|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 8:29 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| The influence of the Bavarian Illuminati on the Revolution through its proxy Freemasonry is fairly well documented, as is the importance of Jewish mysticism in these orders. |
I'm pretty sure the French Revolution would have happened, and gone much the same way that it did, with or without the influence of Jewish-inspired Freemasonry. It's not as if the ancien regime was just going along swimmingly, and then suddenly out-of-the-blue these Freemasons came along and put ideas in everyone's head about the need to overthrow things. At most, Masonic lodges provided a safe-house for bourgeois-liberal ideas that would have found some outlet in any event.
Last edited by On the other hand on Tue Jun 08, 2010 8:35 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wintermute
Joined: 01 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| wintermute wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| [quo .38 special and TUM are complete apologists . |
I'm merely presenting the other side as some people in this thread are putting all the blame on Israel. BTW do you have an actual argument or nothing but name-calling? |
Are you representing your own opinions or being the devil's advocate, by "presenting the other side"?
By the way, I'm comfortable with "accepts anything Israel says without question" as a useful definition of "Israeli apologist". And specifically I'm thinking of the video evidence with the IMPLIED AND UNPROVEN Israeli claim that NO SHOOTING TOOK PLACE BEFORE THE FILM WAS TAKEN.
You base your entire justification on that assumption. You are unable to even say "it was a difficult situation, which maybe they could have handled better". That is what makes you an apologist.
. |
Only you are wrong. On Page 2 I said that it was "regrettable" that people were killed. I would have used a stronger word like "murder" only I don't think it's murder if you attack a man with a knife and he shoots you. In other words it's "regrettable" how it was handled, but once the soldiers hit that deck, they were justified in defending themselves.
Like the war in Afghanistan...I support it, but I think it could have been implemented much better without a lot of needless suffering that went on.
On page 16 I said in response to Mr. Leon "Certainly killing civilians is wrong whether it is done by the Israeli government, Hamas or Hezbollah."
Here I clearly condemned the murder of civilians regardless of who committed said murder...even the Israeli government.
(bolding mine for easier comprehension since you appear to have missed it the first time around) |
Ok, fair enough. I don't mind dropping pointless labels.
I do want to talk about your use of the video as justification of your argument.
My current opinions:
1. We don't know for sure what happened yet. -
2. Currently Israel can be assumed to be engaging in an all-out PR effort to defuse the situation and buy time.
3. The video proves nothing... yet. Lets investigate the events that preceded it.
4. The weapon photos do not support the Israeli claims intent to attack. No AKs, no explosives, no pistols. just a couple of slingshots and folding knives that some dickheads brought on board against the organisers' wishes.
5. Either Israels bungled badly or killed intentionally. In both cases they should be held accountable.
- I'd be happy to change my mind if it turns out my assumptions are wrong
- I'm not saying the flotilla didn't intentionally put Israel in a difficult position I think it did, but for the majority of participants it was an act of conscience, of passive resistance. I'm sure it was also exploited for other reasons, too, but armed incursion or attack was not one of them. Passive-aggressive resistance, at worst. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 8:52 pm Post subject: Edited to add missing link to Spengler article |
|
|
Here's the oft-advocate of America invading Iran saying that Israel's reaction was a screw-up:
| Daniel Goldman wrote: |
Israel mishandled the Gaza "humanitarian aid" flotilla through extreme forbearance, and will suffer a marathon of tongue-clicking and hand-wringing by diplomatic hypocrites who know better. The Jewish state lost the propaganda battle the moment the floating time bomb disguised as a humanitarian mission sailed from Turkey. If Israel had denounced the matter as a provocation and withdrawn its ambassador from Turkey, warning that the object of the exercise was to provoke violence and open the way for weapons deliveries to Hamas, the outcome might have been quite different. |
Yes, the outcome would have been quite different, there wouldn't be 10 martyrs. The Israeli reaction was foolish. They could have accomplished their aims through diplomatic channels.
| Quote: |
The international press persist in describing the flotilla as a humanitarian aid convey rather than as a transparent provocation by terrorist organizations, and the governments of the world will click their tongues hypocritically over the Israeli action.
There is a curious symmetry between Israel's reluctance to call out the Turks for their sponsorship of the provocation, and the seemingly explicable reluctance of the Israeli military to treat the threat with the seriousness it clearly deserved. The Israeli navy commandos walked into a trap for which they clearly were unprepared. |
Even a columnist who views the flotilla as 'a transparent provocation by terrorist organizations' criticizes the Israeli reaction as unserious.
Meanwhile, most Israelis have lost all perspective.
| Quote: |
Eighty five percent (85%) of the respondents indicated that Israel either did not use enough force (39%) or the right amount of force (46%) regarding the recent ship boarding incident. Only eight percent (8%) of respondents felt that Israel used too much force. Sixty one percent (61%) felt that Israel should not adjust its tactics to elicit a more favorable international reaction. Seventy three percent (73%) of those polled indicated that Israel should not open up Gaza to international humanitarian shipments.
A majority, fifty nine percent (59%) responded that they definitely should not open Gaza to international humanitarian shipments. A majority of those polled, fifty six percent (56%) indicated that Israel should not agree to an international inquiry committee to investigate the incident.
Seventy one percent (71%) disliked U.S. President Barack Obama with forty seven percent (47%) expressing a strong dislike. In all, sixty three percent (63%) of those polled were dissatisfied with the American government's reaction to the incident. |
My feelings are growing increasingly closer to the sentiment, "Well, frak the ingrates."
Last edited by The Happy Warrior on Tue Jun 08, 2010 9:36 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Eighty five percent (85%) of the respondents indicated that Israel either did not use enough force (39%) or the right amount of force (46%) |
| Quote: |
| My feelings are growing increasingly closer to the sentiment, "Well, frak the ingrates." |
Yeah, me too. They've been having big rallys in front of the Turkish embassy in Israel too. Check out the youtube vids. Try and make it through the interviews.
Now, why would Spengler (Daniel Goldman) want America to attack Iran? Sure is a pickle. Will he be sending his boy over like Palin did?
Speaking of Palin:
| Quote: |
The Netanyahu government is filled with Americans. The prime minister himself attended high school in the Philadelphia suburbs. Ron Dermer, one of his closest advisors, was born in Miami Beach. His ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, hails from New Jersey. In addition, prominent Americans like Abrams regularly appear in the U.S. media to echo the Netanyahu line. But paradoxically, this familiarity breeds overconfidence and ignorance. When Netanyahu travels to Washington, he speaks before Jewish audiences that mostly dislike Barack Obama�s Israel policy, even though according to a recent American Jewish Committee survey, American Jews overall support it by a margin of close to two to one. When he�s not speaking to right-wing Jews, he�s speaking to right-wing Christians. And when he�s not speaking to right-wing Christians, he�s speaking to former Bush administration officials who expect to soon be back in their old jobs.
As an Obama official once told me about the Netanyahu team, with amazement, �these guys are actually waiting for President Palin.� |
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-06-07/israels-gaza-blockade-crisis-shows-its-out-of-touch-with-america/
How about that! Imagine the outcome.. Netanyahu and Palin, as one. Together on the world stage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="The Happy Warrior"]Here's the oft-advocate of America invading Iran saying that Israel's reaction was a screw-up:
| Daniel Goldman wrote: |
Israel mishandled the Gaza "humanitarian aid" flotilla through extreme forbearance, and will suffer a marathon of tongue-clicking and hand-wringing by diplomatic hypocrites who know better. |
You don't say... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Demographics in Jewish America are changing. The Liberal Jews no longer hold the Israeli double-standard, but the Orthodox Jews are breeding more rapidly. Andrew Sullivan's Israeli Derangement Syndrome is representative of the cohort he hangs around with, the older cohort, not the cohort I hang with.
Here's a relevent selection from a Beinart masterpiece.
| Beinart wrote: |
In the American Jewish establishment today, the language of liberal Zionism�with its idioms of human rights, equal citizenship, and territorial compromise�has been drained of meaning. It remains the lingua franca in part for generational reasons, because many older American Zionists still see themselves as liberals of a sort. They vote Democratic; they are unmoved by biblical claims to the West Bank; they see average Palestinians as decent people betrayed by bad leaders; and they are secular. They don�t want Jewish organizations to criticize Israel from the left, but neither do they want them to be agents of the Israeli right.
