Noony vs Furry, an invitation to PROBLEM SOLVING.

Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Noony vs Furry, an invitation to PROBLEM SOLVING.

Now, both of you have had me blast both of you. I will NOT post in this thread and consider it ONE ON ONE.  I may start another peanut gallery thread. But this one is between the two of you.

But keep this in mind. I hear constantly in the news how both sides want peace. And I am sure there are PLENTY in both camps who do.

However, it seems that it is a peace based on all or nothing and the submission of the other.

My postulation TO BOTH SIDES, is that neither wants to budge because of history of tradition and RELIGION.

"Just follow me" seems to be what the other side says will solve all the problems, which WONT happen.

So how DO each of you think this problem can be solved without the baggage of the past? Neither side can undo what has been done. Neither can get rid of the other.

I would like to think BOTH of you know ultimately no matter how much each side in this conflict disagrees, that ultimately we are still dealing with humans.

So without HE SAID SHE SAID, and with out "MINE" or "THEY STARTED IT"

What would each of you do if you could have the power to end this conflict right now?

I want each of you to talk as humans, not labels. As if BOTH of you were trying to arbitrate a fight between co-workers or friends or family members.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Peel Commission partition mapHere's the thing to keep in mind -- that land area bordered in red?  That's what the original partition called to be Jewish land.  The Arabs =rejected= those borders.  If you don't recognize the land, the body of water in the bottom half, in the middle, is the Dead Sea.  The river to the north is the Jordan and the smaller body of water at the top is the Sea of Galilee.  The area bordered in black, with the checkered pattern, is a corridor that connects Jerusalem to the coast.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is difficult to imagine where you found that map as every google for partition maps shows you are lying again.

It the partition map from ... The Royal Commission's Partition Plan.

And what might you pretend the Royal Commission's map had to do with the UN committee recommendation which presented a substantially different map?

 

Quote:
And no, it's very much a real map and was rejected by the Arabs the same as every other partitioning plan. Not that you can't actually figure out where the map came from since it =says= where it came from in the 'img' tag for the image.

I don't know who told you all the lies that have turned you into a hate-filled bigot, but I assure you they really are lies.  The Arabs really have had one goal in mind -- driving every single last Jew in the Middle East into the Sea -- since the time of the Islamic conquests.  That idiotic objective has cost them more human lives and suffering than just about anything =other= than running around conquering land.

So you use an inapplicable map which shows the few number of Jews getting what appears less than their percentage instead of the map that went with the resolution giving them much more than their percentage of the population.

Nor do you point out the Palstinians were to receive none of the land but rather it was to be given to all who considered themselves culturally Arabs meaning they could all sends their armies to claim it. Note also the Jews got all the good harbors as well as access to the Red Sea against the shallow port of Gaza. 

Note also it was not the UN's land to partition, to divide up, or to establish who had to live under whose government in any way. Additionally the Jews began running terrorists organizations against the Palestinians in the early 20s, Hagannah, Stern and Irgun being the three major ones. Bombing markets to kill women and children because the Brits arrested Jews is shining example of jewish morality. But to the point, were people to choose to live under terrorists? Terrorists are murderers by definition regardless which god sanctioned it.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:
That's exactly the point I was trying to make: since God isn't required to explain those events, I don't think those events are proof of God's existence.

Having grown up in an environment where there was a lot of "physics" and a lot of "metaphysics", I'm convinced that both are equally "real".  Not like some sort of "god of the gaps", but in the sense that there is no gap.

Metaphysics is easier. No evidence required.

How did you manage to convince people you are an engineer?

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:
That's exactly the point I was trying to make: since God isn't required to explain those events, I don't think those events are proof of God's existence.

Having grown up in an environment where there was a lot of "physics" and a lot of "metaphysics", I'm convinced that both are equally "real".  Not like some sort of "god of the gaps", but in the sense that there is no gap.

Metaphysics is easier. No evidence required.

How did you manage to convince people you are an engineer?

Course work in three engineering fields, a degree in one, professional work in four.

How did that last arrest work out for you?

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
FurryCatHerder wrote:
That's exactly the point I was trying to make: since God isn't required to explain those events, I don't think those events are proof of God's existence.
Having grown up in an environment where there was a lot of "physics" and a lot of "metaphysics", I'm convinced that both are equally "real".  Not like some sort of "god of the gaps", but in the sense that there is no gap.
Metaphysics is easier. No evidence required.

How did you manage to convince people you are an engineer?

Course work in three engineering fields, a degree in one, professional work in four.

Which might the degree be in? Which are the other three? Just curious of course.

Quote:
How did that last arrest work out for you?

Are you claiming I was arrested? Keep in mind the courts have held that demonstrating malice is not a matter of degree and that posting on the internet constitutes publication. Libel is such an ugly word. Error is not a defense. Please respond.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
For the record

A participant here has libelled me within the legal meaning of the term.

The courts have yet to rule upon what constitutes a "public" person in matters of the internet however a public person can prevail if malice is demonstrated. Malice can be reasonably construed from previous posts. Degree of malice is not an issue; even a little bit constitutes malice within the meaning of the law.

The person is an admitted internet stalker within the common meaning of that term.

The person has posted false information about me in the form of a question regarding an alleged arrest.

This constitutes public advisement only. It does not reflect upon this website, its owner(s), nor its web host nor any other participant. It is not to be construed in any way as a statement of intent.

PS. I enjoy this place. I am just giving notice so folks can follow the issue if they are so bored with their real lives they have nothing better to do.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:A

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

A participant here has libelled me within the legal meaning of the term.

A =person= cannot be libeled, under any meaning of the term, if their identity is not known.  There is no such thing as "generic libel".

Sheesh.

Likewise, a person cannot be libeled, under any meaning of the term, if there is no =harm=.

An libelous act cannot be a =question=, it must be a statement of fact, which is clearly not a statement of opinion.  For example, asking someone "Have you stopped beating your wife?" is not a libelous statement, because it isn't a STATEMENT OF FACT, that a person has ever beaten their wife.

This is what a libelous statement looks like:

Quote:
The person is an admitted internet stalker within the common meaning of that term.

It is a statement which meets this definition:

Quote:
"libel 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact, and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious that the statement would do harm and is untrue. Proof of malice, however, does allow a party defamed to sue for "general damages" for damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to actual harm (such as loss of business) called "special damages."

For me to sue you, I'd have to show "actual harm".  As I suspect no one here believes a word you say, I'd have to show that your false and malicious claim that I am "an admitted internet stalker within the common meaning of that term" resulted in something other than a good chuckle.

For you to sue me, you'd have to show that a question is a statement.  Which it isn't.

Now for another question -- is your real name Matt Giwer?

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

A participant here has libelled me within the legal meaning of the term.

A =person= cannot be libeled, under any meaning of the term, if their identity is not known.  There is no such thing as "generic libel".

Sheesh.

Likewise, a person cannot be libeled, under any meaning of the term, if there is no =harm=.

An libelous act cannot be a =question=, it must be a statement of fact, which is clearly not a statement of opinion.  For example, asking someone "Have you stopped beating your wife?" is not a libelous statement, because it isn't a STATEMENT OF FACT, that a person has ever beaten their wife.

This is what a libelous statement looks like:

Quote:
The person is an admitted internet stalker within the common meaning of that term.

It is a statement which meets this definition:

Quote:
"libel 1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact, and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious that the statement would do harm and is untrue. Proof of malice, however, does allow a party defamed to sue for "general damages" for damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to actual harm (such as loss of business) called "special damages."

For me to sue you, I'd have to show "actual harm".  As I suspect no one here believes a word you say, I'd have to show that your false and malicious claim that I am "an admitted internet stalker within the common meaning of that term" resulted in something other than a good chuckle.

For you to sue me, you'd have to show that a question is a statement.  Which it isn't.

Now for another question -- is your real name Matt Giwer?

A person knowing enough law to have made this response would never have made the post to which I refer.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Speaking of Zionism and Judaism

For some reason people have been questioning my assertion of Jews originally being anti-zionist.

original.antiwar.com/krasnow/2012/01/08/the-world-for-israel/

At the heart was presentation of a new book,

Rabbi Outcast: Elmer Berger and American Jewish Anti-Zionism

, written by Jack Ross and published by Potomac Books. Ross, of Brooklyn, N.Y., graduated from

National Labor College

in 2006. Since 2005, he has been writing for

Antiwar.com

,

The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs

, and

The American Conservative

.

As the book’s caption says, dramatic changes have been taking place in the attitudes of American Jews toward Israel and Zionism. At no time since the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 has there been such disenchantment with Israel and Zionism. The role the Israel lobby played in the Iraq War and the “global war on terror,” as well as Israel’s attacks on Lebanon and Gaza, made large swaths of the American Jewish community question Israel’s foreign policy and its Zionist ideology.

The history of Jewish anti-Zionism in America predates the founding of Israel. Ross’s hero is Elmer Berger, a Reform Jewish rabbi (1908 –1996) who was one of the founders and first director of the American Council for Judaism (ACJ), which took a strongly anti-Zionist stance at its founding in 1942. Berger resigned from the ACJ in 1968, but he continued to fight via American Jewish Alternatives to Zionism, an organization he led until he died in 1996.

Ross says his own discovery of the anti-Zionist heritage of America was “a revelation.” He praises Berger’s mentor, the father of American Reform Judaism, Isaac Mayer Wise, who in 1900 denounced the nascent Zionist movement as “a prostitution of Israel’s holy cause to a madman’s dance of unsound politicians.”

The forum’s panel included Ambassador Andrew Killgore, publisher of The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs; Allan Brownfeld, a former member of President Ronald Reagan’s transition team who now writes for The American Council on Judaism (ACJ); Josh Ruebner, national advocacy director of the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation; and Jon Utley, associate publisher of The American Conservative magazine.

Killgore recalled his friendship with the rabbi. “Elmer and I were in agreement,” he said, that “Hitler’s persecution of European Jewry was being cynically exploited by the Zionists to further their own cause.” In the 1960s, said Killgore, the rabbi was tireless in explaining to U.S. diplomats dealing with the Middle East that “Judaism’s basic values could not be reconciled with disregard for the rights of the Palestinians upon whose lands the new Jewish state had been created.”

The forum was sponsored by the Freda Utley Foundation and Fran Griffin, founder of the Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation, which hosts a number of conservative authors, including several Jews. FGF’s mission is to educate leaders and the public on the need to preserve Western civilization.

Speaker after speaker praised Ross’s book as an act of scholarly perseverance and civic courage. The book also won the praise of such scholars as John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago, co-author of the 2006 book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. Though he was not present at the forum, Professor Mearsheimer sent his comments, calling the work an “important book for anyone interested in understanding the complex history of how American Jews have related to the State of Israel.”

Actually, anti-Zionism in the United States has a long history. Among the several Reform rabbis who founded the American Council for Judaism, Berger is the best-known because he dedicated his whole life to the struggle to free U.S. foreign policy from the grip of Zionists. Whereas Berger’s anti-Zionism was rooted in Reform Judaism, his modern followers are not the only American Jews who oppose Zionist Israel. There are the radical pro-socialist leftists who want to make Israel a binational Jewish-Arab state. And there is the Neturei Karta movement of Orthodox Haredi Jews who call for a peaceful dismantling of Israel because, in their view, Jews are commanded not to have their own state until the coming of the Messiah.

Zionists, on the other hand, either reject or don’t care for the spiritual, eschatological, and metaphysical dimensions of Judaism. Theirs is a quasi-religious ideology that aims at purely political, materialist, territorial, and economic goals. As Brownfeld pointed out, true “Judaism is centered on the worship of God, not the idolatry or worshiping of any political entity.” He agreed with Ross that “the essence of Judaism is not in the ‘national narrative’ … but rather in … the prophets, who spoke out against the kings and priests who corrupted the nation and the people.”

Josh Ruebner noted that the more Israel oppresses Palestinians, the more young American Jews question the Israel lobby and the right-wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu. Desperate to ensure support for Israel, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) pays for “birthright Israel” trips for Americans. But the majority of young Jews enjoy their American birthright, as they abhor the fact that since its inception Israel has relied on violence in pursuit of its goals in the Middle East.

“The façade of Jewish unanimity that AIPAC likes to project will not last forever,” said Ruebner. His organization is an umbrella for over 380 U.S. groups that aim to end the Israeli occupation of Palestine. They campaign for Boycott, Disinvestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israeli interests in the U.S.

Though originally indifferent to religion, Zionist political ideology now likes to dress up Israel’s territorial ambitions in religious garb. This hypocrisy, however, backfired as it inspired the struggle of Palestinian Arabs, both Muslim and Christian, against dispossession, discrimination, and humiliation inside and outside of Israel.

In fact, some observers have described Israel as an apartheid state. Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize for helping negotiate peace between Israel and Egypt, spelled out the stark choice Israel now faces in his book Palestine: Peace or Apartheid.

Zionist claims on Jerusalem as an exclusive capital of Israel have inflamed anti-Israeli and anti-American passions in all Muslim countries. It has helped the fanatical jihadists win the hearts and minds of millions of Muslims who came to mistrust their moderate and secular politicians for their failure to defend Muslim rights to Jerusalem, or Al-Quds, as sacred to their cultural tradition.

As an exclusive capital of Israel, Jerusalem is an abomination to Muslims and Christians alike. It is also abhorrent to those religious and secular Jews who are proud that Judaism set high ethical standards for its Christian and Islamic offshoots. Now divided and sectored, Jerusalem ought to be a universal monument to religious tolerance and brotherhood under the auspices of the United Nations. Only then could it fulfill its prophesied role as a source of unity for mankind.

A hotbed of hatred, mistrust, and war in the Middle East, Israel also sets a bad example for right-wing demagogues in Europe and the United States who clamor for getting tough on Muslim and other immigrants, just as the Israelis were in their Operation Cast Lead against the Gaza Strip. It is noteworthy that the Labor Party youth group that the Norwegian right-wing extremist Anders Behring Breivik attacked on July 22, 2011, expressed support for the BDS campaign against Israel.

Albert Rosenblatt, a poet and journalist who came to the forum from New York, suggested it’s not enough for American Jews to be “anti,” be it anti-Zionist, anti-Israel, or anti–American Empire. “Don’t we need to say what we are FOR?” Several people responded that they do not necessarily question Israel’s right to exist, but they want to have its policy revised in such a way that it would become not “a Jewish state,” but a normal country.

Since Jon Utley mentioned my role in finding the grave of his Jewish father, Arkady Berdichevsky, who was executed in the USSR during mass purges of the “Trotskyites,” I felt I had to speak too. Referring to Jon’s article published in 2005 in The Freeman and later turned into a film,  Return to the Gulag: Jon Utley’s Search for His Father, I thanked him for introducing me to the story of Rabbi Berger as a fellow dissident, just as Jon and I have been.

In my own comments, I noted that when I came to the United States in 1966 on an invitation from the University of Chicago, I didn’t find many Zionists on or off campus. My main concern was that too many of my colleagues and students were either pro-Soviet or soft on Communism. With all respect due to Rabbi Berger, I take exception to his illusions about the USSR as the land of liberty for the Jews. Communism was good neither for Jews nor Muslims nor Russians, especially the religious ones. As a totalitarian ideology, Communism was hostile to all free spirits, even the atheists who were not of the Marxist-Leninist stripe.

Zionism was not in vogue then in the United States. The predominant concern was not with the fate of Israel but with making sure we didn’t irritate the USSR in Vietnam and elsewhere, lest a nuclear war be unleashed. Sometimes, I felt I was just about the only Zionist in Chicago, and I’m a Gentile to boot. I knew Soviet propaganda manipulated Palestinians for geopolitical advantage.

The main significance of this forum is that we let the world know that there are many courageous and righteous Jews who are not Zionists. By honoring the memory of Rabbi Berger we inflict a blow not only to Zionists, but also to those who lump all Jews into one homogeneous group that rushes from one extreme to another, from Communist internationalism, which cares for neither religion nor nationality, to Zionist nationalism. Israel’s leaders profess to care for one religion and one nationality. In fact, they have but one self-serving goal: to perpetuate their own power at any cost, even at great risk to the rest of humanity.

We broke for refreshments and fresh efforts to figure out, face to face, what’s going on in Israel, the United States, and the world. The foremost topic was: Will Israel attack Iran? Will the United States allow it to happen? Will we facilitate the attack?

Nobody knew the answer, but the concern itself showed how far the Zionist regime was ready to take the whole world for the sake of its own survival.

Lately, this concern has spiked. I have already posted a report about Russian troops in the Caucasus being put on high alert in case an Israeli attack triggers warfare along Iran’s borders with Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan.

It was also reported, or rather, underreported, that on Dec. 16 President Barack Obama met behind closed doors with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak. The meeting was held in the outskirts of Washington, D.C., at the Gaylord Hotel, National Harbor, Maryland. It focused on the issue of a U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran.

Since Obama has already said he takes “no options off the table,” one might suspect, as Michel Chossudovsky of Global Research does, that the attack on Iran could include the use of tactical bunker-buster nuclear weapons that only the United States has and that Israel may request to make the attack effective. These bunker busters have an explosive capacity between one third and six times that of the Hiroshima bomb.

