Israel vs. Middle Eastern Arab states

[xoni]

Point taken on board ref copy and paste however in this case questions about STWCs position on various elements were raised. I felt rather than address each as they were presented it made more sense to cover many of them in an already well written piece was appropriate.

 

As you pointed out this was from the Palestine Solidarity Campaign who are affiliated with the STWC and have members on the steering Committee. Hope that clarifies my intention.

[Gibber]

Cheers.

[euripides]

I believe - please correct me if I'm wrong - that we've already had a "longer, bigger list" - ad nauseam - from you on this thread.

As for your invitation to bring my own thoughts and arguments, thanks but no thanks. In my long experience I've always found it infinitely more stimulating, fruitful, rewarding and exciting to enter into debate with open-minded, creative and intellectually flexible individuals. Aplogies for not including you in this category.

[Gibber]

Didn't think so.

[EM]

... EM claimed all the points were valid, without question.

You are quite incorrigible. Despite my having highlighted your habit of misattributing opinions, you brazenly keep doing so. The above quote is quite unambiguously stated as a fact. It is, however, a demonstrable lie.

 

Here is what I wrote:

Perhaps you might suggest which of the statements are least correct in order to simplify the verification you recommend? I don't see anything obviously dubious.

I think that my text quite clearly shows that I am not making a blanket statement on the total veracity of all the points, but rather that I do not see anything which conflicts with my own understanding of the issues. There are, however, points made about matters which I am not sufficiently knowledgable to have an opinion. I therefore asked for suggestions as to which points the poster considered incorrect. You may note that I used a "?" character. Not only is the question quite clear, the use of such a symbol obviously highlights the questioning nature of the request. Despite such clear meaning, you mischievously misinterpret my opinions and dishonestly state I made a blanket statement "without question."

 

QED.

[Gibber]

Your flippant response to my comment on human shields lead me to believe that questioning anything from that list would get the same response.

 

You haven't questioned or asked for clarification of anything on the list on your own (and there is plenty there to question) and you chose to not address what you found lacking in my comment on human shields which I made immediately after you said there was nothing obviously dubious.

 

You can respond to my comment with a counter point and not flippancy or pedantry, its Quite Easily Done.

[EM]

^

Diversion, obfuscation, ...

 

No humility or acceptance of having lied. Am I surprised? Nope.

 

I assert that there is no possible way you can reconcile your lie with my text. True or false?

[Gibber]

...I wouldn’t expect them to be able to engage with me on anywhere near an equal intellectual level

Why don't you go the full hog and add "modesty" to your list of virtues and superiorities? You really just do not get it.

 

Why not go the whole hog and quote the full sentence if you are so concerned about misattribution?

 

If your lurker is so witless as to embrace racism I wouldn’t expect them to be able to engage with me on anywhere near an equal intellectual level in any kind of discussion on Israel.

 

I conclude you are out of ammunition, I graciously accept your surrender. The terms of which require you to read the links I gave to Xoni on the STWC thread in the "anything else" section.

[EM]

Why not go the whole hog and quote the full sentence if you are so concerned about misattribution?

The answer to that is very simple. In all cases where I quote text I am careful to avoid bloat and irrelevant material. In cases where I am quoting from a source which is not immediately accessible (i.e. not a few posts higher in a thread) I provide a link to the full original material. If you check back on all my Shetlink postings you will see that this is fact.

 

Interestingly you moan about Xoni posting too much material on the basis that it is bloat. My care to present relevant quoting is done in order to follow robust scholarly procedure and good netiquette. I believe my quotations miss out nothing which is relevant to the matters for which I am providing them to provide context. If you believe otherwise then explain what should have been included?

 

I conclude you are out of ammunition,

Not so. Having several times completely ignored my assertion that you lie, I think I am on much stronger ground concluding that you are indeed an unrepentant liar.

 

I graciously accept your surrender.

Pitiful patronisation.

[Gibber]

My care to present relevant quoting is done in order to follow robust scholarly procedure and good netiquette.

 

Selective omission to attempt to make a fellow Shetlinker look arrogant violates both these points. The points you omitted from my sentence are in bold, a simple visual aid I would have thought would clarify what should have been included.

 

Are you sure you aren't out of ammunition? if not it's longevity is a miracle of Chanukah-esque proportions.

[EM]

Selective omission to attempt to make a fellow Shetlinker look arrogant violates both these points.

I disagree. I posit that the text I quoted demonstrates arrogance under any circumstances whatsoever. The addition of the other text does not change that conclusion, it is therefore not disingenuous "selective omission," but appropriate adherence to the goal of clarity of communication.

 

The points you omitted from my sentence are in bold, a simple visual aid I would have thought would clarify what should have been included.

More patronisation I see, and again entirely inappropriate. I said:

If you believe otherwise then explain what should have been included?

I did not say "please provide the text which should have been included" because I had already noted that, with or without the bold font. I asked you to explain.

[Gibber]

I'll let you work out the different meanings to those quotes at your own pace.

[skaterboy]

come on guys this is about Israeli Arab relations not a critique on each others debating skills.

 

So lets get back to the matter at hand, which is Muslims are willing to do whatever it takes up to and including Armageddon in order to wipe out the Jews.

 

We also have a bunch of loony Christians desperate to get in on the act, god forbid they miss out on the last great party.

[EM]

come on guys this is about Israeli Arab relations not a critique on each others debating skills.

I agree completely and would much prefer this material was not distracting from the key issues. Perhaps a new thread for "Gibber v EM et al." would tidy things up. It is, nevertheless, relevant to note that Gibber is a liar, and that when he is caught, he wriggles anywhere to try to avoid any kind of acceptance of guilt.

[Dagfinn]

come on guys this is about Israeli Arab relations not a critique on each others debating skills.

 

So lets get back to the matter at hand, which is Muslims are willing to do whatever it takes up to and including Armageddon in order to wipe out the Jews.

 

We also have a bunch of loony Christians desperate to get in on the act, god forbid they miss out on the last great party.

There are crimes commited on both sides in this conflict, but I think the UN is biased; fx houndred of thousands Sephardic (Arabic) Jews were expelled from their homes without compensation after 1948; not one Arab country has been condemned for this, while Israel has been condemned how many tims by the UN?

 

Listen to this guy, I think he has a point: