In the news

I think TW2 deserves all the rep left in the lfgss coffers.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/picking-a-side-in-israel-palestine_b_5602701.html

This was a pretty strong, balanced article I thought.

Makes my comments about religion look pretty stupid, with a few choice quotes from the Koran.

yawn

now THIS is news.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/30/dick-pic-janet-looks-at-89-dicks_n_5635212.html?cps=gravity

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/picking-a-side-in-israel-palestine_b_5602701.html

This was a pretty strong, balanced article I thought.

Makes my comments about religion look pretty stupid, with a few choice quotes from the Koran.

Balanced? Looooool! I read that article the other day. A more accurate headline would've been '7 things (some of which I just made up whilst taking a shit) to consider before deciding to support Israel in this conflict'.

I mean, it claims that Israel ended the occupation of Gaza in 2005. No. They withdrew settlers and troops in 2005. That doesn't mean the occupation ended. It just means that the flavour of it changed. They still control the airspace, the airwaves, the borders, the registration of births/deaths/etc., the import export of goods. Fuck, I could go on. And that's just one fucking stupid point out of seven stupid points. Fuck that guy.

Fuck that guy.

By which, I mean the author of the article.

Seems like you've chosen a side then.

Yep. I'm unashamed to say that I'm on the side of the people who are the victims of a racist, colonial state. I'm also unashamed to say that I'm sick of reading propaganda dressed up as neutral, ideology-free reportage.

I mean, look at point 1 there. You'd have to be thick as shit to think that was a balanced point. I'm not saying there's no anti-semitism in the Arab world, but the way it posits that as the only possible reason that Sunni and Shia would unite in support of the Palestinian cause is borderline racist. You think maybe Sunni and Shia wouldn't also unite because they both have recent historical experiences of the injustice of colonialisation? Or because they fucking hate the USA and Israel is obviously a US client state? Nah...couldn't be that, could it? Must be because the fucking darkies are barbarian Jew haters. Only possible reason.

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/concentrate-and-exterminate-israel-parliament-deputy-speakers-gaza-genocide-plan

You'd have to be thick as shit to think that was a balanced point....Must be because the fucking darkies are barbarian Jew haters. Only possible reason.

They are programmed to oppose "the other" just as Palestinian children are. At its very core, this is a tribal religious conflict that will never be resolved unless people stop choosing sides.

So you really don't have to choose between being "pro-Israel" or "pro-Palestine." If you support secularism, democracy, and a two-state solution -- and you oppose Hamas, settlement expansion, and the occupation -- you can be both.

His point is your vitriol, and the vitriol of every commentator sitting behind a computer in a safe western country, is useless.
Did you miss these links he posted?
http://online.wsj.com/articles/palestinians-mourn-four-boys-killed-on-gaza-beach-by-israel-missiles-1405616076http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/15/world/middleeast/israelis-watch-bombs-drop-on-gaza-from-front-row-seats.html?_r=1http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.530993

No. His point - if he has one - is to repeat hasbara talking points so that he can come to a false conclusion about how both sides are just as bad as each other and he can sit smugly in the political centre like the hack that he is.

At its very core, this is a tribal religious conflict[/URL]

I mean, this is bullshit. Yes, there's a tribal element to it. And yes, Zionism is religiously motivated colonialism, and that is part of the problem. But to reduce the Palestinian side of the conflict to 'religious tribalism' is to ignore this:

And therefore be a massive cock.

Doctrines are an expression of man's will to power, not the cause of it.

You were on far stronger ground with this. This was a smart thing to say.

And so what, he posted some links? Half his article is fucking spurious nonsense. He lambasts Hamas for using human shields, but completely neglects to mention that there is far more evidence for Israel using human shields than there is for Hamas. He asks 'why would Israel deliberately kill civilians?' and comes to the conclusion that it wouldn't! Loooool! He claims that the occupation of Gaza ended in 2005 - shame the fucking UN or the international law community doesn't agree with him on that one.

The whole article is literally paragraphs of lies, half-truths and half-cocked fantasies that lead up to a fucking strawman conclusion:

So you really don't have to choose between being "pro-Israel" or "pro-Palestine." If you support secularism, democracy, and a two-state solution -- and you oppose Hamas, settlement expansion, and the occupation

which is just self-aggrandising 'look at me I'm so rational and centrist' bullshit. I support secularism, democracy and a two state solution. I don't agree with Hamas' tactics, I oppose settlement expansion and the occupation. And yet somehow I manage to be pro-Palestinian. How strange.

NBA Basketball player Paul George snaps his leg like a fucking twig in a friendly exhibition game for Team USA ahead of the FIBA World Cup. putting him out of the world cup, next season and possibly ending his career.

Daily Mail posts picture and video footage.

stay classy DM.

errr... link?

it's too nasty to link.

any word on John and Ringo?

Kind of like Israel and the Forth Geneva Convention.

And, although I'm not a international law scholar, I suspect bombing UN schools is probably some sort of crime.

Is EdwardZ one of these people paid to support Israel online? I'm suspecting this is the case more and more.

I don't know about that, but I do find myself wondering what the Z stands for.

Also, a useful refresher on Arthur Schopenhauer's "The Art of Controversy".

NBA Basketball player Paul George snaps his leg like a fucking twig in a friendly exhibition game for Team USA ahead of the FIBA World Cup. putting him out of the world cup, next season and possibly ending his career.

Daily Mail posts picture and video footage.

stay classy DM.

I once saw someone break his leg in a (very low-league) basketball match. He came down hard and you could see his muscles spilling out. The sight has always stayed with me.

Best not search for that video then!

Watched the video, wish I hadn't. Bleurgh.

yeah it's not nice. which is why i think it's low even for the mail to link to it. they literally called the game off after he did it as the players were all in shock and espn only showed the replay once or maybe twice immediately after then apologised when the seriousness of it sank in and said they'd not be showing it again.

This is the DM you are talking about. I don't think morals are high on their agenda

Just to make us all feel a bit more shit:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/.premium-1.606542

P.S.
Haaretz is awesome.

I rent all my cars from them.

The Times of Israel is also awesome. In a completely different way. Hot on the back of their quickly deleted blog 'When genocide is permissable', they bring us the equally as awful but in a very different way 'Does this war make me look fat?'

It must be fun working for their editorial team.

Just to make us all feel a bit more shit:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/.premium-1.606542

I suspect that its taken out of context. Rape is, one need recall, a standard weapon of war. Its nothing new. When Muhammad's army took Khybar the army killed the men and "took the women".

“Safiyah was born in Medinah. She belonged to the Jewish tribe of Banu 'I-Nadir. When this tribe was expelled from Medinah in the year 4 A.H, Huyaiy was one of those who settled in the fertile colony of Khaibar together with Kinana ibn al-Rabi' to whom Safiyah was married a little before the Muslims attacked Khaibar. She was then seventeen. She had formerly been the wife of Sallam ibn Mishkam, who divorced her. One mile from Khaibar. Here the Prophet married Safiyah. She was groomed and made-up for the Prophet by Umm Sulaim, the mother of Anas ibn Malik. They spent the night there. Abu Ayyub al-Ansari guarded the tent of the Prophet the whole night. When, in the early dawn, the Prophet saw Abu Ayyub strolling up and down, he asked him what he meant by this sentry-go; he replied: "I was afraid for you with this young lady. You had killed her father, her husband and many of her relatives, and till recently she was an unbeliever. I was really afraid for you on her account". The Prophet prayed for Abu Ayyub al-Ansari (Ibn Hisham, p. 766) Safiyah had requested the Prophet to wait till he had gone a stage away from Khaibar. "Why?" asked the Prophet. "I was afraid for you on account of the Jews who still happened to be near at Khaibar!"

The biblical Israelites too "took women" .Both the stories of Dina (in Vayishlach) and later Pinchas in the Torah come to mind. From the Torah we learn that rapists are forced to marry their victims.

“If a man finds a virgin girl who was not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, then the man who lay with her shall give fifty [shekels of] silver to the girl’s father, and she shall become his wife, because he violated her. He shall not be able to send her away all the days of his life.”

From Pinchas we learn that these intermarriages can be viewed as a problem.
Today rape continues to be a popular intrument of war be it in the Congo, Libyia, Syria, Sudan, Russia, Bosnia, Sri Lanka, India, Nepal, or "Palestine".
The issue at hand, following Dershowitz is to increase the price of terror. In his book "Why terror works" he points out why the usual deterents don't work. Why even trying to understand "the root cause" of the terrorists' grievences is morally wrong.
But.. lets take the whole discussion out of context and give it a spin... Would the intermarrage with the leaders of HAMAS' families solve a problem .....?

You write so. much. bullshit. You repulsive little stain.