Most fittingly, at least, in the popular psyche, 2012 is the year of Armageddon. Fiat justitia, pereat mundus, “let justice be done even if the world shall perish”: this was one of the philosopher Immanuel Kant’s maxims. Whether this Latin motto stems from ancient Rome or Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand I (1503-1564), its grave implications are no longer philosophical. Nor are they metaphorical.

Whatever pretext Israel and the United States (for consistency) might find for the war they threaten, at stake is the existence of the world as we know it. Even a triumph of their justitia may turn utterly hollow, for there might be no people to celebrate it. So the real question that Jews and non-Jews alike face today is: Is the world for Israel or are Jews for the world? We know how Rabbi Berger would have answered.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:A person

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
A person knowing enough law to have made this response would never have made the post to which I refer.

Not at all -- people have been threatening all manner of stupid lawsuits on the Internet for far longer than you've been on it.  The real demonstration of legal stupidity, "in my opinion", is your claim that you were libeled.

Libel requires a number of components, none of which apply to the post you claim libeled you.  To be libel, something must be a STATEMENT about a REAL PERSON.  A question asked of an anonymous person can't be libel, no matter how much you want to pretend it is.

Here's an interesting web page about a lawsuit that someone using the name Matt Giwer suggested against a Jewish website for "defamatory statements."

http://www.nizkor.com/ftp.cgi/ftp.py?people/g/giwer.matt/lies/lie-lawsuit

"In my opinion", the themes of "lies", "Jews" and "defamation" are consistent with your posts here.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
You can slander and liable

You can slander and liable an individual, it all depends on degree of the public nature of the individual. If the individual is not well known and you deliberately lie about them that standard is a lot lower. If however, they are a public figure, it is a much higher standard to prove.

Having said that, government law should protect everyone for discrimination such as at the workplace or pay. But you CANNOT defame an entire group of people. That is absurd. You have to protect the bitching of all citizens even if that bitching is bigoted and aimed at your label, ANY LABEL.

FOR EXAMPLE ONLY

Noony can say "Fuck Zionists"

You can say "Fuck Muslims"

And I can say "Fuck all religion"

Noony can say "All Jews are scum"

You can say "All Muslims are scum"

I can say "All religious people are scum"

ALL OF THAT IS LEGAL

What is not legal FOR EXAMPLE ONLY

If Noony said "Go kill all Jews"

If you said "Go kill all Muslims"

Or I said, "Go kill all religious people"

That is a call to violence. But that would also be the same as FOR EXAMPLE ONLY

Someone said "Kill my wife, I want the insurance money"

Or, "Kill my business rival, he is steeling my customers"

Or, "Kill that gay man"

(end example)

I don't like laws or lawsuits that attempt to protect an entire label from blasphemy. Blasphemy is neither liable or slander or defamation. It is merely saying "I don't like those people, or I don't like that claim".

Bottom line, whatever laws we have have to be neutral. They have to protect everyone's civil rights, but they also have to protect everyone's right to bitch and even offend.

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Brian37 wrote:

Noony can say "Fuck Zionists"

You can say "Fuck Muslims"

And I can say "Fuck all religion"

Noony can say "All Jews are scum"

You can say "All Muslims are scum"

I can say "All religious people are scum"

I point out over and over there is no religion on the Palestinian side. It is a matter of titled ownership of real estate. I then give you a low review of a source you can read for yourself showing how recent the religious component of Zionism save for public relations.

And STILL you insist upon posting about it as though it were a matter that involves religion.

Is there some reason you are incapable of addressing the issue based upon the facts instead of your imagination? How do you expect to talk about the subject when you talk about a factor which is not involved save recently and peripherally and then only one Israeli side?

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Brian37

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Noony can say "Fuck Zionists"

You can say "Fuck Muslims"

And I can say "Fuck all religion"

Noony can say "All Jews are scum"

You can say "All Muslims are scum"

I can say "All religious people are scum"

I point out over and over there is no religion on the Palestinian side. It is a matter of titled ownership of real estate. I then give you a low review of a source you can read for yourself showing how recent the religious component of Zionism save for public relations.

And STILL you insist upon posting about it as though it were a matter that involves religion.

Is there some reason you are incapable of addressing the issue based upon the facts instead of your imagination? How do you expect to talk about the subject when you talk about a factor which is not involved save recently and peripherally and then only one Israeli side?

Do not try to sell me the powers on that side are secular and value pluralism. That is a bunch of crap. Go read "End of Faith" by Sam Harris. The opening of that book is typical of the mindset of the people who blow themselves up. To make the absurd claim that it Islam does not play a role in suicide bombing IS FLAT OUT CRAP!

Hamass is a Muslim organization, not a secular one. No Jew or atheist would be able to get any form of political power in their ranks.

AND I WOULDN'T GIVE a damn if it were all atheists and no Muslims fighting over property rights. But you are lying to me flat out trying to say that Palestinians are not ruled by Muslims.

The length of this conflict negates "I was here first". that argument has a shelf life. Just like it would be absurd to expect me to give back land to Native Americans.

That conflict IS about Jews and Muslims and always has been, long before you or I were born. There is no damned conspiracy going on here. Your "property rights" distraction does not change that Muslims and Jews have been fighting over that area long before WW2.

NOW even if I agreed with you which I don't, Your problem and theirs is the same regardless. More of the same is why the sandbox is swimming in the urine of tribalism, regardless of religion or property rights. As long as you make that the issue instead of ALL human suffering the issue, neither of you will have peace.

STOP LIVING IN THE PAST! There isn't a thing you can do about it. What you will do is perpetuate the worst our species has to offer by clinging to the "virtue of the oppressed" crap.

You have never answered my question and you wont because you know you are wrong.

WOULD..............WOULD WOULD WOULD Palestine write a secular constitution protecting political and religious freedom and the protection of dissent? At best their democracy would be mob rule by vote. It would still set up a political and religious litmus test for anyone to have a voice in any government they set up.

THE ANSWER IS NO! And you damned well know it. So your "property rights" "poor me" crap wont get my any sympathy knowing what they would set up if they could.

Now, YOU and THEY, like I said, could very quickly take the wind out of the sales of Israel's land grab, by denouncing theocracy and an Islamic state. THEN AND ONLY THEN will you get my support.

ATTITUDE CHANGE.

I don't care if you want to falsely make this about just boarders and deny that they have religious rulers. I DON'T CARE. What matters is the future, not the past. You want my support, I want proof that any future state will be inclusive in their constitution under whatever government they set up. Until they make an official public decree protecting the rights of non-Muslims I cannot support any Palestinian state.

A PUBLIC GOVERNMENT DOCUMENT THAT PROTECTS A SECULAR GOVERNMENT, PROTECTS DISSENT, PROTECTS THE RIGHTS OF MINORITIES. PROTECTS A FREE PRESS.

Not the same crap Christians try to pull here, "Christian nation" we wont hurt you as long as you accept that you are merely a guest , even if you are a citizen.

Whatever they set up has to protect the rights of non-Muslims and protect the rights of non-Muslims to compete politically. Setting up a mob rule state by vote does not mean it will protect the rights of all who live under that government.

Here is how you can get my support.

1. Skip the labels

2. Don't cherry pick the past to suit your own desires

3. Look to the future by recognizing all human suffering, not just the suffering of your side

4. Demand that if Palestine wants a state, that it has to have a Constitution that protects the rights of all, not just the rights of the majority.

WHEN you can get a majority of Palestinians to do that, then and only then, will you get my support.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Brian37 wrote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
Brian37 wrote:
Noony can say "Fuck Zionists"You can say "Fuck Muslims"

And I can say "Fuck all religion"

Noony can say "All Jews are scum"

You can say "All Muslims are scum"

I can say "All religious people are scum"

I point out over and over there is no religion on the Palestinian side. It is a matter of titled ownership of real estate. I then give you a low review of a source you can read for yourself showing how recent the religious component of Zionism save for public relations.

And STILL you insist upon posting about it as though it were a matter that involves religion.

Is there some reason you are incapable of addressing the issue based upon the facts instead of your imagination? How do you expect to talk about the subject when you talk about a factor which is not involved save recently and peripherally and then only one Israeli side?

Do not try to sell me the powers on that side are secular and value pluralism. That is a bunch of crap. Go read "End of Faith" by Sam Harris. The opening of that book is typical of the mindset of the people who blow themselves up. To make the absurd claim that it Islam does not play a role in suicide bombing IS FLAT OUT CRAP!

