Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
A Planet Visitor
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
news:slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net...
> url:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2277805.stm
>
> I daresay that FW will now call the United Nations 'anti-Semite'. However,
> Israel will once again ignore this resolution, which calls for ...
>
No.. I will call you the Jewish 'Uncle Tom,' and a clear anti-Semite
in your pathetic attempt to 'fit in.' There is no doubt that your comment
is offered as a defense mechanism to the self-loathing you have for
yourself.
The resolution is certainly necessary. I believe the U.S. should have
agreed to the resolution. I do not believe the U.S. should
have abstained, but they certainly didn't exercise veto power. I do
believe the U.S. was right to TRY to incorporate a mention of
Palestinian terrorism in the resolution. Unlike you, the U.N. should
not stick its head in the sand, and ignore the realities in that region.
Lacking such inclusion, would have been no reason, however; for the
U.S. to veto that resolution. The world realizes that Israel must be more
accommodating if anything is to be achieve. But I have little hope that
doing so will actually result in any elimination of terrorism on the
Jewish population. Nonetheless, it seems petty to me, for the U.S.
to have crossed its arms and rather petulantly (as you often do)
closed its voice in this matter. On the whole, I think they should
have agreed with the resolution. Voicing reservations outside the
terms of the resolution.
To me, Israel's 'right' to claim the land given it by the U.N., is
beyond question. Almost every reasonable person agrees
with that. It is a FACT that it is ON that land (and the
consequences of it ceasing to exist on that land are too grave to
contemplate). But I also believe it has a legitimate 'right' to that
land (and no more than that). I believe that the U.N. legitimized
that fact. Lawfully... as a judge bestows 'legitimacy' in law, to a
child born illegitimately. Some disagree with that, but it strikes me
as inconsistent to claim that something illegitimate has 'rights.'
It rather goes against the definition. The fact is that the land is now
Jewish. If one claims that such is 'illegitimate' then the Jew has no
'right' to claim that land. And, as I said, to me that seems inconsistence.
Either they have a 'right' to that land and are legitimate in that claim.
Or they have neither a 'right' nor a legitimacy. Thus, I personally cannot
disconnect the 'right' they have and the fact that this 'right' devolves from
having been declared, and actually being legitimate. IMHO. Even more
than the U.N. resolution, I feel that International recognition of its
legitimate borders resulted from the 1949 cease-fire line. Of course
1) The continued Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory
2) Israeli Settlement of the West Bank
3) What I see as Israel's use of disproportionate force against the Palestinians
4( And Israel's numerous excursions into Lebanon
stand out as stark disappointments to me.
I believe the 1995 assassination of Prime Minister Rabin, was one of the most
unfortunate events to occur in that region. With the subsequent election
of Benjamin Netanyahu, and a decline downward in any hope for peace from
that moment on. It began the reluctance of Israel to negotiate from any
other than ITS position, and the escalation of terrorist violence by Palestinian
radicals. With Arafat becoming more and more impotent, as every day went by.
Only now, in presumed martyrdom, regaining some stature among Palestinians.
While Israel became more and more aggressive in its response to terrorist
attacks on its civilian population, and more aggressive in its efforts to populate
the West Bank. Which is certainly one of the most egregious acts they could
have undertaken. And speaks nothing to self-defense.
But let us not forget the other disappointments -- most especially --The
Palestinians using their own children in this conflict, placing them
intentionally in the line of fire to inspire sympathy for their cause
(a legitimate one) and teaching them to hate the Jew. And the
inconceivable use of suicide terrorists, taught to sacrifice their lives to
take the lives of innocents. Jews simply trying to exist as a nation,
outside of any political spectrum, as are most Palestinians. Most
of those who lead those Palestinian efforts are leaders who are
apparently willing to fight for their 'freedom' down to the last child,
as long as they can teach children to hate the Jew.
While, to me, the 'final' solution would be for Israel to return to its 1967
borders, no such solution can be realized without a secure peace
treaty and obviously a recognition of Israel's right to exist from
every nation. Yes... Israeli settlement on the West Bank is perhaps the
most principal obstacle to peace; yes... militarily, Israel has nothing to
fear from an independent Palestinian State; and yes... to have a
Palestine consisting simply of Jewish settlers is neither realistic
nor moral.
Finally, there ARE certainly realities in that region that need to be recognized.
Islam, in the Middle East version, is certainly, at its core, determined
to exterminate the Jew. Moderate Islam, that exists outside of that
raging crucible of hate usually holds a peaceful agenda. And in some
U.S. ghettos of Black poverty, despair and violence, it can be a great force
for reducing those aspects. Proof of what I say is demonstrated by a
great number of proclamations issued by that religion in that region.
No such counter-proclamations, filled with such anti-Semitic rage,
against the other major Semite religion or Semite people, can be found from
the Jew. If you have any... perhaps you might provide them for us,
in your not-so-latent Anti-Semitic postings.
I've posted them before. But they need constant examination --
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"'I would like to stand at the place and kill the Jew, who stands opposite
me. If each Arab kills one Jew, then no more Jews will be left.'
Mustafa Tlas, Syrian Secretary of Defense, Lebanese television LBC
6 May 2001.
'Have no mercy with the Jews, no matter, in which country. Fight against
them, wherever you meet them. Wherever you might be, kill the Jews
and Americans, who are like them, and who assist them. They all lie
in the same trench (fighting) against the Arabs and Muslims.'
Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya, a member of the ' Fatwa Council,' appointed
by the Palestinian autonomy authority, and former rector of the Islamic
University in Gaza, television of the Palestinian autonomy authority,
14 October 2000.
'Jews are Jews, whether Labor or Likud, Jew is Jews. There are no
moderate ones or supporters of peace among them. They are all liars.
We must massacre and kill them. As Allah the all powerful one says:
'Fight against them.' Allah will torture them with your hands and will
humiliate them and will help you, to overcome them and to release
the souls of the believers (...) They (the Jews) created her (Israel)
as an outpost of their civilization - and as a vanguard of their army
and as a sword of the West and of the Knight of the Cross, which
is hanging in this country over the heads of the Muslim monotheists.
They want Jews to be their leaders...'
Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya, member of the Fatwa Council, in the
mosque Zayd bin Sultan Nahyan in Gaza, 13 October 2000 (on
the day after the lynching murder of two Israeli reservists in Ramallah,
which they showed live on the Palestinian television." (2002:23)
'Each pious Muslim must participate in the Dshihad, in order to
liberate the robbed Palestine from the condemned heretical Jews
(...); of what advantage would be a normalization with the impure Jews?'
Iast Ibrahim, vice-president of the Iraq, on the summit conference of
the Islamic States, 12 November 2000." (2002:30).
"We will not give up one patch of ground in Palestine, from Haifa and
Jaffa and Akko and Mulabbas (Petah Tikvah) and Salamah and
Majdal (Ashkelon) and from the entire country and Gaza and the
West Jordan territory... '
Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya, member of the 'Fatwa Council' of the
Palestinian autonomy authority, 13 October 2000, the day after
the lynching murder of two Israeli reservists in Ramallah, which they
showed live on the Palestinian television. (Haifa, Jaffa, Akko, Petah
Tikvah and Ashkelon are Israeli cities)." - Gal Ben Ari (2002:34)
'Even if we agreed, to proclaim our State, while it contains now only
22 per cent of Palestine, that is, the West Jordan territory and Gaza,
our final goal will still be the liberation of the entire historical Palestine
from the river (= Jordan) up to the sea (= Mediterranean) (...). We
differentiate between the strategic, long-term goals and the short term
political goals, which we must accept temporarily, due to international
pressure.'
Faisal al-Husseini, former Palestinian Minister for Jerusalem questions,
in the Egyptian newspaper al-Arabi 24 June 20001." - Gal Ben Ari (2002:35)
'... if Allah wants it, this unfair State of Israel will be extinguished, this
unfair State of Great Britain will be extinguished (...) Blessed is he, who
leads de Dshihad, in order to accomplish Allah's will (...). Blessed is he,
who attaches a belt with explosives at his body or at the bodies of his
sons, to throw himself with this into the middle of a crowd of Jews...'
Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi in a lecture a few days after Jassir Arafat declared
an armistice, Palestinian television, 8 June 20001." - Gal Ben Ari (2002:36)
'We teach the children that suicide assassination attempts will cause
the Israeli people to become afraid and that we are allowed to do that
(...), we teach them, that someone, who becomes a suicide assassin,
achieves the highest rank in the paradise.'
Palestinian advisor 'Paradise Camp' toward BBC, quoted after the
Jerusalem Post, 20 July 2001." - Gal Ben Ari (2002:36)
'All weapons must be directed against the Jews, Allah's enemies, which
the Koran describes as apes and pigs, worshippers of the calf and
worshipper of idols. Allah will let the Muslim rule over the Jew, we will
blow them up in Hadera, we will blow them up in Tel Aviv and in Netanya
for Allah's justice against this rabble (...) We will enter Jerusalem and
Jaffa and Haifa and Ashkelon as conquerors (...), we bless all those,
who educate their children in the spirit of the djihad and martyrdom.
Blessed is, who fires a bullet into the head of a Jew.'
In a lecture, sent on the television of the Palestinian autonomy authority,
3 August 2001." Gal Ben Ari (2002:36, 37)
'The West has changed Islam into an enemy (...), already since the
wars of the Knights of the Cross (...). It is inconceivable that we, the
Muslims, will sign a treaty against another Muslim State (...). One must
bring the fear (the terror) over Allah's enemies (...). If these are terrorists,
then this is the best kind of terror, which there is (...). I do not believe
that a Muslim will allow it that a Muslim homeland, such as Palestine
and Jerusalem, remains in the hands of the Zionists (...). Each person
has the right, to transform himself into a human bomb and to explode
in this society (Israel) as a bomb.'
Sheikh Jussuf Al Kardawi, one of the most outstanding Islam scholars
(Doha, Qatar) in an interview for the TV organization El Dschazia, 16
September 20001." - Gal Ben Ari, The seed of hate. Jews and Israel
in the Arab media (2002:37, 38)
And From Palestinian school books ==
'It is a self-sacrifice, when a Muslim dies, while doing Allah's will (...).
A person, who dies in this way, is called a martyr (...). Self-sacrifice
for Allah is a hope for those, who believe in Allah and trust in his
promises. The martyr is glad, full of ecstasy, that he will go into the
paradise, which Allah has prepared for him.'
Islamic education for the 7th Class, P. 112.
'The Muslim sacrifices himself for his faith and fights a Holy War
for Allah. He does not know cowardice, because he understands
that the time of his death has already been determined and that
it is better to die as a martyr on the battleground, than to die in bed.'
Islamic education for the 8th Class, P. 176.
'... Fighters and martyrs of the Holy War are the most honorable
persons after the prophets.'
Reading book & literary texts for the 10th Class, P. 103.
'I will take my soul into my own hand and hurl it (in the war) into
the abyss of death (...). You know, I do see my own death and
march toward it fast (...). You know - That is the death of men
and of the one (...), seeking an honorable death - that is death
pure and simple.'
Song of the martyrs, from: Our Arabic language for the 5th Class,
P. 60 and guide for the improvement of the Arabic language for
the 12th Class, P. 84.
'... The youth will not be fatigued, it will want to be either free or to
die. We scoop our water out of death. And we will not be slaves of
the enemies. Our symbol is the 'sword' and the 'feather', but not
'words'.'
My homeland, from: Palestinian national education for the 1st Class,
P. 67-68." - Gal Ben Ari (2002: 39, 40).
'The holy war is a religious obligation for each Muslim man and each
Muslim woman.'
Our Arabic language for the 5th Class, P. 167.
'Know this, my son, that Palestine is your country (...), its entire
earth has been soaked with the blood of the martyrs. Why do we have
to fight (against the Jews) and drive them from our country?'
Our Arabic language for the 5th Class, part I, P. 64-66." - Gal Ben
Ari (2002:43).
'My brothers! The suppressors (the Israelis) have crossed the borders.
Therefore Holy War and self-sacrifice are an obligation! (...) Should
we allow them to steal our Arab nature? (...) Draw your sword! Let us
collect for this with red blood and kindled fire. (...) Death will call the
sword and it will become mad from so many battles. Oh, Palestine,
your youth will save your country.'
Reading book & literary texts for the 10th Class, P. 120-122." - Gal
Ben Ari (2002:44).
'... in your left hand you carried the Koran, and in your right hand
an Arab sword (...) Not one centimeter (= of the land) will be freed
without blood. Therefore, go forward, and shout: Allah is great!'
Bayonet and torches, from: Reading book & literary texts for the 10th
Class, P. 131-135.
'Remember: The last and inevitable result will be the victory of the
Muslims over the Jews.'
Our Arabic language for the 7th Class, S. 67." - Gal Ben Ari (2002:45)
'This religion (= Islam) will destroy all other religions, and it will be
spread by Allah's will, by the Muslim fighters of the Holy War.'
Islamic education for the 7th Class, part 2, P. 67." - Gal Ben Ari,
The seed of hate. Jews and Israel in the Arab media (2002:46)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PV
> Desmond Coughlan |THE BITCH DROPPED THE BIKE ON MY TOE
> |SO I DUMPED HER SORRY ASS
> |AND MY 5 KIDS AS WELL
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:46:45 +0000
>
>url:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2277805.stm
>
>I daresay that FW will now call the United Nations 'anti-Semite'. However,
>Israel will once again ignore this resolution, which calls for ...
>
>* Israel to "immediately cease measures in and around
> Ramallah, including the destruction of Palestinian civilian
> and security infrastructure"
>
>* for the "expeditious withdrawal of Israeli occupying forces"
> from Palestinian cities toward positions held prior to
> September 2000
>
>* and for "the complete cessation of all acts of violence,
> including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and
> destruction"
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.g
blx.net!nntp.gblx.net!triton.net!smallfeed.triton.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!
fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:46:45 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 22
>Message-ID: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032864517 8108945 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: lievre.voute.net!nobody
>X-No-Archive: Yes
>X-OS: BSD UNIX
>X-PGP: http://www.zeouane.org/pgp/pubring.pkr
>User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (FreeBSD)
>
The Dr. Dolly Coughlan archive exists because Desmond Coughlan lacks conviction
in his words. He won't allow his posts to be archived in Google. Please feel
free to use it to your advantage.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 16:33:22 +0000
>
>Le Tue, 24 Sep 2002 21:29:05 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>> To me, Israel's 'right' to claim the land given it by the U.N., is
>> beyond question.
>
>Well we agree on something, then. What a pity that Israel, through
>its current terrorist activities, is doing everything it can to
>alienate those who support its right to exist, but who challenge its
>right to engage in the indiscrimate slaughter of innocents.
>
>{ snip remainder, unread }
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!feed.news.nacamar.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-ber
lin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 16:33:22 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 19
>Message-ID: <slrnap3pai.mih.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><BO4k9.28999$R8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1032971683 9366183 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: lievre.voute.net!nobody
>X-No-Archive: true
A Planet Visitor
> Le Tue, 24 Sep 2002 21:29:05 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> > beyond question.
>
> its current terrorist activities, is doing everything it can to
> alienate those who support its right to exist, but who challenge its
> right to engage in the indiscrimate slaughter of innocents.
>
admission. His words carefully avoid 'right to exist.' His use is of
the term 'indispensible' (sic). He clearly states that 'Israel is factually
occupied land.' There is no question that he denies a 'right'
associated with such an 'occupation.' Further, he clearly steers
clear (as you seem to now do), of ANY mention of 'Palestinian
terrorists.' They are ALL 'freedom fighters,' is what I see in his
meaning.
PV
> { snip remainder, unread }
>
> --
John Rennie
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
news:BO4k9.28999$R8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
I know lots of reasonable people who did not agree with that. Just
because you have convinced yourself that Israel has a 'right' to Palestinian
land you cannot then trumpet that you represent the voice of reason. You
merely represent one side of the argument. I do not consider you to be
unreasonable in your claims for Israel:; just wrong. And yes, one can be
reasonable and wrong. As for the nonsense that the UN 'gave' Israel the
land; the land had already been stolen. If there was any legal basis to the
UN's decision which is very doubtful then it was based on the shaky premise
that 'possession is nine tenths of the law'. Again I make the point that
in the first 10 years or so of the UN's life whatever America wanted from
the UN she got. There's more than one reason for this. Firstly many
countries required aid and only one country had the necessary funds 2) the
memory of the League of Nations and its impotency without the membership of
America was
fresh in many of the minds of the European members of the UN. Many voted
for the resolution with misgivings but were nervous of the consequences if
they didn't and that included the Soviet Union. It was Stalin, after all,
who insisted the UN be based in America; he thought that America would be
unlikely to flounce out of an organisation when it was on their home ground.
John Rennie
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:_Rxk9.386$vN6....@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
>
snip
>> Again I make the point that
> in the first 10 years or so of the UN's life whatever America wanted from
> the UN she got. There's more than one reason for this. Firstly many
> countries required aid and only one country had the necessary funds 2) the
> memory of the League of Nations and its impotency without the membership
of
> America was
> fresh in many of the minds of the European members of the UN. Many voted
> for the resolution with misgivings but were nervous of the consequences if
> they didn't and that included the Soviet Union. It was Stalin, after all,
> who insisted the UN be based in America; he thought that America would be
> unlikely to flounce out of an organisation when it was on their home
ground.
>
BTW I find it laughable that both Bush and previously, Rice, have criticised
the 'weakness' of the League of Nations with regard to it's attitude to the
rise of H****r. Does no one in the American administration not understand
why it was weak. After all it was the brain child of President Wilson and
his hard won arguments at Versailles. By her entry into the war in 1917
America
became a world player and IMHO THE world player. Without America's
participation, the League of Nations was a no no. Unfortunately President
Harding was proved right, all America wanted in the 1920's was 'a five cent
cigar'.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 12:39:48 +0000
>
>Le Thu, 26 Sep 2002 02:32:24 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>>> > To me, Israel's 'right' to claim the land given it by the U.N., is
>>> > beyond question.
>
>>> Well we agree on something, then. What a pity that Israel, through
>>> its current terrorist activities, is doing everything it can to
>>> alienate those who support its right to exist, but who challenge its
>>> right to engage in the indiscrimate slaughter of innocents.
>
>> Well... finally.
>
>'Finally' my arse. At _no time_, in the all the years I have been
>posting to usenet, will you see one single utterance challenging
>the right to Israel to occupy the pre-1967 land. I have never
>written such a challenge, I have never spoken such a challenge. I
>have not done so because I fully believe in the right of Israel to
>exist.
>
>Your calling me 'anti-Semitic' does a great disservice to any argument
>that you could possibly hope to make. Those who can see and understand,
>know the difference between being anti-Semitic, and disagreeing with
>Israel's 'right' to kill innocents.
>
>Only you and that halfwit Lexham (although to be fair to you, you don't
>attempt to 'neutralise' your anti-Arab vitriol by mentioning that your
>wife is an Arab ... as if that changed a thing), seem to think that
>when I disagree with the destruction of houses by the Israeli army, with
>the killing of innocent Palestinians by armed soldiers, and with the
>systematic humiliation of Palestinians, I am challenging Israel's
>right to exist. I am not. I never have. I never will.
>
>Israel has a right to exist, and a right to self-defence. We just
>disagree on what constitutes 'self-defence'.
>
>Now get some sleep; you're going to need all of your energy this
>evening, when I answer the rest of your posts. :-)
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!lnewspeer00.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!emea.uu.net
!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dh
cp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-fo
>r-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 12:39:48 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 43
>Message-ID: <slrnap600k.pag.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><BO4k9.28999$R8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap3pai.mih.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Ykuk9.4035$O8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033044070 9772042 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
A Planet Visitor
> Le Thu, 26 Sep 2002 02:32:24 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> >> > To me, Israel's 'right' to claim the land given it by the U.N., is
> >> > beyond question.
>
> >> Well we agree on something, then. What a pity that Israel, through
> >> its current terrorist activities, is doing everything it can to
> >> alienate those who support its right to exist, but who challenge its
> >> right to engage in the indiscrimate slaughter of innocents.
>
> > Well... finally.
>
> posting to usenet, will you see one single utterance challenging
> the right to Israel to occupy the pre-1967 land. I have never
> written such a challenge, I have never spoken such a challenge. I
> have not done so because I fully believe in the right of Israel to
> exist.
>
Actually.. I meant we 'finally' AGREE on something. I knew that you,
regardless of your patent 'desire to fit in,' in your Jewish 'Uncle Tom'
persona, had never denied the 'right' of Israel to 'exist.' Neither have
you ever said anything in respect to believing they might have a 'reason'
to do some of the things they do, in self-defense. It's typical de rigueur
behavior: Stand in presumed 'moral' righteousness, that -- of course,
they have a right to exist, old boy...but my word... look how they
'abuse' the other side... the other side standing 'purity white,' as victims.
> Your calling me 'anti-Semitic' does a great disservice to any argument
> that you could possibly hope to make. Those who can see and understand,
> know the difference between being anti-Semitic, and disagreeing with
> Israel's 'right' to kill innocents.
ROTFLMAO.. I call them the way I see them, sport. The very words
you use here, clearly demonstrate a great passion for 'trying to fit
in.' Now, I don't expect you to understand what I mean, or the
implication that holds to you being anti-Semitic.. but you should.
> Only you and that halfwit Lexham (although to be fair to you, you don't
> attempt to 'neutralise' your anti-Arab vitriol by mentioning that your
> wife is an Arab ... as if that changed a thing), seem to think that
> when I disagree with the destruction of houses by the Israeli army, with
> the killing of innocent Palestinians by armed soldiers, and with the
> systematic humiliation of Palestinians, I am challenging Israel's
> right to exist. I am not. I never have. I never will.
>
No... actually it is your one-sided approach to the conflict. Clearly
demonstrated by the very words you put up here. Right in those
few words above.. is encapsulated exactly what I mean. The
inclusion of not a SINGLE word in respect to some of the acts of
Palestinians. Totally empty... not ONE WORD. IMHO, you've
this huge shovel in your hands, and you're intent on digging your
own grave, with your own words.
> Israel has a right to exist, and a right to self-defence. We just
> disagree on what constitutes 'self-defence'.
>
I never claimed you didn't. What I've always seen from you is
a lop-sided belief that the Palestinians have no such thing as
a terrorist. Because those working and living beside you, see
no such thing as a Palestinian terrorist. And your blindness to
the logical paranoia (which everyone understands is not always
seen as reasonable to the outside observer, but holds great
influence for the insider suffering from such fear) of the typical
Jew in Israel.
Of course Israel should leave the West Bank.
Of course a State of Palestine should be created.
Of course that State must be permitted to decide unilaterally
what should be done with all the Jewish settlers in the West Bank.
Of course Sharon is the worst possible evil that could have been
foisted on both Israel and the Palestinians (who had much to
do with 'creating' that 'evil')
And of course, the security of Israel and its 'right to exist' must
not be compromised in the slightest
And the last one is no less than the others. And I have posted
a great number of quotes from sources that clearly shows the
last one, is not going to be that easy to achieve regardless of
the others. There is a large faction, of very dedicated people,
who will accept NOTHING OTHER than the total destruction
of Israel, REGARDLESS of any action of Israel. The very idea
of a Jew existing, much less a State of Jews is antithetic to
their entire belief.
Think it's ALL one-sided? Think again. But that's what I see coming
from you. In a word -- Sycophant! I see this from you as that
Uncle Tom image I refer to. You're in a country that has not, and
work with people that have not, totally severed themselves from the
past over 1000 years, of blaming the Jew for all their problems --
STILL. I will tell you this straightforward... I believe, and nothing can
shake this conviction... that the Jew has been historical the
MOST irrationally despised human on this planet. Blamed for
every evil that has occurred.. from 'the black plague' to 'they
steal my money,' to 'they cook and eat their own children as
part of their religious ritual,' to 'touch one and you will get a boil.'
The eternal scapegoat for every ailment that afflicted Europe. The
OBSCENE perception of the 'filthy' Jew. The fucking Crusaders,
on their way to fight the Arab, slaughtered Jews as they traveled
to that fight. Only in the past 300 years has this prejudice been
redirected more toward the Black. And it was 'moved further to
the backburner' because the events of WW II brought it into such
stark focus. People no longer talk about it 'openly.' But it actually
went ''underground' in Europe. Things stayed much the same on the
inside. And you'd like to 'fit in' with that crowd. And the 'fitting in'
requires you to 'spread the European party line,' in respect to
the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Which is that the Jew is TOTALLY
at fault, while the Palestinian has been uprooted, displaced and
a new Diaspora of Palestinians rather than Jews, is being perpetrated
on them by the 'filthy' Jew, himself.
I find a reason for you to claim you'd crap your pants on the way
to your death. Because you're afraid.. afraid even here to stand
up for what you SHOULD stand up for. An unbiased view of
that conflict. Look at your words: Hiding behind the statement that
"Israel has a right to exist, and a right to self-defence." Said
in defense of the vitriolic anti-Israeli prose that follows. Where
ALL the blame is heaped on Israel... and the Palestinian is
'purity personified.'
> Now get some sleep; you're going to need all of your energy this
> evening, when I answer the rest of your posts. :-)
>
Oh..gee... I might be worried if you had ever said anything intelligent.
Lacking that... It's looks like a new record for you.. you seem to be
'claiming' victory before you've put a word up here. Victory through
'telepathy' perhaps.
PV
> --
> Desmond Coughlan
A Planet Visitor
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:_Rxk9.386$vN6....@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
>
What we have there is a disagreement as to what constitutes
'reasonable' rather than who we know.
> Just
> because you have convinced yourself that Israel has a 'right' to Palestinian
> land you cannot then trumpet that you represent the voice of reason.
Gimme a break.. just because you don't see 'eye to eye' with me,
doesn't mean you're the 'voice of reason' either. We only hold
opinions, and when we suggest we're the 'voice of reason,' we
presume more of ourselves then we should. I simply report what
I see in my opinion. But I make no claim to being the 'definitive'
voice of reason. If I see another display what is to me 'unreason,'
I'll SAY I see it to be so, in my view. Others may find MY views
unreasonable. But it goes a bit beyond when you begin evaluating
OUR OWN 'eye' claiming IT is 'the voice of reason.' We enter that
special realm prepared especially for desi and Earl... that 'realm
of the pompous.'
Look, John... I may disagree with you violently, or ANYONE violently.
And I'll call them stupid, or dumb or .... That does not mean I
REPRESENT the 'voice of reason.' I am simply saying how I
see it. For example, Jürgen... I've called him anti-Semitic. I
believe he is... from how 'I' interpret his postings. That does
NOT mean I claim to be the 'voice of reason.' It's simply what
I SEE, and REPORT. I would rather ask OTHERS to simply
look at what I say, and my interpretation of what others say, and
make up their OWN minds. You may see Jürgen as 'the Second
Coming.' It doesn't affect how I see him. Nor should how I see
him, affect how you see him. When I say 'almost every reasonable
person agrees with that,' I'm speaking of those I believe are
reasonable. If anything, I should have added my usual IMHO.
But that should be obvious from the number of times I have
said that I do NOTHING but express an opinion UNLESS I
state it as 'fact.' I am simply 'the voice of PV.' Which means
you can do anything with.. insult it, discard it, abuse it... it
remains mine. And nothing you do will 'get my cherry.' I've
been deflowered long ago. I simply have 'my opinion.' And you
simply have one of your own. And lastly... if ANYONE
presumes they are the 'voice of reason' in this particular dialog
vis a vis Israeli/Palestinian... I find that to be our boy Jürgen. As
I said.. you may find him however you wish.
> You
> merely represent one side of the argument.
I don't know which 'side' you expect that to be. And to me, that's
part of the problem, and what I've been expressing. It seems all
Europeans see this as a 'we must take a specific unchangeable,
inflexible SIDE.' I've said from the beginning that my view shifts
in this conflict. Prior to 9-11, I was mildly pro-Palestinian. My
view shifted a good deal on 9-11 toward Israel, as I gained a
better perspective of what her problems were, seeing the U.S.
was now entering some of those same problems, and better
recognizing the attitudes of those she faced. It has tended to
drift slowly back toward the Palestinian, with the repressive
actions of Sharon. Terrorist acts by the Palestinians appall
me. And then - thinking I can be no more appalled... that
belief is again shattered, by some totally irresponsible reaction
from Sharon. If I see someone express a view that they must
'take a side' (which usually involves forgetting ALL ABOUT
the other side), I get a bit angry. Not as any 'voice of reason,'
but as a 'voice of PV.' Here is 'my side' --
Of course Israel should leave the West Bank.
Of course a State of Palestine should be created.
Of course that State must be permitted to decide unilaterally
what should be done with all the Jewish settlers in the West Bank.
Of course Sharon is the worst possible evil that could have been
foisted on both Israel and the Palestinians (who had much to
do with 'creating' that 'evil')
And of course, the security of Israel and its 'right to exist' must
not be compromised in the slightest
The last one is no less than the others. And I have posted
a great number of quotes from sources that clearly shows the
last one, is not going to be that easy to achieve regardless of
the others. There is a large faction, of very dedicated people,
who will accept NOTHING OTHER than the total destruction
of Israel, REGARDLESS of any action of Israel. The very idea
of a Jew existing, much less a State of Jews existing is antithetic
to their entire belief.
> I do not consider you to be
> unreasonable in your claims for Israel:; just wrong. And yes, one can be
> reasonable and wrong. As for the nonsense that the UN 'gave' Israel the
> land; the land had already been stolen. If there was any legal basis to the
> UN's decision which is very doubtful then it was based on the shaky premise
> that 'possession is nine tenths of the law'. Again I make the point that
> in the first 10 years or so of the UN's life whatever America wanted from
> the UN she got. There's more than one reason for this. Firstly many
> countries required aid and only one country had the necessary funds 2) the
> memory of the League of Nations and its impotency without the membership of
> America was
> fresh in many of the minds of the European members of the UN. Many voted
> for the resolution with misgivings but were nervous of the consequences if
> they didn't and that included the Soviet Union. It was Stalin, after all,
> who insisted the UN be based in America; he thought that America would be
> unlikely to flounce out of an organisation when it was on their home ground.
>
>
You can make all the excuses you wish... devise all the 'clever'
arguments you would devise. Condemn the U.S. all you wish
(your boy, Jürgen, suggested adding a 'star' to the U.S. banner -
you'll not be able to top that one). But I do not believe you can
deny the validity of the U.N. making a legitimate legal finding
in this matter, which makes the existence of Israel de jure.
Of course, there is a de facto existence of Israel. Jürgen
seemed to express that, as if he was providing some great
secret of the universe. Presumably no one understood that most
obvious of facts prior to him saying it. They are THERE, in FACT.
So the point is do they have a 'right' to be there? And I get the
impression that you sort of skirt about the issue.
I believe if the U.N. made a decision which SUITED you,
you would be one of the first ones to claim it was a
legitimate decision which had legally binding implications
on the parties who are members of the U.N. But I seem
to see you arguing that 'in this one particular case,' they
do not. Perhaps because you don't AGREE with the decision.
Keep in mind...'the voice of PV.' You realize that Britain had
(and has) veto power. But you argue that your nation was
presumably a lackey to the U.S. at that time. We know
the U.N. has made many 'legally binding' decisions. Is it
only this one that sticks in your craw?
To my mind... if someone claims de facto, but not de jure
'right' to exist of Israel, they consider them to be as squatters
are considered in law. No better than bums living in burnt-out
buildings in a squalid neighborhood under the ownership of
landlords. With the presumption that they have no 'rights' at
all. And are only living where they are, because it would be
'a catastrophe' to uproot them. Certainly that is exactly
Jürgen's view as I see it.
Let me repeat a bit from my post to Jürgen.
If you deny Israel her 'right' to exist, you deny the U.N. the
very powers that all nation members have agreed to give her.
If you deny Israel her 'right' to exist, it seems you would view
her as some kind of a festering boil that you wish would go
away... but the consequences of 'morally' lancing it are to
dangerous to contemplate for your own 'self-image.' You're
afraid you might become 'morally' infected, by stating
she should 'go away.'
.If you believe the Jews are ONLY 'de facto' on the land... as
squatters. Then Russians are 'de facto' on East Prussia... as
squatters. But have no de jure 'right' to be there. It still belongs
to Germans --- Texans are 'de facto' on Texas... as squatters.
But have no de jure 'right' to be there. It still 'belongs' to Mexicans
--- Australians are 'de facto' on Australia.. as squatters. But
have no de jure 'right' to be there. It still belongs to aboriginals.
All immigrant Americans are 'de facto' on U.S. soil... as squatters.
But have no de jure 'right' to be there. It still belongs to native
Americans --- Every migration by any body of people to an area
previously populated by your presumed 'owners' of that land, and
establishing a society within that land, are only there as 'squatters.'
They are there... but they have no 'right' to be there. I cannot
morally accept that concept.
PV
John Rennie
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
I'll wait till you respond to my second post and then reply.
Jürgen
A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>
>"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
>news:slrnap3pai.mih.p...@lievre.voute.net...
>> Le Tue, 24 Sep 2002 21:29:05 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
écrit :
>>
>> { snip }
>>
>> > To me, Israel's 'right' to claim the land given it by the U.N., is
>> > beyond question.
>>
>> Well we agree on something, then. What a pity that Israel, through
>> its current terrorist activities, is doing everything it can to
>> alienate those who support its right to exist, but who challenge its
>> right to engage in the indiscrimate slaughter of innocents.
>>
>Well... finally. You will find, however; that Jürgen makes no such
>admission. His words carefully avoid 'right to exist.' His use is of
>the term 'indispensible' (sic). He clearly states that 'Israel is
factually
>occupied land.
Since you claim Israel to exist on Jewish homeland I am awaiting either your
statement that the Jews did not drive the Palestinians away, or that they
had the right to do so in '48, Sir. Space:
_________________________________
[My own reasoning for Israel's _right_to_exist_ stands, of course. It is the
reason for which The Meister called me an anti-Semite]
A Planet Visitor
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:JSXk9.2789$sh4.1...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
>
> "A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
> news:V2Uk9.6328$O8.5...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> I'll wait till you respond to my second post and then reply.
>
I'm not sure what post you refer to. Your post on Harding certainly
did not seem to require an answer.. not being directed to me, and
simply expressing an opinion. And with your other post, I rather went off
at length to answer.
In any case -- let me lay out on the table EXACTLY a real-life situation
which demonstrates the Israeli/Palestinian conflict to me. In no more
possible clearer terms of a microcosm of that macrocosm of a
disaster we call 'the Middle East conflict.' This actually happened
yesterday.
Yesterday, a passenger aircraft, an MD-80, with 137 passengers on
board (from Spirit airlines - a smaller airline), took off from Orlando, Florida
bound for New York. Two passengers, looking to be of Arab descent
boarded that aircraft. Along with passengers boarding were a group of
Orthodox Jews. The tension even before take-off was somewhat
frosty and jittery. In flight, uneasy glances were cast from the Jews to
the 'Arabs.' Overriding common sense with fear. Then --
Words between them were spoken in flight.
The stress, and distrust mounted.
One of the 'Arabs' rose from his seat, and looking in both directions,
turned toward the direction of the cockpit.
The hysteria of the Jews was immediately expressed to the Steward.
The Steward confronted the 'Arab.'
The 'Arab' grew angry and defiant. Why was 'his space' being
invaded? Didn't he pay for his 'share' of that aircraft. Wasn't that
'space' HIS 'space'?
The confrontation mounted.
The Jews pushing in paranoia for someone to 'restrain' the 'Arab.'
The 'Arab'... his anger mounting, approaching a rage.
The steward trying to pacify both sides.
The cockpit was informed.
The pilot made a decision to turn back the aircraft.
Upon landing, the FBI met the arriving aircraft. It seems that the
'Arabs' were of Guyanese descent. Why had the 'Arab' made a
move toward the cockpit? Gee... he was looking to take a piss.
A totally benign attempt to do what anyone might decide to do
when necessary. No charges were filed against ANYONE.
Was the paranoia of the Jews 'reasonable' Of course not. Was it
'excessive'? Of course it was. Was it 'explainable'? In a psychological
sense... of course. We ALL have fear. The Jew drew on 'past
experiences' which heightened that 'unreasonable' paranoia, resulting
from his fear. His 'safety'... his 'existence'... was being threatened...
in his 'mind.' Actuality had no meaning to him. Fear overcame
every reasonable emotion. And obviously. the 'threat' was much less
than it 'actually' was. Which was actually 'zip.' But there was
the feeling that SOMETHING must be done in self-protection. Even
if it is viewed by the external viewer as 'unreasonable and excessive.'
The 'Arab,' on the other hand, was expressing exactly the opposite
view... One we would all agree on in hindsight-- Righteous indignation.
His 'space' was being invaded. Space he felt he had 'bought and
paid for.' Anger was his reaction to that 'invasion.' A perception
that the world (in that small world of the aircraft) was against him
in any 'legal' right he might have to 'own' his space in that small world.
'Legal' reaction was perceived by him as being 'denied to him.' And
now only 'illegal' anger would serve to satisfy this emotional rage he
felt, the sense of his being the aggrieved party.
Given the limited confines which permitted the steward to control
that confrontation (conflict), we can extrapolate that into the
larger world, and realize that there IS NOT a steward. The
Middle East is much larger than that aircraft. We can only work to try
and calm those two sides, and reason to them in respect to their
respective emotions. We cannot, as was done with the aircraft...
turn it around.
Now, think of the U.N. as the airline management having decided to
permit those two sets of passengers to board that limited space
aircraft (the Middle East). Could a decision have been made which would
have taken away the 'right' of EITHER set of passengers to board that
aircraft? Given the conditions faced at boarding time, on our planet.
I think not. Others may think differently. But, once having been given
a 'boarding pass' by that airline management at that time, that
'boarding pass' constituted a 'legal' right to board. They were both
'legitimate' passengers. Thus, to me, there is no question of the
'right' of EITHER set of passengers to be on that aircraft. And, in
even a much larger sense, we are all on that same journey, as those
passengers on that aircraft. Whether we wish to actually reach our
destination, or find it 'better to 'turn back time,' in the Middle East
is a question we should all ask of ourselves.
And -- This was IN THE U.S. -- Not Israel and its existence in the Middle
East - a nation much more paranoid in the general sense. To try
and extrapolate that insignificant space, in a country much more secure,
to the larger space of the Middle East, and a country presuming itself
to be under virtual siege from terrorism, virtually boggles the mind.
And --- The 'Arabs' were not 'Arabs' -- the U.S. is presumed to be
much less prone to paranoia from those of Arab descent living among
us (less than 9-11, of course). Much more 'accepting' of the role they
can play in society. While in the Middle East the Arab is virtually
ostracized by the nation of Israel. Cast into the most menial of roles
in that country itself. Given hardly a whisper of respectability. Feared
at every crossroad. Denied of virtually every 'right' in Israel proper. The
Arab Jew, a citizen of Israel, living in Israel, is similar to the Black living in
the U.S.--- one of the more 'emotionally abused' persons on our planet.
Made so through the 'fear' of the Jew. Both real and imagined.
Can we expect more from the Middle East then we see in that aircraft
conflict? I don't know the answer. All I am sure of in my mind.. is that
we must try. We cannot, as Jürgen implies... do nothing. Feeling that
doing nothing is superior to trying to do something.
So.. Ladies and Gentlemen... there you have it -- I give you the
Middle East conflict in the nutshell of an aircraft in flight --
Paranoia from the Jew - feeling threatened. To what extent
only they can say.
Anger from the Arab -- feeling that their 'space' has been
taken from them. And that they have no 'legal' means to
respond to that 'space' having been taken from them.
A microcosm of the entire Israeli/Palestinian conflict, played out
in the close confines of one small passenger plane. The entire
Israeli/Palestinian problem encapsulated in that small space,
now laid out before us. An aircraft which could well be thought
of as the entire Middle East, in a larger sense. The often
unreasonable paranoia of the Jew juxtaposed against the anger
of the Palestinian, resulting from a sense of being an aggrieved
party, without legal recourse. Those same emotions which are
often felt by each of us who live on this small planet, at one time
or another. Our basic inability to live together.
PV
Lexham
> Le Thu, 26 Sep 2002 02:32:24 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
écrit :
>
---------------------------snip
> Only you and that halfwit Lexham (although to be fair to you, you don't
> attempt to 'neutralise' your anti-Arab vitriol by mentioning that your
> wife is an Arab ... as if that changed a thing),
I mentioned that my wife is Arabic for one reason and one reason only: you
tried to play the race card on me, insinuating that I hated Arabs. My
"anti-Arab vitriol" was nothing more than a link to graphic depictions of
Palestinian street justice, and an expression of support for the Israelis
fighting random suicide bombers.
If you care to use Google to remind me of any slurs against Arabs that I
uttered, please do so.
-------------------------snip
> Israel has a right to exist, and a right to self-defence. We just
> disagree on what constitutes 'self-defence'.
The same kind of self-defence the Allies used when they waged war against
the Axis powers until they were so defeated, broken, and ruined that they
could only make one rational choice: stop fighting and throw themselves at
the mercy of their conquerors. Otherwise, continue to be relentlessly
bombed into oblivion.
Neither of these alternatives was attractive, and by the time it was over
the perpetuators certainly had a lot more war than they bargained for when
they picked the fight. I'm sure that Hamas, Islamic Jihad, et al are
starting to get a little tired of the urban warfare game they started with
the Israelis, too.
----------------snip
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:an22su$jb2$02$1...@news.t-online.com...
>
> A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
> >
> >"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
> >news:slrnap3pai.mih.p...@lievre.voute.net...
> >> Le Tue, 24 Sep 2002 21:29:05 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
> écrit :
> >>
> >> { snip }
> >>
> >> > To me, Israel's 'right' to claim the land given it by the U.N., is
> >> > beyond question.
