To Topo. Absinthe and other anti-Semites.

Agnes Selby · Post by **Agnes Selby** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:23 pm

It is obvious that none of you have lived through the
Holocoust.

Hence, I do not think it is too much to ask to
allow people on this board not to be reminded of the
hatred of Jews now so enjoyed in England and the rest
of Europe.

Actually this is not the place for anti-Semitism. There are
many other sites devoted to the subject and I am sure
you are frequent visitors there, so that you have places
where to go to air your sentiments.

Posts, such as yours, employ bully-boy tactics.
I request most respectfully that your personal feelings
about Jews be regarded as personal and not brought
here where they are hurtful.

Agnes.

absinthe · Post by **absinthe** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:56 am

Please don't label me anti-semite - that's hateful let alone abusive.

Because I'm a gentile here in an obviously Jewish pub does not make me anti-semite. I'm anti-nothing. Do you imagine I can't FEEL for the horrors people went through in Auschwitz and elsewhere? Do you imagine they were only Jews? That's why I haven't been in this forum so much of late. That I feel equally about thousands of Palestinians relentlessly murdered and maimed by some extremely cruel war weapons, notably white phosphorus, doesn't make me anti-Jewish.

I'm a spiritual person. I have no wish to see anyone hurt as a result of two or more ageing Peter Pans unable to solve their identity problems and demanding power over others to send them to massacre people elsewhere in the world, simply because they can't assert themselves elsehow. If there is to be war, let those who declare it present themselves on the front line as happened in days of yore. They won't of course, bloody cowards that they are, happier to send their "subjects" to their death. I have no desire whatsoever for such power and why anyone should want it I can't fathom.

So, enough. Eh?

I'll keep out this pub for a while now - browse maybe and re-enter if one or more of my ideals are violated but otherwise, no. Does that satisfy you now?

jack stowaway · Post by **jack stowaway** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:56 am

That was a bit over the top, Agnes, particularly in the case of Absinthe.

I realise you are understandably sensitive on the subject and I don't deny for a moment the moral ugliness of anti-semitism nor its malign influence.

But your post doesn't give much credit to the other members of this board, who recognise anti-semitism when we see it and are not about to be seduced into agreeing with it.

Absinthe's posts are critical of Israel's actions in the recent fighting in Gaza. That is his privilige. I don't agree with him, but I respect his position. I certainly wouldn't characterize his arguments as anti-semitic.

And if you characterise Absinthe as an anti-semite, how would you characterise Saul on the basis of his far more intemperate posts?

Agnes Selby · Post by **Agnes Selby** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 5:50 am

I do not agree with Saul's posts either and have said so many times.
I have asked him personally to limit his rhetoric. In fact, if
you remember, he was upset with me because of it.

I have also asked Topo but to no avail. As for Absinthe,
she seems to forget that the Gaza incident was started by Hamas and
continued for 9 years before retalliation started. If Australia
was shelled on a daily basis, I would hope that my government
would act to stop it.

Anyone who is not convinced about the Holocoust, please
visit my Jewish father's 97 year old cousin who survived
Auschwitz and was operated on without anaesthesia
and left to die on a heap of corpses. But she did not die
and she is a living testament to human cruelty which Topo
seems to enjoy denying.

If my post was too strong, then think of the many posts
to which I responded.

Agnes.

Madame · Post by **Madame** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 6:25 am

Deleted by poster

Michael · Post by **Michael** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 6:41 am

With all due respect from me too Agnes but are there really Holocaust deniers that post on this board

Maybe I am naive and whilst it is true that I don't really know much about the many members of this board the idea is repugnant. In the short time that I have been back posting it is true that I don't understand Topo's posts. I suspect Topo enjoys upsetting the apple cart and is not quite what he seems to be. For all I know he may even be pretending that English is not his first language. A veil of mystery that I have no wish to penetrate. I find it odd Topo but if I am mistaken then I apologise.
As far as Absinthe is concerned his/her posts are highly articulate and have provoked stimulating debate which I for one have found fascinating. All facets of the debates. To say that Absinthe is an anti-Semite is in my view mistaken and I'm sorry Agnes, but rather offensive. Yes, Absinthe is critical of Israel but to be critical of Israel doesn't necessarily mean that one is anti-Semitic. I would like to think that 'in a free and safe place' one can exchange views passionately with mutual respect, if it is deserved. I think that Absinthe deserves that respect and it would be a great shame if his/her views were no longer forthcoming because of being accused, quite wrongly in my opinion, of being an anti-Semite.

Edited for typos..

TopoGigio · Post by **TopoGigio** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 6:43 am

I see this now, after my farewell to Lance,and Im returning
here for a last word!
Im not antisemite and I was not at any denial...again...

Best Wishes,
Topo

(Edited for the putting of the 'not'!

)

living_stradivarius · Post by **living_stradivarius** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:40 am

Agnes Selby wrote: I have also asked Topo but to no avail. As for Absinthe,
she seems to forget that the Gaza incident was started by Hamas and
continued for 9 years before retalliation started. If Australia
was shelled on a daily basis, I would hope that my government
would act to stop it.