Hamass is a Muslim organization, not a secular one. No Jew or atheist would be able to get any form of political power in their ranks.

AND I WOULDN'T GIVE a damn if it were all atheists and no Muslims fighting over property rights. But you are lying to me flat out trying to say that Palestinians are not ruled by Muslims.

The length of this conflict negates "I was here first". that argument has a shelf life. Just like it would be absurd to expect me to give back land to Native Americans.

That conflict IS about Jews and Muslims and always has been, long before you or I were born. There is no damned conspiracy going on here. Your "property rights" distraction does not change that Muslims and Jews have been fighting over that area long before WW2.

NOW even if I agreed with you which I don't, Your problem and theirs is the same regardless. More of the same is why the sandbox is swimming in the urine of tribalism, regardless of religion or property rights. As long as you make that the issue instead of ALL human suffering the issue, neither of you will have peace.

STOP LIVING IN THE PAST! There isn't a thing you can do about it. What you will do is perpetuate the worst our species has to offer by clinging to the "virtue of the oppressed" crap.

You have never answered my question and you wont because you know you are wrong.

WOULD..............WOULD WOULD WOULD Palestine write a secular constitution protecting political and religious freedom and the protection of dissent? At best their democracy would be mob rule by vote. It would still set up a political and religious litmus test for anyone to have a voice in any government they set up.

THE ANSWER IS NO! And you damned well know it. So your "property rights" "poor me" crap wont get my any sympathy knowing what they would set up if they could.

Now, YOU and THEY, like I said, could very quickly take the wind out of the sales of Israel's land grab, by denouncing theocracy and an Islamic state. THEN AND ONLY THEN will you get my support.

ATTITUDE CHANGE.

I don't care if you want to falsely make this about just boarders and deny that they have religious rulers. I DON'T CARE. What matters is the future, not the past. You want my support, I want proof that any future state will be inclusive in their constitution under whatever government they set up. Until they make an official public decree protecting the rights of non-Muslims I cannot support any Palestinian state.

A PUBLIC GOVERNMENT DOCUMENT THAT PROTECTS A SECULAR GOVERNMENT, PROTECTS DISSENT, PROTECTS THE RIGHTS OF MINORITIES. PROTECTS A FREE PRESS.

Not the same crap Christians try to pull here, "Christian nation" we wont hurt you as long as you accept that you are merely a guest , even if you are a citizen.

Whatever they set up has to protect the rights of non-Muslims and protect the rights of non-Muslims to compete politically. Setting up a mob rule state by vote does not mean it will protect the rights of all who live under that government.

Here is how you can get my support.

1. Skip the labels

2. Don't cherry pick the past to suit your own desires

3. Look to the future by recognizing all human suffering, not just the suffering of your side

4. Demand that if Palestine wants a state, that it has to have a Constitution that protects the rights of all, not just the rights of the majority.

WHEN you can get a majority of Palestinians to do that, then and only then, will you get my support.

If you ever demonstrate you are bright enough to tell the difference between religion and property ownership I might begin to give you the time of day or even in the extreme take you seriously although I doubt the latter will ever occur.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Brian37

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
Brian37 wrote:
Noony can say "Fuck Zionists"You can say "Fuck Muslims"

And I can say "Fuck all religion"

Noony can say "All Jews are scum"

You can say "All Muslims are scum"

I can say "All religious people are scum"

I point out over and over there is no religion on the Palestinian side. It is a matter of titled ownership of real estate. I then give you a low review of a source you can read for yourself showing how recent the religious component of Zionism save for public relations.

And STILL you insist upon posting about it as though it were a matter that involves religion.

Is there some reason you are incapable of addressing the issue based upon the facts instead of your imagination? How do you expect to talk about the subject when you talk about a factor which is not involved save recently and peripherally and then only one Israeli side?

Do not try to sell me the powers on that side are secular and value pluralism. That is a bunch of crap. Go read "End of Faith" by Sam Harris. The opening of that book is typical of the mindset of the people who blow themselves up. To make the absurd claim that it Islam does not play a role in suicide bombing IS FLAT OUT CRAP!

Hamass is a Muslim organization, not a secular one. No Jew or atheist would be able to get any form of political power in their ranks.

AND I WOULDN'T GIVE a damn if it were all atheists and no Muslims fighting over property rights. But you are lying to me flat out trying to say that Palestinians are not ruled by Muslims.

The length of this conflict negates "I was here first". that argument has a shelf life. Just like it would be absurd to expect me to give back land to Native Americans.

That conflict IS about Jews and Muslims and always has been, long before you or I were born. There is no damned conspiracy going on here. Your "property rights" distraction does not change that Muslims and Jews have been fighting over that area long before WW2.

NOW even if I agreed with you which I don't, Your problem and theirs is the same regardless. More of the same is why the sandbox is swimming in the urine of tribalism, regardless of religion or property rights. As long as you make that the issue instead of ALL human suffering the issue, neither of you will have peace.

STOP LIVING IN THE PAST! There isn't a thing you can do about it. What you will do is perpetuate the worst our species has to offer by clinging to the "virtue of the oppressed" crap.

You have never answered my question and you wont because you know you are wrong.

WOULD..............WOULD WOULD WOULD Palestine write a secular constitution protecting political and religious freedom and the protection of dissent? At best their democracy would be mob rule by vote. It would still set up a political and religious litmus test for anyone to have a voice in any government they set up.

THE ANSWER IS NO! And you damned well know it. So your "property rights" "poor me" crap wont get my any sympathy knowing what they would set up if they could.

Now, YOU and THEY, like I said, could very quickly take the wind out of the sales of Israel's land grab, by denouncing theocracy and an Islamic state. THEN AND ONLY THEN will you get my support.

ATTITUDE CHANGE.

I don't care if you want to falsely make this about just boarders and deny that they have religious rulers. I DON'T CARE. What matters is the future, not the past. You want my support, I want proof that any future state will be inclusive in their constitution under whatever government they set up. Until they make an official public decree protecting the rights of non-Muslims I cannot support any Palestinian state.

A PUBLIC GOVERNMENT DOCUMENT THAT PROTECTS A SECULAR GOVERNMENT, PROTECTS DISSENT, PROTECTS THE RIGHTS OF MINORITIES. PROTECTS A FREE PRESS.

Not the same crap Christians try to pull here, "Christian nation" we wont hurt you as long as you accept that you are merely a guest , even if you are a citizen.

Whatever they set up has to protect the rights of non-Muslims and protect the rights of non-Muslims to compete politically. Setting up a mob rule state by vote does not mean it will protect the rights of all who live under that government.

Here is how you can get my support.

1. Skip the labels

2. Don't cherry pick the past to suit your own desires

3. Look to the future by recognizing all human suffering, not just the suffering of your side

4. Demand that if Palestine wants a state, that it has to have a Constitution that protects the rights of all, not just the rights of the majority.

WHEN you can get a majority of Palestinians to do that, then and only then, will you get my support.

If you ever demonstrate you are bright enough to tell the difference between religion and property ownership I might begin to give you the time of day or even in the extreme take you seriously although I doubt the latter will ever occur.

 

Get this through your head. No one is denying land is being taken. You however are ignoring WILLFULLY the history of this conflict and refuse to accept what Palestinians would set up if given a state.

It simply is not worth supporting them knowing what kind of state they would set up if they did get all the land back.

The would simply go from being abused to becoming the abuser. When Palestine takes donations from Saudi Arabia A MUSLIM STATE through a telethon like a charity to give money to suicide bombers families who are MUSLIM, I find it hard to believe that it is merely about boarders.

IT IS A LIE that it is merely about borders. Hamass is NOT a secular organization, it is a MUSLIM organization and that is who your majority elected.

"We want our land back". And "they" take it from you because they too "want it back" because both of you CLAIM "I was here first."

DONT CARE. You are no better than those you accuse.

I see nothing from you personally or Palestine as a whole that would give me one indication that if they got what they wanted they would give equal rights in government and politics to non-Muslims, politically or religiously.

You are both stuck in the past and both of you want the land and neither are going to stop this crap because you wont let go of the past.

If in 60,000 years both Islam and Jewish faiths get treated like myths, and got replaced with another "boarder war" between future populations, my attitude would be the same. HOW are you(insert label here) going to treat minorities and political dissent? If they could not answer that, I wouldn't help them. Because it would be as stupid as getting in between two pit bulls.

You are letting your REAL empathy cloud your reason just like when Furry talks about those she has known affected by bombings and rockets. And I wouldn't care if you were both atheists and this was merely a property dispute.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Until you get that you will not understand why I cannot support you.

