How Can Anyone Defend This...

[Dot Com]

Wikipedia!!! Is that the best you got, you fucking loser!

You prove, day in and day out, that you're one of the biggest idiots on the board

 

[Ropey]

Wikipedia!!! Is that the best you got, you fucking loser!

You prove, day in and day out, that you're one of the biggest idiots on the board

I just proved how Wikipedia takes the Davis statement and hacks a portion out removing much context.

It also does not show the connections between Davis...

 

[Dot Com]

None of those are laws. Those are no more than recommendations.

With 57 Muslim countries who vote as a block in the General Assembly it is understandable how so many resolutions get passed. Like the recent one on Blasphemy which only affects Muslims but is a resolution for the world to follow the Islamic Blasphemy Law.

Yes, indeed. But the thing is that none of these are binding resolutions and NONE are law.

Israel has one, at most two accomplices, who consistently vote w/ the apartheid State in the U.N. Others may vote w/ them occasionally but most don't.

 

[Ropey]

None of those are laws. Those are no more than recommendations.

With 57 Muslim countries who vote as a block in the General Assembly it is understandable how so many resolutions get passed. Like the recent one on Blasphemy which only affects Muslims but is a resolution for the world to follow the Islamic Blasphemy Law.

Yes, indeed. But the thing is that none of these are binding resolutions and NONE are law.

Israel has one, at most two accomplices, who consistently vote w/ the apartheid State in the U.N. Others may vote w/ them occasionally but most don't.

And now it is clear why you came in this thread about an Israeli family brutally butchered.

You did so to post the above underlined drivel. Create a thread about Israel being an Apartheid State. I'll enter it you can be sure.

You just can't help sticking your foot in your mouth, can you?

 

[Foxfyre]

Wikipedia!!! Is that the best you got, you fucking loser!

You prove, day in and day out, that you're one of the biggest idiots on the board

I just proved how Wikipedia takes the Davis statement and hacks a portion out removing much context.

It also does not show the connections between Davis...

Sometimes Wikipedia does a good job pulling a lot of information together that would otherwise take a lot of time to dig out from numerous other sources. But anybody who trusts Wiki to get it right or uses it as an authority is really REALLY foolish. Too often information, most especially historical information, is written from a highly biased point of view and there will be absolutely no effort made for any kind of objectivity.

I frequently go to Wiki to see what's there and, when I know the info to be right, will even quote Wiki WITH a disclaimer that it IS Wiki and I think they have it right, but it should be verified with other sources before adopted as truth or the whole truth.

Wiki is useful to pick up names, dates, and key words to use to research from more reliable sources, which is what you did in the case you just cited. In that case, the Wiki account was obviously written by somebody who wanted to produce an appearance that the uninformed and gullible would swallow hook, line, and sinker.

You didn't. Kudos for that.

 

[Ropey]

You prove, day in and day out, that you're one of the biggest idiots on the board

I just proved how Wikipedia takes the Davis statement and hacks a portion out removing much context.

It also does not show the connections between Davis...

Sometimes Wikipedia does a good job pulling a lot of information together that would otherwise take a lot of time to dig out from numerous other sources. But anybody who trusts Wiki to get it right or uses it as an authority is really REALLY foolish. Too often information, most especially historical information, is written from a highly biased point of view and there will be absolutely no effort made for any kind of objectivity.

I frequently go to Wiki to see what's there and, when I know the info to be right, will even quote Wiki WITH a disclaimer that it IS Wiki and I think they have it right, but it should be verified with other sources before adopted as truth or the whole truth.

Wiki is useful to pick up names, dates, and key words to use to research from more reliable sources, which is what you did in the case you just cited. In that case, the Wiki account was obviously written by somebody who wanted to produce an appearance that the uninformed and gullible would swallow hook, line, and sinker.

You didn't. Kudos for that.

It's too bad that there's no internal contextual verification procedure. Until they begin to fully verify data I believe that they can do more harm than good in the public domain. None of it would stand in courts because the real truth will come out.

They are not an "Encyclopaedia" with regards to full content and contextual validation.

Ill informed is not better informed. In this case it was useful in ferreting out the reason for the poster to post in this thread. It was put in Wiki in that form, for that reason. To confuse and obfuscate the truth. And was used here to do the same.

As I posted with regards to Resolution 242, sometimes what is left out clarifies the intent. This is why all drafts are available. So we can see the stages and steps that were taken in order to legaly codify the document.

We see the intent in Resolution 242 with regards to "Land" and "All Land". The intent is clear by the very nature of the request for the 'inclusion' of "All" which shows that conversely the Arabian countries clearly understood that "All" was not implied.

 

[spectrumc01]

*****This is NOT a defense of the killings*******


But how far would you go to defend your boarders against what you percieve as an invasion? I would stop short of stabbing children and kill the fucking turd that killed a baby. We have illegals running across the boarder here in the US daily, look at the legislation we try to pass against the illegals and anyone who helps them i.e. business owners and landlords. We want to deny them everything from eduacation to medical care, no matter age or sex. They are dying in our deserts and in supposed safe houses here in the US. To listen to the people who live on the border talk they might be capable of the same things. I think I might be able to understand the killings, but not defend them.

this is by no means even close to the same thing.

How did I manage to get misquoted, " I would stop short of stabbing children and kill the fucking turd that killed a baby." never said that. check page one of the thread.

 

[Foxfyre]

Understanding what a motive is and condoning or shifting blame for an act are two entirely separate things.

In my opinion a bad act should be evaluated as a bad act.

A viscious murder of innocents is a viscious murder regardless of the motive.

Unintended casualties of war are one thing.

Deliberately slashing the throat of a mother and three small children quite another.

And in my opinion, nobody who values the sanctity of life or anything that is good and decent and profitable can justify that act in any way or use anything other than insanity to excuse the murderer who did it.

 

[Jroc]

You guys allowed PT and his buddies to successfully hijack this thread, Ropey was right in his previous posts, you are now are now defending Israelis right to exist, which is not what this thread is about stay on topic there are plenty of other threads to discuss that topic or start a new one

 

[spectrumc01]

As an aside, how many fathers or heads of households would knowingly move their families into an area where violence of this nature is possible? Surely there must be some sort of responsibility on the fathers part. You don't see too many open Klan members moving into Compton do ya?

 

[Ropey]

As an aside, how many fathers or heads of households would knowingly move their families into an area where violence of this nature is possible? Surely there must be some sort of responsibility on the fathers part. You don't see too many open Klan members moving into Compton do ya?

Now you are clear. Quoted for posterity. It doesn't take long to make the victims the culprits in an aside.

 

[P F Tinmore]

As an aside, how many fathers or heads of households would knowingly move their families into an area where violence of this nature is possible? Surely there must be some sort of responsibility on the fathers part. You don't see too many open Klan members moving into Compton do ya?

Who told these settlers that it was safe to raise a family in a war zone on some else's land?

How many people take their families with them to Afghanistan?

 

[Dot Com]

Understanding what a motive is and condoning or shifting blame for an act are two entirely separate things.

In my opinion a bad act should be evaluated as a bad act.

A viscious murder of innocents is a viscious murder regardless of the motive.

Unintended casualties of war are one thing.

Deliberately slashing the throat of a mother and three small children quite another.

And in my opinion, nobody who values the sanctity of life or anything that is good and decent and profitable can justify that act in any way or use anything other than insanity to excuse the murderer who did it.

What would you do if someone pulled a truck up in your back yard, dumped a load of lumber, and started constructing a house?

This is what monotheistic (Abrahamic) religion does to people. They willingly put themselves in danger, not to mention break the law, to prove a point. Sad that.

 

[Ropey]

Understanding what a motive is and condoning or shifting blame for an act are two entirely separate things.

In my opinion a bad act should be evaluated as a bad act.

A viscious murder of innocents is a viscious murder regardless of the motive.

Unintended casualties of war are one thing.

Deliberately slashing the throat of a mother and three small children quite another.

And in my opinion, nobody who values the sanctity of life or anything that is good and decent and profitable can justify that act in any way or use anything other than insanity to excuse the murderer who did it.

What would you do if someone pulled a truck up in your back yard, dumped a load of lumber, and started constructing a house?

This is what monotheistic (Abrahamic) religion does to people. They willingly put themselves in danger, not to mention break the law, to prove a point. Sad that.

P F meet Dot Com. May you be happy ever after.

I understand. You've got some fine Jew haters who won't come in here but who will rep you for this kind of stand on a thread about the murder of a family.

 

[Dot Com]

Understanding what a motive is and condoning or shifting blame for an act are two entirely separate things.

In my opinion a bad act should be evaluated as a bad act.

A viscious murder of innocents is a viscious murder regardless of the motive.

Unintended casualties of war are one thing.

Deliberately slashing the throat of a mother and three small children quite another.

And in my opinion, nobody who values the sanctity of life or anything that is good and decent and profitable can justify that act in any way or use anything other than insanity to excuse the murderer who did it.