> >>
> >> Well we agree on something, then. What a pity that Israel, through
> >> its current terrorist activities, is doing everything it can to
> >> alienate those who support its right to exist, but who challenge its
> >> right to engage in the indiscrimate slaughter of innocents.
> >>
> >Well... finally. You will find, however; that Jürgen makes no such
> >admission. His words carefully avoid 'right to exist.' His use is of
> >the term 'indispensible' (sic). He clearly states that 'Israel is
> factually
> >occupied land.
>
> Since you claim Israel to exist on Jewish homeland I am awaiting either your
> statement that the Jews did not drive the Palestinians away, or that they
> had the right to do so in '48, Sir. Space:
>
This is totally independent of the right of Israel to exist. You might as
well ask did the Nazis have a right to drive the Jew from your land?
Atrocities were committed from the very beginning. On both
sides -- Arab and Jew. Many continue to this day. One cannot look
at this conflict in a lop-sided manner. Of course, when the State of
Israel was created, a huge upheaval of humanity was underway. Those
Jews who had not been exterminated in the death camps were virtually
without a home. As with any mass migration of peoples, the human
landscape is drastically altered. It is not generally known, but the
number of Palestinians who fled the newly formed State of Israel
was surpassed by the number of Jews who were forced to emigrate
from Arab countries. Between 1948 and 1976, the Jewish population
of 10 Arab countries, went from 881,000 to 25,620. This is only from
10 Arab countries. And ignores ALL other immigration into Israel.
Arranging some historical data from that time --
On the night of November 29, 1947 the U.N. General Assembly took a
vote on approving the Palestine Partition Plan. The result of the roll call
was 33 in favor, 13 opposed and 11 abstaining. By a large majority the
decision was taken to partition the country into two states. Israel gained
international approval. And a de jure right to exist as far as I'm concerned.
The Arabs didn't accept the plan. Arab rioters massed in Jerusalem
and looted the stores and set fires in the commercial center. Riots broke
out in other cities, especially those with mixed populations. Many residents
of border neighborhoods abandoned their homes. Jews in more isolated
neighborhoods fled to other Jewish neighborhoods, and many Arabs left
for nearby Arab countries. Outbreaks of violence also occurred against
Jews in Arab lands. When the Arab attacks began the Hagana decreed
that no settlement was to be abandoned, no matter how small. It was
necessary to maintain a presence at all costs, since the borders of the
state would be determined not by the Partition Plan but by the cease fire
lines.
November 30, 1947 - March 10, 1949
Historians differ as to which event led directly to the War of Independence.
But all agree that the war began approximately at the time of the U.N.
General Assembly's decision (November 29, 1947), which preceded
the Declaration of Independence. The War of Independence lasted for a
year and four months. From the outset Israel's position was worse than
that of the Arabs, both in the number of fighters and the poor quality of
its equipment. Many did not believe that the Jews could gain the upper
hand in this battle. At the time, the Jewish community in the country
numbered 600,000. During the war 4,500 soldiers and 1,500 civilians
lost their lives - one percent of the total Jewish population in Israel.
The Arab population exceeded 1,300,000. They were flanked by the
well equipped regular armies of the Arab countries - a total of 100,000
soldiers. Approximately half of the Jewish force was made up of people
who had been active in "underground" organizations such as the
Hagana, Etzel, and Lehi calling themselves 'freedom fighters.' At the
beginning of the war, their ammunition totaled one million bullets, or
50 bullets per rifle. There was a negligible number of larger weapons
such as mortars and there was no organized air force. The entire air
service numbered nine single-engine planes. There was no armored
corps and the naval fleet consisted of a few motor boats.
On May 14, 1948, David ben Gurion declared the establishment of the
State of Israel. This was the day when the British finally left the land of
Israel. It was marked by the departure of the High Commissioner, who
hastened back to England. Thus ended the Mandate on Palestine
On the same day representatives gathered to set up a provisional
Government. Where the independent State of Israel was established.
Those there called on the neighboring Arabs to remain in the country
and to live together in peace.
The day, fears of war became a reality. On May 15, 1948, regular Arab
armies invaded the newly declared State of Israel. The Egyptians
invaded on the coastal plain, aiming for Tel Aviv. Bitter battles were
waged along the length of the Egyptian front, surprising the Egyptians
with the force and intensity of Israeli resistance. The planned march
on Tel Aviv proceeded more slowly than expected, which gave the
Israeli forces time to regroup on the central front. Near Ashdod, the
Egyptian column was stopped and surrounded.
The Syrian army attacked Degania in the north but was pushed back.
It succeeded, however, in conquering the area of Mishmar Hayarden.
The Lebanese overran the Malchiah area and reached Nazareth. The
Jordanian army succeeded in cutting off Jerusalem from surrounding
settlements. The Etzion Bloc was defeated in the south, Beit Ha'arava
in the east and Neve Ya'akov and Atarot in the north. But the most
tragic defeat was the fall of Jerusalem's Jewish Quarter on May 28, 1948.
On June 11, 1948 a cease fire came into effect. It lasted four weeks,
during which time both sides regrouped and re-equipped their forces.
On July 9, 1948 the fighting resumed. Within ten days the Israeli forces
managed to block the Egyptian army, reopen the road to Jerusalem
and stage several operations which succeeded in connecting Jewish
held areas in the city. In the Lower and Western Galilee they retook
large areas. Despite these efforts, however, the Negev remained cut
off and in ten days of fighting all attempts to link up failed. On July 19,
a second cease fire was arranged, but the Egyptians contravened
the cease fire agreement. In the fighting that ensued, the Negev was
liberated. In another operation, the IDF (Israel Defense Forces)
penetrated Sinai, but due to heavy political pressure, they were forced
to retreat. In March 1949 the War of Independence ended. One Arab
country after another signed cease fire agreements with Israel, starting
with Egypt on February 24 and concluding with Syria on July 20. These
agreements specified the interim borders between Israel and the Arab
states, as decided by the outcome of the battles. Procedures for
communications between countries were drawn up. It was agreed that
this would be a temporary agreement, pending peace negotiations
between Israel and her neighbors. Understand that at any time during
this period the entire nation of Israel could have been annihilated, and
every Jew literally slaughtered. It was literally a life and death struggle
far greater than the Palestinian is now experiencing.
During the first four years of statehood, the country had to struggle for
its existence, while simultaneously absorbing over 700,000 immigrants.
These immigrants did not come from prosperous countries. Israel opened
its gates to every Jew simply because he was Jewish. The very first to
be accepted were those who were snatched from the inferno of the
Holocaust. And all the blockade runners - who had been caught and held
by the British in detention camps in Cyprus,
Another group of early immigrants in the period following the establishment
of the State were Jews from Arab countries. They exploited the temporary
willingness of these countries to permit them to emigrate, albeit without
their property. As a result, Jews from Poland, Rumania and Hungary
came to Israel alongside Jews from North Africa, Iraq, Kurdistan and Yemen.
This is just a short history lesson, son. Do not think that Israel was
not born out of the fires of an intense cauldron of hate, from many
corners of the world. I will not justify many of the acts that occurred
at that time. When speaking of a specific act it is impossible to
justify the displacements, the brutalities, and yes, the murders that
were certain to happen. Nor is it possible to point the finger at either
side, without recognizing that your other hand must point a finger at
the other side.
Clearly the Jew, in total, has suffered more than the Palestinian, even
though in present day, the pendulum has certainly swung in the
other direction. Most of the true suffering of the Jew in Israel has passed
into history. But all counts of Palestinian displacement from Israel,
pale in comparison to Jewish displacement from other countries
into Israel. See
http://www.hsje.org/forcedmigration.htm
Quoting -- The displacement of 850.000 Jews from Arab countries,
the loss of all their assets and property, and the hardships
accompanying their migration and emigration to Israel, constitute
an aspect of the Middle East refugee problem which has been
neglected. As almost half of the Jewish citizens of Israel, together
with their descendants, are from Arab countries, peace research
and future peace efforts should take this important part of the history
of the conflict into account, and to address it, in all its complex aspects.
/unquote/
When you ask how many Palestinians are still in Israel today.
I would ask you how many Jews are in Saudi Arabia?
Has the Jew enjoyed greater assistance from the U.S. than the
Palestinian in terms of economic support? Of course --- From private
sources. Since the American Jew constitutes a much larger and
admittedly more prosperous group than the American Palestinian,
who is practically invisible economically on the U.S. landscape.
Has the American public and government been BLIND to the plight
of the Palestinian? Not a chance.
> _________________________________
>
> [My own reasoning for Israel's _right_to_exist_ stands, of course. It is the
> reason for which The Meister called me an anti-Semite]
>
Now about that 'right' in the sense of de jure for Israel to exist.
And an apology for one of the more insensitive remarks ever to
appear in this group, regarding a 'star' and a banner.
PV
Jürgen
Na endlich!!!!!!!!!!!
>This is totally independent of the right of Israel to exist.
Why? Explain the diametric discrepancy in this two statements. (A hint to
historical suffering of Jewish people as provided by you in a justificating
sense does not wash)
<historical considerations read & snipped>
>When you ask how many Palestinians are still in Israel today.
>I would ask you how many Jews are in Saudi Arabia?
>Has the Jew enjoyed greater assistance from the U.S. than the
>Palestinian in terms of economic support? Of course --- From private
>sources. Since the American Jew constitutes a much larger and
>admittedly more prosperous group than the American Palestinian,
>who is practically invisible economically on the U.S. landscape.
>
>Has the American public and government been BLIND to the plight
>of the Palestinian? Not a chance.
[Do you believe Israel had settled in the West Banks if sharp and serious
warnings from the US to withdraw their support had been spoken? I do not
believe so.]
>> _________________________________
>>
>> [My own reasoning for Israel's _right_to_exist_ stands, of course. It is
the
>> reason for which The Meister called me an anti-Semite]
>>
>Now about that 'right' in the sense of de jure for Israel to exist.
Yes--where is that right, not according to me, but according to _YOU_? You
called me an anti-semite for my reasoning pro Israel and thus claimed a
reason based on anything other than "fait accompli" - I can not see this
reason. You apparently are trying to construe a "de jure"-justification for
the Jews to occupy a land of their choice for the historical suffering they
had been subjected to. I can not accept this, since 'two wrongs make not a
right'.
You think you can make disappear plain facts by exclamating enough
frequently and loudly 'Anti-Semitism' and 'Anti-Americanism', Sir.
>And an apology for one of the more insensitive remarks ever to
>appear in this group, regarding a 'star' and a banner.
>
Well, sensitive people do recognize themselves in common whether they said
inappropriate or unfair things in the heat of the moment, and do
unrecommendedly apologize. Others sometimes are in need of external hints to
their lapsus, and apologize after having got sufficient well-founded critics
from outstanding observators. The third category however demands quickly for
apologies, but forgets instantly how 'apology' were spelled whenever it
comes to any need for an apology by themselves.
Should there be ever any factual need to post an apology from me then I will
do so. But do never expect an apology from me for your straw-men. The
coincidence of H*****'s symbol to label Jewish humans with the US-symbolism
for their single states is absolutely no reason for an apology. If you take
offence for US-symbolism I'd suggest again to substitute the White Stars in
your banner by Blue Beans.
J.
P.s. (1) Since you are excusing Jewish "misbehavior" with passed atrocities
done to the Jews we will come back to the US-DP soonly. We will discuss
whether a guilty human who was pathetically treated in his/her life would
belong on death row, or whether your excusing scheme would apply only in the
cases of your selection.
P.s. (2) This time, Sir, I will not accept any 'The Jury (=your good self)
is out on Jürgen'. This time the Jury is out on you. You claimed sotto con
voce to be unbiased yourself, whilst I were biased, and even an anti-Semite.
We now will see whether you are able to accept a plain fact, which is that
the Jews drove the Palestinians away in '48, and that the Jews had been in
consequence not 'de jure'-legitimized to build up the State of Israel,
independent from what the US-dominated UN decided.
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:an43tp$3gg$05$1...@news.t-online.com...
side. You've been the one who claims the Palestinians do not
commit such atrocities. In point of fact, the Arabs drove more Jews
away from their lands into Israel, than Israel drove Arabs out of its
land. And THEY also had 'no right to do so.' And trust me.. it BECAME
'Israel's' land. The following is not actually part of my argument in this
matter -- but you cannot put a one-sided face to this issue. Both the
Jew and the Palestinian held an equal division of the land at the time
of the partition. And look today... Israel is green and prosperous.
The Palestinian, still after 50 years, spends all his time trying to
regain what is no longer 'rightfully' his. While the land that is his,
dies around his feet.
> >This is totally independent of the right of Israel to exist.
>
> Why? Explain the diametric discrepancy in this two statements. (A hint to
> historical suffering of Jewish people as provided by you in a justificating
> sense does not wash)
>
Why should I have to 'explain' it to you? Who do YOU arrogantly
presume you are? Clearly I am not RESPONSIBLE to explain it
to you. Certainly not in the face of your, one could call vengeful
attacks on both the U.S. and Israel, without any consideration of
atrocities on the other side of this conflict. Perhaps, YOU should
explain the 'star' you wished planted on the banner of the U.S.,
proclaiming Israel the 53rd State?
> <historical considerations read & snipped>
>
> >When you ask how many Palestinians are still in Israel today.
> >I would ask you how many Jews are in Saudi Arabia?
> >Has the Jew enjoyed greater assistance from the U.S. than the
> >Palestinian in terms of economic support? Of course --- From private
> >sources. Since the American Jew constitutes a much larger and
> >admittedly more prosperous group than the American Palestinian,
> >who is practically invisible economically on the U.S. landscape.
> >
> >Has the American public and government been BLIND to the plight
> >of the Palestinian? Not a chance.
>
> [Do you believe Israel had settled in the West Banks if sharp and serious
> warnings from the US to withdraw their support had been spoken? I do not
> believe so.]
>
It little matters 'what you believe,' since it simply represents your
opinion. I clearly believe that Israel will do what it believes necessary,
regardless of sharp and serious warnings from the U.S. to withdraw
their support. Clearly the latest warnings to Sharon to withdraw from
his siege on Arafat had little impact until he felt OTHER pressures
building within the Palestinians themselves. He recognized that
his efforts were, in fact, making Arafat STRONGER. That was his
reason for withdrawing, even though the U.S. had made considerable
efforts to get him to withdraw earlier. If any one person, can weaken
Israel politically and morally in the eyes of the world, it is Sharon.
> >> _________________________________
> >>
> >> [My own reasoning for Israel's _right_to_exist_ stands, of course. It is
> the
> >> reason for which The Meister called me an anti-Semite]
> >>
> >Now about that 'right' in the sense of de jure for Israel to exist.
>
> Yes--where is that right, not according to me, but according to _YOU_?
Didn't I say you'd never admit that Israel has such a 'right.'?
Personally, I don't NEED to prove that it does to you. Although
it's there, and has been posted here before. Prove that it DOESN'T.
> You
> called me an anti-semite for my reasoning pro Israel and thus claimed a
> reason based on anything other than "fait accompli" - I can not see this
> reason. You apparently are trying to construe a "de jure"-justification for
> the Jews to occupy a land of their choice for the historical suffering they
> had been subjected to. I can not accept this, since 'two wrongs make not a
> right'.
>
You have an irrational hate for the U.S. in regards to it Middle East policy.
You have an irrational hate for Israel
You deny Israel has a 'right' to exist.
You deny Palestinians can be terrorists.
All of these can only lead me to the conclusion you are anti-Semitic.
And let me say that beyond that... you have greatly offended my
country and its people. First, my country by claiming that Israel
is the 53rd U.S. State. Second, its people by bundling in American
Fundamentalists with terrorists.
> You think you can make disappear plain facts by exclamating enough
> frequently and loudly 'Anti-Semitism' and 'Anti-Americanism', Sir.
>
If the shoe fits, sport. I have provided THIRTY clear examples of
your EXACT words that demonstrate what I mean. I notice they've
ALL disappeared. I will not waste any more time with you. Since
all you seem to do is arrogantly ask me the same question over
and over, while I provide a reply over and over. Why don't YOU
start providing some answers? Should you wish the answer to
any further question you've asked me, simply reread the entire thread,
and you will find I've already provided the answer somewhere in there.
Nor will I permit you, as desi feels I should, to hide behind your
country's history. You are one individual... No more...no less.
I find your comments in regard to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict
extremely insensitive, to say the least. Certainly, one-sided,
and most certainly anti U.S. and anti Israeli. I really don't care
WHERE you're from in an individual sense. You would seem no
different in how I see you, if you posted from East Orange, New Jersey.
But it certainly needs NOTING where you are from. Because of the
fear I have for a country with an unbelievably rich history, inhabited
by a race possessed with an extraordinary sense of beauty, spirit,
and intellect unsurpassed. A people who I felt had put aside all
bitterness, and were returning to the greatness they certainly can achieve.
Yet, as I say.. if your myopic thinking represent even a minority of
the people, I feel that this subconscious hate for the Jew has not
been set aside by a hopefully insignificant number of people in your
country. I cannot but believe that you only represent a small faction
of that type of thinking in Germany. Nor will I allow you to HIDE
behind the wall of that great country, feeling it permits you
as an individual to say whatever hateful thing that comes to your
mind, and feel you are protected by that birth.
>
> >And an apology for one of the more insensitive remarks ever to
> >appear in this group, regarding a 'star' and a banner.
> >
>
<snip pathetically insensitive remarks simply confirming more surely
that a deep sense of hate for the U.S., it's policies, and its people
is held by Jürgen>
PV
Jürgen
A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>> Why? Explain the diametric discrepancy in this two statements. (A hint to
>> historical suffering of Jewish people as provided by you in a
justificating
>> sense does not wash)
>>
>Why should I have to 'explain' it to you? Who do YOU arrogantly
>presume you are?
<rest snipped unread>
You accuse - you have to explain.
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com...
clipped them, and now ask me to 'explain' again. That could go
on forever.
PV
Jürgen
A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>
>"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com...
>>
>> A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>>
>> >> Why? Explain the diametric discrepancy in this two statements. (A hint
to
>> >> historical suffering of Jewish people as provided by you in a
>> justificating
>> >> sense does not wash)
>> >>
>> >Why should I have to 'explain' it to you? Who do YOU arrogantly
>> >presume you are?
>>
>> <rest snipped unread>
>>
>> You accuse - you have to explain.
>>
>My listing of your 30 comments was the explanation.
Wrong topic. Not my standpoint IYO is what is of interest, but YOUR
justification of Israel's existence. Accusations do not help here, Sir. Put
why the Jews were right in driving the Palestinians away, or admit that this
was not what is called 'de jure'.
J.
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com...
such as you seem to demand. Mainly because of your almost pathological
immediate removal of all references previously provided, and simply
parroting the same refrain to 'again' prove something or other. I
have never claimed that the Palestinian didn't suffer, and doesn't at
this moment suffer greatly. But neither will I admit that the Jew
had his land (and it IS now his), handed to him on a silver-platter
by the U.N. Quite the opposite is true, IMHO.
What you clearly cannot do in any role here, is assume the exalted
position of the 'Grand Inquisitor.' Demanding that I again and again,
provide what I have already provided, and justify my opinion over
and over. I am NOT your 'witness' that you might believe you can
'grill on the witness stand.' Clearly, you are NOT the 'Prosecutor,'
nor anything close to the Judge of what I offer here. I am not
beholden to you, as this 'witness.' And I will not play the role
of the accused. I've offered your comments, my comments,
many URL references and opinions to this and other threads
of the past few days. The jury is neither you or me. I am not
your 'witness,' Herr Prosecutor... and I will not play that role.
I have, in the past few days, over and over, expressed a clear
opinion that both sides have suffered, and both sides have
committed atrocities. I have no further obligation. Either to
you, or to this group. From this point on, they need only
examine my words if they care to, or ignore them if they care
to do that. And take them.. if they do examine them.. as my
views only... and not as you presume yourself to be...
the Voice of God.
PV
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com...
away. Clear... my stated view. Anymore than the Arabs were 'right' in
driving the Jews out of their countries when Israel was born. Clear...
my stated view. Here are just a few of the 'numbers' of the Jewish
population in Arab countries forced to migrate after 1948, losing all
their property and goods, just as many Palestinians did in the wake
of the creation of the State of Israel --
COUNTRY 1948 1976
Morocco 265,000 17,000
Algeria 140,000 500
Tunisia 105,000 2,000
Libya 38,000 20
Egypt 100,000 200
Iraq 135,000 400
Syria 30,000 4,350
Lebanon 5,000 150
Yemen 55,000 1,000
Aden 8,000 0
TOTAL 881,000 25,620
See
http://www.hsje.org/forcedmigration.htm
Who speaks for those people, as well as those Palestinians
uprooted from this new Israel? What 'right' provides for THEM
to be oppressed?
Do you KNOW what de jure is? Who gave this God-given
RIGHT of de jure to that land? Are YOU God to presume YOU
can decide what is a de jure right? Clearly, if ANY body can
determine that in our secular lives, it is the present day U.N.
And they did so.
PV
> J.