 


 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Jews

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

You do realize that not ALL the land making up Israel was confiscated using the "Absentees Property Law". The estimates I found vary widely: they go from about 12% to about 70%.

Here's the link for the wikipedia page I got my info from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_land_and_property_laws#The_.27Absentees_Property_Law.27

 

Do you think the Jews living on that land now should be expelled just like their Arab predecessors were--by killing enough of them that the rest flee out of fear?

See this page for details:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_1948_Palestinian_exodus#Second_Stage:_Israeli_army_victories_and_expulsions

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915

blacklight915 wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

You do realize that not ALL the land making up Israel was confiscated using the "Absentees Property Law". The estimates I found vary widely: they go from about 12% to about 70%.

Here's the link for the wikipedia page I got my info from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_land_and_property_laws#The_.27Absentees_Property_Law.27

 

Do you think the Jews living on that land now should be expelled just like their Arab predecessors were--by killing enough of them that the rest flee out of fear?

See this page for details:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_1948_Palestinian_exodus#Second_Stage:_Israeli_army_victories_and_expulsions

 

"My land" is short sighted in evolution, when we all die. Powers shifts and time change. To maximize human dignity and common interest there has to be a shelf life to "mine".

Even outside the issue of borders, there has been a history of some sorts that a once private figure who did something notable, once a couple generations passed and that person, or invention was so much a part of culture, the personal rights of the original family were given up to the property of the people.

It would be like a genetic descendant of Jefferson demanding royalties to his private letters or use of his name.

There can be no winners in a war rooted in the past making claims about a past neither can change.

Muslims in Egypt would not give back the rights of the Pyramids their ancestors eventually took control over if someone gave DNA evidence that they were directly related to them.

And Hebrews were not the first people in our evolution to occupy the "Fertile Crescent". Furry would not give back that land to anyone who could genetically link themselves to the prior Canaanites.

"My land" has a shelf life. Just like both Furry and Noony when I point out that Native Americans had their land stolen from them, dodge the issue.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915

blacklight915 wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

You do realize that not ALL the land making up Israel was confiscated using the "Absentees Property Law". The estimates I found vary widely: they go from about 12% to about 70%.

Here's the link for the wikipedia page I got my info from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_land_and_property_laws#The_.27Absentees_Property_Law.27

 

Do you think the Jews living on that land now should be expelled just like their Arab predecessors were--by killing enough of them that the rest flee out of fear?

See this page for details:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_1948_Palestinian_exodus#Second_Stage:_Israeli_army_victories_and_expulsions

 

"My land" is short sighted in evolution, when we all die. Powers shifts and time change. To maximize human dignity and common interest there has to be a shelf life to "mine".

Even outside the issue of borders, there has been a history of some sorts that a once private figure who did something notable, once a couple generations passed and that person, or invention was so much a part of culture, the personal rights of the original family were given up to the property of the people.

It would be like a genetic descendant of Jefferson demanding royalties to his private letters or use of his name.

There can be no winners in a war rooted in the past making claims about a past neither can change.

Muslims in Egypt would not give back the rights of the Pyramids their ancestors eventually took control over if someone gave DNA evidence that they were directly related to them.

And Hebrews were not the first people in our evolution to occupy the "Fertile Crescent". Furry would not give back that land to anyone who could genetically link themselves to the prior Canaanites.

"My land" has a shelf life. Just like both Furry and Noony when I point out that Native Americans had their land stolen from them, dodge the issue.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

blacklight915 wrote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

You do realize that not ALL the land making up Israel was confiscated using the "Absentees Property Law". The estimates I found vary widely: they go from about 12% to about 70%.

Here's the link for the wikipedia page I got my info from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_land_and_property_laws#The_.27Absentees_Property_Law.27

Fisk is generally reliable and he used the go to source for the information putting the fraction at 70%. You do realize that causing owners to be absent under pain of summary execution is theft under color of law.

Quote:
Do you think the Jews living on that land now should be expelled just like their Arab predecessors were--by killing enough of them that the rest flee out of fear?

See this page for details:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_1948_Palestinian_exodus#Second_Stage:_Israeli_army_victories_and_expulsions

I think thieves should be required to return stolen property. That is hardly a new principle in custom or in law. If they innocently bought stolen property their complaint with the criminal that misrepresented the property as his to sell.

Let me repeat, my standard of justice for the Palestinians is exactly the same that Jews and the government of Israel have demand from Germany, Poland, Hungary and other countries in matters related to WWII. If one is just both are just. If Palestinians have no claims then Jews have no claims.

=====

As to wikipedia, you can do better than that. It is suitable for high school level information just as are all encylopedias. None are suitable for college level work.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Fisk is

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Fisk is generally reliable and he used the go to source for the information putting the fraction at 70%. You do realize that causing owners to be absent under pain of summary execution is theft under color of law.

Your signature gives me the impression you think ALL of Israel is stolen land. However, we seem to agree that not all of Israel was stolen using the "justification" of the absentee laws you've mentioned. 

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

As to wikipedia, you can do better than that. It is suitable for high school level information just as are all encylopedias. None are suitable for college level work.

This was the first time I really looked into the Palestine-Israel conflict; wikipedia is generally where I start all my investigations.

 

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

I think thieves should be required to return stolen property. That is hardly a new principle in custom or in law. If they innocently bought stolen property their complaint with the criminal that misrepresented the property as his to sell.

Let me repeat, my standard of justice for the Palestinians is exactly the same that Jews and the government of Israel have demand from Germany, Poland, Hungary and other countries in matters related to WWII. If one is just both are just. If Palestinians have no claims then Jews have no claims.

Could you point me to some sources (preferably online) detailing what these demands were (or are)?

I am not willing to advocate a plan that would involve the violent expulsion of people from the land they're living on.

 

 


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

blacklight915 wrote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Fisk is generally reliable and he used the go to source for the information putting the fraction at 70%. You do realize that causing owners to be absent under pain of summary execution is theft under color of law.

Your signature gives me the impression you think ALL of Israel is stolen land. However, we seem to agree that not all of Israel was stolen using the "justification" of the absentee laws you've mentioned.

The distinction between all and 70% is for purists. Some other methods of acquisition, including fraudulent bills a sale, account for much of it. Declation of public land is another. It continues to this day in occupied Jerusalem and the West Bank. Any such declaration in occupied territory was determined to be a hanging offense at Nuremberg. All occupied territories may only be administered for the benefit of the occupied people save as a strict military necesity.

Back before the peace treaty with Jordan all the squattertowns were declared to be military necessities. After the peace treaty Israel changed the lie.

Quote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
As to wikipedia, you can do better than that. It is suitable for high school level information just as are all encylopedias. None are suitable for college level work.

This was the first time I really looked into the Palestine-Israel conflict; wikipedia is generally where I start all my investigations.

No blame just not really the place to start. Note the expansion of "facts" in wikipedia I added. Only Israel and izziehuggers disagree with those facts. The izzies like to say the land is disputed. However, like an argument, it takes two to make a dispute. No one disputes the issue with the izzies. It is occupied territory, period. The currently popular lie that replaced the previous lie is still a lie.

Quote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

I think thieves should be required to return stolen property. That is hardly a new principle in custom or in law. If they innocently bought stolen property their complaint with the criminal that misrepresented the property as his to sell.

Let me repeat, my standard of justice for the Palestinians is exactly the same that Jews and the government of Israel have demand from Germany, Poland, Hungary and other countries in matters related to WWII. If one is just both are just. If Palestinians have no claims then Jews have no claims.

Could you point me to some sources (preferably online) detailing what these demands were (or are)?

I am not willing to advocate a plan that would involve the violent expulsion of people from the land they're living on.

You man you would not force thieves to return stolen property? You buy stolen property the police take it from you. You have no right to the property of others regardless of how it came into your possession. Embargoing oil to Israel is not violent. They can decide to return stolen property after the lights go out. They can certainly have a reasonable time to leave as long as they start paying reasonable rent to the owners. They can get the money by not paying mortgages and rents to the criminals who were part of the criminal enterprise that got them into the mess. The victims of the Jews are the ones with the moral rights in this case. Thieves have no rights.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915

blacklight915 wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Fisk is generally reliable and he used the go to source for the information putting the fraction at 70%. You do realize that causing owners to be absent under pain of summary execution is theft under color of law.

Your signature gives me the impression you think ALL of Israel is stolen land. However, we seem to agree that not all of Israel was stolen using the "justification" of the absentee laws you've mentioned.

"Stolen" is always relative to the starting date.  There's a reason anti-Semites like to claim there was never a Kingdom of Israel or that modern Jews aren't the same people (as in nationality, ethnicity, whatever) as the people who lived there prior to the Roman conquest.

