Palestine (continuation)

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Nov 11 - 05:03 AM

"Bluster away, "
The bluster comes from you Mike - '"Jew baiter" wasn't it?
I'd have thought one thing we should all have learned from the Holocaust was not to peddle generalisations about "cukltural traits" without evidence - of which there is not a single shred in the case of ethnic communities living in Britain
"I am not any sort of racist"
If it quacks it's probably a duck
"I will once again knock down all those false accusations"
By supplying a source for your "experts" maybe Keith?
Once again?????
Have no intention in opening the thread you made into a racist platform - but will happily continue with the ethnic takeover of Palestine now we've got this out of the way.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 11 - 03:06 AM

Jim, I will once again knock down all those false accusations, but in a pm.
Mudcat has suffered enough.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 22 Nov 11 - 02:53 AM

I know perfectly well that I am not any sort of racist, out & out or otherwise.

Bluster away, Jim, with your back-refs to irrelevant longsince other threads, your provocations and overinterpretations.   You are just getting sillier & sillier; from the way the thread runs more & more of us have just stopped listening to you.

Me too

Tara

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Nov 11 - 02:46 AM

"first show me an instance of any such case of grooming in disproportionate numbers"
So you do believe that Keith had a case when he claimed that "all male Pakistani Muslims have a culturally implanted tendency" which tends them towards paedophelia - at least that's that one out of the way - both you and he are out and out racists.
We discussued at stomach-heaving length why what was happening in small pockets in the North of England regarding the abuse of underage girls was taking place. Keith claimed fairly early on that it was an inbuilt cultural flaw within an entire ethnic community, and refused to consider any other reason put forward. He put more effort into proving that male Muslims were a threat to our 'way of life' and to the safety and well being of our children, and only by curbing their 'cultural urges' could they prevent themselves from preying on young girls
Earlier on in this thread you defended someone who, to me, is obviously guilty of war crimes on the basis that she had not faced trial for those crimes - don't you extend the same right to "All make Pakistani Muslims"?.
The Nazis gave themselves permission to send six million Jews to the gas chambers on the basis that they were racially inferior and a threat to German society. Sorry - apart from the numbers involved (there are only one million Pakistanis living in Britain!) I find an extremely thin dividing line between those twin conclusions.
For me, it is not a good time to discuss racist generalisations while the retrial of racist thugs for killing a young man because he was the "wrong colour" is taking place - such is the consequences of such racist generalisations.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 05:41 PM

But Kevin, I have never expressed an opinion on that!

The people of Sderot are suffering an abuse of their human rights OK.
How much worse an abuse can there be?
Jim supports that abuse of human rights, doesn't he Kevin?
Will you acknowledge that?
I support no such.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 05:16 PM

Refugees who have been forced to leave their homes in a conflict have the right to return to their homes when the fighting has ceased.

That human right has been consistently obstructed by Israel, in a continuing breach of human rights.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 04:44 PM

It would also require some prominent members of the Jewish community to be quoted at length without contradiction in all the media, saying that aspects of the culture they were brought up in give rise to those statistics.
Such that I might be convinced by them.

Would you then denounce me as a rabid anti-semite and hound me through every Mudcat thread for the next nine months Michael?
Jim would.
Jim did.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 03:56 PM

Well, Jim, first show me an instance of any such case of grooming in disproportionate numbers [or indeed at all] having been made against Jews anywhere at any time, & I will address your challenge. Until then, it seems to me to make no sense whatever. I genuinely have not the remotest idea what you are on about here.

~M~

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 03:02 PM

Then explain your underwriting of Keith's racism and tell us why what he claimed about Pakistanis is not applicable when referring to Jews?
You've had the quote you claimed not to understand - fire away.
One more time:
"Don I do now " believe that all male Pakistani Muslims (Jews?) have a culturally implanted tendency"" towards having sex with under-age girls
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 12:58 PM

"a sordid little holocaust and ethnic cleansing supporter;"

were the actual words I took exception to, Jim ~~ or indeed, only one word thence, the 4th. You appeared to appreciate this fact at the time ~

Yet in a later post, you rendered this as

"Mike objected to my describing it as comparable with holocaust denial!!!"

which I didn't, because you didn't make any such comparison ~ or if you did, none that I noticed or responded to.

"ven Mike, with his racist double standards..."

you exclaim in a later post. I have none such, as you well know, for all your rhetoric.

