Re: Palestinians Under Attack
Stephen Bishop
>Stephen Bishop <nospam...@now.com> wrote:
>>On 31 Jan 2009 20:55:39 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>
>>>Stephen Bishop <nospam...@now.com> wrote:
>>>>On 31 Jan 2009 07:48:03 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospam...@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>On 29 Jan 2009 07:06:40 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospam...@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>On 28 Jan 2009 07:00:18 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospam...@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>On 27 Jan 2009 03:40:05 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospam...@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>On 26 Jan 2009 05:24:02 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospam...@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 25 Jan 2009 03:43:31 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospam...@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 24 Jan 2009 20:37:39 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospam...@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 23 Jan 2009 18:09:14 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospam...@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 23 Jan 2009 08:37:55 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Stephen Bishop <nospam...@now.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 22 Jan 2009 04:15:08 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>HEMI - Powered <no...@none.supernews> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Chris H added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Then you need to get a life and learn to do independent research
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have. Including going to the ME. My parents have travelled in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Israel and Palestine. Your experience is?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sounds like you were more on a sight seeing tour than a fact
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>finding mission as your thesis is ludicrous at best.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>My "experience" is precisely this: I think that ALL/ANY sovereign
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>nations have the RIGHT to defend themselves against unwarranted
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>attacks without resorting to bullshit arbitration by the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>international community,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No you don't. You totally reject the Palestinian's right to do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>anything of the sort.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The Palestinians are NOT a sovereign nation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>How convenient doe you to make such an excuse.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Excuse? That's simply a fact that cannot be disputed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And WHY aren't they a nation?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Because Israel doesn't allow it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Israel is still illegally expanding settlements in the West Bank and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>refuses to withdraw.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Why is it illegal?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>If you think wikipedia is a reliable source, you are a fool.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Translation: Any source that isn't pro-Israel must be biased.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>But I notice no denial or refutaton from you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>No translation needed. Virtually nobody considers Wikipedia to be a
>>>>>>>>>>>>trustworthy source.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.onegoodmove.org/fallacy/attack.htm
>>>>>>>>>>> Attacking the Person
>>>>>>>>>>> (argumentum ad hominem)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Definition:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the argument
>>>>>>>>>>> itself. This takes many forms. For example, the person's character,
>>>>>>>>>>> nationality or religion may be attacked. Alternatively, it may be
>>>>>>>>>>> pointed out that a person stands to gain from a favourable outcome.
>>>>>>>>>>> Or, finally, a person may be attacked by association, or by the
>>>>>>>>>>> company he keeps.
>>>>>>>>>>> There are three major forms of Attacking the Person:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion, the argument
>>>>>>>>>>> attacks the person who made the assertion.
>>>>>>>>>>> ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an assertion the
>>>>>>>>>>> author points to the relationship between the person making the
>>>>>>>>>>> assertion and the person's circumstances.
>>>>>>>>>>> ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the person notes that a
>>>>>>>>>>> person does not practise what he
>>>>>>>>>>> preaches.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They captured that land from Jordan during the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>1967 Arab-Israeli war when they won that war of Arab aggression. They
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>have every right to it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Just like the nazis had every right to Poland.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Poland never started multiple wars against Germany for the purpose of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>removing them from Europe, knucklehead.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>And until the Zionists started using terrorism to drive out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Palestinians, neither did the Arabs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Again, you are ignoring history,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Evidence? What "history" do you believe is being ignored?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>You tell me.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>You make an accusation you can't even justify.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>That makes you a stupid liar.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Ray, you've already demonstrated that you view any source that
>>>>>>>>supports Israel's right to exist as propaganda.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And now you're lying your bigoted ass off again. You lie, you get
>>>>>>>challenged, you come up with some new lie.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It's a sickness with you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Those aren't lies.
>>>>>
>>>>>You admitted that your statements are lies.
>>>>
>>>>Uhmm ... no.
>>>
>>>Of course you did.
>>
>>Never. You are the worst kind of liar, one who actually thinks he is
>
>Lessee, what is it that you say? Something about calling people liars
>as a way of deflecting from your own lies?
>
>Back at you, hypocrite.
Deleting most of my post and then using that as a springboard for more
insults?
Talk about being a lying hypcrite, Ray.
You just repeat a lie as a way of avoiding the questions I've asked
you.
Am I lying? Then prove it by not deleting text and by actually
answering questions.