Harvard's Leftist Destroy Israel conference

[P F Tinmore]

All kidding aside,I would like to see some tangible evidence of the issues you say took place in 1948. It seems to me you imagine that an event took place and you dwell on those suppositions until they become real in your mind. If an event took place someone wrote about it or broadcast it on news programs. Please give us some of your revelations.

Broad question. Name one.

A technique of propaganda called "turnspeak"

This and taqiyyah. 'Nuff said.

That is not one of the issues that I have discusses.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Even for you this is a stupid post.

What is stupid about it? The UN General Assembly passes a partition plan recommending the Security Council to implement. The Security Council did not.

There was no partition. No borders were defined. No land was transferred. No states were created. Like I said. it is irrelevant.

All kidding aside,I would like to see some tangible evidence of the issues you say took place in 1948. It seems to me you imagine that an event took place and you dwell on those suppositions until they become real in your mind. If an event took place someone wrote about it or broadcast it on news programs. Please give us some of your revelations.

Seriously, if you would like me to clarify an issue or two just specify.

 

[Hossfly]

Broad question. Name one.

A technique of propaganda called "turnspeak"

This and taqiyyah. 'Nuff said.

That is not one of the issues that I have discusses.

OK. Let's turn the discussion? to something dear to my heart. You don't realize it yet but you are an example of a hard-core anti-Semitic Freedom Fighter that is an easy mark to be turned into an ardent Zionist. How 'bout we discusses dat?

 

[P F Tinmore]

A technique of propaganda called "turnspeak"

This and taqiyyah. 'Nuff said.

That is not one of the issues that I have discusses.

OK. Let's turn the discussion? to something dear to my heart. You don't realize it yet but you are an example of a hard-core anti-Semitic Freedom Fighter that is an easy mark to be turned into an ardent Zionist. How 'bout we discusses dat?

Sure, go ahead. At this point I don't know what you mean.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Of course that is irrelevant. There was no offer to accept. The Security Council rejected the plan making it null and void.

Even for you this is a stupid post.

What is stupid about it? The UN General Assembly passes a partition plan recommending the Security Council to implement. The Security Council did not.

There was no partition. No borders were defined. No land was transferred. No states were created. Like I said. it is irrelevant.

As is so often the case, your post raises the question: did you wake up this stupid in the morning or is it something you've had to work at?

The General Assembly has jurisdiction over internal UN matters and the Security Council has jurisdiction over issues arising among member states. The Protectorate over Palestine was an internal UN matter and for that reason it fell entirely under the jurisdiction of the GA. If you had ever read the Partition resolution you would have known that it created a mechanism for implementing the division of the Protectorate among the two states, and all it asked the Security Council to do was to try to prevent the Arab states from disrupting the process, which the Security Council did in a series of resolutions in 1948.

The Security Council take the necessary measures as provided for in the plan for its implementation;

The Security Council consider, if circumstances during the transitional period require such consideration, whether the situation in Palestine constitutes a threat to the peace. If it decides that such a threat exists, and in order to maintain international peace and security, the Security Council should supplement the authorization of the General Assembly by taking measures, under Articles 39 and 41 of the Charter, to empower the United Nations Commission, as provided in this resolution, to exercise in Palestine the functions which are assigned to it by this resolution;

The Security Council determine as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression, in accordance with Article 39 of the Charter, any attempt to alter by force the settlement envisaged by this resolution;

The Avalon Project : UN General Assembly Resolution 181

Security Council Resolutions 1948

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Hey, I told my Jewish friends I will never forgive them, not for killing Christ, that was a family dispute, but for not sharing the 911 memo with me.

Perhaps they hoped you got the message to get to the WTC.

I did! I didn't get there on time because my mode of transportation at that time was:

 

[P F Tinmore]

Even for you this is a stupid post.

What is stupid about it? The UN General Assembly passes a partition plan recommending the Security Council to implement. The Security Council did not.

There was no partition. No borders were defined. No land was transferred. No states were created. Like I said. it is irrelevant.

As is so often the case, your post raises the question: did you wake up this stupid in the morning or is it something you've had to work at?

The General Assembly has jurisdiction over internal UN matters and the Security Council has jurisdiction over issues arising among member states. The Protectorate over Palestine was an internal UN matter and for that reason it fell entirely under the jurisdiction of the GA. If you had ever read the Partition resolution you would have known that it created a mechanism for implementing the division of the Protectorate among the two states, and all it asked the Security Council to do was to try to prevent the Arab states from disrupting the process, which the Security Council did in a series of resolutions in 1948.

The Security Council take the necessary measures as provided for in the plan for its implementation;

The Security Council consider, if circumstances during the transitional period require such consideration, whether the situation in Palestine constitutes a threat to the peace. If it decides that such a threat exists, and in order to maintain international peace and security, the Security Council should supplement the authorization of the General Assembly by taking measures, under Articles 39 and 41 of the Charter, to empower the United Nations Commission, as provided in this resolution, to exercise in Palestine the functions which are assigned to it by this resolution;

The Security Council determine as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression, in accordance with Article 39 of the Charter, any attempt to alter by force the settlement envisaged by this resolution;

The Avalon Project : UN General Assembly Resolution 181

Security Council Resolutions 1948

Resolution 181 recommended that the Security Council establish a commission to implement the plan. There are supposed to be procedures and reports.

Where is all this stuff?

 

[toomuchtime_]

What is stupid about it? The UN General Assembly passes a partition plan recommending the Security Council to implement. The Security Council did not.

There was no partition. No borders were defined. No land was transferred. No states were created. Like I said. it is irrelevant.

As is so often the case, your post raises the question: did you wake up this stupid in the morning or is it something you've had to work at?

The General Assembly has jurisdiction over internal UN matters and the Security Council has jurisdiction over issues arising among member states. The Protectorate over Palestine was an internal UN matter and for that reason it fell entirely under the jurisdiction of the GA. If you had ever read the Partition resolution you would have known that it created a mechanism for implementing the division of the Protectorate among the two states, and all it asked the Security Council to do was to try to prevent the Arab states from disrupting the process, which the Security Council did in a series of resolutions in 1948.

The Security Council take the necessary measures as provided for in the plan for its implementation;

The Security Council consider, if circumstances during the transitional period require such consideration, whether the situation in Palestine constitutes a threat to the peace. If it decides that such a threat exists, and in order to maintain international peace and security, the Security Council should supplement the authorization of the General Assembly by taking measures, under Articles 39 and 41 of the Charter, to empower the United Nations Commission, as provided in this resolution, to exercise in Palestine the functions which are assigned to it by this resolution;

The Security Council determine as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression, in accordance with Article 39 of the Charter, any attempt to alter by force the settlement envisaged by this resolution;

The Avalon Project : UN General Assembly Resolution 181

Security Council Resolutions 1948

Resolution 181 recommended that the Security Council establish a commission to implement the plan. There are supposed to be procedures and reports.

Where is all this stuff?

Idiot, 181 established the Commission and recommended to the Security Council that it cooperate with the Commission, which it did by passing a series of resolutions in 1948 calling on member states not to disrupt the process. Are you really too stupid to understand the Partition resolution? If you had read the Security Council resolutions from March 1948 onward, you would have seen that they take note of the reports received from the Commission.

Man up and acknowledge that you have lied about this because you understand there are no substantial arguments to support your positions.

 

[Ropey]

Hey, I told my Jewish friends I will never forgive them, not for killing Christ, that was a family dispute, but for not sharing the 911 memo with me.

Perhaps they hoped you got the message to get to the WTC.

I did! I didn't get there on time because my mode of transportation at that time was:

Then you've had your few minutes of fame long ago and unbeknownst to anyone that matters.

Here you go. Share your experiences with 9-11 Dante


They likely will find your story quite intriguing. Eots for certain will and then I'll come in later.

 

[Jroc]

Liberal Jew haters, make Jews feel unsafe on College compasses

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OzHXfq-wjk&]UCSD Divestment 2012 - Jewish Students - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Liberal Jew haters, make Jews feel unsafe on College compasses

UCSD Divestment 2012 - Jewish Students - YouTube[/ur

then you don't know the Jews I know

 

[Jroc]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46HkD7dzyGQ]Crossing The Line: Antisemitism On Campus - YouTube[/ame]

 

[P F Tinmore]

Crossing The Line: Antisemitism On Campus - YouTube

Interesting Propaganda piece. Perhaps we could discuss some of the issues presented.

One thing that stood out was that the Palestinian side was presented as being against Israel and Jewish interests. That it is anti Semitic.

However, Jews were not mentioned by the pro Palestines. only by the pro Israels.

The first thing mentioned is that the students are standing up against the occupation of Tibet, the massacre in Darfur, and the war in Iraq.

Then later in the video they complained about a double standard. That with the other problems in the world, why is Israel singled out?

The propagandists are contradicting themselves.

There is more. Maybe we should discuss them. This is a discussion board isn't it?

 

[Ropey]

Liberal Jew haters, make Jews feel unsafe on College compasses

Let them 'try' to make Jews feel unsafe on the College campus. Jews have fought this before and in far worse environments than the United States of America. I don't foresee a Kristallnacht in the US.

 

[Jroc]

Liberal Jew haters, make Jews feel unsafe on College compasses

Let them 'try' to make Jews feel unsafe on the College campus. Jews have fought this before and in far worse environments than the United States of America. I don't foresee a Kristallnacht in the US.

No because most people are pro-Israel in this country but too many of these liberal professers teach this stuff as fact. Anti -Israel bias is common amoung them.

 

[Jroc]

Horowitz’s proposed legislation has yet to be adopted by any state. Georgia did pass a resolution recommending that state universities adopt the document. In Congress, the text was introduced as a resolution by Georgia congressman Jack Kingston in 2003, but has stalled since then.

Horowitz has been pushing the legislation for a number of years, but it has only been in recent months that the effort has picked up steam in several states — including Minnesota, Ohio and Rhode Island — amid a string of controversial campus incidents. The University of Colorado has been under pressure to fire professor Ward Churchill since it emerged that the teacher had compared victims of September 11, 2001, to Nazis and argued that they were responsible for the attacks. In New York, the Columbia University campus has been rocked by accusations that pro-Palestinian professors intimidated pro-Israel students.

Supporters of the legislation have been motivated in part by events at Columbia and at other campuses, where Jewish groups have charged that there is a persistent anti-Israel bias in teaching about the Middle East. Opponents of the Florida bill have said that, among other dangers, the measure could force professors to give a platform to Holocaust deniers. This fear, they said, springs from a clause in the Florida legislation that demands professors “make their students aware of serious scholarly viewpoints other than their own

.”



Read more: Conservative

 

[P F Tinmore]

Horowitz’s proposed legislation has yet to be adopted by any state. Georgia did pass a resolution recommending that state universities adopt the document. In Congress, the text was introduced as a resolution by Georgia congressman Jack Kingston in 2003, but has stalled since then.

Horowitz has been pushing the legislation for a number of years, but it has only been in recent months that the effort has picked up steam in several states — including Minnesota, Ohio and Rhode Island — amid a string of controversial campus incidents. The University of Colorado has been under pressure to fire professor Ward Churchill since it emerged that the teacher had compared victims of September 11, 2001, to Nazis and argued that they were responsible for the attacks. In New York, the Columbia University campus has been rocked by accusations that pro-Palestinian professors intimidated pro-Israel students.

Supporters of the legislation have been motivated in part by events at Columbia and at other campuses, where Jewish groups have charged that there is a persistent anti-Israel bias in teaching about the Middle East. Opponents of the Florida bill have said that, among other dangers, the measure could force professors to give a platform to Holocaust deniers. This fear, they said, springs from a clause in the Florida legislation that demands professors “make their students aware of serious scholarly viewpoints other than their own

.”



Read more: Conservative

“make their students aware of serious scholarly viewpoints other than their own

Interesting. Could you cite an example?

If passed by the full legislature, the bill would potentially allow students in Florida to sue if they feel that a university is not providing “balanced exposure to significant theories and thoughtful viewpoints.”

Read more: Conservative

So, the Nazis would get a fair balance?

Stupid idea of a stupid person.

 

[Hossfly]

Horowitz’s proposed legislation has yet to be adopted by any state. Georgia did pass a resolution recommending that state universities adopt the document. In Congress, the text was introduced as a resolution by Georgia congressman Jack Kingston in 2003, but has stalled since then.

Horowitz has been pushing the legislation for a number of years, but it has only been in recent months that the effort has picked up steam in several states — including Minnesota, Ohio and Rhode Island — amid a string of controversial campus incidents. The University of Colorado has been under pressure to fire professor Ward Churchill since it emerged that the teacher had compared victims of September 11, 2001, to Nazis and argued that they were responsible for the attacks. In New York, the Columbia University campus has been rocked by accusations that pro-Palestinian professors intimidated pro-Israel students.

Supporters of the legislation have been motivated in part by events at Columbia and at other campuses, where Jewish groups have charged that there is a persistent anti-Israel bias in teaching about the Middle East. Opponents of the Florida bill have said that, among other dangers, the measure could force professors to give a platform to Holocaust deniers. This fear, they said, springs from a clause in the Florida legislation that demands professors “make their students aware of serious scholarly viewpoints other than their own

.”



Read more: Conservative

“make their students aware of serious scholarly viewpoints other than their own

Interesting. Could you cite an example?

If passed by the full legislature, the bill would potentially allow students in Florida to sue if they feel that a university is not providing “balanced exposure to significant theories and thoughtful viewpoints.”

Read more: Conservative

So, the Nazis would get a fair balance?

Stupid idea of a stupid person.

Thank you, Tinmore, for showing us that you would rather see college students intimidated at the campuses across the U.S. rather than have them enjoy their college experience.

 

[ima]

Jews are a bunch of whiners. They solely created the problem in Palestine and should man up and deal with it like adults.

 

[P F Tinmore]

.”



Read more: Conservative

Interesting. Could you cite an example?

If passed by the full legislature, the bill would potentially allow students in Florida to sue if they feel that a university is not providing “balanced exposure to significant theories and thoughtful viewpoints.”

Read more: Conservative

So, the Nazis would get a fair balance?

Stupid idea of a stupid person.

Thank you, Tinmore, for showing us that you would rather see college students intimidated at the campuses across the U.S. rather than have them enjoy their college experience.

So you think a student should be able to sue the school if he thinks his issue is no treated fairly?

What a can of worms. Stupid idea.