I am in a state of constant puzzlement as to the identity of this non-existent entity, to whom you attribute my name but no views in any way resembling mine; and as to what point or points you are intending to make in doing so. This "Mike" you have created and keep invoking must be some other fellow entirely. He certainly shares none of my opinions, says nothing that I have ever said, and indeed bears no identifiable relationship to me whatsoever. He seems to be some avatar of your Aunt Sally that you have set up for the sole purpose of knocking down. Why you should have named him after me I cannot imagine.

I have tried to reply rationally to your irrationalities, but it has turned out to be nothing but pissing-in-the-wind so far as what I have written has penetrated your entrenched unsupportable assumptions as to what you think I might have meant ~ but didn't. You really are in a state of near-hysterical confusion, Jim; I should go & have a nice long lie-down if I were you, before you do yourself a mischief.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 11:31 AM

Seth Freedman, The Guardian.
"Imagine a London where a sword of Damocles hangs over every street and every building. A London where the day is punctuated by missiles raining down indiscriminately on schools, homes, parks and gardens. A London where the difference between crossing the road or not could be the difference between having your face ripped to shreds by shrapnel from incoming rockets falling from the sky.

For the last seven years, and especially in the wake of the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip, that has been the fate of Sderot, the beleaguered town on the edge of the Gazan-Israeli border."

Those people are suffering an abuse of their human rights OK.
How much worse an abuse can there be.
Jim supports that abuse of human rights, doesn't he Kevin?
Will you acknowledge that?
I support no such.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 10:47 AM

Put one up and shame me Kevin.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 09:30 AM

I am sure you actually believe that to be true, Keith.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,keith A
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 08:48 AM

I have supported NO human rights abuse.
Not one.
None.
0.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 08:06 AM

Your support for human rights abuses goes far beyond anybody elses here - and Mike objected to my describing it as comparable with holocaust denial!!!
jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 05:30 AM

the stated intention by the Israelis themselves to expel a whole ethnic group

You have made that up Jim.
(Nice colours and fonts though)

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 05:27 AM

Confirming my last post.

Jim, your timeline provides evidence AGAINST Israeli complicity, but NO EVIDENCE FOR it.

Did you read it before posting it?

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 05:26 AM

ven Mike, with his racist double standards, hs expressed his disquiet of the behaviour of the Zionists in Israel - you have not and until you do you will remin an apologist for war crimes and acts of inhumanity against non-combatants.
You have even realised that you overstepped the mark by claiming "no massacres at all", but instead of accepting that as a mistake and withdrawing it, which would have been th sensible thing to do, you first denied that it had ever been claimed, and then attempted to lie your way out of it - which makes you not only an apologist for war crimes and abuses against civilians, but a rather clumsy liar.
Even now you are attempting to describe the stated intention by the Israelis themselves to expel a whole ethnic group as "(rather good) treatment" - are you not worried by your own fanatical behaviour - I would be?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,keith A
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 04:31 AM

Are you really trying to absolve the Israelis from the leading part they played in the Sabra/Shatila massacres

No. I am saying there is no evidence that they did.
You have failed to produce anything despite weeks of asking.

you are claiming consistently that Israel is innocent of any human rights violations whatever

No. I am not.

You have failed to comment on the mass expulsion of the Bedouins,
I am not aware that they have been expelled from Israel.
I have commented on their (rather good) treatment in Israel.

There has been no discussion here of issues like the wall.
Are you thinking of starting a thread about them?

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 04:13 AM

Are you really trying to absolve the Israelis from the leading part they played in the Sabra/Shatia massacres by claiming - they did it as well.
Apart from yourself, everybody here is deploring the violence in the Middle East and arguing for a peaceful solution - you are claiming consistently that Israel is innocent of any human rights violations whatever
You have supported massacres of civilians as "self defence", chemical weapons used in built-up areas as "illuminations", described the role of the Israelis in two of the largest massacres to have taken place since WW2 as "failing to stop them from happening," the killing of what you claim to be "hostages" as "acceptable in wartime"....
You have downgraded humanitarian aid as "junk" and the killing of unarmed aid-bringers by highly trained and well armed troops as "self-defence" - as well as the bringing of that aid as "politically motivated".
You have failed to comment on the mass expulsion of the Bedouins, the criminal (though as yet untried) supervision of war crimes by an Israeli politician, the prevention of use of land vital to to livelihood of an already impoverished people by a Berlin-type wall, the frighteningly Nazi-like humiliation and persecution of ordinary Palestinians on a daily basis
And you say we are ignoring human rights abuses and supporting killing
Give us a break
JIM Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 04:11 AM

Jim,
Now, in the face of an account placed before you of the Shatila Sabra massacres, you continue to deny there to be any evidence

Thanks for the account Jim.
It does not implicate Israelis in the massacre.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Nov 11 - 01:36 AM

Not true Lox.
Not in this or previous thread.
Both were started to discuss the membership application, a discussion I have tried to keep going.

