The Nazi posts are removed, one remains, probably to show people to which political side the Nazis are voting for, meaning not the Zionist right.Originally Posted by Speaker
Why the Nazis isn't banned, is a whole different story.
Home | The Nazi posts are removed, one remains, probably to show people to which political side the Nazis are voting for, meaning not the Zionist right.
Why the Nazis isn't banned, is a whole different story.
It's important that people see how these events are giving license to the anti-semites to say what they've been thinking all along. They can't contain themselves. No longer are we paranoid, or sensationalistic.
As much as I understand the logic, and could argue for leaving Gaza, the reality of all this is pretty grim. Israel is making a mistake. Just allowing the news footage of an Israeli crying will cost Israel and the entire Western civilized World, it's security in the end.
It's called censorship Speaker, one of the foundations of any extremist society. I find it particularly ironic that Nazi Germany was into censorship too!
Greetings Zyklon-B
Nazi Germany ended in 1945
What do you call present day Germany with their Holocaust Denial Law (which includes Britain France and Austria). The precise text of the German law that makes it an offence, (called "defaming the dead"), to publicly deny the holocaust - would you not call it censorship?
His messages were removed because of obvious trolling and anti-Semitic contents. As Gilgamesh noted, some posts might be left intact because they got decent and sensible replies, but IMO, it's best to report and igonore such posters.
FWIW I have tried to poison other boards (like CSPAN) in response to the normal chatter there which was over the top antisemitic noise. Real obnoxious stuff - and when it was brought to the attention of the mods they did nothing as did the web admins and the editorial staff even though straight up hate speech was being published in their name. So - I tried to poison the board by pushing it even further. All I found out was that:
there is no upper limit on antisemtic hate speech online
the more you generate it the more people actually start to support it
you cannot shame anyone into anything
So the belief that you 'can show them for what they are' winds up being completely false.
Huh? You were pulling a stunt that backfired on you. The rest of these people actually think this way. Are we any better off if they were to disguise their true feelings?
The point is this. You can't out antisemite the antisemites. You can post pages straight from the American Nazi Party on most boards and people will sagely agree.
I'm not very educated on all the history, and have no specific idealism and agenda here, but just a observer who has in recent years have become interested in the overall situation.
Now, just taking a glance at this post/article with some of its terms, poll numbers gives the impression of a friend I once had who was so desperate, one minded, lack of integrity to twist the situation to his own liking and personal agendas, with many inaccuracies in hopes of pulling the wool over my eyes, discounting the intelligence and opinion of the listener, in hopes of selling his product and story.
Now, whether all this is is moral, immoral, right, wrong, etc, is not the issue, keep this sort of shennigan up will result in everything that the person who is trying so hard with any words necessary to twist the situation, to fall further and further into the black pit; the very thing you are so hard to twist against. And usually, the end result will be the very thing you are fighting against growing that much stronger, and defeating all the misleading words and cause. It will be well deserved. (Note, this is just an opinion)
If the issue isn't about right and wrong, then what is it about? You hate statistics that much?
If its immoral, what I'm saying is if you want the world behind you and to help you, to expect sympathy by twisting facts, arguments with selective data is not the way. This also includes other unjust issues. Do it in a way where the world is given a more objective, or realistic picture. It is impossible to reach this truth, but at least aim for it. Not in a feverish, one-minded way ulterior way.
Otherwise if one counters the unjust in a unjust way of his/her own, credibility is eroded, words are taken as that of a child spewing in a impulsive, selfish way and due to the clouding of deception (even if its meant for the good), the real stories, genuine reasons fall on deaf ears leading to only more self pity, negligance from others, and wondering why the world won't listen. Like I said, I'm only a outside observer but I know when someone is trying to dupe me and sell me something even though I may know it to be true. It is this type of thing that will only make things worse.
Excuse me, who is twisting facts immorally?
Debate the information, not the style of how one choses to debate.
So far you have used a personal issue with a friend to discount statistical information, even though it's the standard for how all academic studies measure cognitive information.
I'd say you're in poor form for any teach-in on this planet.
Last edited by redcake; 08-23-2005 at 06:21 AM.
Gilgamesh,
you are one sick puppy.Never respond to a Nazi troll.
He is part of the herd that visited us yesterday.
He feels safe bragging from the other side of the world, too coward to face us. In Israel we step on brown roaches like him.
Soon, the Arabs will shove their Hammas falgs up his arss in his own beloved country.
We out live all our enemies, we will out live the Europeans as well.
I just love when the Arab Jihadist will rip you to pieces. Good thing when our enemies kill each other for our pleasure.
regarding gaza and the west bank...
if i may quote Cato:
is there not a clear arab majority in gaza and the wb? should they have the right for selfdetermination? if not why?In what was partitioned to Israel there was a clear jewish majority.
Ours by right of self determination.
Style and information are intertwined when one's style is to include shady information.
"Ariel Sharon’s cabinet has decided that the only way to guarantee the government’s survival is to suspend the democratic rights of the majority of the country’s citizens who vehemently oppose Sharon’s planned expulsion of the Jews of Gaza"
If read carefully, there is no mention of the stats that seems to consume you. For one, the stats I have read from many different sources shows results that there is a slight majority in favour for the pullout. That is, there is more support then opposition. The article does not use any hard figures, and clearly infers that there is major support for the settlers with chaos around. And let's say there has been a reversal, where there is slight support against the pullout, it is hardly a "vehemently opposition"
Bostong Globe - June 3rd, 2005 - "Israel intends to evacuate all 21 Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip and four of 120 in the West Bank starting in mid-August under Sharon's plan to disengage from conflict with the Palestinians.
Opinion polls had put support for the withdrawal, approved by Israel's parliament, at around 60 percent.
The latest survey noted that while the figure now stood at 50 percent, only 38 percent of those polled said they opposed the pullout, with 12 percent undecided."
I have also read seveal national newspapers to support this. But then again, if you are one of those whom have bought into the product, there's nothing much I can do, just like when my friend was selling me his product with false statistics "I can guarantee a rate of return higher then the benchmark average".
"refusal of military personnel to participate in the ethnic cleansing have triggered a state of emergency throughout Israel"
""Meanwhile, Sharon continued to seek legislative approval for the ethnic cleansing .."
With such strong words as ethnic cleansing, to invoke pity and attention, (though I understand where the speaker would be coming from and feel, it is also a abused word just like it seems everybody refers somebody to Hitler), from my understanding, this is mostly done within, not some foreign entity from outside. Though this would be considered a expulsion, there is hardly any mass killing. And I'm sure there are instances where the military is having or or outright refusal, but as a whole, this is clearly not the case further eroding credibility for any valid help or sympathy.
Like I said, I do not know all the specifics, but articles like this do not help the situation (believe me, I won't be the only one reacting like this with eyes rolled back). The rest of the article is more balance, but as soon I read the first few paragraphs, my reaction is 'oh, another one of these' and just moved on or did not take the whole article seriously. If you don't agree with me, that is fine, but like I said, it is these type of articles that will push people's support away.
No, it's the predisposed combative attitude of people like yourself which prevents support - and since you admit it's not based on specifics - it's obviously based on a deeper bias. Learn the specifics, and then challenge them. If you want to abolish statistics in news reporting, go hit up the New York Times with that crusade instead, alright squirt. To come here and try to undermine the entire pro-Israel message is going to be futile. I agree though...getting through to people like yourself who form judgement before they "know the specifics" is going to be near impossible. Good job.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks