American position on the PA

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by CyberGnu I just did.

Not to mention the NUMEROUS stories which were never sourced, published with the sole intention of inflaming hatred against palestinians.

If they are not sourced then the article writer is the actual source and wittness.

Well, since the JP 'quoted' an article in Die Welt, that same story should exist in Die Welt. It didn't. The web version is the same as the print version.

(and while this is subjective, I do think it is importnat: the story was sufficiently huge that if true, it would have been on the first page of every news media in the world...).

a)Which story would that be? I specifically remember you already mentioning this in another thread, in which some poster iirc even said he has seen a similar story.

b) well, the Palestinains promoting hatered in school is expected to be on the first page of every news media in the world. but it isn't. It rarely appears on back pages, which shows intentional down-playing.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by CyberGnu


Which might have some relevance if there had ever been a palestinian state.

Since their hasn't been, how could we occupy it?

[CyberGnu]

I'm asking your opinion.

I luckily have my own morals which differentiate between civilians and combatants, unlike you.

I wouldn't invoke morals in your shoes. You are defending a nation that has invaded another and the deaths this occupation causes.

[Sirotnikov]

Either way, while you could question the basic humanity of someone taking cover behind a child, the moral fault is still with the invading soldiers. If they don't open fire, no children will get hurt.

a) you chose to ignore questioning the humanity of those who take cover behind children. at least when they are palestinains.

b) the invading soldiers aren't invading then, since as you have self stated, there was no palestinian state.

[Sirotnikov]

G. Tactics - Gnu is a biggotted troll. You should have noticed it.

[Sirotnikov]

You are defending a nation that has invaded another and the deaths this occupation causes.

How could we have invaded palestine if there has never been a palestine, as you have stated yourself?

[CyberGnu]

Mr President:

Newspapers often get facts not just wrong, but completely wrong. Even your precious New York Times frequently prints retractions.

Mistakes happen. I'm assuming that things written in the NYT is true until I have reason to believe otherwise, as it is a widely respected media. The fact that it prints retractions is a vital part of that.

[CyberGnu]

How is entering a school dormatory, and shooting the kids, or enetring a house where children were sleeping and targetting them is different from me targetting your child?

You don't even know your own posts? Do check your numbered points again.

I asked for a source on the dormitory. If you can manage to find one (and we assume that the palestinian knew it was indeed a kids dormitory), then I'll condemn it. I'm not holding my breath though... Soiurces aren't one of your strong points either...

Entering the house: well, one could assume that not only kids live in the house, don't you think? In fact, one could even assume that there is a larger propability of there being adults in the house than there being children. So the attack was aimed at adults, and children were the victims. Victims of Sharons greed.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Why? The only thing I do is to call you on your lack of substance in those instances. Would be easier for both of us if you left them out in the first place.

Then deal with it when I call you on your lack of substance as to all Israeli news sources others than JP, whose "dishonest nature" you still haven't proven.

You mean things like 'It is all Arafats fault'?

It seems to me that this is also backed by the US intelligence sources, and US government, and even US press.

Are they untrustable as well?

So when I ask for sources, you should be able to find ones, right?

Assuming that it's quoted from a web based service - yes.

Could you? I'm willing to bet money that the newspaper which employed him aologized and published retractions.

I won't bother finding it, but yes, I think they did appologize.

Israeli newspapers publish retractions too.

What's the point?

It's your bias that makes all the difference.

[Sirotnikov]

You don't even know your own posts? Do check your numbered points again

What difference does it make?

Can't you defend that?

You referred to case 9 and 11, in both the kids were not targetted as part of a general crowd, but rather the attacker went from room to room, hunting down targets.

I would assume it's not "mistakes".

Especially since those kids were usually aged 7, 9 and 11.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
*sigh*... Should I type slowly? They have no business being there. They have no moral right to return fire even if shot upon. They are an occupying presence. The only moral choice they could do is to stop the occupation.

They have every moral right.

Every person has a moral right to defend himself. Isn't that one of your basic pillars?

Does it hurt to contemplate Israels crimes? Does it ease the hurt to try to blame others for the suffering those crimes cause? I'm struggling to understand the mental block you seem to have.

To me it appears you have a mental block, understanding the difference between soldiers and civilians, grownups and children, attacker and defender and so on.

so it's not me with the mental problems here.

[CyberGnu]

This makes no difference. The Palestinians (and other Arab nations) have been attacking ISrael since it's founding. IF you attack somewhere, you lose, and they take action to stop you attacking again, tough.

Not the point. You are claiming that Israeli soldiers must occpuy palestine since palestine carries out attacks on Israel. But it is flawed logic, since the occupation is CAUSING the attacks.

How other arabs attacked in 1948 has nothing to do with terrorist attacks.

[Sirotnikov]

I asked for a source on the dormitory. If you can manage to find one (and we assume that the palestinian knew it was indeed a kids dormitory), then I'll condemn it. I'm not holding my breath though... Soiurces aren't one of your strong points either...

You could have watched it on CNN some month or two ago.

Or you could have followed the threads here.

The fact that you have no idea about this specific terrorist act, makes me even more sure that your words are based on general prejudices with little knowledge as to specific events on the field.

Entering the house: well, one could assume that not only kids live in the house, don't you think? In fact, one could even assume that there is a larger propability of there being adults in the house than there being children.

But he entered a room and saw a child and then killed it.

I don't see this as falling under the "killed child on accident" category underwhich it falls on the shoulders of the occupiers.

[The Mad Monk]

I was considering making a 'Caption This!' thread with this. Thought better of it.

[Sirotnikov]

Not the point. You are claiming that Israeli soldiers must occpuy palestine since palestine carries out attacks on Israel. But it is flawed logic, since the occupation is CAUSING the attacks.

Your logic is again false, since the attacks (terrorist attacks) from the territories, and other arab countries existed before the occupation of 1967.

They also existed before 1947.

1929 being the most famous example of local arab massacres of innocent jews.

The real reason for terror is that arabs do not want jews to be their neighbours.

In 1929 jews only settled on land bought, or on unoccupied land in mandatorial palestine.

This continued until 1948.

The terror and resistance started there, due to the arab's unwillingness to accept new neighbours.

Their claim that the jews were stealing their lands, is the same as racist white americans have over the hispanic immigrants stealing US land.