Jim's only contribution has been to assert that the Jews of Israel are monsters.
First he said they mistreat the Bedouin.
I countered by providing evidence that they treated them rather well, and certainly much better than Egypt who Jim did not criticise.

Then he said they massacred refugees at Sabra and Shatila.
I countered that there was no evidence that they did any such thing, but proof that neighbouring Arabs carried out a worse massacre there without reproach from Jim.

He then said that they massacred civilians at Jenin.
BB and I informed him that no civilians had been killed there at all!
It was just a made up lie.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 05:31 PM

Keith,

Once again,


All massacres deserve condemnation.

Some Mudcatters wish to justify and/or deny massacres committed by Israel.

Hence there is a discussion about those ones.

You are one of those catters that wish to let Israel of the hook for their massacres.

Show me where anyone else sticks up for, justifies or denies any other massacres ....

Nobody - just you and your pals justifying or denying the Israeli ones.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 04:36 PM

It is not disputed that a Muslim militia carried out a massacre later in those camps.
Why no outrage about that Jim?
Is it only a massacre if Jews can be accused?

From Wiki
On May 19, 1985, heavy fighting erupted between Amal and Palestinian camp militias for the control of the Sabra, Shatila and Burj el-Barajneh camps in Beirut. Amal was supported by the predominantly Shiite Sixth Brigade of the Lebanese Army commanded by Major-General Abd al-Halim Kanj [1] and even by some units of the predominantly Christian Eighth Brigade loyal to General Michel Aoun stationed in East Beirut. Virtually all the houses in the camps were reduced to rubble.

In Shatila, the Palestinians only retained the part of the camp centered around the mosque. Burj al-Barajneh remained under siege as Amal prevented supplies from entering or its population from leaving. The death toll remains uncertain, but is likely to have been high.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 02:23 PM

" I have not the remotest idea what the following, apparently addressed to me"
You are acting as stupid as Keith, (only he isn't acting) - that is the statement you claimed was not racist (course it wasn't when it was addressed to Muslims!!!)
Having shrieked hysterically that anyone (me in particular) is a "Jew Baiting Anti Semite" for seeing a resemblence in the ethnic cleansing by the Israeli Zionists and that of the Nazis - you now appear to be attempting to support your previous claim that while it is permissable to write off a whole ethnic culture as sexual perverts, it would only be racist to make exactly the same claim about Jews - making you a racist hypocrite "Over & out..." totally lacking the bottle even to respond to your own racism - over and out indeed.
A matched pair, (I was forgetting Terrytoon and BB) - a full house I think.
"Israelis cynically using the victim status conferred by that attempted genocide, to deflect any criticism of their oppressive behaviour."
Isn't this what it is all about Don?
"It is not disputed that a Muslim militia.....)"
Well, it is actually -
The Lebanese Phalanges (Arabic: ÍÒÈ ÇáßÊÇÆÈ ÇááÈäÇäíÉ, Hezb al-Kata'eb al-Loubnaniyya), better known in English as the Phalange (Arabic: Kata'eb), is a traditional right-wing Lebanese political party. Although it is officially secular, it is mainly supported by Maronite Christians.
It is you and you alone who has attempted to absolve the instigators, and almost certainly, the active participants of the massacre - the Israelis - from blame
You have persistantly stated that you "only wish to present the Israeli case" for these and all other massacres.
Nobody else here (apart from your trio of friends) has attempted to excuse or support any human rights abuses or war crimes.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 01:37 PM

And, predictably, nobody felt inclined to make any response to my point about the Israelis cynically using the victim status conferred by that attempted genocide, to deflect any criticism of their oppressive behaviour.

For how long does historical victimhood grant the right to special consideration?

Don T.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 12:56 PM

"It is not disputed that a Muslim militia carried out a massacre later in those camps.
Why no outrage about that Jim?
Is it only a massacre if Jews can be accused?"



All massacres deserve condemnation.

Some Mudcatters wish to justify and/or deny massacres committed by Israel.

Hence there is a discussion about those ones.