>
>
>
Jürgen
Exactly. And despite this fact I spoke out *PRO*-Israel, and you called me
an anti-Semite for my reasoning *PRO*-Israel. So I do expect a reasoning
from you which would exceed the mine, and a hint to a formal decision of the
UN is not enough. Why was the Palestinian land the right place to build up
the State of Israel?
Good Luck.
J.
Jürgen
Desmond Coughlan schrieb in Nachricht ...
>Le Wed, 2 Oct 2002 17:10:46 +0200, Jürgen <K.J.H...@t-online.de> a
écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>>Wrong topic??? The Jews were not 'right' in driving the Palestinians
>>>away. Clear... my stated view. <....>
>
>> Exactly. And despite this fact I spoke out *PRO*-Israel, and you called
me
>> an anti-Semite for my reasoning *PRO*-Israel. So I do expect a reasoning
>> from you which would exceed the mine, and a hint to a formal decision of
the
>> UN is not enough. Why was the Palestinian land the right place to build
up
>> the State of Israel?
>
>fact diametrically opposed to the view that you have already expressed
>here ?
>
>No. Really ?
>
Yes, exactly this he does. He wants to fabricate anti-Semitism from that he
feels not comfortable with my reasoning, although I well stand for a state
of Israel. He wants to put forward that I would lie and rather advocate
implicitely for an extermination of Israel, since I call the origin of
Israel illegitime. This is (1) a plain character assassination of him, and
(2) he yet failed to put any point why Israel were existing rightfully where
it is located: On pre-1948-ly Arabic ground.
Jürgen
Jürgen
A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>I have, in the past few days, over and over, expressed a clear
>opinion that both sides have suffered, and both sides have
>committed atrocities. I have no further obligation.
BullShit "Voice Of God".
You launched a personal accusation of anti Semitism against me for my
reasoning pro-Israel, and claimed to hold the real reasoning. So put this
reasoning: Why exactly has Israel been legitimatedly founded on in '48
Arabic ground?
A Planet Visitor
> >>away. Clear... my stated view. <....>
>
> > Exactly. And despite this fact I spoke out *PRO*-Israel, and you called me
> > an anti-Semite for my reasoning *PRO*-Israel. So I do expect a reasoning
> > from you which would exceed the mine, and a hint to a formal decision of the
> > UN is not enough. Why was the Palestinian land the right place to build up
> > the State of Israel?
>
> fact diametrically opposed to the view that you have already expressed
> here ?
>
> No. Really ?
>
a *PRO*-Israel view. There is no evidence of that whatsoever. Since he
does not believe Israel has a 'right' to exist, and that it sits on eternal
Palestinian land. Putting this into another context, we could presume
he is saying that he is *PRO*-God... but 'God' has no 'right' to exist.
PV
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com...
were squatting on land that eternally belonged to the Palestinians,
perhaps? Why do you presume it was 'Palestinian land'? I always
though the 'land' belongs to nature. Clearly, I've already... at the
end of WW II, it could just as well have been Bavaria, that was
declared such a state. In some form of retribution. And the German
would necessarily have needed to share that land... because it is not
'eternally' German.. just as 'East Prussia' was not 'eternally' German.
It is the height of hypocrisy and arrogance to believe that some
'supernatural force' has ceded for eternity some particular people the
land which belongs to all of us, and none of us.
So, your question might as well be posed as 'why not Bavaria?'
as well as 'why the Middle East?' Certainly, I understand that
you would have preferred it to be Montana (lacking an ability to
populate Mars), but I'm quite certain you prefer the Middle East
rather than Bavaria.
> Good Luck.
I would certainly never call you an 'anti-Semite' if you expressed a
*PRO*-Israel view. Quite the contrary. I might call you 'stupid' if
you were one-sided in that view. And I might call you a few other
things in reference to any particular comment you might make holding
that view. But I would certainly not call you an anti-Semite for holding
a pro-Jewish view. The very idea is counter-intuitive. One can only
be called 'possibly anti-Semitic' if they hold an ANTI-Jew view.
Whether you ARE anti-Semitic or not is not mine to determine.
Just as whether the DP is moral or not is not mine to determine.
We form our opinions based on our personal viewpoints, and
those viewpoints compel no other viewer to find the same
conclusion. This is part of your problem in respect to the DP
argument as well. You continue to believe that people MUST
accept YOUR viewpoint, and cannot form their own.
Given what I've now said --- I find in 'my opinion' that your views
are highly suspect in respect to anti-Semitism. There is a
certain deep rage I see in you against the Jew, who you
believe is not only squatting on eternal Palestinian land, but
who you feel is 'responsible' for much of what is happening
in the world today, because of the Jew's existence. I find that
to be a dangerous viewpoint. Certainly, I have NEVER found
you to express a *PRO-Israel viewpoint. You admit that she
has no 'right' to exist on what you see as Palestinian land.
That can hardly be seen as pro-Israel to me.
So, looking at the above, the caveat is that it represents IMHO.
No more, and no less. Do not try to imply that I contend
others must agree with my view... I do not do so. But, by the
same token... do not try to demand I cannot form such a
view from what I see. Because I can.
PV
> J.
>
>
>
A Planet Visitor
> >>fact diametrically opposed to the view that you have already expressed
> >>here ?
> >>
> >>No. Really ?
>
> > Yes, exactly this he does. He wants to fabricate anti-Semitism from that he
> > feels not comfortable with my reasoning, although I well stand for a state
> > of Israel. He wants to put forward that I would lie and rather advocate
> > implicitely for an extermination of Israel, since I call the origin of
> > Israel illegitime. This is (1) a plain character assassination of him, and
> > (2) he yet failed to put any point why Israel were existing rightfully where
> > it is located: On pre-1948-ly Arabic ground.
>
>
> Still, you're in good company, Jürgen. JPB was accused of calling Judge
> Zobel 'a crook', when he said no such thing, dirt was accused of being
> a moron, when he is...
Well... I would ask you again... the question that you refuse to
answer --
A judge KNOWS Roger Coleman is not guilty.
Roger Coleman is found guilty by a jury.
The judge has the POWER to change that verdict to not guilty.
He allows the guilty verdict to stand.
Q -- In your opinion... is that judge a 'crook' in your eyes?
Just a 'yes' or 'no' will do. As with Thedore Frank.
<rest of hysterical lies clipped>
> How 'intellectual' of him.
>
No.. how presumed 'intellectual' of you. Answer the fucking question.
PV
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com...
In fact you 'can't stand' the state of Israel. It does not have a
de jure existence to you. You cannot play both sides of the
table. You may well accuse the Jews of attrocities, consistent
with a balanced view of the attrocities committed by the
Palestinians. But you cannot say that --
"Israel is factually occupied land, which belongs de jure to
the Palestinians."
Your exact words.. your English is not so limited that you cannot
see that your words do not permit you to say you 'stand' for a
state of Israel. Because in your words.. there IS NO state of
Israel... there is only Palestinian occupied land.
PV
> Jürgen
>
>
>
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 15:13:21 +0000
>
>Le Wed, 2 Oct 2002 17:10:46 +0200, Jürgen <K.J.H...@t-online.de> a écrit
>:
>
>{ snip }
>
>>>Wrong topic??? The Jews were not 'right' in driving the Palestinians
>>>away. Clear... my stated view. <....>
>
>> Exactly. And despite this fact I spoke out *PRO*-Israel, and you called me
>> an anti-Semite for my reasoning *PRO*-Israel. So I do expect a reasoning
>> from you which would exceed the mine, and a hint to a formal decision of
>the
>> UN is not enough. Why was the Palestinian land the right place to build up
>> the State of Israel?
>
>No, wait, Jürgen. LDB claimed that you expressed a view, which is in
>fact diametrically opposed to the view that you have already expressed
>here ?
>
>No. Really ?
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
-out.nuthinbutnews.com!propagator2-sterling!news-in-sterling.newsfeed.com!
newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!
newsfeed.freenet.de!fu-berl
>in.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 15:13:21 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 23
>Message-ID: <slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><BO4k9.28999$R8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap3pai.mih.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Ykuk9.4035$O8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an22su$jb2$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><%A7l9.14603$g73.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an43tp$3gg$05$1...@news.t-online.com>
><CuQl9.26857$O8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com>
><wHTl9.26995$O8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033571764 14124553 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 19:22:45 +0000
>
>Le Wed, 2 Oct 2002 20:01:32 +0200, Jürgen <K.J.H...@t-online.de> a écrit
>:
>
>{ snip }
>
>>>No, wait, Jürgen. LDB claimed that you expressed a view, which is in
>>>fact diametrically opposed to the view that you have already expressed
>>>here ?
>>>
>>>No. Really ?
>
>> Yes, exactly this he does. He wants to fabricate anti-Semitism from that he
>> feels not comfortable with my reasoning, although I well stand for a state
>> of Israel. He wants to put forward that I would lie and rather advocate
>> implicitely for an extermination of Israel, since I call the origin of
>> Israel illegitime. This is (1) a plain character assassination of him, and
>> (2) he yet failed to put any point why Israel were existing rightfully
>where
>> it is located: On pre-1948-ly Arabic ground.
>
>Yes, I know. I was being facetious. :-)
>
>Still, you're in good company, Jürgen. JPB was accused of calling Judge
>Zobel 'a crook', when he said no such thing, dirt was accused of being
>'anti-Semitic' when he has only as much as _mentioned_ Israel once,
>I've been accused of being 'racist', when I have never made a single
>'racist' comment on this newsgroup, and I was accused of saying (and I
>quote), 'Theodore Frank would NOT have murdered again if set free',
>which I did not.
>
>In short, as you said in another post, he fabricates, and then repeats the
>fabrication as often as possible, in the hope that it will pass into 'urban
>legend', and people will start to believe it. When it is pointed out to
>him and all of AADP (except his 'partner in crime', for whom he can do no
>wrong) that he is a liar, he responds with the shortest expression he can
>find, and be sure that it doesn't contain a grammatical error ... 'la de da'.
>
>How 'intellectual' of him.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-b
erlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 19:22:45 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 41
>Message-ID: <slrnapmhs1.1i6.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><BO4k9.28999$R8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap3pai.mih.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Ykuk9.4035$O8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an22su$jb2$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><%A7l9.14603$g73.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an43tp$3gg$05$1...@news.t-online.com>
><CuQl9.26857$O8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com>
><wHTl9.26995$O8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033586681 14494744 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Jürgen
A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>
Oh well I do.
>In fact you 'can't stand' the state of Israel. It does not have a
>de jure existence to you. You cannot play both sides of the
>table.
This is the task of a balanced poster, FYI.
You may well accuse the Jews of attrocities, consistent
>with a balanced view of the attrocities committed by the
>Palestinians. But you cannot say that --
>
>"Israel is factually occupied land, which belongs de jure to
>the Palestinians."
Of course I can say what is historical fact.
J.
Jürgen
A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>
>news:slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net...
>> Le Wed, 2 Oct 2002 17:10:46 +0200, Jürgen <K.J.H...@t-online.de> a
écrit :
>>
>> { snip }
>>
>> >>Wrong topic??? The Jews were not 'right' in driving the Palestinians
>> >>away. Clear... my stated view. <....>
>>
>> > Exactly. And despite this fact I spoke out *PRO*-Israel, and you called
me
>> > an anti-Semite for my reasoning *PRO*-Israel. So I do expect a
reasoning
>> > from you which would exceed the mine, and a hint to a formal decision
of the
>> > UN is not enough. Why was the Palestinian land the right place to build
up
>> > the State of Israel?
>>
>> No, wait, Jürgen. LDB claimed that you expressed a view, which is in
>> fact diametrically opposed to the view that you have already expressed
>> here ?
>>
>> No. Really ?
>>
>Really, no. Jürgen made the presumption here that he has expressed
>a *PRO*-Israel view. There is no evidence of that whatsoever.
"Evidence"? You hold not even "Evidence" that I am anti-DP, strictly spoken.
You have to trust in any the written text's degree of honesty. You now
select from a text what you would like to believe, and are calling the
passages lies which would not fit in your prejudices.
J.
Jürgen
A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>Whether you ARE anti-Semitic or not is not mine to determine.
Then do not type it in your keyboard, simply.
You are apparently believing the prefix "IMHO" would imagine a general
legitimation to express all sorts of impudences, fabricated accusations and
polarizing interpretations. This however is fallacious.
J.
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:angt00$5fl$07$1...@news.t-online.com...
land, which belongs de jure to the Palestinians"
> >In fact you 'can't stand' the state of Israel. It does not have a
> >de jure existence to you. You cannot play both sides of the
> >table.
>
> This is the task of a balanced poster, FYI.
>
What I clearly mean... is that up to this point, as evidenced by
all of your comments, you clearly stated that you did NOT 'stand'
for a State of Israel. As shown above, by your previous comment.
NOW -- Finding yourself boxed into a position that would
cast some doubt as to your MOTIVES for saying what you've
said... you would hypocritically REVERSE yourself, to make
it APPEAR you are 'balanced.' You cannot say you "stand
for a State of Israel," if you also say it has no 'right to exist,'
nor if your argument is that it does not exist, since it 'belongs' to the
Palestinians.
> >You may well accuse the Jews of attrocities, consistent
> >with a balanced view of the attrocities committed by the
> >Palestinians. But you cannot say that --
> >
> >"Israel is factually occupied land, which belongs de jure to
> >the Palestinians."
>
> Of course I can say what is historical fact.
>
Of course, you CANNOT say that this is consistent with your
dual-claim now that you "well stand for a state of Israel."
You cannot 'stand for' that which you believe has 'no right
to stand.' The meaning of the two claims are totally
the opposite. Nor is there any such thing as 'historical
fact' showing that Israel is "factually occupied land."
PV
> J.
>
>
>
>
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:angt8p$5rr$07$1...@news.t-online.com...
presume there IS NO 'legally constituted' Israel. That evidence is
contained in your very exact words -- "Israel is factually occupied land,
which belongs de jure to the Palestinians"
PV
> J.
>
>
>
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:angtns$6h8$07$1...@news.t-online.com...
>
> A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>
>
> >Whether you ARE anti-Semitic or not is not mine to determine.
>
> Then do not type it in your keyboard, simply.
>
a factually 'proof' is not mine to determine. Clearly I find the
DP to be moral. But I make no claim to it BEING moral.
Simply that I find it, in my own personal framework to be
'moral.' No one can deny me saying that -- just as no one
can deny me forming an opinion, as long as I provide the
words from you that provided this opinion. I have provided
those words in 30 separate direct quotes from you.
> You are apparently believing the prefix "IMHO" would imagine a general
> legitimation to express all sorts of impudences, fabricated accusations and
> polarizing interpretations. This however is fallacious.
>
Not as long as I provide some substances to my belief... I positively
HATE to do this, again. Believe me, that is the truth. But you
persist in demanding that I find a 'reason' to say what I've said ---
so again. those 30 statements from you --
1. "Well, a synopsis of the American effords over the last 50 years to do
respect to Palestinian vital interests were helpful at this point."
Certainly, clear evidence that you view Palestinian vital interests
above Israel vital interests. You are in fact claiming the U.S. should
shift its efforts to what you would see as more balance to Palestinian
purposes. One can hardly find anything but bias in those words. And
a rather disgusting supposition that the U.S. is engaged in perpetrating
destructive acts against Palestinians.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2. My words "So, can you perhaps tell me what efforts France, or the
EU for that matter, have made toward resolving the conflict in the Middle
East? I'll tell you what effort. Nothing!"
Your reply: "'Nothing' can be way better than an unilateral support,
providing the ground for zealots to put forward their radical ideas."
The implication that the U.S., trying to negotiate peace in that
region, provides the ground for zealots to put forward their radical
ideas. Actually, quite the opposite is true. Zealots need apathy.
They live for apathy. It is only when one CONFRONTS zealots
that they fear the consequences.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
3. "People begin supporting terrorism if they are frauded chances and
perspectives. Arafat has the support of Palestinians."
And -- "I do not support Arafat. You make this up."
Hardly could I make that up. It's just too ironic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
4. I wrote "At least the U.S. has exerted an effort politically. The U.S. has
rightly condemned both sides in this conflict."
You said "Any consequences exceeding lip-services? Is there a behavior
of Israel thinkable which would seriously endanger Israel to loose the
US-support, or is Israel factually free in action?"
It is quite certain that Israel is factually free in action, irrespective
of the loss of any support. It is simply an implication again that
Israel runs the U.S. A common anti-Semitic sentiment. You are
'afraid' what others might think if you 'directly' attack the'dirty'
Jew. So you claim Israel is the 53rd State of the U.S... slap
a 'star' on its 'banner,' and feel free to attack the U.S.
------------------------------------------
5. "I think Israel's settlers are still where they settled, despite your alleged
US-effords."
I think they are there as well despite your country's lack of effort.
But this is the way you'd wish to take the argument. It's always
an attack on the U.S. in support of Israel. And that IS clearly
an anti-Semitic sentiment. The 'dirty' Jew should not receive
'support' from ANY quarter, in your view. And you are happy
if you see Germany not providing even any political support, in any
respect. Let them 'slug it out,' is your idea. The last man
standing wins.
----------------------------------------------
6. Why do you not simply add another star in your banner and declare
Israel the 53 US-state?
One of the most horrid few lines I have ever read. Totally oblivious
to what you are saying. Coupled with an arrogant attack on BOTH
the U.S. and Israel. Chaining them together as presumable BOTH
common criminals. With a transparent attempt to hope others view
their common purpose to be --killing Palestinians-- Once you claim
there IS such a coupling, you cannot attack the U.S. (which you do
most viciously), without realizing you are ALSO attacking Israel.
Which has clear anti-Semitic undertones. If yours is a common
feeling among Germans, I am deeply troubled. Because it is
skinhead philosophy. In fact, I was stunned. And I replied in part -
"I'm more saddened than angry over such an outburst. It seems that
anti-Semitism has not been erased in your people, and its roots are
again beginning to flourish. Prior to this outburst from you, I had found
you to be at the least PRINCIPLED, even if I found your views wrong.
I can no longer find you PRINCIPLED in the comment you just provided."
You will notice that I, and I am not especially clever, made the
immediate connection to 'the star.' You were NOT thinking. Or
even worse... you might have been subconsciously thinking.
--------------------------------------------
7. "The problem rather is that any partitioner in the conflict inclusive their
associated can per definitionem not be an arbiter."
Again, your clear meaning that the U.S. cannot be an arbiter, because
you presume the connection to Israel is biased. Which is an attack
on U.S. Policy in respect to Israel. But by attacking the U.S., (and
you do), then by extension of the fact you have claimed the U.S.
and Israel are as one, you are attacking Israel as well. Thus, the
road to Anti-Semitism.
-------------------------------------------------
8. "I tell you what. As horrible particularly the German crimes against
the Jews had been, there results no justification for neither the Jews
nor the Americans from to kill even ONE innocent human."
Does ANYONE other than me, see the absence of ANY mention
of the death of innocent Jews? That is a particularly damaging
statement in respect to your possible subconscious denial of
those murders. I believe you DO only see one side of this issue.
And as the dialog progressed, you found yourself needing to
assert more and more toward the end, that you were NOT biased.
But you certainly came ON as biased. And even now.. with
your play on words, such as 'indispensable,' to avoid any
mention of 'right.'
----------------------------------------------------
9. "[Europe engages in alternate, renewable energy-resources plus
energetically economical technics, last not least in view of Kyoto,
and will so step by step reduce the dependence of oil.]"
A comment you provided presumable as an 'answer' to the
argument -- what is Europe doing in respect to this problem?
See any mention of 'lives,' there?
----------------------------------------------------------
10. I asked ''Is there any behavior of the Palestinian terrorist which
would cause YOU to change YOUR support?"
And totally avoiding that question (as usual), you replied "You are wrong.
I do not support Hamas, AlQua'eda, or any 'drive-the-Jews-into-the-sea'-
Palestinians. I do support *NO* zealots. Not the Taleban, not the
Fatah, not the Hamas, not the Intifada, no Skinheads, no American
fundamentalists."
Notice how you threw Americans among those others... guilt by
association come to mind? It was a pitiful display of sanctimonious
'piety,' which neither answered the question, nor demonstrated any
real 'piety.' In fact... the last two words you threw in, "American
fundamentalists," would seem to be your effort to CONNECT them
with those other groups you first mention. Sounds racist to me.
------------------------------------------------------------
11, Germany does very, very well in holding a neutral position in this
conflict. Very, very well, Sir. Very, very, very well.
Exactly how? This is that part of 'nationalistic superiority' I see
from you. Condemn the U.S. at will. Avoid condemning Israel
by simply making the U.S. one and the same... believing you
can now condemn the U.S without anyone realizing you are
also condemning Israel when you do so. And claim German
superiority. I do not condemn Germans. But I worry about
YOU.
----------------------------------------------------------------
12. "In fact, it was you US-honey-pies who lifted the lot of most
cynical regimes on the thrones - for exactly oil."
Like Kadaffi... the Ayatollah...Saddam...
Get real. And in any case. A typical attack on the U.S.,
which by extension is an attack on Israel.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
13. "You are trying to define neutrality as a partitioner in the conflict. This
is exactly the same naive mistake than trying to give the arbiter while
simultaneously taking part in the game."
See 2, and 11, above
----------------------------------------------------------------
14. My words "There is no doubt they are BOTH to blame, which was the
context of my citing only the acts I am aware of in this research.
But clearly the Jew has engaged in no 'suicide bombings,' which
to me are totally insane, and rather demonstrate the insanity
behind such terrorist acts.
Yours -- ''If Palestinian civilians are shot and bombed in their houses
then this is more legitime than suicide bombings' - is this what
you want to proclaim?"
A clear demonstration of twisting words which STATE ''There is
no doubt they are BOTH to blame." In respect to 'suicide
bombing' it is a FACT that the Jewish use is almost
insignificant. I know of no instant... although I'm sure there
have been a few.
----------------------------------------------------------------
15. "The difference between the US and Europe is that the latter know the
essential rules of diplomacy. You and your fabulous nation have difficulties
to even UNDERSTAND that anyone taking sides in the game can not
simultaneously give the part of the referee."
See 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 11 and 13, above.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
16. "The top however is your current leading equipe. The guys are doing
their best to fight against freedom by restricting civil rights to zero; indeed I
daresay Bush and Ashcroft are Usama Ben Laden's best combattants, as they
alltogether pursue the same goal: The end of freedom.
Need I count the ways you have insulted the U.S. and its
officers and policies here? And by doing so, it is clearly
meant to imply that Israel is part of the U.S., thus your
attack is on Israel as well. Guess what I see in that?
------------------------------------------------------------------
17. The United States of America are directly responsible for the Taleban's
terrorism, for one pure reason: The flow of OIL towards the world's greatest
producer of dirt. Your nation, Meister, gives provenly a damn for innocent
deads. So do yourself a favor and be quiet about opportunism for oil.
Actually, that's the silliest argument of all. Since the U.S. is
hardly dependent on oil from the Middle East. While Europe
would suffer an economic catastrophe should that flow stop.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
18. "I rather establish that the US took side in a conflict while
trying to appear neutral."
You didn't 'establish' anything. You continually presented your
'opinion.' And I saw something very disturbing in that opinion.
I saw racism against the U.S., it's policies and its people
(American Fundamentalists). And I saw you trying to connect
the U.S. and Israel as ONE. Both consciously and sub-consciously.
And I saw you try to 'pin a Jewish star' on the U.S. And
thus, whenever you attacked the U.S, I saw that as an attack
on Israel. And when I decided to withdraw from your rather
sick little game, you turned to again insult me, and my country.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
19. "One phrase is enough, again: You and your fabulous nation have
difficulties to even UNDERSTAND that anyone taking sides in the
game can not simultaneously give the part of the referee."
Simply the same as I've mentioned above. Attacks on the U.S ==>
connect Israel to the U.S. ==> Attacks on Israel ==> bias in
the Israeli/Palestinian conflict ==> I hate to draw this conclusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------
20. "The US are a simple WarLord in the Near Eastern and did and
do unlimitedly support Sharon, a most radical and fundamentalistic guy"
This is one of your worst one. There is no doubt that Sharon is
a disaster for both sides. I have called him a 'monster.' But what
you have done here, is presume that ALL of Israel is Sharon.
Once again, there is only one conclusion that can be drawn
from your words. It is a negative bias in respect to Israel.
You NEVER mention any negative bias in respect to the
Palestinians. Even when you speak of terrorists...It is always
'third-party' terrorists. Those 'other' terrorists. Not the
freedom-loving Palestinian variety terrorist. They're simply
'freedom fighters.' Are you prepaped to call them terrorists?
Totally and fundamentally.
-------------------------------------------------------------
21. "Fact is that Israel is in no way threatened in her existence."
There is nothing else to call this but a lie. I provided page
after page of comments from radical Muslims and Palestinians
who will accept NO State of Israel... under ANY conditions,
EVER. Having NOTHING to do with any form of U.S. policy,
but simply a condition of their faith. U.S. Policy changes will
not alter that one bit. You promised that you had
heard similar for Jewish sources. I have yet to see them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. I posted -- and this is the ONLY one you left in and
responded too --
"'Remember: The last and inevitable result will be the victory of the
Muslims over the Jews.' Our Arabic language for the 7th Class,
S. 67." - Gal Ben Ari (2002:45)
'This religion (= Islam) will destroy all other religions, and it will be
spread by Allah's will, by the Muslim fighters of the Holy War.'
Islamic education for the 7th Class, part 2, P. 67." - Gal Ben Ari,
The seed of hate. Jews and Israel in the Arab media (2002:46)"
You replied, rather pitifully, and again piously -- "As long as no
strong *inner-Muslimic* counter-movement to the ideology above
will get its feet on the ground there is no chance to get this hatred under
control. Thus, for to come to a real solution of the conflict it is not
especially useful to glare at the hatemongers, which doubtlessly are present
not too few, but it rather is necessary to get clear *WHY* such hateful
attitudes do function as a "seed". An answer to 'What are the reasons for
terrorism's prosperity?' is what can lead to a solution. What however does
not lead to a solution is to support one side by bashing at the other."
I was totally intrigued by your last words. Since you have continually
bashed the U.S... connected the U.S. directly to Israel... which is
a clear indication you are trying to bash Israel. And nowhere in
there, was there an indication of condemnation of Palestinian
terrorists, but rather an 'explanation' of 'why they do it.'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
23. "Oh...of course. Who dares criticize the general licence from the
US to Israel for ad-libitum-suppression of Palestinians were "anti-Semitic".
Well.. you draw the dots.
U.S. ==> bad
Israel ==> bad
Palestinians ==> good
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
24, (1) Since being the home of a community for more than half a century
Israel has become indispensible. It would make no sense to fight against a
humanitary catastrophy via substituting it by a new one. (2) Nevertheless
Israel is factually occupied land, which belongs de jure to the Palestinians.
Thus Israel is in obligation to make far-going concessions to the
Palestinian people.
Your (1) seems to very reluctantly say 'well... if we must.'
I felt then, and I feel now... that you would be 'happier' if we
moved those 'dirty' Jews to Montana, so you wouldn't have to
'think about them' any more. While in (2), you almost
RETRACT what you said in (1). It's 'occupied,' not 'really
theirs.' Implying that if push comes to shove, the Palestinians
have a 'right' to take it back, unless Israel makes 'far-going
concessions.' Clearly you go too far. What Israel MUST
DO is return to its own land. Vacate the West Bank. But
they do not need to make 'concessions' in respect to
THEIR land. They must simply admit that what is theirs
is theirs, and not one square meter more. That's not a
concession... it is what they should RIGHTLY DO. Until
they do, no one can claim that Israel is in the 'right.'
But, clearly, they are not the only ones in the wrong.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25. My words -- "Have some Jews committed atrocities?
Of course. Have some Palestinians committed atrocities?
Of course."
You replied -- "Why then do you support the totally unreflected
support of Israel by the US?"
Again. A transparent twisting of my words. And a clear attack
on U.S. policy... claiming it supports Israel... which is as
much an attack on Israel... you know where that leads.
NEVER do you criticize the Palestinians. The closest you
come is you piously state you are 'neutral.' But your words
don't SUBSTANTIATE that 'neutrality.' It is somewhat like
French Vichy was 'neutral' in WW II... ho ho ho.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. "You, perfectly represening your entire nation, claim verbally
a balanced view, whilst you simultaneously are supporting and
sponsoring the _way_stronger_ side in a bilateral conflict.
Again... this is clearly an attack against what you presume
is the 'stronger side,' implying 'aggressor' implying prejudice
against that 'aggressor.' Implying prejudice against the
Jew.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
27. "I heard "Orthodox" Jewish statements which pretty resembled
in wording and semantic the collection of Palestinian fundamentalisms
provided by you above"
Funny... I've 'heard' a lot of things. But I haven't seen you put
any of them here. While I've put up a great number of statements
from 'the other side.'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
28. "'The Jew' for to address the Jews, and 'The Palestinian' for to address the
Palestinians, but that you even spoke of 'The terrorist' in our conversation
[Thread 'War' by John Rennie]. I feel this personifications for dangerous.
They tend to make forget that freely thinking individuals are the grains of
any society, ethnicy or group, and make it easy to judge over an entity by
inherently claiming unanimosity.
Another effort to DISCONNECT 'the terrorist' from the
Palestinian. In other words.. there are ONLY 'the Jew'
and 'the Palestinian.' One does not speak of the 'terrorist.'
Anyone see what I see in those words?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
29. "I am awaiting your proper derivation of Israel's right to exist on
the ground from which the Palestinians had been driven away."
So there we have it... Israel is merely 'indispensable.' You
DENY her 'right to exist.' I'm the one who needs to PROVE it to
you. Oh, Jürgen... if only you could see the implication in those
words. If Israel does not have a 'right' to exist... your use of
'indispensable' has little meaning. I understand the WAY you
are trying to say it -- as something that cannot be done away
with. But you make it sound like a boil on your ass. It has
no 'right' to be there... but you can't get rid of it... although you
WOULD if you COULD.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
30, "I am consequently snipping your straw people, as I got not the time to go
through your selective reading and your larmoyant accusative moralizations
built upon your own dishonest and projective ideas about other's
standpoints."
In other words... you are too hard-headed. This is one of the main
reasons I wished to withdraw. Because your rage against the U.S.
was becoming too intense. And your connection of Israel to that
rage was too obvious for me to overlook. I did not wish to have to
cite and recite all these points. You could easily have gracefully
remarked in reason, not insult, and it would have been finished.
In a nutshell -- this is what I find above, in those words from you --
1) The Jew is an interloper and a thief.
2) The U.S. is a partner in that thievery.
3)The U.S. took control of an International body in a conspiracy to
steal the land from the Palestinians
4) The Palestinian was excluded from any mention of having
killed children
5) The land was somehow eternally God-given to the Palestinians.
6) Israel is actually land only 'occupied' by the Jew, but belongs
eternally to the Palestinians.
7)The State of Israel does not have a de jure 'right' to exist at this moment.
Those points are why I have said what I have said.
PV
> J.
>
>
>
>
Jürgen
You are obviously not capable to consider more than one parameter.
J.
Jürgen
See above in the thread. This phrase is ONE fact. To come to a conclusion it
is useful to consider ALL facts and facets.
John Rennie
> Le Wed, 02 Oct 2002 22:46:09 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> > What a crock of shit... you do not 'stand' for a state of Israel.
> > In fact you 'can't stand' the state of Israel. It does not have a
> > de jure existence to you. You cannot play both sides of the
> > table. You may well accuse the Jews of attrocities, consistent
> > with a balanced view of the attrocities committed by the
> > Palestinians. But you cannot say that --
> >
> > "Israel is factually occupied land, which belongs de jure to
> > the Palestinians."
> >
> > Your exact words.. your English is not so limited that you cannot
> > see that your words do not permit you to say you 'stand' for a
> > state of Israel. Because in your words.. there IS NO state of
> > Israel... there is only Palestinian occupied land.
>
> 'factually occupied land', posted from Jürgen's e-mail address of
> 'K.J.H...@t-online.de'.
>
>
url:http://groups.google.com/groups?as_epq=factually%20occupied%20land&ie=IS
O-8859-1&as_uauthors=K.J.Hartwig%40t-online.de&lr=&as_scoring=d&hl=fr
>
> Guess what : I can't find any mention of his writing it. Is this another
> lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even though at no point have
> I made a single racist comment ?
>
> --
> Desmond Coughlan
Ah dear me - you don't understand PV's technique yet after all these years.
Poor Jurgen doesn't have to actually write 'factually occupied land' he
merely has to 'imply' it.
John Rennie
> Le Fri, 4 Oct 2002 09:08:43 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> Guess what : I can't find any mention of his writing it. Is this
another
> >> lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even though at no point have
> >> I made a single racist comment ?
>
years.
> > Poor Jurgen doesn't have to actually write 'factually occupied land' he
> > merely has to 'imply' it.
>
>
> --
> Desmond Coughlan
I have told him so enough times. Are you missing these particular posts?
John Rennie
> Le Fri, 4 Oct 2002 14:57:25 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
écrit :
>
> >> >> Guess what : I can't find any mention of his writing it. Is this
> > another
> >> >> lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even though at no point
have
> >> >> I made a single racist comment ?
>
> >> > Ah dear me - you don't understand PV's technique yet after all these
> > years.
> >> > Poor Jurgen doesn't have to actually write 'factually occupied land'
he
> >> > merely has to 'imply' it.
>
> >> Is this an admission on your part that LDB lies, John ?
>
posts?
>
> gentle 'prods', delivered almost apologetically, and suggesting that such
> and such a poster, might not have made the comment in question, in quite
the
> way that LDB suggests ...
>
> --
> Desmond Coughlan
You, not I, share one or two of PV's characteristics. The saddest of which
is that you see only what you want to see. I have told PV that he lies, I
have told him that he invents strawdogs, I have told him that because he
does these stupid things he has become a laughing stock. (Still more than a
match for you tho'. ;-))
A Planet Visitor
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
or an incompetent. When I use double-quotes, in the method I have
done here, there is no question that I intend to provide an accurate
and direct 'clip and paste' quote. In this case, see
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl892410675d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=am53vc%24m9s%2402%241%40news.t-on
line.com&rnum=75
I would hope that you recognize this.
PV
A Planet Visitor
> Le Fri, 4 Oct 2002 09:08:43 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> Guess what : I can't find any mention of his writing it. Is this another
> >> lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even though at no point have
> >> I made a single racist comment ?
>
> > Poor Jurgen doesn't have to actually write 'factually occupied land' he
> > merely has to 'imply' it.
>
>
the net. And YOU calling ME a liar, is somewhat like the Pope calling
someone else 'A Catholic.'
See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl892410675d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=am53vc%24m9s%2402%241%40news.t-on
line.com&rnum=75
A Planet Visitor
> Le Fri, 4 Oct 2002 14:57:25 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a écrit :
>
> >> >> Guess what : I can't find any mention of his writing it. Is this
> > another
> >> >> lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even though at no point have
> >> >> I made a single racist comment ?
>
> >> > Ah dear me - you don't understand PV's technique yet after all these
> > years.
> >> > Poor Jurgen doesn't have to actually write 'factually occupied land' he
> >> > merely has to 'imply' it.
>
> >> Is this an admission on your part that LDB lies, John ?
>
>
> gentle 'prods', delivered almost apologetically, and suggesting that such
> and such a poster, might not have made the comment in question, in quite the
> way that LDB suggests ...
>
Just as with "execreta" (sic). See
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl892410675d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=am53vc%24m9s%2402%241%40news.t-on
line.com&rnum=75
But, I can imagine you will say 'no apology is necessary, since I
had 'good intentions' when I lied.'
A Planet Visitor
> Le Wed, 02 Oct 2002 22:46:09 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> > In fact you 'can't stand' the state of Israel. It does not have a
> > de jure existence to you. You cannot play both sides of the
> > table. You may well accuse the Jews of attrocities, consistent
> > with a balanced view of the attrocities committed by the
> > Palestinians. But you cannot say that --
> >
> > "Israel is factually occupied land, which belongs de jure to
> > the Palestinians."
> >
> > Your exact words.. your English is not so limited that you cannot
> > see that your words do not permit you to say you 'stand' for a
> > state of Israel. Because in your words.. there IS NO state of
> > Israel... there is only Palestinian occupied land.
>
> 'factually occupied land', posted from Jürgen's e-mail address of
> 'K.J.H...@t-online.de'.
>
>
url:http://groups.google.com/groups?as_epq=factually%20occupied%20land&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_uauthors=K.J.Hartwig%40t-online.
de&lr=&as_scoring=d&hl=fr
>
> lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even though at no point have
> I made a single racist comment ?
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl892410675d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=am53vc%24m9s%2402%241%40news.t-on
line.com&rnum=75
/Quote/ (2) Nevertheless Israel is factually occupied land, which belongs de jure to
the Palestinians. Thus Israel is in obligation to make far-going concessions
to the Palestinian people./unquote/
A Planet Visitor
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:s7hn9.364$7w5.59834@newsfep2-gui...
a liar. See
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl892410675d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=am53vc%24m9s%2402%241%40news.t-on
line.com&rnum=75
PV
A Planet Visitor
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:Rshn9.672$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
the words I quoted were absolutely accurate -- See
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl892410675d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=am53vc%24m9s%2402%241%40news.t-on
line.com&rnum=75
You have to quit 'trusting' desi so much in his 'research.' And that should
be clear by now.
PV
John Rennie
> Le Fri, 4 Oct 2002 15:20:29 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> > I have told him so enough times. Are you missing these particular
> > posts?
>
> >> Evidently. All I have seen (and I say this without malice) so far, are
> >> gentle 'prods', delivered almost apologetically, and suggesting that
such
> >> and such a poster, might not have made the comment in question, in
quite
> > the
> >> way that LDB suggests ...
>
which
> > is that you see only what you want to see. I have told PV that he
lies, I
> > have told him that he invents strawdogs, I have told him that because he
> > does these stupid things he has become a laughing stock. (Still more
than a
> > match for you tho'. ;-))
>
>
8&selm=Hb_C7.21371%24a14.1877179%40news6-win.server.ntlworld.com&rnum=5
>
> I quote ...
>
> '(BTW PV doesn't lie - he may be mistaken now and again
> but he is not a liar - silly Jurgen)'
>
> --
> Desmond Coughlan
Well on the 28th of October, 2001, I may have been of that opinion. The
last two years have caused me to revise my position regarding PV's veracity.
A Planet Visitor
> Le Fri, 04 Oct 2002 14:43:33 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> 'factually occupied land', posted from Jürgen's e-mail address of
> >> 'K.J.H...@t-online.de'.
>
> >
> > line.com&rnum=75
>
> Acknowledged.
>
LOL... Acknowledged with the most crimson-colored ass (in this
particular case -- for your benefit -- ARSE) possible. Now
kiss the ring. And apologize.
A Planet Visitor
> >>
> >> '(BTW PV doesn't lie - he may be mistaken now and again
> >> but he is not a liar - silly Jurgen)'
>
> > last two years have caused me to revise my position regarding PV's veracity.
>
> to 'bite' him these past few months, I would have been _astonished_ if you
> still considered him 'honest'.
>
LOL... As I said -- you calling me a liar, is like the Pope calling
someone 'a Catholic.'
A Planet Visitor
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:8rin9.1097$YB1.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
quoted Jürgen, ABSOLUTELY accurately, while desi presumed to
argue that I had lied.
PV
John Rennie
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
news:xrln9.6722$S8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
So acknowledged - I remove said slur from the bin wherein still lies "Zobel
is a crook" and "He WOULD prefer that Theodore Frank murder another child
RATHER than be executed."
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 11:36:08 +0000
>
>Le Fri, 4 Oct 2002 09:08:43 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Guess what : I can't find any mention of his writing it. Is this another
>>> lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even though at no point have
>>> I made a single racist comment ?
>
>> Ah dear me - you don't understand PV's technique yet after all these years.
>> Poor Jurgen doesn't have to actually write 'factually occupied land' he
>> merely has to 'imply' it.
>
>Is this an admission on your part that LDB lies, John ?
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!cano
e.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp21
2-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 11:36:08 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 18
>Message-ID: <slrnapqv98.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><BO4k9.28999$R8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap3pai.mih.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Ykuk9.4035$O8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an22su$jb2$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><%A7l9.14603$g73.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an43tp$3gg$05$1...@news.t-online.com>
><CuQl9.26857$O8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com>
><wHTl9.26995$O8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033731649 15508148 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 14:07:32 +0000
>
>Le Fri, 4 Oct 2002 14:57:25 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
>écrit :
>
>>> >> Guess what : I can't find any mention of his writing it. Is this
>> another
>>> >> lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even though at no point have
>>> >> I made a single racist comment ?
>
>>> > Ah dear me - you don't understand PV's technique yet after all these
>> years.
>>> > Poor Jurgen doesn't have to actually write 'factually occupied land' he
>>> > merely has to 'imply' it.
>
>>> Is this an admission on your part that LDB lies, John ?
>
>> I have told him so enough times. Are you missing these particular posts?
>
>Evidently. All I have seen (and I say this without malice) so far, are
>gentle 'prods', delivered almost apologetically, and suggesting that such
>and such a poster, might not have made the comment in question, in quite the
>way that LDB suggests ...
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
feed.news2me.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!opentransit.net!fu-b
erlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 14:07:32 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 25
>Message-ID: <slrnapr854.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><BO4k9.28999$R8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap3pai.mih.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Ykuk9.4035$O8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an22su$jb2$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><%A7l9.14603$g73.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an43tp$3gg$05$1...@news.t-online.com>
><CuQl9.26857$O8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com>
><wHTl9.26995$O8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapqv98.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><s7hn9.364$7w5.59834@newsfep2-gui>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033740562 15077676 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 22:19:32 +0000
>
>Le Fri, 4 Oct 2002 22:44:03 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
>écrit :
>{ snip }
>
>>> Nonetheless, I would expect acknowledgement from you that I
>>> quoted Jürgen, ABSOLUTELY accurately, while desi presumed to
>>> argue that I had lied.
>
>> So acknowledged - I remove said slur from the bin wherein still lies "Zobel
>> is a crook" and "He WOULD prefer that Theodore Frank murder another child
>> RATHER than be executed."
>
>And the rest.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!wn11
feed!worldnet.att.net!206.191.82.231!rockie.attcanada.net!newsfeed.attcana
da.net!204.71.34.3!newsfeed.cwix.com!skynet.be!skynet.be!fu-berlin.de!uni-
berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-
>68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 22:19:32 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 17
>Message-ID: <slrnaps4vk.c9v.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><an43tp$3gg$05$1...@news.t-online.com>
><CuQl9.26857$O8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com>
><wHTl9.26995$O8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapqv98.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><s7hn9.364$7w5.59834@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnapr854.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Rshn9.672$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapra9n.ade.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><8rin9.1097$YB1.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><xrln9.6722$S8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><JYnn9.2421$975.1...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033770103 15251079 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 20:28:55 +0000
>
>Le Fri, 04 Oct 2002 18:52:13 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Well on the 28th of October, 2001, I may have been of that opinion. The
>>> last two years have caused me to revise my position regarding PV's
>veracity.
>
>> Nonetheless, I would expect acknowledgement from you that I
>> quoted Jürgen, ABSOLUTELY accurately, while desi presumed to
>> argue that I had lied.
>
>Everyone here knows that you lie. Thus, if I had accused you of lying
>in the 'factually occupied' 'quote' (sic), then it would have been
>justified. However, I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt, and
>wrote ...
>
> 'Guess what : I can't find any mention of his writing it. Is
> this another lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even
> though at no point have I made a single racist comment ?'
>
>In other words, I _asked_ you if it was a lie. As 98.8% (source:
>Gallup) of your posts _are_ lies, it was just pure luck that this one
>wasn't.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-b
erlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 20:28:55 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 28
>Message-ID: <slrnaprug7.beu.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><%A7l9.14603$g73.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an43tp$3gg$05$1...@news.t-online.com>
><CuQl9.26857$O8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com>
><wHTl9.26995$O8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapqv98.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><s7hn9.364$7w5.59834@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnapr854.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Rshn9.672$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapra9n.ade.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><8rin9.1097$YB1.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><xrln9.6722$S8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033763508 15858134 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 14:46:31 +0000
>
>Le Fri, 04 Oct 2002 14:43:33 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Just out of curiosity, I ran a search on google for the expression
>>> 'factually occupied land', posted from Jürgen's e-mail address of
>>> 'K.J.H...@t-online.de'.
>
>>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl892410675d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&
oe=UTF-8&selm=am53vc%24m9s%2402%241%40news.t-on
>> line.com&rnum=75
>
>Acknowledged.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-b
erlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 14:46:31 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 17
>Message-ID: <slrnaprae7.ade.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><BO4k9.28999$R8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap3pai.mih.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Ykuk9.4035$O8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an22su$jb2$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><%A7l9.14603$g73.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an43tp$3gg$05$1...@news.t-online.com>
><CuQl9.26857$O8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com>
><wHTl9.26995$O8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><pOhn9.5990$S8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033742908 16098941 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 16:27:25 +0000
>
>Le Fri, 4 Oct 2002 16:26:57 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> I quote ...
>>>
>>> '(BTW PV doesn't lie - he may be mistaken now and again
>>> but he is not a liar - silly Jurgen)'
>
>> Well on the 28th of October, 2001, I may have been of that opinion. The
>> last two years have caused me to revise my position regarding PV's
>veracity.
>
>To be perfectly frank, considering the number of lies which have come back
>to 'bite' him these past few months, I would have been _astonished_ if you
>still considered him 'honest'.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.g
blx.net!nntp.gblx.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!opentransit.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-b
erlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 16:27:25 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 20
>Message-ID: <slrnaprgbd.akl.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><an22su$jb2$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><%A7l9.14603$g73.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an43tp$3gg$05$1...@news.t-online.com>
><CuQl9.26857$O8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com>
><wHTl9.26995$O8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapqv98.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><s7hn9.364$7w5.59834@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnapr854.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Rshn9.672$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapra9n.ade.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><8rin9.1097$YB1.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033749021 15347108 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 14:44:08 +0000
>
>Le Fri, 4 Oct 2002 15:20:29 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> > I have told him so enough times. Are you missing these particular
>> posts?
>
>>> Evidently. All I have seen (and I say this without malice) so far, are
>>> gentle 'prods', delivered almost apologetically, and suggesting that such
>>> and such a poster, might not have made the comment in question, in quite
>> the
>>> way that LDB suggests ...
>
>> You, not I, share one or two of PV's characteristics. The saddest of which
>> is that you see only what you want to see. I have told PV that he lies, I
>> have told him that he invents strawdogs, I have told him that because he
>> does these stupid things he has become a laughing stock. (Still more than
>a
>> match for you tho'. ;-))
>
>
>url:http://groups.google.com/groups?q=PV+lie+author:Rennie&hl=fr&lr=&ie=U
TF-8&selm=Hb_C7.21371%24a14.1877179%40news6-win.server.ntlworld.com&rnum=5
>
>I quote ...
>
> '(BTW PV doesn't lie - he may be mistaken now and again
> but he is not a liar - silly Jurgen)'
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!opentransit.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.d
e!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 14:44:08 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 30
>Message-ID: <slrnapra9n.ade.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><slrnap3pai.mih.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Ykuk9.4035$O8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an22su$jb2$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><%A7l9.14603$g73.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an43tp$3gg$05$1...@news.t-online.com>
><CuQl9.26857$O8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com>
><wHTl9.26995$O8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapqv98.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><s7hn9.364$7w5.59834@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnapr854.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Rshn9.672$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033742755 15868189 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 01:56:55 +0000
>
>Le Wed, 02 Oct 2002 22:46:09 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>> What a crock of shit... you do not 'stand' for a state of Israel.
>> In fact you 'can't stand' the state of Israel. It does not have a
>> de jure existence to you. You cannot play both sides of the
>> table. You may well accuse the Jews of attrocities, consistent
>> with a balanced view of the attrocities committed by the
>> Palestinians. But you cannot say that --
>>
>> "Israel is factually occupied land, which belongs de jure to
>> the Palestinians."
>>
>> Your exact words.. your English is not so limited that you cannot
>> see that your words do not permit you to say you 'stand' for a
>> state of Israel. Because in your words.. there IS NO state of
>> Israel... there is only Palestinian occupied land.
>
>Just out of curiosity, I ran a search on google for the expression
>'factually occupied land', posted from Jürgen's e-mail address of
>'K.J.H...@t-online.de'.
>
>
>url:http://groups.google.com/groups?as_epq=factually%20occupied%20land&ie
=ISO-8859-1&as_uauthors=K.J.Hartwig%40t-online.de&lr=&as_scoring=d&hl=fr
>
>Guess what : I can't find any mention of his writing it. Is this another
>lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even though at no point have
>I made a single racist comment ?
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!mang
o.news.easynet.net!easynet.net!feed.news.nacamar.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berli
n.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.no
>os.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 01:56:55 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 33
>Message-ID: <slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><BO4k9.28999$R8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnap3pai.mih.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Ykuk9.4035$O8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an22su$jb2$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><%A7l9.14603$g73.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an43tp$3gg$05$1...@news.t-online.com>
><CuQl9.26857$O8.10...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com>
><wHTl9.26995$O8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033696723 14709645 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
A Planet Visitor
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:JYnn9.2421$975.1...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
1) The first remark has been duly acknowledged, that if anyone presumed
I meant it as a direct quote from JPB, I specifically state he has
never said those four words in that exact manner. Nonetheless, he
HAS said that Judge Zobel KNOWS that Louise Woodward was not
guilty. And we KNOW that Judge Zobel FOUND her guilty. I conclude
that difference to represent him implying that Judge Zobel is a crook.
Others are welcome to find what they will in that inconsistency. I
personally find it absurd to try and 'justify' it by saying he might be
simply 'incompetent' considering he KNOWS.
2) That is, of course not stating that desi SAID 'I would prefer that
Theodore Frank murder another child rather than be executed.' Obviously,
even he would not be so stupid as to make such a direct statement
as that. My words form MY conclusion that it is what he would prefer,
since he has stated that he would RATHER Theodore Frank be set
free than executed. And he based his rationale on his own question
to himself - when he asked himself -- "Am I willing to gamble on that
infinitesimally small chance that he will kill again ?" and AGAIN,
answered his own question with the same short answer he had
provided before -- "Yes." Certainly, in any perception of a 'gamble'
one presumes an acceptance of a risk one WOULD take, rather
than the alternative of a 'sure bet' (the execution) which would
provide a 'no-lose' alternative. So yes... He would 'prefer' to GAMBLE
on Theodore Frank murdering again, rather than executing him. And
the very idea of him using the words "infinitesimally small chance
he will kill again," knowing what we know of Theodore Frank is
positively revolting to me. Examine the two 'possibilities' of Theodore
Frank murdering again. The first being that it becomes a possibility,
regardless of how remote he presumes that possibility to be, and
the alternative, which permits NO possibility. In those two choices
he chooses that which DOES PROVIDE a possibility. Clearly the
two choices are 'let Frank go free to 'possibly murder again' or 'execute
Frank and allow NO possibility of Frank murdering again.' Placed in
that context he has chosen the former. That is -- his 'preference.'
So yes... in that respect he WOULD prefer (to gamble) that Theodore
Frank murder another child rather than be executed. He has tried
to JUSTIFY that choice by remarking on the small possibility he
sees of that happening. But in the two choices available, you should
have no doubt which he would PREFER. 1) Take a chance 2) Take
no chance.
Finally, I would hope you are also keeping score of desi. For a quick
example of only 3 --
His mis-spelling "Execreta" (sic) to hide his past comment
His Deceptive misquoting of me when he posted "you said that O.J.
Simpson had been convicted of murder in a civil court." Since
I had never said that.
And his most current accusation that I had misquoted Jürgen.
PV
A Planet Visitor
> Le Fri, 04 Oct 2002 18:52:13 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> last two years have caused me to revise my position regarding PV's veracity.
>
> > Nonetheless, I would expect acknowledgement from you that I
> > quoted Jürgen, ABSOLUTELY accurately, while desi presumed to
> > argue that I had lied.
>
> in the 'factually occupied' 'quote' (sic), then it would have been
> justified. However, I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt, and
> wrote ...
>
> this another lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even
>
> In other words, I _asked_ you if it was a lie. As 98.8% (source:
> Gallup) of your posts _are_ lies, it was just pure luck that this one
> wasn't.
>
You accused me of posting words as quotes from Jürgen, which
did not come from him. But they DID. And all your hysterical
raving cannot extract you from that most clumsy of comments.
Every day... it becomes more obvious how cunning and deceitful
you actually are.
A bit of advice -- You should begin consuming small regular doses of
poison, to build up your immunity to any possible act that might be taken
by you wife, relatives of friends.
John Rennie
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
The above is supposed to balance your lies? All that blather
to cover the fact that you made statements that simply were not
true and all you can come up with is a spelling error and the
difference between being 'convicted' and found liable. Desmond
has many faults but when you point out to him errors of fact
he spends no time in admitting them. Increasingly you ruin many
a good argument by just not behaving responsibly. You cannot
resist the odd embellishment, the fatuous strawdog, the
misrepresentation of an argument. You don't need to do
these things - try to behave and we might, just might, take you
and your attitudes that little more seriously.
Jürgen
A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>
>"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:angtns$6h8$07$1...@news.t-online.com...
>>
>> A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>>
>>
>> >Whether you ARE anti-Semitic or not is not mine to determine.
>>
>> Then do not type it in your keyboard, simply.
>>
>I am entitled to my opinion.
An insultive and unreasoned opinion is not what anyone is entitled to.
<Fabrications snipped>
I did not wish to have to
>cite and recite all these points.
I am still awaiting your reasoning what sort of "right" legitimized the Jews
deporting the Palestinians under UN/US-Authority. It is put-time, Master.
Not accusation-time. You claimed, alongside with shouting 'Anti-Semite'- you
put.
You could easily have gracefully
>remarked in reason, not insult, and it would have been finished.
Oh well - I could have swallowed again your impudence, as I did 2 1/2 years
along. You claimed me to be an anti-Semite, since I feel the deportation of
Palestinians not for providing a 'de jure'-ground for a Jewish state. You
claimed to hold a 'de jure'-ground, and should you actually hold such
reason, then clearly the Palestinians had been driven away _righteously_.
Put reason:
________________________________
J.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 10:35:01 +0000
>
>Le Sat, 05 Oct 2002 04:51:58 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>> Guess what... you're a hypocrite... and everyone can now see it.
>> You accused me of posting words as quotes from Jürgen, which
>> did not come from him.
>
>What a delicious irony that in so desperately wanting to demonstrate just
>once, that I have 'lied', you create yet another lie. Soooo delicious !!
>
>In your desperation to show once, just once (jump, LDB !! Jump !!) that I
>have
>'uttered' a dishonest statement, you claim that I 'accused' you of saying
>something I didn't. Ho, ho, ho ... claim whatever you want, Ô Dishonest
>One, for there, in all its glory in my post, is the simple little thing
>called a question mark ... '?' ...
>
> 'Guess what : I can't find any mention of his writing it. Is this
> another lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even though at no
> point have I made a single racist comment ?'
>
>LOL ... and another LOL ... I _asked_ you if you had lied. I didn't _accuse_
>you of it ...
>
>Policeman to Suspect : Did you do it ?
>Suspect to Policeman : Hey, he accused me of doing it !!!!
>
>ROTFLMAO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>{ snip }
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
feed.news2me.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!new
sfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp2
12-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-m
>ail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 10:35:01 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 35
>Message-ID: <slrnaptg2e.d5i.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com>
><wHTl9.26995$O8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapqv98.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><s7hn9.364$7w5.59834@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnapr854.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Rshn9.672$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapra9n.ade.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><8rin9.1097$YB1.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><xrln9.6722$S8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnaprug7.beu.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Odun9.9137$S8.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033814200 16446460 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 10:57:13 +0000
>
>Le Sat, 5 Oct 2002 09:18:38 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip LDB chasing his tail ... around and around he goes ... }
>
>> The above is supposed to balance your lies? All that blather
>> to cover the fact that you made statements that simply were not
>> true and all you can come up with is a spelling error and the
>> difference between being 'convicted' and found liable. Desmond
>> has many faults but when you point out to him errors of fact
>> he spends no time in admitting them.
>
>Thank you, John. Erm ... I think. :-)
>
>Indeed, for all my _many_ faults (mea culpa ...), I do not lie, and this
>has been consisently shown to be the case on this newsgroup.
>
>You will remember (so will LDB, but he wasn't posting as 'PV' at that time)
>when 'Trinity' (who in fact was an alias of Lucas Stults) spent at least a
>month trawling google, to try to find even one occasion where I had 'lied'.
>He failed. As Mark commented once ...
>
> 'Despite my manifold and virulent objections to his opinion on all
> issues, he is clearly principled, honest and peaceful.'
>
>
>url:http://groups.google.com/groups?q=desmond+honest+peaceful+group:alt.a
ctivism.death-penalty&hl=fr&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=9gjadt%24d2j%241%40newsg2.sv
r.pol.co.uk&rnum=1
>
>{ snip }
>
>QED.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news
feed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berl
in.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 10:57:13 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 34
>Message-ID: <slrnapthc8.gkr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><an8vbi$ml$07$1...@news.t-online.com>
><wHTl9.26995$O8.11...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapqv98.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><s7hn9.364$7w5.59834@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnapr854.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Rshn9.672$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapra9n.ade.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><8rin9.1097$YB1.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><xrln9.6722$S8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><JYnn9.2421$975.1...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
><_Ptn9.9056$S8.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><Dfxn9.127$gY1.21175@newsfep2-gui>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033815544 16242692 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:anmdd5$t03$04$1...@news.t-online.com...
>
> A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
> >
> >"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message
> news:angtns$6h8$07$1...@news.t-online.com...
> >>
> >> A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
> >>
> >>
> >> >Whether you ARE anti-Semitic or not is not mine to determine.
> >>
> >> Then do not type it in your keyboard, simply.
> >>
> >I am entitled to my opinion.
>
> An insultive and unreasoned opinion is not what anyone is entitled to.
>
> <Fabrications snipped>
>
> >I did not wish to have to
> >cite and recite all these points.
>
> I am still awaiting your reasoning what sort of "right" legitimized the Jews
> deporting the Palestinians under UN/US-Authority. It is put-time, Master.
> Not accusation-time. You claimed, alongside with shouting 'Anti-Semite'- you
> put.
>
I've already answered that, probably a dozen times here. Yet
you continue to hysterically scream. The State of Israel was
made legitimate by U.N. Resolution 181, and at that moment
assumed the 'rights' due to any sovereign nation. Whether
such a sovereign nation has a 'right' to expel people from their
land is a sovereign nation issue. Personally, I feel it is not
right, for any nation to take such actions. But Israel is not
worse than many other nations who have 'expelled' Jews. None
of it is 'right,' IMHO. But I get the impression that you again
are only seeing this one side... which simply add to my perception
that your anger at the Jews is deeper and perhaps has a different
source than might appear on the surface.
> >You could easily have gracefully
> >remarked in reason, not insult, and it would have been finished.
>
> Oh well - I could have swallowed again your impudence, as I did 2 1/2 years
> along. You claimed me to be an anti-Semite, since I feel the deportation of
> Palestinians not for providing a 'de jure'-ground for a Jewish state. You
> claimed to hold a 'de jure'-ground, and should you actually hold such
> reason, then clearly the Palestinians had been driven away _righteously_.
> Put reason:
>
Why is Israel not really Israel, but instead belongs eternally to the
Palestinian? Put answer here:
> ________________________________
PV
>
> J.
>
>
>
A Planet Visitor
> Le Sat, 05 Oct 2002 04:51:58 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> > You accused me of posting words as quotes from Jürgen, which
> > did not come from him.
>
> once, that I have 'lied', you create yet another lie. Soooo delicious !!
>
> In your desperation to show once, just once (jump, LDB !! Jump !!) that I have
> 'uttered' a dishonest statement, you claim that I 'accused' you of saying
> something I didn't. Ho, ho, ho ... claim whatever you want, Ô Dishonest
> One, for there, in all its glory in my post, is the simple little thing
>
> 'Guess what : I can't find any mention of his writing it. Is this
> another lie along the lines of 'desi is a racist', even though at no
> point have I made a single racist comment ?'
>
> you of it ...
>
> Policeman to Suspect : Did you do it ?
> Suspect to Policeman : Hey, he accused me of doing it !!!!
>
> ROTFLMAO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
remark that you "Can't find any mention of his writing it."
1) You are too stupid to search google.
2) You are lying.
Since it WAS there. So take your choice.
And your 'question' was -- "Is this another lie along the lines of 'desi
is a racist', even though at no point have I made a single racist
comment ?" Which can certainly be refuted by some of your
comments-- such as
1) "'Gimme da dough, mothafucka o ah toast yo ass !!'"
2) 'Gimmie da money, honkey mothafucka, oh ah toast yo ass !!'
3) "smelly 'Jigaboo' auslander."
4) "smelly auslanders."
4) "I even 'tweaked' your nose a few days back, by using theword 'jigaboo'"
5) "ragheads"
6) "Arab cunts"
7) "same bestial beating administered
to LDB's now almost 'jigaboo' buttocks"
8) "All Germans smell of sausage."
9) Plus your many, many uses of the 'N' word.
In fact, IMHO, you're what is referred to as a 'latent racist.' You
PROFESS not to be... in fact, seeming to 'piously' express just
the opposite... but sometimes your words trip you up.
PV
> { snip }
>
> --
> Desmond Coughlan |
A Planet Visitor
> Le Sat, 5 Oct 2002 09:18:38 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a écrit :
>
> { snip LDB chasing his tail ... around and around he goes ... }
>
> > to cover the fact that you made statements that simply were not
> > true and all you can come up with is a spelling error and the
> > difference between being 'convicted' and found liable. Desmond
> > has many faults but when you point out to him errors of fact
> > he spends no time in admitting them.
>
>
> Indeed, for all my _many_ faults (mea culpa ...), I do not lie, and this
> has been consisently shown to be the case on this newsgroup.
>
> You will remember (so will LDB, but he wasn't posting as 'PV' at that time)
> when 'Trinity' (who in fact was an alias of Lucas Stults) spent at least a
> month trawling google, to try to find even one occasion where I had 'lied'.
> He failed. As Mark commented once ...
>
> 'Despite my manifold and virulent objections to his opinion on all
> issues, he is clearly principled, honest and peaceful.'
>
>
url:http://groups.google.com/groups?q=desmond+honest+peaceful+group:alt.activism.death-penalty&hl=fr&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=9
gjadt%24d2j%241%40newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk&rnum=1
>
might try to deny. In fact, you lied with only a few hours in-between
the statement and the lie.
1) Statement from you -- "Re: Murder outside my home" - 2002-07-20
08:30:40 GMT -- "The owner of one of our favourite restaurants where
we used to live, before Drewl had it firebombed, was beaten to death in
1998."
2) But in another thread from the same day -- "Re: Desmond, did Dolly
stop putting out" 18:13:52 GMT -- You remarked to me -- "Eh ? What
are you talking about ? The firebombing ? I did _not_ claim that Drewl
was responsible for that."
Clearly, in 1) you did claim that Drewl had 'firebombed' your flat, and
a few hours later, denied it.
And certainly you lied in your misquote of me, claiming I had used
the word 'murder' in your supposed 'quote' of my words. That word
did not exist within my quotes. And there are so many mis-statements
of yours, that you presume to offer as fact, that one can hardly claim
they do not represent lies. One need only look at the list I periodically
provide. It doesn't matter how Mark found you. That represents only
his opinion. I find you unprincipled (most certainly), dishonest (totally),
and hateful (most decidedly).
PV
> QED.
A Planet Visitor
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:Dfxn9.127$gY1.21175@newsfep2-gui...
Yeah..yeah... yeah.. 'we' might, just might... big fucking deal.
I found that JPB implied that Judge Zobel was a 'crook.'
I found it reprehensible that desi lied in an effort to hide his
posting history, with his purposeful deceptive mis-spelling of
'excreta.'
I find that desi DID choose 'the possibility of Theodore Frank
murdering again' over 'the impossibility of Theodore Frank
murdering again.' The question WAS unfair. And that was
the way he SHOULD have answered it. Rather than presume
he would 'gamble' (his word), on that murder, rather than the
execution. Trick questions are MEANT to 'trick.' And he clearly
WAS 'tricked.' Trick questions deserve no answer, but once doing
so... illustrate that one HAS been 'tricked.'
I found it disgusting that desi would 'quote' ME falsely, by claiming
to quote me as saying 'O.J. Simpson was found guilty of murder.'
I find much that is anti-Semitic in the posts of Jürgen.
There are some things that I do not have to defend myself about,
since they represent my perceptions here. I'll have my say,
regardless of your 'presumption' that I might not be taken
seriously. I believe I am taken very seriously... by some very
destructive people. Who would attempt any deception to
try to insure I am NOT taken seriously. And whether I CARE
about how I might be 'taken here' is quite immaterial... because
I want to be taken as I am, not as what others believe they can
mold me into. I value your opinion, more than any other abolitionist
here. But I will not allow even you to try and mold me into what
I am not. Just as you would not expect me to try and mold you
into what you are not. This is the difference between desi and me.
He WOULD try to mold you into HIS casting. I like you just the
way you are. But do not presume you can play desi with me,
as he tries to play with you.
PV
John Rennie
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
snip
>
> There are some things that I do not have to defend myself about,
> since they represent my perceptions here. I'll have my say,
> regardless of your 'presumption' that I might not be taken
> seriously. I believe I am taken very seriously... by some very
> destructive people. Who would attempt any deception to
> try to insure I am NOT taken seriously. And whether I CARE
> about how I might be 'taken here' is quite immaterial... because
> I want to be taken as I am, not as what others believe they can
> mold me into. I value your opinion, more than any other abolitionist
> here. But I will not allow even you to try and mold me into what
> I am not. Just as you would not expect me to try and mold you
> into what you are not. This is the difference between desi and me.
> He WOULD try to mold you into HIS casting. I like you just the
> way you are. But do not presume you can play desi with me,
> as he tries to play with you.
>
> PV
>
>
mould, n.1 Forms: 1_6 molde, 3_ (now U.S.) mold, 5 moold, 5_6 mulde, 6
moulde, Sc. muild, 6_ mould.
You will note that the rotten old OED let me down there.
Jürgen
A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht
>
>"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:anmdd5$t03$04$1...@news.t-online.com...
>>
>> A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>> >
>> >"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message
>> news:angtns$6h8$07$1...@news.t-online.com...
>> >>
>> >> A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >Whether you ARE anti-Semitic or not is not mine to determine.
>> >>
>> >> Then do not type it in your keyboard, simply.
>> >>
>> >I am entitled to my opinion.
>>
>> An insultive and unreasoned opinion is not what anyone is entitled to.
>>
>ROTFLMAO.. This from you? The mirror, sport... look in the mirror.
>
>> <Fabrications snipped>
>>
>> >I did not wish to have to
>> >cite and recite all these points.
>>
>> I am still awaiting your reasoning what sort of "right" legitimized the
Jews
>> deporting the Palestinians under UN/US-Authority. It is put-time, Master.
>> Not accusation-time. You claimed, alongside with shouting 'Anti-Semite'-
you
>> put.
>>
>I've already answered that, probably a dozen times here. Yet
>you continue to hysterically scream. The State of Israel was
>made legitimate by U.N. Resolution 181,
To get this straight, you are claiming alongside with Resolution 181 exactly
the following:
The Jews had been just in driving the Arabs away from the ground where they
traditionally lived. So was decided by the UN, by the US, and by you, in a
merely *formal* way. Now you claimed a reason "de jure" for this act, and I
want to read this reason from you, since you claimed in this context
anti-Semitism from me. Put:
_____________________________________
and at that moment
>assumed the 'rights' due to any sovereign nation. Whether
>such a sovereign nation has a 'right' to expel people from their
>land is a sovereign nation issue. Personally, I feel it is not
>right, for any nation to take such actions. But Israel is not
>worse than many other nations who have 'expelled' Jews. None
>of it is 'right,' IMHO. But I get the impression that you again
>are only seeing this one side... which simply add to my perception
>that your anger at the Jews is deeper and perhaps has a different
>source than might appear on the surface.
I got from the very begin the impression that you have no reason why the
Jews had been just in deporting the Palestinians, and I don't see anything
else than your usual accusations.
>
>> >You could easily have gracefully
>> >remarked in reason, not insult, and it would have been finished.
>>
>> Oh well - I could have swallowed again your impudence, as I did 2 1/2
years
>> along. You claimed me to be an anti-Semite, since I feel the deportation
of
>> Palestinians not for providing a 'de jure'-ground for a Jewish state. You
>> claimed to hold a 'de jure'-ground, and should you actually hold such
>> reason, then clearly the Palestinians had been driven away _righteously_.
>> Put reason:
>>
>Why is Israel not really Israel, but instead belongs eternally to the
>Palestinian?
Who has claimed this? Surely not me, since I clearly stated that from the
generations-eduring EXISTENCE of Israel derives a RIGHT to exist. Ergo: You
Fabricate, as told.
You however claim a deportation under licence of the US/UN to be a righteous
one. Put reason:
_________________________________
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 10:49:57 +0000
>
>Le Sun, 06 Oct 2002 04:17:00 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip various false 'quotes' (sic) attributed to me, a plethora of
> spelling errors, topped off with some frustrated 'table-thumping' by
> LDB ... }
>
>> 8) "All Germans smell of sausage."
>
><*wheeze!!!*>
>
>{ snip }
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.stealth.net!news.ste
alth.net!news.belwue.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noo
s.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 10:49:57 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 16
>Message-ID: <slrnaq05al.483.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><an9v4u$h2m$04$1...@news.t-online.com>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapqv98.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><s7hn9.364$7w5.59834@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnapr854.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Rshn9.672$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapra9n.ade.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><8rin9.1097$YB1.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><xrln9.6722$S8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnaprug7.beu.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Odun9.9137$S8.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnaptg2e.d5i.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><0POn9.81737$O8.19...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033901513 16917280 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: lievre.voute.net!nobody
>X-No-Archive: true
>X-OS: BSD UNIX
>X-PGP: http://www.zeouane.org/pgp/pubring.pkr
>User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (FreeBSD)
>
The Dr. Dolly Coughlan archive exists because Desmond Coughlan lacks conviction
in his words. He won't allow his posts to be archived in Google. Please feel
free to use it to your advantage.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 10:51:12 +0000
>
>Le Sun, 06 Oct 2002 04:17:01 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip LDB's buttocks belching black smoke }
>
>> 1) Statement from you -- "Re: Murder outside my home" - 2002-07-20
>> 08:30:40 GMT -- "The owner of one of our favourite restaurants where
>> we used to live, before Drewl had it firebombed, was beaten to death in
>> 1998."
>>
>> 2) But in another thread from the same day -- "Re: Desmond, did Dolly
>> stop putting out" 18:13:52 GMT -- You remarked to me -- "Eh ? What
>> are you talking about ? The firebombing ? I did _not_ claim that Drewl
>> was responsible for that."
>
>I can't find those 'quotes' (sic) anywhere ... is this another lie ?
>
><cue screaming at 'evil', 'onery' 'desi' (sic) ...>
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-b
erlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 10:51:12 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 22
>Message-ID: <slrnaq05cv.483.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><i5bm9.32972$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapqv98.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><s7hn9.364$7w5.59834@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnapr854.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Rshn9.672$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapra9n.ade.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><8rin9.1097$YB1.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><xrln9.6722$S8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><JYnn9.2421$975.1...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
><_Ptn9.9056$S8.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><Dfxn9.127$gY1.21175@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnapthc8.gkr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><1POn9.81738$O8.19...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1033901601 17089923 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
A Planet Visitor
> Le Sun, 06 Oct 2002 04:17:00 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip various false 'quotes' (sic) attributed to me, a plethora of
> spelling errors, topped off with some frustrated 'table-thumping' by
> LDB ... }
>
>
"it was German beer ... now, if only I could get the smell
of sausage out of the bloody bottles"
"Not to mention that all Germans smell of sausage,"
> <*wheeze!!!*>
>
snort...cackle..snigger.. chortle... guffaw...chuckle... boo.. and a big
bwahahahaha.
PV
> { snip }
>
> --
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:anosib$9nn$05$1...@news.t-online.com...
quite deceptively I might add. Perhaps thinking you could return at
a later time, and claim I said them. I've never said the 'Jew
had been just in driving the Arab away from the ground where
they had traditionally lived.' Nor have I implied any such thing.
My claim is in respect to Israel having a 'de jure' right to exist.
Not that - 'I believe in my moral framework that all the acts they might
take are JUST.' Quite clearly, the acts my nation takes are
not always JUST -- IN MY OPINION. Nor are those taken by
your nation -- IN MY OPINION. I cannot DEFINE what is 'just'
for everyone in the world. Nor have I tried to do so. I have simply
tried to demonstrate that NEITHER 'side' is just. While you have
presumed, IMHO, that the Palestinian IS JUST, in his pursuit of land
you believe 'belongs to him' as some sort of God-given covenant.
To the exclusion of all acts that Palestinian might take, since you
seem to presume those acts are 'just.'
And in that 'humble opinion of mine,' I hold that you've demonstrated
some very frightening ideas in respect to the 'right' of Israel to
exist. Whether that has a more subconscious source on your
part, is for others to examine as I have done, and form their own
opinion. Since your comment implied above, suggests that
the U.S. pulls the strings of the U.N. And again, forcefully
reminds me of your words regarding a 'star' to be placed on the
banner of the U.S. proclaiming Israel as its 53rd State. A most
sickening conclusion on your part, in my opinion.
> _____________________________________
>
>
> >and at that moment
> >assumed the 'rights' due to any sovereign nation. Whether
> >such a sovereign nation has a 'right' to expel people from their
> >land is a sovereign nation issue. Personally, I feel it is not
> >right, for any nation to take such actions. But Israel is not
> >worse than many other nations who have 'expelled' Jews. None
> >of it is 'right,' IMHO. But I get the impression that you again
> >are only seeing this one side... which simply add to my perception
> >that your anger at the Jews is deeper and perhaps has a different
> >source than might appear on the surface.
>
> I got from the very begin the impression that you have no reason why the
> Jews had been just in deporting the Palestinians, and I don't see anything
> else than your usual accusations.
>
That has nothing to do with this argument. Were the Germans
'just' in their pursuit of WW II? Does a perception that they were
not, DENY Germany a 'right' to exist? IMHO, there is NO...
repeat NO..'just' reason to deport a people from land. PERIOD.
Nor is there a 'just' reason to claim that Israel has 'no right' to exist.
Nor is it 'just' to believe that a spot of land will ALWAYS 'belong'
to a select group of people. IMHO.
> >
> >> >You could easily have gracefully
> >> >remarked in reason, not insult, and it would have been finished.
> >>
> >> Oh well - I could have swallowed again your impudence, as I did 2 1/2
> years
> >> along. You claimed me to be an anti-Semite, since I feel the deportation
> of
> >> Palestinians not for providing a 'de jure'-ground for a Jewish state. You
> >> claimed to hold a 'de jure'-ground, and should you actually hold such
> >> reason, then clearly the Palestinians had been driven away _righteously_.
> >> Put reason:
> >>
> >Why is Israel not really Israel, but instead belongs eternally to the
> >Palestinian?
>
> Who has claimed this? Surely not me, since I clearly stated that from the
> generations-eduring EXISTENCE of Israel derives a RIGHT to exist. Ergo: You
> Fabricate, as told.
>
Hello... you certainly implied it. Since you believe that land (Israel) --
1) Presumably BELONGED to the Palestinians pre-Israel.
2) Presumably believe it BELONGED to the Palestinians at the
moment the U.N. passed Resolution 181.
3) Presumably believe it STILL belongs to the Palestinians.
That certainly represents some form of a 'Proof by Induction' that you
believe it will 'belong' ETERNALLY to the Palestinians. You've
certainly set no 'time-limit' when you expect it to no longer 'belong'
to the Palestinians. If not.. when DO you think the land will no
longer 'belong' to the Palestinians? Certainly, your words that
"Israel is factually occupied land, which belongs de jure to
the Palestinians" seem to demonstrate you believe that land
will NEVER 'belong' to any people but the Palestinians.
> You however claim a deportation under licence of the US/UN to be a righteous
> one. Put reason:
>
But I've never claimed that. Thus, you are apparently trying to squirm
your way out. Israel has a de jure right to exist, because MAN makes
secular law...law in the sense of de jure... not your presumed God (who
exists, IMHO, but does not FAVOR one people over another). I've never
said the deportation of ANY people is 'right.' Nor am I qualified to
determine what is 'right' in a moral sense. In that subjective 'moral sense'
I have, I do NOT believe the forced deportation of any people -- Jew, Black,
Chinese, Palestinian, or Martian is 'right,' in a moral sense. Which is quite
different from the legal sense of a de jure 'right' to EXIST. Do not accuse
me of things I have not said, or at the least provide the exact words (as I
have done in your 30 comments), which form the basis for you claiming that
I've said 'forced deportation' is 'righteous'? Do YOU believe it was 'right' for
Arab nations to expel Jews after the legitimate creation of the state of
Israel? Put reason:
> _________________________________
>
PV
A Planet Visitor
> Le Sun, 06 Oct 2002 04:17:01 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip LDB's buttocks belching black smoke }
>
> > 08:30:40 GMT -- "The owner of one of our favourite restaurants where
> > we used to live, before Drewl had it firebombed, was beaten to death in
> > 1998."
> >
> > 2) But in another thread from the same day -- "Re: Desmond, did Dolly
> > stop putting out" 18:13:52 GMT -- You remarked to me -- "Eh ? What
> > are you talking about ? The firebombing ? I did _not_ claim that Drewl
> > was responsible for that."
>
>
You can't 'find' them because you are an 'IT' amateur. There are quite
a few others things you 'can't find,' my friend. Things such as 'truth,'
'honor,' and 'integrity.' You've been unable to 'find' a lot of your statements,
and quotes of others..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)
------------------- Headers --------------------
Path:
From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespam_de...@zeouane.org>
Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
Subject: Re: Murder outside my home.
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 23:18:42 +0000
Organization: None
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <slrnajh7ii.2304.pasd...@lievre.voute.net>
References: 8PGZ8.51185$rU2.4...@news11-gui.server.ntli.net
ujejug5...@corp.supernews.com
<a11_8.2870$UG3.1...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
Reply-To: pasdespam_de...@zeouane.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1027120780 29033895 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
X-Orig-Path: lievre.voute.net!nobody
X-No-Archive: true
X-OS: BSD UNIX
X-PGP: http://www.zeouane.org/pgp/pubring.pkr
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (FreeBSD)
In article <slrnajh7ii.2304.pasd...@lievre.voute.net>,
Desmond Coughlan <pasdespam_de...@zeouane.org> writes:
Subject: Re: Murder outside my home.
From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespam_de...@zeouane.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 23:18:42 +0000
Le Sat, 20 Jul 2002 00:13:22 +0100, incubus <inc...@hellfire.com> a écrit :
<clipped>
The owner of one of our favourite restaurants where we used to live,
before Drewl had it firebombed, was beaten to death in 1998. He had
100 FrF (about £10) on him at the time. A life for 100 FrF ? It's
enough to put you off your chicken fajitas ... :-(
--
Des On The Road |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
desmond @ zeouane.org
http: // www . zeouane . org
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)
------------------- Headers --------------------
Path:
From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
Subject: Re: Desmond, did Dolly stop putting out?
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 18:13:52 +0000
Organization: None
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <slrnajja30.1ggi....@lievre.voute.net>
References: 50464b70997aa8d3...@xganon.com
3D38C64A...@hotmail.com
Gw8_8.5617$UG3.1...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net
slrnajid3r.b12.pasde...@lievre.voute.net
<jBh_8.73591$DS.19...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1027188948 29544475 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
X-Orig-Path: lievre.voute.net!nobody
X-No-Archive: true
X-OS: BSD UNIX
X-PGP: http://www.zeouane.org/pgp/pubring.pkr
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (FreeBSD)
In article <slrnajja30.1ggi....@lievre.voute.net>, Desmond
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
Subject: Re: Desmond, did Dolly stop putting out?
From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 18:13:52 +0000
Le Sat, 20 Jul 2002 18:02:55 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
écrit :
{ snip }
Eh ? What are you talking about ? The firebombing ? I did _not_
claim that Drewl was responsible for that.
{ snip }
--
Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
Yamaha FJR1300 |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
desmond @ zeouane.org
http: // www . zeouane . org
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, if you are prepared to deny that those two posts did not
originate from YOU (since you deceptively hide your posting
history), then we can depend on the 'eye of the beholder' to
determine if you lie or not. Which brings this group to a sad
state of affairs, if a presumably 'principled, honest..' poster
here, will deny his words, a little after 2 months from posting them.
So, let's hear you DENY that you posted messages containing
the words I've shown above. And tell us how many posts you
have made to this group in this year. Since google reports a
grand total of 50... while my newsreader reports 202, just in
the past 9 DAYS. Obviously you cannot claim you didn't
post something, if you purposely hide what you have posted.
> <cue screaming at 'evil', 'onery' 'desi' (sic) ...>
>
<cue embarrassed 'denials' from FDP>
PV
RichardJ
> In article <slrnaq05cv.483.p...@lievre.voute.net>, Desmond
Why don't you cut this crap out or at least have the balls to post
using your real address? I have you plonked on my regular reader, but
my newsfeed is down and I'm using Google for the time being. Your
posts serve no purpose other than to irritate.
--
Teflon
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
ric...@hotmail.com (RichardJ) wrote:
Some people are obsessed with prominent, provocative posters, Richard.
Those of us with more maturity either ignore their "feistier" moments or
have our fun with them and then leave them to their own devices. Heh,
heh...
My deepest sympathy for your having to use Google for posting. It's
quite, quite horrible. :(
Mr Q. Z. D.
--
Drinker, systems administrator, wannabe writer, musician and all-round bastard.
"...Base 8 is just like base 10 really... ((o))
If you're missing two fingers." - Tom Lehrer ((O))
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 17:06:32 +0000
>
>Le Mon, 07 Oct 2002 03:26:00 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> I can't find those 'quotes' (sic) anywhere ... is this another lie ?
>
>> You can't 'find' them because you are an 'IT' amateur. There are quite
>> a few others things you 'can't find,' my friend. Things such as 'truth,'
>> 'honor,' and 'integrity.' You've been unable to 'find' a lot of your
>statements,
>> and quotes of others..
>
>I'm choking with laughter as I write these words ... could this _get_
>any easier ? One 'wood' (sic) swear blind that you're radio-controlled,
>such is the ease with which I snap my fingers, and make you jump. LOL !!!!!
>
>However ... LOL ... stop laughing, Des ! ... none of the words you
>post below, are on google ... and as google is an impartial source, the
>'eye of the beholder' (ROTFFLMAO !!!) is all that we need to see that you're
>a ... 'retard' ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>> Message-ID: <slrnajh7ii.2304.pasd...@lievre.voute.net>
>
>
>url:http://groups.google.com/groups?ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=slrnajh7ii.23
04.pasdespam_des_on_the_road%40lievre.voute.net&lr=&hl=en
>
>{ snip }
>
>> Message-ID: <slrnajja30.1ggi....@lievre.voute.net>
>
>
>url:http://groups.google.com/groups?ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=slrnajja30.1g
gi.pasdespam_desmond%40lievre.voute.net&lr=&hl=en
>
>Oh dear ... is that egg that we can see on LDB's chin ? That, together
>with the black smoke belching from his arse ... you _are_ in a bad state
>lately ...
>
>{ cue LDB's once more devoting 80% of his posting time to me, whilst
> labouring under the false premises that a) I give a damn what he writes,
> and b) anyone else does ... }
>
>You've been shown to lie continuously. _Everyone_ on AADP has now commented
>on this ... yet you want us to take seriously your 'quotes' (sic), when
>there is no independent corroborative evidence ? That deserves another
>hale and hearty 'ROTFFLMAO!!'. It 'wood' (sic) be 'rood' (sic) not to ...
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone2.usenetserver.com
!news.webusenet.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR
!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 17:06:32 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 49
>Message-ID: <slrnaq3fon.epg.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapqv98.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><s7hn9.364$7w5.59834@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnapr854.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Rshn9.672$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapra9n.ade.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><8rin9.1097$YB1.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><xrln9.6722$S8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><JYnn9.2421$975.1...@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net>
><_Ptn9.9056$S8.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><Dfxn9.127$gY1.21175@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnapthc8.gkr.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><1POn9.81738$O8.19...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnaq05cv.483.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><c97o9.56525$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1034010706 17665445 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: lievre.voute.net!nobody
>X-No-Archive: true
>X-OS: BSD UNIX
>X-PGP: http://www.zeouane.org/pgp/pubring.pkr
>User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (FreeBSD)
>
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 17:12:29 +0000
>
>Le Mon, 07 Oct 2002 03:26:02 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a
>écrit :
>
>{ snip }
>
>>
>url:http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn8trp04.28uu.desmond%40lievre
.voute.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
>
>>
>> "Not to mention that all Germans smell of sausage,"
>
>>> <*wheeze!!!*>
>
>> snort...cackle..snigger.. chortle... guffaw...chuckle... boo.. and a big
>> bwahahahaha.
>
>Damn, I knew that things were hard for you on AADP right now, but I hadn't
>realised that I was beating you so hard ... I 'guess' (sic) I owe you
>an apology: LDB, I'm sorry for spanking you so hard.
>
>Of course, we once more bear witness to LDB's now legendary dishonesty,
>in quoting out of context. Here is the remainder of that post, which
>was in fact in response to Richard Jackson's mentioning the war ...
>
>--- BEGIN INCLUDED TEXT ---
>
>On Fri, 06 Oct 2000 11:57:01 GMT, Richard Jackson <ri...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> > Richard, the proportion of trolls to posts in your output is rapidly
>> > approaching ridiculous proportions. The Germany of the Third Reich is
>> > dead and buried. For fuck's sake, if you knew Europe as well as you
>> > claim (or as well as your numerous trolls attacking the French and
>> > the Germans seem to indicate), you would have no fear of the New
>> > Germany; a major player for peace in Europe.
>
>> The only reason to study history, Desmond, is that history tends to
>> repeat itself. Right now, Germany is a major player for peace in
>> Europe. That can change in one generation.
>
>Right now, Richard, the UK is a peaceful, democratic nation. 'That can
>change in one generation'. Right now, the United States is the dominant
>superpower. 'That can change in one generation'. Right now, France has
>a nuclear deterrent. 'That can change in one generation'.
>
>Those examples serve, I hope, to illustrate how meaningless what you wrote
>was. Almost _anything_ can change in one generation, Richard; and harping
>on about what happened in Germany almost sixty years ago, doesn't bring us
>any closer to understanding events of that era.
>
>> How many times has Germany
>> been a world leader, and come storning out of their borders intent on
>> taking over, if not the World, at least the rest of Europe?
>
>I don't know, to be frank, and I care even less. Germany paid a high sum,
>both financially, and morally, for the actions of Hitler. I for one,
>however,
>would be a happy man, if those who, for example, still refer to today's
>Germans as 'the Hun', got it into their tiny little brains that that was
>sixty years ago. We no longer define Britons by the murderous actions of
>Bomber Harris, or Americans by the civilian-scorching 'heydey' of napalm,
>so why the _fucking hell_ must 'Germany' always be associated with 'Nazism'
>?!?!
>
>> The Germans
>> are what they are, and can no more help that than the inevitability of
>> the sun coming up.
>
>Oh, yeah, and I suppose that blacks are more prone to criminality, and
>Indians
>are 'peaceful', and Arabs 'can't be trusted', and Scots are 'mean', and so on
>and so on ...
>
>Not to mention that all Germans smell of sausage, the French stink of garlic,
>the Greeks have oily skin, the Spanish all walk around saying, 'Olé', the
>Scots' favourite expression is 'Och aye the noo!', and the Japanese can't
>begin a sentence without first inserting an 'Ah-so' ...
>
>I sincerely hope that you're winding me up, Richard (if you are, then you got
>me!), because if you're really as racist as your posts imply, I can only say
>that I pity you. You're so tied up in your stupid stereotypes that you don't
>even see the irony in claiming that Germany's peaceful present can 'change in
>one generation', whilst apparently closing your eyes to their violent past
>having been banished _two_ generations ago.
>
>> Within a decade or two, perhaps three, we will start
>> to see an increase in militarism in Germany.
>
>Just far enough away so that no one will even remember what you wrote, and
>so you'll never be called to task about it ... how convenient.
>
>[snip]
>
>> The inevitable will follow. Personally, I hope the US is on
>> Germany's side the next time. The chances are that we will not be, but
>> will join forces with the same European nations as before, with the same
>> results.
>
>There will be no war in Europe, Richard. Germany and France are committed
>to closer ties between the nations, and when the little Englanders in the
>UK are seen for the lying fuckers that they are, then the British will
>embrace Europe and all the mighty benefits that such a union entails.
>
>Germany has got over the war, Richard. I suggest you try to do the same.
>
>--- END INCLUDED TEXT ---
>
>No more needs to be said, as it has now been confirmed that my post was
>in no way 'racist'. Now, what about your claim that 'all Germans are
>dumb Kraut fuckers' ? Or are you still trying to work out an explanation
>for your claim that Palestinians are 'dumb, thieving, lazy cunts who [sic]
>I wouldn't trust as far as I can throw them' ..?
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-b
erlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 17:12:29 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 110
>Message-ID: <slrnaq3g3s.epg.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnap0gkk.gtj.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anf1mk$mo5$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
><slrnapm38h.va.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><anfbmq$40k$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
><RGKm9.57194$O8.16...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnapptb5.8bv.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><k0cn9.205$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapqv98.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><s7hn9.364$7w5.59834@newsfep2-gui>
><slrnapr854.9pc.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Rshn9.672$YB1....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><slrnapra9n.ade.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><8rin9.1097$YB1.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
><xrln9.6722$S8.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnaprug7.beu.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><Odun9.9137$S8.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnaptg2e.d5i.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><0POn9.81737$O8.19...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><slrnaq05al.483.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><e97o9.56533$g73.1...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1034010913 17327225 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
A Planet Visitor
> Le Mon, 07 Oct 2002 03:26:00 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
>
> > You can't 'find' them because you are an 'IT' amateur. There are quite
> > a few others things you 'can't find,' my friend. Things such as 'truth,'
> > 'honor,' and 'integrity.' You've been unable to 'find' a lot of your statements,
> > and quotes of others..
>
> any easier ? One 'wood' (sic) swear blind that you're radio-controlled,
> such is the ease with which I snap my fingers, and make you jump. LOL !!!!!
>
> However ... LOL ... stop laughing, Des ! ... none of the words you
> post below, are on google ... and as google is an impartial source, the
> 'eye of the beholder' (ROTFFLMAO !!!) is all that we need to see that you're
> a ... 'retard' ...
>
> { snip }
>
> > Message-ID: <slrnajh7ii.2304.pasd...@lievre.voute.net>
>
>
url:http://groups.google.com/groups?ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=slrnajh7ii.2304.pasdespam_des_on_the_road%40lievre.voute.net
&lr=&hl=en
>
> { snip }
>
> > Message-ID: <slrnajja30.1ggi....@lievre.voute.net>
>
>
url:http://groups.google.com/groups?ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=slrnajja30.1ggi.pasdespam_desmond%40lievre.voute.net&lr=&hl=
en
>
from being there. Nonetheless, others can see for themselves what
they find in this dialog as to what your purpose is for hiding your
words, once they leave the active newsgroup. You may deny it all
you wish... but others can see you for the liar you are --
Your post in thread 'Re:Murder outside my home' 2002-07-19.
Your words "The owner of one of our favourite restaurants where
we used to live, before Drewl had it firebombed, was beaten to death in
1998."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020719212920.08190.00000331%40mb-cu.aol.com&output=gplain
Your post in thread 'Re:Desmond, did Dolly stop putting out' 2002-07-20.
"Eh ? What are you talking about ? The firebombing ? I did _not_ claim
that Drewl was responsible for that."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020720212941.22384.00000259%40mb-fo.aol.com&output=gplain
Both of your posts can be found by doing a search on dolly. You see,
FDP... you simply confirm what I've said all along. The reason that
you turn archive off, is that you do not wish to have your lies called
back on you. Rather than all the bullshit you've provided, a simple
denial that those words did not come from posts of yours would be
sufficient and then others can see if you intend to be deceptive or
honest here, depending on your answer and what they find in the
references I've provided. Of course NO ONE expects you to be
honest.
<pathetic denial clipped>
A Planet Visitor
> Le Mon, 07 Oct 2002 03:26:02 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >
> > "Not to mention that all Germans smell of sausage,"
>
> >> <*wheeze!!!*>
>
> > snort...cackle..snigger.. chortle... guffaw...chuckle... boo.. and a big
> > bwahahahaha.
>
> realised that I was beating you so hard ... I 'guess' (sic) I owe you
> an apology: LDB, I'm sorry for spanking you so hard.
>
> Of course, we once more bear witness to LDB's now legendary dishonesty,
> in quoting out of context. Here is the remainder of that post, which
> was in fact in response to Richard Jackson's mentioning the war ...
Ah.. it's nice to know that FDP is finally admitting to some of his
more disgusting words. Clearly, we've had a breakthrough.
>
> No more needs to be said, as it has now been confirmed that my post was
> in no way 'racist'. Now, what about your claim that 'all Germans are
> dumb Kraut fuckers' ? Or are you still trying to work out an explanation
> for your claim that Palestinians are 'dumb, thieving, lazy cunts who [sic]
> I wouldn't trust as far as I can throw them' ..?
>
Ah.. FDP... but you see, you can provide no reference to my having
said anything of the sort. Nor do I 'hide my posts' as you do. Lord
only knows how many racist slogans have come from your pen, that
no longer exist in Usenet. While you now ADMIT that you've said
"Not to mention that all Germans smell of sausage," and of course,
the other one -- "it was German beer ... now, if only I could get the smell
of sausage out of the bloody bottles"
Apparently, you have no love for the Germans. Nor homosexuals...
nor Blacks.. nor Jews..
PV
RichardJ
> In article <a2a8a540.02100...@posting.google.com>,
> ric...@hotmail.com (RichardJ) wrote:
>
> > dollyc...@aol.compasdespa (Dr. Dolly Coughlan ) wrote in message
> > news:<20021006212905...@mb-md.aol.com>...
> > > In article <slrnaq05cv.483.p...@lievre.voute.net>, Desmond
> >
> >
> > Why don't you cut this crap out or at least have the balls to post
> > using your real address? I have you plonked on my regular reader, but
> > my newsfeed is down and I'm using Google for the time being. Your
> > posts serve no purpose other than to irritate.
>
> Some people are obsessed with prominent, provocative posters, Richard.
> Those of us with more maturity either ignore their "feistier" moments or
> have our fun with them and then leave them to their own devices. Heh,
> heh...
>
> My deepest sympathy for your having to use Google for posting. It's
> quite, quite horrible. :(
>
> Mr Q. Z. D.
It is horrible. I am attempting to get the news feed to sort things
out. If they don't, I may bloody well have to use AOL. <shudder>
Teflon
Desmond Coughlan
{ snip }
>> My deepest sympathy for your having to use Google for posting. It's
>> quite, quite horrible. :(
> It is horrible. I am attempting to get the news feed to sort things
> out. If they don't, I may bloody well have to use AOL. <shudder>
Check your e-mail, Richard.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 13:31:41 +0000
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!n
ews.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR
!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 13:31:41 +0000
>Organization: None
>Lines: 16
>Message-ID: <slrnaq5nht.89.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnaq05cv.483.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><20021006212905...@mb-md.aol.com>
><a2a8a540.02100...@posting.google.com>
><jonathan-9C12BC...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><a2a8a540.02100...@posting.google.com>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1034084124 18525372 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: lievre.voute.net!nobody
RichardJ
> Le 8 Oct 2002 06:27:28 -0700, RichardJ <ric...@hotmail.com> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> My deepest sympathy for your having to use Google for posting. It's
> >> quite, quite horrible. :(
>
> > It is horrible. I am attempting to get the news feed to sort things
> > out. If they don't, I may bloody well have to use AOL. <shudder>
>
> Check your e-mail, Richard.
I have, and I have done as you suggested. Thanks, Desmond
A Planet Visitor
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
news:slrnaq5nht.89.p...@lievre.voute.net...
>
> { snip }
>
> >> My deepest sympathy for your having to use Google for posting. It's
> >> quite, quite horrible. :(
>
> > It is horrible. I am attempting to get the news feed to sort things
> > out. If they don't, I may bloody well have to use AOL. <shudder>
>
> Check your e-mail, Richard.
>
John Rennie
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
>
> "Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
> news:slrnaq5nht.89.p...@lievre.voute.net...
> > Le 8 Oct 2002 06:27:28 -0700, RichardJ <ric...@hotmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> > { snip }
> >
> > >> My deepest sympathy for your having to use Google for posting. It's
> > >> quite, quite horrible. :(
> >
> > > It is horrible. I am attempting to get the news feed to sort things
> > > out. If they don't, I may bloody well have to use AOL. <shudder>
> >
> > Check your e-mail, Richard.
> >
> Ah... another reason to provide only a handle. desi -- the e-mail spam
provider.
>
> PV
Richard didn't seem to think so. You really should try to restrain your
spite.
RichardJ
Indeed. Although Desmond and I have had heated arguments, some quite
nasty, we developed respect, perhaps it is not too strong to say a
friendship. He has an open invitation to visit me in the States
should he come across the pond. He did me a favor for which I am
grateful, and I thanked him.
Just because people are of differing opinions doesn't mean we have to
act hatefully.
Teflon
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> Indeed. Although Desmond and I have had heated arguments, some quite
> nasty, we developed respect, perhaps it is not too strong to say a
> friendship. He has an open invitation to visit me in the States
> should he come across the pond. He did me a favor for which I am
> grateful, and I thanked him.
>
> Just because people are of differing opinions doesn't mean we have to
> act hatefully.
Spoken like a true Southern Gentleman[1].
Mr Q. Z. D.
[1] - I won't even _attempt_ a phonetic spelling of the intended pronunciation of that sentence.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: 9 Oct 2002 22:53:57 GMT
>
>Le Wed, 9 Oct 2002 09:44:08 +0100, John Rennie <j.re...@ntlworld.com> a
>écrit :
>
>>> > >> My deepest sympathy for your having to use Google for posting. It's
>>> > >> quite, quite horrible. :(
>
>>> > > It is horrible. I am attempting to get the news feed to sort things
>>> > > out. If they don't, I may bloody well have to use AOL. <shudder>
>
>>> > Check your e-mail, Richard.
>
>>> Ah... another reason to provide only a handle. desi -- the e-mail spam
>> provider.
>
>> Richard didn't seem to think so. You really should try to restrain your
>> spite.
>
>ITYM 'frustrated rage'.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan |CUNT#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
>desmond @ zeouane.org |BONY#48 ANORAK#11
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!cano
e.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp21
2-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Yet _Another_ UN Resolution ...
>Date: 9 Oct 2002 22:53:57 GMT
>Organization: None
>Lines: 22
>Message-ID: <slrnaq9coe.90c.p...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <slrnaq05cv.483.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><20021006212905...@mb-md.aol.com>
><a2a8a540.02100...@posting.google.com>
><jonathan-9C12BC...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><a2a8a540.02100...@posting.google.com>
><slrnaq5nht.89.p...@lievre.voute.net>
><wjOo9.102205$O8.23...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><u%Ro9.691$5u2....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>
>Reply-To: pasdespa...@zeouane.org
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1034204037 19376545 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-No-Archive: true
A Planet Visitor
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:u%Ro9.691$5u2....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
>
than myself. I find it personally beneficial to not provide such an e-mail
address, if it insures I do not receive posts from liars. Case in point --
desi claimed that Don Kool (drewl) firebombed his flat, and some hours
later denied having made such a claim. And even now denies having
made EITHER statements. Yet they are there for all to see --
In thread 'Re:Murder outside my home' 2002-07-19.
His words
"The owner of one of our favourite restaurants where
we used to live, before Drewl had it firebombed, was beaten to death in
1998."
And the next day, in thread 'Re:Desmond, did Dolly stop putting out' 2002-07-20.
"Eh ? What are you talking about ? The firebombing ? I did _not_ claim
that Drewl was responsible for that."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020720212941.22384.00000259%40mb-fo.aol.com&output=gplain
Yet you'd refer to me as having lied... when the biggest liar in
the group is that very same desi.
PV
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
> His words
> "The owner of one of our favourite restaurants where
> we used to live, before Drewl had it firebombed, was beaten to death in
> 1998."
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020719212920.08190.00000331%40mb-cu
> .aol.com&output=gplain
>
> And the next day, in thread 'Re:Desmond, did Dolly stop putting out'
> 2002-07-20.
>
> "Eh ? What are you talking about ? The firebombing ? I did _not_ claim
> that Drewl was responsible for that."
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020720212941.22384.00000259%40mb-fo
> .aol.com&output=gplain
I'm not going to weigh into the "Desi is a liar/PV is <insert insult
here>" war but I will quietly point out that the first quotation could
refer to Desmond's flat. The sentence is far from clear, but it could
be interpreted as meaning "[before] where we used to live" was
firebombed.
I make no judgements about the veracity of the firebombing tale and
refuse to enter into that particular fight. I merely wish to point out
the possibility that you have misinterpreted the quoted words. It's not
a particularly long bow to draw.
John Rennie
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
You so often react like a hurt little child revealing that quite dreadful
lack of maturity that disfigures so many of your posts. Desmond was helping
Richard with an ISP problem, a subject fit for an e-mail. You had to pour
your bile over their interchange;
such a silly man.
A Planet Visitor
"John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:HYbp9.280$um6.53300@newsfep2-gui...
as the lawful Death Penalty as practiced today in the U.S.
PV
A Planet Visitor
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in message
> In article <oB7p9.75955$g73.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, "A Planet
> Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
>
> > His words
> > "The owner of one of our favourite restaurants where
> > we used to live, before Drewl had it firebombed, was beaten to death in
> > 1998."
> > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020719212920.08190.00000331%40mb-cu
> > .aol.com&output=gplain
> >
> > And the next day, in thread 'Re:Desmond, did Dolly stop putting out'
> > 2002-07-20.
> >
> > "Eh ? What are you talking about ? The firebombing ? I did _not_ claim
> > that Drewl was responsible for that."
> > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020720212941.22384.00000259%40mb-fo
> > .aol.com&output=gplain
>
> I'm not going to weigh into the "Desi is a liar/PV is <insert insult
> here>" war but I will quietly point out that the first quotation could
> refer to Desmond's flat. The sentence is far from clear, but it could
> be interpreted as meaning "[before] where we used to live" was
> firebombed.
>
> I make no judgements about the veracity of the firebombing tale and
> refuse to enter into that particular fight. I merely wish to point out
> the possibility that you have misinterpreted the quoted words. It's not
> a particularly long bow to draw.
>
the answer is exactly ONE. The firebombing of his flat. In comment
1, there is no question he states "Drewl had it firebombed." And
his comment 2, is a direct denial of "claiming" drewl was responsible
for that 'firebombing.'
PV
A Planet Visitor
> Le Thu, 10 Oct 2002 04:45:08 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
> { snip }
>
> >> spite.
>
> > I certainly did not intend to speak for Richard, or for ANYONE, other
> > than myself. I find it personally beneficial to not provide such an e-mail
> > address, if it insures I do not receive posts from liars. Case in point --
> > desi claimed that Don Kool (drewl) firebombed his flat, and some hours
> > later denied having made such a claim. And even now denies having
> > made EITHER statements. Yet they are there for all to see --
>
>
TRANSLATION -- 'I've been caught in a lie, and will try to weasel out
of it, any way I can.'
PV
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
> Exactly how MANY 'firebombings' has desi accused others of?
Not interested in the argument one way or another. As a born pedant, I
was concerned with the semantics of the statements quoted and the
possibility of misunderstanding.
I'm not part of the fight and I don't _want_ to become part of the fight
again. My only view here is that Des mangled the language to the extent
that you misunderstood. I may be wrong but I'm not going to sit down
and see the language undergo stresses that it was not designed to take.