The Gaza "incident" is not an isolated part of history. Many parties are to blame, and going back through history we look at Great Britain and the Ottoman Empire.

slofstra · Post by **slofstra** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 11:33 am

Agnes, this is a vicious personal attack.
The entire thread should be deleted at once.

Topo, absinthe and chalkie.
Please consider the source. She doesn't represent the view of anyone but herself.

Chalkperson · Post by **Chalkperson** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 11:36 am

With all due respect Agnes, naming Absinthe and Topo Anti Semites in a Thread Title is one of the most insulting things that I have ever seen in this Pub, why is someone who disagrees with the way Israel behaves in War an Anti Semite, I had stopped posting in the Pub because of the countinuous use of the words Bigot and Anti-Semite and the unsavory way members speak to each other, you can have the Pub all to yourself, I want nothing to do with it any more, I hope you are happy now...

piston · Post by **piston** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:16 pm

Nobody needs to leave the pub slamming the door on their way out. People are responding to a single thread, Agnes's, when the thread in itself was motivated by and in reaction to countless other threads that, for some unknown reason, are all focused on a single hot spot in the world, are all highly opinionated about Israel and/or Hamas, and include not a few "push-button" topics which were seemingly intended by the originator to provoke.

A simple, basic, fundamental rule folks: it is not that difficult to recognize who, among CMGers, tamper their "freedom of speech" with a genuine desire to cultivate and maintain relationships among members or, dare I say, some harmony around the kitchen table. But, for whatever personal reason, other posters simply don't give a hoot about such relationships and take a malicious pleasure in pushing them buttons they know will trigger a heated, emotionally-loaded reaction from other members.

To my mind, that is the source of the problem, not Agnes's single thread.

Bellelettres · Post by **Bellelettres** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:34 pm

Aren't there rules in this forum about personal attacks? Rules against personal attacks?

Werner · Post by **Werner** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:50 pm

I have been staying out of the Pub lately, and will make an exception now, merely to explain something to you about one of our better members, Agnes, who has been attacked unduly.

What makes her unique among us, I think, is that Agnes has endured - and survived - both the Nazi and Communist dictatorships before escaping to the free world in Australia. Along the way, besides enduring hardships in her own life, she lost many dear members of her family in the Holocaust - yes, friends, ther WAS such a thing - as I also know from my own family's experience, - so this is something more than a story from ancient times, or a subject of lectures by some of our dogmatic dilettantes, who like to sound off from time to time here.

Unfortunately, in her responses to my own messages or to what goes on here, Corlyss seems to fail to discriminate betwen free speech and what can poison a site, as we've seen here and in other sites. And until that gets cleaned up, I'm out of the Pub.

piston · Post by **piston** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:33 pm

I for one do not envy Corlyss's role, a role which has become similar to a High School Assistant Principal in a working-class neighborhood! Ain't she supposed to enjoy these boards too? But I can see how a cooling off period may be desirable at this time. Perhaps she should completely lock up the pub every now and then, at her discretion!!!

slofstra · Post by **slofstra** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:07 pm

Thanks Werner and piston, for trying to put some perspective on this. I tend to avoid all manner of threads that may have triggered Agnes' reaction. However, this attack was not even placed in the context of one of those threads, so it's out there for everyone to see, and needs to be dealt with on that basis.
When you consider the history, Werner, how hurtful do you think it is to someone to be associated with that cruel history by being called an anti-Semite?
Again, I don't know what triggered the comment, but as it stands it's an unsupported personal attack out of nowhere. I think Agnes should apologize and withdraw the remark.

HoustonDavid · Post by **HoustonDavid** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:35 pm

I respect and admire Agnes Selby and her personal history greatly, but I agree, an apology and a withdrawal of the remarks and the thread are in order. I cannot and do not defend anti-Semitism from anyone, anywhere, anyplace, anytime, but I also cannot defend castigating anyone as an anti-Semite in a public forum. I am sorry our excellent and much-appreciated moderators have allowed it to be posted and continue.

David Sherman

Agnes Selby · Post by **Agnes Selby** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:28 pm

HoustonDavid wrote:I respect and admire Agnes Selby and her personal history greatly, but I agree, an apology and a withdrawal of the remarks and the thread are in order. I cannot and do not defend anti-Semitism from anyone, anywhere, anyplace, anytime, but I also cannot defend castigating anyone as an anti-Semite in a public forum. I am sorry our excellent and much-appreciated moderators have allowed it to be posted and continue.

David Sherman

Dear David,

My reaction is not prompted by my personal history. I am reacting
to a constant barrage of articles concerning the denial of the Holocoust
about which there cannot be a discussion. The Holocoust is verified
historical fact. Deniers of this historical fact belong to sites created
for such a purpose. Inciters sow their hateful seeds in the hope that
they will grow. After a while their efforts gain acceptance.

I owe no one an apology. As for Absinthe, the story would take on
a different hue were it the Irish bombing London. She would be the
first to demand of her government to protect her as a citizen.
This does not seem to apply to Israel as Israelis are Jews and they
should take what's coming to them. I have no patience with such
diatribe. I have been a writer and journalist for many years
and know perfectly well where such propaganda leads to.

At this very time, the KKK is distributing leaflets in New Zealand
inciting racial hatred where there was none. Their numbers, according to
today's Sydney Morning Herald, have grown in the USA since the
election of President Obama. I don't condone racism in any form and
least of all on this forum which has changed from a place of friendly
discussion since these articles appeared.

As my note to you is the last one for some time to come,
please accept this as a rejection of your suggestion that I should apologise.
Those who have aggravated the situation on this forum for it
to become a propaganda site should be the ones to apologise.

Regards,
Agnes.

Madame · Post by **Madame** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:33 pm

Deleted by poster

Donald Isler · Post by **Donald Isler** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:43 pm

Agnes is right. Period.

living_stradivarius · Post by **living_stradivarius** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:09 pm

Agnes Selby wrote: I owe no one an apology. As for Absinthe, the story would take on
a different hue were it the Irish bombing London. She would be the
first to demand of her government to protect her as a citizen.

Based on what I've seen of absinthe's posts, I don't think s/he would support cluster bombing Ireland even if the IRA decided to bomb London. Nor would I believe that standing against disproportionate retaliation deserves the label analogous to "anti-Semite." The whole Israel-Palestine issue should not be conflated with Holocaust denial.

Looking back to the Obama-Hitler thread, I would say that Agnes was unfairly accused of making an assertion others assumed she intended to make. What comes around goes around folks.

Wallingford · Post by **Wallingford** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:28 pm

As for myself, Agnes, I'd choose ungentlemanliness-in-general over anti-Semitism any old day.

SaulChanukah · Post by **SaulChanukah** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 6:46 pm

Chalkperson wrote: why is someone who disagrees with the way Israel behaves in War an Anti Semite? ...

Because Israel waited for 8 years to respond to this evil terror organization that wants to murder every single Jew in the world. If you criticize Israel for doing something to protect itself from these beasts after 8 long years of restrained, then you are without a question a Jew hater of the worst kind, because you take away the right from Jews to defend themselves.

I completely agree with Agnes, she is right, she doesn’t have the luxury to pretend that people who criticize Israel are not anti Semites, because the truth stands with Israel very clearly and without any contradictions and confusions. Any normal decent human being understand that Israel is under attack and is the victim here, and when people criticize Israel in these circumstances, the only natural conclusion that self aware Jews reach is that these people are Jew haters.

I expect every decent human being to stand with Israel and not criticize it. Israel is fighting for its survival and is surrounded by 300.000.000 Muslims who seek its destruction. In the short 60 years of its existence Israel was attacked and had to go through 7 wars and 2 intifadas and an on going boycott and non stop terror. How can you criticize a country like this, that is under attack by the enemies of peace and freedom if you're not a Jew hater?

Bellelettres · Post by **Bellelettres** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 7:04 pm

Saul, your argument seems to be that people who have been oppressed and dispossessed and killed and driven out of their homes have the right to oppress, dispossess, kill, and drive others out of their homes with impunity. Does that really make sense to you?

SaulChanukah · Post by **SaulChanukah** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 7:11 pm

Bellelettres wrote:Saul, your argument seems to be that people who have been oppressed and dispossessed and killed and driven out of their homes have the right to oppress, dispossess, kill, and drive others out of their homes with impunity. Does that really make sense to you?

Your comparison is idiotic. If you can't see the difference between us Jews and the Muslims, then there is no point talking to you.

living_stradivarius · Post by **living_stradivarius** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 7:59 pm

Bellelettres wrote:Saul, your argument seems to be that people who have been oppressed and dispossessed and killed and driven out of their homes have the right to oppress, dispossess, kill, and drive others out of their homes with impunity. Does that really make sense to you?

Hi Belle, just a forewarning, discussion over such matters here has had a history of getting nowhere. Just know that your concerns are more than reasonable and that some here just won't give a damn.

BWV 1080 · Post by **BWV 1080** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 8:04 pm

I have been bothered by how Topo has repeatedly linked to Holocaust denial sites like IHR or Rense pretty much from the day he showed up here. Whether he believes the denialists or is just trolling does not matter. On a site with many Jewish contributors who lost family during the period either is inexusable.

However you cannot conflate critsism of Israeli policy with anti-semitism. By definition every anti-semite is an anti-zionist but the reverse is not true. I have not seen anything Absinthe has posted that I would construe as antisemetic

Steinway · Post by **Steinway** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 8:15 pm

SaulChanukah wrote:
Bellelettres wrote:Saul, your argument seems to be that people who have been oppressed and dispossessed and killed and driven out of their homes have the right to oppress, dispossess, kill, and drive others out of their homes with impunity. Does that really make sense to you?

Your comparison is idiotic. If you can't see the difference between us Jews and the Muslims, then there is no point talking to you.

As usual, Saul, you're blindly lashing out on this issue.