Keith is one of those catters that wish to let Israel of the hook for their massacres.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 09:42 AM

... and hysterical. I have not the remotest idea what the following, apparently addressed to me


---"Don I do now " believe that all male Pakistani Muslims (Jews?) have a culturally implanted tendency"" towards having sex with under-age girls
Your argument appears to indicate that there is evidence of Keith's statements Mike - can you confirm this to be the case?---

is supposed to mean; and I frankly don't believe you know either, Jim. Nor what it is supposed to have to do with the topic of this thread. Nor what you are calling on me to 'confirm'. Just more of your demagogic hysteria, is all I can make of it.

Over & out...

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 08:47 AM

"Oh dear - pay attention class!!!" - Jim Carroll

Not to you dear boy - you are plainly delusional.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 08:36 AM

Oh dear - pay attention class!!!
"Don I do now " believe that all male Pakistani Muslims (Jews?) have a culturally implanted tendency"" towards having sex with under-age girls
Your argument appears to indicate that there is evidence of Keith's statements Mike - can you confirm this to be the case?
Stop digging Keith - you claimed there have been no massacres carried out by Israel, then you said that nobody had made such a claim.
Stop lying.
Now, in the face of an account placed before you of the Shatila Sabra massacres, you continue to deny there to be any evidence -
Stop lying.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 07:42 AM

The term "Holocaust" is also used in the context of the slaughter of Armenians in 1915 - which seems to have been used as a precedent by Hitler, who in face of questions about "Final Solution" is quoted as saying "Who, after all, speaks to-day of the annihilation of the Armenians?"

I do not think that when people in Turkey have been imprisoned for referring to this episode as "the Armenian Holocaust" it would be reasonable to infer that this happened because the words were seen as "antisemitic".

When the word is deployed it is intended to have shock effect, as an accusation that some action is comparable to that of the Nazis. I think using it in this way is generally a mistake, since it invites the response that the actions in question are not on the same scale as that of Nazi Germany, and thus can even tend to trivialise their actual horror by the comparison. However I do not think that it is correct to see it as an expression of antisemitism - a true antisemite might indeed be expected to see a comparison of Israel with Nazi Germany as unacceptable, because it would involve saying something favourable about the Jewish government.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 04:22 AM

Jim, re. Sabra and Shatila, your timeline has nothing to refute Israel's version of events, and your eye-witness did not witness any Israeli wrongdoing.
As I have said all along, it is disputed and I have still seen no evidence of Israel's guilt so I will keep an open mind.
(Unprejudiced!)

It is not disputed that a Muslim militia carried out a massacre later in those camps.
Why no outrage about that Jim?
Is it only a massacre if Jews can be accused?

Most or all of the "massacres" in your list involve demonstrators.
Arab security forces routinely fire on unarmed demonstrators (Hamas 12th Nov 2007, Egypt Lybia Syria this year) with no outrage ever expressed by you.
Is this not another example of your prejudice?

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 20 Nov 11 - 01:31 AM

No, it wouldn't have been a euphemism, I don't think, Don: it isn't a euphemisable word IMO. We have had the precise connotations of 'Massacre' discussed to death[!] on this thread: that is no euphemism, but a perfectly apposite word to call on in the context. But "Nazi" & "Holocaust", with their overtones ~~ and in particular, re the latter of which we are speaking ~~ have a peculiar referent which is of peculiar offensiveness, and have for long carried definite implications as to the motivations of those using them re Israel ~ implications of which Jim is well aware. I am simply reminding him of the accusations he is purposefully, as it seems to me, inviting by his pertinacity in employing the term. I do not think he is really, consciously, antisemitic {any more than I know myself to be racist, howsomever much he may call on the term in a sort of aggressive self-defence}; but I reiterate that he is impolitic in the extreme to go on repeating this deliberate provocation and then hoping his motivations will not be denounced as such.

If one must find a figure of speech to define 'holocaust' here, I think hyperbole would do much better than euphemism. Think of the numerical scale of the Holocaust; remember the pictures of piles of corpses and hair and spectacles & children's shoes ~~ and one should be ashamed of letting a train of thought in the present discussion even letting one anywhere near such a usage.

~M~

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 07:06 PM

""Stop using the word "Holocaust" in relation to Israel or we shall all KNOW beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are an antisemite.""

Michael, purely in the interests of balance in debate, do you not at times feel that the Israelis are much too inclined to use their victim status as a weapon to prevent criticism of their actions?

Whenever anybody attempts to take them to task for their arrogance and intransigence (both of which you have acknowledged to exist) they are likely to respond with a reference, direct or implied, to the Holocaust.

