15
   

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

 
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Jul, 2009 07:48 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Yup, blame the Palestinians for how Jews were treated in Europe. Makes a whole lot of sense - for Foofie.


How did you make the connection between Palestineans and the desire of American diplomacy to put a halt to growth in the west bank settlements?

Notice how many Arabs live in Israel. No one is trying to curtail their population growth. There is a desire, I suspect, by some who want to see peace in the Middle East, to sacrifice the purpose of Israel when peace arrives. In other words, a peaceful ghetto (that cannot allow for an expanding population).

May I remind you that it was the Manifest Destiny of the U.S. that allowed you today to be a U.S. citizen. Otherwise, you would have been speaking Spanish, and a citizen of Spain. Perhaps, you would not have minded?
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Jul, 2009 07:50 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
You have ignored my point, or if you feel it is too trivial to address,


It's too foofie to address.


Are you Foofie baiting? I have met Jew baiters, but never Foofie baiters.
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Jul, 2009 01:03 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie, I recommend you keep in mind that making rational rebuttals to that with which they disagree is above the Statist job code.

Quote:
LIBERTY AND TYRANNY
BY MARK R. LEVIN
Page 4.
The Modern Liberal believes in the supremacy of the state, thereby rejecting the principles of the Declaration and the order of the civil society, in whole or part. For the Modern Liberal, the individual’s imperfection and personal pursuits impede the objective of a utopian state. In this, Modern Liberalism promotes what French historian Alexis de Tocquerville described as a soft tyranny, which becomes increasingly more oppressive, potentially leading to a hard tyranny (some form of totalitarianism). As the word liberal is, in its classical meaning, the opposite of authoritarian, it is more accurate, therefore, to characterize the Modern Liberal as a Statist.

The Founders understood that the greatest threat to liberty is an all-powerful government, where the few dictate to the many.

Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Jul, 2009 08:04 pm
@ican711nm,
Your point is obscure to me. Can you simplify your thoughts?
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Jul, 2009 09:51 pm
@Foofie,
It's obscure because it's all a heaping pile of bullshit. Itry is going to have a heart attack with all the shoveling he's doing.
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2009 03:51 am
@Foofie,
Quote:
Re: ican711nm (Post 3694864)
Your point is obscure to me. Can you simplify your thoughts?


You're falling into the trap of trying to analyse an Ican post. It's not possible to do that, with any hope of beneficial outcome. In fact if Ican and OmSigDavid could be locked together in a strong room, without internet access, and without limit of time, think how much better it would be.
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2009 12:15 pm
@Foofie,
I previously posted: Foofie, I recommend you keep in mind that making rational rebuttals to that with which they disagree is above the Statist job code.

The following is what I meant by that post:
Statists are incapable of making rational rebuttals to that that with which they disagree.

So Statists resort to what they can do. They slander those with whom they disagree.

Mark R. Levin in his book LIBERTY AND TYRANNY, Page 4, wrote:
.
As the word liberal is, in its classical meaning, the opposite of authoritarian, it is more accurate, therefore, to characterize the Modern Liberal as a Statist.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2009 12:19 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:
It's obscure because it's all a heaping pile of bullshit. Itry is going to have a heart attack with all the shoveling he's

QED!

Like I posted: Statists cannot make rational rebuttals to that with which they disagree. Consequently, they slander instead.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2009 12:22 pm
@McTag,
McTag wrote:
You're falling into the trap of trying to analyse an Ican post. It's not possible to do that, with any hope of beneficial outcome. In fact if Ican and OmSigDavid could be locked together in a strong room, without internet access, and without limit of time, think how much better it would be.

QED!

Like I posted: Statists cannot make rational rebuttals to that with which they disagree. Consequently, they slander instead.

0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2009 12:35 pm

I think the word you'reaching for is libel. Slander is purely verbal.

My bons mots are neither, of course.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2009 06:44 pm
@McTag,
McTag wrote:

... In fact if Ican and OmSigDavid could be locked together in a strong room, without internet access, and without limit of time, think how much better it would be.


You are saying this from the context of being on an island (nation); not much different than your scenario above, in my opinion. But why would it be better? Your posts on your island (nation) are no better, or worse, in my opinion, than if you were on the Continent, or beyond the setting sun on a past British Empire?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2009 08:01 pm
@McTag,
McTag wrote:


I think the word you'reaching for is libel. Slander is purely verbal.

My bons mots are neither, of course.


As Ican used the term, it was used accurately as he was not offering a legal definition but rather the common definition which would be a false and/or malicious statement or report about someone.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2009 08:46 pm
@McTag,
McTag, you are correct! A slander is a false statement spoken, while a libel is a false statement written. Up to now, I have tended to think of all these posts here as the equivalent of something spoken, but, of course, they are not spoken, they are written.

I stand corrected! Thank you for your rational rebuttal!
Quote:

http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=slander&x=32&y=6
Main Entry: 1slan·der
...
1 : utterance of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and damage reputation
2 : a false tale or report maliciously uttered orally, tending to injure the reputation of another, and constituting a legal tort : a malicious oral utterance of false defamatory reports : malicious publication by speech of false tales or suggestions to the injury of another -- compare LIBEL
...

Quote:

http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=libel&x=22&y=10
Main Entry: 1li·bel
...
1 a obsolete : a written declaration, bill, certificate, request, or supplication b : the written statement made in civil law and admiralty law practice and in proceedings in ecclesiastical and occasionally other courts by the plaintiff of his cause of action and the relief he seeks -- compare DECLARATION c Scots law : the part of an indictment stating the grounds of the charge d Scots law, archaic : the punishment attached to an offense
2 obsolete : a brief piece of writing (as a little book or short treatise)
3 a archaic : a handbill or circular especially attacking or defaming someone b (1) : a written or oral defamatory statement or a representation or suggestion that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression <his criticism was a libel of the writer> <the photograph is more a libel than a reproduction> (2) : a statement or representation published without just cause or excuse, expressed either in print or in writing or by pictures, effigies, or other signs and tending to expose another to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule : defamation of a person by means of written statements, pictures, or other visible signs : the publication of such writings or pictures as are of a blasphemous, treasonable, seditious, or obscene character
-- compare PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION 2, SLANDER (3) : the act, tort, or crime of publishing such a libel

Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2009 08:50 pm
@ican711nm,
But slander is used as a common verb as well as a legal term. Only as a legal term must the damaging content or defamation be spoken. Libel is rarely if ever used in any serious context other than as a legal definition, however. At least that is how it was 50 years ago, and I doubt the context has changed much since then.
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Jul, 2009 02:30 am
@Foxfyre,

Foxy, you are wrong, and Ican and I are right, concurring for the first and perhaps the only time.
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Jul, 2009 07:33 am
@McTag,
Well, while I would not presume to interfere in this bonding ritual between you and Ican, and while I don't care enough to spend any more time arguing the point, I do know that there is a difference between libel and slander used as legal terms, and the same terms used in more casual conversation.

Quote:
Dictionary.com
slan⋅der  /ˈslændər/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [slan-der] Show IPA
Use slandered in a Sentence
"noun 1. defamation; calumny: rumors full of slander.
2. a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report: a slander against his good name.
3. Law. defamation by oral utterance rather than by writing, pictures, etc.

"verb (used with object) 4. to utter slander against; defame.

"verb (used without object) 5. to utter or circulate slander.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/slandered


Quote:
Merriam-Webster
Main Entry: 1li·bel
Pronunciation: \ˈlī-bəl\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, written declaration, from Anglo-French, from Latin libellus, diminutive of liber book
Date: 14th century
1 a: a written statement in which a plaintiff in certain courts sets forth the cause of action or the relief sought barchaic : a handbill especially attacking or defaming someone
2 a: a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression b (1): a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt (2): defamation of a person by written or representational means (3): the publication of blasphemous, treasonable, seditious, or obscene writings or pictures (4): the act, tort, or crime of publishing such a libel
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/libel


Quote:
Free Online Dictionary
libel
Noun
1. Law the publication of something false which damages a person's reputation
2. any damaging or unflattering representation or statement
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Jul, 2009 09:45 am
Now back on topic, according to this article the Saudis would not give formal assent and would publicly complain while silently cheering an Israeli raid on Iranian nuclear faciltiies. What do you want to bet that the USA response would go much the same way?

Quote:
July 5, 2009
Saudis give nod to Israeli raid on IranUzi Mahnaimi in Tel Aviv and Sarah Baxter

The head of Mossad, Israel’s overseas intelligence service, has assured Benjamin Netanyahu, its prime minister, that Saudi Arabia would turn a blind eye to Israeli jets flying over the kingdom during any future raid on Iran’s nuclear sites.

