Some of those ads made close minded people freak out.like the one where a priest and a nun kissed. :lol:
Israel - The Right to exist as a State?
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
I'm not here to help with your basic educational needs. That should have been taken care of in elementary and secondary school.
Then you go on in response to my
To say
Admitting that am being factual! that the Israeli narrative about orders is a lie which you just now claim to have presented your obviously fabricated quote to support.
Really? forget about goal posts, with every post you dig yourself a deeper hole. I thought you could not sink lower than providing a distorted quote as your favorite 'evidence' and sticking by it, but apparently you can, by letting slip an admission that you are wrong!
As for this "evidence" that supposedly exists and you keep referring to, unlike you, I've presented the actual evidence in the study I linked, which of course you continue to ignore, is it for the third time now? (go read it, seriously its just 13 pages) whereas you presented a fabricated quote by someone who ironically openly discredits himself on the subject by admittance in the same source material, not once, but twice. I needn't bring up his almost pathological tendency throughout his memoir to blame other Arab leaders for pretty much everything negative that happens (and not just in Palestine).
Again, I've already admitted that I'am personally aware of one such case, and I've already said the figure of less than 5% twice. There is nothing here to laugh about, my numbers are based on my own observation from the many refugees I met which of course I understand is subjective, but luckily there is plenitude of evidence available be in the form of radio broadcasts on Zionist and Arab radio, some major Zionist leaders' lacking the "they were ordered to leave" explanation of the refugees' flight, orders to stay being reported in major newspapers. Laws by governments penalizing Palestinians who fled, I mean I cited the king of Jordan, the country that has the highest number of refugees, commending Palestinians (through radio) who are not escaping and asking those who are fleeing to return and those who remain to stay. And then you have the chronology of events and the refugees' flight that stands in the face of your claim. Seriously am tired of repeating this but there you go again;
Khalid, Why Did The Palestinians Leave?
And I never really denied that but this is not evidence like you insinuate disingenuously to Israel's ability to live with the Arab native majority, they live in peace because the war for ethnic domination is over and Israel had its way, the conflict continues because it cannot compromise that ethnic domination that it could not attain if those refugees return. The fact that the native minority is living in peace with Jews in Israel could just as easily be used as evidence against its right to continue existing as Jewish state barring entry to the rest of the native people and their families for so long when it is apparent as you claim that they could 'live in peace'.
That is the whole point, lol! you did not speak about the entire picture which mind you is the same subject matter, because you are being intentionally dishonest.
Typical, you make a claim and do not support it. Your lols fool no one ;D (plus my smilies give a better impression, I think), seriously though should I be surprised at this point?
At this point the only appropriate answer is whatever. Even if you did in fact invest that amount of time studying a conflict the premise of which (as far as Zionism and Israelis are concerned) you do not care about and have not formed an opinion on. It is perfectly logical for anyone to doubt your claim.
Revealed: how Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons | World news | The Guardian
The Apartheid one, But you probably heard about that.
So does Israel have the right to exists as a State- free from attack with secure borders- same would apply to the Palestinians- You asked my why Israel has this right - I replied. I may have missed your reply.
LOL.
Now that's truly funny.
No, I said your commentary would be factual, if I had relied on or used the Israeli narrative.
Which of course I haven't. I encompassed the varied terminology to express by whatever term you wanted to use.
I put forth a quote from an involved party, you expanded on that quote, you chose to focus on one term, which hardly represents the full context of his admission, and most certainly does not negate the fact that he admits Arab leaders 'invited', or whatever you want to call it, Palestinians to leave.
Cool, so what's your argument? The percentage of Palestinians?
You invalidate that here...
Yes, I know. Which means it has no value.
Lets take a look at this from the beginning...
This is the origin...
That's a finite statement, subjective at best, with no qualifiers, based on supposition and conjecture.
To which I replied...
There is absolutely nothing disingenuous about that.
Your shifting goalposts however, are as disingenuous and dishonest as it gets.
Why, it's become a central part of your strategy.
No, I'm being intentionally cryptic and lean in sharing opinion, to see how far you'll go to invent a narrative.
It's a tactic I developed to determine and identify those who are genuinely interested in a discussion, and those that have a bias and/or an agenda, that prevents them from having an honest discussion.
Would you care to hear how you're doing so far?
The fact that I already did, aside. Would there be a point?
I agree, but the assumption, fabrication and exaggeration you employ to formulate that opinion, point to a motive on your part.
Wow, when you miss a point, you really miss it eh.
Last edited:
Oh I see now, so its time to beat at straws and play with semantics. If you didn't actually mean what you very clearly said and I'll quote it again
"It was offered to support the the opinion that Arab leaders asked, told, invited, ordered, or whatever, Palestinians to leave."
What are you claiming?, and you're fabricated favorite quote is evidence of what exactly? that the Arabs left due to orders? that Arabs left because they were told to? that they were simply 'invited' but it played no role? or what exactly? this whole argument began when you quoted me disputing the myth that they were ordered to leave and that that is the reason why they left and presented your own "evidence" to support an ambiguous claim that could literally mean anything (If am to trust the terminology in your post explaining your terminology in the previous one ;d).
An involved party who wasn't actually there and claims ironically enough that he played no role in Palestine during the war. What does "involved" mean to you? I imagine am an involved party and so are you.
He is not a credible source, he can't "admit" anything even if he wanted to, because as he says he wasn't involved in anything and when his non credible statements are contradicted by the bulk of evidence we have which I presented (and you continue to ignore) his statements and 'claims' should be taken with a grain of salt.
As for me focusing on the parts that were left out and the parts that were distorted, it is only because they are the most relevant to the argument of "why they left?" he was clearly stating the main reason Arabs wanted to leave was due to widespread terror, he made no claim about governments or leaders asking them to leave because they wanted to "expunge" the Jews or that this was the reason they left. The word "invite" and his reference to their panic due to Zionist terrorism in this context make sense and therefor it was convenient for whoever you got your source from to distort that.
But why am I still writing about this when it appears you have been intentionally disingenuous from the start
If in fact you do not believe the governments were the main reason that Arabs left, as the Israeli claim that they (leaders and governments) are the ones reponsible for the actual exodus (a claim that has been disproved sufficiently with actual evidence as opposed to irrelevant non credible fabricated quotes) I see no point in wasting my time any further.
My argument is that your statement of "Well at least you concede to the possibility, lol." is disingenuous and as I said not funny since I've already "conceded the possibility" and admitted to have met such refugee in my previous posts in this thread. Which aren't plenty btw.
So now you resort to quoting me out of context, you obviously missed "but luckily there is plenitude of evidence available" that was literally the next sentence, my subjective evaluation is supported by objective evidence. Moreover, my subjective evidence from my own experience and meetings with refugees including my grandparents on both sides is definitely of value, maybe its not of value to you.
All fancy words that ultimately mean nothing, Israel refuses to allow natives back claiming that would mean the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state, I simply agreed. its common sense really and only requires the ability to subtract and add numbers.
Rofl, disingenuous according to the free dictionary means;
"Not straightforward or candid"
when I confronted you about being disingenuous and not giving the whole picture on this exact issue you've already answered by admitting you were being and I quote
There, you've done it yet again, I wonder how deep that hole could get -.- .
Still waiting- It is an easy question - or is it....
So does Israel have the right to exists as a State- free from attack with secure borders- same would apply to the Palestinians- You asked my why Israel has this right - I replied. I may have missed your reply.
I'd like to see a name of a state in the world that doesn't have the right to exist? Someone enlighten me! :smile:
No surprise there, you like fallacies.
The "or whatever" is usually a dead give away.
No you're right, he wasn't the leader of a nation that Palestinians fled to, he never returned, and spent the remainder of his career in the cone of silence, lol.
That's awesome, but it isn't relevant to what I said, lol. Try and stay in context.
That's not out of context. You stated you came to 5% by your research and know at least one person that admits it, and then went on to say your conclusion of the actual amount was subjective.
I agree.
What's out of context?
That's right. Because it's subjective.
All fancy words that ultimately mean nothing, especially since you obviously understand you made an error when you assumed I'd miss your fallacies and invention of context and opinions not offered.
Just say you're sorry and we can move on from there.
Speaking of selective cropping, lol.
I have no idea, you're the one digging it.
You're trying to attribute my admission to two separate strings. One involving what I actually said, and another discussing what you fabricated.
It isn't my fault that your fabrications have led you to be confused.
Perhaps if employed a few less fallacies and stopped fabricating opinion, and attributing to me. You wouldn't end up at the bottom of a hole of your construction.
If an organized crime has the right to exist as a state then we have truly abandoned any pretense about the rule of law and we have surrendered to a permanent state of war, the very engine that sustains that blighted rotten sore on the collective human conscience.
Have not heard you for a while- Wondered if there was an electrical short in your universe now that they have discovered the God Particle.
There is no god particle to discover and their is no valid nation state called Israel. And there never was.
I do believe there will be a Palestinian State - or would that be 2 as you have the West Bank and Gaza- Would 1 be Greater Palestine and the other Lesser Palestine - Do you have enough amps to figure that one out for us.
You refuse to consider the facts Goober. It is true as true can be that the hatred towards Israel is great. Of course you prefer the cause to be the anti semitic construct when in fact it is good taste and competent discrimination wedded to wholesome ethical disgust for genocidal maniacs.