The phrase "What's sauce for the goose....etc" does tend to present itself, even to those of us who are not "anti" anyone.

We have a number of people on this thread who are, like myself and you, of the opinion that both sides need to give way to some extent, and ranged against us a few who cannot abide any criticism of Israel, and cannot countenance the idea of Israel being in the slightest responsible for the present hostilities.

This situation, expanded to the World at Large, explains why Israel feels empowered to do exactly as it wishes, regardless of the cost in human life, and call any and all objectors anti semites.

Perhaps you see it differently, but from where I sit Jim's comment, while undiplomatic, has some merit and is worthy of discussion rather than dismissal with accusations of anti semitism.

Perhaps if he had made the same statement using an alternative word?....but then that would have simply been a euphemism.

Don T.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 12:28 PM

Thank you, Keith. I still am a bit vague about it all; but I seem to recall, Jim, thanks to this reminder, that it was not just Keith who was trying to keep the thread on track in relation to a particular set of statistics recently published; but Lizzie, Bruce, and several others as well as myself; in the face of some point-missing (& in at least one case abusively inaccurate speculations as to my excretory arrangements on which I do not need to be more specific} denunciations of racism from some others. I can't see that anything was said particularly similar to the remark you think I should take exception to if it related to Jews rather than to Pakistanis: I am not aware of any Jewish activity resulting in a statistic of the sort we were addressing ourselves to having ever been referenced, except conceivably in Nürnberg in 1934 where the Will was Triumphant, or having ever featured in any news medium. If any such Jewish-based statistic had arisen for consideration then the case would be altered, would it not? I cannot know for sure in the abstract how I would react to any conclusion that might be drawn from consideration of such a phenomenon.

Hope that addresses your point, Jim.

~M~

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 11:33 AM

Here is the post Michael.
Please read previous posts to get it in context.
thread.cfm?threadid=135090&messages=2602&page=12#3094279

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 10:03 AM

Jim ~~ Fair challenge. The quote you refer to is some time since. Can you copy/paste it for me to reconsider, with a date/time ref? If precisely as you word it, I should certainly find it objectionable; but it is so far of yore that I will need to have it presented back precisely. I am honestly not even sure on what thread to look for it. My recolleciton is that I was not supporting all Keith's views at the time, but endeavouring simply to confine the discussion to the particular news item as to some disproportion in certain offences brought to trial in specific locations, to the distress of several prominent people incl leading Muslims; but the thread kept getting muddied by accusations given rise by this, of a sort of general racism not applicable to the specific instances.

The quick answer to your question as you put it above is that of course I would not regard it as an acceptable proposition; but I shall need a bit more confirmation that precisely such terms were ever used of any demographic.

~M~

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 09:55 AM

Jim, when you accused me of saying it, I thought you meant recently.
I had recently said "no massacre" about Jenin.
How was I to know you had gone back to a previous thread and a previous month??
Do you suppose I meant there has never been a massacre in history?
Or even in the history of Palestine?

Why did you not challenge such an extraordinary and absurd statement at the time?
Answer, because we were just talking about Israel's guilt for Sabra and Shatila.
I had not time for a full answer that day, but the context was clear enough and anyway I clarified it IN MY NEXT POST.
Have I made such a ludicrous denial before or since?

You are a dishonest man.
For the sake of a debating point on a Mudcat thread you make a liar of yourself.

I remind you that you faked a quote yesterday.
You must know what I really said after all the arguments about it, but you need to lie to stand up your baseless smear.
Contemptible.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 09:00 AM

PS By the way Keith - you originally claimed that yor "no massacres at all" referred to Jenin - cn't you even stick to your own script???
Back to the West Clare festival of Traditional singing
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 08:48 AM

Keith - you continue to lie - somewhat desperately
"No massacres at all" mean exactly that -"No massacres at all"
You now appear to be inventing a context in which it means something else.
You have backed up your claim by denying every single Israli atrocity that has been placed before you.
Mike
A simple acid test:
Please replace Keith's "every make Pakistani" with "every Jewish male" and tell me that it is not offensive racism - look forward to your response with some interest.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 04:33 AM

Jim, in your 18 Nov 11 - 10:54 AM post you put something in quotes and attributed it to me.
I never made such a statement and never would.
It does not represent my views.
It is another lie.

If you have to be dishonest to make a case, it is not worth making Jim.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 02:52 AM

I do remeber Your List kevin, and I worked through a large number.

There is a striking difference between those attributed to Israel and Palestinians.