I consider myself a "decent, normal human being", I'm Jewish, and I do not believe that Israel is the only victim in this situation. Israel is not beyond any criticism on this issue. Many Palestinians are also victims and, like many Israelis, have no control over what their leaders do.

I'm no more an anti-Semite than you are and I very much resent this continual effort to lump together all those who voice any protest against some Israeli policies as Jew haters. Your stance on this subject is so narrow and immovable, that it leaves no room for compromise or discussion.

Too bad.

Chalkperson · Post by **Chalkperson** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 8:43 pm

SaulChanukah wrote:
Chalkperson wrote: why is someone who disagrees with the way Israel behaves in War an Anti Semite? ...
Because Israel waited for 8 years to respond to this evil terror organization that wants to murder every single Jew in the world. If you criticize Israel for doing something to protect itself from these beasts after 8 long years of restrained, then you are without a question a Jew hater of the worst kind, because you take away the right from Jews to defend themselves.

Saul, don't be ridiculous, don't you understand that nobody here is against Israel's right to respond to Hamas, we are only against the use of Cluster Bombs and White Phosphorous on civilians, not the War itself, as for calling me a Jew Hater of the Worst Kind it just shows what a shallow, bitter, twisted and immoral person you are, you started a thread to say that Israel should never be expected to accept International Law, OK, Israel's Prime Minister agrees with you, he has said he will protect any Soldier in any Prosecution, but, let's look at your other thread a little harder, Spain is concerned that Israel dropped a One Ton Bomb in a Crowded Civilian Neighbourhood in order to Kill One Hamas Member, there is no way that can be considered a Proportional Response...you Spew Bile at us Gentiles and Hatred at the World, I was asked by another member of this forum recently if all Israeli's were like you...my answer was that I hoped not...my Wife is Jewish, as are many of my friends, so keep your personal attacks to yourself...

Seán · Post by **Seán** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 8:58 pm

The allegations made aganist Topo and Absinthe are very serious indeed. I read most of the threads in the Pub but I rarely post on any of the threads. From what I have read thus far I feel that the accusations made against Absinthe are wrong. She does express a view that is at odds with most of the contributors to the Forum, has expressed a view that is sympathetic to the Palestinian position but that does not mean that she hates Jewish people, nor should it be construed as such.
I don't know why Topo has been singled out for attack. I do not know what Topo's position is on anything as I will not make an effort to try to understand someone who deliberately tries to be cryptic or "clever" in their wrtings, perhaps Topo is the victim of his/her own approach to the things here, I don't know.
I have made my position clear before and I will repeat that I loath and detest Holocaust deniers and if I were moderating a Forum I'd ban their poisonous hate immediately, that's not the American way I know and I respect that.

Post by **Corlyss_D** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:23 pm

Bellelettres wrote:Saul, your argument seems to be that people who have been oppressed and dispossessed and killed and driven out of their homes have the right to oppress, dispossess, kill, and drive others out of their homes with impunity. Does that really make sense to you?

Poor dumb Palestinians, without even enough sense to recognize who their real tormentors are. It's their Arab and Muslim brothers, who first threatened to kill them if they did not evacuate Israel in 1948, and then refused to take them in and integrate them when they did flee, and then turned them into a permanent non-state army to wreak Arab vengance on Israel and her allies. Can't feel the least bit sorry for the way the Israelis protect themselves from such crazed human monsters, i.e., the Arab states that are most certainly at the root of this festering problem. A world that so repeatedly and uncritically takes their side should be ashamed of itself. Unfortunately, shame is in wretchedly short supply everywhere.

SaulChanukah · Post by **SaulChanukah** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 10:58 pm

Chalkperson wrote:
SaulChanukah wrote:
Chalkperson wrote: why is someone who disagrees with the way Israel behaves in War an Anti Semite? ...
Because Israel waited for 8 years to respond to this evil terror organization that wants to murder every single Jew in the world. If you criticize Israel for doing something to protect itself from these beasts after 8 long years of restrained, then you are without a question a Jew hater of the worst kind, because you take away the right from Jews to defend themselves.
Saul, don't be ridiculous, don't you understand that nobody here is against Israel's right to respond to Hamas, we are only against the use of Cluster Bombs and White Phosphorous on civilians, not the War itself, as for calling me a Jew Hater of the Worst Kind it just shows what a shallow, bitter, twisted and immoral person you are, you started a thread to say that Israel should never be expected to accept International Law, OK, Israel's Prime Minister agrees with you, he has said he will protect any Soldier in any Prosecution, but, let's look at your other thread a little harder, Spain is concerned that Israel dropped a One Ton Bomb in a Crowded Civilian Neighbourhood in order to Kill One Hamas Member, there is no way that can be considered a Proportional Response...you Spew Bile at us Gentiles and Hatred at the World, I was asked by another member of this forum recently if all Israeli's were like you...my answer was that I hoped not...my Wife is Jewish, as are many of my friends, so keep your personal attacks to yourself...

Chalike and the rest of the Israel attackers one question please:

Where were you when Israel was attacked for 8 years non stop by the hamas terrorists?

I for one didn’t hear a word of protest and any sort of outrage about Israel’s suffering all these years when a rain of missiles landed on them by hamas.

You guys are only good in upholding the rule of law when it comes to Israel. You think that the Arabs are goim ( gentiles) and it is perfectly understandable for gentiles to behave this way. You know, kill, murder, terrorize, steal and do all the evil in the world, so what’s the point to protest, how can anyone protest something that is so ingrained in the very nature of the Gentile world?

With this mindset, you turn around and see the Jews. You believe that when Jews defend themselves its ‘violence’ because you have a twisted vision of a Jew. You believe that a Jew is a victim and always bound to stay that way. Therefore even if his battle is righteous and self defensive, you automatically interpret it to be violence and therefore criminal.

There are different ways to understand the word ‘crime’. Crime can be interpreted to mean something un natural, not ordinary, queer, and strange. For example, in the natural order of things, people earn their living, they work and they get paid for their services. The opposite and un-natural aspect of this is stealing, people taking things from other people without their consent, that’s un-natural and therefore criminal.

This same misconception is applied to the Jews. For thousands of years, the Jews were victims, always persecuted and made feel inferior. But things have changed and the Jews today are able to wield a weapon and protect themselves. Many people view this new reality to be un natural, a different order, something doesn’t sit well, they assume, and therefore decide that Israel’s actions are criminal.

There is nothing criminal with Israel’s actions. They fought a most just war and a most natural war that any normal and sane nation would have fought under similar circumstances. Their cause was righteous and their methods noble compared to other nations.

Some important points to remember:

1. All of Israel’s actions were defensive, it only responded to violence directed.

2. It waited 8 long years and tried everything to avoid this battle, but nothing else worked, they had to act.

3. They warned in advance every family before they attacked. Few days ago Israel’s president Shimon Peres said in Davos Switzerland that Israel made some 250.000 phone calls and warned all the ‘civilians’ in Gaza before they attacked.

4. The Israeli Air Force had developed a special missile system that gives the pilot a chance to divert the fired missiles in mid air to explode somewhere else if a civilian happens to pass through the designated terrorist target. An amazing dedication to human life and righteous use of weapons ever by any nation, but you don’t hear this in the media . You can view this system by watching an actual footage in Gaza here:

Chalkperson · Post by **Chalkperson** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 11:27 pm

Therefore, anyone that criticizes Israel in her just and rightful war against its enemies, is sadly but surely an anti Semite.

I disagree..

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 11:28 pm

SaulChanukah wrote: ... I’m 32 years old and I have read of many battles both recent and historic, and I must say for the love of truth and honestly that I have never encountered a more just war brilliantly executed with such accuracy and professionalism and solid dedication for avoiding innocent civilians, as Israel did.

Therefore, anyone that criticizes Israel in her just and rightful war against its enemies, is sadly but surely an anti Semite.

There is some truth to that first paragraph, Saul. But the second paragraph doesn't logically follow from the first, as you'd have us believe. Certainly, some of the people who always oppose Israel when there is a conflict are anti-Semitic, but not all of them. IMO, many simply have a misguided sense of morality or a naive belief that war is never the answer to dealing with a problem. Much of the world media (especially organizations like C-Span International and the BBC) act as propaganda wings for Hamas and other anti-Israel forces in the Middle East and that Israel-bashing is a sort of cause célèbre in some places; probably England more so than anywhere else in the west.

Chalkperson · Post by **Chalkperson** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 11:45 pm

Chalike and the rest of the Israel attackers one question please:

Where were you when Israel was attacked for 8 years non stop by the hamas terrorists?

I live in Ground Zero, my home was attacked, my building was shut for three months, how dare you speak to me the way you do...

I have no idea how you can have been brought up in a Religious Enviroment and yet speak to your Elders the way you do...

Chalkperson is 54
Ralph is 65
Werner is 85

Yet you disrespect us, you are nothing...

SaulChanukah · Post by **SaulChanukah** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 12:03 am

Chalkperson wrote:
Chalike and the rest of the Israel attackers one question please:

Where were you when Israel was attacked for 8 years non stop by the hamas terrorists?
I live in Ground Zero, my home was attacked, my building was shut for three months, how dare you speak to me the way you do...

I have no idea how you can have been brought up in a Religious Enviroment and yet speak to your Elders the way you do...

Chalkperson is 54
Ralph is 65
Werner is 85

Yet you disrespect us, you are nothing...

Not physically genius, I meant where was your outcry and outrage?

About the age thing, what does this have to do with anything?

Been old doesnt make you right on things.

Chalkperson · Post by **Chalkperson** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 12:07 am

SaulChanukah wrote:About the age thing, what does this has to do with anything?

Been old doesnt make you right on things.

No, it means we have lived longer, we may have acquired wisdom, you are 33 but act like a twelve year old...you are in good company, I never got past age 15...

