Israel talking about adopting Geneva Convention in territories

[sharonbn]

AG urges Sharon to consider adopting Geneva Convention

The government should "thoroughly examine" the possibility of formally applying the Fourth Geneva Convention - which governs the treatment of civilians in occupied territory - to the territories, a Justice Ministry legal team has recommended, though it said that the international treaty must be applied in a way that maintains Israel's right to assume security responsibility in those areas.

The team was appointed by Attorney General Menachem Mazuz to examine the implications of the International Court of Justice's July 9 ruling on the separation fence.

If the team's recommendation is accepted, it would represent a U-turn in the consistent policy of all previous Israeli governments, which has been not to apply the Geneva Convention to the West Bank and Gaza. Israel's position is that there was no recognized sovereign in these areas before 1967, so they are not "occupied territory" as defined in the convention.

Israel has agreed to apply the convention's humanitarian provisions de facto, but has always stressed that this does not constitute formal acceptance of the convention's applicability. In particular, Israel rejects the claim that the settlements violate the convention, which forbids the transfer of civilians into occupied territory.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/468472.html

[Oh Jerusalem]

Tastes like chicken. (http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?t=6745)

[TheMagus]

It's about time Israel started seeing 'reason' on the Fence issue.

[Mediocrates]

Because terrorists obey the 4th Geneva convention of course.

[Gilgamesh]

It's about time Israel started seeing 'reason' on the Fence issue.What makes your "reason", better then our reason?

[TheMagus]

"Reason" is a function of "logic".

The presupposition is that it should all "make sense", not "nonsense".

And why all the silly slogans? A 9mm? Someone once asked me why I owned a .45 - I answered "Because they don't make a .50!" Sounds good, but it doesn't really mean anything beyond the mouthings of an immature fool (which I once was, to my great chagrin).

Ban? Ban? And what good does that do? All it does is announce a position of weakness. And leave the person who 'bans' with no-one to talk to for the purpose of 'honing' one's argument to a razor-sharp edge.

Puzzling, this approach that you take. But - to each his own, I guess.

Shalom.

[Oh Jerusalem]

"Reason" is a function of "logic".

The presupposition is that it should all "make sense", not "nonsense".
What makes your "logic" better then our logic?

This is fun!

[KSO]

What makes your "logic" better then our logic?

This is fun!

What makes your fun better than our fun?

[TheMagus]

Easy (like taking candy from a baby).....

True 'logic' always leads to a "solution" that is Just, Equitable, and balanced.

Where does yours lead?

[Oh Jerusalem]

Easy (like taking candy from a baby).....

True 'logic' always leads to a "solution" that is Just, Equitable, and balanced.

Where does yours lead?
Justice and protection of the innocent.

[TheMagus]

"Innocents" are very sparsely sown in this world, and even more sparsely reaped. Who and where are these so-called "innocents"?

And, to reflect the style that is being employed, "what makes your 'innocent' more innocent than another's innocent?" Pray tell.

[Oh Jerusalem]

What makes you "logic" true and leading to a "solution" that is just, equitable, and balanced?

[Oh Jerusalem]

KSO, stop smirking!

[TheMagus]

No such thing as "my" logic or "your" logic..... That's not logic, just a 'position' or 'point of departure'.

Logic. Starts at "a" and ends at "z". Perfect. Pure. Undeniable. And thus, must always end up knocking the 'issue' on its head.

Argument for the sake of argument is just the activity of the idle. Logic has a 'purpose' and its purpose is to achieve a solution that defies any attempt to subvert it. Can you live by those rules?

[Mediocrates]

The government should "thoroughly examine" the possibility of formally applying the Fourth Geneva Convention - which governs the treatment of civilians in occupied territory - to the territories,

As opposed to what? That is, what does it buy you and how would you implement it?

treaty must be applied in a way that maintains Israel's right to assume security responsibility in those areas.

Why would you think that's important or even relevant?


If the team's recommendation is accepted, it would represent a U-turn in the consistent policy of all previous Israeli governments, which has been not to apply the Geneva Convention to the West Bank and Gaza.

As opposed to what?

Israel's position is that there was no recognized sovereign in these areas before 1967, so they are not "occupied territory" as defined in the convention.

And the difference here........is what precisely?

Israel has agreed to apply the convention's humanitarian provisions de facto, but has always stressed that this does not constitute formal acceptance of the convention's applicability.

Ergo?

In particular, Israel rejects the claim that the settlements violate the convention, which forbids the transfer of civilians into occupied territory.

Which article or annex article is that in? Please point it out. You can use this as a reference
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Human_Rights/geneva1.html

[Mediocrates]

No such thing as "my" logic or "your" logic..... That's not logic, just a 'position' or 'point of departure'.

Logic. Starts at "a" and ends at "z". Perfect. Pure. Undeniable. And thus, must always end up knocking the 'issue' on its head.

Argument for the sake of argument is just the activity of the idle. Logic has a 'purpose' and its purpose is to achieve a solution that defies any attempt to subvert it. Can you live by those rules?

And? And? And?.....seem to be going in circles or something like that.

[TheMagus]

Such impatience!

I've told you already - finesse over battery. Subtlety over Crassness.

Remember - I'm still just getting to know you, feeling you out, drinking it in. I like some courtship before I get down to business. Consider this the stage of foreplay.

[Ophra]

Ah :cool:
That's what I love about the English .... they are such straight talkers :rolleyes:

[sharonbn]

You're asking me to defend the article from Haaretz?
that's a new one.
I can only reply with the best understanding I have of the issue, which is not much.

As opposed to what? That is, what does it buy you and how would you implement it?
As opposed to "consistent policy of all previous Israeli governments, which has been not to apply the Geneva Convention to the West Bank and Gaza"
Complying with int'l accords and agreements buys legitimacy to Israeli presence in occupied territories.

Israel never did and does not claim today any sovereignty over the occupied territories. Israel's position is that the sovereignty of the occupied territories is "unknown". So why does Israel continue to occupy the territories? the official answer is for security reasons (i.e. to serve as buffer zone) The issue of Compliance to the Geneva Convention is an attempt of damage control after the ruling of ICJ proved harmful to Israel.

Regarding effectiveness (whether compliance to GC will matter to the world or not) is a different issue. It seems the AG thinks it will matter. but at least I hope I answered your question as to why Israel bothers to debate this issue.

Regarding implementation, I do not know what is involved here, besides an official statement (which is important by itself.) I would assume that GC itself details what are the criteria for compliance. I would also assume that compliance means Israel allows inspection of the implementation

Why would you think that's important or even relevant?
I assume that Israel fears that full application of GC may compromise security procedures and considerations, so Israel is willing to comply with GC (for reasons given above) but only with the attached disclaimer.

As opposed to what?
I don't understand the question. Previous policy: not apply GC, proposed policy: apply GC - one is "opposed" to the other.

And the difference here........is what precisely?
You have to understand that the whole issue, starting with ICJ ruling and up to the proposed application of GC is all about legal position, official standing and semantics. If you're asking what are the real-life implications of this whole topic, then this can only be answered in long term examination. These issues usually matter most in the legal disputes, diplomatic relations and UN debates. However, they may affect the shape of the final peace agreement between Israel and Palestine.

Ergo?
See answer above.
You seem to dismiss this whole issue as irrelevant to reality. AG Mazuz (for one) believes this issue is important enough to merit discussion. Ynet believes this issue is important enough to merit report.

Which article or annex article is that in? Please point it out. You can use this as a reference
Geneva Convention, PART III: Status and Treatment of Protected Persons, Section III. Occupied Territories, Article 49: Deportations, transfers, evacuations:

“The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”

http://www.civicwebs.com/cwvlib/constitutions/un/e_un_geneva_convention_4.htm#Article%2049

[Oh Jerusalem]

“The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”
No Israelis were deported to Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Nor were they "transfered". They bought homes and invested their lives building communities there.

[sharonbn]

No Israelis were deported to Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Nor were they "transfered". They bought homes and invested their lives building communities there.

I think "transfer" here means "to move", in general terms, and not necessarily forcefully. For instance, Israeli governments encouraged civilians to move to the occupied territories by means of funding, reduced taxes, etc.

[Mediocrates]

Art. 2. In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace-time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.

> When did the PLO, Hamas and Hezbollah, Tanzim, PFLP, Force 17 and al Aqsa sign?<


Art. 6
In the case of occupied territory, the application of the present Convention shall cease one year after the general close of military operations; however, the Occupying Power shall be bound, for the duration of the occupation,to the extent that such Power exercises the functions of government in such territory, by the provisions of the following Articles of the present Convention: 1 to 12, 27, 29 to 34, 47, 49, 51, 52, 53, 59, 61 to 77, 143.

Isn't there a PA which is the legitimately elected so and so of the downtrodden Palestinians? I swear I remember reading that somewhere. So who exactly is the legitimate authority?

Art. 49
Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.

Nevertheless, the Occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand. Such evacuations may not involve the displacement of protected persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory except when for material reasons it is impossible to avoid such displacement. Persons thus evacuated shall be transferred back to their homes as soon as hostilities in the area in question have ceased.

The Occupying Power undertaking such transfers or evacuations shall ensure, to the greatest practicable extent, that proper accommodation is provided to receive the protected persons, that the removals are effected in satisfactory conditions of hygiene, health, safety and nutrition, and that members of the same family are not separated.

The Protecting Power shall be informed of any transfers and evacuations as soon as they have taken place.

The Occupying Power shall not detain protected persons in an area particularly exposed to the dangers of war unless the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.

The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.

You have to read all of #49 Clearly this refers to internal ethnic cleansing for example if Israel were to deport its own Arabs to Yesha.

[Mediocrates]

[quote]As opposed to "consistent policy of all previous Israeli governments, which has been not to apply the Geneva Convention to the West Bank and Gaza" Complying with int'l accords and agreements buys legitimacy to Israeli presence in occupied territories.

Quite the reverse. It defines in rather stark outlines that your country is a brutal unfair oppressor who's only recompense would be to flee from everywhere on that side of green line and leave everything behind including Jerusalem.

Israel's position is that the sovereignty of the occupied territories is "unknown". So why does Israel continue to occupy the territories?

You answered it yourself. Don't be dense. It's 'unknown'.

The issue of Compliance to the Geneva Convention is an attempt of damage control after the ruling of ICJ proved harmful to Israel.

PR spin, now we're getting somewhere.

But at least I hope I answered your question as to why Israel bothers to debate this issue.

No. I'll give you an analogy. Here in the US there is a vague group of 'native americans' who claim they are the rightful owners of the western half of the state of Connecticut. They are not a recognized native tribe, never have been. In fact they live apart from one another indistinguishable from you or I and most have never lived in the state. Yet under whatever legal tools they pick and choose they are attempting to sue the state and every single person in it to walk away from every piece of property in the western half of the state in exchange for nothing. Nada. Ludicrous. Yet because we pretend that all people are 'equal under the law' they get their day in court no matter how absurd the circumstances. This too is worthy of serious debate.

I would assume that GC itself details what are the criteria for compliance. I would also assume that compliance means Israel allows inspection of the implementation.

Inspect what? Comply with what? See the only thing one could comply with is wholesale evacuation of everything including all of Jerusalem. Live by the law, die by the law, I guess.

These issues usually matter most in the legal disputes, diplomatic relations and UN debates. However, they may affect the shape of the final peace agreement between Israel and Palestine.

How so? To me it seems that one could make a case that the PA is therefore utterly powerless utterly w/o any legitimacy at all and can therefore be safely ignored while Israel goes off and does whatever is in its and only its national interest. The point of enforcing this law is to prop up the notion that Israel is the only responsible party.

You seem to dismiss this whole issue as irrelevant to reality. AG Mazuz (for one) believes this issue is important enough to merit discussion. Ynet believes this issue is important enough to merit report.

Why? What does it gain you to do so? And what does it matter if you do?

[Ariksan]

First of all, Judea, Samaria and Gaza are not occupied territories. According to all binding international agreements the territories in question are disputed territories.

However, I think we should implement the Geneva convention: Due to the volatile security situation we shall then relocate the Arab population of Judea and Samaria to Gaza. As soon as hostilities in the area in question have ceased they can move back of course... If terror does not stop.. well... that could take some time.

[MGB8]

Magus,

First, darn are some of those posts arrogant. You are not that smart, sorry to tell you.

Second, time to learn a hard lesson in life... Not every conflict has a "solution", as you apply the term - which seems to be in the "getting to yes" "Win/Win" solution idea, a solution that everyone can be reasonable happy with.

Moreover, every action, every solution, has both negative consequences and unintended consequences.

You see, there is no "perfect outcome" - if there was, there would never be war, there would not be any hungry or poverty. Unfortunately, as human beings, inperfect as we are, all of our solutions are also imperfect.

In fact, the most "perfect" solution to be come up with recently was the FINAL SOLUTION, in that, in order to solve a "grievence" of many, all you had to do was murder millions of people, and the problem would be gone, forever. Of course, other problems would replace that, but that problem would be gone. If only we'd destroy Israel, right? Then the Arabs and Muslims wouldn't have any grievance...or maybe they'd just bring up the other ones on their list...

You strike me as another person who thinks he is much smarter than he actually is. There is a big club of you guys over on the left, and you all are well represented on this forum, too. Oh, lead us to your perfect solutions with your impenatrable wisdom!

[TheMagus]

You will surely be able to form an opinion in time, of course. But that time is not the present, I must aver. For you know virtually nothing about me - yet.

But I intend to satisfy your longing for a more intimate knowledge of me, never fear. It shall most certainly be my pleasure to initiate you into my deepest secrets, in time.

But why do I gain the impression that you take yourself oh so very seriously? A point for me to ponder, to be sure. And I shall.

As for "Resolution of conflicts"..... Ah, well - I have some experience of conflicts myself. I do not fault 'what' you say - only the manner in which it is said.

Let me try and bring some further enlightenment to your perceived conundrum, picayune though it certainly is:

LOGIC - and its usage, requires first and foremost that the user thereof has an "open mind". Otherwise, it stands to reason that such "logic" as is employed will always be subverted to the Cause of the preconceived idea or the 'position' that is already taken.

In such a case, the "logic" (such as it is already only a pale shadow or caricature of the 'real thing') will of necessity always be negatively applied towards any fact or rationale that conflicts with what one has already decided to believe in as an 'absolute'. Now what purpose could that possibly serve, other than as a vehicle for the expending of energy and creation of 'hot air'?

Such 'logic' would be like the riddle: A politician and a lawyer are in a plane that is going to crash - only one parachute available. Who gets it? Answer - Who cares? ..... That isn't 'logic' - it is a desperate attempt to while away one's idle time in meaningless and superficial intellectual activity.

It is like the endless pointless and spurious arguments about the Israeli-Palestinian "dispute" - where the debaters foolishly allow the debate to become so mired in erroneous "detail" that the able mind rebels and rejects the totally unnecessary 'complication' that is artificially introduced. I have noticed that many use this method for the sole purpose of wearying their intellectual opponents to the point of sheer and utter exhaustion through unspeakable boredom. Who cares about who did what to whom during the past 5 or 10 generations? And for that matter, what purpose would caring about such things even serve?

Its like an Ant-Lion - sucking everything and everyone into its pit that leads only to one inevitable conclusion - DEATH.

No, that's not how LOGIC works, my good man.

What logic does, is create the conditions that allow creativity, insight and discernment to flourish in order that the "Path" can be found that leads to the place where the conditions are ripe for 'success' and 'balance' to spontaneously take shape.

Let me try and explain it a different way - it is like the difference between creating a new concept and "reverse-engineering". For the latter, one has only the existing bits and pieces to work with, and 'assumptions' are the best guess about the 'purpose' inherent in the design of the bits and pieces. At its very best, such practise is only plagiarism that stems from desperation, without even a modicum of 'original thought'.

But the former is different. It starts with 'imagining' a perfect solution. Then it evolves, through trial and error (with an open mind), to a state where the 'imagination' of such a 'perfect solution' becomes more than that - a 'perception' (a 'seeing' of what does not yet exist). And then the process starts to 'reverse engineer' (in theory first - then in practice) from the point of 'perception' back to the place where one is 'at'. In so doing, a new and clearly-defined "purpose" becomes inbuilt into every step and component.

In other words - imagine the end-result that should be achieved, if we were in a perfect world and the end-result was balanced, Righteous, Just and Fair. Of necessity, this is a function of idealism. Then start working out how such a situation can be achieved or realised - backwards from where we want to be, not forwards from where we are. Somewhere along the way, the "Logic" will create its own momentum and the connections will find each other.

Simple, isn't it?

But then again - what do I know? Perhaps I'm not as clever as I appear to be. On the other hand, perhaps I'm not as stupid as you think I am, either.

Time will surely tell. And the circle is complete, for the moment.
_______________________________

Riposte, anyone?

[MGB8]

A lot of writing that means very little.

For some of us here, smart guy, this is a very serious matter, not some curiosity to be bantied about, but a "war" over facts and against propaganda which may result in lives saved.

You are definately not as smart as you think you are. Pretentious...that's another matter.

Go on with your oh so wise and learned self....

[David_in_NYC]

According to the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel is fully entitled to respond to the behavior of the Palestinians by massacring every last non-Israeli man, woman, and child in the disputed territories. Apply away.

[Mediocrates]

Of course under the 4GC it would necessarily define attacks on IDF troops inside Yesha as 'illegal' as well.

[alexbmn]

what's with the false the title to the thread?

[Ariksan]

Magus dude, get a life...

[Oh Jerusalem]

Magus dude, get a life...
Don't encourage him.

[Gilgamesh]

"Reason" is a function of "logic". You first correct insight in some 20 posts of yours. Congratetulations...

The presupposition is that it should all "make sense", not "nonsense". And who made you the judge of sense and nonesense? It were the Brits Eduard Lir and Lewis Carol who truned nonesense into art form, and it were british politicians who pushed the nonesense into global affairs. Have you made you mind up to excell all your fine countrymen in the high sport of nonesense?

And why all the silly slogans? A 9mm? Dare to meet me face to face, and then produce a Jew-hating remark and see what happens next.

Someone once asked me why I owned a .45 - I answered "Because they don't make a .50!" Wrong. The do make them .50. See this little piece (http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/small_arms/desert_eagle/Desert_Eagle.html) - They call it Desert Eagle and it good in spreading evil anti semites in all directions at thesame time. (though after the fun is over, there is lots of cleaning to do...).

Sounds good, but it doesn't really mean anything beyond the mouthings of an immature fool (which I once was, to my great chagrin). Care to test or validiate your assumptions?

Ban? Ban? And what good does that do? Reduce unwanted noise. Usually it is works.

All it does is announce a position of weakness. Weaks can't ban.

And leave the person who 'bans' with no-one to talk to for the purpose of 'honing' one's argument to a razor-sharp edge. Don't over estimate yourself. You ain't that clever.

Shalom. Shalom.

[TheMagus]

The 'Rover' Man -

Its "bandied about", not 'bantied about'. Presumably a typo.
I too take these matters seriously - just not in exactly the same way you do. All things will become clearer in time. Be patient.

Mediocrity -

I need no encouragement. I am a "self-starter".

Let me continue to elucidate:

"Logic" is a function of "Reason". As such, it is a specific requirement that any person employing logic, or any position arrived at as a result of the use of logic, must of necessity be able to be identified as "reasonable".......

Now.... Is it 'reasonable' to only employ a response that is judgemental and unnecessarily aggressive when no cause for such behaviour has been apparent? Akin to regarding everything as "hostile" until it is proved not to be so?

Or is it more 'reasonable' to withold judgement until a clear 'motive' has been established and intent is discerned...........?

Is it 'reasonable' to view everything and everyone with suspicion, even though no evidence exists to logically underpin such a view?

Or is it more 'reasonable' to act in "good faith" until one has factual and solid grounds to do otherwise.

Its like the situation between Jews and Gentiles.... or Jews and Muslims. There seems to be a 'trend' that has emerged where Jews automatically assume that any Gentile who criticises any policy of Israel's government or any action by any Jewish 'caucus'.... is clearly identifiable as an "Anti-Semite". Is this 'reasonable'?

If so, then this would make it as 'reasonable' for any Gentile to call any Jew an "Anti-Christ", or an "Anti-Gentile" even though such a Jew might be no such thing at all. (That's always the problem with shallow 'labels', isn't it?)

Taking such 'positions' from the outset is neither 'reasonable' nor does it conform to the laws of 'logic'. It also leaves absolutely no place for "neutrality" (aka "balance"). Such an attitude is pre-designed and therefore pre-destined to create "enemies", not "friends". Ergo, a 'solution' that is fair, just and equitable is automatically and deliberately excluded from and in the process of such sublimated 'logic'. People who think that way usually end up spraying swastikas on synagogues or beating Palestinian civilians at checkpoints. An ironic "duality" that tends to suggest genetic similarities between those at two apparent opposites of the spectrum.

SO - My 'premise' is that before one can 'discuss' any issue properly and with sensitivity, one must make a decision to employ "logic" and "reason" from a position of "neutrality" - putting 'subjectivity' deliberately aside in favour of 'objectivity' and making a conscious decision to be 'reasonable' under any and all circumstances. "Reasonable" means putting aside all personal prejudices and always looking for where the 'balance' is to be found.

Once this is accepted as the basis for discussion - the process becomes a lot easier and the 'hot air' is released in favour of calm rationality.

But again - what do I know? I'm just a supercilious fool, as some have already decided. I can live with that. I've been called a lot worse.

Now that I've posted some more of my 'thoughts', let's see how creative some of you can be with your insults and sarcastic rejoinders. So far they are not impressive - but I can always live in hope, can't I? Stroke me.

[Gilgamesh]

No such thing as "my" logic or "your" logic..... That's not logic, just a 'position' or 'point of departure'. Now you contradict your self. First you talk about reason and logic of some anti Israeli position of a certain individual. Now you talk about position. Is this an argument for the sake of argument or your just being silly.

Logic. Starts at "a" and ends at "z". Now that is stupid. English is only a second language for me and I know the logic starts with an "l" and ends with a "c".

Perfect. Pure. Undeniable. And thus, must always end up knocking the 'issue' on its head. Even certain mathematical formulas can have more the one solution. Only with one solution we can live with and the rest a simply dumb. So, "TheMagus", which of the dumbest silliest solutions are you pointing at?

Argument for the sake of argument is just the activity of the idle. Logic has a 'purpose' and its purpose is to achieve a solution that defies any attempt to subvert it. Can you live by those rules? Are you beeing idle again?

[Gilgamesh]

Ah :cool:
That's what I love about the English .... they are such straight talkers :rolleyes:But with little knowladge of foreplay and very short business as well.
No wonder their women jump on the first Israeli / Itlian they see.

[TheMagus]

Gilgamesh - now there's an Epic.

Sadly, your grammatical usage of my language leaves much to be desired - but I forgive you for your excruciatingly uncomfortable use of syntax.

Don't you think that "schoolyard" challenges are a bit silly? Where is the 'logic' in issuing 'challenges' on the Internet - where anonymity is the norm, 'contact' is electronic, and geography is an obstacle? Personally, I can't see the logic at all. Mind you, I am sure that you can get really "aggressive" with your keyboard....... Brrrrrrrrr!!!..... You've sent all kinds of shivers of apprehension coursing down my spine and through my vitals. One thing is for sure - you are a living example of everyone's caricature of an "Israeli". Nice Doggy... Down Boy. Save your energies for rational debate - it is clear that you are going to need a lot of it, based upon your last posting.

Life has taught me that people who issue threats and challenges are not to be taken very seriously. Real 'dangerous' people do not announce their intentions - they just do what needs to be done in the most professional and safe way (for them) possible, usually without warning (it's called: Using the element of Surprise to your tactical advantage - Infantry Tactics 101).

You should be careful with your gun - the capacity for self-harm when in the hands of the rash and brash can be quite significant.

[Oh Jerusalem]

I have to pish again.

[TheMagus]

Cheap Japanese bladder, huh?

[Ariksan]

Sadly, your grammatical usage of my language leaves much to be desired - but I forgive you for your excruciatingly uncomfortable use of syntax.

What in the world makes you think that everyone here is a native English speaker? Are you a racist that thinks everyone should speak perfectly English to be considered 'intelligent'? I am quite familiar with this racist attidute predominantly existent in the UK.

[Gilgamesh]

"Logic" is a function of "Reason". As such, it is a specific requirement that any person employing logic, or any position arrived at as a result of the use of logic, must of necessity be able to be identified as "reasonable"....... Not all that is reasonable is also correct. As I said, even a mathematical forumal may have more then one solution (called roots, btw).

Now.... Is it 'reasonable' to only employ a response that is judgemental and unnecessarily aggressive when no cause for such behaviour has been apparent? Akin to regarding everything as "hostile" until it is proved not to be so? There are things and certine fundementals or axioms, that once attacking or question those, it make one hostile.

You can't demand to saw the branch we sit one, and claim you never ment us to fall.

Or is it more 'reasonable' to withold judgement until a clear 'motive' has been established and intent is discerned...........? Motive is out of the scope of our debates. Some of us here are Zionist because of Jewish philosophy and Jewish faith, some are Zionist beacause they believe it the best way for self preservation. Motives has nothing to do with our debate.

Is it 'reasonable' to view everything and everyone with suspicion, even though no evidence exists to logically underpin such a view? You can not provide such evidence through such media, like this forum.

Or is it more 'reasonable' to act in "good faith" until one has factual and solid grounds to do otherwise. We already have enough factual evidences to prove you exactly the opposite of what you claim about yourself: you are hostile.

There seems to be a 'trend' that has emerged where Jews automatically assume that any Gentile who criticises any policy of Israel's government or any action by any Jewish 'caucus'.... is clearly identifiable as an "Anti-Semite". I talked about it in many of the my posts, and so have the others here. It becomes like an initiation ritual for us.
Critisism of Israel becomes anti semetism under the following criteria:
1. When questioning Jews right to exist - like showing support for Arab terrorism.
2. When questioning Jews right of self determination and national lieberalism and self sovereigninty - Like when question Jews defenition of nationhood, denying Israel right to exist or denying Jewish history or question Jews right for sites scread to Jewish national history and religion.
3. When questioning Jews right of self defense - When critisising israel right for fight terrorism. While asking for information about certain Israeli actions, in a polite manner is not anti semetism, Anti semetism is when one denyies Israel very right to defend her citizens.

If so, then this would make it as 'reasonable' for any Gentile to call any Jew an "Anti-Christ". Although most Christians living today done me no personal harm, I am very much "Anti Chirst"...

, or an "Anti-Gentile" I am very anti-certain-gentiles. I admit of being that. Some gentiles I hate (see my signature).

even though such a Jew might be no such thing at all. (That's always the problem with shallow 'labels', isn't it?) When I label someone, it's not shallow. You are not being branded yet because we consider you to be ignorant fool wishing to get educated, or hearing our side. Keep playing the fool and all will remain shiny clean and dandy between us two. How's that fella?

People who think that way usually end up spraying swastikas on synagogues or beating Palestinian civilians at checkpoints. Had you manning a check point in mid London looking for some normal police work, and a drunk skin head sod was starting pushing spitting and throwing broken bottles at you, you won't be very polite either... so quit the hypocracy, cut the BS and become a little aware of your own bias against us. You don't have to prove us you master BBC and Arab propaganda by heart. We believe you do already master every lie and half truth before you came over here.

If you are looking for a battle of wits, forget it. You have proven you don't have any wits.

SO - My 'premise' is that before one can 'discuss' any issue properly and with sensitivity, Things seem "sensative" to you because of anti semetism built into your world view and shades and limits your vision and blurs your understanding of the obvious reality from you. The fact there are topics you find sensative for you, prove your biase.

There are Zionist Christians here. And different pro Israeli gentiles. They do not find anything "sensative". They don't have problems to see things clear.

"Reasonable" means putting aside all personal prejudices and always looking for where the 'balance' is to be found. You look for balance... I am looking for the Truth, whether it is balanced or not. The search for truth is what makes reason, not balancing things out.

Once this is accepted as the basis for discussion - the process becomes a lot easier and the 'hot air' is released in favour of calm rationality. You can reales your hot winds where ever you like, just keep a distance.

[TheMagus]

Ariksan -

What on earth has "Race" got to do with "Language"?

You drop the word "racist" very easily, don't you? Perhaps because you have 'internal problems' with racism within yourself?

You don't even know what "Race" I am - for all you know I may well be a Jew. Don't jump to conclusions - it just shows ignorance.

Irrespective of my "Race", I am an Englishman. As such, I believe I am able to make commentary about the use of my home language. And this is an "English" (in language terms) Forum, no?

[Gilgamesh]

Gilgamesh - now there's an Epic. Pitty you have never read it. You might learn something from us Jew's anciant forefathers. We Jews are the only surviving direct decendents of the most anciant Sumerians.

Now that I have presented myself, Who might you be?

Sadly, your grammatical usage of my language leaves much to be desired - but I forgive you for your excruciatingly uncomfortable use of syntax. Oh, so sorry about that! I am making leaping progress, btw.
Be glad you are not Frenchmen, whome I can torment with my French.

Don't you think that "schoolyard" challenges are a bit silly?
Nah... anything goes. All is valid to get a message across.

Where is the 'logic' in issuing 'challenges' on the Internet - where anonymity is the norm, 'contact' is electronic, and geography is an obstacle? As long as you stick to your rain fog and keyboard... the chalanges got no meaning. Now help us to keep it that way, regarding the rest of your countrymen who set thier minds up to cause us grief and much drama.

Personally, I can't see the logic at all. You will work it out. Just don't give up. If your head aches, get a TEVA's Akamol.

Mind you, I am sure that you can get really "aggressive" with your keyboard....... Brrrrrrrrr!!!..... That nothing... read my past posts!

You've sent all kinds of shivers of apprehension coursing down my spine and through my vitals. Don't tell me you're about to pass to the other side... you know I won't live with myself :rolleyes:

Besides, dieing on the middle of a debate is extremley un polite. I expected you Brits for a little better.

One thing is for sure - you are a living example of everyone's caricature of an "Israeli". Thanks!!! I am an Israeli in every nerve and every muscle. There are planty more Yidds where I came from...

If you look for graveling and snivelling whining self hating anti semetic Jews, you are on the wrong forum. It's a pity you fear handling to the real Zionist Israel thing... ie me, and always look for the kind of Jews you made your self used too.

Sorry mate, I am not licking you boot today...

Life has taught me that people who issue threats and challenges are not to be taken very seriously. They is European resistance to the war on terrorism in a nut shell. Well done!

Real 'dangerous' people do not announce their intentions - they just do what needs to be done in the most professional and safe way (for them) Had I been going hunting anti semeite in Europe today, I wouldn't be here talking to you, would I? It's like duhh...

possible, usually without warning (it's called: Using the element of Surprise to your tactical advantage - Infantry Tactics 101). I was brought up with this line! Some much nostaliga... thanks!

You should be careful with your gun - the capacity for self-harm when in the hands of the rash and brash can be quite significant.That's what trainign and practice were invented for. Don't worry for me... I am good at these things...

[Oh Jerusalem]

Gil and Arik, let's stop feeding the troll. It's boring and it distracts us from more important posts.

[Gilgamesh]

I am an Englishman. As such, I believe I am able to make commentary about the use of my home language. And this is an "English" (in language terms) Forum, no?

Look at it from this angle. English, unlike Hebrew which exists for over 30 centuries, is a new language. No one spoke English 8 centuries ago... so it take me some time to get used to it.

Do enlight me please of the proper use of English if that's what you feel like doing... the advantage will only be mine.

How is your Hebrew today, btw...

[Gilgamesh]

Gil and Arik, let's stop feeding the troll. It's boring and it distracts us from more important posts.
cool.
I'll answer a real post of his, once he will be able to produce one...

[Ariksan]

Ariksan -

What on earth has "Race" got to do with "Language"?

You drop the word "racist" very easily, don't you? Perhaps because you have 'internal problems' with racism within yourself?

You don't even know what "Race" I am - for all you know I may well be a Jew. Don't jump to conclusions - it just shows ignorance.

Irrespective of my "Race", I am an Englishman. As such, I believe I am able to make commentary about the use of my home language. And this is an "English" (in language terms) Forum, no?

So you are not a racist but an English supremacist. And yes, the primary language in this forum is English. However, this does not mean that you are allowed to put down people because they are not native English speakers like you.

I pity you.

[Oh Jerusalem]

So you are not a racist but an English supremacist. And yes, the primary language in this forum is English. However, this does not mean that you are allowed to put down people because they are not native English speakers like you.
That would make him both a troll and a grammar Nazi.
I pitty you.
I pity us. :o

[TheMagus]

Master Gilgamesh,

I am sorry to have to burst your bubble, but you leave me no choice. I will, however, try and be gentle with you.

Firstly - I am quite familiar with mathematics. However, it is known that mathematics is an "abstract" that is empirical and formulaic and does not take such things as "unpredictability" or "randomness" into account - unless one ventures into the Quantum realm (in which case your reasoning becomes obtuse and non-applicable). We are not talking about abstract theorems here - but reality. In 'reality', one needs to be 'realistic' and employ 'realism'. There may very well be an unlimited number of potential solutions - but any solution proposed by a fanatic, a racist, a bigot or an idiot would not necessarily fall into the scope of those 'solutions' that should be taken seriously. Thus, I would prefer to confine myself to considering only those 'solutions' that are realistic and balanced and are arrived at through the process of 'logic' and 'reason' by persons who are prepared to approach issues in this manner. Thats my choice. I am sure you would disagree, so no need to confirm to me what is already obvious in your behaviour. I already know.

Secondly - becoming or being "hostile" is something that one 'chooses' to do, not something that one is 'forced' to do. You, like everyone else, are wholly personally responsible for the choices you make. It seems both churlish and infantile to blame one's own personal choices on someone else, not to mention 'irresponsible'. Nobody is 'sawing' at YOUR branch - the more realistic view is of the 'cartoon' where the person sitting on the branch is himself the one wielding the saw, but then who gets all upset when they engineer their own 'fall'.

Thirdly - Without establishing 'motive', there can be no serious debate. If I see a man carrying an axe, I do not automatically assume that he intends to hit me with it. He may well just be a woodcutter. To establish his 'motive' in carrying the axe is simple - I ask him and then evaluate his response. If he seems hostile, threatening, or if his reply is discordant - I will keep my distance and be ready to defend myself. (And by the way - a large number of people on this forum appear to be neither Zionist nor Jew, contrary to your assertion).

Fourthly - I am 'hostile' to nothing except deliberate and wilfull ignorance. If that makes me your 'enemy', then so be it. In any event - show me some evidence of my supposed 'hostility'. Let's see how you string your particular brand of 'logic' together, huh?

Fifthly - 'Criticism' of Israel is just that - 'criticism'. (Just as criticism of Palestinian 'suicide-bombings' is not "anti-Muslim"). It has nothing to do with your convenient 'label' of "anti-semitism" (note the correct spelling, please). That 'label' has been bandied about so much and with so little accuracy that it has become nothing more than a 'yawn'. Let me explain it to you in words of very few syllables - if I criticise the (my own) British Government because of a certain 'policy' - does this make me an "Anti-Brit"? Of course not, silly. It just makes me a critic of a government policy. And by the way - by your definition of an "anti-semite", many Israelis involved in organisations such as "Courage to Refuse", Beth Gul and other would become "anti-semites" in your book, even though they are Jews and Israelis. It seems to me that anyone who doesn't immediately fully and whole-heartedly support YOUR views is, in your opinion, an automatic "anti-semite". Not a very logical or rational position, I would aver.

Sixthly - To label yourself as being "very much Anti- 'Christ'" is to give Christ power and legitimacy. I would have thought that a Jew would be clever enough not to do that so ostentatiously. Careful - you may annoy our fundamentalist Christian "brothers" and current "fellow-conspirators".

Seventhly - "Hate" is a destructive and wasteful emotion. It also clouds the judgement (something which appears to be very apparent in your case).

Eighthly - good, I like being branded as 'ignorant'. It suits my purpose.

Ninthly - I try always to be polite. It is the mark of a gentleman and an honourable pursuit. (I'm not sure that you will understand this concept but I would like to be wrong).

Tenthly - "Sensitivity" is an art and a skill that is denied to those that engage in thuggery. Ask any woman, if you can find one who will talk to you at that level. They seem to have an appreciation of such distinctions.

And finally - it would be wise to remember that when you speak of "Truth", you do not or cannot speak of "THE Truth", only "A Truth". And when you eventually find yourself walking upon the Path of Truth, be humble. For it is a blessing to be appreciated, not a tool to be abused.

[Ariksan]

Magus, you have come to this board starting of with long winded posts about logic and reason.

Yet, you have shown your true colors. You are nothing more than a self-righteous English supremacist who puts people down because they do not command the English language like you do. You think you have the answer for everything and that you were spoon-fed with wisdom yet failed to produce one single post with real substance.

Try again.

[TheMagus]

And I find it amusing that a Jew would so readily throw the word "Nazi" about.

Perhaps a "Zionist" Nazi?

And thanks for the "pity". I am sure you mean it well.

[TheMagus]

Ariksan -

Those who despise "correction" are no more than fools who desire their own destruction.

Guess where that comes from?

[Ariksan]

Sadly, your grammatical usage of my language leaves much to be desired

This is not a correction dude. You can't hide your self-righteous face forever.

[TheMagus]

Gilgamesh -

I am quite familiar with Utnapushtim, thanks.

And what makes you think I'm not a Jew, schlemiel?

Avenu shalom aleichem.

[TheMagus]

Ariksan -

No, THAT wasn't a 'correction' - merely an observation.

[Oh Jerusalem]

And I find it amusing that a Jew would so readily throw the word "Nazi" about.
This I have to respond to.

"Troll" and, sadly, "grammar Nazi" are the standard Internet terms used to describe forum posters who exhibit your posting behavior here. I wish there were another standard term in its place for me to use.

Anyway, folks, I suggest you take my earlier advice.

[Ariksan]

Gilgamesh -

I am quite familiar with Utnapushtim, thanks.

And what makes you think I'm not a Jew, schlemiel?

Avenu shalom aleichem.

Sotah 5a: Gd says, "I cannot dwell in the same world as an arrogant person!" Arrogance is compared to idolatry, and to denial of Gd's existence.

[TheMagus]

A pathetic excuse. As a Jew, I find it quite obnoxious when fellow-Jews are so eager to use the term "Nazi" in applying it to goyim, not to mention to another Jew. Try applying it to yourself - see how it feels.

[Oh Jerusalem]

Avenu shalom aleichem.
That should be "Hehveinu Shalom Aleichem".

There!

Now I'm a grammar Nazi, just like you.

I feel fine.

[Ariksan]

A pathetic excuse. As a Jew, I find it quite obnoxious when fellow-Jews are so eager to use the term "Nazi" in applying it to goyim, not to mention to another Jew. Try applying it to yourself - see how it feels.

You call yourself a Jew. A Jew who propagates his own destruction by using idolatry? Please help me to understand.

Enough 'Sichah Beteilah' about your 'supreme reason' already!

[Mediocrates]

what's with the false the title to the thread?


How's that?

[TheMagus]

Jerusalem -

I always appreciate anyone's attempts at correction of my language or grammar. But I am not alone in my chosen task of "bringing peace", so the correction is not necessarily appropriate.

Ariksan -

Yes, I call myself a Jew. Or do you presume to decide whether I can be one or not? And what's with the "idolatry" bit? What exactly is your meaning? And why do you feel that I am engineering my own "destruction"? Who is the "destroyer" that I am supposed to fear (according to you)?

Oy vey.....

[Gilgamesh]

I am quite familiar with Utnapushtim, thanks. All praises to Google...

And what makes you think I'm not a Jew, schlemiel? Your bad usage of commonly know Yiddish phrases, for one istance.

Even a Goy, who seen one of Gay Richy films, knows more Yiddish words then you...

[Gilgamesh]

Master Gilgamesh, Now that's the way forward... quick learner you are...

Firstly - I am quite familiar with mathematics. However, it is known that mathematics is an "abstract" that is empirical and formulaic and does not take such things as "unpredictability" or "randomness" into account - unless one ventures into the Quantum realm (in which case your reasoning becomes obtuse and non-applicable). I know my Quantum physics to a degree (that would be first degree). And I know I am right. Science is a perfect a legitiamte way to see and interperate the world. A way of looking at things, and a way of find the truth.

We are not talking about abstract theorems here - but reality. Science is very real. Always.

In 'reality', one needs to be 'realistic' and employ 'realism'. There may very well be an unlimited number of potential solutions - but any solution proposed by a fanatic, a racist, a bigot or an idiot would not necessarily fall into the scope of those 'solutions' that should be taken seriously. True! This why we look at your "solutions" soon to be coming up on our heads, as either funny or very funny right through histarical outrageous.

Secondly - becoming or being "hostile" is something that one 'chooses' to do, not something that one is 'forced' to do. Not alwasy one has the time of careness of looking into the motives of some guy who chases you around with a working chain-saw (or a bomb or what have you) and raving mad battle crys... sorry. Infact, the maniac motives are quite irrelevent once he is one blood lust craze. Wouldn't you agree?

It seems both churlish and infantile to blame one's own personal choices on someone else, not to mention 'irresponsible'. Quite often in this evil and brutal world, one cannot avoid reaction for someone elses actions. This process of matching the right reaction to the action, is called "justice", and we Jews built our entire civilization around such an idea. The rest are private cases of Justice.

Another example. In Hebrew, TZo'dek, means both "correct, Right" and "Justfull".

Nobody is 'sawing' at YOUR branch - Some try to saw my branch, and the rest stand near in cyrcle and clap their hands and shoute to encourage the branch chopper. This is a source of some of our hostility toward some sort of blocks. Hope you understand that, once I had clarified my cartoon.

Thirdly - Without establishing 'motive', there can be no serious debate. Not always, motives are relevent. Some crimes, such as rape or murder (or terrorism, which is premeditated indiscriminate mass murder of civilians) are so terrible the motive is made irrlevent. There can be no logical motive, appology or justification for such crime.

If I see a man carrying an axe, I do not automatically assume that he intends to hit me with it. I do, unless the axe man is Jewish ofcourse. Call me paranoid if you wish, I call myself survivialist.

He may well just be a woodcutter. Ecological crimminal. Tree murderer. Only Arabs in Israel, chop trees Jews planted. Only Arab set fires to forests Jews planted.

To establish his 'motive' in carrying the axe is simple - I ask him and then evaluate his response. I take a great distance and then see.

If he seems hostile, threatening, or if his reply is discordant - I will keep my distance and be ready to defend myself. How hypocritic of you, while you seem to deny Jews from similar right or reasoning. Correct me if I am wrong about you.

(And by the way - a large number of people on this forum appear to be neither Zionist nor Jew, contrary to your assertion). You are right about the lurkers, not about the active contributers and posters, who are mostly Zionist (Jews) or pro-Zionist.

I am 'hostile' to nothing except deliberate and wilfull ignorance. Great! Now cure your ignorance, with few direct questions and get ready for direct answers.

If that makes me your 'enemy', then so be it. It's your choises, your bias and in deed your ignorance that makes you hostile. Yet, it can be fixed. You choise, you move.

In any event - show me some evidence of my supposed 'hostility'. You attitude, your style, your arrogance, you assumptions as made in your past posts.

You see, me and the others are veterans here, and you Euros are all alike, as if I am talking with the same person over and over again, with a different nick each time. You are all force fed by the same propaganda machine you call "media", the same BBC made perverted reality, and spout out the same lies and the same allegations. We feel that for the very first posts you made.

For a hard proof, it's this post (http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=113574&postcount=3) of yours.

'Criticism' of Israel is just that - 'criticism'. There is a legitimate critisism, like critisism of Israel's goverment decistions, and there are denail of Jews rights and freedoms as I detailed in past post.
Quick reminder: 1. Denial of Jewish nationhood. 2. Denail of Jews right for self sovereignity, Jews right for self national determination in the land of Israel 3. Denial of Jews right of self defense.

If you critisis one of Jewish freedoms as I detailed above, you are anti semite, since you accept similar right for yourself and others, but not Jews.

You may however, and I won't hold it against you (meaning I will, but won't be allowed to call you "anti semite") if you critisis certain actions or non actions or policies.

There is a difference between "I hate this action of your goverment", or "I hate it when Israel kills Arab terrorists".

(Just as criticism of Palestinian 'suicide-bombings' is not "anti-Muslim"). Not my turf.

That 'label' has been bandied about so much and with so little accuracy that it has become nothing more than a 'yawn'. It ment more are a pointer for the Admin as "ripe for banishment" and to other posters witnessing this dual, rather at the anti semite involved. It's like a flock of brides on a tree looking at my dog huntress cat, Rosa, approaching...

if I criticise the (my own) British Government because of a certain 'policy' - does this make me an "Anti-Brit"? Dependce on the critisism. See for example "Lord How-How". He was "crititcal" of Churchil anti-Nazi police, talked about it often in his Nazi radio show, and got himself hanged on the end of the war (a right and duefull punishment I fully support, btw). The odd thing is, he got hanged by the Brits rather then the Americans, although he was American citizen and not British.

Now days, "How-How" would have been a freedom of speach hero of the far left (and right)... :( Which is a bad thing, you know...

by your definition of an "anti-semite", many Israelis involved in organisations such as "Courage to Refuse", Beth Gul and other would become "anti-semites" in your book, even though they are Jews and Israelis. Anti Semetism refers to ideas, not people.
Yes, there are very few traitors, our "how-how"s, who quite equally deserve to be hanged for thier evil choises, who spread anti semetism and promote hatered of Israel and deligitimation of Jews rights, for the interest of greed, publicity hunting or just plain old hatered of our own people.

Yes, some of the worst anti semites are Jews, and even Israelis. No doubt about it. !!! So be careful who you choose to quote, some quotes of some Israelis are just as anti semetic.

The fact you are better aware of such movements rather then others, prove to us again your true colours. You have a choise of your reading matrial and you have made that choise according to your bias.

No worries mate, with your collabortions, we can fix ya in no time.

It seems to me that anyone who doesn't immediately fully and whole-heartedly support YOUR views is, in your opinion, an automatic "anti-semite". You assume wrong then.

To label yourself as being "very much Anti- 'Christ'" is to give Christ power and legitimacy. I oppose many of the ideas held by Chrisitanity, aspcialy the Catholic and Orthodox. Their existance or legitimacy do not need my apporval. They exist and preech and incite, whether I like it or not. Christianity exist, and in this respect, I am an "anti Christ".

Careful - you may annoy our fundamentalist Christian "brothers" and current "fellow-conspirators". Zionism is not a conspiracy but national lieberation movement. As for the Chirisitan Zionist, we know each other long time, and share many views. They already familiar with my ideas as a Jew, far better then you are.

Seventhly - "Hate" is a destructive and wasteful emotion. It also clouds the judgement (something which appears to be very apparent in your case). Cristian Catholic rethorics. Sorry mate, I am Jewish. It means nothing for me. And besides, it's irrelevent.

Hate, is a given. Like any of the human choises and actions or attributes. Can't fight that, can we? Only it's applications (such as anti semetism, which is hate, which is the reason we Jews need the right of self defense).

Eighthly - good, I like being branded as 'ignorant'. Great! Knowing oneself is your first step toward enlightment.

[Gilgamesh]

Ninthly - I try always to be polite. It is the mark of a gentleman and an honourable pursuit. (I'm not sure that you will understand this concept but I would like to be wrong). We call it a mantch, which means a man, a human, in Yiddish. Whoever is not human, is beast, a CHa'ye . There is a whole lot of philosophy behind it, yet I won't get into it right now. sorry.

Although I'll miss needleing you, I'll be a mantch if you'll be a gentlmen.

"Sensitivity" is an art and a skill that is denied to those that engage in thuggery. What you talk about is diplomacy, and diplomatic talk. Sensativity is when one knows he is ignorant and fear to revel the extent of his ignorance for fear he'll be branded stupid. (For us, stupid is a very bad thing, and smart is a very good thing. Just wishing to bridge the cultural gap between us two).

Ask any woman, if you can find one who will talk to you at that level. You seem more desperate then me about that very subject. What ever you do, make sure you are protected !

And finally - it would be wise to remember that when you speak of "Truth", you do not or cannot speak of "THE Truth", only "A Truth". Now that is a Post Modern standard nonesense. Open a new thread about it and I'll adress that in full details, if you can't live your life without knowing the answers for it,

And when you eventually find yourself walking upon the Path of Truth, be humble. For it is a blessing to be appreciated, not a tool to be abused. Truth is a world view and an instrument to make the right decistions for the right reactions, Truth is a key for achiving Justice and social harmony.

Get a course on Judaism, it helps.

[TheMagus]

Master Gilgamesh -

You are obviously not aware that, in English, when one addresses a male person as "Master" it is because that person is very young. Once a "Master" reaches maturity, they are then referred to as "Mister". You learn something new every day - this is my contribution to your 'learning'.

The reason I am familiar with Utnapushtim has nothing to do with Google. It is because I have read the poetic account known as "The Epic of Gilgamesh" and had to write a 4,000-word essay on the similarities between it and the Genesis account of Adam.

I must confess that I don't speak Yiddish and have only a smattering of Hebrew that I can remember from attending a Jewish school for 3 years. And that was about 30 years ago. Although my mother (now deceased) was Jewish, my father was not. Funnily enough, he was an English Catholic, although a very poor one. I was brought up as a Jew and converted to Christianity about 20 years ago. Hope that satisfies your curiosity.

As for your claims of holding a "First" (from which University, I wonder) in Quantum Mechanics - perhaps then you can give us a concise explanation of Nonlinear Dynamical Systems, Phase Transitions (or Punctuations), the significance of Random Boolean Networks (and the effect of "attractors"), The Lambda Parameter and Cellular Automation, the Acetabularia Model and the "Red Queen Effect" - and how each of these relate to conditions now known to exist on the Quantum level? I would be interested to hear how you viewed these connected subjects in mathematical terms.

[Canajew]

there are many situations that, through the employment of logic, have no solutions. More variables than unknowns, and games with no Nash equilibria.

Plus of course where one side does not employ logic in their reasoning but other criteria (like elusive concepts such as justice, mercy) and use subjective assessments to make decisions that should be based on objective criteria, the blind application of logic as if the entire system is logically constructed will result in error.

This sort of abstract probably belongs in another thread, though. What was supposed to be the point in all this?

[Canajew]

Funnily enough, he was an English Catholic, although a very poor one. I was brought up as a Jew and converted to Christianity about 20 years ago. Hope that satisfies your curiosity.

and how in the world is this remotely logical? Religion is as illogical as can be, when assessing the arguments on their merits, and with respect to Christianity and Judaism, Christianity is far less logical (and even oriented towards logic) than Judaism.

[redcake]

Master Gilgamesh -

You are obviously not aware that, in English, when one addresses a male person as "Master" it is because that person is very young. Once a "Master" reaches maturity, they are then referred to as "Mister". You learn something new every day - this is my contribution to your 'learning'.

We've gone from 6th rate vaudeville Yiddish to Ren-Fair class. Next you'll be trying to hand out Jews for Jesus handouts... oh wait....