Tweet
Originally posted by GePap
I am not having it both ways: One thing i am always clear with is sources. Honestly look at the two sites given, the one I posted to, the one Edan posted too. LOOK at THEM. Read what they say, and how they say it. No one can be unbiased when it comes to this conflict, but as we all know from this forum, you can make an arguemnt well or you can make it badly.
All the peole bashing the site as biased: how many of you actually read it? I read Edans site, and besides the poor use of sitation, well, it gives you 2, and most of it is simple argument, without facts. The one I posted, well, it almost all sites, quotes, and may I point out, almost none from a Palestinian source.
For example, in the pro-zionist site quoted, you get the argument that since most palestinians were from newly arrived families, they had no tie to the land, and thus could not become refugees. Well, how mnay Israelis can trace thier families back more than 70 years themselves in that land? So the site is telling me that if there was a war tommorrow, and Eli, Siro, and Azazel were forced to flee from Israel due to a war, because none of them were actually born in the land, that they have no tie to it? That they would NOT be refugees? I am sorry, but not only is that argument totaly undocumented (the law defining refugees says nothing about a time span one must have lived there to become a refugee), but it is CRAP ON ITS FACE!
So no, i have no problem questioning the site Edan gave me, because unlike most people here, I actually read both, and the differences in style, in usefullness are vast, and the "bias" (you actualy mean, its politcal leaning) does nothing to detract from its value, or its effectiveness.
I am finding more and more that poeple here don;t seem to know how to honestly handle sources. If they don;t say what you like, well, ignore them: that is the surest way to a crap arguemnt, and to those waiting to say I want it both ways, well address my comment about the method of quotation: I assume you al go, or have gone, to some sort of higher education, one which calls for you to create research papers: tell me that site does a good job: look at them both as if you were a professor, and tell me which of them makes a stronger case, a case with evidence. Are they equal?
The UN would telly ou, as they handle the camps and must eep the data. it is certainly more than one million.
I am not having it both ways: One thing i am always clear with is sources. Honestly look at the two sites given, the one I posted to, the one Edan posted too. LOOK at THEM. Read what they say, and how they say it. No one can be unbiased when it comes to this conflict, but as we all know from this forum, you can make an arguemnt well or you can make it badly.
All the peole bashing the site as biased: how many of you actually read it? I read Edans site, and besides the poor use of sitation, well, it gives you 2, and most of it is simple argument, without facts. The one I posted, well, it almost all sites, quotes, and may I point out, almost none from a Palestinian source.
For example, in the pro-zionist site quoted, you get the argument that since most palestinians were from newly arrived families, they had no tie to the land, and thus could not become refugees. Well, how mnay Israelis can trace thier families back more than 70 years themselves in that land? So the site is telling me that if there was a war tommorrow, and Eli, Siro, and Azazel were forced to flee from Israel due to a war, because none of them were actually born in the land, that they have no tie to it? That they would NOT be refugees? I am sorry, but not only is that argument totaly undocumented (the law defining refugees says nothing about a time span one must have lived there to become a refugee), but it is CRAP ON ITS FACE!
So no, i have no problem questioning the site Edan gave me, because unlike most people here, I actually read both, and the differences in style, in usefullness are vast, and the "bias" (you actualy mean, its politcal leaning) does nothing to detract from its value, or its effectiveness.
I am finding more and more that poeple here don;t seem to know how to honestly handle sources. If they don;t say what you like, well, ignore them: that is the surest way to a crap arguemnt, and to those waiting to say I want it both ways, well address my comment about the method of quotation: I assume you al go, or have gone, to some sort of higher education, one which calls for you to create research papers: tell me that site does a good job: look at them both as if you were a professor, and tell me which of them makes a stronger case, a case with evidence. Are they equal?
BTW, does anyone know how many refugees live in the camps outside of Palestine?
The UN would telly ou, as they handle the camps and must eep the data. it is certainly more than one million.
we must be doing something good , .... "crap argument" , ....
well the ones you read at who knows whatever website that is created for either the purpose of spreading hate or else it has to be written by people who have never ever set foot in the middle east , ..... as for the un ,
they stand for U know Nothing even in these parts of the world , ....you should read some of the books they give to the people when they arrive , ....
one of the reasons the us is leaving the sinai , ....
, you can see what you want , i make sure you can travel without any restrictions , .....
Comment