Israeli Ambassador pulls out of Oireachtas meeting

[Main Street]

Israel invaded lebanon previously, withdrew but held onto swathes of land but only after allowing their "christian" allies in Lebanon to butcher women and children in refugee camps. They also murdered Irish peace keepers and attacked UN positions. To call Hezbollah aggressors as if they started the whole thing is insane, like always it is Israel that is the root cause of all this conflict.

On the contrary, what I wrote was not insane.
I never said the whole thing, I picked one example of one serious conflict which escalated into an invasion, an invasion which should be in people's recent living memory. Do you disagree with the commonly accepted reasoning that the Hezbollah were the aggressors in that conflict?
There is plenty to mull about in this link or find your own about Hezbollah
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah

from their charter
Our primary assumption in our fight against Israel states that the
Zionist entity is aggressive from its inception, and built on lands
wrested from their owners, at the expense of the rights of the Muslim
people. Therefore our struggle will end only when this entity is
obliterated. We recognize no treaty with it, no cease fire, and no
peace agreements, whether separate or consolidated.

We vigorously condemn all plans for negotiation with Israel, and
regard all negotiators as enemies, for the reason that such
negotiation is nothing but the recognition of the legitimacy of the
Zionist occupation of Palestine. Therefore we oppose and reject the
Camp David Agreements, the proposals of King Fahd, the Fez and Reagan
plan, Brezhnev's and the French-Egyptian proposals, and all other
programs that include the recognition (even the implied recognition)
of the Zionist entity.

I don't see any point in going further back, because there is no end to that journey.
In my memory, I can recall all the major conflicts of the Middle East right back to 1967.
Why not go back sixty years to the formation of the modern Israeli state?  And why not then look at this in the context that I quoted from Hezbollah's charter, to destroy the israeli State, a State they believe should not exist and waged a violent campaign to carry out that dogma.
I would have as much criticism for Israel action in their sense of proportion and brutality, but I do not dispute their right to exist and the sovereign right to defend their country. Israel has an inherent right of self-defence.

I have found this article informative on the matter of UN  Article 51 re the debate on "Self-Defense and Pre-emptive Strikes"
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2006/07/israel-v-hezbollah-article-51-self.php

[Nally Stand]

I can read perfectly. Can't you? I put two questions forward for you to answer. I put them in bold and everything to help you! Maybe if I put it in big, easy to read lettering you will answer this time.


You stated that I suggested "no Palestinian has ever fired rockets into Israel, or bombed them or anything worse than stone throwing". I ask you to show some balls and give me the quote where I stated such a thing.

Question 1: Rather that provide me with evidence to me saying this, you again repeat the allegation by referring to "my bigoted attempt to portray Palestinian attacks on Israel as little more than stone throwing". WHERE DID I SUGGEST THAT THE PALESTINIANS ONLY FORM OF RESISTANCE WAS STONE THROWING???

Question 2: I spoke of the Israeli Army having a history of over reactions to Palestinian stone throwers. How can you deduce from that, that I believe stone throwing was the only form of Palestinian resistance?

If you don't agree with the term resistance then so be it. Just answer the questions this time.

Gallsman, your silence is deafening. And I see you wee last active this morning according to your profile. Running away when you are proven wrong? You must have graduated from the Ardmhacaabu School of Debating.

[Nally Stand]

Ohhhh last active not ten minutes ago! You going to answer the questions honestly now or hide like a coward?

[gallsman]

Yes, I'm hiding. I'm terrified of your intellectual superiority stripping me of any respect I have for myself and rendering me a shell of a man.

That's known as "sarcasm" by the way. Wee lesson for you seeing as you missed out on lots of school.

[Nally Stand]

Right. Right. So anyway, your answers?

[gallsman]

I'll also point out one more time your history of not reading stuff properly. Remember that time you flew off the handle demanding answers of me and quoting posts left, right and centre in an attempt to mock me without copping on that you were quoting another poster whose only similarity to me was that both our usernames began with the same letter? Want me to get the posts for you?

I'll answer both your questions with the one - this is a discussion board. An anonymous discussion board. In order to maintain any credibility you have to acknowledge both sides to every story, no matter how much you disapprove. So when discussing Israeli shooting of stone throwers without mentioning more serious attacks you made a decision to ignore a fundamental aspect of the entire conflict.

Then again, you do tend to ignore anything you don't approve of or agree with. Like the fact that certain people might actually want to vote for the SDLP but shouldn't be allowed to because you think they should step down.

[Nally Stand]

I'll also point out one more time your history of not reading stuff properly. Remember that time you flew off the handle demanding answers of me and quoting posts left, right and centre in an attempt to mock me without copping on that you were quoting another poster whose only similarity to me was that both our usernames began with the same letter? Want me to get the posts for you?

I'll answer both your questions with the one - this is a discussion board. An anonymous discussion board. In order to maintain any credibility you have to acknowledge both sides to every story, no matter how much you disapprove. So when discussing Israeli shooting of stone throwers without mentioning more serious attacks you made a decision to ignore a fundamental aspect of the entire conflict.

Then again, you do tend to ignore anything you don't approve of or agree with. Like the fact that certain people might actually want to vote for the SDLP but shouldn't be allowed to because you think they should step down.

What a wonderfully long winded way of avoiding giving me the specific answers to the questions. Just ANSWER THEM

[Nally Stand]

Look I'll even show you the questions again to help you refresh your memory:

You stated that I suggested "no Palestinian has ever fired rockets into Israel, or bombed them or anything worse than stone throwing". I ask you to show some balls and give me the quote where I stated such a thing.

Question 1: Rather that provide me with evidence to me saying this, you again repeat the allegation by referring to "my bigoted attempt to portray Palestinian attacks on Israel as little more than stone throwing". WHERE DID I SUGGEST THAT THE PALESTINIANS ONLY FORM OF RESISTANCE WAS STONE THROWING???

Question 2: I spoke of the Israeli Army having a history of over reactions to Palestinian stone throwers. How can you deduce from that, that I believe stone throwing was the only form of Palestinian resistance?

If you don't agree with the term resistance then so be it. Just answer the questions this time.

[gallsman]

I'll also point out one more time your history of not reading stuff properly. Remember that time you flew off the handle demanding answers of me and quoting posts left, right and centre in an attempt to mock me without copping on that you were quoting another poster whose only similarity to me was that both our usernames began with the same letter? Want me to get the posts for you?

I'll answer both your questions with the one - this is a discussion board. An anonymous discussion board. In order to maintain any credibility you have to acknowledge both sides to every story, no matter how much you disapprove. So when discussing Israeli shooting of stone throwers without mentioning more serious attacks you made a decision to ignore a fundamental aspect of the entire conflict.

Then again, you do tend to ignore anything you don't approve of or agree with. Like the fact that certain people might actually want to vote for the SDLP but shouldn't be allowed to because you think they should step down.

What a wonderfully long winded way of avoiding giving me the specific answers to the questions. Just ANSWER THEM

Forget all the piss-taking, can you ACTUALLY not read or something? You made the conscious decision to ignore an absolute certainty. Swept it completely under the rug. By ignoring something completely you implied that the other side of the story is the ONLY die to the story. Maybe you didn't mean to, or didn't realise it, but you did.

You are an absolute fool with whom I have no further desire to engage on the subject so I'll politely ask you to f**k off.

[Nally Stand]

So what you are really saying is that, while you made a claim about something I said, you refuse to accept that that claim was incorrect despite the evidence which I have posted before you.

You claimed that I said the only form of Palestinian resistance was stone throwing, yet you continually refuse to admit that I made no such claim. I have asked you repeatedly to answer the question as to where I made such a claim and the only reason you have not done so is because you can't. Politely asking me to fcuk hardly proves you are in the right on this one either. If you are so confident in your position then just answer - where did I say stone throwing was the ONLY form of Palestinian resistance?? Just give me the exact quote or accept that you lied, that's all I ask.

[Nally Stand]

My post was about the reactions of Israeli soldiers to stone throwing. Could you please quote me as saying that I suggested "no Palestinian has ever fired rockets into Israel, or bombed them or anything worse than stone throwing". Thank You.

[Nally Stand]

P.s. You said I made an "attempt to portray Palestinian attacks on Israel as little more than stone throwing."  That is more than saying I implied it. The subject of my post was about the OVER REACTION to A form of resistance

Considering my post referred to incidences of Israeli soldiers over-reacting to stone throwers, I still fail to see how that can be implying that stone throwing was the only form of Palestinian resistance.