Israeli ones usually involve a possible over-reaction or disproportionate response to a genuine security challenge.

Palestinian ones tend to be planned and deliberate, like a bomber picking out a bus carrying many Jewish children.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Nov 11 - 02:41 AM

No-one is claiming "no massacres"!

To make that claim against me, Jim had to go back nearly a thousand posts in two threads to find a hurried post where I appear to deny all massacres, but only if you ignore the context of the previous posts (just Sabra/Shatila), ignore the clarification I gave in the following post (just Sabra/Shatila), and ignore the fact that in the subsequent month of posting on the same subject I never made such a ludicrous claim again!

It was a false and dishonest attempt to deceive.
Like deleting "citation needed" warnings from a cut and paste.
Like his smear campaign against me as a person.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 05:50 PM

There really is no question butbthat there have been numerous massacres carried out in this cobnflict iover the years. Some by Paletinians or their allies, but far more by Israeli forces, and these have resulted in far more deaths.

I remember putting up a link to a neutral source listing all of these up to the date it was produced, a list which provided links to information about all of them. I can't recall whether it was on this thread or its predecessor.

Unfortunately "there were no masscres" is pretty well never true, wherever you look, in any conflict, and much of the time when there isn't even a conflict. Here is a link to a list by country, with links to details..

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 12:03 PM

Israelis claim to fame has been the deliberate slaughter and persecution of civilians - now apparently even accepted by Keith - albeit grudgingly.
I have accepted the evidence you have finally provided.
It is not as convincing as you suggest.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 12:00 PM

NO I AM NOT - WE HAVE CONSTANTLY DISCUSSED MASSACRES - WHAT YOU ACTUALLY WROTE WAS NO MASSACRES AT ALL indicating that you were referring to all of them that had been pointed out to you,

Not true Jim.
I read right through the old thread up to that post.
Only those 2 massacres discussed.
Deny that?
I did a quick 5 word post (not counting "at alls") and clarified when I had time next post.
It was just about those 2 massacres.

That was over a month of solid debate ago and I have never denied all massacres.

Deny that?

If you have to resort to dishonesty to make your case, is it worth making Jim?

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 11:55 AM

... &, Jim, you miss, or deliberately avoid, my point with continued inaccurate counter-accusatory irrelevancies. You are clearly impressing nobody with your demagogic rants which fail to engage with any question you are asked or any point made to you.

You are doing yourself very little credit, I fear.

~M~

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 11:13 AM

Jim,

As usual, you fail to address the question, and make claims without any factual basis.

I take it you have nothing worthwhile to even say, from your reply.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 10:54 AM

"Jim, you are being dishonest."
NO I AM NOT - WE HAVE CONSTANTLY DISCUSSED MASSACRES - WHAT YOU ACTUALLY WROTE WAS NO MASSACRES AT ALL indicating that you were referring to all of them that had been pointed out to you,
Is there no end to your lying?
And your lying about having a source for your " Male Pakistani implant" claim.....?
Mike,
I was just looking through your hysterical torrent of abuse at my observing similarities between the massacre of Jews and the massacre of Palestinians. I wuld have found it deeply insulting if it had not come from somebody who sees no racism in the claim that "All male Pakistanis have a cultural implant which makes them sexual threats to young girls"
The fact that you now write this off as "some statements you had taken your doctrinaire exception to" confirms me that you are both a hypocrite and a closet (highly selective) racist - so please feel free to regard me as an Anti-Semite if you feel it covers your own racism in any way.
Don't you take exceptioon to such blatent racist stereotyping - silly question, of course you don't!!
- I HAVE NEVER COMPARED LIKE WITH LIKE, nor would I, but the slaughter of any group of human beings because they are in the way of political or territorial ambition is bound to attract such claims of similarities as far as I'm concerned.
"1. Continue to treat the Palestinians the way they are presently"
You mean to continue the persecution, humiliation, attempts to starve them into submission...
How about treating them as the human beings they are....
Whatever the military and political problems, the Israelis claim to fame has been the deliberate slaughter and persecution of civilians - now apparently even accepted by Keith - albeit grudgingly.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Nov 11 - 09:55 AM

Jim, you are being dishonest.
When I posted, "no massacres" we had only ever discussed Sabra and Shatila in the whole thread.
That was the whole context, as made clear in my following post.
It was the shortest of posts followed by a clarification and only referring to Israeli invovement in massacres of Sabra and Shatila.

(You have now provided some evidence after over a month of asking and denying.
Thank you.)