How to shut up an anti-semite.......

Vesayen · March 21, 2002, 21:01

http://vnboards.ign.com/message.asp?...start=26302818

HisMajestyBOB · March 21, 2002, 21:05

And how is this different from Poly ME threads?

Vesayen · March 21, 2002, 21:11

Im sorry buy what are poly me threads? I only found this forum(which I love) last week.

Gibsie · March 21, 2002, 21:16

How to shut up someone who dares to defend the Pal's: brand him an anti-Semite, and have him banned. You're half way there

Also, one post of yours stuck in me in that thread... which of the sides in this conflict doesn't kill civilians? Is there a third side I don't know about?

(Spare me the "Israel doesn't target civilians" diatribe... that's not what I asked)

DarkCloud · March 21, 2002, 21:17

"ME threads"
Middle East Threads:

Commonly started by Sirotnikov, Eli or antoher Israeli poster.
There are various sides on the issues, with most taking the israeli side excepting (either Spartan007 or CyberGnu-I'm not sure)

I hope that was helpful

Sirotnikov · March 21, 2002, 21:18

There are ME (Middle East) threads here on Apolyton off-topic.

I happenned to meet several people which adressed Israel and Israelis in very unkind manners, and some continued to ignore posts replying to them.

A great example would be laurentius, who ignored each and everyone one of my posts, until I got mad and then he blamed me of shutting him up because he was saying things which I didn't like.

He hadn't actually defnded any of his points, and ignored every point of mine, rarely posting a

smilie.

And then what I got angry, he used this to accuse me of shutting him up, after I let out some of my anger.

DarkCloud · March 21, 2002, 21:22

I hope you arent referring to "dugfrom the earth" from what I see on page 1 all of his arguments are valid- and in fact better than your argument that the

Quote:

"The Jews were given Israel by the international community, and by the mandate of Brittain, who previously owned the land. The Palestinians never had it."

So basically you are talking about right of conquest, might makes right. The Palestinians lived there. Arguing that the British conquered it and gave it to Israel doesn't exactly give Israel any moral claim to it. Just the international recognition that might makes right.

(dug was the second)
I fully support his statement. AT least that one.

Israelis have no more right to the land than the Palestinians who were unlawfully kicked out.

Sirotnikov · March 21, 2002, 21:23

It's nice that you consider my thread a "news site"

You'll be happy to know it's a translation and a summary of news pieces from http://news.walla.co.il, and the Israeli Channel 2 News Company TV news.

Sirotnikov · March 21, 2002, 21:29

Israelis have no more right for this land than palestinians.

Jews, have IMO more rights for this land than palestinians, since they ahve a historical connection to this land, while the palestinians are a mixture of nomads and arabs from syria and jordan.

The major palestinian immigration to palestine was during the same time as jews began immigrating here - starting from 1890 etc.

Why? Because small jewish centers became profitable, and needed working hands. Because the whole area was slowly developing.

Under the brits, more immigration followed by both sides.

DarkCloud · March 21, 2002, 21:29

Just wondering... Why did you edit out the link, Vesayn?

Vesayen · March 21, 2002, 21:36

Oh I didnt mean to edit it out.......I was testing a board function heh, I'll put it back.

Sirotnikov · March 21, 2002, 22:00

I don't think the person in question is an anti-semite.

He does relate to the points.

And comparing terracts to acts of war is an event I meet often among left-wing people who simply can not differentiate acts of agression. For them, it doesn't matter what were the settings, the target or the intetion.

PS:

Here you can edit anytime you want.

The only thing is, if you do this more than 5 minutes after you've posted, you'll get a nice notice in the bottomn of your post

chequita guevara · March 21, 2002, 22:05

Can you point out the anti-Semetic part? I didn't see anything in that thread that said anything horrible. Maybe I missed it, since I skimmed pretty quickly.

As for you Siro, what do you do, surf all the game boards and do battle with anyone who think that maybe the Israelis might be slightly less than perfect?

Natan · March 21, 2002, 22:13

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Can you point out the anti-Semetic part? I didn't see anything in that thread that said anything horrible. Maybe I missed it, since I skimmed pretty quickly.

As for you Siro, what do you do, surf all the game boards and do battle with anyone who think that maybe the Israelis might be slightly less than perfect?

Just one paragraph which put Israel in the context of America's supposed support for and conducting of mass-murderers everywhere, with a list which included the Shah, the Taliban and was topped off by the fire bombing of Dresden and the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I thought invoking the atomic bomb was a bit of overkill, but not in any way anti-Semitic.

Sirotnikov · March 21, 2002, 22:18

CHE - I sent you a mail or a PM a day ago.

