Mosque at ground ZeroFollow

You're not, actually, but I'm ok leaving you with whatever you want to believe. Like I said, your telescope sucks.

You want me to read this whole post to weigh in? Hah.

If female circumcision is your example of how Islam spreads hate and intolerance...its a poor one. You said it, not me.

No, I seldom read an entire thread. Are you telling me you read all of gbajis ramblings?

It doesn't matter. It's not like I erred. If I didn't explain myself fully within the context of the ongoing conversation, or if the meat of the matter had changed before I weighed in...so sorry. It's the nature of the beast eh.

Still, you gave a crappy example, and frankly, I'm tired of us civilized white folks shaking our fists at the heathens simply because they're different.

No, but I don't respond to him very often either. When I do I have read the post I am responding to.


I offer you absolution.


So you'll take issue with one of several examples I gave and make your entire response about its merit ignoring the rest of the argument? Do people look at you funny when you suggest Mengele was a visionary in twin research?

That's kind of bad ***, really.

You can't cast female "circumcision" (horrifying as I find the practice) solely at Islam either. Most Christians, Jews and Muslims in the North-East part of Africa practice it, as young women are seen as "unmarriagable" if they have not had it done.

Malaysian Islam is not the same as Western Chinese Islam is not the same as Arabian Islam is not the same as Ethiopian Islam is not the same as Australian Islam is not the same as American Islam is not the same as French Islam...

If you don't think that the UK/US/AUS/NZ governments are also not doing this, you are hallucinating.



Just sayin'.

Links to your assertations or STFU.

(Dont worry about the CIA ones. I can find those myself)

The only other country to have "boxed" Gaza is Egypt, and it only did so at the request of the US and Israel.

This myth that Israel is surrounded by enemies on all sides is pretty convenient, but its patently not true. Jordan, with whom it shares its largest border by far, is an ally. Egypt is an ally. Lebanon is partly an ally, and partly an enemy through Hezbollah. And Syria is not ally, but it's not a threat either. So who the enemy countries "surrounding" Israel? Iran, for sure, but they're as close to Israel as Greece is, and separated from them by Iraq and Syria. And... that's it. Not exactly what I would call "surrounded".

Obviously, you have Hamas and its 3 home-made rockets a day, and Hezbollah. They are a threat of sorts, of course, but nothing compared to the 1960s when Israel really was surrounded by angry countries with serious armies. Back then, yes, Israel faced an existential threat. But this has not been the case since they got nukes, and since they signed peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan. And yet, it is still the predominant narrative used to justify anything and everything from the Israeli government. We treat people like animals? Existential threat. We've got illegal nukes? Existential threat. We annex territory that isn't ours? Existential threat. We build a giant illegal wall? Existential threat. We impose a blockade on a territory that isn't ours? Existential threat. We allow racists and fascists in government? Existential threat. Give me a break...

Other Arab countries have been cbunts to the Palestinian, there is no doubt about it. They don't have much a moral high ground, despite all their rhetoric. But, on the other hand, they weren't responsible for the Palestinian crisis. They just inherited its fall-out...

You'll get a free Tibet for every purchase of a full China.

First off, the implication made previously that I support the policies of Isreal are misleading, at best. I support their right to exist, I support their right to rule themselves as they see fit, and I support their right to defend their borders as they see fit within their borders. In addition to this I acknowledge that they are in a war with Hamas and Hezbollah, which are essentially state sponsored terrorist organizations dedicated to the destruction of Israel as a country, and as such are entitled to conduct war operations against those organizations and the states that sponsor them.

The assertion that Lebanon is even partly an ally is laughable. Their sponsorship of Hezbollah precludes this outright. Jordan and Egypt are only "allies" in the sense that they got tired of getting their asses kicked and decided that rather than spend the money and lives necessary to continue their losing effort they would sign peace treaties. The relationship is motivated out of practicality rather than ideology and assistance from them in Israel's struggles is tenuous, at best. Syria is a threat in that they fund insurgent activities and give haven to terrorist organizations.


To add a little context to this, those 3 rockets per day had amounted to over 5700 rockets and 4000 mortar shells as of January 2009 according to Shin Bet. If the Swiss had launched nearly 6000 rockets at Lyon you can bet your arm raising *** NATO would have been required to do something about it. The idea that no threat exists from countries already having been pointed out as laughable, your assertion that the private organizations that receive state funding and private funding from one of the richest regions in the world (due to oil money) is a complete joke.


