Thread: Debate: Israel – victim or aggressor?

Originally Posted by The Third Man

I guess actual factual information is not your thing then. I suggest you stick with reading the BS that you produce in your not well thought out badly researched lamely put across posts.

Heheheheheheheheheheheeeeeeeee eeeeee, and look who's talking about BS, Mr. BS spreader himself...., hahahhhahahahahahahaaaaaa..... .....

Originally Posted by beenthere

Hehjeheheheheheheeeeeee, .... well, what ever you think, Third, but the facts you seem to deal in are myths

Seems you cannot keep to your own words.

Third, your not worth answering.

Originally Posted by beenthere

Heheheheheheheheheheheeeeeeeee eeeeee, and look who's talking about BS, Mr. BS spreader himself...., hahahhhahahahahahahaaaaaa..... .....

Wow you have produced a lot of letters and some of them are in a straight line. Very good. Tomorrow you can start on real sentences and then we will work on your spelling.

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Wow you have produced a lot of letters and some of them are in a straight line. Very good. Tomorrow you can start on real sentences and then we will work on your spelling.

Straight lines are good most of the time. I never claimed to be able to spell.

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Wow you have produced a lot of letters and some of them are in a straight line. Very good. Tomorrow you can start on real sentences and then we will work on your spelling.

It has already been pointed out that there are those that feel your beloved Norman G. Finkelstein is full of you know what. One of those that has already been pointed out is Alan Dershowitz. Now let's take a look at his credentials, shall we;

http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/d...dex.html?id=12
Alan M. Dershowitz
Education
Brooklyn College A.B. 1959
Yale Law School LL.B. 1962

Appointments
Assistant Professor of Law, 1964
Professor of Law, 1967
Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, 1993

And just to be fair

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Dershowitz
He has spent most of his career at Harvard Law School where in 1967, at the age of 28, he became the youngest full professor of law in its history. He has held the Felix Frankfurter professorship there since 1993.[1]




Now, let's take a look at your beloved Norman Finkelstein's credentials;


http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/
Norman G. Finkelstein received his doctorate in 1988 from the Department of Politics at Princeton University


Oh, and I had to go to Wiki to get this next tidbit, because what I have from Finkelstein offical site other than the book advertisements was what I posted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein
He has held faculty positions at Brooklyn College, Rutgers University, Hunter College, New York University, and, most recently, DePaul University, where he was an assistant professor from 2001 to 2007.


Oh, wow, it doesn't look like your beloved Finkelstein is even in the same ball park when it comes to education does it. Hey, your the one touting education, not me.

I know, a list of books by both sorces, that should do it, right??


Books by Finkelstein
2011: Goldstone Recants. Richard Goldstone renews Israel’s license to kill, OR Books, New York: 2011.[75], ISBN 978-1-935928-51-5

2010: This Time We Went Too Far: Truth and Consequences of the Gaza Invasion. OR Books, New York: 2010. [3], ISBN 978-1-935928-43-0

2005: Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History. U of California P, ISBN 0-520-24598-9. 2nd updated edition, U of Cal. P.

2000: The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering, Verso, ISBN 1-85984-488-X.

1998: A Nation on Trial: The Goldhagen Thesis and Historical Truth (Co-author with Ruth Bettina Birn) Henry Holt and Co., ISBN 0-8050-5872-9.

1996: The Rise and Fall of Palestine: A Personal Account of the Intifada Years. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, ISBN 0-8166-2859-9.

1995: Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict, Verso, ISBN 1-85984-442-1
1987: From the Jewish Question to the Jewish State: An Essay on the Theory of Zionism, thesis, Princeton University.



Books by Dershowitz
Dershowitz, Alan M. Preemption: A Knife that Cuts Both Ways (W.W. Norton & Company 2006).


Dershowitz, Alan M. The Case for Peace (John Wiley & Sons 2005).


Dershowitz, Alan M. America on Trial: Inside the legal battles that transformed our nation -from the Salem witches to the Guantanamo Detainees (Warner Books 2004).


Dershowitz, Alan M. America Declares Independence (John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2003).


Dershowitz, Alan M. The Case for Israel (John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2003).


Dershowitz, Alan M. Shouting Fire: Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age (Little Brown 2002).


Dershowitz, Alan M. Why Terrorism Works: Understanding the Threat, Responding to the Challenge (Yale University Press 2002).


Dershowitz, Alan M. Letters to a Young Lawyer (Basic Books 2001).


Dershowitz, Alan M. Supreme Injustice: How the High Court Hijacked Election 2000 (Oxford University Press 2001).


Dershowitz, Alan M. The Genesis of Justice: Ten Stories of Biblical Injustice That Led to the Ten Commandments and Modern Law (Warner Books 2000).


And your Finkelstein is described as an activist. Hey, so was Timothy Leary, and he was a psychologist and another writer, and he was known for his activism for psychedelic drugs. The fact that Finkelstein was a "political scientist" means nothing once he had the word, activist" attached to his name. When the word "Activist" comes into play it means BIAS!!!! And the fact that your beloved Finkelstein has never risen above an assistant professor says a lot too. And please tell people why he left DePaul.

Originally Posted by beenthere

It has already been pointed out that there are those that feel your beloved Norman G. Finkelstein is full of you know what. One of those that has already been pointed out is Alan Dershowitz. Now let's take a look at his credentials, shall we

.

I have already proven that your beloved Dershowitz is a liar in a previous post but it looks like you prefer proven liars over real scholars like Finklestein.

Debate: Israel – victim or aggressor?

That you would even try and big up a proven liar like Dershowitz just goes to show how desperate your non existent argument is.

Aggressor, obviously: http://tinyurl.com/40ReasonsWeKnowJewsPulled911

Originally Posted by beenthere

{{""Which is you telling me in response to my statement that there was an anti jewish pogrom in aden. Aren’t you""}}

Aden is in Yemen and had continued there with a large Jewish community for 2,000 years until your beloved Arabs once again started killing Jews for no other reason than they were Jews, the same way the KKK killed Blacks, just because they were black, no differnce except the Arabs did it on a larger scale that you seem to aprove of;

Yes, yes arabs attacked jews in Aden. Youve told us that over and over again. Now you tell us I approve of jews being killed etc etc. Lets hope you can do better.

{{""Ive responded to that several times now by pointing out that this pogrom was in Aden not Palestine and not Israel. Ive said this again and again. What more do you want""}}

Funny, I never read your responce to the events that took place in Aden in 1947.

Ive said it over and over again , my response is this ; Aden is nowhere near Palestine and therefore your riposte to the statement on Israeli wars is irrelevant.

What more do you want ?

{{""On here civility is required in our discourse. You can believe whatever you wish, you just can’t go calling people names.""}}

Will an abbreviation suffice? Cre.?? Because you are FAR from being a creator of creation.

Um no ‘creation’ will suffice. Nothing more nothing less. Fair enough?

{{""Of course the Jewish, as well as the British of course. Do I really need to list the many examples of jewish terror attacks beenthere? Really? You wouldn’t contend that only arabs attacked jews would you?""}}

When you want to debate a subject you had better. And Cre., don't list attacks that were in retaliation for former attacks mby the Arabs.

Well now youve added a qualification you hadn’t mentioned earlier haven’t you?
Thats the thing, if one cant mention things that are retaliations then we cant mention any attacks at all and instead we go right to the thing that first started it, the Zionist council in Berne deciding to create a jewish nation in Palestine.

{{""I have already responded to you, every time. If ive not specifically addressed a link or quote, its only an addition to a point youve already made or its not relevant to our discussion. Get that?
Any specifics Ill be happy to explain.
But are you really saying that you wont address me respectfully unless I answer in a way you deem fit?""}}


I will address you respectfully, but please refrane from posting nonsense.

Well thank you. I suppose I should ask you not to post nonsense either but first please explain to us what your definition of nonsense is and how one may know your conception in advance that we may avoid any unpleasantness.

{{""The British. They had invaded the land, occupied it and ruled it against the wishes of the very people who had helped them get rid of the Ottomans.""}}

Rubbish. Let's go through this once more, and Cre., address the points made. The British and the Sherif of Meca (Hussein) made an agreement in 1916

Please note, "he proclaimed himself King of the Hejaz, which received international recognition". So the world at large recognized his position as King of the Arabs.

Lol. No he proclaimed himself King of the Arab Countries, but received recognition as King of the Hejaz, not as King of the Arabs – Avi Shlaim, Israel and Palestine page 5 paragraph 4.

Now, do ywe have it established that Faisal, King Hussein's son lead the Arab Armies that did the fighting against the Ottomans???

Yes.

And do we agree that him and his father KNEW what was expected of them concerning the Balfour Declaration??

Um no, not at all. In fact he was silent after the Balfour Declaration, greatly disturbed by it, and had a meeting with a a Commander Hogarth who reported that he then thought he had the UKs assurance that Jewish settlement in Palestine, which he respected as he respected the jewish people, would not conflict with Arab independence – therefore he was emphatically opposed to Zionism - Avi Shlaim, Israel and Palestine page 7 paragraph 1.

And do we agree that in 1920 "Palestine" consisted of the land shown on the provided map??

Yes

And REGARDLESS what the British did the Arab Monarchy knew and tried to follow through with their agreement???

Yes. I suppose so.

