The debates

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
39,285
Reaction score
4,857
Points
1,130
Bernard Lewis and Leon Wieseltier vs. Edward Said and Christopher Hitchens

Although I appreciate You bringing this unique presentation of some of the most influential intellectuals on West's perspective of the Middle East in one place - but this is not debate.

They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.

The one thing they all seem to agree,
is that "the West" has no clue about the Middle East,
and the notion, that almost as if intellectually incapable.
They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.
Indeed, it was a wimpy debate.

I would love to see a real debate. Both sides at facing tables challenging each other.

I would like to see people like Susan Akram, Rashid Khalidi, Virginia Tilley, Nur Masalha, Ilan Pappe
Noura Erakat, Lamis Deek, Salma Karmi-Ayyoub,Nadia Hijab. Of course there are more but more than a half dozen or so on each side would be unworkable.

Who are some of the people you would want on your side? Just curious.
Indeed, your list of cartoon characters are included in most of your silly YouTube videos.
The question was: What Israelis can handle a debate?
Should I offer a youtube video in response to your YouTube video?
Sure, that would help. Bet you can't post one that is not a PMW or MEMRI.
Hurt feelings?
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
39,285
Reaction score
4,857
Points
1,130
RE: The Debates
SUBTOPIC: Recognition
⁜→ danielpalos, MJB12741, et al,

BLUF: Well, I'm not so sure that your assumption and "Wikipedia" information is accurate.


PREFACE: As a layman, I can see a conflict.

What is the holdup for another State in historic Palestine?
Opportunities given Opportunities rejected. Go figure Palestinian leadership.
I just read on Wikipedia that the State of Palestine is officially recognized by the UN. They merely need "free trade" agreements with their neighbors.
(REFERENCE)

◈ LEGAL MEANING OF THE “TERMINATION OF THE MANDATE”​
RESTRICTED A/AC.21/UK/42 25 February 1948 Memorandum "A"​
EXCERPT: After the 15th May, 1948, Palestine will continue to be a legal entity but it will still not be a sovereign state because it will not be immediately self-governing. The authority responsible for its administration will, however, have changed.​
◈ Issues Related to General Assembly Resolution A/RES/67/19 on the Status of Palestine​
(COMMENT)

The KEY here is that after A/RES/67/19, wherein the UN decided "to accord Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations," Palestine was identified as a State and could its authorities be identified as a government.

Under the Montevideo Convention (1933) there are criteria:

Article 1
The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications:

a) a permanent population;​
b) a defined territory;​
c) government; and​
d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.​

SO, up to the point when A/RES/67/19 was passed, Palestine was NOT recognized by the UN as a STATE. However, recognition is not required to be a state. Recognition is only required for membership in the UN. Once an entity achieves the four criteria - it is technically a state. The trouble is the matter of territory and government. Where in the territory does the Ramallah Government have full control? I consider that Area "A"...

1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
There are a wide variety of views regarding the legal status of the State of Palestine, both among the states of the international community and among legal scholars, but there is a general consensus that the State of Palestine is de jure sovereign.[1][2][3][4] It is a non-member observer state at the United Nations since November, 2012.[5][6] As of 31 July 2019, a total of 138 countries recognize it.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_the_State_of_Palestine
Is Palestine a state? It depends on who you ask.

Palestine was created as a state in 1924. There has been a lot of smoke blown at the issue but there has been nothing concrete.

So, who has the authority to dismantle a foreign state?
Odd that you repeatedly make the false claim about a Pally state created by the Treaty of Lausanne when that Treaty did no such thing.

Rather strange that you insist on inventing your own version of history. Did you know that the Treaty of Lausanne actually invented canned tuna and French bread?
 

RoccoR

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
10,624
Reaction score
2,862
Points
290
Location
Reynoldsburg, OH
RE: The Debates
SUBTOPIC: Recognition
⁜→ danielpalos, MJB12741, et al,

BLUF: At the turn into the 21st Century, it is still unclear as to what it means to be a "state" although in most cases, we can see what is not a state. No matter how you look at it, Palestine is an
abnormal class of States (AKA: "dependent States"). It does not exercise full sovereignty over all the territory it claims; but, rather a number of different external powers or forces create a condition where Palestine is dependent on them for its existence.

There are a wide variety of views regarding the legal status of the State of Palestine, both among the states of the international community and among legal scholars, but there is a general consensus that the State of Palestine is de jure sovereign.[1][2][3][4] It is a non-member observer state at the United Nations since November, 2012.[5][6] As of 31 July 2019, a total of 138 countries recognize it.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_the_State_of_Palestine
(PROVISIONAL QUESTION)

◈ When (as has been said) 139 nations recognize "Palestine," what defined territory did they recognize ?​
✦ The territory formerly subject to the Mandate for Palestine (less Jordan)​
✦ The territory formerly outlined by the 1949 Armistice Agreements​
✦ The pre-June 4th 1967 border with East Jerusalem as its Capital​
✦ Area "A" Palestinian Authority full civil and security control​

◈ When (as has been said) 139 nations recognize "Palestine," what government did they recognize ?​
✦ The Palestinian Authority (PA)​
✦ The Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS)​
✦ The Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) (Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated.) Seventh Arab League Summit Conference Rabat, Morocco 28 October 1974​
✦ PA + HAMAS​

(COMMENT)

Israel is a sovereign state having great control over Palestine (as seen by some as another state) that has limited autonomous authority. Israel originally came to control the territory known as the West Bank in the Six-Day War (1967). However, the Six-Day War is a misnomer. Forces of the Arab League were observed massing in great numbers along the 1949 Armistice Lines, taking an offensive posture. At that time, there was no Palestinian State. The West Bank became sovereign under the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan when the West Bank Palestinians were given equal representation in the newly formed Jordanian parliament. The newly formed Parliament "unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan." In the massing of hostile Arab League forces, poised to attack from every direction (creating an Article 2(4), Chapter of the UN Charter • from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence), Israel exercised a military intervention under Article 51, Chapter VII of the UN Charter (Right of Self-dense). While in hot pursuit of enemy forces, Israel became the Occupation Force which was necessary to secure the territory from the further staging of conventional forces.

Israel did not cross a State of Palestine demarcation. It crossed a Jordanian demarcation by Armistice. The Armistice, broken, Israel became the Occupation Force over Jordanian sovereign territory. In 1988 Jordan "cut all ties" (abandon) and relinquished all claims to the formerly held West Bank territory (Disengagement from the West Bank). In effect, there territory became "Terra Nullius" • whether it is inhabited by Arab Palestinians whose community is not considered to be a state. In fact, the PLO did not declare Independence for another three months and had no government formed.

I'm not sure that a competent authority has Ruled on the Issue. There are a hell'av'a some questions to be addressed, before we can understand who/what Palestine is in A/RES/67/19 Palestine non-member Observer State 4 DEC 2012.

1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
• Anne Orford, Human Rights and the Use of Force in International Law © Anne Orford 2003 Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York,
• John P. Grant and J. Craig Barker. Parry & Grant Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law / -- 3rd ed. Copyright © 2009 by Oxford University Press, pp. 597-599.
• James R. Crawford (2007), "The Creation of States in International Law"• Dependent States and Other Dependent Entities', Published to Oxford Scholarship, pp. 25-64.
 