They inherited the fallout and decided to start paying for the private armies to act on their behalf. Let's be a little bit honest.

Word of warning, block of text incoming...



I'm not sure I implied that.



I support their right to exist, obviously. And I support their right to defend themselves in a proportional and measured manner, and for it to be held to the same standards we would hold any other country.



I don't think Israel is in a state of permanent "war" with those groups. Obviously, Israel should defend itself when attacked by those groups, but I don't think the mere existence of those groups in other countries allows Israel to wage war on them. Hezbollah hasn't attacked Israel in, what, 6 years, despite being based just north of them. That's not much of a "war", is it?



Lebanon doesn't sponsor Hezbollah. Maybe instead of laughing you should do a bit of research into the political system that exists there. Hezbollah threatens Lebanon ten times more than it threatens Israel. It's an Iranian pawn, not a Lebanese one.



Firstly that's ********* secondly so what?

Jordan and Egypt are allies. They are both allies of the US, and beneficiaries of huge subsidies from them. They are not, in any way, shape or form, a threat. The President of Egypt got assassinated for signing that peace treaty with Israel, so maybe they did take it a bit more seriously than you suggest. But even if they didn't, it doesn't change the fact that Israel is not surrounded by enemies.



The problem with all these similes is that they don't reflect the entirety of the situation. You can't take a one-sided, 10 second snapshot and say "well this is the situation". The "situation" has been an ongoing saga for 60 years now. For your comparison to work, we would have to say: imagine Lyon used to be part of Switzerland, and then it was given independence by people outside it, so Frenchies came from all over the world to settle in Lyon, so all the Swiss in Lyon fled to neighbouring countries, then there was lots of wars involving all neighbouring states, then French bombed Switzerland to the ground and blockaded, etc, etc... It would be a fucking analogical nightmare, and even then it wouldn't do it justice...

Yes, Israel did come under serious attack in the 60s and 70s. Yes, Israel did suffer from suicide-bombings in the late nineties and early noughties. But you can't separate those from the rest of the story. Well you can, and you do, but it's dishonest. Especially if you don't also mention the land-grabs, the settlers, the second class citizenship of Israeli Arabs, the continual annexation of land, the destruction of Gaza and Lebanon, and the destruction of Palestinian property, all of which have been going on for 60-70 years. Most of the actions are reactions to previous actions which were themselves reactions from previous reactions. And this is from both sides. But most of the killing, the vast majority of the killing, almost to a 10-1 ratio, is done by Israel. That's a strong indicator in my books. For all the hate-filed rhetoric of Hezbollah, their KP is ten times lower than Israel's. So what, are ineffective rocket attacks really that much worse than bombing a city flat? Can you really compare the 25 people killed by Hamas rockets in 5 years to the 1385 (including 400 children) people killed in the 3 week Gaza offensive? Just for one moment, imagine it was the other way round... Would you really justify the killing of 1385 Israeli in 3 weeks because they had killed 25 Palestinians in 5 years? How is that anything other than hypocrisy?

Don't get me wrong, Israel have real enemies: Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran.

But that's it. Distorting the narrative to turn all its neighbour, or all Muslim countries, into threats to Israel is simply a lie. Egypt is not a threat. Jordan is not a threat. Neither are Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iraq, or any other ME or Muslim country you can think of. These groups do not receive money from a "region". I don't know why you feel the need to assimilate countries, ideologies, or religious groups which have nothing to do with each other. Lebanon is not Iran. Saudi Arabia is not Iran. Is it laziness? Lack of intellectual capacity? Dislike of Muslims? I'd wager it's the first one, but I'm beginning to have my doubts...

Finally, my real problem in all this is that if other countries used the same tactic and justifications as Israel, we'd have WWIII tomorrow. If India used that framework in its relation with Pakistan, nuclear war would've already happened there. When Iraq used it against Iran, there was an 8 year war and tens of millions of death. If the US had used it against the USSR, none of us would be here writing on this forum. Indiscriminate and brutal retaliation against perceived threats is not an acceptable course of action for a democratic country. The only reason they get away with it is because the US supports them. I'm quite keen on the categorical imperative, but if it was applied to Israel, we'd all be in a state of perpetual conflict. The rules that apply to everyone else should apply to Israel. Simple as.