rigorousintuition.ca

ahh, thats a good one 17breezes, you talking about credibilty is actually the laughter i needed to deal with feeling so upset by it all,

now, just remind me, which arab state just killed 9 or more people in international waters and got away with it?

~

barracuda wrote:The same goes for America, and almost any country you can name, smiths.

I feel pretty much the same way when I read people going on about their favorite football or baseball teams, or talking about tee vee shows they enjoy while their countries of residence are literally burning children world-wide. Should we ban those people too?

What fine country do you live in that is not currently killing innocent children?

Does this make you a defeatist, barracuda?

Yes. We should ban those people who loudly support the burning of children.
~

once again you miss the point barracuda, i know realise it is intentional

this is not a discussion of racists pasts and abuse

this is a discussion about the actions NOW of a CURRENT and ACTIVE racist state that is receiving protection from an international community

smiths wrote:ahh, thats a good one 17breezes, you talking about credibilty is actually the laughter i needed to deal with feeling so upset by it all,

now, just remind me, which arab state just killed 9 or more people in international waters and got away with it?

LOL you think I expected anything else but this? Not from you pal. Listen to cuda....he has some wisdom for you.

smiths wrote:once again you miss the point barracuda, i know realise it is intentional

this is not a discussion of racists pasts and abuse

this is a discussion about the actions NOW of a CURRENT and ACTIVE racist state that is receiving protection from an international community

And Australia is not actively a racist state? Working with the terrorist US state? Then why the discrepancy in life expectancy?

I am honestly trying to understand where you're coming from, dude.

Username wrote:Yes. We should ban those people who loudly support the burning of children.

I'd say the people who quietly support it are no less offensive. And in one way or another, through action or the lack thereof, we are all complicit in that regard.

~

I'd say the people who quietly support it are no less offensive.

I disagree.
~

On the poll thread today:

Sepka wrote:Israel's blockade is praiseworthy. Keeping extremely tight control over the Palestinians until they decide to live in peace is the solution most likely to prevent needless loss of life. It's not a perfect solution, but it's better than any of the proposed alternatives that I've seen. The Israelis are showing a great deal more restraint and humanity than the Palestinians have ever done.

Not even a response. I find that interesting.

Well, actually, I did respond. It wasn't a great response (or even a memorable response), but... well, it was there.

~
pffffft . . . it was Sepka.

and there was too a response.

Simulist wrote:Sepka, bless your little heart... You're terribly wrong, but you are unfailingly consistent at it.

Seems like that deserves some credit. (You know, for something.)

~

Jeff:

On the poll thread today:

Sepka wrote:
Israel's blockade is praiseworthy. Keeping extremely tight control over the Palestinians until they decide to live in peace is the solution most likely to prevent needless loss of life. It's not a perfect solution, but it's better than any of the proposed alternatives that I've seen. The Israelis are showing a great deal more restraint and humanity than the Palestinians have ever done.




Not even a response. I find that interesting.

That's because even though I may not agree with Sepka, it's a reasonable point. And I can sympathize with Percival's viewpoint as well.

Meanwhile, they're not busy screaming at their opposition calling them stupid anti-semites either.

Sorry, a response. Just unlike by orders of magnitude the responses if it hadn't been Sepka.

You know, I'm starting to have a great deal more sympathy for Nordic's hissy fit. I would not characterize the situation in such stark terms as he, but it does appear that statements which dehumanize Palestinians (such as Sepka's, not to mention 17's) get a pass, while even the vaguest whiff of anti-semitism gets at least a stern warning if not an outright ban.

Jeff, it's your forum, you can moderate it any way you deem fit. But it does raise questions about inherent biases, and whether it is really worth my time anymore to participate in this forum.

EDIT: Pfft, I misunderstood what Jeff was getting at. Still, the subtle bias is there.

Username wrote:~
pffffft . . . it was Sepka.

Which is my point.

If Sepka gets a pass from the board's anti-zionists then for all the rhetoric this is just a pissing personality clash.

slomo wrote:You know, I'm starting to have a great deal more sympathy for Nordic's hissy fit. I would not characterize the situation in such stark terms as he, but it does appear that statements which dehumanize Palestinians (such as Sepka's, not to mention 17's) get a pass, while even the vaguest whiff of anti-semitism gets at least a stern warning if not an outright ban.

Jeff, it's your forum, you can moderate it any way you deem fit. But it does raise questions about inherent biases, and whether I should participate under the circumstances.

Dehumanize Palestinians? Where do you get that shit from? Come on prove it!! With EVIDENCE.