Please answer!!

And yes, I feel obligated to make sure that Israel's behaviour and motief are understood, for people to have better judgement.

There are countless PA henchmen on CNN and BBC who are experts in selling terracts to the people.

I've seen only 3 Israelis with rethoric skills enough to combat the palestinian propoganda, and they seldomly appear.

One is Bibi Nethanyahu.

Two is I forgot his name, but he's currenly Sharon's secretary of information. I rarely see him though, and suspect he got sacked after telling people that Sharon ordered the Mossad to capture Daniel Pearl's murderors.

Three is someone whom I seen on CNN a week ago, who's apparently one of the staff of the Israeli embassy in USA.

Al B. Sure! · March 21, 2002, 22:21

Quote:

Its waiting for the world to realize they arent the agressor so they can deport the palestinians.

Didn't get far before I noticed this... deporting a people because of their racial identification... oh that doesn't sound racist one bit...

thanks

chequita guevara · March 21, 2002, 22:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
CHE - I sent you a mail or a PM a day ago.

I have not recieved it, my friend.

BTW, you should consider that American opinions are the only ones that actually count. Europe and Canada can hem and haw about Israeli attrocities, but as long as Americans see innocent Israelis, Palestinian terrorists, and don't see the effects of the occupation on the Palestinians, our government and our people will be behind you, and continue funding and arming your cause.

It's in the images the media shows, it's in the language they use. Israelis only respond, never attack. And so on. You should not worry so much. The American media is firmly on your side.

Tom201 · March 21, 2002, 22:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
I've seen only 3 Israelis with rethoric skills enough to combat the palestinian propoganda, and they seldomly appear.

Hm, from my experience u get more Israel propaganda than palastinien one. At least on TV. When they show pictures its usually of Israelis died or injured by a terror act. Retalition Actions on the normal news is only text message with maybe showing some helicopter (not the victims). When they show Palastins they show either stone throwing kids or radicals swearing revenge, firing weapons etc.
So its more one sided in favor of Israel (German/Dutch tv)

WhiteElephants · March 21, 2002, 22:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
There are countless PA henchmen on CNN and BBC who are experts in selling terracts to the people.

I've seen only 3 Israelis with rethoric skills enough to combat the palestinian propoganda, and they seldomly appear.

Don't you think, just maybe, that since there are only three people in the world (?) who you feel can "combat" (nice word choice) palestinian propaganda that maybe your view is a little stilted? OK maybe its an international conspiracy set up by the ancient order of the illumanti, CNN, BBC, and various shadow goverments, or maybe, just maybe, you've deluded yourself. I'm going to let you decide, but I'll let you in on a secret -- there's one rational answer, and there's one irrational answer.

Urban Ranger · March 22, 2002, 01:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Jews, have IMO more rights for this land than palestinians, since they ahve a historical connection to this land, while the palestinians are a mixture of nomads and arabs from syria and jordan.

What historical connection? You mean with the Jews that were "tranferred" away from Palestine by the Romans two millennia ago? That's very thin don't you think?

Quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
The major palestinian immigration to palestine was during the same time as jews began immigrating here - starting from 1890 etc.

So who lived in the area before then? Who fought with the crusaders?

Quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Why? Because small jewish centers became profitable, and needed working hands. Because the whole area was slowly developing.

Are you sure it was Jews who fought the crusaders? Seems like there were other peoples in the area for a long time.

Zoid · March 22, 2002, 06:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Israelis have no more right for this land than palestinians.

Jews, have IMO more rights for this land than palestinians, since they ahve a historical connection to this land, while the palestinians are a mixture of nomads and arabs from syria and jordan.

You´re full of ****, Siro. That´s just zionist justification of a illegal occupation of Palestine territory.

Hydey · March 22, 2002, 06:28

Not this crap again.

When they finally destoy each other , the romans or egyptians can claim lands that are rightfully theres .

No wait I am wrong it is the americans they are the true owners of that land.

laurentius · March 22, 2002, 06:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
There are ME (Middle East) threads here on Apolyton off-topic.

I happenned to meet several people which adressed Israel and Israelis in very unkind manners, and some continued to ignore posts replying to them.

A great example would be laurentius, who ignored each and everyone one of my posts, until I got mad and then he blamed me of shutting him up because he was saying things which I didn't like.

He hadn't actually defnded any of his points, and ignored every point of mine, rarely posting a

smilie.

And then what I got angry, he used this to accuse me of shutting him up, after I let out some of my anger.

-=Vagrant=- · March 22, 2002, 07:02

Laurentius, löytyykö kauheesti kokemusta tällaisesta väittelystä? Kysyn ihan uteliaisuudesta. En uskalla postata tähän ketjuun, vaikka mieli tekeekin.

In english: Laurentius, nice weather today, don't you think so?
They said there should be some rain in the afternoon. Well take care.

Rogan Josh · March 22, 2002, 07:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Jews, have IMO more rights for this land than palestinians, since they ahve a historical connection to this land, while the palestinians are a mixture of nomads and arabs from syria and jordan.

Well, as far as I am concerned, this sort of statement should be a banning offense. It is cleary racism of the worst kind.

I have a very good friend who is Palestinian - she was born there and brought up there and has never committed any crime. She is well eductaed (I am sure she is a hell of a lot better educated than Sirotnikov) and a nice, well-meaning person. Who has more right to the place of her birth? Her, or someone who was not born there but happens to be of a religion which was in dominance in the area 2000 years ago?

Zoid · March 22, 2002, 07:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Rogan Josh

Well, as far as I am concerned, this sort of statement should be a banning offense. It is cleary racism of the worst kind.

I have a very good friend who is Palestinian - she was born there and brought up there and has never committed any crime. She is well eductaed (I am sure she is a hell of a lot better educated than Sirotnikov) and a nice, well-meaning person. Who has more right to the place of her birth? Her, or someone who was not born there but happens to be of a religion which was in dominance in the area 2000 years ago?

Well spoken!

laurentius · March 22, 2002, 08:50

Quote:

Originally posted by -=Vagrant=-
Laurentius, löytyykö kauheesti kokemusta tällaisesta väittelystä? Kysyn ihan uteliaisuudesta. En uskalla postata tähän ketjuun, vaikka mieli tekeekin.

In english: Laurentius, nice weather today, don't you think so?
They said there should be some rain in the afternoon. Well take care.

Yhden liekitysketjun verran löytyy kokemusta. Siron mukaan väittelyssä ei saa olla eri mieltä

. Joo en itsekään enää mielellään postaa Lähi-Itä ketjuihin koska siellä on Siron tapaisia kuumakalleja, vrt. kylmäkalle esim. minä.

Mutta jos sulla on perusteltu mielipide niin älä ihmeessä jätä postaamatta.

In english: -=Vagrant=-, Yeah, sure is. I was planning to go hiking tomorrow but they promised those showers to continue tomorrow also. Well, I'll be seeing ya!

Keygen · March 22, 2002, 11:28

Quote:

Originally posted by DarkCloud
I hope you arent referring to "dugfrom the earth" from what I see on page 1 all of his arguments are valid- and in fact better than your argument that the

Quote:

"The Jews were given Israel by the international community, and by the mandate of Brittain, who previously owned the land. The Palestinians never had it."

So basically you are talking about right of conquest, might makes right. The Palestinians lived there. Arguing that the British conquered it and gave it to Israel doesn't exactly give Israel any moral claim to it. Just the international recognition that might makes right.

(dug was the second)
I fully support his statement. AT least that one.

Israelis have no more right to the land than the Palestinians who were unlawfully kicked out.

I have noticed that the most common argument of the people who disagree with the establishment of Israel is that they came after the Palestinians. Like nobody ever read about the history of Middle East. Where were those Palestinians when Hebrews first settled there 3000 years ago? Does anyone knows that the Babylonians when conquered Israel destroyed their temple (the most sacred symbol of theirs) and forced all Hebrews to leave their home and serve them as slaves in Babylon in the 6th century BC? They have been forced to leave Palestine many times in the past by many different conquerors.

I have the feeling that the newer nations can't understand terms like instauration

ZoboZeWarrior · March 22, 2002, 14:00

The fact that Hebrew people give more right to leave here only for their eyes.

The fact that they build the country is a good point for them.
But Pals people give them hands too to build cities and building.

Since Israelis have perfectly the right to leave here. But Pals too.

What they refuse to understand apparently is that other nations will not considere as normal that Israel gouvernment destroy the house of palestinian living here for several generation now to settle newbie Israeli.

Rogan Josh · March 22, 2002, 17:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Keygen
I have noticed that the most common argument of the people who disagree with the establishment of Israel is that they came after the Palestinians. Like nobody ever read about the history of Middle East. Where were those Palestinians when Hebrews first settled there 3000 years ago?

You are not getting this are you?

It doesn't ****ing matter what the history is. It doesn't ****ing matter what happened 3000 years ago. All that matters are the people. Anyone born in Irael/Palestine should have the right to live there, unpersecuted for their religion and with a say in their government. It shouldn't matter what their colour is, or their religion or their political persuasion.