ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

@Foxfyre,

That was many thousands of years ago? Why go through all that blurb; it's a waste of your's and our time.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

But that doesn't give the Jews the rights to take lands away from the Palestinians at gun point, and no legal rights.

0 Replies

I give up. It is impossible to engage a person in conversation who doesn't even read what HE writes, much less what anybody else says. Somebody else explain it to CI.

2 Replies

@Foxfyre,

You "give up," not because of what I write, but because what I write are the facts as they stand "today." Even Israel's Attorney General agrees with me. Who agrees with you?

From CBS News:

Quote:

Israeli Group Charges Settler 'Land Grab'
JERUSALEM, Nov. 21, 2006(CBS/AP) Forty percent of all West Bank settlements were built on private Palestinian land and are therefore illegal, a settlement watchdog group said Tuesday, basing its claims on data provided by Israel's military.

"We are talking about an institutional land grab," said Dror Etkes, a settlement expert with the Peace Now group.

Etkes said Peace Now's claims were based on data the court ordered the military to provide. The group has forwarded the information to Attorney General Meni Mazuz, asking him to take immediate action against the illegal land seizures.

Israel claims that the settlements are built on state land and not on private property, reports CBS News correspondent Robert Berger.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

From the Times:

Quote:

From The Times
November 22, 2006
West Bank settlements were built on stolen land, says Israeli group

Stephen Farrell, Jerusalem

Nearly 40 per cent of the land occupied by Israel’s West Bank Jewish settlements is owned by Palestinians, an Israeli human rights group said yesterday.

Peace Now said it had obtained information from Israel’s military, which undermined claims by successive governments that the Jewish state’s hilltop settlements were built on state-owned land and not areas seized from Palestinian farmers and landowners.

It said that the leaked digital documents showed that more than 130 of the West Bank’s 162 settlements were built “either entirely or partially” on private Palestinian land, amounting to 15,000 acres.

“We are talking about a systematic and institutionalised land grab. This has been happening for decades and in almost every settlement in the West Bank,” said Dror Etkes, of Peace Now. “The data presented here has been hidden by the state for many years, for fear that the revelation of these facts could damage its international relations.”

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

"How all societies work?" Please show me?

I would prefer not to show you.

1 Reply

@Foofie,

Just as I figured; you make a statement you can't back up.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Just as I figured; you make a statement you can't back up.

I can back it up; I just prefer not to engage in a discussion with you.

1 Reply

@Foofie,

That's obvious; you can't answer my question. LOL

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

That's obvious; you can't answer my question. LOL

The answer is self-evident. If you do not see that, do not ask me to explain.

1 Reply

@Foofie,

To an adult who mindlessly repeats childish propaganda drummed into his head as a youth, "self-evident" simply means delusional.

Do the flag routine again, Foofie, it's such a hoot.

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

To an adult who mindlessly repeats childish propaganda drummed into his head as a youth, "self-evident" simply means delusional.

Do the flag routine again, Foofie, it's such a hoot.

"Such a hoot"? Are you from a region that would use such colloquialisms?

1 Reply

@Foofie,

Language issues are not really your forte, Foofie.

Part of being delusional is the avoidance of serious issues, the inability to face disconcerting facts about oneself or one's country.

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Language issues are not really your forte, Foofie.

Part of being delusional is the avoidance of serious issues, the inability to face disconcerting facts about oneself or one's country.

The serious issue I am avoiding is the use of the ad-hominem "delusional." That makes me think that you a priori consider my position/opinion disqualified for any credence.

Notice I do not try to proselytize you to my position/opinion. That is because my position/opinion is not for everyone; I understand that. What makes your position/opinion such objective truth? Do not answer. I know nothing about you, and that means I should not attempt to debate you. As you surely know, in live debates the audience gets to know something about the debaters. That is a shortcoming of this forum that makes me feel foolish attempting to debate with someone that might be of a background/age/educational level that would quickly tell me to not engage in any interaction if the debate was face-to-face. Nor, do I want to meet anyone here face-to-face. That is why I try to add some levity to replies that are, in my opinion, over zealous in its seriousness. So, do yourself a favor, and do not try to make me subscribe to your level of seriousness.

1 Reply

@Foofie,

Quote:

So, do yourself a favor, and do not try to make me subscribe to your level of seriousness.

Stay out of the serious issues then, Foofie. I hardly discounted your position before you put it forward. You have here, long been an avid defender of some of the most barbaric actions perpetrated by the US government. The only way that a sentient human could do that is to engage in self delusion, hence the apt description, delusional.

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Quote:
So, do yourself a favor, and do not try to make me subscribe to your level of seriousness.

Stay out of the serious issues then, Foofie. I hardly discounted your position before you put it forward. You have here, long been an avid defender of some of the most barbaric actions perpetrated by the US government. The only way that a sentient human could do that is to engage in self delusion, hence the apt description, delusional.

The US government is not run by androids. You are referring to many live people as delusional; I am the least delusional (according to your criteria). I am just a true believer in the cause. So are the people that did what you refer to as "barbaric." That is not delusional. That is called being a true believer in a cause. You might not see a cause; there were people in the U.S. in 1940 that did not see a cause either. True believers to a cause act. Others have reasons not to. They might have another cause to be true believers in?

Again. I do not try to proselytize you to be a true believer in my cause that I truly believe in (Americanism). You can choose not to make less than complimentary references to my true beliefs.

Perchance to inquire, do you not agree that the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary?

1 Reply

@Foofie,

Foofie wrote:

Quote:

The US government is not run by androids.

Exactly what point are you trying to make with this statement? FYI, many live people are delusional, and that includes many within our government and without. If you are a "true believer of the cause," you are also an advocate of torture (abu Garaib and Gitmo), and killing of tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children; that's what we did in Iraq.

And what exactly is "your" cause?

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Of course it's impossible. If you can torture yourself to read some of CI's posts, you will understand that he is probably senile!!!

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Of course, but CI is ignorant of the UN's mandate. Because he does not read, he does not know that, as Paul Johnson has written in his "A History of the Jews"---P. 525

quote:

The UN produced a partition plan: there would be Jewish and Arba states, plus an international zone in Jerusalem. On November 29, 1947 it was endorsed by the General Assembly, 33 votes to 13, with 10 abstension

End of Quote

0 Replies

@genoves,

genoves wrote:

Of course it's impossible. If you can torture yourself to read some of CI's posts, you will understand that he is probably senile!!!

But you know, I skip over CI's posts, and sometimes temporarily put him on ignore, when he is in one of his hateful, unkind, personally insulting modes. It just makes life more pleasant not to deal with that.

And though you at least have much to offer in the way of insights and good information, Genoves, I do not appreciate hateful, unkind, personally insulting remarks from you directed at anybody either. While liberals so often cannot, I like to think that at least most conservatives can make their case without doing that. It isn't necessary. Your unkind reference to CI here was unnecessary.

1 Reply

ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know