Since you put a precondition on answering the question and want to divert the the thread, I will ask you the following as a precondition to your precondition. Do you realise what you doing/attempting is a Straw Man Argument? Do you realise there are similar quotes in the Jewish book? straw man argument to your straw man argument? If you answer any of those above with a "yes", THEN I'll give you an honest answer to your Straw man argument and give you examples of Jewish hate and give my thoughts on them. THEN... You can try to justify which bit if any qualifies that statement? IE "liberals fail to see why it is necessary for armored tanks to shoot at unarmed kids" or makes it any less sickening? (from the above the "in-context version") You may consult your Propaganda Guide (except using diversion) if necessary and even use highlighting. However, if you want to turn this thread into a bitch fest of which religion is worst your out of luck, I will give my thoughts on those Quaran quotes, then I'll give my thoughts on Torah/Jewish quotes that I'm aware of, then you must accept that as my opinion, do not say they are out of context (I don't read entire holy books) you get my "opinion" that's it job done, and then don't even further the discussion in that regard. Else start a new thread about which religion wants unbelievers dead and I'll comment on it, then you can answer the original question and qualify that quote about shotting kids.
No worries, theres obviously great difficulty rationalizing the shooting of unarmed children in any context, it would be a very difficult thing to as a human being. Maybe someone else can try to rationalize it.
All the ad hominems and straw mans are not "sense", they are the opposite, imbecilic is the word you're looking for. The precondition you gave = Answer a straw man = Then I'll provide an "in-context version" answer that is STUPID! You refuse to give an answer to a subject that you posted so diligently on? why? because someone wants to talk substance and not straw mans? that's pathetic.
for the zillion time, I answered, once, in my post. debunked said the say before me (and I didn't read his post before I posted mine). I will not repeat the same explanation again. just refer to my post and read it again. and again. and again. until you understand what I meant to say. This is a political discussions forum and the reading comprehension class. Then I tried an alternative approach and in your infantile style you wouldn't co-operate. I can't see what else I can do for you.
Post a link to your post that qualifies that statement? IE "liberals fail to see why it is necessary for armored tanks to shoot at unarmed kids". Remember you said after we discuss Islamic quotes you would answer? then you just said it's been answered a zillion times? Does that make sense? Can't just simply (1) quote your quote (the in-context one) and (2) highlight (3) what makes that statement justified, I pointed this out a zillion times "ok"? You have so far only said it's out of context, without further explanation. Just denying something is not usually enough. In other words in what circumstances is that statement acceptable? Why "do liberals fail to see that shooting kids unarmed kids" is necessary? (obviously there must be a need to shoot kids, us liberals just need to know why?, so why it is necessary?) Examples: Is it ok to shoot unarmed kids because they are Muslim. Is it ok to shoot unarmed kids because they maybe become terrorists. Is it ok to shoot unarmed kids because their parents need to suffer. Is it ok to shoot unarmed kids because the eat Jews. They climb on our apartheid wall. You said I need to read the Torah to understand at one point, does that say killing unarmed kids is "ok"? (hence when I read it it'll all make sense?) Your argument that it looks better in a big chunk of text (in-context), is just so wrong, but right in a way (only because it's hidden). Was all that White phosphorus that we saw raining down on civilians and civilian areas on TV during the Israeli (USA-backed) Cast lead attack on Gaza, really not White phosphorus or a war crime? The typed that burnt kids down to their bone? Was the world watching it out of context? (no thanks to Israel, having a media blackout, wonder why?) When the Jews ethnically cleanse 'occupied territory' of the Arabs is that "ok"? When Arabs want them out is that ethnically cleansing? When Barack Obama demands for a halt to 'settlement expansion' is he promoting ethnic cleansing of Jews? Is Obama an Anti-Semite, In your opinion? -------------------- Secondly you think by me pointing these things out, it makes me Pro-Muslim or Pro-Islam, or a "dumb atheist". And that's why you introduced your strawman argument about Islamic quotes, you thought by me being aware of the quotes, or being made aware but uncomfortable to answer, but nevertheless forced to answer with "yes, you got me there", that I would withdraw my support for these "barbarians" that want atheists dead, right? otherwise what's the point? I'm an Atheist fairy tale books are not for me. Would you have quoted Quran verse if I was criticizing Zimbabwe? No... Hence you thought, I would support your cause and not theirs, because your good and do no wrong and they "suck". Well I'm afraid to say, I have read what I would consider hate from all religious texts (Quaran, Torah, Bible) and threats of eternal punishment. None is "ok" to me - but if I were to be outraged as you think I should be; then really I should be advocating an holocaust of most of the people in the world. And I support neither Jews nor Muslims in their religious fairy tales, nor a Muslim over a Jew nor a Jew over a Muslim, I support honesty, and each's rights and even their right to be religious, but I will point out flaws and give my views about religion as they do (by promoting it). I used to support Israel endlessly, so to attribute falsehoods like you did about being "evil" and against Israel is ridiculous. I stopped supporting you guys after seeing what you did during cast lead. This is something you need to take note of, because lots of people saw exactly (what I saw) and they too stopped supporting you guys. Israel damages it's own image, the settlement issue is absolutely see through too, for your government to ignore the entire world gets them no support. And do you know what happens when someone who thought Israel was all about "peace, security and freedom", sees this type of stuff and knows most of what they knew was a lie, and that Israel talk is mostly rhetoric? Imagine... Imagine what happens when these people that found out Israel was lying and then these people got to real news with out spin... Now lets a wait more spin, no discussion and ad hominem attacks and childish games, or "I can't read all that" - lets hope not. So now your strawman is answered maybe you'll stick to your promise.
Chaos argument, and Zionist argument in general is so simple to understand, first they commit a terrible crime as usual against Palestinians, when they are being faced with the fact about their ugly crime, they try to divert the discussion to become about Muslims, to imply that "it is ok to commit crimes against Muslims" their justification is "because Muslims themselves are criminals" and their proof is "verses from Qur'an" which they interpret as they want, and not as their true meaning, it is very easy to dismiss such arguments, I will take Chaos's first point as an example, and destroy it, the rest, are using the same method, and they are all been debunked, you can find them online, and they already been discussed in details on DP, if you want me to destroy them too, I will be more than glad, 1- You are referring to a verse from Qur'an, which says do not take Jews and Christians as "awliya'a" since you claim that you know Arabic, why do not you refer to the word in Arabic, then tell us what does friends mean in Arabic, does it mean awliya'a? 2- From the Qur'an itself, Muslims can have people as friends, from any belief, even if they were unbelievers or atheists, which means, it is not like you said (don't take Jews and Christians as friends) 3- Historical documents and writings by non-Muslims about Muslims, sorry for the copy and paste: 4- Mohammad pbuh sayings: 5- Muslim Scholars writings: that was just a small example, and there are many many many more, if anybody took the time to research, and not be a dumpster to Chaos's lies and propaganda...
I won't disturb you guys further in your fruitful discussion as I see that you hold a minority opinion on this forum, hmmm.. yet again. Laters
anything to comment about what been said? it is a refutation for your own propaganda, or the ones you love to quote from hate sites, I'd love to hear your opinion about the below two quotes, both talk about the same subject (the rights of the people from different religions) when put in comparison with this quote from Talmud: or this from Qur'an that talks about Christians: and the one below from Talmud that also talks about Christians, come on, lets all quote from all holy texts (umm some are not that holy for me)
Hard questions "hard talk" not the usual run of the mill, DP thread. Even Mark Regev gets pissed unless he can talk about what he want's, or if he's challenged. So the conclusion is: "You can put into "context" shooting unarmed kids" - chaostrivia Here's some quotes for your mistake that "popular" = "right". Mahatma Gandhi - "Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth." Immortal Technique - “Universal truth is not measured in mass appeal.†Immortal Technique - "cuz if you go platinum , it's got nothing to do with luck, it just means that a million people are stupid as fuck" lolz
All very very true. Of course it should be pointed out that you can also be in the minority and be dead wrong. I especially like your last quote, because it is a prerequisite to selling the Palestinian pity party.
Like Chaos declaring a false victory? When actually more people here opposing shooting unarmed kids it's 5/6? lmao you think people are blind The ones that support it cannot even defend. They are just clueless. Are you aware that one can't be right by just 'saying look over there' - Maybe you can attempt to justify shooting unarmed kids, theres a challenge. Actually it sums up American politics perfectly, how did so many people vote for an absolute moron that brought ruin to your country
Referring to the many staged photographs put out of Palestine? Or perhaps Hamas shooting rockets from houses filled with children? Don't bother clarifying. Palestine's credibility is so low, Israel could actually be drinking the blood of young Palestinian children and nobody would believe you. Apparently they didn't like the other option. I'd still take living here over living in Palestine or even the UK for that matter. Hell, I'd rather live in Ethiopia than Palestine.
Strawman - Get uneducated. Rationalize shooting kids you gutless idiot, that's what the topics about.
No, the subject is how there are a group of people who claim they are shooting kids and how they have to counter that ignorant claim. That is what everyone keeps trying to explain to you. The pdf is not claiming that, it is saying idiots who believe or make that up and tell the media that it happens and how to counter that claim. But, since you seem to be boiling with hatred of the Jew, you won't even try to understand, because you don't want to or need to. This isn't Israel to you, it is a Jew thing, and since you owe money to a Jewish bank, watch news on a Jewish channel like Fauxnews, you really build up resentment. Off to enjoy a long weekend and I hope to forget to look at the foolishness that will be posted after my post.
No learn to read: "liberals fail to see why it is necessary for armored tanks to shoot at unarmed kids", it says nothing about countering it at all. Maybe you can do this? just simply (1) quote the quote (the in-context one) and (2) highlight (3) what makes that statement justified, like where they say it needs to be "countered".
Its a credibility issue, as I mentioned before. Credit takes time to build, and it requires positive action. How many rockets shot into Israel today? Hell, Hamas cant even keep it under control for a day to consumate a prisoner exchange deal they got going on. Easier just to hang a sign on the front and call it what it is, the Gaza Penitentiary. Women and children welcome.
Well it would be. Israel can't fire weapons that are not allowed to be used in civilian areas (a war crime) whilst the world is watching and then deny it to the same audience can they. Maybe this propaganda guide with be the "help they need". I don't know do you have a source? There are more groups than just Hamas that opposes the Israeli occupation, these groups are known to fire rockets as well. Hamas did reach an agreement with these groups but obviously if rockets were fired by these other groups then there's not much the Hamas government can do. Just like the USA/UK could not stop prisoner abuse in Iraq (if you believe the official story). Also what did Israel do? to further peace whilst Hamas stopped groups firing rockets, Did the settlement expansion stop? That's why when Israel says "Hamas rockets" it's just dishonest, do they put their names on the rockets? Quite.