The great thing about Israel is that the people who've stolen the land from us knew it was stolen.  They just used all sorts of bogus arguments for reasons.  "You killed our god!!!" being one of my favorites.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:The

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

The distinction between all and 70% is for purists.

Well, to me, 30% seems like a pretty big difference. But whatever, I still need to read more about the issue anyway.

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Embargoing oil to Israel is not violent. The victims of the Jews are the ones with the moral rights in this case. Thieves have no rights.

As long as it's not violent, I don't have a problem supporting it. Thieves may not have moral rights, but they still have legal rights. Even convicted felons have a lot of the same legal rights as everyone else (in the US, at least).

 

FurryCatHerder wrote:

"Stolen" is always relative to the starting date.  There's a reason anti-Semites like to claim there was never a Kingdom of Israel or that modern Jews aren't the same people (as in nationality, ethnicity, whatever) as the people who lived there prior to the Roman conquest.

Nony is not an anti-Semite, he's an anti-Zionist. Not all Jews are Zionists.

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

blacklight915 wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Fisk is generally reliable and he used the go to source for the information putting the fraction at 70%. You do realize that causing owners to be absent under pain of summary execution is theft under color of law.

Your signature gives me the impression you think ALL of Israel is stolen land. However, we seem to agree that not all of Israel was stolen using the "justification" of the absentee laws you've mentioned.

"Stolen" is always relative to the starting date.  There's a reason anti-Semites like to claim there was never a Kingdom of Israel or that modern Jews aren't the same people (as in nationality, ethnicity, whatever) as the people who lived there prior to the Roman conquest.

The great thing about Israel is that the people who've stolen the land from us knew it was stolen.  They just used all sorts of bogus arguments for reasons.  "You killed our god!!!" being one of my favorites.

Quote:
"Stolen" is always relative to the starting date.

No, "stolen" is relative to shelf life. In America we have "statute of limitation" laws, that prevent the powers that be from our government having the absolute power of spying on you forever. If both Palestinians and Israel had those same concepts, the land disputes would be replaced with common law. That won't happen as long as religion and nationalism override the common interest both have.

Humans migrate, we always have. Prior cultures exist to ours, and always have. Otherwise the land Jews occupy should be given back to any person who can genetically prove they were related to the Canaanites.

BOTH you and Noony get it wrong because both of you are stuck in the past and in the moment when the reality is we ALL have the same past, the same behavior, the same fears and desires.

EVOLUTION! The harm both cause to each other is simply a product of mundane evolution. You both latch on to an idea in the form of a label and miss the common existence we all have and the finality of death none of us can escape.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915

blacklight915 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

"Stolen" is always relative to the starting date.  There's a reason anti-Semites like to claim there was never a Kingdom of Israel or that modern Jews aren't the same people (as in nationality, ethnicity, whatever) as the people who lived there prior to the Roman conquest.

Nony is not an anti-Semite, he's an anti-Zionist. Not all Jews are Zionists.

No, he's pretty much a garden-variety anti-Semite.  Anti-Semites try to wrap themselves with a thin veneer of "anti-Zionism", but he also argues -- counter to biological evidence -- that modern day Jews aren't the "real" Jews.  I forget who posted the "If Jews were really Jews they'd look like this" challenge, but my brother looks enough like Bob Dylan, and Bob Dylan looks enough like that image (horrid as it may be ...) that he's just plain wrong.

Years ago I ran across a woman from Iraq.  Based on "ethnic" characteristics, I look more like her than the countries my ancestors came from more recently.  Which is to say, he's just plain wrong.

The bigger "hahahaha" is that many Israelis are able to freely mingle with Arabs in the Middle East, which really messes with their heads.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:No,

FurryCatHerder wrote:

No, he's pretty much a garden-variety anti-Semite.  Anti-Semites try to wrap themselves with a thin veneer of "anti-Zionism", but he also argues -- counter to biological evidence -- that modern day Jews aren't the "real" Jews.  I forget who posted the "If Jews were really Jews they'd look like this" challenge, but my brother looks enough like Bob Dylan, and Bob Dylan looks enough like that image (horrid as it may be ...) that he's just plain wrong.

Years ago I ran across a woman from Iraq.  Based on "ethnic" characteristics, I look more like her than the countries my ancestors came from more recently.  Which is to say, he's just plain wrong.

The bigger "hahahaha" is that many Israelis are able to freely mingle with Arabs in the Middle East, which really messes with their heads.

I was under the impression that Judaism was a religion, not an ethnic group. Wait, are you saying that Jews and Arabs look alike?

 


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915

blacklight915 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

No, he's pretty much a garden-variety anti-Semite.  Anti-Semites try to wrap themselves with a thin veneer of "anti-Zionism", but he also argues -- counter to biological evidence -- that modern day Jews aren't the "real" Jews.  I forget who posted the "If Jews were really Jews they'd look like this" challenge, but my brother looks enough like Bob Dylan, and Bob Dylan looks enough like that image (horrid as it may be ...) that he's just plain wrong.

Years ago I ran across a woman from Iraq.  Based on "ethnic" characteristics, I look more like her than the countries my ancestors came from more recently.  Which is to say, he's just plain wrong.

The bigger "hahahaha" is that many Israelis are able to freely mingle with Arabs in the Middle East, which really messes with their heads.

I was under the impression that Judaism was a religion, not an ethnic group. Wait, are you saying that Jews and Arabs look alike?

Arabs are our closest genetic relatives.

Just like the bible says

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Arabs

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Arabs are our closest genetic relatives.

Just like the bible says 

Are the Torah and the Old Testament the same thing?

 


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915

blacklight915 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Arabs are our closest genetic relatives.

Just like the bible says 

Are the Torah and the Old Testament the same thing?

For the purpose of answering your question, "Yes".

However, they aren't actually the same thing, but think of that as an "advanced topic".

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:For the

FurryCatHerder wrote:

For the purpose of answering your question, "Yes".

However, they aren't actually the same thing, but think of that as an "advanced topic".

Here's the first paragraph on the wikipedia page titled "Torah":

The Torah is the name given by Jews to the "Five Books of Moses" that begin the Hebrew Bible: Genesis Exodus LeviticusNumbers and Deuteronomy. In rabbinic literature the word Torah denotes both these five books and an Oral Torah. The Oral Torah consists of the traditional interpretations and amplifications handed down by word of mouth from generation to generation and now embodied in the Talmud and Midrash.

Does this seem pretty accurate?

 

The second paragraph begins with this sentence: "According to Jewish tradition, the entire Torah, both written and oral, was revealed to Moses at Mount Sinai."

Is it even possible to find evidence to back this up? I mean, how could you verify that the writer's name was actually "Moses"? Or that he could accurately remember all that information in time enough to write it down? How could anyone verify that it was all written by one man--aren't all the original manuscripts lost? It all just seems a bit sketchy to me...


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2376
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915

blacklight915 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Arabs are our closest genetic relatives.

Just like the bible says 

Are the Torah and the Old Testament the same thing?

 

 

 

 

                     No but Tom Brady  beating the crap outta  bejesus lovin' Tebow   IS the REAL thing. Bwahahahahahaha!!!!!

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

blacklight915 wrote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
The distinction between all and 70% is for purists.

Well, to me, 30% seems like a pretty big difference. But whatever, I still need to read more about the issue anyway.

Consider the only land Palestinians would bother owning was land that suitable for living, farming, grazing, generically productive land. 90% of that was stolen. What was not stolen were a few towns turned into ghettos and some surrounding lands. Being caught outside one after curfew was a crime often punished by summary execution.

Making the desert bloom consisted of showing the gullible farms that had been in existence for thousands of years and claiming it had been wasteland only a few years before.

Quote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
Embargoing oil to Israel is not violent. The victims of the Jews are the ones with the moral rights in this case. Thieves have no rights.

As long as it's not violent, I don't have a problem supporting it. Thieves may not have moral rights, but they still have legal rights. Even convicted felons have a lot of the same legal rights as everyone else (in the US, at least).

Thieves do have the legal right to a reasonable period of time to return stolen property after being ordered to do so. "Put down that TV set!" comes to mind. If there is no legal recourse to reclaim stolen property then lethal force is a moral alternative. That is why there are laws and why people are required to use legal recourse. Absent that recourse it is back the way it was.

Quote:
FurryCatHerder wrote:

"Stolen" is always relative to the starting date.  There's a reason anti-Semites like to claim there was never a Kingdom of Israel or that modern Jews aren't the same people (as in nationality, ethnicity, whatever) as the people who lived there prior to the Roman conquest.

Nony is not an anti-Semite, he's an anti-Zionist. Not all Jews are Zionists.

Zionists, rednecks, and those ignorant of real history are always trying to hide behind being Jews even though the movement was atheist. No matter what they do to anyone any response is called antisemitism.

Quote:
Quote:
On his first trip away from home a jewish boy is going off to fight in the Crimean War. His mother gives him some good advice.

"Every time you shoot a Turk you take a rest. Shoot a Turk and rest. Alway shoot a Turk and rest."

Then the boy asks his mother, "But what if the Turk shoots me?"

To which his mother replies, "Why would he do that? What have you ever done to him?"

And the son says, "You know how antisemitic the Turks are."

Feel free to substitute Palestinian for Turk. Feel free to substitute anything for Turk.

That said, bibleland freely joined the Roman Empire. There was no conquest. The priests were pissed at Herod for agreeing to annexation but that is a long dead problem. Today's problem is people lying about the history of Judea.

As to a kingdom of Israel when someone produces the archaeological evidence from the percentagewise most dug place on the planet I am certain they will announce it to the world. So far all the archaeological evidence contradicts the possibility of biblical Israel ever existing including the fact the land was ruled by Egypt or the Hyksos for all the time it was supposed to have existed.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Brian37 wrote:

No, "stolen" is relative to shelf life. In America we have "statute of limitation" laws, that prevent the powers that be from our government having the absolute power of spying on you forever. If both Palestinians and Israel had those same concepts, the land disputes would be replaced with common law. That won't happen as long as religion and nationalism override the common interest both have.

In non-capital crimes the statute of limitations only applies to those discovered after the limit. After discovery of the crime there is no time limit. Zionist thefts have been well documented since the moment they were committed. Just look to the legal documentation of title transfer in Israel for all the evidence needed.


 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

blacklight915 wrote:
FurryCatHerder wrote:
Arabs are our closest genetic relatives.Just like the bible says 
Are the Torah and the Old Testament the same thing?

An advanced topic? The Torah consists of the first five books of the Old Testament. How advanced was that? For Pussy maybe.

 

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:
blacklight915 wrote:
FurryCatHerder wrote:
"Stolen" is always relative to the starting date.  There's a reason anti-Semites like to claim there was never a Kingdom of Israel or that modern Jews aren't the same people (as in nationality, ethnicity, whatever) as the people who lived there prior to the Roman conquest.

Nony is not an anti-Semite, he's an anti-Zionist. Not all Jews are Zionists.

No, he's pretty much a garden-variety anti-Semite.

It is difficult to imagine you are really as dumb/ignorant as you are posting.

Quote:
Anti-Semites try to wrap themselves with a thin veneer of "anti-Zionism", but he also argues -- counter to biological evidence -- that modern day Jews aren't the "real" Jews.  I forget who posted the "If Jews were really Jews they'd look like this" challenge, but my brother looks enough like Bob Dylan, and Bob Dylan looks enough like that image (horrid as it may be ...) that he's just plain wrong.

I have cited several prominent jewish authors who have documented the Ashkenazi, the eastern European Jews, being converts from the now defunct Khazar empire. Were those Jews antisemites or is it just antisemitic to cite them?

As to who Robert Zimmerman, aka Bob Dylan, looks like, quite Eastern European not like the Palestinians, Muslim, Christian and Jewish, who are not of Khazar origin.

Quote:
Years ago I ran across a woman from Iraq.  Based on "ethnic" characteristics, I look more like her than the countries my ancestors came from more recently.  Which is to say, he's just plain wrong.

The bigger "hahahaha" is that many Israelis are able to freely mingle with Arabs in the Middle East, which really messes with their heads.

More interesting is your ignorance of the subject while at the same time willing to tell gratuitous lies about anyone whom you dislike, including Turks. It is difficult to keep lies straight. Assuming you mean "many [jewish] Israelis" then given your false genetic claims ALL of them should be able to "freely mingle" save the Ashkenazi are not. All Sephardim are so able as are the native Muslims and Christians. The Ashkenazim cannot. They look too German Eye-wink western Mongol actually save for the interbreeding with Germans and Slavs.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Jeffrick wrote:blacklight915

Jeffrick wrote:

blacklight915 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Arabs are our closest genetic relatives.

Just like the bible says 

Are the Torah and the Old Testament the same thing?

No but Tom Brady  beating the crap outta  bejesus lovin' Tebow   IS the REAL thing. Bwahahahahahaha!!!!!

Well, the Saints are out of the running as of yesterday, which is sad.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915

blacklight915 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

For the purpose of answering your question, "Yes".

However, they aren't actually the same thing, but think of that as an "advanced topic".

Here's the first paragraph on the wikipedia page titled "Torah":

The Torah is the name given by Jews to the "Five Books of Moses" that begin the Hebrew Bible: Genesis Exodus LeviticusNumbers and Deuteronomy. In rabbinic literature the word Torah denotes both these five books and an Oral Torah. The Oral Torah consists of the traditional interpretations and amplifications handed down by word of mouth from generation to generation and now embodied in the Talmud and Midrash.

Does this seem pretty accurate?

For the purpose of answering your question, "Yes"

"Torah" can also include the entire Tanakh, which is what Christians call the "Old Testament", as well as the texts and oral traditions you mentioned -- Mishnah, Talmud, midrashim, etc.

blacklight915 wrote:
The second paragraph begins with this sentence: "According to Jewish tradition, the entire Torah, both written and oral, was revealed to Moses at Mount Sinai."

Is it even possible to find evidence to back this up? I mean, how could you verify that the writer's name was actually "Moses"? Or that he could accurately remember all that information in time enough to write it down? How could anyone verify that it was all written by one man--aren't all the original manuscripts lost? It all just seems a bit sketchy to me...

Well, it's been a LONG LONG time, so of course the original manuscripts are lost.

First off, it really isn't that much information, in terms of what was written down, and the rest was passed down orally.  If you'd like to see a fairly recent example, look at Muslims and how well they manage to memorize the entire Qur'an.  A Qur'an, in the Arabic script is about 10% longer than the five books of the Torah, so it can be done.

Secondly, Hebrew is an interesting language in that there are no numbers in Hebrew.  Instead, every letter has a numerical value.  The first letter, alef, has the value "1", bet has the value "2", and so on through the last (tav) which has the value 400.  The values are 1 to 9, then 10 to 90, then 100 to 400, and that covers the 22 letters of the alef-bet.

This brings up something called Gematria, which is a sort of Hebrew numerology.  If you start calculating numerical values for letters, you can wind up with a short-hand notation that can be used to describe an entire text, to verify that the text was transmitted correctly -- the length of a text and the sum of the values in a text, taken together, provide a basic "check" that the text was transmitted correctly.  The simplest form of number is something called a checksum, and they've been used since ancient times to make sure the Torah stays "correct".

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Secondly, Hebrew is an interesting language in that there are no numbers in Hebrew.  Instead, every letter has a numerical value.  The first letter, alef, has the value "1", bet has the value "2", and so on through the last (tav) which has the value 400.  The values are 1 to 9, then 10 to 90, then 100 to 400, and that covers the 22 letters of the alef-bet.

This brings up something called Gematria, which is a sort of Hebrew numerology.  If you start calculating numerical values for letters, you can wind up with a short-hand notation that can be used to describe an entire text, to verify that the text was transmitted correctly -- the length of a text and the sum of the values in a text, taken together, provide a basic "check" that the text was transmitted correctly.  The simplest form of number is something called a checksum, and they've been used since ancient times to make sure the Torah stays "correct".

Hmm, that's rather clever. Have you seen the thread about Isaac Newton decoding the Bible using Gematria? I believe it was started by someone named Jimenez. I'm not sure if what he's claiming is accurate, but it seemed pretty interesting.

 


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915 wrote:Hmm,

blacklight915 wrote:
Hmm, that's rather clever. Have you seen the thread about Isaac Newton decoding the Bible using Gematria? I believe it was started by someone named Jimenez. I'm not sure if what he's claiming is accurate, but it seemed pretty interesting.

I think so, but I've not read it.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

blacklight915 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Arabs are our closest genetic relatives.

Just like the bible says 

Are the Torah and the Old Testament the same thing?

For the purpose of answering your question, "Yes".

However, they aren't actually the same thing, but think of that as an "advanced topic".

"You wouldn't understand"

Been there done that. It's called moving the goal posts to suit your own desires. Everyone who is the fan of a pet deity does that.

"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires" Susan B Anthony.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:FurryCatHerder

Brian37 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

For the purpose of answering your question, "Yes".

However, they aren't actually the same thing, but think of that as an "advanced topic".

"You wouldn't understand"

Been there done that. It's called moving the goal posts to suit your own desires. Everyone who is the fan of a pet deity does that.