These American Zionists are largely the product of a particular era. Many were shaped by the terrifying days leading up to the Six-Day War, when it appeared that Israel might be overrun, and by the bitter aftermath of the Yom Kippur War, when much of the world seemed to turn against the Jewish state. In that crucible, Israel became their Jewish identity, often in conjunction with the Holocaust, which the 1967 and 1973 wars helped make central to American Jewish life. These Jews embraced Zionism before the settler movement became a major force in Israeli politics, before the 1982 Lebanon war, before the first intifada. They fell in love with an Israel that was more secular, less divided, and less shaped by the culture, politics, and theology of occupation. And by downplaying the significance of Avigdor Lieberman, the settlers, and Shas, American Jewish groups allow these older Zionists to continue to identify with that more internally cohesive, more innocent Israel of their youth, an Israel that now only exists in their memories.
But these secular Zionists aren�t reproducing themselves. Their children have no memory of Arab armies massed on Israel�s border and of Israel surviving in part thanks to urgent military assistance from the United States. Instead, they have grown up viewing Israel as a regional hegemon and an occupying power. As a result, they are more conscious than their parents of the degree to which Israeli behavior violates liberal ideals, and less willing to grant Israel an exemption because its survival seems in peril. Because they have inherited their parents� liberalism, they cannot embrace their uncritical Zionism. Because their liberalism is real, they can see that the liberalism of the American Jewish establishment is fake.
To sustain their uncritical brand of Zionism, therefore, America�s Jewish organizations will need to look elsewhere to replenish their ranks. They will need to find young American Jews who have come of age during the West Bank occupation but are not troubled by it. And those young American Jews will come disproportionately from the Orthodox world. |
But as the American Jews grow more polarized, Israel's youth gets more extremist, as the poll Sully posted, and I re-posted here, confirms. For what its worth, I think the history matters. I became pro-Israel from reading accounts of the 1967 and 1973 wars. Even during the '06 summer war, it was clear to me that Iran was trying to breathe new life into a Hezbollah threatened by Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon. But the recent Israeli incident, combined with needless violent clashes in the West Bank (forget Gaza for a minute), is making me sour on my own commitment to Israel. (Of course, I'm not Jewish). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The influence of the Bavarian Illuminati on the Revolution through its proxy Freemasonry is fairly well documented, as is the importance of Jewish mysticism in these orders. |
I'm pretty sure the French Revolution would have happened, and gone much the same way that it did, with or without the influence of Jewish-inspired Freemasonry. It's not as if the ancien regime was just going along swimmingly, and then suddenly out-of-the-blue these Freemasons came along and put ideas in everyone's head about the need to overthrow things. At most, Masonic lodges provided a safe-house for bourgeois-liberal ideas that would have found some outlet in any event. |
How are you "pretty sure" about that? Do you think the Reign of Terror was organized by a few angry peasants with pitchforks? Not a chance. The Jacobins were linked directly to Freemasonry and the Illuminati (starting with Mirabeau, Duport and others), were organized along the same lines, and even practiced many of the exact same rituals. The conspiracy to overthrow society went back long before the storming of the Bastille and it attracted involvement from many of the most powerful people in Europe. This has been documented at length. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The conspiracy to overthrow society went back long before the storming of the Bastille and it attracted involvement from many of the most powerful people in Europe. |
So, it's your contention that the perpetual continuation of the ancien regime would have been a viable prospect, except that a few powerful guys, with no support from anyone else in society, formed a secret cabal to bring it down? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
No AKs, no explosives, no pistols. just a couple of slingshots and folding knives that some dickheads brought on board against the organisers' wishes.
|
I don't have a bone in this fight, but I would really like to say something about this issue.
In my country, a black belt in a Martial arts is considered a deadly weapon. If they injure or kill some one, they will be charged.
Knives and heavy objects are not considered weapons by peace activist standards. Thats B/S and they and you know it.
A special forces soldier is trained to ppull a pistol and put 2 shots into a target in 3 seconds. Its one of the reasons, I don't believe the police should ever be trained to that level, as it takes a few minutes for a civilian to ever know whats being yelled at them.
4 bullets in a head only tells me 2 people shot at the individual, not that he was ended on the ground, as most commentators want the reader to believe.
I think they had serious control actually. If I had been attacked from the minute I hit the deck, saw three of my friends dragged away to 'who knows what' and was unsure of who was an enemy.
I would personally said 'F'mm, kill them all, let God sort it out'. Only 9 died is quite a mild reaction really. Special forces are trained to kill, not to discuss politics over a cup of tea.
Really, I do wonder more about the ability of the Israeli SF to win a fight now, then I do about the damage. But thats probably because I don't care about the issue really. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Summer Wine wrote: |
| Only 9 died is quite a mild reaction really. Special forces are trained to kill, not to discuss politics over a cup of tea. |
I don't think this is a reasonable reaction. People needlessly died. Whether one supports Israel, opposes Israel, or is indifferent to Israel, I think we should all be united in saying this was totally unacceptable. As you pointed out, these men were professionals. Part of being a professional is control. They initiated this situation by boarding the vessel, they're the ones with professional training in combat. Even a single civilian casualty is unacceptable given that combination of circumstances. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Actually Fox, they were in control.
If you read between the lines you have to accept that either the Israelis shot first and still the turks had the opportunity under a hail of bullets to grab 3 israeli soldiers and drag them down a flight of stairs into a room.
(most would consider them soldiers as most civi's (I include myself as one) would not do so well under a hail of gun fire.
Secondly, the soldiers who obviously did the killings, were the ones who arrived after the hail of gun fire as it suppressed the attack against those who dropped onto the deck by helicopter and allowed them to regroup.
If you tske the argument that all the new soldiers knew is that thier friends and weapons had been taken away and who knows what done to them. (2 Israeli soldiers were thrown from a building and then desecrated in the past) then you might act to make sure they weren't killed.
I am looking at this issue from my own countries perspective, if you did the same thing to my countries SF or police and you didn't die then I would say they were restrained.
This isn't an Israeli issue, its a SF issue or a human rights issue.
But I am not making an issue of it as a Jewish or Israeli issue. Rather, if th Egyptians, Syrians, Iranians had experienced a similar issue, what is the result do you think?
I have read many books over the years, in one book I read an ex SAS made the point that the media response against the Iran Embassy siege and the terrorist who made it out alive was so negative.
That the next hostage situation that the SAS dealt with was ended by them making sure that none of the kidnappers walked out of the building. If that is truly how they dealt with the issue, then you must say the Israelis were still pretty much in control.
Last edited by Summer Wine on Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:33 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Summer Wine wrote: |
| Actually Fox, they were in control. |
Then they willingly chose to needlessly kill a number of civilians, making them murderers. That's horrific.
| Summer Wine wrote: |
| But I am not making an issue of it as a Jewish or Israeli issue. Rather, if th Egyptians, Syrians, Iranians had experienced a similar issue, what is the result do you think? |
I think soldiers from any country would have behaved similarly. This is why I oppose militaries so feverently; they are evil institutions that causes endless devestation -- both economic and humanitarian -- merely by existing, and whose only justification is that other militaries also exist.
Militaries busting onto civilian vessels and killing people is not acceptable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I think soldiers from any country would have behaved similarly |
Ok, so we agree.
Look, I want to say that there should be no armies but I also grew up never knowing my Grandfather and knowing his best mate died 2 weeks before the war against Germany ended.
If my GF hadn't gone to war, if the US hadn't sent troops to my country to defend it, then I wouldn't be here.
I have to accept that the military does have its uses or do you want to be drafted every time, your country is attacked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Summer Wine wrote: |
| I have to accept that the military does have its uses ... |
Yeah, defending against other militaries. It's a totally self-reinforcing evil.
| Summer Wine wrote: |
| ... or do you want to be drafted every time, your country is attacked. |
Attacked by who? Canadian barbarians? Mexican legions? I'm not too worried about it.
In all seriousness, though, I've gone on about my anti-military sentiments sufficiently at length in the past. Best to keep this thread focused on this particular event and the political environment around it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| In all seriousness, though, I've gone on about my anti-military sentiments sufficiently at length in the past. Best to keep this thread focused on this particular event and the political environment around it. |
Fair enough.
Do we both accept that as a means of blockading a vessel, it was *beep* up?
If it was illegal according to the activists? thats it not true, they did follow international law in checking and stopping the vessel.
That it was an attack against Turkey? No, only if turkey considers an attack against its citizens to be an attack against it. If you consider how many turkish kurdish it has killed then it wasn't an attack.
If it was a mistake then sure, maybe they could follow mother russia and utilise baseball bats that lenghten and shorten and are covered by rubber. They can use them at a distance or up close.
(post edit)
I am not going to forecast the end of Israel like so many other commentators have on the newspapers. As seriousl, Syria doen't have activists, as it arrests them all. Neither does Iran and they say they will send ships there.
I do question the reasoning (not by Fox) by many against Israel as it seems to have less to do with fact and more to do with desire.
Last edited by Summer Wine on Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:59 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
