How to Talk to Your Jewish Friends About Israel

[kobymu]

**********************
Breaking new
"4 blasts hit Turkey"
**********************

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
There is no 'should's in what I said there, please trying understanding what I said again without adding one in.

Then ignore that sentence, and answer the rest.

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Gee, another anti-Israel hit piece.


At least he didn't claim that the Holocaust didn't happen.

Then again why should he, enough idiots around here and elsewhere like to claim it doesn't matter anymore.

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: screech
Some Palestininians were run off their land, and that was a tragedy, and a crime; most left after the Arabs told them to leave because the Arabs invaded...thus, the Arabs started the war.

One reason some were forced out is because they were hostile, and after surrendering, still opened fire; you simply can't have that kind of people in the rear, disrupting your logistics, etc; I guess you can think of it as another form of terrorism.

By the way, no point arguing with TheSnowman: he seems to have changed his tactic and now resorts only to posting assertions without any facts to back it up; nor does he address the Jewish Refugee issue, where people were clearly forced out through intimidation and violence..... talk about collective punishment! (that's one of his favorite buzzwords, right next to "oppression")

Here's an interesting British police report dated several weeks before the end of the mandate. Notice the use of the word "evacuation".

 

[piasabird]

This article constitutes Hate Speech agains Jewish people.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: piasabird
This article constitutes Hate Speech agains Jewish people.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I see,

Israel invades Lerbanon and you expect the people who then feel they are now at war with Israel to sing I love Israel hyms.

In war, the first casuality is the truth---and the second job is to dehumanise the enemy--they are now longer people---they are gooks, or Jerries, or ragheads.---different war, different names, same formula.

 

[imported_dna]

You must have been out of the loop, Lemon Law, as the dehumanizing has been going on for decades, but I know you don't bother with such minor details.
Here's a nice bit about Al-Manar -- note the movie with the blood ritual, which was most definitely broadcasted prior to this war.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: dna
You must have been out of the loop, Lemon Law, as the dehumanizing has been going on for decades, but I know you don't bother with such minor details.
Here's a nice bit about Al-Manar -- note the movie with the blood ritual, which was most definitely broadcasted prior to this war.

Ivebeen doing alot of rreading trying to catch up on things.

One thing I se is constant - we still have people who have no clue who honestly believe they are experts.

As for myself -- eh-- I have an opinion but I will kep it to myself.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: screech
Some Palestininians were run off their land, and that was a tragedy, and a crime; most left after the Arabs told them to leave because the Arabs invaded...thus, the Arabs started the war.

You have that backwards.

Originally posted by: screech
All of Israel's "land-grabbing" wars have been defensive....yes, even '67.

All of those wars have earned Israel animosity from the civilians who were caught in the middle of those land-grabs and everyone who supports them.

Originally posted by: kobymu

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
There is no 'should's in what I said there, please trying understanding what I said again without adding one in.

Then ignore that sentence, and answer the rest.

I stopped reading when you started condescending me for something I never suggested but you projected on me anyway. If you'd like me to answer some questions please ask without resorting to such methods.

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
You have that backwards.

As usual: zero backing for your assertions.

I stopped reading when you started condescending me for something I never suggested but you projected on me anyway. If you'd like me to answer some questions please ask without resorting to such methods.

Am I also getting the silence treatment?
You have yet to answer the issues that I have raised.

 

[kobymu]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: kobymu

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
There is no 'should's in what I said there, please trying understanding what I said again without adding one in.

Then ignore that sentence, and answer the rest.

I stopped reading when you started condescending me for something I never suggested but you projected on me anyway. If you'd like me to answer some questions please ask without resorting to such methods.

First thing first, if you haven?t tried to obscure your arguments with smoke screens, and generalizes them to the point where they are meaningless, I would not been so harsh on you, and you did this because you have let your arguments and reasoning reach to a point where they no longer portray and communicate what you have meant them to do. Shame on you, not me.

I have attacked your reasoning, not you.

If you can't handle being wrong then I suggest you leave the debate on the Middle East for people that can. For the Middle East is THE most complex place on the face on the earth, and you AND me are bound to error while debating it, analyzing it, understanding it, and foreseeing it.

however, if you can not see fault in your reasoning even after it was presented to you, by someone that is by far more knowledgeable on the topic at hand, not only you are incapable of admitting you are wrong, but also hinder your ability to learn.

And I am more knowledgeable in Middle Eastern affairs then you, almost 30 years of living in it, is bound to give me more knowledge on it, a better understanding of it , and more insight into it. Just like you don?t know more about British internal politics then the British, or try to teach British about it, don?t try to teach me about Middle Eastern affairs.

Don?t let your pride be an obstacle to yourself, only you will stand to lose from it.

You have been given the opportunity to learn about the Middle East from the second best source there is, someone else that lives there and experience it, on a daily basis and is willing to teach you about it (first hand experience is of course much better). If you will let your pride get in your way, you will be the one the forfeits that opportunity.

 

[kylebisme]

ou have confused yourself; I've got many sources in and around to Middle East to draw from and wasn't looking for anything from you, you were the one last asking me questions and demanding answers from me. But it seems you are actually just interested in lecuturing me, at which point I'll just say no thanks and leave it at that as I have done with dna.

 

[imported_dna]

You're a funny type....
You were bitching about Deir Yassin for message after message, consistently ignoring what I presented about the Jewish Refugees and what Khaled al-Azm said.
In the end you did what Siwy the innumerate did -- throw a smoke bomb and disappear, leaving behind some scribble on the wall asserting "LAND WAS STOLEN".

Well buddy, it doesn't work that way -- I've raised valid issues that you consistently ignored, and there is no surprise there, since it completely debunks your assertions.

You're nothing more than a propagandist and a charlatan.

 

[kylebisme]

Just for postarty sake on Deir Yassin:

The burden of proof in this debate is on "massacre deniers" like ZOA and its report. The reason for this is simple. Conventional history, at least in English, has generally accepted that a massacre took place at Deir Yassin. The ZOA report agrees with that assessment. By its own figures only 8 out of 170 English language books on the subject (about 5%) question that a massacre took place. Many of the "pro-massacre" books, it notes, are required academic reading, others like the bestseller O Jerusalem! and Genesis:1948 are popular works by major publishers, and one is the only-?and therefore standard?English source on Zionist anti-British resistance in Palestine (Bell, J. Bowyer. Terror out of Zion).

http://www.deiryassin.org/op0005.html

 

[imported_dna]

Thank you for proving my point.

If that's how you wanna play it, then here -- I'll match your Deir Yassin, and raise you by the Hebron Massacre of 1929.

 

[kylebisme]

Thing is, I'm not playing any game here and I don't accept the argument that one atrocity justifies another.

 

[kobymu]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
ou have confused yourself; I've got many sources in and around to Middle East to draw from and wasn't looking for anything from you,

With how many of those so called "sources" do you have the opportunity:

• To converse with;
• To ask them to elaborate;
• To tell them you don?t agree with them, and offer them a different point of view which they may critic (one of your least favorite approaches);
• To answer to their question (see smoke screen). If you had any experience with teaching you would have known that sometimes it is better to ask someone the question then to give him an answer (another one of your least favorite approaches).

you were the one last asking me questions and demanding answers from me.

Last = smoke screen.

I wasn't the one that seems to think that they have the magic answer to the Middle East problems, and tried to lecture a nation how to conduct herself. You are the arrogant one that think he is smarter then the combine intelligence of all the Israel prime minister consultant, as in military specialists, foreign affairs advisors and so on.

But it seems you are actually just interested in lecuturing me, at which point I'll just say no thanks and leave it at that as I have done with dna.

I'm interested in showing you where you're wrong, so you can understand the Middle East problems better, and taking you to a place from where you can observe it with the most clarity, even if you don?t deserve it.

You see that is the problem with a lot if not most Jewish Israelis, we want to teach even if the student doesn?t want to learn, which is in alignment with our other not so productive trait, which is to try and make peace with nation that do not what to make peace with us.



/edit

dna, TheSnowman is expecting you to accept his opinion and his links as absolute truths, while dismissing you links and to "don't accept the argument" to be accepted without question. All he wants to do is, get this, lecturing you.

/edit 2

This is reminding me of an old classical joke:
Why do Jewish people always answer questions with another question?
"Why not?"

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Thing is, I'm not playing any game here and I don't accept the argument that one atrocity justifies another.

You don't accept it when it is convenient to you, but at other times it is very much convenient, othwerise you would not have strewn references to Deir Yassin over a bazillion messages.

You started the whole thing with Deir Yassin to demostrate that people were forced out, or that the specter of Deir Yassin caused people to flee in terror from the Israeli soldiers. However, that's where the conversation stopped, because it was conveneit for you.

Sure, some people were kicked out, but that was partly because they surrendered, and then resumed fighting, and in that sort of situation, you simply remove the menance outside your borders. As for your fleed-in-terror theory, that's not very convincing: during that time there were many hostilities, and after Deir Yassin there was what could be called a retaliatory massacre, so if they had the peope to massacre, then it doesn't seem like they were in so much terror, or that they did not have people to defened their positions.

Anyway, back to the real issue: it's time you addressed the Jewish Refugees, and what Khaled al-Azm said. As a bonus, you'll find this British police report very interesting, stating the Jews asked the Arabs to open their shops, while saying that other Arabs were evacuating, even before the Mandate was over; seems to be in-line with the idea that they left because the Arab League asked them to.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: kobymu

you were the one last asking me questions and demanding answers from me.

Last = smoke screen.

No:

last = you were the one asking me questions after I had already given up hope of you ever answering mine.


And dna, I broguth up Deir Yassin only as an example of what groups like Lehi were involved with after you denied their role in driving out the indigenous population. Sorry man, but these games you keep trying to play will do nothing to change that.

 

[kobymu]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: kobymu

you were the one last asking me questions and demanding answers from me.

Last = smoke screen.

No:

last = you were the one asking me questions after I had already given up hope of you ever answering mine.

Which question was that, exactly?

 

[Lemon law]

If we care to return to rationality on this thread----and want to stay on thread subject rather than argue about whose version of history to accept.---we have to ask where your jewish friends are? If they are next door neighbor types---or co-workers---the overwelming chance then becomes that they live in the same country you do. With a very small chance then that both you and your jewish friends live in Israel.

But given that high probability chance that both you and your jewish friends are non-Israelies---then it also follows that you and your jewish friends also subscibe to the prevalent social justice assumtions of the given country in which the question is asked. Its just human nature that your jewish friend would want to support the state of Israel---but its also highly probable that they too are deeply confused about the dissconnect between their jewish values and the behavior of the State of Israel.

Making the question no different than the very question I have to ask of my current government. As an American citizen I believe deeply in American principles and values---and find myself unable to support the domestic and foreign policy of my government---now current perverted by the bozo's in charge. And dangerous bozos with wacked out values to add insult to injury. With their own myths and revisionist histories to justify getting alot of people killed.

And given that likely cognitive dissonce responce by your jewish friend---and then also ask them at a distance to understand all the complex undercurrents of current Israelie politics---with various small parties able to disproportionately able to advance their agenda's by making marriages of convience in a larger parlimentary system--and it gets even harder to understand or predict. But as long as Israel allows settler parties and their myths to drive the Israelie agenda, Israel also is in danger of being driven by wacked out values that will lead it to ruin.

 

[IrateLeaf]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
If we care to return to rationality on this thread----and want to stay on thread subject rather than argue about whose version of history to accept.---we have to ask where your jewish friends are? If they are next door neighbor types---or co-workers---the overwelming chance then becomes that they live in the same country you do. With a very small chance then that both you and your jewish friends live in Israel.

But given that high probability chance that both you and your jewish friends are non-Israelies---then it also follows that you and your jewish friends also subscibe to the prevalent social justice assumtions of the given country in which the question is asked. Its just human nature that your jewish friend would want to support the state of Israel---but its also highly probable that they too are deeply confused about the dissconnect between their jewish values and the behavior of the State of Israel.

Making the question no different than the very question I have to ask of my current government. As an American citizen I believe deeply in American principles and values---and find myself unable to support the domestic and foreign policy of my government---now current perverted by the bozo's in charge. And dangerous bozos with wacked out values to add insult to injury. With their own myths and revisionist histories to justify getting alot of people killed.

And given that likely cognitive dissonce responce by your jewish friend---and then also ask them at a distance to understand all the complex undercurrents of current Israelie politics---with various small parties able to disproportionately able to advance their agenda's by making marriages of convience in a larger parlimentary system--and it gets even harder to understand or predict. But as long as Israel allows settler parties and their myths to drive the Israelie agenda, Israel also is in danger of being driven by wacked out values that will lead it to ruin.

Spelling errors aside as well as credibility issues. I seriously doubt any of the above makes any sense to you.

Its one thing to claim to be for something or to love something. But its apparent via other posts etc that just is not the case.

Its one thing to ask people to stay on topic when as the OP you feel you can go off topic to justify what you are asking of other to stay on topic.

I am only saying this because to a few of us its obvioous there can be no interaction or exchanging of ideas when the OP does not budge and when the Op miss quotes or adheres to the opinion that all history is fabricated based on who has written it.

Finally the Op himself thinks he is some sort of historian. When I would say it is safe to say the Op has no college degree and possibly no high school degree.

There are those I disagree with who I have no problems discussing things concerning the middle east due to fact they present themselves differently yet they get their point(s) accross!

Have a nice day!!

 

[Lemon law]

To Irate Leaf,

You might do some fact checking----I am not the OP on this thread. But you seem to be convinced I am hostile to the State of Israel---but nothing seem to make sense to you other than unconditional support of Israel---and any idea that a settlement not based on total Israeli military dominance is a similar non-starter---as you blithely seem to condem the Palistinians to a perpetual state of hopelessness.

But do have a nice day. I just hope your kind of thinking does not dominate Israeli politics
and that those days are numbered. If not, there are going to be many people on both sides who will not have a nice day---or month---or year--or lifetime span.

And the only way to change that grim prognosis will be to change thinking on both the Israelie and Arab sides. And as another thread direction change---what about the thinking of our ordinary Moslem friends---how do you talk to them?

Nor can any claim the current or past Arab leaders have done a good job either. But this current escalction of this Israelie Hezbollah conflict also puts the more status quo arab heads of State in an ackward position---on one hand they could IN PAST point out the plight of the Palistinians without doing anything about it with no risk---and now risk being swept away by the passions of the day if they do nothing now.

I am saying its especially critical now for more moderate Israelies and more moderate arabs to reach out to each other and get a peace process that has been stalemated for over a decade moving again.

Because you can't change the past---and all this stupid arguing over which side was right
is fruitless when both sides have no shortage of reprehensable brutality---and all you are arguing about is which side is less wrong----and you can debate that until the cows come home and get nowhere other than more confused and divided.

With no one talking about what matters---how do you get the tensions down and a just mid-east settlement that both sides can build on.

 

[kylebisme]

Well said Lemon law, and that is exactly what Professor Chernus is geting at with his conlusion:

...
That?s why I suggest avoiding the question of Israel?s moral right or wrong and sticking to the practical question of security. Focusing on the moral issue may well press the defensive buttons so hard, the conversation may end before it begins. Focusing on security improves the chances that your friends will listen to your criticisms of Israeli policy.

They may never agree with you completely. But if you can understand them sympathetically, you can help them begin to listen to new viewpoints. Eventually, they may begin to think about Israel in new, more peace-affirming ways. That alone can make a tremendous difference. It?s worth the effort.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0810-22.htm

 

[kobymu]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
you were the one asking me questions after I had already given up hope of you ever answering mine.

Which question was that, exactly?

Which question was that, exactly?

Which question was that, exactly?

Which question was that, exactly?

Which question was that, exactly?

Which question was that, exactly?

 

[kobymu]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
...
And the only way to change that grim prognosis will be to change thinking on both the Israelie and Arab sides. And as another thread direction change---what about the thinking of our ordinary Moslem friends---how do you talk to them?

Check Israel government web site, or something, we (Israel) change out approach, almost every election. And the Arabs ?

Nor can any claim the current or past Arab leaders have done a good job either. But this current escalction of this Israelie Hezbollah conflict also puts the more status quo arab heads of State in an ackward position---on one hand they could IN PAST point out the plight of the Palistinians without doing anything about it with no risk---and now risk being swept away by the passions of the day if they do nothing now. show me

Show me these Arab leaders that were in en 'ackward' position?

I know of only one, the Palestinians leaders, how almost begged on Israel media for Israel to not let the situation in Lebanon to interfere with disengagement, they were in a very awkward position, on one hand they cant say to the Hezbollah "stop, your actions are pushing the Israeli disengagement back", and on the other hand they can go "good for you Hezbollah, kick some Israel ass" so we wont get upset at them, and might reconsider are future plans after Lebanon.

I am saying its especially critical now for more moderate Israelies and more moderate arabs to reach out to each other and get a peace process that has been stalemated for over a decade moving again.

We shell see how many ' moderate arabs' will come forward.
Only time will tell....