succinylcholine in Mossad hit

Emploi Marketing Agency
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Members do not see this ad.
cfdavid said:
Seriously, can anyone really take this guy seriously? Security fence eh?? So, on who's land will this fence continue to be built. "Jewish land", or Palestinian land?

Which water supplies will it cut off, or guaranteed?? We both know the answer.

Just face it that Israel is using every excuse in the book to ethinical cleanse (i.e. genocide) the region from any Arab existence.

I'll continue this later.
Click to expand...

Remember what prompted the building of the fence--the suicide bombings. It has been very effective at controlling them.
 
dr doze said:
Successful individuals is not the same as successful groups.

I do believe that Jewish success is the principal reason for historical antisemitism.

Antisemitism has been around a lot longer than 1948. What is your opinion of the reason for historical antisemitism?
Click to expand...

Doze, I actually really respect you. Believe it or not, if you really knew me, I feel we'd get along very well.

Regarding historical Anti-Semitism...... I really can't speak of non-Western European countries, but I have an idea as to WHY Western European countries learned to dislike Jews.

It's very simple. French, Germans, The Danish, The Dutch, have always had strong cultures, whether they be religious, cultural, racial, ideological cohesiveness.

In my opinion, when Jews moved into these countries with the strongest cultural/racial identity (which Jews are so preoccupied with), they've felt threatened. Simply put, they felt as if a "breakdown" of traditional "norms" would be of benefit to your "Tribe".

So, subtle attacks against Christian Europeans (perhaps Puritanical) traditions became the norm. Things got "carried away" in fact, and people began resenting this affront to their traditions/values.

This lead to ever increasing resentment, and the rest is history. I do believe it was a bit more complicated, but this is what allowed the Axis powers to succeed.......
 
This is a great discussion; just limit your responses to each other's arguments, and do not level anger at the person making the arguments.

I will refrain from contributing to the thread for now... I will go ahead and say that I am a Christian Israeli-Arab (I have never posted on this forum with the prerequisite that I would be anonymous...).
 
cfdavid said:
It's very simple. French, Germans, The Danish, The Dutch, have always had strong cultures, whether they be religious, cultural, racial, ideological cohesiveness.

In my opinion, when Jews moved into these countries with the strongest cultural/racial identity (which Jews are so preoccupied with), they've felt threatened. Simply put, they felt as if a "breakdown" of traditional "norms" would be of benefit to you "Tribe".
Click to expand...

Ha, I will go ahead and comment on this and say that I believe something similar is happening now with Muslims in Europe...
 
It just means there will more death. It will be some poor Jew next who gets bombed/killed. Then the cycle repeats...
 
Camel said:
Ha, I will go ahead and comment on this and say that I believe something similar is happening now with Muslims in Europe...
Click to expand...

Camel,

You know me at least a little bit. So, don't take offense. But, Muslims are free to leave Europe at any time, if they so choose that European culture and traditions are not to their liking or compatible with their own values and traditions.

cf

P.S. let's stay on point for this one. We can discuss future Muslim/European issues later, as they are for sure "pending".
 
yeah lets stay on point, cfdavid, let's continue to bring up facts from the history of the world which prove that killing a terrorist is a bad idea.
 
cfdavid said:
Camel,

You know me at least a little bit. So, don't take offense. But, Muslims are free to leave Europe at any time, if they so choose that European culture and traditions are not to their liking or compatible with their own values and traditions.

cf

P.S. let's stay on point for this one. We can discuss future Muslim/European issues later, as they are for sure "pending".
Click to expand...

No offense taken; I certainly did not mean to derail the topic, I only thought it was a pertinent observation.

Out of curiosity, what is the ultimate point of this discussion? I think, no matter what, one must look at the big picture. What motivates people? Money, power, etc., that applies to essentially every group that seeks leadership in the world, irrespective of race/religion. No?
 
Camel said:
No offense taken; I certainly did not mean to derail the topic, I only thought it was a pertinent observation.

Out of curiosity, what is the ultimate point of this discussion? I think, no matter what, one must look at the big picture. What motivates people? Money, power, etc., that applies to essentially every group that seeks leadership in the world, irrespective of race/religion. No?
Click to expand...

I agree 100% with this statement. It is what it is, I guess. It's just a shame that "everyday" folks usually pay the price for the greed and ambitions of their respective leaders. But, this has always been the case, and probably always will be.

The goal, though, is to become educated on different issues so that those "leaders" can't manipulate and spread mis/disinformation in order to gain support for their policies. This was much harder to do when we only had a handful of news organizations and the same for major newspapers. And it's even worse with state controlled/influenced media as in the case of some countries.

Also, I'd like to say that I didn't mean to come off so strong on the "muslims being free to leave Europe" statement. It's just that I believe that EVERY group of people has the right to advocate for their traditions and values, and this includes Europeans just as it should all people. That's all.

cf
 
Last edited:
dr doze said:
A grown man recognizes the reality of the situation. Doesn't spout platitudes and honestly acknowledges the fundamental obstacles that exist. But you wouldn't know anything about that would you?
Click to expand...

I acknowledge that there are obstacles to peace. Everyone acknowledges that. But then I also acknowledge that there is no end to this cycle of violence if the focus is on revenge and continuation of violence. I further acknowledge that physicians--American physicians--should not promote such a cycle of hatred and violence. Go ahead, promote/cheerlead for "hits" on "targets" and see in the future what that will lead to: more deaths on both sides. I want to focus on solutions, you, however, want to get bogged down by the facts on the ground and continuation of violence through the promotion of "hits on targets" and praise of assasinations. Now I ask, as an attending physician: who has the higher moral ground here?
 
dr doze said:
At best he is a soldier who views himself at war with Israel, thus a legitimate target.
Click to expand...

Did you just threaten me? Are you suggesting an American citizen exercising his 1st Amendment right to be a "legitimate target"?? And, a target of who? You? Mossad?

Doze, you really are an extremist. I'm glad you had a lapse in discipline for all to see your true colors.

And don't pretend you were referring to the Hamas dude. You responded to IN2B8R when he suggested he finds my posts interesting.
 
Last edited:
cfdavid said:
Did you just threaten me? Are you suggesting an American citizen exercising his 1st Amendment right to be a "legitimate target"?? And, a target of who? You? Mossad?

Doze, you really are an extremist. I'm glad you had a lapse in discipline for all to see your true colors.

And don't pretend you were referring to the Hamas dude. You responded to IN2B8R when he suggested he finds my posts interesting.
Click to expand...

Whoa, settle down. He was very clearly referring to the Hamas dude.

dr doze said:
IN2B8R said:
I find your view points interesting. I for the most part agree with many of your views: violence begets violence. Physicians are healers, they should not cheerlead death/assasination. I doubt that this "hit" will change the Israeli-Palestinian dynamic--they will still be at war for the forseeable future. Granted this guy is labeled as a "terrorist" by the Israeli's, but I am sure that he is labeled as a "freedom fighter" by the Palestinians.... So who's right? Well, as an American, I will stand for justice: in this case, the two state solution is the only way....
Click to expand...
At best he is a soldier who views himself at war with Israel, thus a legitimate target.
Click to expand...

No one's threatening anyone here.
 
pgg said:
Whoa, settle down. He was very clearly referring to the Hamas dude.

No one's threatening anyone here.
Click to expand...

I agree with pgg's assesment. I think Doze was referring to the Hamas leader.


pgg said:
When Genghis Khan subdued a region and beheaded every male who stood taller than a wagon wheel, that area didn't give him any more crap. I'm not saying the guy ushered in a golden age of peace and tranquility (though I give him full points for exempting doctors from taxation), but ruthlessly efficient violence can accomplish a lot if there aren't any hippies around getting their mellows harshed on CNN.
Click to expand...

At pgg, I do hope you're saying this tongue in cheek here. Otherwise, you're suggesting Israel execute every adult male Palestinian. Which is genocide. I'd like to think it's not just the hippies on TV that find genocide repugnant.

Besides, a good number of reports indicate Genghis Khan died from battle wounds. So violence still begets violence.
 
pgg said:
Yes, tongue firmly in cheek. 🙂
Click to expand...

I thought so, but with this being the Interweb and all, I couldn't help but ask.

It's kinda a shame though, because I was all geared up to type out some righteous indignation and condemnation on yo' ass. 😉
 
pgg said:
Whoa, settle down. He was very clearly referring to the Hamas dude.



No one's threatening anyone here.
Click to expand...

My apologies to all. Clearly you are correct pgg.
 
.
 

Attachments

  • motivational-poster.jpg
    motivational-poster.jpg
    15.2 KB · Views: 186
dr doze said:
.
Click to expand...

Well Doze, first, you're so trigger happy with the word "anti-semite", so what do you expect!?

Secondly, you've justified continued violence against Palestinians, the building of a wall which restricts movement greatly and violates international law on the premise of property rights, and so many other extremist, Zionist policies that, sure, I did jump the gun.

But, really, take a look in the mirror because the policies you support are not only extreme, but paranoid to be sure. All bent out of shape about Iran while Israel sits on 200 or so nuclear warheads is just one example.
 
cfdavid said:
Well Doze, first, you're so trigger happy with the word "anti-semite", so what do you expect!?

Secondly, you've justified continued violence against Palestinians, the building of a wall which restricts movement greatly and violates international law on the premise of property rights, and so many other extremist, Zionist policies that, sure, I did jump the gun.

But, really, take a look in the mirror because the policies you support are not only extreme, but paranoid to be sure. All bent out of shape about Iran while Israel sits on 200 or so nuclear warheads is just one example.
Click to expand...

The wall has prevented violence. Violence against Israelis. Remember the events that led to building it.

I think that it is a better decision than replying with artillery shells.
 
IN2B8R said:
I acknowledge that there are obstacles to peace. Everyone acknowledges that. But then I also acknowledge that there is no end to this cycle of violence if the focus is on revenge and continuation of violence. I further acknowledge that physicians--American physicians--should not promote such a cycle of hatred and violence. Go ahead, promote/cheerlead for "hits" on "targets" and see in the future what that will lead to: more deaths on both sides. I want to focus on solutions, you, however, want to get bogged down by the facts on the ground and continuation of violence through the promotion of "hits on targets" and praise of assasinations. Now I ask, as an attending physician: who has the higher moral ground here?
Click to expand...

A targeted killing might have prevented two gulf wars. (Saddam Hussein). Who knows how many lives have been saved by targeted killings that have already taken place?

If England and Germany had preemptively squashed Hitler in the 30s they would have been roundly condemned as aggressors, for the world would never know the horrors that were averted. That is the downside of preemption. You never know what is averted.

I do consider it a moral course of action as long as professionals who answer to civilian government leadership weigh the costs and benefits with are making the calls.
 
dr doze said:
The wall has prevented violence. Violence against Israelis. Remember the events that led to building it.

I think that it is a better decision than replying with artillery shells.
Click to expand...

I seriously want Israeli's within the 1967 defined territory to be safe. That is not to say that I want Israeli's in occupied territories or even settlements to experience violence against them (though the opposite is generally true there). I'm just less "sympathetic" to the settlers whom are "settling" on other peoples land, that they have legal rights to (the Palestinians that is).

What should be happening is a more frank discussion as to WHY the Israeli's need to take such extreme measures to prevent violence.

How many generations of Palestinians can go on living under the conditions in which they live? How many little girls that die as a result of an Apache rocket missfire (in occupied territories) does it take for just ONE young man to decide (in despair, poverty etc.) that it's worth strapping explosives to his body in a desperate attempt at changing the situation??

These are the questions that need to be addressed or like others have said, violence will continue to beget violence.

cf
 
GoodmanBrown said:
I thought so, but with this being the Interweb and all, I couldn't help but ask.

It's kinda a shame though, because I was all geared up to type out some righteous indignation and condemnation on yo' ass. 😉
Click to expand...

🙂 I do think 'violence begets violence' is a worn-out, tired old platitude that's just as naive and foolish as a claim that violence can solve anything. Clearly there are times when violent responses are both warranted and necessary.

I don't really have a strong opinion on the Israeli vs Palestinian conflict, though I admit a relatively pro-Israel bias.
 
dr doze said:
A targeted killing might have prevented two gulf wars. (Saddam Hussein). Who knows how many lives have been saved by targeted killings that have already taken place?

If England and Germany had preemptively squashed Hitler in the 30s they would have been roundly condemned as aggressors, for the world would never know the horrors that were averted. That is the downside of preemption. You never know what is averted.

I do consider it a moral course of action as long as professionals who answer to civilian government leadership weigh the costs and benefits with are making the calls.
Click to expand...

History is always a lesson: you get rid of one Hamas guy, another ten pop up. Thus, in the long run, more people from both sides die.... One thing to keep in mind: there was only one Saddam and one Hitler in existence, thankfully. As you have eloquently stated above, have they been gotten rid of initially, countless lives may have been saved. Your analogy above would have been valid if there was only one Hamas leader who is responsible for all the terrorism that innocent Israeli's suffer. That, however, is not reality. The reality is that there are two peoples at war. They have been at war for generations. Cyclical revenge killings have been going on since Israel's inception. Both sides--note that I said sides, not just Israel vs. one Hamas guy, or one palestinian group--feel that they have a right to the land. In the end, the solution, thus, is a political and not a military one. Unless you plan on targetted killing of every Palestinian, I seriously doubt that preemptively killing one Hamas guy will get anyone anywhere (and I say this both for the sake of Israeli's and Palestinians). And, as I have stated above, history is always a lesson: if you kill them, more will come, more (on both sides) will die....
 
pgg said:
🙂 I do think 'violence begets violence' is a worn-out, tired old platitude that's just as naive and foolish as a claim that violence can solve anything. Clearly there are times when violent responses are both warranted and necessary.

I don't really have a strong opinion on the Israeli vs Palestinian conflict, though I admit a relatively pro-Israel bias.
Click to expand...

The thing I find so interesting is how two people read the same situation so differently. Someone once pointed out the website The Armed Citizen as demonstrating why we, as citizens, should all carry guns. But, I read those stories, and about 50% of them make me sad. Some, yeah, I'd readily use a gun in the same situation. But, a decent number involve some 17 year old punk kid who's totally unarmed and gets killed for a B&E. Is violence (of the deadly variety) warranted and necessary there? For me, no ****ing way. For others, obviously so.

So, I'm not convinced there are many times when a violent response is both warranted and necessary.

Anyway, I somehow accidentally hijacked multiple threads into gun-ownership debates which was honestly not my intention...
 
Last edited:
pgg said:
🙂 I do think 'violence begets violence' is a worn-out, tired old platitude that's just as naive and foolish as a claim that violence can solve anything. Clearly there are times when violent responses are both warranted and necessary.

I don't really have a strong opinion on the Israeli vs Palestinian conflict, though I admit a relatively pro-Israel bias.
Click to expand...

This position is not at all uncommon amongst Americans. Would this be the case, however, if 80% of major Hollywood studio heads and producers had Arab surnames??

I think not. So, not only is your position typical for what seems to be obvious reasons, it's also lazy. That is, most people have this bias because of a "consistency" with the current power structure. It's always easiest to side with power versus against it. Jews have considerably more (infinitely more) power in the world than do Palastinians.

Frankly, I'm not even suggesting this is right or wrong. There will always be these kinds of differences. But, we must self-reflect on what truly influences our belief system.

cf
 
I have long tried to think of an analogy for the situation in Israel.

It doesn't fit perfectly, but what if the U.S. government (analogous to the UN) decided to give Mississippi to all of the Native Americans (some of them had their ancestral homes in Mississippi) in the U.S. because of the atrocities that befell them as a group, against the protests of the Mississippi state government and, clearly, the citizens therein. The U.S. government then arms this group and helps them establish a state on the land and helps them fight off any militias that pop up.

The Mississippians that are exiled from their homes and land become refugees in Alabama and other neighboring states which do not have the resources to help.

I am sure this could be refined further, but the problem now is longstanding historical violence between these 2 groups where there was once peace (Arabs are semites, too).

Was the Holocaust awful beyond description? Of course. Did the Palestinians contribute to it?

It's the same situation with any group that attempts to consolidate power (for whatever reason, including an attempt to prevent such atrocities against their group). Ultimately, there is resentment. The (original) beauty of the U.S. was that democracy helped prevent the typical avenues for such consolidation. I, for one, think democracy in the U.S. has or will fail IF the old Jeffersonian ideas of renewal by blood of patriots are not included in the very basic idea of democracy.

Lot of blabbing, I'll stop. Would love to hear everyone's thoughts.
 
Camel said:
I have long tried to think of an analogy for the situation in Israel.

It doesn't fit perfectly, but what if the U.S. government (analogous to the UN) decided to give Mississippi to all of the Native Americans (some of them had their ancestral homes in Mississippi) in the U.S. because of the atrocities that befell them as a group, against the protests of the Mississippi state government and, clearly, the citizens therein. The U.S. government then arms this group and helps them establish a state on the land and helps them fight off any militias that pop up.

The Mississippians that are exiled from their homes and land become refugees in Alabama and other neighboring states which do not have the resources to help.

I am sure this could be refined further, but the problem now is longstanding historical violence between these 2 groups where there was once peace (Arabs are semites, too).

Was the Holocaust awful beyond description? Of course. Did the Palestinians contribute to it?

It's the same situation with any group that attempts to consolidate power (for whatever reason, including an attempt to prevent such atrocities against their group). Ultimately, there is resentment. The (original) beauty of the U.S. was that democracy helped prevent the typical avenues for such consolidation. I, for one, think democracy in the U.S. has or will fail IF the old Jeffersonian ideas of renewal by blood of patriots are not included in the very basic idea of democracy.

Lot of blabbing, I'll stop. Would love to hear everyone's thoughts.
Click to expand...

Camel, I appreciate the fact that you're THINKING about things.

As a general rule, we must THINK for ourselves and not just listen to various sound bites by people that may (or may not) have a particular vested interest in a given topic. That's what we're all trained to do with EBM, so it seems logical that physicians (and those to be) would attempt to adopt this principle in their everyday lives.

Regarding Israel/Palastine, it's REALLY NOT a huge issue that I'm super passionate about (I'm neither Jewish nor Palastinian). However, it serves as a great example of how power differentials and media/political clout can (and clearly does) influence an otherwise pretty uneducated public. This is how power perpetuates itself. Usually by manipulation of information or strength of arms. Or both....

cf
 
Stitch said:
Wouldn't they see the needle hole or the old IV site? That should tip them off during an autopsy, I'd imagine...
Click to expand...

If the intramuscular injection is on the dependent side of the body it might be concealed by livor mortis...
 
I should also say that I abhor the violence against civilians on both sides of this conflict.

And cf, your ultimate intent of spurring critical thinking is a noble one and one that I try to do myself. One of my fundamental beliefs is that I can always be wrong (and so can anyone else). Present new evidence or a new way of thinking, and I must consider it.
 
cfdavid said:
So, not only is your position typical for what seems to be obvious reasons, it's also lazy.
Click to expand...

Well, I deliberately didn't get into why I have something of a pro-Israel bias, mainly because Israel threads always go nowhere in the most contentious ulcer-inducing fashion imaginable. But now that you've somehow leaped to the conclusion that I'm lazily swallowing Hollywood Jew propaganda, I'll (briefly) outline the basis for my bias:

Israel is a western secular democracy surrounded by theocratic dictatorships. The Palestinians are at best tragic pawns, used or neglected by said dictatorships. If someone put a gun to my head and told me to pick a side, Israel it would be.

What they've had in Israel amounts to a civil war that has been going on for a long, long time. Someone, don't remember who, wisely laid out three rules for getting involved in someone else's civil war.
1) Don't.
2) If you do, pick a side.
3) Win.

Don't interpret my pro-Israel bias as a statement that I'm content with my own country's failure to abide by these rules.
 
pgg said:
Israel is a western secular democracy surrounded by theocratic dictatorships.
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, the Israeli-Arabs I know all love living in Israel and would much rather live there than any of the Arabic countries; that being said, they are mostly Christian Arabs.
 
pgg said:
Well, I deliberately didn't get into why I have something of a pro-Israel bias, mainly because Israel threads always go nowhere in the most contentious ulcer-inducing fashion imaginable. But now that you've somehow leaped to the conclusion that I'm lazily swallowing Hollywood Jew propaganda, I'll (briefly) outline the basis for my bias:

Israel is a western secular democracy surrounded by theocratic dictatorships. The Palestinians are at best tragic pawns, used or neglected by said dictatorships. If someone put a gun to my head and told me to pick a side, Israel it would be.

What they've had in Israel amounts to a civil war that has been going on for a long, long time. Someone, don't remember who, wisely laid out three rules for getting involved in someone else's civil war.
1) Don't.
2) If you do, pick a side.
3) Win.

Don't interpret my pro-Israel bias as a statement that I'm content with my own country's failure to abide by these rules.
Click to expand...

Wow. A "secular" democracy?? The ENTIRE concept of a JEWISH state refutes your arguement completely. Please pgg, you'll need to become MUCH MORE sophisticated than that for anyone to respect your opinion when challenged by someone who knows what the reality is.

How would worldwide Jewry respond to ANY OTHER nation's contention that they are a purely, and exclusively Christian nation?? (regardless of citizenship granted to other religious minorities).

Would the ADL, SPLC, or AIPAC support such a "regime" or denounce it entirely?

Doze, how about you? If Germany, for example, were to declaire itself a "Christian nation", would you agree that that is their right? Afterall, Israel is PREOCCUPIED with maintaining the Jewish state, and character of the Israeli nation. Look at all of the concerns of Jewish vs. Arab birthrates in the Israeli mainstream press. This preoccupation of a racially/religious state is what makes Israel and most Jews hipocritical with regards other races/religions asserting that same level of "vigor" towards an ethnic/religious nation.

Again, we MUST THINK FOR ourselves.


cf
 
Last edited:
Obviously you know very little abut the middle east, it's culture and it's history but you still feel that you are entitled to make such radical statements about it.
You represent a significant slice of the American society that has absolutely no knowledge about the real issues in the middle east but were programmed since a very a young age to sympathize with Israel and hate the Palestinians.
I wish people would read some unbiased history, try to see the other side of the story and have an open mind especially when they are supposed to be the educated elite of the society.






pgg said:
Well, I deliberately didn't get into why I have something of a pro-Israel bias, mainly because Israel threads always go nowhere in the most contentious ulcer-inducing fashion imaginable. But now that you've somehow leaped to the conclusion that I'm lazily swallowing Hollywood Jew propaganda, I'll (briefly) outline the basis for my bias:

Israel is a western secular democracy surrounded by theocratic dictatorships. The Palestinians are at best tragic pawns, used or neglected by said dictatorships. If someone put a gun to my head and told me to pick a side, Israel it would be.

What they've had in Israel amounts to a civil war that has been going on for a long, long time. Someone, don't remember who, wisely laid out three rules for getting involved in someone else's civil war.
1) Don't.
2) If you do, pick a side.
3) Win.

Don't interpret my pro-Israel bias as a statement that I'm content with my own country's failure to abide by these rules.
Click to expand...
 
IN2B8R said:
History is always a lesson: you get rid of one Hamas guy, another ten pop up. Thus, in the long run, more people from both sides die.... One thing to keep in mind: there was only one Saddam and one Hitler in existence, thankfully. As you have eloquently stated above, have they been gotten rid of initially, countless lives may have been saved. Your analogy above would have been valid if there was only one Hamas leader who is responsible for all the terrorism that innocent Israeli's suffer. That, however, is not reality. The reality is that there are two peoples at war. They have been at war for generations. Cyclical revenge killings have been going on since Israel's inception. Both sides--note that I said sides, not just Israel vs. one Hamas guy, or one palestinian group--feel that they have a right to the land. In the end, the solution, thus, is a political and not a military one. Unless you plan on targetted killing of every Palestinian, I seriously doubt that preemptively killing one Hamas guy will get anyone anywhere (and I say this both for the sake of Israeli's and Palestinians). And, as I have stated above, history is always a lesson: if you kill them, more will come, more (on both sides) will die....
Click to expand...

In case you haven't noticed few palestinians and even fewer israelis have been killed since the Gaza conflict 1 year ago. There have been few israeli targeted killings in Gaza. Few rockets have been fired at Israeli citizens from Gaza. In case you haven't noticed the israeli/lebanon border has been remarkably quiet since the 2006 war with hezbollah in lebanon. I believe that an unofficial truce is in effect.

Israeli policy has been effective at minimizing loss of life on both sides.
 
dr doze said:
Israeli policy has been effective at minimizing loss of life on both sides.
Click to expand...

You are not serious are you?
Did you see what happened in Gaza during that thing you call war?
It's OK to be biased but please don't invent stuff.
Palestinian children were murdered with cold blood and the whole world watched and did nothing, so please don't talk about Israel conserving Palestinian lives!
 
Planktonmd said:
You are not serious are you?
Did see what happened in Gaza during that thing you call war?
It's OK to be biased but please don't invent stuff.
Palestinian children were murdered with cold blood and the whole world watched and did nothing, so please don't talk about Israel conserving Palestinian lives!
Click to expand...

Plank, you must realize (as I'm sure you already do) that Doze is a Zionist Extremist of the worst kind, despite his dialed down tone, and claims to the contrary.

We often hear about Muslim extremists, Christian extremists (both of whom definitely exist), but what about JEWISH extemism?? It clearly exists, and in abundance.


Guys like this HATE people like me (and tens of millions of others) that shed light on this hipocracy.
cf
 
Planktonmd said:
You are not serious are you?
Did see what happened in Gaza during that thing you call war?
It's OK to be biased but please don't invent stuff.
Palestinian children were murdered with cold blood and the whole world watched and did nothing, so please don't talk about Israel conserving Palestinian lives!
Click to expand...

Maybe the Israelis should behave the way your and my parents and grandparents did 60 years ago?

IN WW2 Not a single shell or bomb fell on the continental US. The survival of the US was never in doubt, Yet there was overwhelming support for the fire bombing of Tokyo and Dresden, not to mention Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Why don't you consider the above and then Google "HAMAS charter Israel"

Then answer the question: who has behaved better: Israel or the "greatest generation" ?
 
If you want me to google the HAMAS charter then I suggest that you google:
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion
Although I am sure you know it very well.



dr doze said:
Maybe the Israelis should behave the way your and my parents and grandparents did 60 years ago?

IN WW2 Not a single shell or bomb fell on the continental US. The survival of the US was never in doubt, Yet there was overwhelming support for the fire bombing of Tokyo and Dresden, not to mention Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Why don't you consider the above and then Google "HAMAS charter Israel"

Then answer the question: who has behaved better: Israel or the "greatest generation" ?
Click to expand...
 
dr doze said:
Maybe the Israelis should behave the way your and my parents and grandparents did 60 years ago?

IN WW2 Not a single shell or bomb fell on the continental US. The survival of the US was never in doubt, Yet there was overwhelming support for the fire bombing of Tokyo and Dresden, not to mention Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Why don't you consider the above and then Google "HAMAS charter Israel"

Then answer the question: who has behaved better: Israel or the "greatest generation" ?
Click to expand...

Once again, I'll need to censure your propaganda. NEVER was it "up for vote" on whether or not to bomb Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Dresden the same. SO, give it up. You're probably for the first time in your sad little life, up against people that know what they're talking about and willing and able to challenge you.

cf
 
Planktonmd said:
If you want me to google the HAMAS charter then I suggest that you google:
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion
Although I am sure you know it very well.
Click to expand...

You have got to be f*cking kidding me you piece of ****.
 
cfdavid said:
Wow. A "secular" democracy?? The ENTIRE concept of a JEWISH state refutes your arguement completely. Please pgg, you'll need to become MUCH MORE sophisticated than that for anyone to respect your opinion when challenged by someone who knows what the reality is.
Click to expand...

Yes, Israel is - for the most part - a secular democracy. Freedom of religion is codified in their laws. Christians, Muslims, Hindus, and atheists aren't criminalized or shot on sight. Jewish religious law (Halacha?) is not the law of the state. Citizens aren't involuntarily subjected to religious courts or anything resembling Sharia. Religious leaders don't have legislative, executive, or judicial authority (except, as I understand it, citizens who voluntarily subject themselves to Halacha laws and a Rabbi's authority).

Obviously this isn't a black & white issue - there is a continuum, and Jewish people and religious leaders influence their government (just as Christian people and religious leaders heavily influence our own government). It's also obvious that Israel is much closer to the secular democratic end of that continuum than the theocratic dictatorship end.


In any case, like I said earlier:
pgg said:
Israel threads always go nowhere in the most contentious ulcer-inducing fashion imaginable
Click to expand...
Unless you (again) misrepresent what I believe, I'm done.
 
If all religions are represented equally then why are they only encouraging Jews to immigrate to Israel?
Why don't you see advertisement for Muslims to immigrate to Israel and receive government aid and free insurance?
How can you say that a country that is based on a biblical fairy tale is a secular country?
What are you smoking?



pgg said:
Yes, Israel is - for the most part - a secular democracy. Freedom of religion is codified in their laws. Christians, Muslims, Hindus, and atheists aren't criminalized or shot on sight. Jewish religious law (Halacha?) is not the law of the state. Citizens aren't involuntarily subjected to religious courts or anything resembling Sharia. Religious leaders don't have legislative, executive, or judicial authority (except, as I understand it, citizens who voluntarily subject themselves to Halacha laws and a Rabbi's authority).

Obviously this isn't a black & white issue - there is a continuum, and Jewish people and religious leaders influence their government (just as Christian people and religious leaders heavily influence our own government). It's also obvious that Israel is much closer to the secular democratic end of that continuum than the theocratic dictatorship end.


In any case, like I said earlier:Unless you (again) misrepresent what I believe, I'm done.
Click to expand...
 
Planktonmd said:
If all religions are represented equally then why are they only encouraging Jews to immigrate to Israel?
Why don't you see advertisement for Muslims to immigrate to Israel and receive government aid and free insurance?
How can you say that a country that is based on a biblical fairy tale is a secular country?
What are you smoking?
Click to expand...

Israel is a jewish state with ethnic diversity.

Try building a church or synagogue in any muslim country as opposed to building a mosque or a church in Israel and see how that goes for you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

coffeebythelake
Meanwhile over in the UK
Replies
7
Views
2K
TeslaCoil
TeslaCoil
A
NAPA in NY
Replies
47
Views
4K
aneftp
A
A
Hospital putting profits over patients in…Spain?
Replies
1
Views
604
coffeebythelake
coffeebythelake
N
Practicing Anesthesia in Florida
Replies
18
Views
3K
aneftp
A
N
Market in Austin, TX?
2
Replies
50
Views
5K
aneftp
A
Top Bottom