I'm with Gamblor,at least it's entertaining.

You're not interested in debate. You're into pushing your warped views out there.

I said I wouldn't because it is your framing I am rejecting, not some specific point within it, but I just can't help myself this is so silly. Did you REALLY miss the arab spring where huge sections of the arab street DID in fact rise up against their dictators, that this movement WAS peaceful, and DID have a highly vocal secualr and civil rights components to it? Of course, the more moderate islamist party won by they adopted the langauge of civil rights and there certainly were both secular and liberal parties in the election. Now of course most of these countries did these things for their own domestic reasons not for reasons of israeli policy, and as it happened most of the countries have heavily western backed dictatorships so it can't exactly be said rising up against there dictators for peace with the west and israel but much of what you have written here precisely the kind of dramatic once in a generation event we actually just saw

lol.

Tunisian Draft Constitution:
Springtime in Egypt!
(Jail)Birds are in the air

Not even the stage is safe
See? There was a Spring (for people who want Egyptians to have less freedom)!

****in awesome. she's a hero and role model.

what do you want? if you want both sides to sit down and make peace, then recognize the players and the reality. Im posting their words, not mine.

if you want to deny reality in an effort to appear "balanced", im not interested.

I am confused, how does this negate anything I just said? It reads exactly as how I have called you out in this thread: throwing any negative thing about palestinians (or apparantly not expanded to arabs) that you can find. I never said egyptian society was flawless or that everything any islamist does is perfect. Let me remind you what this post is supposedly addressing:
Noting imperfect examples of fines against actors and the like doesn't dismiss a word of this. Heck, I would have prefered if one of the liberal or secular parties that more appropriately captured the spirit of tahir square before the muslim brotherhood stepped in, but it was not to be. However, you were denying that ANY such movements existed, denying even that people were rising up against their dictators when this is the defining trend of the arab spring.....and pointing out imperfect things on the part of a different political party is just silly.

I shouldn't be surprised. I have consistently commented on your tactic of just throwing everything bad you can think of and hoping it sticks. Looks like you did just that once again.

"Accepting reality" is not the same as "say everything bad about palestinians you can find, say everything good about israel you can find".

Now perhaps you know more about negotiations than I do, but I highly doubt a tactic of unrelenting criticism of the other side and bolstering the pure awesomeness of your side is a productive path forward.

uke_master, i generally find myself disagreeing with Gamblor but i think you are being harsh to expect everyone to adhere to a completely balanced, rational mindset (or even close to). Humans are irrational and it is kind of disgusting that you are belittling him based on what you correctly believe to be his pro-israel stance. Everyone has a position and is pro something or the other and whether they like it or not, this position is projected in their communications. The subject matter is extremely delicate and volatile thus by its very nature its going to attract a lot of one sided positions (same can be said about lots of things).

Bottom line is that he is a good poster and its pretty obvious that he isn't trolling and is sincere in his positions. His presence is good for the forum as there aren't many in his corner over here thus he is providing diversity therefore stimulating interesting discussion and debate.

this, obv

What in the hell is this response?

All I've been posting is to show you that the stories from the "Palestinian" or "Arab" side tend to be carefully crafted narratives designed specifically to delegitimize Israel and the Jewish people. It's not anti-Zionism, its outright Jew-hatred and Muslims/Arab supremacism. And its carefully crafted by governments to provide external animus for the masses.

And lol at "they fined him". An actor got 3 months hard labour from a court of law for "insulting Islam". Think about that.

Everyone in Israel and that was knowledgeable was very nervous about the so-called Arab Spring. Early on, stories of mobs attacking Jews and Islamists wreaking havoc and assaulting improper women were coming out daily. We saw this coming.

Now, how exactly do you want us to negotiate with people (the government/electorate) that by and large think like this? Israel has signed two peace treaties in exchange for tangible, strategic assets, and has received nothing but vague promises in return. Despite "peace", there's been no fundamental culture change that accepts Israel as a permanent fact.

Oh, and Morsi, who promised to appoint a Coptic Christian woman as VP to allay fears of the Muslim Brotherhood, broke another promise today.

Make no mistake, after the spring came the Winter.

this has nothing to do with BATNAs, or ZOPAs, or ZONAs, or any other negotiation theory.

I'm not negotiating with anyone on this. I'm not a politician and I don't have to make those hard and risky decisions.