OP
P F Tinmore

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
60,960
Reaction score
2,728
Points
1,815
RE: The Debates
SUBTOPIC: Demarcation
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: The demarcation of Israel is self-determined and in most cases under a bilateral agreement between Israel and its adjacent neighboring countries.


b) a defined territory;
And to the question you always duck.
Where is Israel's defined territory?
(DEMARCATION REFERENCES)


(COMMENT)

See Posting 631, RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
See Posting 18112 RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
See Posting # 78 RE: Israel's Lies

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States. In the case of the claims made by the Hostile Arab Palestinians, the applicable international boundaries were established at the conclusion of the 1948 War for Independence. These boundaries were outlined in the two Treaties Israel has with Egypt and Jordan (supra).​
Article 11. Means of expressing consent to be bound by a treatyPg 39 International Law Handbook © United Nations, 2017
The consent of a State to be bound by a treaty may be expressed by signature, exchange of instruments constituting a treaty, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, or by any other means if so agreed.​
Article 11. Boundary regimes, Law of TreatiesPg 60 International Law Handbook © United Nations, 2017
A succession of States does not as such affect:​
(a) a boundary established by a treaty; or​
(b) obligations and rights established by a treaty and relating to the regime of a boundary.​

(Ω)


You make this point • "And to the question, you always duck" • regularly. And each time I respond. What is it that you think I "duck?"

1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
Like Israel's violation of Palestine's international boundaries in 1948.
 
OP
P F Tinmore

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
60,960
Reaction score
2,728
Points
1,815
RE: The Debates
SUBTOPIC: Demarcation
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: The demarcation of Israel is self-determined and in most cases under a bilateral agreement between Israel and its adjacent neighboring countries.


b) a defined territory;
And to the question you always duck.
Where is Israel's defined territory?
(DEMARCATION REFERENCES)


(COMMENT)

See Posting 631, RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
See Posting 18112 RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
See Posting # 78 RE: Israel's Lies

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States. In the case of the claims made by the Hostile Arab Palestinians, the applicable international boundaries were established at the conclusion of the 1948 War for Independence. These boundaries were outlined in the two Treaties Israel has with Egypt and Jordan (supra).​
Article 11. Means of expressing consent to be bound by a treatyPg 39 International Law Handbook © United Nations, 2017
The consent of a State to be bound by a treaty may be expressed by signature, exchange of instruments constituting a treaty, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, or by any other means if so agreed.​
Article 11. Boundary regimes, Law of TreatiesPg 60 International Law Handbook © United Nations, 2017
A succession of States does not as such affect:​
(a) a boundary established by a treaty; or​
(b) obligations and rights established by a treaty and relating to the regime of a boundary.​

(Ω)


You make this point • "And to the question, you always duck" • regularly. And each time I respond. What is it that you think I "duck?"

1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
the 1948 War for Independence
Independent from what?
 

RoccoR

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
10,624
Reaction score
2,862
Points
290
Location
Reynoldsburg, OH
RE: The Debates
SUBTOPIC: Demarcation
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: There was no violation of any boundaries after the Armistice of Mudros and prior to the Arab League invasions.


Like Israel's violation of Palestine's international boundaries in 1948.
(COMMENT)

Israel was not in violation of any Palestinian International Boundaries. There was no such thing. There were boundaries that were used by the Allied Powers to mark-off the Territories to which the Mandates applied. Those were international demarcations established between the Allied Powers and not the Arab Palestinians.

1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
 
OP
P F Tinmore

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
60,960
Reaction score
2,728
Points
1,815
✦ The territory formerly subject to the Mandate for Palestine (less Jordan)
That is the territory inside Palestine's international borders. However, nobody ever told anybody that Palestine has international borders. It was a lie by omission.
 

rylah

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
13,620
Reaction score
2,688
Points
290
Bernard Lewis and Leon Wieseltier vs. Edward Said and Christopher Hitchens

Although I appreciate You bringing this unique presentation of some of the most influential intellectuals on West's perspective of the Middle East in one place - but this is not debate.

They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.

The one thing they all seem to agree,
is that "the West" has no clue about the Middle East,
and the notion, that almost as if intellectually incapable.
They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.
Indeed, it was a wimpy debate.

I would love to see a real debate. Both sides at facing tables challenging each other.

