Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've been giving thought to what Golgi said - that Judaism is a vile, genocidal religion that wants to kill all other people (leaving the Earth with a population of 12 million or so). Thus, I have decided to convert to the loving religion that Golgi practices.
P.S. It's April 1st.
Aside from the rhetoric that I always try to sift through along with the rest of the nonsense, I wonder if you have given thought to what facts golgi laid out that no one seems to have bothered to address as true or false. This to me is where the thought needs to be applied, even if facts are not always as we prefer to believe, even amidst a "noise" we struggle to endure, coming from any direction. From every direction in this particular case, there is always lots of that sort of noise. Still, the truth remains...
In particular, it is what people choose to believe, support and promote in the way of their particular holy books, testaments and rituals that should not be exempt of anyone's judgement as to what is right or wrong, for better or worse, for all concerned. True and worthy or not? I view such assessment in the same way we all might consider any manifesto, and I think it our obligation to evaluate such teachings and thinking as either truthful or not, right or wrong, for everyone's benefit or about something else entirely? If about something else, what?
Or would we consider the manifesto of the man who shot up the mosque in New Zealand as somehow about a "personal belief" that everyone has their right to believe and promote? Regardless the truth? Regardless what makes sense?!? I don't' think so!
Obvious bias or objective reasoning? When you can't even tell which or refuse to admit what is what, you are part of the problem...
No, my friend....peace will come ONLY when the Arabs, under the leadership of the Hamas terrorists, are willing to acknowledge ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO EXIST. They have been offered land back, along with peace, but they refuse to agree to Israel's right to exist. Nothing short of "Death to Israel" is acceptable to them.
Very telling how you put the onus entirely on the Israelis. Not very objective if you ask me.
Seriously though...
Seems you either did not read what I wrote about this before or who knows what, but this notion that either side will ever lean toward acceptance of the other is just more nonsense based on rationale that defies reality. To expect either side not to have all manner of reason to want "death" to the other, after all the death to the other already done, is simply naive. To insist on such a ridiculous notion or condition is just another way to throw yet another wrench into the peace negotiations that Israel really doesn't want to go anywhere given what it would take to actually arrive at a settlement that would satisfy all parties concerned.
The Palestinians have not accepted the terms up until now, because they have not been "balanced" in terms of what they too want in the way of land and a reasonable shot at economic prosperity. Far beyond what Israel is willing to consider, and the Israelis could really care less what the Palestinians want. For both sides, the question of what is reasonable at this point in time is beyond reconciling without significant concession on the part of Israel.
And the notion the Palestinians at this point, will ever necessarily "agree to Israel's right to exist," is like insisting on the McCoys sitting down to dinner with the Hatfields. Ain't going to happen, but a peace between the two CAN happen even if they will forever hate one another. We've got plenty of examples of countries that don't get along but have managed a way to live side by side regardless, in relative peace. Better to end the endless war and continue hating one another than to continue killing one another with no end in sight...
Aside from the rhetoric that I always try to sift through along with the rest of the nonsense, I wonder if you have given thought to what facts golgi laid out that no one seems to have bothered to address as true or false. This to me is where the thought needs to be applied, even if facts are not always as we prefer to believe, even amidst a "noise" we struggle to endure, coming from any direction. From every direction in this particular case, there is always lots of that sort of noise. Still, the truth remains...
In particular, it is what people choose to believe, support and promote in the way of their particular holy books, testaments and rituals that should not be exempt of anyone's judgement as to what is right or wrong, for better or worse, for all concerned. True and worthy or not? I view such assessment in the same way we all might consider any manifesto, and I think it our obligation to evaluate such teachings and thinking as either truthful or not, right or wrong, for everyone's benefit or about something else entirely? If about something else, what?
Or would we consider the manifesto of the man who shot up the mosque in New Zealand as somehow about a "personal belief" that everyone has their right to believe and promote? Regardless the truth? Regardless what makes sense?!? I don't' think so!
Obvious bias or objective reasoning? When you can't even tell which or refuse to admit what is what, you are part of the problem...
NO. Once someone like Golgi comes out with such vile hatred to Jews, anything more he has to say loses all credibility. He deserves NONE of my consideration, for whatever else he might spew.
And now *I* am part of the problem? This is the problem I have with arrogant liberals: they attack everyone who disagrees with their world view as being unreasonable, unwilling to "listen" (which means unwilling to agree with them), bereft of any critical reasoning skills, have some unstated "agenda," and of course, a fool - all of which you have accused me.
(It hasn't gone by me that you are more willing to consider the opinion of a vile-spewing anti-Semite than an American Jew who.....shudder.....supports Israel and fights back against the double standards applied to it.)
For both sides, the question of what is reasonable at this point in time is beyond reconciling without significant concession on the part of Israel.
And the notion the Palestinians at this point, will ever necessarily "agree to Israel's right to exist," is like insisting on the McCoys sitting down to dinner with the Hatfields. Ain't going to happen, but a peace between the two CAN happen even if they will forever hate one another. We've got plenty of examples of countries that don't get along but have managed a way to live side by side regardless. Better to end the endless war and continue hating one another than to continue killing one another with no end in sight...
The only "peace" that the Palestinian leadership will agree to will be one that ultimately dooms Israel as a Jewish state.
Seems you either did not read what I wrote about this before or who knows what, but this notion that either side will ever lean toward acceptance of the other is just more nonsense based on rationale that defies reality. To expect either side not to have all manner of reason to want "death" to the other, after all the death to the other already done, is simply naive. To insist on such a ridiculous notion or condition is just another way to throw yet another wrench into the peace negotiations that Israel really doesn't want to go anywhere given what it would take to actually arrive at a settlement that would satisfy all parties concerned.
The Palestinians have not accepted the terms up until now, because they have not been "balanced" in terms of what they too want in the way of land and a reasonable shot at economic prosperity. Far beyond what Israel is willing to consider, and the Israelis could really care less what the Palestinians want. For both sides, the question of what is reasonable at this point in time is beyond reconciling without significant concession on the part of Israel.
And the notion the Palestinians at this point, will ever necessarily "agree to Israel's right to exist," is like insisting on the McCoys sitting down to dinner with the Hatfields. Ain't going to happen, but a peace between the two CAN happen even if they will forever hate one another. We've got plenty of examples of countries that don't get along but have managed a way to live side by side regardless. Better to end the endless war and continue hating one another than to continue killing one another with no end in sight...
So you're saying that you're OK with the Palestinians' insistence that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth, and Israel should be willing to overlook that and offer peace anyway?
Wow. You sure are putting it all on Israel and demanding NOTHING of Hamas, which controls and manipulates the Palestinians.
But of course, as you keep telling us, you're completely objective. Right.
NO. Once someone like Golgi comes out with such vile hatred to Jews, anything more he has to say loses all credibility. He deserves NONE of my consideration, for whatever else he might spew.
And now *I* am part of the problem? This is the problem I have with arrogant liberals: they attack everyone who disagrees with their world view as being unreasonable, unwilling to "listen" (which means unwilling to agree with them), bereft of any critical reasoning skills, have some unstated "agenda," and of course, a fool - all of which you have accused me.
(It hasn't gone by me that you are more willing to consider the opinion of a vile-spewing anti-Semite than an American Jew who.....shudder.....supports Israel and fights back against the double standards applied to it.)
With all due respect, gogli was very long with facts, reason and logic, compared to the rest you conveniently use to dismiss what matters most. The facts of these matters regardless all the "vile hatred" is what matters most. It's the facts that have instilled hatred in so many people now, right or wrong. It's our duty to determine what is justified and what is not, fact vs fiction, DESPITE all the noise!
It isn't golgi that deserves any of our consideration personally. It is the facts that deserve all our consideration, however they might be presented! Not sure I've ever seen comments providing so much information to digest about the source of this challenge in any case.
I am not "attacking you!" Too much drama for my taste...
I am pointing out that when objectivity is lacking and bias tends to dictate reason and logic, "you" are part of the problem (as in those people who can be described in that way). If that's you, then such is my judgement. If that is not you, very hard to tell given your thread here and many a comment you have posted. That's all...
I am more than glad to consider ANY opinion by way of the criteria I have explained countless times already!
The only "peace" that the Palestinian leadership will agree to will be one that ultimately dooms Israel as a Jewish state.
I would have to see some proof of that assertion, beyond just opinion, and given so many attempts by third parties who have felt there was a path toward peace (again Jimmy Carter's book comes to mind), it may be your claim is yet another "monkey wrench" that keeps peace from becoming a possibility, per Israel's agenda to keep all she wants for herself.
I would have to see some proof of that assertion, beyond just opinion, and given so many attempts by third parties who have felt there was a path toward peace (again Jimmy Carter's book comes to mind), it may be your claim is yet another "monkey wrench" that keeps peace from becoming a possibility, per Israel's agenda to keep all she wants for herself.
Do you have evidence of an organized push by the Palestinian leadership for peace? Or in the alternative is there a viable Palestinian anti-war movement? There are defectors from the "cause" but no such viable movement.
So you're saying that you're OK with the Palestinians' insistence that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth, and Israel should be willing to overlook that and offer peace anyway?
Wow. You sure are putting it all on Israel and demanding NOTHING of Hamas, which controls and manipulates the Palestinians.
But of course, as you keep telling us, you're completely objective. Right.
Right. Objectively speaking, largely because I've got no "dog in this fight." I just want the dogs to stop fighting so I can get some sleep! Some peace!
So say I step in, and I can easily see these two dogs absolutely hate one another. Neither will ever be willing to chew on a bone together in peace, bark at a squirrel up a tree together in peace, pee on the lawn together in peace. Just AIN'T going to happen. Do I need to convince them to get along before I decide how to broker a better arrangement between the two? Do I need to train them not to hate one another in order to find a way to have these dogs live in the same general proximity without killing one another? Of course not!
And until we also stop with these ridiculous unrealistic conditions before we can even get on with the job of establishing a better arrangement, we will never get to the point of that better arrangement. How hard is this to understand and accept really?
I hope you will forgive the dog analogy. Not meant to demean either the Israelis or Palestinians, though I know both have called the other far worse than dogs...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