On 3 January 1919, Faisal and Dr. Chaim Weizmann, President of the World Zionist Organization signed the Faisal–Weizmann Agreement for Arab-Jewish cooperation, in which Faisal conditionally accepted the Balfour Declaration based on the fulfillment of British wartime promises of development of a Jewish homeland in Palestine and on which subject he made the following statement:

Well firstly, Faisal didn’t speak English in which the latter agreement with Weizmann you mention was written, the agreement was dependent on fulfilment of arab independence demands, further he was not in any sense representative of arabs, and lastly more credible arab opinion from the time such as the third Palestinian congress in Haifa 1920 flatly rejected both the declaration and Zionist goals.

That's as far as we need to go at this point. After the Ottomans fell, The area was under the rule of another monarch.

Um no , Transjordan was. The rest of mandate Palestine wasn’t.

{{""They denied the political rights of the majority of the inhabitants and therefore caused the violence just as the British caused the violence in America by denying Americans proper representation. Added to that was the influx of jewish people who fully intended to take over the entire land as your own link demonstrates""}}

This is what I have been calling NONSENSE!!! Tell us, Cre., when was the last time subjects had "political rights" in a true Monarch;

Well the last time in the UK case was ever since the civil war. Even before then people had political rights.

Plus the area had NEVER known anything else other than a Manarch and would have never recongized Democracy if it had crawled up and bite them. So to carry on like the Arabs of that day and age knew our form of government and act like that's what they were after is worse than silly.

Not true. Even the Ottoman empire took account of Palestinian wishes.
Anyway, why don’t you think they knew about democracy and wanted at least something like that? They had numerous political parties and the third congress rejected British mode of government and demanded at least representation of their wishes. Whats ‘worse than silly’ about that?

And as far as America went and the reason we refused to join the League of Nations is to do so would have violated American's sovereignty.

So?

{{""At what point are we talking about? Oh how about the bit where the germans were sitting deep inside Russia trying to create liebensraum. Say at Stalingrad. Is that clear enough for you?""}}

Answer in one word, NO! Why? Because in Sept. of 1942 the Germans were attacking Stalingrad. By Nov 1942 The Russians kicked off their counter-offensive. Now, do we need the definition of counter-offensive??? Do you see what I'm driving at when I want the time, place, who, what, when, where, and why???

Um no, are you saying that if instead the Germans had halted before Stalingrad, set up fortifications and settled the land they would not be considered to be attacking Russia?

You also seem to be now telling us that the Egyptian operation on Yom Kippur 1973 was a counter offensive rather than an attack. Is that correct?

{{""As for Soviet offensives, they were still in Russia for much of it. Still an offensive war on their part was it or not? ""}}

After Nov. 1942, yes it was but it's called a counter offensive, not being the offenders, they were countering the offenders, yes, Cre., there is a difference.

Indeed a counter offensive to conduct the defense of their lands which the germans by dint of thrusting deep into were attacking. When the Russians started this counter offensive were they no longer defending Russia?

{{""Was that a defensive or offensive war that both they and the Egyptians were conducting then when in their own territory? ""}}

The fact that you are driven back to your own territory doesn't now make you the defender. Since Egypt and Syria were the ones pushing for and mobilizing their troops, kicking U.N. Peace Keeper out, Closing the Straits of Tiran, they were the offenders.

Aren’t you now referring to a previous war? That of 67? If so why then did you bring up the Yom Kippur war and tell us it was an Egyptian attack?

But in any case now youve moved the goalposts again, what is offensive about mobilising troops in your own land? Whats offensive about asking UNEF that was deployed to protect Egypt to leave your own land? Why didn’t Israel then ask UNEF to deploy on its side? Why did Israel reject diplomacy over the Straits and what Israeli ship was ever stopped?

{{""It was an offensive when they entered Germany. Just as the allies were on the offensive.""}}

Wrong, they wouldn't have been entering Germany if Germany hadn't attacked, it was still Russia's counter offensive in action.

AH so one can conduct a counter offensive and still be defending one’s land, even if one has invaded another country and especially when one is actually fighting on one’s own land. Like Egypt in 1973 – Point demonstrated.

Originally Posted by beenthere

And your Finkelstein is described as an activist. Hey, so was Timothy Leary, and he was a psychologist and another writer, and he was known for his activism for psychedelic drugs. The fact that Finkelstein was a "political scientist" means nothing once he had the word, activist" attached to his name. When the word "Activist" comes into play it means BIAS!!!! And the fact that your beloved Finkelstein has never risen above an assistant professor says a lot too. And please tell people why he left DePaul.

Lol

Thats hilarious. Dershowitz was Michael Jackson's lawyer. A life long career in advocacy, if your going to credit lawyers as easily credible historians then really youre on a wobbly wicket.

Would anyone like to see some of the debates between Finkelstein and Dershowitz? Funny stuff.

Originally Posted by creation

Lol


Would anyone like to see some of the debates between Finkelstein and Dershowitz? Funny stuff.

Yes please.