What would you do if someone pulled a truck up in your back yard, dumped a load of lumber, and started constructing a house?

This is what monotheistic (Abrahamic) religion does to people. They willingly put themselves in danger, not to mention break the law, to prove a point. Sad that.

P F meet Dot Com. May you be happy ever after.

I understand. You've got some fine Jew haters who won't come in here but who will rep you for this kind of stand on a thread about the murder of a family.

There is a legal term called "culpability". Its like robbing a bank then complaining when you get shot.

 

[Foxfyre]

Understanding what a motive is and condoning or shifting blame for an act are two entirely separate things.

In my opinion a bad act should be evaluated as a bad act.

A viscious murder of innocents is a viscious murder regardless of the motive.

Unintended casualties of war are one thing.

Deliberately slashing the throat of a mother and three small children quite another.

And in my opinion, nobody who values the sanctity of life or anything that is good and decent and profitable can justify that act in any way or use anything other than insanity to excuse the murderer who did it.

What would you do if someone pulled a truck up in your back yard, dumped a load of lumber, and started constructing a house?

This is what monotheistic (Abrahamic) religion does to people. They willingly put themselves in danger, not to mention break the law, to prove a point. Sad that.

Baloney. Do you honestly think normal people would go find an innocent mother and three very young children and slit their throats just because they felt somebody was invading their turf? Is that truly what you intend to say here? I have NEVER met a Jew who thought something like that was justifiable under ANY circumstances. Judaism is a monotheistic religion. I have NEVER met a Christian who thought something like that was justifiable under ANY circumstances. Christianity is a monotheistic religion.

Like too many of your brethren you deny condoning that even as you strain at gnats trying to justify it.

 

[Jroc]

Understanding what a motive is and condoning or shifting blame for an act are two entirely separate things.

In my opinion a bad act should be evaluated as a bad act.

A viscious murder of innocents is a viscious murder regardless of the motive.

Unintended casualties of war are one thing.

Deliberately slashing the throat of a mother and three small children quite another.

And in my opinion, nobody who values the sanctity of life or anything that is good and decent and profitable can justify that act in any way or use anything other than insanity to excuse the murderer who did it.

What would you do if someone pulled a truck up in your back yard, dumped a load of lumber, and started constructing a house?

This is what monotheistic (Abrahamic) religion does to people. They willingly put themselves in danger, not to mention break the law, to prove a point. Sad that.

Baloney. Do you honestly think normal people would go find an innocent mother and three very young children and slit their throats just because they felt somebody was invading their turf? Is that truly what you intend to say here? I have NEVER met a Jew who thought something like that was justifiable under ANY circumstances. Judaism is a monotheistic religion. I have NEVER met a Christian who thought something like that was justifiable under ANY circumstances. Christianity is a monotheistic religion.

Like too many of your brethren you deny condoning that even as you strain at gnats trying to justify it.

Yep... "If the Arabs disarmed there would be peace, if the Jews disarmed there would be genocide" it's not about Israel, it's about the elimination of the Jews for these people. If a Jew had murdered an arab family as happened here no Jew I know would ever try to justify that kind of evil, yet we have Americans suppose civilized people trying to justify this evil, it's unbelievable to me.

 

[Dot Com]

Israeli Army T-Shirts Mock Gaza Killings – Terrorist fashion 2009 | Sabbah Report

 

[Foxfyre]

Israeli Army T-Shirts Mock Gaza Killings – Terrorist fashion 2009 | Sabbah Report

If you are intellectually honest you'll go to the Haaretz website and read ALL the articles re soldier misconduct. And read the actual articles rather than what some hate site says about them. And the IDF IS investigating any charges of soldier misconduct.

Do you suppose the Palestinians are conducting investigations re the deliberate murder of the mother and three children?

 

[blu]

(Reuters) - A Jewish couple and three of their children were stabbed to death in bed in a West Bank settlement in what Israeli officials said Saturday was an attack by one or more Palestinians who broke into their home.

Israeli troops set up roadblocks and were searching the area around the Jewish religious settlement of Itamar, near the Palestinian city of Nablus, for the killer or killers.

In a televised speech, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed shock that the parents and three of their children -- including a baby -- were "brutally murdered on Sabbath eve while sleeping."

Netanyahu, in what appeared to be a warning to settlers not to launch revenge attacks, urged Israelis not to take the law into their own hands after the killings.

Israel has been loosening restrictions on the movement of Palestinians and goods in the occupied territory but maintains a system of roadblocks and checkpoints.


Jewish couple and three children killed in West Bank | Reuters

what did they expect when they steal people's land?