I would like to see people like Susan Akram, Rashid Khalidi, Virginia Tilley, Nur Masalha, Ilan Pappe
Noura Erakat, Lamis Deek, Salma Karmi-Ayyoub,Nadia Hijab. Of course there are more but more than a half dozen or so on each side would be unworkable.

Who are some of the people you would want on your side? Just curious.
Indeed, your list of cartoon characters are included in most of your silly YouTube videos.
The question was: What Israelis can handle a debate?
Should I offer a youtube video in response to your YouTube video?
Sure, that would help. Bet you can't post one that is not a PMW or MEMRI.
What is there worth debating??? As a country Israel IS & Palestine IS NOT. And as long as Palestinian leadership punishes the Palestinian citizens by not joining with other Arab nations to recognize Israel & work with Israel for a lasting peace that will not change. So, again I ask --- what is there worth debating???
Look we can analyze it from different perspectives.
Tinmore most probably wouldn't post if he didn't believe BDS members won the debate.
And I think it is pretty apparent there was only one side totally open and non-manipulative.
In short, their target audience is way larger than those they think are influenced by this.

2 BDS members think they've 'proven this Israeli' for all to see, that their movement can be absolved of being held accountable for racism or double standards against Israel...and of course for that they have to start at the point of rejecting the words of its formal founder, and the views held by many , if not most members - on an Israeli channel.

See the irony?
 
Last edited:
OP
P F Tinmore

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
60,960
Reaction score
2,728
Points
1,815
Bernard Lewis and Leon Wieseltier vs. Edward Said and Christopher Hitchens

Although I appreciate You bringing this unique presentation of some of the most influential intellectuals on West's perspective of the Middle East in one place - but this is not debate.

They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.

The one thing they all seem to agree,
is that "the West" has no clue about the Middle East,
and the notion, that almost as if intellectually incapable.
They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.
Indeed, it was a wimpy debate.

I would love to see a real debate. Both sides at facing tables challenging each other.

I would like to see people like Susan Akram, Rashid Khalidi, Virginia Tilley, Nur Masalha, Ilan Pappe
Noura Erakat, Lamis Deek, Salma Karmi-Ayyoub,Nadia Hijab. Of course there are more but more than a half dozen or so on each side would be unworkable.

Who are some of the people you would want on your side? Just curious.
Indeed, your list of cartoon characters are included in most of your silly YouTube videos.
The question was: What Israelis can handle a debate?
Should I offer a youtube video in response to your YouTube video?
Sure, that would help. Bet you can't post one that is not a PMW or MEMRI.
What is there worth debating??? As a country Israel IS & Palestine IS NOT. And as long as Palestinian leadership punishes the Palestinian citizens by not joining with other Arab nations to recognize Israel & work with Israel for a lasting peace that will not change. So, again I ask --- what is there worth debating???
Look we can analyze it from different perspectives.
Tinmore most probably wouldn't post if he didn't believe BDS members won the debate.
And I think it is pretty apparent there was only one side totally open and non-manipulative.
In short, their target audience is way larger than those they think are influenced by this.

2 BDS members think they've 'proven this Israeli' for all to see, that their movement can be absolved of being held accountable for racism or double standards against Israel...and of course for that they have to start at the point of rejecting the words of its formal founder, and the views held by many , if not most members - on an Israeli channel.

See the irony?
A couple basic facts will tell you almost everything you need to know about the creation of Israel.

The Zionists needed a lot of land. After purchasing as much as they could for 50 years, they only owned about 6% of Palestine.

What were their options?

They wanted an 80% majority Jewish population to create a democratic state. After 50 years of scouring the world for as many Jews as they could find, they still were a 1/3 minority.

What were their options?

Two simple questions.
 

rylah

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
13,620
Reaction score
2,688
Points
290
Bernard Lewis and Leon Wieseltier vs. Edward Said and Christopher Hitchens

Although I appreciate You bringing this unique presentation of some of the most influential intellectuals on West's perspective of the Middle East in one place - but this is not debate.

They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.

The one thing they all seem to agree,
is that "the West" has no clue about the Middle East,
and the notion, that almost as if intellectually incapable.
They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.
Indeed, it was a wimpy debate.

I would love to see a real debate. Both sides at facing tables challenging each other.

I would like to see people like Susan Akram, Rashid Khalidi, Virginia Tilley, Nur Masalha, Ilan Pappe
Noura Erakat, Lamis Deek, Salma Karmi-Ayyoub,Nadia Hijab. Of course there are more but more than a half dozen or so on each side would be unworkable.

Who are some of the people you would want on your side? Just curious.
Indeed, your list of cartoon characters are included in most of your silly YouTube videos.
The question was: What Israelis can handle a debate?
Should I offer a youtube video in response to your YouTube video?
Sure, that would help. Bet you can't post one that is not a PMW or MEMRI.
What is there worth debating??? As a country Israel IS & Palestine IS NOT. And as long as Palestinian leadership punishes the Palestinian citizens by not joining with other Arab nations to recognize Israel & work with Israel for a lasting peace that will not change. So, again I ask --- what is there worth debating???
Look we can analyze it from different perspectives.
Tinmore most probably wouldn't post if he didn't believe BDS members won the debate.
And I think it is pretty apparent there was only one side totally open and non-manipulative.
In short, their target audience is way larger than those they think are influenced by this.

2 BDS members think they've 'proven this Israeli' for all to see, that their movement can be absolved of being held accountable for racism or double standards against Israel...and of course for that they have to start at the point of rejecting the words of its formal founder, and the views held by many , if not most members - on an Israeli channel.

See the irony?
A couple basic facts will tell you almost everything you need to know about the creation of Israel.

The Zionists needed a lot of land. After purchasing as much as they could for 50 years, they only owned about 6% of Palestine.

What were their options?

They wanted an 80% majority Jewish population to create a democratic state. After 50 years of scouring the world for as many Jews as they could find, they still were a 1/3 minority.

What were their options?

Two simple questions.
Well, this is your narrative and you reject anything beyond by default.
But why pretend you're interested in anything, when you're not even addressing anything in the conversation in response to the video you've just posted.

And the apparent controversy - a diehard BDS-hole (you), posts a link to 2 BDS members appearing on one of the most famous Israeli channels, speaking their mind,
Israelis let them go 2 against 1 and even moderate...

....only now realizes what he sees :auiqs.jpg:
 
Last edited:
OP
P F Tinmore

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
60,960
Reaction score
2,728
Points
1,815
Bernard Lewis and Leon Wieseltier vs. Edward Said and Christopher Hitchens

Although I appreciate You bringing this unique presentation of some of the most influential intellectuals on West's perspective of the Middle East in one place - but this is not debate.

They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.

The one thing they all seem to agree,
is that "the West" has no clue about the Middle East,
and the notion, that almost as if intellectually incapable.
They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.
Indeed, it was a wimpy debate.

I would love to see a real debate. Both sides at facing tables challenging each other.

I would like to see people like Susan Akram, Rashid Khalidi, Virginia Tilley, Nur Masalha, Ilan Pappe
Noura Erakat, Lamis Deek, Salma Karmi-Ayyoub,Nadia Hijab. Of course there are more but more than a half dozen or so on each side would be unworkable.

Who are some of the people you would want on your side? Just curious.
Indeed, your list of cartoon characters are included in most of your silly YouTube videos.
The question was: What Israelis can handle a debate?
Should I offer a youtube video in response to your YouTube video?
Sure, that would help. Bet you can't post one that is not a PMW or MEMRI.
What is there worth debating??? As a country Israel IS & Palestine IS NOT. And as long as Palestinian leadership punishes the Palestinian citizens by not joining with other Arab nations to recognize Israel & work with Israel for a lasting peace that will not change. So, again I ask --- what is there worth debating???
Look we can analyze it from different perspectives.
Tinmore most probably wouldn't post if he didn't believe BDS members won the debate.
And I think it is pretty apparent there was only one side totally open and non-manipulative.
In short, their target audience is way larger than those they think are influenced by this.

2 BDS members think they've 'proven this Israeli' for all to see, that their movement can be absolved of being held accountable for racism or double standards against Israel...and of course for that they have to start at the point of rejecting the words of its formal founder, and the views held by many , if not most members - on an Israeli channel.

See the irony?
A couple basic facts will tell you almost everything you need to know about the creation of Israel.

The Zionists needed a lot of land. After purchasing as much as they could for 50 years, they only owned about 6% of Palestine.

What were their options?

They wanted an 80% majority Jewish population to create a democratic state. After 50 years of scouring the world for as many Jews as they could find, they still were a 1/3 minority.

What were their options?

Two simple questions.
Well, this is your narrative and you reject anything beyond by default.
But why pretend you're interested in anything, when you're not even addressing anything in the conversation in response to the video you've just posted.

And the apparent controversy - a diehard BDS-hole (you), posts a link to 2 BDS members appearing on one of the most famous Israeli channels, speaking their mind,
Israelis let them go 2 against 1 and even moderate...

....only now realizes what he sees :auiqs.jpg:
You ducked my last 2 questions. You also ducked me previous question.

Do they teach ducking in Hebrew school?
 

rylah

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
13,620
Reaction score
2,688
Points
290
Bernard Lewis and Leon Wieseltier vs. Edward Said and Christopher Hitchens

Although I appreciate You bringing this unique presentation of some of the most influential intellectuals on West's perspective of the Middle East in one place - but this is not debate.

They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.

The one thing they all seem to agree,
is that "the West" has no clue about the Middle East,
and the notion, that almost as if intellectually incapable.
They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.
Indeed, it was a wimpy debate.

I would love to see a real debate. Both sides at facing tables challenging each other.

I would like to see people like Susan Akram, Rashid Khalidi, Virginia Tilley, Nur Masalha, Ilan Pappe
Noura Erakat, Lamis Deek, Salma Karmi-Ayyoub,Nadia Hijab. Of course there are more but more than a half dozen or so on each side would be unworkable.

Who are some of the people you would want on your side? Just curious.
Indeed, your list of cartoon characters are included in most of your silly YouTube videos.
The question was: What Israelis can handle a debate?
Should I offer a youtube video in response to your YouTube video?
Sure, that would help. Bet you can't post one that is not a PMW or MEMRI.
What is there worth debating??? As a country Israel IS & Palestine IS NOT. And as long as Palestinian leadership punishes the Palestinian citizens by not joining with other Arab nations to recognize Israel & work with Israel for a lasting peace that will not change. So, again I ask --- what is there worth debating???
Look we can analyze it from different perspectives.
Tinmore most probably wouldn't post if he didn't believe BDS members won the debate.
And I think it is pretty apparent there was only one side totally open and non-manipulative.
In short, their target audience is way larger than those they think are influenced by this.

2 BDS members think they've 'proven this Israeli' for all to see, that their movement can be absolved of being held accountable for racism or double standards against Israel...and of course for that they have to start at the point of rejecting the words of its formal founder, and the views held by many , if not most members - on an Israeli channel.

See the irony?
A couple basic facts will tell you almost everything you need to know about the creation of Israel.

The Zionists needed a lot of land. After purchasing as much as they could for 50 years, they only owned about 6% of Palestine.

What were their options?

They wanted an 80% majority Jewish population to create a democratic state. After 50 years of scouring the world for as many Jews as they could find, they still were a 1/3 minority.

What were their options?

Two simple questions.
Well, this is your narrative and you reject anything beyond by default.
But why pretend you're interested in anything, when you're not even addressing anything in the conversation in response to the video you've just posted.

And the apparent controversy - a diehard BDS-hole (you), posts a link to 2 BDS members appearing on one of the most famous Israeli channels, speaking their mind,
Israelis let them go 2 against 1 and even moderate...

....only now realizes what he sees :auiqs.jpg:
You ducked my last 2 questions. You also ducked me previous question.

Do they teach ducking in Hebrew school?
No, in Hebrew school they teach that straw man fallacies,
reveals the opponents inability to directly address the opposing argument.

That's why your didn't actually address a thing I've said in response to your video.

You're really pathetic, but let's see again - I dare you, open a thread on this specific question, and look how you will be proven to lie knowingly before the end of 2nd page...
 
Last edited:

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
39,285
Reaction score
4,857
Points
1,130
The Zionists needed a lot of land. After purchasing as much as they could for 50 years, they only owned about 6% of Palestine.
Wait, what? What happened to your "stolen land" conspiracy theory?



They wanted an 80% majority Jewish population to create a democratic state. After 50 years of scouring the world for as many Jews as they could find, they still were a 1/3 minority
Jews are a minority in Israel?

Your conspiracy theories are a hoot.
 
OP
P F Tinmore

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
60,960
Reaction score
2,728
Points
1,815
Bernard Lewis and Leon Wieseltier vs. Edward Said and Christopher Hitchens

Although I appreciate You bringing this unique presentation of some of the most influential intellectuals on West's perspective of the Middle East in one place - but this is not debate.

They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.

The one thing they all seem to agree,
is that "the West" has no clue about the Middle East,
and the notion, that almost as if intellectually incapable.
They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.
Indeed, it was a wimpy debate.

I would love to see a real debate. Both sides at facing tables challenging each other.

I would like to see people like Susan Akram, Rashid Khalidi, Virginia Tilley, Nur Masalha, Ilan Pappe
Noura Erakat, Lamis Deek, Salma Karmi-Ayyoub,Nadia Hijab. Of course there are more but more than a half dozen or so on each side would be unworkable.

Who are some of the people you would want on your side? Just curious.
Indeed, your list of cartoon characters are included in most of your silly YouTube videos.
The question was: What Israelis can handle a debate?
Should I offer a youtube video in response to your YouTube video?
Sure, that would help. Bet you can't post one that is not a PMW or MEMRI.
What is there worth debating??? As a country Israel IS & Palestine IS NOT. And as long as Palestinian leadership punishes the Palestinian citizens by not joining with other Arab nations to recognize Israel & work with Israel for a lasting peace that will not change. So, again I ask --- what is there worth debating???
Look we can analyze it from different perspectives.
Tinmore most probably wouldn't post if he didn't believe BDS members won the debate.
And I think it is pretty apparent there was only one side totally open and non-manipulative.
In short, their target audience is way larger than those they think are influenced by this.

2 BDS members think they've 'proven this Israeli' for all to see, that their movement can be absolved of being held accountable for racism or double standards against Israel...and of course for that they have to start at the point of rejecting the words of its formal founder, and the views held by many , if not most members - on an Israeli channel.

See the irony?
A couple basic facts will tell you almost everything you need to know about the creation of Israel.

The Zionists needed a lot of land. After purchasing as much as they could for 50 years, they only owned about 6% of Palestine.

What were their options?

They wanted an 80% majority Jewish population to create a democratic state. After 50 years of scouring the world for as many Jews as they could find, they still were a 1/3 minority.

What were their options?

Two simple questions.
Well, this is your narrative and you reject anything beyond by default.
But why pretend you're interested in anything, when you're not even addressing anything in the conversation in response to the video you've just posted.

And the apparent controversy - a diehard BDS-hole (you), posts a link to 2 BDS members appearing on one of the most famous Israeli channels, speaking their mind,
Israelis let them go 2 against 1 and even moderate...

....only now realizes what he sees :auiqs.jpg:
You ducked my last 2 questions. You also ducked me previous question.

Do they teach ducking in Hebrew school?
No, in Hebrew school they teach that straw man fallacies,
reveals the opponents inability to directly address the opposing argument.

That's why your didn't actually address a thing I've said in response to your video.

You're really pathetic, but let's see again - I dare you, open a thread on this specific question, and look how you will be proven to lie knowingly before the end of 2nd page...
So, what straw man are you talking about?
 

rylah

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
13,620
Reaction score
2,688
Points
290
Bernard Lewis and Leon Wieseltier vs. Edward Said and Christopher Hitchens

Although I appreciate You bringing this unique presentation of some of the most influential intellectuals on West's perspective of the Middle East in one place - but this is not debate.

They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.

The one thing they all seem to agree,
is that "the West" has no clue about the Middle East,
and the notion, that almost as if intellectually incapable.
They only present their subjective perspective on the situation,
without arguing anything specific.
Indeed, it was a wimpy debate.

I would love to see a real debate. Both sides at facing tables challenging each other.

I would like to see people like Susan Akram, Rashid Khalidi, Virginia Tilley, Nur Masalha, Ilan Pappe
Noura Erakat, Lamis Deek, Salma Karmi-Ayyoub,Nadia Hijab. Of course there are more but more than a half dozen or so on each side would be unworkable.

Who are some of the people you would want on your side? Just curious.
Indeed, your list of cartoon characters are included in most of your silly YouTube videos.
The question was: What Israelis can handle a debate?
Should I offer a youtube video in response to your YouTube video?
Sure, that would help. Bet you can't post one that is not a PMW or MEMRI.
What is there worth debating??? As a country Israel IS & Palestine IS NOT. And as long as Palestinian leadership punishes the Palestinian citizens by not joining with other Arab nations to recognize Israel & work with Israel for a lasting peace that will not change. So, again I ask --- what is there worth debating???
Look we can analyze it from different perspectives.
Tinmore most probably wouldn't post if he didn't believe BDS members won the debate.
And I think it is pretty apparent there was only one side totally open and non-manipulative.
In short, their target audience is way larger than those they think are influenced by this.

2 BDS members think they've 'proven this Israeli' for all to see, that their movement can be absolved of being held accountable for racism or double standards against Israel...and of course for that they have to start at the point of rejecting the words of its formal founder, and the views held by many , if not most members - on an Israeli channel.

See the irony?
A couple basic facts will tell you almost everything you need to know about the creation of Israel.

The Zionists needed a lot of land. After purchasing as much as they could for 50 years, they only owned about 6% of Palestine.

What were their options?

They wanted an 80% majority Jewish population to create a democratic state. After 50 years of scouring the world for as many Jews as they could find, they still were a 1/3 minority.

What were their options?

Two simple questions.
Well, this is your narrative and you reject anything beyond by default.
But why pretend you're interested in anything, when you're not even addressing anything in the conversation in response to the video you've just posted.

And the apparent controversy - a diehard BDS-hole (you), posts a link to 2 BDS members appearing on one of the most famous Israeli channels, speaking their mind,
Israelis let them go 2 against 1 and even moderate...

....only now realizes what he sees :auiqs.jpg:
You ducked my last 2 questions. You also ducked me previous question.

Do they teach ducking in Hebrew school?
No, in Hebrew school they teach that straw man fallacies,
reveals the opponents inability to directly address the opposing argument.

That's why your didn't actually address a thing I've said in response to your video.

You're really pathetic, but let's see again - I dare you, open a thread on this specific question, and look how you will be proven to lie knowingly before the end of 2nd page...
So, what straw man are you talking about?
Nothing special, a random red herring wrapped in circular argumentation,
which you're not up to challenge to defend in its own thread.

Which begs the question - if this desperate evasion
of what I've just said in post #310, confirms the exact weakness in your position?
 
Last edited:
OP
P F Tinmore

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
60,960
Reaction score
2,728
Points
1,815
Israel Engage Debate: Dr. Jeff Halper vs Rabbi Dov Lipman

 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top