SaulChanukah · Post by **SaulChanukah** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 12:17 am

Chalkperson wrote:
SaulChanukah wrote:About the age thing, what does this has to do with anything?

Been old doesnt make you right on things.
No, it means we have lived longer, we may have acquired wisdom, you are 33 but act like a twelve year old...you are in good company, I never got past age 15...

With your acquired wisdom and you blame the victim?

That's some 'wisdom'...

Post by **Corlyss_D** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 12:35 am

*Sigh* It's so comforting to find some topics that never grow stale . . .

Chalkperson · Post by **Chalkperson** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 1:58 am

Corlyss_D wrote:*Sigh* It's so comforting to find some topics that never grow stale . . .

Yeah, I was not even supposed to be in here...

Michael · Post by **Michael** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 7:38 am

Barry wrote:Much of the world media (especially organizations like C-Span International and the BBC) act as propaganda wings for Hamas and other anti-Israel forces in the Middle East and that Israel-bashing is a sort of cause célèbre in some places; probably England more so than anywhere else in the west.

A word about the BBC. I spent a month in Britain recently and was able to see how the BBC reported the current developments in the conflict. They were scrupulous about putting both sides of the story on air giving both Israeli and Palestinian representatives a fair crack at the whip. Since I returned to Spain various groups have instigated an appeal to foster humanitarian aid to the people of Palestine. The BBC have consistently refused to broadcast this appeal on the grounds that it may illustrate impartiality.

From the Editor in Chief of the BBC:

A few days ago, the DEC approached us about an appeal for Gaza and, after very careful reflection and consultation inside and outside the BBC, we decided that in this case we should not broadcast the appeal. One reason was a concern about whether aid raised by the appeal could actually be delivered on the ground. You will understand that one of the factors we have to look at is the practicality of the aid, which the public are being asked to fund, getting through. In the case of the Burma cyclone, for instance, it was only when we judged that there was a good chance of the aid getting to the people who needed it most that we agreed to broadcast the appeal. Clearly, there have been considerable logistical difficulties in delivering aid into Gaza. However some progress has already been made and the situation could well improve in the coming days. If it does, this reason for declining to broadcast the appeal will no longer be relevant.

But there is a second more fundamental reason why we decided that we should not broadcast the appeal at present. This is because Gaza remains a major ongoing news story, in which humanitarian issues - the suffering and distress of civilians and combatants on both sides of the conflict, the debate about who is responsible for causing it and what should be done about it - are both at the heart of the story and contentious. We have and will continue to cover the human side of the conflict in Gaza extensively across our news services where we can place all of the issues in context in an objective and balanced way. After looking at all of the circumstances, and in particular after seeking advice from senior leaders in BBC Journalism, we concluded that we could not broadcast a free-standing appeal, no matter how carefully constructed, without running the risk of reducing public confidence in the BBC's impartiality in its wider coverage of the story. Inevitably an appeal would use pictures which are the same or similar to those we would be using in our news programmes but would do so with the objective of encouraging public donations. The danger for the BBC is that this could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story. When we have turned down DEC appeals in the past on impartiality grounds it has been because of this risk of giving the public the impression that the BBC was taking sides in an ongoing conflict.

However, BBC News and the BBC as a whole takes its responsibility to report the human consequences of situations like Gaza very seriously and I believe our record in doing it with compassion as well as objectivity is unrivalled. Putting this decision aside, we also have a very strong track-record in supporting DEC appeals and more broadly, through BBC Children In Need, Comic Relief and our many other appeals, in using the BBC's airwaves to achieve positive humanitarian and charitable goals. This is an important part of what it is to be a public service broadcaster. It is sometimes not a comfortable place to be, but we have a duty to ensure that nothing risks undermining our impartiality. It is to protect that impartiality that we have made this difficult decision.

Finally, it is important to remember that our decision does not prevent the DEC continuing with their appeal for donations and people are able to contribute should they choose to.

Taken from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/mark_thompson/

BTW If you think that impartiality is present in Britain then you should come to Spain. Anti-Israeli graffiti is forever turning up in the square where I live in the heart of the city and all over the country. My dear Israeli neighbours are deeply distressed at the level of contempt that is shown towards them. The bars are full of people debating the issue..well..debating is perhaps the wrong word. If ever I venture to put forward an opinion that is perceived to be favourable to the Israeli cause I am shouted down and it's often pointed out that because I am British I must support a government that always bows down to Washington and the despotic Americans, believing everything that I read in the press against the Palestinians and so forth..... This is a country where I saw people cheering in bars when the planes were crashing into the twin towers on 9/11...and if you think that the BBC are biased then watch the Spanish news channels. Hell

Spain will not be the only country behaves like this. Give me Britain and the BBC any day as far as this issue is concerned

SaulChanukah · Post by **SaulChanukah** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 7:41 am

Michael wrote:
Barry wrote:Much of the world media (especially organizations like C-Span International and the BBC) act as propaganda wings for Hamas and other anti-Israel forces in the Middle East and that Israel-bashing is a sort of cause célèbre in some places; probably England more so than anywhere else in the west.
A word about the BBC. I spent a month in Britain recently and was able to see how the BBC reported the current developments in the conflict. They were scrupulous about putting both sides of the story on air giving both Israeli and Palestinian representatives a fair crack at the whip. Since I returned to Spain various groups have instigated an appeal to foster humanitarian aid to the people of Palestine. The BBC have consistently refused to broadcast this appeal on the grounds that it may illustrate impartiality.

From the Editor in Chief of the BBC:

A few days ago, the DEC approached us about an appeal for Gaza and, after very careful reflection and consultation inside and outside the BBC, we decided that in this case we should not broadcast the appeal. One reason was a concern about whether aid raised by the appeal could actually be delivered on the ground. You will understand that one of the factors we have to look at is the practicality of the aid, which the public are being asked to fund, getting through. In the case of the Burma cyclone, for instance, it was only when we judged that there was a good chance of the aid getting to the people who needed it most that we agreed to broadcast the appeal. Clearly, there have been considerable logistical difficulties in delivering aid into Gaza. However some progress has already been made and the situation could well improve in the coming days. If it does, this reason for declining to broadcast the appeal will no longer be relevant.

But there is a second more fundamental reason why we decided that we should not broadcast the appeal at present. This is because Gaza remains a major ongoing news story, in which humanitarian issues - the suffering and distress of civilians and combatants on both sides of the conflict, the debate about who is responsible for causing it and what should be done about it - are both at the heart of the story and contentious. We have and will continue to cover the human side of the conflict in Gaza extensively across our news services where we can place all of the issues in context in an objective and balanced way. After looking at all of the circumstances, and in particular after seeking advice from senior leaders in BBC Journalism, we concluded that we could not broadcast a free-standing appeal, no matter how carefully constructed, without running the risk of reducing public confidence in the BBC's impartiality in its wider coverage of the story. Inevitably an appeal would use pictures which are the same or similar to those we would be using in our news programmes but would do so with the objective of encouraging public donations. The danger for the BBC is that this could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story. When we have turned down DEC appeals in the past on impartiality grounds it has been because of this risk of giving the public the impression that the BBC was taking sides in an ongoing conflict.

However, BBC News and the BBC as a whole takes its responsibility to report the human consequences of situations like Gaza very seriously and I believe our record in doing it with compassion as well as objectivity is unrivalled. Putting this decision aside, we also have a very strong track-record in supporting DEC appeals and more broadly, through BBC Children In Need, Comic Relief and our many other appeals, in using the BBC's airwaves to achieve positive humanitarian and charitable goals. This is an important part of what it is to be a public service broadcaster. It is sometimes not a comfortable place to be, but we have a duty to ensure that nothing risks undermining our impartiality. It is to protect that impartiality that we have made this difficult decision.

Finally, it is important to remember that our decision does not prevent the DEC continuing with their appeal for donations and people are able to contribute should they choose to.

Taken from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/mark_thompson/

BTW If you think that impartiality is present in Britain then you should come to Spain. Anti-Israeli graffiti is forever turning up in the square where I live in the heart of the city and all over the country. My dear Israeli neighbours are deeply distressed at the level of contempt that is shown towards them. The bars are full of people debating the issue..well..debating is perhaps the wrong word. If ever I venture to put forward an opinion that is perceived to be favourable to the Israeli cause I am shouted down and it's often pointed out that because I am British I must support a government that always bows down to Washington and the despotic Americans, believing everything that I read in the press against the Palestinians and so forth..... This is a country where I saw people cheering in bars when the planes were crashing into the twin towers on 9/11...and if you think that the BBC are biased then watch the Spanish news channels. Hell Spain will not be the only country behaves like this. Give me Britain and the BBC any day as far as this issue is concerned

You should really consider a career in fantasy fiction writing.

living_stradivarius · Post by **living_stradivarius** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 8:18 am

I wonder how the BBS censors will treat the following...
"Life is a tale told by an idiot [sic] -- full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” William Shakespeare

Resorting to personal attacks reflects poorly on the poster. I suggest giving the parties directly involved the cold shoulder for a while, regardless of how tempting their topics may be

Steinway · Post by **Steinway** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 9:27 am

I have a suggestion. Perhaps the best solution to this endless and totally futile war of words between Saul and the rest of us on the Israel issue is to not respond to his hateful rants and propagandizing at all.

Let him say his thing and, tough as it is, don't respond. I'm doing it.

It may work and this ugly thread will cease to exist.

Michael · Post by **Michael** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 9:41 am

Eminently sensible suggestion.

SaulChanukah · Post by **SaulChanukah** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 10:39 am

Cliftwood wrote:I have a suggestion. Perhaps the best solution to this endless and totally futile war of words between Saul and the rest of us on the Israel issue is to not respond to his hateful rants and propagandizing at all.

Let him say his thing and, tough as it is, don't respond. I'm doing it.

It may work and this ugly thread will cease to exist.

So much from a hamas supporter.

living_stradivarius · Post by **living_stradivarius** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 11:21 am

And someone who disapproves of burgers supports ice cream. Makes logical sense

. Just ignore the squirrelly noises coming from the background Cliftwood

So much from a so-called composer

Little does he know it makes him look just like this (figuratively of course):

*NOT to be confused with kippers or the Gipper

pizza · Post by **pizza** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 1:59 pm

Cliftwood wrote:
SaulChanukah wrote:
Bellelettres wrote:Saul, your argument seems to be that people who have been oppressed and dispossessed and killed and driven out of their homes have the right to oppress, dispossess, kill, and drive others out of their homes with impunity. Does that really make sense to you?

Your comparison is idiotic. If you can't see the difference between us Jews and the Muslims, then there is no point talking to you.

As usual, Saul, you're blindly lashing out on this issue.

I consider myself a "decent, normal human being", I'm Jewish, and I do not believe that Israel is the only victim in this situation. Israel is not beyond any criticism on this issue. Many Palestinians are also victims and, like many Israelis, have no control over what their leaders do.

I'm no more an anti-Semite than you are and I very much resent this continual effort to lump together all those who voice any protest against some Israeli policies as Jew haters. Your stance on this subject is so narrow and immovable, that it leaves no room for compromise or discussion.

Too bad.

Attacking Saul because he supports Israel's position on how it handled the Gaza war is nonsense. He is on solid ground, both factually and on well-established principles of international law.

There are lawyers who do know what they're talking about, and who have taken the time and trouble to inform these boards at various times concerning the law with regard to fault and responsibility where combatants conducting hostilities deliberately operate from within civilian populations. The reasons are obvious and within the understanding of most reasonably intelligent laypersons who care to take the time and effort to review the law, and are willing to open their minds to the reasoning supporting it. There is no question whatsoever that such combatants are subject to attack where civilians are present, and if civilians are harmed, the sole responsibility for civilian casualties lies with those who use them as shields. That the civilians have no control over their leaders doesn't alter their responsibility or immunize them from attack one whit. That's equally as true in Gaza today, as it would have been in 1943 if the German General Staff had operated in close vicinity to a Berlin kindergarten.

On that point, there is no room for compromise or discussion. You may not like it, but that's the law.

Bellelettres · Post by **Bellelettres** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 2:34 pm

Corlyss_D wrote:
Bellelettres wrote:Saul, your argument seems to be that people who have been oppressed and dispossessed and killed and driven out of their homes have the right to oppress, dispossess, kill, and drive others out of their homes with impunity. Does that really make sense to you?
Poor dumb Palestinians, without even enough sense to recognize who their real tormentors are. It's their Arab and Muslim brothers, who first threatened to kill them if they did not evacuate Israel in 1948, and then refused to take them in and integrate them when they did flee, and then turned them into a permanent non-state army to wreak Arab vengance on Israel and her allies. Can't feel the least bit sorry for the way the Israelis protect themselves from such crazed human monsters, i.e., the Arab states that are most certainly at the root of this festering problem. A world that so repeatedly and uncritically takes their side should be ashamed of itself. Unfortunately, shame is in wretchedly short supply everywhere.

To laugh at people who have been dispossessed, abused, and slaughtered, and then find it unfortunate that shame in those who protest this injustice "is in wretchedly short supply": Is that an example of chutzpah?

SaulChanukah · Post by **SaulChanukah** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 2:45 pm

Bellelettres wrote:
Corlyss_D wrote:
Bellelettres wrote:Saul, your argument seems to be that people who have been oppressed and dispossessed and killed and driven out of their homes have the right to oppress, dispossess, kill, and drive others out of their homes with impunity. Does that really make sense to you?
Poor dumb Palestinians, without even enough sense to recognize who their real tormentors are. It's their Arab and Muslim brothers, who first threatened to kill them if they did not evacuate Israel in 1948, and then refused to take them in and integrate them when they did flee, and then turned them into a permanent non-state army to wreak Arab vengance on Israel and her allies. Can't feel the least bit sorry for the way the Israelis protect themselves from such crazed human monsters, i.e., the Arab states that are most certainly at the root of this festering problem. A world that so repeatedly and uncritically takes their side should be ashamed of itself. Unfortunately, shame is in wretchedly short supply everywhere.
To laugh at people who have been dispossessed, abused, and slaughtered, and then find it unfortunate that shame in those who protest this injustice "is in wretchedly short supply": Is that an example of chutzpah?

You know after hamas got its ass kicked in a way it never had before, and most of Gaza was in ruins the hamas 'leaders' came out of their holes and said : 'We have won a great victory".

Today if you once in your life follow Arab media you will see and hear the jokes that the Palis living in Gaza have for their ' leaders ', the joke goes :" One more 'victory ' like this and we are history". The Arabs are laughing on their leaders , so why blame corlyss for laughing?

These beasts live in a movie, they call defeat victory, lol that's hilarious.

Bellelettres · Post by **Bellelettres** » Sun Feb 01, 2009 3:21 pm

Your message is an example of what's called a non sequitur, Saul. If you're interested in the term for it.

Who is online