Earlier this year Meir Dagan, Mossad’s director since 2002, held secret talks with Saudi officials to discuss the possibility.

The Israeli press has already carried unconfirmed reports that high-ranking officials, including Ehud Olmert, the former prime minister, held meetings with Saudi colleagues. The reports were denied by Saudi officials.

“The Saudis have tacitly agreed to the Israeli air force flying through their airspace on a mission which is supposed to be in the common interests of both Israel and Saudi Arabia,” a diplomatic source said last week.

Although the countries have no formal diplomatic relations, an Israeli defence source confirmed that Mossad maintained “working relations” with the Saudis.

John Bolton, the former US ambassador to the United Nations who recently visited the Gulf, said it was “entirely logical” for the Israelis to use Saudi airspace.

Bolton, who has talked to several Arab leaders, added: “None of them would say anything about it publicly but they would certainly acquiesce in an overflight if the Israelis didn’t trumpet it as a big success.”

Arab states would condemn a raid when they spoke at the UN but would be privately relieved to see the threat of an Iranian bomb removed, he said.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6638568.ece
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Jul, 2009 10:02 am
@Foxfyre,
Besides that I miss hwere this quoted article reports that the Saudis are "silently cheering an Israeli raid on Iranian nuclear faciltiies", besides that I think (when reading through the Israelian papers) that this is just one argument during the discussion about Mossad hold in Israel in the moment. (Meir Dagan's term was running out - for those who don't follow international politics.)


On the other hand, it may be true.
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Jul, 2009 11:07 am
@Foxfyre,
OK! From now on, I'll use the term, slander, or libel, or slander/libel, or libel/slander.

I'm an easy accomodator ... when I want to be! ( ;- )

Naah! The hell with it! I'll continue to use the term slander to characterize lies about a person whether written or spoken. | :- |

0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  0  
Reply Sun 5 Jul, 2009 11:20 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Interesting. I wondered what problems translation was creating in perceptions, so I plugged the first three paragraphs of that article into my translator and got this as the German translation:

Original text
Quote:
Saudis give nod to Israeli raid on IranUzi Mahnaimi in Tel Aviv and Sarah Baxter [/size]

The head of Mossad, Israel’s overseas intelligence service, has assured Benjamin Netanyahu, its prime minister, that Saudi Arabia would turn a blind eye to Israeli jets flying over the kingdom during any future raid on Iran’s nuclear sites.

Earlier this year Meir Dagan, Mossad’s director since 2002, held secret talks with Saudi officials to discuss the possibility.


German Translation:
Quote:
Der Kopf von Mossad, Israels Übersee Intelligenzdienst, hat Benjamin Netanyahu, sein Premierminister, beruhigt, den Saudi-Arabien ein blindes Auge zu israelischen Düsenflugzeugen drehen würde, die über das Königreich während jedes künftigen Überfalles auf Irans nukleare Stellen fliegen.

Früher hielt dieser Jahr Meir Dagan, Mossad's Direktor seit 2002, Geheimnisgesprächen mit Saudiaraber Beamte, um die Möglichkeit zu besprechen.

Die israelische Presse hat schon unbestätigte Berichte getragen, daß hochrangige Beamte, einschließlich Ehud Olmert, der ehemalige Premierminister, hielten Treffen mit Saudiaraber Kollegen. Die Berichte wurden Beamte von Saudiaraber bestritten.


And then when I translated the German back to English, it came out like this:

Quote:
The head of Mossad, Israel's overseas intelligence service, calmed down Benjamin Netanyahu, his/its prime minister, that Saudi Arabia would turn a blind eye to Israeli jet planes, that fly across the kingdom during every future raid on Iran's nuclear places.

Earlier, this held year Meir Dagan, Mossad's director since 2002, secret conversations with Saudi officials in order to discuss the possibility.

The Israeli press carried already unconfirmed reports that high-ranking officials, including Ehud Olmert, the former prime minister, meetings with Saudi held colleagues. The reports were been in officials of Saudi the main person.


I think this might explain some of the disconnect.
 

Related Topics

Israel's Reality - Discussion by Miller
THE WAR IN GAZA - Discussion by Advocate
Israel's Shame - Discussion by BigEgo
Eye On Israel/Palestine - Discussion by IronLionZion
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 01/24/2025 at 12:16:46