No, it's because "Torah" is the name of the first five books written by Moses, the entire Tanakh, the combination of the Oral and Written revelations from G-d, and the entire corpus of Jewish religious literature.

Go read this, then decide if a simple "yes" or "no" answer was appropriate --

http://www.answers.com/topic/torah

There =is= a reason I ignore you for the most part.  I hope that whatever you get out of the behavior that has caused me to ignore you is rewarding.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

This link is quite helpful. However, I'm confused as to why you didn't post it in response to my first question; it would have saved a lot of time. That said, I definitely appreciate you taking the time to answer.

 


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915

blacklight915 wrote:

This link is quite helpful. However, I'm confused as to why you didn't post it in response to my first question; it would have saved a lot of time. That said, I definitely appreciate you taking the time to answer.

Because it seemed like an answer that would only lead to more questions!

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

blacklight915 wrote:

This link is quite helpful. However, I'm confused as to why you didn't post it in response to my first question; it would have saved a lot of time. That said, I definitely appreciate you taking the time to answer.

Need I point out that is the answer I gave you, an answer pussy said was an advanced topic and then told you it was more than the first five books? Do I have to? Do not forget to visit www.rationalresponders.com/forum/30998 and see what else the pussy is up to.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

blacklight915 wrote:

This link is quite helpful. However, I'm confused as to why you didn't post it in response to my first question; it would have saved a lot of time. That said, I definitely appreciate you taking the time to answer.

Need I point out that is the answer I gave you, an answer pussy said was an advanced topic and then told you it was more than the first five books? Do I have to? Do not forget to visit www.rationalresponders.com/forum/30998 and see what else the pussy is up to.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Need I

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Need I point out that is the answer I gave you, an answer pussy said was an advanced topic and then told you it was more than the first five books? Do I have to? Do not forget to visit www.rationalresponders.com/forum/30998 and see what else the pussy is up to.

Well, apparently, "Torah" can refer to a number of different combinations of Jewish sacred texts and teachings. Still, I wouldn't call it an advanced concept--just a lengthy one.

And yes, I do appreciate your answer as well. However, I didn't see your post until after I'd already read the wikipedia page "Torah". Since I already knew your answer was correct from what I had read, I kind of ignored it... Sorry about that.

Ah, yes, banning the opposition--not a good way to show tolerance...

 


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

blacklight915 wrote:
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
Need I point out that is the answer I gave you, an answer pussy said was an advanced topic and then told you it was more than the first five books? Do I have to? Do not forget to visit www.rationalresponders.com/forum/30998 and see what else the pussy is up to.
Well, apparently, "Torah" can refer to a number of different combinations of Jewish sacred texts and teachings. Still, I wouldn't call it an advanced concept--just a lengthy one.

And yes, I do appreciate your answer as well. However, I didn't see your post until after I'd already read the wikipedia page "Torah". Since I already knew your answer was correct from what I had read, I kind of ignored it... Sorry about that.

Ah, yes, banning the opposition--not a good way to show tolerance...

I don't care if you appreciate me or not. I just want to be sure you know who you are dealing with.

Quote:

 

Torah

 
American Heritage Dictionary:

To·rah

Home > Library > Literature & Language > Dictionary

also

to·rah (tôr'ə, tōr'ə, toir'ə, tô-rä') pronunciation n. Judaism
  1. The first five books of the Hebrew Scriptures.
  2. A scroll of parchment containing the first five books of the Hebrew Scriptures, used in a synagogue during services.
  3. The entire body of religious law and learning including both sacred literature and oral tradition.

The only modest difference is 3, however the written religious law in the first five books, Torah == Law.

If you really want to go into oral tradition that was invented by the rabbis who first appear in Judaism after the destruction of the temple which caused unemployed priests to call themselves rabbis. They invented the idea of oral law as that also first appears with them. Consider it a way for the unemployed and superfluous to avoid gainful employment. Over the centuries the Karaites who reject the idea of oral law and rabbinical tyranny have nearly been hunted to extinction by the rabbinical sects.

So it comes down to being gullible enough to accept the word of power hungry ex-priests as to whether there is more than the law that is written.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:I don't

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

I don't care if you appreciate me or not. I just want to be sure you know who you are dealing with.

I'm dealing with a very well-educated man devoid of compassion.

 

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

 

The only modest difference is 3, however the written religious law in the first five books, Torah == Law.

If you really want to go into oral tradition that was invented by the rabbis who first appear in Judaism after the destruction of the temple which caused unemployed priests to call themselves rabbis. They invented the idea of oral law as that also first appears with them. Consider it a way for the unemployed and superfluous to avoid gainful employment. Over the centuries the Karaites who reject the idea of oral law and rabbinical tyranny have nearly been hunted to extinction by the rabbinical sects.

So it comes down to being gullible enough to accept the word of power hungry ex-priests as to whether there is more than the law that is written.

No, I was merely gullible enough to believe that dictionaries and encyclopedias are accurate sources. I am aware these types of sources give a general, broad overview of a topic. This is why I typically begin an investigation by looking at these sources. Besides, all those laws and traditions were invented by people anyways...

 

 


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915 wrote:No, I

blacklight915 wrote:
No, I was merely gullible enough to believe that dictionaries and encyclopedias are accurate sources. I am aware these types of sources give a general, broad overview of a topic. This is why I typically begin an investigation by looking at these sources. Besides, all those laws and traditions were invented by people anyways...

The existence of an "oral tradition" or "oral law" is trivially obvious.

Let's consider, briefly, the laws of Shechita, which deal with the requirements for slaughtering an animal.  The "written law" is covered in Deut. 12:21 and a few following verses, and it basically says "Kill it and let it's blood drain out onto the ground, and don't consume the blood."  That's it -- it doesn't say =how= to kill the animal, =how= to let the blood drain out, etc.

So, you're a good Jewish goat herder and it's time to turn a goat into dinner.  You've got a goat, you've got a knife, you've got ... a Torah scroll out in the barn with you?  No, of course not.

Okay, so you have what?  You have what you're parents told you about the proper way to kill that goat.

You might say "Well, what if I want to do it differently?", that case is handled in Deut 17:11 and following -- if it's a difficult question (like, how to properly kill that goat), the Torah says that we are supposed to ask certain people who are given the authority to answer such questions (originally Moses, then he divided that up to various people among the tribes).

So, if you accept that you can't run off to the Torah every time you have a question, you have to accept that there must have been an oral tradition which you learned so you don't have to run off to the Torah every 10 or 15 minutes.  And if you don't buy that rationale, then the Torah is explicit -- if you have a hard question, ask someone who has the authority to give you answers.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:The

FurryCatHerder wrote:

The existence of an "oral tradition" or "oral law" is trivially obvious.

Let's consider, briefly, the laws of Shechita, which deal with the requirements for slaughtering an animal.  The "written law" is covered in Deut. 12:21 and a few following verses, and it basically says "Kill it and let it's blood drain out onto the ground, and don't consume the blood."  That's it -- it doesn't say =how= to kill the animal, =how= to let the blood drain out, etc.

So, you're a good Jewish goat herder and it's time to turn a goat into dinner.  You've got a goat, you've got a knife, you've got ... a Torah scroll out in the barn with you?  No, of course not.

Okay, so you have what?  You have what you're parents told you about the proper way to kill that goat.

You might say "Well, what if I want to do it differently?", that case is handled in Deut 17:11 and following -- if it's a difficult question (like, how to properly kill that goat), the Torah says that we are supposed to ask certain people who are given the authority to answer such questions (originally Moses, then he divided that up to various people among the tribes).

So, if you accept that you can't run off to the Torah every time you have a question, you have to accept that there must have been an oral tradition which you learned so you don't have to run off to the Torah every 10 or 15 minutes.  And if you don't buy that rationale, then the Torah is explicit -- if you have a hard question, ask someone who has the authority to give you answers.

True, that's the way pretty much any set of written instructions works. Of course, I really doubt that the Torah is still the best the instruction manual around...

Also, are you just ignoring all the posts by A_Nony_Mouse?  because it certainly seems that way...

 


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

FurryCatHerder wrote:
blacklight915 wrote:
No, I was merely gullible enough to believe that dictionaries and encyclopedias are accurate sources. I am aware these types of sources give a general, broad overview of a topic. This is why I typically begin an investigation by looking at these sources. Besides, all those laws and traditions were invented by people anyways...
The existence of an "oral tradition" or "oral law" is trivially obvious.

When it comes to trivial ... The oral law is self-reflexive in claiming it came from Moses. Moses is a myth. Therefore the oral law is a myth.

QED

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml