• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jewish Terrorism

Winston Smith

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
915
Reaction score
204
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
We all know the saying, "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslims." Perhaps it's a fair statement in terms of raw numbers, but is it fair to suggest that terrorism is a peculiarly Muslim phenomenon? Apparently, other groups have their share of terrorists as well. And no, we're not just talking about "state terrorists" killing civilians in battle or dropping bombs on villages.

 
We all know the saying, "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslims." Perhaps it's a fair statement in terms of raw numbers, but is it fair to suggest that terrorism is a peculiarly Muslim phenomenon?

I wouldn't even say that is a fair statement in raw numbers with seperatist groups around the world like the R-IRA and others like it.
 
The JDL is an American group.

This forum is set up to discuss the middle east.
 
Bam, we have a winner.

3......2........1..

"You just can't say ANYTHING about Israel policy"..........




oops. Am I stifling legitimate debate? I never can tell.
 
i missed it
what about the story's discussion of goldstein's terrorism of the west bank Palestinians in prayer causes it to be placed in a section other than the middle east forum
 
i missed it
what about the story's discussion of goldstein's terrorism of the west bank Palestinians in prayer causes it to be placed in a section other than the middle east forum

It was an example, as was the other example of Kahana.
The theme of the article (from a very biased website on its own right) is about Jewish-American terrorism.
 
It was an example, as was the other example of Kahana.
The theme of the article (from a very biased website on its own right) is about Jewish-American terrorism.

Thank you for showing you didn't even bother to read the article.

“Contrary to common belief,” noted the anonymous authors, “the American export of terrorism or terrorists is not a recent phenomenon, nor has it been associated only with Islamic radicals or people of Middle Eastern, African or South Asian ethnic origin.” According to the analysts, Jewish extremists “have supported and even engaged in violent acts against perceived enemies of Israel,” and “some Irish-Americans have long provided financial and material support for violent efforts to compel the United Kingdom to relinquish control of Northern Ireland.”
 

So the main theme is not about the Middle East.
Thanks for proving it.
 
So the main theme is not about the Middle East.
Thanks for proving it.

No, the theme of the article is exported terrorism and their effect on certain nations. You would know this if you bothered reading the entire article before making absurd statements.
 
No, the theme of the article is exported terrorism and their effect on certain nations. You would know this if you bothered reading the entire article before making absurd statements.

Unless all of those nations are in the Middle East the theme of the article is not the middle east.
The article is ridiculous by its own right for using the word 'exports' as if those people don't choose where they want to live, but it doesn't deal with the Middle East and the only connection is that a middle eastern nation is given in one of the examples.
 
Unless all of those nations are in the Middle East the theme of the article is not the middle east.
WTF? Where exactly did anyone say the theme of this article was the Middle East? Do all countries specified in an article have to be from the Middle East for a topic to be posted here? Is that what you are insinuating?
Good job contradicting yourself.
 
I thought WIKIleaks was proven to be ANTI- American. If so then using them as a source is discredited upon its face.
 
I thought WIKIleaks was proven to be ANTI- American. If so then using them as a source is discredited upon its face.
This makes no sense. A source being "anti-American" has little to do with its actual content and the factual base of it.
 

If you think the thread is in the wrong section then report it. Stop trying to block a discussion.
 
Good to know you people have a firm stand against terrorists.
Well... at least when they are not Arabs.
 
Good to know you people have a firm stand against terrorists.
Well... at least when they are not Arabs.

could you re-visit with us the way israel handled jewish terrorists within its own ranks
as i recall from your post in another thread, most were winked at and provided positions within the IDF
 

I take it then that you claim that if one of the countries which is being given as an example in an opinion article is a middle eastern country then the thread about this opinion article needs to be placed in the Middle Eastern section (AKA, its topic is the Middle East).
This is of course wrong, and just as this article does not fit the Europe section it also does not fit the Middle East section and is hence fitting the general politics section.
 
If you think the thread is in the wrong section then report it. Stop trying to block a discussion.

Already did, but once a poster has engaged me with an argument claiming that it does fit on topic I was obliged to respond to him with a counter argument.
 
This makes no sense. A source being "anti-American" has little to do with its actual content and the factual base of it.

This makes no sense, a source holding certain bias would certainly imply on its content - otherwise it wouldn't be labeled biased to begin with.
 

Well, seeing as how their is a general ban on all topics related to Israel/Palestine that are posted outside the M/E section, it's seems quite useless for the OP to post it somewhere it has no opportunity to be discussed.
 
This makes no sense, a source holding certain bias would certainly imply on its content - otherwise it wouldn't be labeled biased to begin with.

Merely calling something anti-"etc" is not reason enough to discredit something entirely. That's fallacious and illogical.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…