• 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!

Palestinian tells the truth on CNN and gets arrested for it

Dishonest non-debater finally gets that he will not be debated.

There's hope yet.:)


There's no hope of any honesty in your own commentary as will be demonstrated for the umpteenth time here yet again
and, to repeat, Hamas clearly states its desire to liberate Palestine and expel the Jews, obliterating the state of Israel in the process.

Holding that little fact to be irrelevant to any discussion on the I/P conflict clearly shows what anyone engaging in such absurd line of argument is actually made of.

How and where did I say it was " irrelevant" ? I said there are rejectionists on both sides and they should be treated the same/similar precisely because of their rejectionist positions



The lie of not having used Likud in comparison easily refuted by the response to the above statement on Hamas, reading as

And LIkud papers and commentators have said they will never allow a Palestinian state in the OPTs.........if you are against rejectionism at least be consistent.

and thus constituting the exact equation that the poster now denies having made.


Flog that strawman for all your worth lol :LOL:

You don't quote directly precisely so you can present your own dishonest use of strawmen and misrepresentation without the obvious being seen. Only the dumb will be fooled by such obvious tactics that show a genuine fear of direct debating. You have been burned on so many occasions I can fully understand the caution but I definitely do not respect the cowardice in those tactics
 
Like most everything in this world, including US politics, too much water has passed under the bridge. Truth is no longer objective. It's subjective. About the only thing we can be pretty sure about is history. Jews have occupied the ME for longer than Palestinians. Judaism has been around longer than Islam. Jehovah was before Allah. The conflict is not secular but religious. It's spiritual.
Correct about truth being subjective, esp. when talking about the ME. But who was there when Abraham showed up from Ur? And you have proof that Jews got there before Palestinians? Not that it really matters. I imagine that Jehovah/Allah/Jesus is/are really pissed that three great religions have squabbled over the same plot of land for millennia.

And my impression is that Jehovah, Allah, and God are the same deity -- though God manages to be three persons if you are Christian.

I can imagine the Last Judgement, with the deity saying, referring to the Middle East, "Guys, this was not what I had in mind." Then thinking to Himself, "Sigh. I should have known that giving free will to these morons was a bad idea."
 
Last edited:
It's a nationalist conflict and Hamas has declared that it is only interested in the question of Palestine.

If you look at everyones history you can see the same things, you probably only ever bothered to read the Koran in the aftermath of 9/11 when all of the other wesern scholars lol of it here took it up. How much of Mexico has the USA swallowed up since its founding? Where's the doctrine and book that provides the inspiration for that ?

You are applyiung a standard to Muslims that can be applied elsewhere and most accurately to your own nation. It's not Muslims that have military bases all around the globe and who are acting like the world police, it's your own nation. People in big glass houses and all!
And the word of Hamas is credible?

The only standard I'm applying is the standard of humanity. People, no matter what their race, will do whatever necessary to defend themselves from oppression. People, in general, are either victims, or oppressors. Give Muslims/Palestinians, etc., the opportunity, and they will choose to be the oppressors. That's proven by history. Just go back to ISIS. When they claimed most of Iraq/Syria as their caliphate the Islamic world, for the most part, applauded them. Colonialism is human nature. If it's just about nationalism why do the Sunni and Shite Muslims always cut each others throats?
 
Correct about truth being subjective, esp. when talking about the ME. But who was there when Abraham showed up from Ur? And you have proof that Jews got there before Palestinians? Not that it really matters. I imagine that Jehovah/Allah/Jesus is/are really pissed that three great religions have squabbled over the same plot of land for millennia.

And my impression is that Jehovah, Allah, and God are the same deity -- though God manages to be three persons if you are Christian.

I can imagine the Last Judgement, with the deity saying, referring to the Middle East, "Guys, this was not what I had in mind." Then thinking to Himself, "Sigh. I should have known that giving free will to these morons was a bad idea."
Abraham came before Muhammed. When Abraham left Haran he traveled for several years until there was a famine. He went to Egypt to survive. When he left Egypt he returned to a place between Bethel and Hai. He built an altar there and called on the name of Jehovah. Not Allah. (No one had ever heard of any Allah yet.) Lot was with him. They divided their land because it could not support them both. Lot stayed in the plain of Jordan, and Abraham dwelt in the Land of Canaan.

Years later Abraham would have a son by an Egyptian woman by the name of Hagar. He would be named Ishmael. Out of the progeny of Ishmael would later come 12 princes. Ishmael and his people dwelt from Havilah unto Shur.


The Palestinians deserve to have their own land, but to call Israel their homeland is just a landgrab. Jehovah made a covenant with Abraham. He gave the land to his seed. Jehovah will have the last word.
 
Abraham came before Muhammed. When Abraham left Haran he traveled for several years until there was a famine. He went to Egypt to survive. When he left Egypt he returned to a place between Bethel and Hai. He built an altar there and called on the name of Jehovah. Not Allah. (No one had ever heard of any Allah yet.) Lot was with him. They divided their land because it could not support them both. Lot stayed in the plain of Jordan, and Abraham dwelt in the Land of Canaan.

Years later Abraham would have a son by an Egyptian woman by the name of Hagar. He would be named Ishmael. Out of the progeny of Ishmael would later come 12 princes. Ishmael and his people dwelt from Havilah unto Shur.


The Palestinians deserve to have their own land, but to call Israel their homeland is just a landgrab. Jehovah made a covenant with Abraham. He gave the land to his seed. Jehovah will have the last word.
Somehow relying on Jehovah or Allah (the same thing) to resolve property conflicts seems like bad policy. Unless there is a notarized certification of title, a deed if you will, there will be disputes. Anyway, I am told that "Palestinian" comes from the word "Philistine," so there is little new in the conflict. "Allah" is what Christian Arabs call God, it seems. And of course, Israel seems to be doing the "landgrabbing" of late. If Jesus were to come back, even he would be confused, I fear, and in his bewilderment would probably quote the late Rodney King, "can't we all just get along?"
 
And the word of Hamas is credible?

At least as credible as any of the other players in the game. I take it you aren't familiar with the knee jerk BS that so often eminates from the likes of the IDF/Israeli MOFA offices, or the US state dept, or the British foreign/intel offices etc etc




The only standard I'm applying is the standard of humanity. People, no matter what their race, will do whatever necessary to defend themselves from oppression. People, in general, are either victims, or oppressors. Give Muslims/Palestinians, etc., the opportunity, and they will choose to be the oppressors. That's proven by history. Just go back to ISIS. When they claimed most of Iraq/Syria as their caliphate the Islamic world, for the most part, applauded them. Colonialism is human nature. If it's just about nationalism why do the Sunni and Shite Muslims always cut each others throats?

No, as is obvious from the above, you are applying standards selectively based on personal preferences . Hamas will lie but so do all of the others, verifiable fact and nothing to do with a universal application of what constitutes as being " humanity ". Anyone truly applying that standard, based on an understanding of human history/behaviours, wouldn't want to apply it selectively like you do

You understand that people " will do whatever necessary to defend themselves from oppression " and yet you seem unable to apply that standard to the Palestinians ( or more revealingly imo " Muslims" )


And, for a start, a people can be both oppressor and victim, the two are not mutually exclusive and I would argue that this schozophrenic condition is the one that best sums up " humanity " Sunni and Shia have been " cutting eachother throats " for less time than the differing factions of Christianity and Judaism have been cutting throats. Human history is a tale of conquest and violence, I agree with that summary, but your commentary is obviously grounded in ignoring that when it comes to describing official enemies of your own tribe. That's what ,imo, let's your claim sink like a lead balloon.
 
At least as credible as any of the other players in the game. I take it you aren't familiar with the knee jerk BS that so often eminates from the likes of the IDF/Israeli MOFA offices, or the US state dept, or the British foreign/intel offices etc etc






No, as is obvious from the above, you are applying standards selectively based on personal preferences . Hamas will lie but so do all of the others, verifiable fact and nothing to do with a universal application of what constitutes as being " humanity ". Anyone truly applying that standard, based on an understanding of human history/behaviours, wouldn't want to apply it selectively like you do

You understand that people " will do whatever necessary to defend themselves from oppression " and yet you seem unable to apply that standard to the Palestinians ( or more revealingly imo " Muslims" )


And, for a start, a people can be both oppressor and victim, the two are not mutually exclusive and I would argue that this schozophrenic condition is the one that best sums up " humanity " Sunni and Shia have been " cutting eachother throats " for less time than the differing factions of Christianity and Judaism have been cutting throats. Human history is a tale of conquest and violence, I agree with that summary, but your commentary is obviously grounded in ignoring that when it comes to describing official enemies of your own tribe. That's what ,imo, let's your claim sink like a lead balloon.
Not personal preference, but personal observation. The human "heart" is wicked, and motivated by selfishness. The subject of the thread is the Israel/Palestinian situation, but it's the same everywhere. Wherever there is conflict, which is everywhere, what motivates is the key. Self is the ultimate motivator. I'm not ignoring anything, but speaking to the situation in the ME. However, the situation in the ME is only a microcosm of the whole world. Just different actors.
 
Somehow relying on Jehovah or Allah (the same thing) to resolve property conflicts seems like bad policy. Unless there is a notarized certification of title, a deed if you will, there will be disputes. Anyway, I am told that "Palestinian" comes from the word "Philistine," so there is little new in the conflict. "Allah" is what Christian Arabs call God, it seems. And of course, Israel seems to be doing the "landgrabbing" of late. If Jesus were to come back, even he would be confused, I fear, and in his bewilderment would probably quote the late Rodney King, "can't we all just get along?"
Like I said, Jehovah came centuries before Allah. There is a notarized certification of title. It's call the Holy Bible. As for any confusion on the part of Jesus, He knew long ago how mankind would react to it. Stay tuned.
 
Like I said, Jehovah came centuries before Allah. There is a notarized certification of title. It's call the Holy Bible. As for any confusion on the part of Jesus, He knew long ago how mankind would react to it. Stay tuned.
Of course it did. Moses lived before Christ, who lived before Muhammed. God's name spoken differently by each leader. Different names, different languages, different times, same deity. Three big religions, as Muslims put it, are from the same book, albeit with Muslims and Christians adding new chapters per their new prophets. But I looked it up, and Jehovah and Allah both mean God. The Qur'an apparently says "Our God and your God are one," addressing Christians and Jews. It's also what I was taught in Catholic school, and in the seminary. I can check with some priest friends still in the business if you like, but what difference does it make to your beliefs or mine? "Jehovah," used by some religions, came before "God ," used by others, which came before Allah. Semantic quibbles. Jehovah, Allah, God, Yahweh, Deus, Dio, Dios, Potato, Potahto.
 
.........and what the heck do fables that were written up to thousands of years ago have to do with who has more claim to the land in question here?
 
To the question posed in post #101 wrt the Hamas Charter of
How and where did I say it was " irrelevant" ?

all one need do is look at post #96, there to find
You dived in with the old Hamas Charter stuff like it was relevant to the discussion when it wasn't.

It's the same old tactic as denying having ever declared that all of Israel is a justifiable target (for Hamas rockets) and then, when caught out in that blatantly dishonest denial, attempting to double down on it by declaring it was said in a different thread.

The reality of the Hamas Charter is relevant to any discussion of the I/P conflict, no matter how others try to spin it otherwise.

 
Of course it did. Moses lived before Christ, who lived before Muhammed. God's name spoken differently by each leader. Different names, different languages, different times, same deity. Three big religions, as Muslims put it, are from the same book, albeit with Muslims and Christians adding new chapters per their new prophets. But I looked it up, and Jehovah and Allah both mean God. The Qur'an apparently says "Our God and your God are one," addressing Christians and Jews. It's also what I was taught in Catholic school, and in the seminary. I can check with some priest friends still in the business if you like, but what difference does it make to your beliefs or mine? "Jehovah," used by some religions, came before "God ," used by others, which came before Allah. Semantic quibbles. Jehovah, Allah, God, Yahweh, Deus, Dio, Dios, Potato, Potahto.
Here are the seven redemptive names of the Lord, their meanings, and where they can be found in the Bible.

  • Jehovah-Rapha, The Lord our Healer – (Ex 15:26; Isa 1:5-6; Jer 17:9; Lk 5:31)
  • Jehovah-Nissi, the Lord our Banner [or Refuge] – (Ex 17:8-15; Ps 20:5)
  • Jehovah-Shammah, the Lord (who) is Present – (Ezek 48:35; Ex 33:14-15; 1 Chr 16:27; Ps 16:11; 97:5)
  • Jehovah-Tsidkenu, the Lord our Righteousness – (Jer 23:5-6; Ps 11:7; 89:14; 1 Cor 1:30)
  • Jehovah-Shalom, the Lord our Peace – (Judges 6:24; Isa 9:6; Lk 1:78-79)
  • Jehovah-Jireh, the Lord our Provider – (Gen 22:8-14; Joh 1:29; Gal 3:8; 1 Cor 2:7)
  • Jehovah-Ra’ah, the Lord our Shepherd – (Gen 48:15; Ps 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:10-11; 1 Pet 2:25)
Allah, Arabic Allāh (“God”), the one and only God in Islam. ... Allah is the standard Arabic word for God and is used by Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews as well as by Muslims. It is a more general term. It is true that many Christians believe that Jehovah and Allah are one in the same. I don't believe that, and it's news to me that Catholics are taught that. When you put the Koran next to the Bible it's obvious that they have different authors. The Bible is a collection of inspired writings whose source is the Holy Spirit. That cannot be said about the Koran and be truthful.
 
Here are the seven redemptive names of the Lord, their meanings, and where they can be found in the Bible.

  • Jehovah-Rapha, The Lord our Healer – (Ex 15:26; Isa 1:5-6; Jer 17:9; Lk 5:31)
  • Jehovah-Nissi, the Lord our Banner [or Refuge] – (Ex 17:8-15; Ps 20:5)
  • Jehovah-Shammah, the Lord (who) is Present – (Ezek 48:35; Ex 33:14-15; 1 Chr 16:27; Ps 16:11; 97:5)
  • Jehovah-Tsidkenu, the Lord our Righteousness – (Jer 23:5-6; Ps 11:7; 89:14; 1 Cor 1:30)
  • Jehovah-Shalom, the Lord our Peace – (Judges 6:24; Isa 9:6; Lk 1:78-79)
  • Jehovah-Jireh, the Lord our Provider – (Gen 22:8-14; Joh 1:29; Gal 3:8; 1 Cor 2:7)
  • Jehovah-Ra’ah, the Lord our Shepherd – (Gen 48:15; Ps 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:10-11; 1 Pet 2:25)
Allah, Arabic Allāh (“God”), the one and only God in Islam. ... Allah is the standard Arabic word for God and is used by Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews as well as by Muslims. It is a more general term. It is true that many Christians believe that Jehovah and Allah are one in the same. I don't believe that, and it's news to me that Catholics are taught that. When you put the Koran next to the Bible it's obvious that they have different authors. The Bible is a collection of inspired writings whose source is the Holy Spirit. That cannot be said about the Koran and be truthful.
1- You have a link that shows that Moses, the evangelists and others didn’t write the parts of the Bible they are credited with? 2- Is there a link that explains how the Koran was not inspired by the Holy Spirit?
 
Here are the seven redemptive names of the Lord, their meanings, and where they can be found in the Bible. . . . The Bible is a collection of inspired writings whose source is the Holy Spirit. That cannot be said about the Koran and be truthful.
There's endless different names, words and images assigned to God by endless different people. Jehovah/Yahweh isn't a name as such; in one story from the Tanakh Jacob asks the name of God is rebuffed (Gen. 32), and in another when Moses asks for the name of the 'God of their fathers' he is given the equally coy response that "I am who I am" (Ex. 3), suggested as the derivation for 'Yahweh.' Similarly the Torah strictly prohibits the use of any kind of images to represent God. It seems possible that at least some of the authors, at some stage in its development, were wise enough to recognize that God is utterly beyond human understanding and attempts to represent 'him' with or confine him to particular names or images is misguided, disrespectful and potentially dangerous. Some passages are similarly strict on attributing words to God, prescribing death for the 'false' prophets: But while attributing words to God is obviously far more consequential than names or images, religious folk seem to be even more lax in this regard than the others - even the extremely low bar outlined in Deuteronomy 18, that the word of God must be given in his name and must not be false, is one which most of the Tanakh and most of the Bible fail to meet! If anything, the Quran actually fares much better by those two meagre criteria, being entirely given in the name of God* (unlike the bible's historic, legendary, poetic, biographic and epistle content) and having somewhat fewer errors of objective fact. But I'm pretty sure the Quran, like any other self-declared or later-declared words of God in the canons of Jews, Christians, Hindus or others, is far more a vehicle of human philosophies, moralities and ambitions than a genuine missive by the fleshy appendage of a deity.


* Actually if memory serves there's one surah which doesn't begin with the standard "In the name of God the compassionate and merciful."
 
Last edited:
uslimsNot personal preference, but personal observation. The human "heart" is wicked, and motivated by selfishness. The subject of the thread is the Israel/Palestinian situation, but it's the same everywhere. Wherever there is conflict, which is everywhere, what motivates is the key. Self is the ultimate motivator. I'm not ignoring anything, but speaking to the situation in the ME. However, the situation in the ME is only a microcosm of the whole world. Just different actors.


How can it be based on " personal observation" when you ignore the lack of credibility on the Israeli side, or the US side, or the British side etc etc ?

If the " human heart " is wicked, completely wicked, there would be no need for words such as sympathy, charity, altruism, empathy, etc etc I often think that what they feel is possible is actually just what is possible for them.

So , given the above, why do you hold Muslims/Arabs to a different standard than your owbn tribe or its allies ?
 
How can it be based on " personal observation" when you ignore the lack of credibility on the Israeli side, or the US side, or the British side etc etc ?

If the " human heart " is wicked, completely wicked, there would be no need for words such as sympathy, charity, altruism, empathy, etc etc I often think that what they feel is possible is actually just what is possible for them.

So , given the above, why do you hold Muslims/Arabs to a different standard than your owbn tribe or its allies ?
You're the one talking about holding one side or another to a standard. I have never been to the ME. All I have to go on is my personal observation. Information. I have looked at the history of it. The land belongs to Israel. The British, Americans, and their allies agreed, and allowed the Jews to return and settle there. Only the Arabs resisted. They still refuse to recognize Israel as a nation. Why is that? Look into it.
 
1- You have a link that shows that Moses, the evangelists and others didn’t write the parts of the Bible they are credited with? 2- Is there a link that explains how the Koran was not inspired by the Holy Spirit?
Link, no. Scripture, yes.
 
Link, no. Scripture, yes.
How do you know that the scripture you favor was inspired by the Holy Spirit and others were not? And the Holy Spirit supported genocide?
 
How do you know that the scripture you favor was inspired by the Holy Spirit and others were not? And the Holy Spirit supported genocide?
By personal observation and experience. The Word of God, and the Holy Spirit agree. It's called conviction in the Bible. "Supported" genocide? What exactly does that mean? Colonialism is a fact of life. It's a principle that originated in the garden of Eden. Has it been abused? Yes, and will continue to be, but growth and expansion is necessary. There is a larger picture. It's spiritual, and it's eternal. Your attempt to make it smaller is duly noted.
 
By personal observation and experience. The Word of God, and the Holy Spirit agree. It's called conviction in the Bible. "Supported" genocide? What exactly does that mean? Colonialism is a fact of life. It's a principle that originated in the garden of Eden. Has it been abused? Yes, and will continue to be, but growth and expansion is necessary. There is a larger picture. It's spiritual, and it's eternal. Your attempt to make it smaller is duly noted.
There are places in the Bible when God or someone or other mandates the destruction of all life in certain towns or lands. That's genocide, and scholars have acknowledged such, albeit some suggesting -- as I imagine the Conquistadors, Crusaders, and Nazis did -- that this was somehow necessary for some greater good, such as growth and expansion. It was called "lebensraum" by the Nazis. Doubt the victims agreed, and those similar scriptural incidents are hardly a good advertisement for revering the Bible.
 
You're the one talking about holding one side or another to a standard. I have never been to the ME. All I have to go on is my personal observation. Information. I have looked at the history of it. The land belongs to Israel. The British, Americans, and their allies agreed, and allowed the Jews to return and settle there. Only the Arabs resisted. They still refuse to recognize Israel as a nation. Why is that? Look into it.

None of the above had anything to do with the post of mine it was supposed to be a reply to................................ seems like you haven't a clue about applying the same standards to all parties after all.
 
There are places in the Bible when God or someone or other mandates the destruction of all life in certain towns or lands. That's genocide, and scholars have acknowledged such, albeit some suggesting -- as I imagine the Conquistadors, Crusaders, and Nazis did -- that this was somehow necessary for some greater good, such as growth and expansion. It was called "lebensraum" by the Nazis. Doubt the victims agreed, and those similar scriptural incidents are hardly a good advertisement for revering the Bible.
Can you envision this world without procreation and expansion? I think there's room for a discussion about whether or not genocide was for the greater good, but not if it ends there. Not if it ends up with pointing your finger at God and accusing Him. Redemption is at the heart of everything God does concerning mankind. Everything. It's His plan, and only He can carry it out. Not you, and not anyone. It's too deep, and beyond the finite mind of men. You best leave it to God, and hope and pray you're a part of it.
 
Can you envision this world without procreation and expansion? I think there's room for a discussion about whether or not genocide was for the greater good, but not if it ends there. Not if it ends up with pointing your finger at God and accusing Him. Redemption is at the heart of everything God does concerning mankind. Everything. It's His plan, and only He can carry it out. Not you, and not anyone. It's too deep, and beyond the finite mind of men. You best leave it to God, and hope and pray you're a part of it.
So if I am asked to commit genocide by God. I can fall back on the "I was just following orders" defense? Doesn't work for me.
 
So if I am asked to commit genocide by God. I can fall back on the "I was just following orders" defense? Doesn't work for me.
What's the point of hypothesizing? The real truth is nothing works for you so you just fall in line with the so called "free thinkers". No attempt at original thought. Good luck with it.
 
Back
Top Bottom