You (among others) argued from the start that Israel has been starving Gaza, has been treating the "Palestinians" poorly, and all of the usual slanders and misrepresentations about israeli policy vis-a-vis the Arab world, how Gaza is starving, how there's apartheid, racism, all of that. All I've tried to prove is that its nothing but lies. Pure, unadulterated, lies.

I've gone to great lengths to both dismiss those claims and defend that policy as (more or less) a reasonable response to the nature of the opposing parties in this conflict.

You've replied with nothing better than "NO FAIR".

Truth be told, I don't really care about the "Palestinians" or "Arabs" any more than I care about anyone else. I have no desire for Israel to "rule" over them, or "oppress" them, and would much rather we simply leave them alone until the society as a whole can enter the 21st century. The ones that want to participate in Israeli society and dont give a **** about whether I'm Jewish or Arab, come on. Be my friend. Work with me. The rest are going to have very tough lives until they figure it out.

http://angryarab.net/2012/08/13/isra...d-the-savages/

As far as I can tell these ads are paid for by American anti Muslim bigots and have nothing to do with Israel at all. If so lol As'ad.

I hope you're right, I'd be absolutely disgusted if the Israeli government is behind that.

Full stop. No excuses.


A separate, but sort-of related issue:

Do you feel the same way about the bus ads in London about al Quds day?



These ads are commissioned by the Islamic Human Rights Committee, a UK Registered Charity that has been campaigning for the release of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman.
The fact that the Sheikh is the IHRC’s official Prisoner of Conscience tells you everything you need to know about them.

The gay-rights campaigner Peter Tatchell has documented how the Islamic Human Rights Commission promoted the speaking tour of the hate preacher Abdullah Hakim Quick. Tatchell identified that Quick was on record in saying the following:

• AIDS is caused by the “filthy practices” of homosexuals
• Homosexuals are dropping dead from AIDS and "they want to take us all down with them"
• The Islamic position on homosexuality is "death"
• Homosexuals are "sick" and "not natural"
• "Muslims are going to have to take a stand [against homosexuals] and it’s not enough to call names."

There's lots of scum out there and they all pretend to be your ally for the sake of their causes, either to get you to hate Muslims or to get Muslims to hate you.

Gamblor you need to relax a little. I'm about 99% sure the Israeli government wouldn't put such tacky bus ads up. I'm 99% sure, because I've been following those SIOA douchebags, that it's SIOA's MO. I was poking fun at the writer Angry Arab News Service for letting his propaganda get in the way of the truth. In the same way the Burma Muslim pictures turned out to be fake.


Al Quds day commemorates a day that should be remembered, but foreign governments often use it as a way to froth up the public to distract them when ever worse situations are happening locally. Islamic charities of political entities in Britain and more covertly in America are extremely politicized in their" charity work". Hizb ut tahrir has a long history of advocating political subversion, anti semetism, anti homosexual activity, and misogynist attitudes. They are more or less snakes in my run ins with them.

Ya we are clearly talking at cross purposes here. Let us recall the conversation. You led with this:
And I responded:
As in, the things you listed in your post about overthrowing dictators and there indeed being political parties with liberal and/or secular natures, a focus on civil rights, and that much of the youth centred revolutions were ostensibly peaceful, are all things we saw in the arab spring. This seems like a lock for dismissing your initial quoted post.

You response from here has been along these lines:

None of this dismisses my point. That an islamist party won the popular vote and that they do things you (and I) don't like does not change the fact that people DID rise up to overthrow their dictators, that there ARE movements that have liberal, secular, and civil rights values as part of them, and that the peoples movement was overwhelmingly peaceful.

The problem that is occurring here is that you keep trying to reframe the conversation to be a smorgasbord of bad things done by the other side as if my point here is diminished in any way by saying some bad thing that morsi did when I would not have wished him win in the first place.

Excuse me, but please don't put words into my mouth, particularly when I have no said anything remotely close to any of these things.

In fact, if you want to recall the "start" of my involvement in this thread I made a very much nonpartisan comment and you responded with a hyperpartisan israel vs palestine response as if I was entirely on the one side when nothing I had said indicated it. This was what got me thinking that you were indeed a hyperpartisan if you could essentially misconstrue the benign comments I made so badly.

Yet here you have done it again. Despite not talking about any of these things, you seem to have just assumed - with no evidence outside of my disagree with your hyperpartisanness - that I must be going around making this of claims you just said. I didn't, it just simply isn't true.

There are a lot of partisans on a lot of issues on these forums, and I am sure I am one of them on various issues. But Gamblor goes to a level of egregious hyperpartisanship that is quite rare. And it damages his arguments and posts which otherwise might be useful and instructive given the extent of links/quotes and the like. Perhaps most importantly, it is precisely this kind of entrenched hyperpartisanship where you can only say good things about your side and bad things about the that prolongs the conflict as is.

Now as to the idea that I should not comment on that, well that is the disgusting opinion here. Rightly or wrongly, I think we all have the right and the responsibility to say how we observe the world and if we think someone is wrong in some respect we ought to say so. You can disagree with my interpretation of gamblor - and it seems like you don't - , but to suggest that I ought not to say it is very weird and quite against the spirit of internet forums.

Two state solution cannot possibly 'work'.

I'm going to apologize, as all along I've confused you with a number of other people on this forum. Entirely my mistake and

That also ignores the point; calling me hyperpartisan is like saying that a CEO is hyperpartisan in favour of his company. I have a direct and vested interest in peace, security, and ensuring my rights are upheld.

But the good CEO takes the market as it is, and develops products to suit his market. He doesn't just spend millions to build something and then hope people want it. Likewise, I don't just offer A B and C and hope they accept and suddenly want to make peace. The difference between my and the Arab states' positions is that I see the mutual benefits to peace and prosperity for both israel and her neighbours. Nothing I've ever seen out of Arab media or politics understands that. Arab politics (like all politics) is about power - and when you have dictators and royalty and big oil money at stake, you need to keep people focused on the outside, not the inside. Its just too late now, 100 years of propaganda have taken their toll. Even in revolution, the one and eternal enemy is Israel.

Burying your head in the sand does not make the reality of middle eastern politics go away.

Well yeah but it's in defense of what he feels are posts aimed at delegitimizing Israel.

Goater would be up your alley. I used to post plenty of anti Israel stuff and didnt much care for Gamblors approach. It is what it is though and I do now respect the fact that he does the best he can in the greatest detail possible.

I know that the steady diet of hate the Western world gets about so-called "settlers" will cause a lot of cognitive dissonance here, but try to read this without your blood boiling at these evil murders distributing obviously-poisoned candy to unsuspecting Arabs in an attempt to steal their land.

Did you really just bump the thread to add a story about how wonderful jews are because they give away candy to muslims?

Woke up to this story: "Suspect involved in Jerusalem 'lynch' of Palestinian: 'Let him die, he's an Arab'"
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...sEnabled=false

But I didn't find the urge to run to this thread and post it and be like "see! see! jews are evil these jews did somethign bad omg!" And I don't think my story balances your story, or that the entire framework of goign and finding "good" stories and contrasting them with "bad" stories is justified. The entire framework is incredibly stupid, and you should really just be embarrassed by your idiotic strawman.

Ok I used to think you were just lazy. Now I know you're a complete idiot.

In your blind, seething hatred either of Israel or me, you skimmed over the article, choosing to read it as what you hoped it would be - an article that (perish the thought!) praises Israeli Jews; one that you couldn't wait to counterbalance with a criminal act (that will and ought to be prosecuted and punished, by the way).

But what did the article actually say?

In other words, its an example of so-called "extremist settlers" and ordinary Arabs working together to promote peace and understanding. Something we should be encouraging, supporting.

So you're either an idiot or you must really hate Israeli Jews. I had figured you were just naïve.

Lol, I am kinda glad that you stooped to this level, it makes your fake apology a few posts up extra hilarious.

Yes, yes, yes, I read that it was amongst settlers. So? Who cares? Where is this lobby of people on this forum thinking that every single settler is an evil candy poisoning murderer? The story just has no relevance. Amongst both groups there are people that do good things and bad things and I don't think there is any but the most extremely biased of people that would deny that.

The problem is that this story fits in exactly with all of your previous actions in this thread. You go through and dig out and bump the thread entirely unsolicited because you found a story that casts "your side" in a good light. Great, but it is as utterly meaningless as I am sure you find my example of a story that casts "your side" in a bad light. Now of course, it also involves palestinians, how convenient, but you pretty clearly identified which part of this you think was key with your horrific strawman: