The Syrian conflict exemplifies this with Syria split into warring fiefdoms like Afghanistan.

It's out of Israel's playbook.

https://www.mondialisation.ca/hillary-clintons-uncanny-fulfillment-of-israels-yinon-plan-for-a-middle-east-riven-with-conflict/5541918


Quote:

Hillary Clinton’s Uncanny Fulfillment of Israel’s Yinon Plan for a Middle East Riven with Conflict Wikileaks has released what may be the most underreported story of the year in a year full of them, Hillary Clinton’s uncanny fulfillment of Oded Yinon‘s plan for the Middle East according to Israel 30 years ago. This was summed up in Yinon’s « A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties. » Yinon, an influential right-wing Israeli strategist, envisioned a Middle East riven with conflict between Arab tribes and religious denominations, unable to oppose Israeli ambitions for regional dominance. Yinon wrote: Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel…Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon. When former presidential candidate General Wes Clark shockingly proclaimed in 2011 that he had seen a memo emanating from the Bush defense department which revealed that the invasion of Iraq was only the beginning of a much more extensive program of « regime change » across the Middle East, one could not help but recall Yinon’s desire to provoke « inter-Arab confrontation. » Recalling a conversation with a Pentagon staffer before the invasion of Iraq, Clark told an audience: I said, « Are we still going to war with Iraq? » And he said, « Oh, it’s worse than that. » He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, « I just got this down from upstairs » — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — « today. » And he said, « This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran. » In a recently released email from the Clinton Archives, which run from June 30, 2010 to August 12, 2014 while she was Secretary of State, Clinton wrote from the standpoint of not US interests, but Israeli. She said: Bringing down Assad would not only be a massive boon to Israel’s security, it would also ease Israel’s understandable fear of losing its nuclear monopoly. Then, Israel and the United States might be able to develop a common view of when the Iranian program is so dangerous that military action could be warranted. The unabashedly hawkish exchange, which seems to telegraph the intent to overcome obstacles to « common view » which would justify an attack on Iran, shows that Hillary is of a like mind with Yinon, who held that toppling stable Arab regimes and uncorking fratricidal civil wars, which may go on for decades, is in Israel’s interest. With the world freshly shocked at an image seen in Syria and Libya every day, wounded children, it might help to remember the most exuberant advocate, as Secretary of State, for the military actions which unloosed the horrors seen today in these war zones. The photo of the boy is but one fairly tame example. The true carnage is unpublishable. In a piece at Huffington Post, « Hillary Clinton and the Syrian Bloodbath, »Harvard’s Professor Jeffrey Sachs writes: Clinton has been much more than a bit player in the Syrian crisis. Her diplomat Ambassador Christopher Stevens in Benghazi was killed as he was running a CIA operation to ship Libyan heavy weapons to Syria. Clinton herself took the lead role in organizing the so-called “Friends of Syria” to back the CIA-led insurgency. Sachs is outraged at Hillary’s portraying herself as a « negotiator » who helped conclude ceasefires, writing: This is the kind of compulsive misrepresentation that makes Clinton unfit to be President. Clinton’s role in Syria has been to help instigate and prolong the Syrian bloodbath, not to bring it to a close. As for Libya, not only was Hillary the Obama administration’s most ardent supporter of military action to overthrow Gaddafi. It now comes out that the entire pretense for NATO intervention – stopping a massacre of civilians by Gaddafi, was pure fiction. Human Rights Watch, as reported in the Boston Globe: released data on Misurata, the next-biggest city in Libya and scene of protracted fighting, revealing that Moammar Khadafy is not deliberately massacring civilians but rather narrowly targeting the armed rebels who fight against his government. Charles Kubic at the National Interest writes in « Hillary’s Huge Libyan Disaster »: Despite valid ceasefire opportunities to prevent “bloodshed in Benghazi” at the onset of hostilities, Secretary Clinton intervened and quickly pushed her foreign policy in support of a revolution led by the Muslim Brotherhood and known terrorists in the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. Ongoing casualties of the Libyan Civil War are now in the hundreds of thousands, with just the latest UN report...

Israel's true plan, for the Middle East....

....PEACE, achieved through the application of Jewish reason and logic.



Klavan's One-State Solution_ Give the Middle East to the Jews
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIEeiDjdUuU


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIEeiDjdUuU


I mean, who is going to oppose such a brilliant idea ???

Oh yeah,      .....I FORGOT!              ;)

They already own America.

Why don't they just declare New York their homeland?

QUESTION;
What recognisable group of people,     are principally responsible for all wars and conflicts in the Middle East ?


Yadda said....
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1509883266/40#40

Quote:

ISLAM's foundational religious texts, have plainly been interpreted by moslem scholars to indicate, that those who have embraced ISLAM, have embraced enmity, and hatred, and hostility and warfare and murder, towards those who reject ISLAM. [quote] Here, for example, are two very illuminating passages from the canonical Life of Mohammed by Ibn Ishaq, as translated by A. Guillaume, and a third passage, from the earliest known Muslim historian. Ishaq: 204 - "'Men, do you know what you are pledging yourselves to in swearing allegiance to this man [Muhammad]?' 'Yes. In swearing allegiance to him we are pledging to wage war against all mankind.'" Ishaq:231 - "Muslims are one ummah (community) to the exclusion of all men. Believers are friends of one another to the exclusion of all outsiders." And here is Al-Tabari, a very early Muslim historian, in book 9, chapter or section 69, reporting words that Muslims believe to have been said by Mohammed himself - "Killing infidels is a small matter to us". These texts are not fossils from a distant past. They are not dead letters. They are still 'live' and carry tremendous weight in the imagination and practice of many Muslims around the world. ...DDA

Google



Google;
we are pledging to wage war against all mankind, al-Tabari

[/quote]




ARGUMENT;
In following 'religious' precepts like those above, can anyone      seriously argue      that anyone but the followers of ISLAM are the primary cause of wars and conflicts in the Middle East [and, everywhere that the followers of ISLAM are found] ?

Or argue that the followers of ISLAM are NOT responsible for all wars and conflicts which involve the followers of ISLAM ?





MORE COMPELLING EVIDENCE HERE....

THE RELIGION OF PEACE
http://thereligionofpeace.com/




.




MORE COMPELLING EVIDENCE HERE....

KORAN

"......the curse of Allah is on those without Faith."
Koran 2.089


"....Lo! Allah is an enemy to those who reject Faith."
Koran 2.98


"....those who reject Allah have no protector."
Koran 47.008
v. 8-11


"....take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends....
......he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them."
Koran 5.51


"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "
Koran 9.29


"Fighting [against disbelievers] is prescribed for you, and [if] ye dislike it.....Allah knoweth, and ye know not."
Koran 2.216


"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
Koran 9.123


"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...."
Koran 9.111


"Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves....."
Koran 48.29




.




MORE COMPELLING EVIDENCE HERE....


Spokesmen for ISLAM will tell anyone who will listen;

THAT IT IS WRONG, AND THAT IT IS TOTALLY AGAINST ISLAMIC LAW,      TO KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE.



Here is a moslem in the UK explaining, who the innocent people are.

---------- >



Please watch this YT...
A UK moslem community leader, speaking in the wake of the London 7/7 bombing;


Quote:

YT KILLING OF NON-MUSLIMS IS LEGITIMATE "...when we say innocent people, we mean moslems." "....[not accepting ISLAM] is a crime against God." "...If you are a non-moslem, then you are guilty of not believing in God." "...as a moslem....i must have hatred towards everything which is non-ISLAM." "...[moslems] allegiance is always with the moslems, so i will never condemn a moslem for what he does." "...Britain has always been Dar al Harb [the Land of War]" "...no, i could never condemn a moslem brother, i would never condemn a moslem brother. I will always stand with my moslem brother....whether he is an oppresser or the oppressed."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maHSOB2RFm4


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maHSOB2RFm4



.



ARGUMENT;
There is an identifiable group of people, who do, facilitate, enable, encourage and commit acts of terror,
as an endorsed cultural modality.

They are called moslems.

They are the followers, of ISLAM.



WAKE UP PEOPLE !

QUESTION;
What recognisable group of people,     are principally responsible for all wars and conflicts in the Middle East ?




Quote:

Palestinians: Israel is One Big Settlement by Bassam Tawil  •  February 26, 2018     Let us be clear about this: When Palestinians -- and some of their supporters in the international community, including Europe -- say that they want an end to the "occupation," they mean they want to see an end to Israel's existence, full stop. They do not want to throw the Jews out of their homes in the settlements; rather, they want Jews to be expelled from the whole country.     The conflict, as far as the Palestinians are concerned, did not begin in 1967, when east Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza Strip came under Israeli control. In the eyes of the Palestinians, all Jews are "settlers" and "colonialists." All the land, they argue, stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, is Muslim-owned land, and no Muslim is entitled to give up any part of it to a non-Muslim. For the Palestinians, accepting Israel's "right to exist" with Jews is seen as an act of treason.     What is really bothering the Palestinians is that Israel, with Jews, exists, period. The Palestinians want all of Jerusalem. They want all of "Palestine." They want Israel removed from the planet. It is time to listen carefully to what the Palestinians are saying -- in Arabic -- to understand that the conflict is not about Jerusalem and not about settlements.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11949/palestinians-israel-settlements




A NEVER ENDING hatred and enmity towards the Jewish people,
is plainly stated within ISLAM's       foundational      religious texts....

"Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him." "
Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177



AND.....

"There is for you an excellent example (to follow) in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people: "We are clear of you and of whatever ye worship besides Allah: we have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever,- unless ye believe in Allah and Him alone"....."
Koran 60:4

So is it America's or Israel's fault that middle eastern Muslims are slaughtering each other and raping Yazidi women? It can be so hard to keep up with all the excuses. Did Israel pay for the flights of all those Aussie Muslims who traveled over there to join in the rape and pillage?

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 6:53pm:

So is it America's or Israel's fault that middle eastern Muslims are slaughtering each other and raping Yazidi women? It can be so hard to keep up with all the excuses. Did Israel pay for the flights of all those Aussie Muslims who traveled over there to join in the rape and pillage?

Both, with others.  The State of Israel ought not be in Arabia.  That it does (and that the US supplies Israel with weaponry) is the root cause of all these woes.

So those Aussie Muslims who traveled to Syria to take part in the raping and pillaging are not responsible for their own actions?

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 7:05pm:

So those Aussie Muslims who traveled to Syria to take part in the raping and pillaging are not responsible for their own actions?

Of course they are....but they'd never need/want to be there if the State of Israel had not been plonked artificially and stupidly in Arabia.

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 7:32pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 7:05pm: So those Aussie Muslims who traveled to Syria to take part in the raping and pillaging are not responsible for their own actions? Of course they are....but they'd never need/want to be there if the State of Israel had not been plonked artificially and stupidly in Arabia.

So why has ISIS not attacked Israel?

Can you give an example of a state that is natural?

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 7:01pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 6:53pm: So is it America's or Israel's fault that middle eastern Muslims are slaughtering each other and raping Yazidi women? It can be so hard to keep up with all the excuses. Did Israel pay for the flights of all those Aussie Muslims who traveled over there to join in the rape and pillage? Both, with others.  The State of Israel ought not be in Arabia.  That it does (and that the US supplies Israel with weaponry) is the root cause of all these woes.

The State of Israel is not in Arabia.

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 8:17pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 7:32pm: freediver wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 7:05pm: So those Aussie Muslims who traveled to Syria to take part in the raping and pillaging are not responsible for their own actions? Of course they are....but they'd never need/want to be there if the State of Israel had not been plonked artificially and stupidly in Arabia. So why has ISIS not attacked Israel?

With what?  Fiddle sticks?


Quote:

Can you give an example of a state that is natural?

I have no idea and don't care.  The root problem, the factor which threatens everyone in the Land of Arabs is the State of Israel existing where it is.

So you think the real reason these Aussie Muslims are travelling to Syria to loot and take Yazidi women as sex slaves is because of the existence of an 'unnatural' state, but they have not once targeted that state, nor can you give a single example of a 'natural' state?

How many of these terrorists have you spoken to about their true motivations, in order to credibly speak on their behalf?

Or do you not care about the truth or credibility either? You know all these things, at the same time as having no idea?

freediver wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 8:32pm:

So you think the real reason these Aussie Muslims are travelling to Syria to loot and take Yazidi women as sex slaves is because of the existence of an 'unnatural' state, but they have not once targeted that state, nor can you give a single example of a 'natural' state?

You introduced the word 'unnatural.'  I did not use it.  I'm not playing your smart arse game Effendi.  It is a waste of time  as everyone of your exchanges with Gandalf establishes. 


Quote:

How many of these terrorists have you spoken to about their true motivations, in order to credibly speak on their behalf?

Not one.  You?


Quote:

Or do you not care about the truth or credibility either?

Correct.  On this issue I am single minded.  It is the existence of the artificially State of Israel in Arabia (and the US propping that up with massive weaponry and military support) which is the root cause of all this strife.

Stuffed if I know why it even exists as a Nation other than to be a Jewish haven, but if it must, it ought not have been plonked where it is.

Can I make that any clearer, Effendi?

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 8:41pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 8:32pm: So you think the real reason these Aussie Muslims are travelling to Syria to loot and take Yazidi women as sex slaves is because of the existence of an 'unnatural' state, but they have not once targeted that state, nor can you give a single example of a 'natural' state? You introduced the word 'unnatural.'  I did not use it.  I'm not playing your smart arse game Effendi.  It is a waste of time  as everyone of your exchanges with Gandalf establishes.  Quote: How many of these terrorists have you spoken to about their true motivations, in order to credibly speak on their behalf? Not one.  You? [quote]Or do you not care about the truth or credibility either?

Correct.  On this issue I am single minded.  It is the existence of the artificially State of Israel in Arabia (and the US propping that up with massive weaponry and military support) which is the root cause of all this strife.

Stuffed if I know why it even exists as a Nation other than to be a Jewish haven, but if it must, it ought not have been plonked where it is.

Can I make that any clearer, Effendi?
[/quote]

Again. It's not in Arabia.

It is as far as I am concerned.  It is surrounded by Arabs and water.

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 8:55pm:

It is as far as I am concerned.  It is surrounded by Arabs and water.

If you look at the history of the region as far back as we can go, it's not Arab. I thought you were a stickler for details.

Setanta wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 9:00pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 8:55pm: It is as far as I am concerned.  It is surrounded by Arabs and water. If you look at the history of the region as far back as we can go, it's not Arab. I thought you were a stickler for details.

Again, I don't care about that stuff.  A Jewish State surrounded by Arabs....what do you expect?  Peace in our times?

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 9:02pm:

Setanta wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 9:00pm: Aussie wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 8:55pm: It is as far as I am concerned.  It is surrounded by Arabs and water. If you look at the history of the region as far back as we can go, it's not Arab. I thought you were a stickler for details. Again, I don't care about that stuff.  A Jewish State surrounded by Arabs....what do you expect?  Peace in our times?

I think you are confusing Islamic with Arabic. Are Lebanese Arabs? Are Turks? Are Egyptians? Are Iranians?

Setanta wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 9:05pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 9:02pm: Setanta wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 9:00pm: Aussie wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 8:55pm: It is as far as I am concerned.  It is surrounded by Arabs and water. If you look at the history of the region as far back as we can go, it's not Arab. I thought you were a stickler for details. Again, I don't care about that stuff.  A Jewish State surrounded by Arabs....what do you expect?  Peace in our times? I think you are confusing Islamic with Arabic. Are Lebanese Arabs? Are Turks? Are Egyptians? Are Iranians?

Yes as far as per my basic point, and as far as I am concerned.  The State of Israel was artificially created late 1940s and plonked right into the Land of Arabs.

You can call them Islamists if you want.  I call them 'Arabs.'  Same same for the purposes of my point...and I will never waver from it.  Get over it, and suck it up buttercup.

One of my long term mates...a retired Copper....is a Christian Lebanese, and he loves his nick name...the 'Black Arab.'

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 9:12pm:

Setanta wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 9:05pm: Aussie wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 9:02pm: Setanta wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 9:00pm: Aussie wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 8:55pm: It is as far as I am concerned.  It is surrounded by Arabs and water. If you look at the history of the region as far back as we can go, it's not Arab. I thought you were a stickler for details. Again, I don't care about that stuff.  A Jewish State surrounded by Arabs....what do you expect?  Peace in our times? I think you are confusing Islamic with Arabic. Are Lebanese Arabs? Are Turks? Are Egyptians? Are Iranians? Yes as far as per my basic point, and as far as I am concerned.  The State of Israel was artificially created late 1940s and plonked right into the Land of Arabs. You can call them Islamists if you want.  I call them 'Arabs.'  Same same for the purposes of my point...and I will never waver from it.  Get over it, and suck it up buttercup. One of my long term mates...a retired Copper....is a Christian Lebanese, and he loves his nick name...the 'Black Arab.'

(sorry for the edit)

I don't care what your mate likes, it's not the right description, Lebs have 30% Arab DNA, the other 70% is not Arab pretty much like Palestinians. Turks are much less Arab, so are Persians, more Indo-European.

If you want to make the point you are trying to make, use Islam, not Arab because it is plain wrong.

edit: To show you how stupid it is, up to 23% of modern Brits DNA is from the middle east(from the farmers coming to the hunter gatherers), are they Arabs?

Stupid and useless pedantry.  I doubt there is anyone here who does not get my point.

The State of Israel was artificially created and plonked into the Land of Arabs.  Simple as that.  Deal with it.  Get over it and move on.  What was the expression? 

Was it this one ~ Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the difference.

Yes, that's the one.

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 9:33pm:

Stupid and useless pedantry.  I doubt there is anyone here who does not get my point. The State of Israel was artificially created and plonked into the Land of Arabs.  Simple as that.  Deal with it.  Get over it and move on.  What was the expression?  Was it this one ~ Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the difference. Yes, that's the one.

I don't think anyone gets your point bar you.

No it wasn't.

Irrelevant in this context towards me, perhaps, again, it's something you should take on board.

Israel is not surrounded by Arabs but by Islam. It's a pertinent fact and not something you can change.

You use your word, I'll use mine, and nothing will change that.

Get over it, move on and:


Quote:

Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the difference.

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 9:39pm:

You use your word, I'll use mine, and nothing will change that. Get over it, move on and: Quote: Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the difference.

I accept you choose to be wrong and I know that you are unlikely to change and I understand that your argument is pathetic but you will continue to use it.

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 8:41pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 8:32pm: So you think the real reason these Aussie Muslims are travelling to Syria to loot and take Yazidi women as sex slaves is because of the existence of an 'unnatural' state, but they have not once targeted that state, nor can you give a single example of a 'natural' state? You introduced the word 'unnatural.'  I did not use it.  I'm not playing your smart arse game Effendi.  It is a waste of time  as everyone of your exchanges with Gandalf establishes.  Quote: How many of these terrorists have you spoken to about their true motivations, in order to credibly speak on their behalf? Not one.  You? [quote]Or do you not care about the truth or credibility either?

Correct.  On this issue I am single minded.  It is the existence of the artificially State of Israel in Arabia (and the US propping that up with massive weaponry and military support) which is the root cause of all this strife.

Stuffed if I know why it even exists as a Nation other than to be a Jewish haven, but if it must, it ought not have been plonked where it is.

Can I make that any clearer, Effendi?
[/quote]

You described it as artificial. Is there a difference? If I asked you whether you could name a state that is not artificial, could you give a straight answer, or would you still not have a clue what you are talking about?

You were here at the same time that Abu was here telling us that if an islamic state ever arose and came under attack, his religion would oblige him to travel there and support it militarily. Yes, he thought such a state would, in due course, recapture Israel in the name of Islam, as well as Spain. But the root cause for him travelling there would be that it is an Islamic state that is under attack and he is a Muslim who is obligued to defend it.

It could be in Algeria, Iran or Malaysia. It would not make a difference, and it would not have anything to do with Israel. This is what happens when you actually talk to Muslims Aussie, rather than projecting your own single minded determination to blame Israel for everything onto Muslims.


Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 9:12pm:

Setanta wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 9:05pm: Aussie wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 9:02pm: Setanta wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 9:00pm: Aussie wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 8:55pm: It is as far as I am concerned.  It is surrounded by Arabs and water. If you look at the history of the region as far back as we can go, it's not Arab. I thought you were a stickler for details. Again, I don't care about that stuff.  A Jewish State surrounded by Arabs....what do you expect?  Peace in our times? I think you are confusing Islamic with Arabic. Are Lebanese Arabs? Are Turks? Are Egyptians? Are Iranians? Yes as far as per my basic point, and as far as I am concerned.  The State of Israel was artificially created late 1940s and plonked right into the Land of Arabs. You can call them Islamists if you want.  I call them 'Arabs.'  Same same for the purposes of my point...and I will never waver from it.  Get over it, and suck it up buttercup. One of my long term mates...a retired Copper....is a Christian Lebanese, and he loves his nick name...the 'Black Arab.'

So when you rant about Arabia being for Arabs, you actually mean Muslims? You are not racist, you merely support the cause of Islamic conquest?


Quote:

Stupid and useless pedantry.

Are you actually saying that someone explaining to you the difference between Arab and Muslim, after you have spent years ducking and weaving on accusations of racism, is "stupid and useless pedantry"?


Quote:

I doubt there is anyone here who does not get my point.

I thought I did when I thought you meant what you said, which was Arabs. Now it turns out you actually meant Muslims. I don't think anyone here knows what you mean. I doubt even you do.


Quote:

You use your word, I'll use mine, and nothing will change that. Get over it, move on and:

So we speak English, and you will continue to dribble away in your own nonsense language that sounds a bit like English but in which the words have completely different meanings? By move on do you mean we should ignore you, or try to translate what you say into English?

Unforgiven wrote on Feb 27^th, 2018 at 12:06am:

The Syrian conflict exemplifies this with Syria split into warring fiefdoms like Afghanistan. It's out of Israel's playbook. https://www.mondialisation.ca/hillary-clintons-uncanny-fulfillment-of-israels-yinon-plan-for-a-middle-east-riven-with-conflict/5541918

As the Jews say, 'Thank god for having the Arabs for enemies.  Talk about idiot cousins. The Arabs are the flip side of the Jews: stupid, slovenly, lazy, illiterate, crazy, putting internal fights above everything else. 

Call it whatever you like Effendi.

As far as I am concerned Arabia is for Arabs and the State of Israel has no credible place there other than to be the root cause of all the travails of that region and into the rest of the World.

Putting the State of Israel there was a disaster as is obvious by the outcome.

As for me being 'here' when Abu was here.  I have to assume you are referring to Abu Rashid who was last here on the 19th January, 2009.

I registered here on the 9th October, 2007 and had absolutely zero interest in matters Islamic/Arabic then.

My current interest has been the result of your inability to deal with the safe and sane and clear logic of Gandalf.

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 10:06pm:

Call it whatever you like Effendi. As far as I am concerned Arabia is for Arabs and the State of Israel has no credible place there other than to be the root cause of all the travails of that region and into the rest of the World. Putting the State of Israel there was a disaster as is obvious by the outcome. As for me being 'here' when Abu was here.  I have to assume you are referring to Abu Rashid who was last here on the 19th January, 2009. I registered here on the 9th October, 2007 and had absolutely zero interest in matters Islamic/Arabic then. My current interest has been the result of your inability to deal with the safe and sane and clear logic of Gandalf.

But Israel is not in Arabia FFS! By any stretch of the imagination. Say what you mean! Israel should not be in the land that Islam has conquered.

Feel free to use your terminology....I'll use mine, and that is that.  Get over it, move on etc.

I'm not going to change my terminology, which makes the metaphoric point. 

Simple as that.

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 10:19pm:

Feel free to use your terminology....I'll use mine, and that is that.  Get over it, move on etc. I'm not going to change my terminology, which makes the metaphoric point.  Simple as that.

Your's makes no sense. You cannot convey a message if words mean different things to different parties in the conversation. Your message means shyte because you choose to have a different meaning to others for some words. There has to be a consensus on what words mean.

Well...go and find some consensus then.  I will continue using the expressions 'Arabia,' and 'Land of Arabs' for as long as I like, and I doubt there is anyone here who is not 100% aware of the point I am making.

You have heard this expression...yes?


Quote:

Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the difference.

Get over it, and move on.  I say that everyone here knows what I am saying just like you and Effendi do.

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 10:30pm:

Well...go and find some consensus then.  I will continue using the expressions 'Arabia,' and 'Land of Arabs' for as long as I like, and I doubt there is anyone here who is not 100% aware of the point I am making. You have heard this expression...yes? Quote: Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the difference. Get over it, and move on.  I say that everyone here knows what I am saying just like you and Effendi do.

The point everyone is aware you making is that you are playing the fool. You should translate what you mean by "Arabia" so it can be understood by all. I can see why you are reluctant to do so but language is about consensus on what words mean. Otherwise it's all ashi ni kuchi.

I've made my point. 



/end.

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 10:42pm:

I've made my point.  /end.

Watashi no o shiri kuchizuke.

Edit: perhaps you might prefer...
küss mein Arschloch

Setanta wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 10:47pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 10:42pm: I've made my point.  /end. Watashi no o shiri kuchizuke. Edit: perhaps you might prefer... küss mein Arschloch

Don't worry, it's nothing rude. It just means I agree with you in my interpretation of deciding what words mean.

Aussie would this be a fair characterisation of your argument?

The root cause of Aussie Muslims going on their rape and pillage tour of the middle east is the world's failure to pander to the geopolitical demands of Islam



Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 10:06pm:

Call it whatever you like Effendi. As far as I am concerned Arabia is for Arabs and the State of Israel has no credible place there other than to be the root cause of all the travails of that region and into the rest of the World. Putting the State of Israel there was a disaster as is obvious by the outcome. As for me being 'here' when Abu was here.  I have to assume you are referring to Abu Rashid who was last here on the 19th January, 2009. I registered here on the 9th October, 2007 and had absolutely zero interest in matters Islamic/Arabic then. My current interest has been the result of your inability to deal with the safe and sane and clear logic of Gandalf.

Do you consider Gandalf's "mindless collective of treacherous Jews" meme to be safe, sane and clear logic? What do you think is the appropriate way to deal with it?

Also, why do you insist on using the wrong words? Are you confused, or just trying to be misunderstood? Do you actually mean Arabs, or Muslims? And if Arab means Muslim, what do you actually mean by Arabia? Can you translate what you say from dribble to English for us?

No, as it seems you understand dribble far better than English, as your problem with Gandalf's use of it establishes.

Are you saying you agree with what Gandalf said about the mindless collective of treacherous Jews? You always do this Aussie. You start defending Gandalf, then run away when the topic turns to what Gandalf actually said.

freediver wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 12:42pm:

Are you saying you agree with what Gandalf said about the mindless collective of treacherous Jews? You always do this Aussie. You start defending Gandalf, then run away when the topic turns to what Gandalf actually said.

Who knows what Gandalf said and in what context?  I often see him post that you frequently misrepresent what he says.

I have told you plenty of times, given you quotes, and given you links to the original context. Then you run away. Every single time. Just like you will do now. But you will be back to defend Gandalf soon enough from my "unfair" criticism.

They are a mindless collective of treacherous Jews. The context is Gandalf trying to support Muhammad's genocide.

freediver wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 7:02pm:

I have told you plenty of times, given you quotes, and given you links to the original context. Then you run away. Every single time. Just like you will do now. But you will be back to defend Gandalf soon enough from my "unfair" criticism. They are a mindless collective of treacherous Jews. The context is Gandalf trying to support Muhammad's genocide.

I lose interest as soon as I see your "quote bombs" ~ which is far too often.

Just put up the link to where he FIRST used the expression.

I have put several links and quotes here Aussie. It is an entire thread dedicated to it. I'm surprised you missed it, seeing as you have posted in the thread so many times, as recently as late February this year.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1464336968

Here we go again. FleaDriver tries to divert attention away from the subject to his own agenda.

freediver wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 8:26pm:

I have put several links and quotes here Aussie. It is an entire thread dedicated to it. I'm surprised you missed it, seeing as you have posted in the thread so many times, as recently as late February this year. http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1464336968

From your very first post in that Thread.

You said:


Quote:

I've seen Gandalf use the 'mindless collective' and the treacherous Jews argument

His reply:



Quote:

Quite right - you saw me using them without me ever mentioning them. Clever eh?

That's exactly what I suspected.

You constantly misrepresent what he posts.

Show me where he FIRST posted all these words, this entire phrase, and the context:


Quote:

mindless collective of treacherous Jews

What do you think of this one Aussie?


polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 10:27am:

freediver wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 8:26am: If you think these 800 people acted as some kind of mindless collective Thats exactly what they were.

Wunaway now.

freediver wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 10:28pm:

What do you think of this one Aussie? polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 10:27am: freediver wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 8:26am: If you think these 800 people acted as some kind of mindless collective Thats exactly what they were. Wunaway now.

No.  No 'wunaway.'  I never do that, as you ought know by now.

Show me where he first used this entire phrase.


Quote:

mindless collective of treacherous Jews

Unforgiven wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 9:12pm:

Here we go again. FleaDriver tries to divert attention away from the subject to his own agenda.

I apologise for interrupting your anti-Israel conspiracy theories in support of the Palestinians with some of Gandalf's special justifications for Muhammad's genocide of the Jews.

No problem Aussie, right after you quote me trying to pass that off as a direct quote. In the meantime, do you have an opinion on what Gandalf posted? Or is it not possible because he said it so long ago and I never give you direct quotes?


polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 10:27am:

freediver wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 8:26am: If you think these 800 people acted as some kind of mindless collective Thats exactly what they were.

Here's a few more for you. Do you agree with these?


polite_gandalf wrote on May 23^rd, 2016 at 5:52pm:

Karnal wrote on May 23rd, 2016 at 5:29pm: FD calls them treacherous because they broke some pact with Muhammed. Its scheming K - we call them scheming jews.

polite_gandalf wrote on May 23^rd, 2016 at 8:22pm:

freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2016 at 6:22pm: I've seen Gandalf use the 'mindless collective' and the treacherous Jews argument Quite right - you saw me using them without me ever mentioning them. Clever eh?

freediver wrote on May 23^rd, 2016 at 9:30pm:

Every reference to "tribe" made by Gandalf below just happens to be a tribe of Jews. polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 10:27am: freediver wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 8:26am: If you think these 800 people acted as some kind of mindless collective Thats exactly what they were. polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 8th, 2013 at 7:38pm: Also the treachery of the jews had nothing to do with them refusing to help the muslims. Simple facts FD. polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 3:11pm: As I said, there was no real concept of individuality - your personality was literally defined by which tribe you belonged to. And the decisions that govern the tribe are very much decisions that are represented by all the individuals who make up the tribe. Thus there really is no question of collective guilt - no matter how abhorrent we find the term today. polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 4th, 2013 at 3:48pm: Muhammad had been burnt before by granting another traitorous tribe free passage to leave the city - upon which they immediately started plotting against Medina and instigating hostilities. polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 28th, 2015 at 4:08pm: The leaders conspired - yes. The rest of them had the opportunity to disown their treachery. They declined. So tough titties- off with their heads. polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 28th, 2015 at 4:08pm: What do you think the Banu Qurayza would have done to the muslims if their planned back-stabbing assault on Medina had succeeded? polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 6th, 2013 at 2:05pm: Like I keep saying, it is reasonable to accuse them of collective guilt, since at any time any individual had the opportunity to disassociate themselves from the decisions made on behalf of the tribe. Gandalf is one of the good Muslims.

polite_gandalf wrote on May 24^th, 2016 at 10:42am:

The phrase "treacherous jew argument" has obvious racist connotations. FD was obviously well aware of this when he put these words into my mouth. I went to great lengths to point out their treachery had nothing to do with them being jews. FD deliberately set out to play the race card by using the term "treacherous jew", which he knows perfectly well is a notorious phrase heavily laden with racist overtones. But their treachery is a matter of simple historical fact - they conspired with the people who were attempting to annihilate Medina, in secret, in direct violation of the treaty they signed with Muhammad. But pointing that out is wacist innit. The best FD can argue is that their treachery was justified, but treachery it was.

Will you sneak back in later and accuse me of being mean to Gandalf, but refuse once more to have an opinion on what he says? I'm sure he appreciates the support, even though he does seem a bit ungrateful. How about instead of running away this time, you ask me another incredibly stupid question?

3

2

1

Show me where he used FOR THE FIRST TIME this entire phrase.....the question you refuse to answer.


Quote:

mindless collective of treacherous Jews

3.

2.

1.

I responded directly to your idiotic demand in my previous post Aussie. This is a curious method of running away. You defend Gandalf, but cannot bring yourself to offer an opinion on the things he has said, so instead you demand I prove claims I did not make.

Do you have an opinion on these things that Gandalf has said, or is it all still terribly confusing for you?

What is definitely not an opinion and is crystal clear is that you will not show us where Gandalf first used the entire expression, all these words in a single phrase:


Quote:

mindless collective of treacherous Jews

When do you intend to do that?

3.

2.

1.

I don't Aussie. This is your little fantasy, not mine.

Are you trying to mock Gandalf's slippery Muslim routine?

Not bothered reading back, but Aussie didn't know that Persians were not Arabs and his geopolitical analysis and remedy for Middle East peace is moving Israel to Tasmania. 

Blokes an idiot, he should restrict himself to where he is a subject matter expert...whinging about mod elections, agitating and complaining about moderation and PMing to stir up trouble. 

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2018 at 2:10pm:

I don't Aussie. This is your little fantasy, not mine. Are you trying to mock Gandalf's slippery Muslim routine?

No FD, this is your fantasy.  These are your words which initiated the current exchange.


Quote:

Do you consider Gandalf's "mindless collective of treacherous Jews" meme to be safe, sane and clear logic?

Jews have always had 'Master Plans'.
Ever since they turned 'writing' into Religion via their 'Family Book' of Judaism.

They are currently waiting for the Moslems to attack the French, which will be soon, now that the British have 'backed away'.
Once the Moslems expend the last vapours of the Islamic 'empire' the Jews can further extend their Israeli 'Empire' borders even more  ;)

Aussie wrote on Mar 6^th, 2018 at 3:01pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 6th, 2018 at 2:10pm: I don't Aussie. This is your little fantasy, not mine. Are you trying to mock Gandalf's slippery Muslim routine? No FD, this is your fantasy.  These are your words which initiated the current exchange. Quote: Do you consider Gandalf's "mindless collective of treacherous Jews" meme to be safe, sane and clear logic?

Are you denying that Gandalf used his mindless collective of treacherous Jews meme to justify Muhammad's genocide? If not, why are you making these silly demands? Are you just trying to mock Gandalf's slippery Muslim routine when he tried to deny it?

It really would be best if you simply show us all where Gandalf used for the FIRST time this entire phrase, because the longer you divert from that, the longer I guess I have to ask:


Quote:

"mindless collective of treacherous Jews"

You've done everything but that, so far.

3

2

1

I have already agreed to do that, right after you demonstrate why I should Aussie. I'm waiting.

If you are only doing this to mock Gandalf's slippery Muslim routine when he tried a similar trick, you should say so, in case people think you are serious.

And Moslems will dominate the Australian Racial-Breeding Program
like Jews dominate the USA Cultural-Financial Program.

Jews Rule USA.
Moslems to Rule Australia.

...the Promised lands.

What did the Jew & the Moslem say to the British when they brought their 'Union Jack' Cross back to Jerusalem?
(and a barren wasteland of desert and destruction for constant warfare)
From the USA and Australia they say  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2018 at 7:27pm:

I have already agreed to do that, right after you demonstrate why I should Aussie. I'm waiting. If you are only doing this to mock Gandalf's slippery Muslim routine when he tried a similar trick, you should say so, in case people think you are serious.

I'm not here to demonstrate why you should do anything.  I know that is a total waste of time here.  If Gandalf said that today is Tuesday, somehow you'd manage to toss that phrase at him.

You constantly bang on about it, so show us all where Gandalf FIRST used this expression as an entire phrase:


Quote:

"mindless collective of treacherous Jews"

You so use it almost over the entire Forum as though it is the lynch pin to some valid point you are failing to make, and you attribute it to Gandalf.

Show us where he FIRST used that entire expression.

3

2

1

Quote:

You constantly bang on about it, so show us all

Actually it is only you and Gandalf that say anything about exact phrasing Aussie. If you can give a sensible answer, in English, not gibberish, as to why you are banging on about it, then I will go looking for you.

In the meantime, is the highlighted quote below your reason for mocking Gandalf's slippery Muslim routine?


freediver wrote on May 27^th, 2016 at 6:16pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on May 23rd, 2016 at 5:52pm: Karnal wrote on May 23rd, 2016 at 5:29pm: FD calls them treacherous because they broke some pact with Muhammed. Its scheming K - we call them scheming jews. polite_gandalf wrote on May 23rd, 2016 at 8:22pm: freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2016 at 6:22pm: I've seen Gandalf use the 'mindless collective' and the treacherous Jews argument Quite right - you saw me using them without me ever mentioning them. Clever eh? freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2016 at 9:30pm: Every reference to "tribe" made by Gandalf below just happens to be a tribe of Jews. polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 10:27am: freediver wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 8:26am: If you think these 800 people acted as some kind of mindless collective Thats exactly what they were. polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 8th, 2013 at 7:38pm: Also the treachery of the jews had nothing to do with them refusing to help the muslims. Simple facts FD. polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 3:11pm: As I said, there was no real concept of individuality - your personality was literally defined by which tribe you belonged to. And the decisions that govern the tribe are very much decisions that are represented by all the individuals who make up the tribe. Thus there really is no question of collective guilt - no matter how abhorrent we find the term today. polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 4th, 2013 at 3:48pm: Muhammad had been burnt before by granting another traitorous tribe free passage to leave the city - upon which they immediately started plotting against Medina and instigating hostilities. polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 28th, 2015 at 4:08pm: The leaders conspired - yes. The rest of them had the opportunity to disown their treachery. They declined. So tough titties- off with their heads. polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 28th, 2015 at 4:08pm: What do you think the Banu Qurayza would have done to the muslims if their planned back-stabbing assault on Medina had succeeded? polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 6th, 2013 at 2:05pm: Like I keep saying, it is reasonable to accuse them of collective guilt, since at any time any individual had the opportunity to disassociate themselves from the decisions made on behalf of the tribe. Gandalf is one of the good Muslims. polite_gandalf wrote on May 24th, 2016 at 10:42am: The phrase "treacherous jew argument" has obvious racist connotations. FD was obviously well aware of this when he put these words into my mouth. I went to great lengths to point out their treachery had nothing to do with them being jews. FD deliberately set out to play the race card by using the term "treacherous jew", which he knows perfectly well is a notorious phrase heavily laden with racist overtones. But their treachery is a matter of simple historical fact - they conspired with the people who were attempting to annihilate Medina, in secret, in direct violation of the treaty they signed with Muhammad. But pointing that out is wacist innit. The best FD can argue is that their treachery was justified, but treachery it was.

There you go again....tap dancing in custard yet again.

Just get on with it and show us all where Gandalf FIRST used this expression as an entire phrase:


Quote:

"mindless collective of treacherous Jews"

You know the drill ~ live link, reply #, quote the post.....the less work for us, the better.

Why should I go looking for yet another quote Aussie? And why are you so fixated on the "first" one? If you follow my previous link there are several posts, filling the word limit, with quotes of Gandalf using his mindless collective of treacherous Jews meme to justify his claims of collective guilt and Muhammad's genocide. Are you still confused about what he is saying?

freediver wrote on Mar 7^th, 2018 at 12:26pm:

Why should I go looking for yet another quote Aussie? And why are you so fixated on the "first" one? If you follow my previous link there are several posts, filling the word limit, with quotes of Gandalf using his mindless collective of treacherous Jews meme to justify his claims of collective guilt and Muhammad's genocide. Are you still confused about what he is saying?

That ought be obvious!  It will provide the context in which it appeared for the FIRST time in a POST OF HIS. 

Are you denying that, for ages, he has been complaining long, loud and often that you are either misquoting him, or misrepresenting what he said, or of putting 'words into his mouth?'

3

2

1

Aussie wrote on Mar 7^th, 2018 at 1:49pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 7th, 2018 at 12:26pm: Why should I go looking for yet another quote Aussie? And why are you so fixated on the "first" one? If you follow my previous link there are several posts, filling the word limit, with quotes of Gandalf using his mindless collective of treacherous Jews meme to justify his claims of collective guilt and Muhammad's genocide. Are you still confused about what he is saying? That ought be obvious!  It will provide the context in which it appeared for the FIRST time in a POST OF HIS.  Are you denying that, for ages, he has been complaining long, loud and often that you are either misquoting him, or misrepresenting what he said, or of putting 'words into his mouth?' 3 2 1

I'm at a loss to understand what you want after reading Gandalf's quotes above. He does say the Jews were a mindless collective, he does say they were treacherous Jews.

Perhaps Aussie thinks the first time is always special.

I am not going to go looking Aussie, as you cannot give a straight answer as to why I should, and I don't see how an extra quote would make a difference. If you think it is so important, just go ahead and quote it yourself.

Jews rule USA
Moslems rule Australia


;D ;D

Quote:

Are you denying that, for ages, he has been complaining long, loud and often that you are either misquoting him, or misrepresenting what he said, or of putting 'words into his mouth?'

My apologies Aussie. I only just noticed this. No, of course I am not denying it. What do you think I have been referring to with "Gandalf's slippery Muslim routine"? Did you notice, at the top of this page, a post from me where I quoted Gandalf making such a complaint? You might have noticed because I asked you about it specifically and highlighted it.

I think "often" is a bit of a mischaracterisation though, as it is a bit hard for him to deny it when I have a long list of quotes of him using his mindless collective of treacherous jews meme to justify Muhammad's genocide.

In any case, what do you think of Gandalf's attempts at backpedaling? Do you think "slippery" is a fair characterisation?

And seeing as you have decided to acknowledge the things Gandalf says, what do you think of his mindless collective of treacherous jews routine?

...and when the Christians raise the Union Jack 'Cross' in Jerusalem - there in the war ravaged desolate wastelands of the Middle-East.

The Jews of America
and
The Moslems of Australia
will be
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

freediver wrote on Mar 7^th, 2018 at 6:41pm:

Perhaps Aussie thinks the first time is always special. I am not going to go looking Aussie, as you cannot give a straight answer as to why I should, and I don't see how an extra quote would make a difference. If you think it is so important, just go ahead and quote it yourself.

I knew you would not.

As near as I can tell, Gandalf never ever used the expression 'mindless collective of treacherous Jews' other than to quote your use of that expression.

Duh. I never claimed it was his exact phrasing. That was you and Gandalf, in your absurd attempts to backpedal.

Do you have an opinion on what he said Aussie?

Bahahahah  ;D
Like watching Fleas fight over a Dog (re: Aussie/Freediver)

...much like in the Middle-East.

Aussie wrote on Mar 4^th, 2018 at 10:19pm:

Feel free to use your terminology....I'll use mine, and that is that.  Get over it, move on etc. I'm not going to change my terminology, which makes the metaphoric point.  Simple as that.

How about making a factual point, for a change?

Judea. Nuffin' to do wiv Joooz???

freediver wrote on Mar 7^th, 2018 at 9:27pm:

Duh. I never claimed it was his exact phrasing. That was you and Gandalf, in your absurd attempts to backpedal. Do you have an opinion on what he said Aussie?

You could have said that pages ago.

I don't know enough about the alleged incident to comment.  I do know that it is far from certain the alleged event occurred.

'Mindless collectives' exist everywhere.  Just look at Members of political parties.  Look at Armies.  Look at any group of like minded people.  Look at any group with a Leader.

Quote:

You could have said that pages ago.

I did. I told you to quote me trying to pass it off as an exact quote, and I would give you an exact quote. I then spent several pages telling you I had no idea why you were asking me. Don't blame me for your confusion.


Quote:

I don't know enough about the alleged incident to comment.

Ah, not running away after all eh? Does this mean you won't be commenting in future? Or does complaining about me "misrepresenting" Gandalf not count?

What is stopping you from reading the quotes above? If you put as much effort into reading what Gandalf says as you do riding to his defence, you might develop the ability to have an opinion.

Aussie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 1:43pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 7th, 2018 at 9:27pm: Duh. I never claimed it was his exact phrasing. That was you and Gandalf, in your absurd attempts to backpedal. Do you have an opinion on what he said Aussie? You could have said that pages ago. I don't know enough about the alleged incident to comment.  I do know that it is far from certain the alleged event occurred. 'Mindless collectives' exist everywhere.  Just look at Members of political parties.  Look at Armies.  Look at any group of like minded people.  Look at any group with a Leader.

You are an idiot of Bwianesque, Karnalian proportions. (ie very low IQ, uncomplicated stupid).

A bunch of mathematicians, charity workers, volunteer fire-fighters, teachers, carers, reformers, being like-minded, are now a 'mindless collective' because you, being an complete idiot, do not understand them.
Same for anyone who is not a wastrel and monomaniac like you. 

polite_gandalf wrote on May 23^rd, 2016 at 5:52pm:

Karnal wrote on May 23rd, 2016 at 5:29pm: FD calls them treacherous because they broke some pact with Muhammed. Its scheming K - we call them scheming jews.

polite_gandalf wrote on May 23^rd, 2016 at 8:22pm:

freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2016 at 6:22pm: I've seen Gandalf use the 'mindless collective' and the treacherous Jews argument Quite right - you saw me using them without me ever mentioning them. Clever eh?

freediver wrote on May 23^rd, 2016 at 9:30pm:

Every reference to "tribe" made by Gandalf below just happens to be a tribe of Jews. polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 10:27am: freediver wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 8:26am: If you think these 800 people acted as some kind of mindless collective Thats exactly what they were. polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 8th, 2013 at 7:38pm: Also the treachery of the jews had nothing to do with them refusing to help the muslims. Simple facts FD. polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 3:11pm: As I said, there was no real concept of individuality - your personality was literally defined by which tribe you belonged to. And the decisions that govern the tribe are very much decisions that are represented by all the individuals who make up the tribe. Thus there really is no question of collective guilt - no matter how abhorrent we find the term today. polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 4th, 2013 at 3:48pm: Muhammad had been burnt before by granting another traitorous tribe free passage to leave the city - upon which they immediately started plotting against Medina and instigating hostilities. polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 28th, 2015 at 4:08pm: The leaders conspired - yes. The rest of them had the opportunity to disown their treachery. They declined. So tough titties- off with their heads. polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 28th, 2015 at 4:08pm: What do you think the Banu Qurayza would have done to the muslims if their planned back-stabbing assault on Medina had succeeded? polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 6th, 2013 at 2:05pm: Like I keep saying, it is reasonable to accuse them of collective guilt, since at any time any individual had the opportunity to disassociate themselves from the decisions made on behalf of the tribe. Gandalf is one of the good Muslims.

polite_gandalf wrote on May 24^th, 2016 at 10:42am:

The phrase "treacherous jew argument" has obvious racist connotations. FD was obviously well aware of this when he put these words into my mouth. I went to great lengths to point out their treachery had nothing to do with them being jews. FD deliberately set out to play the race card by using the term "treacherous jew", which he knows perfectly well is a notorious phrase heavily laden with racist overtones. But their treachery is a matter of simple historical fact - they conspired with the people who were attempting to annihilate Medina, in secret, in direct violation of the treaty they signed with Muhammad. But pointing that out is wacist innit. The best FD can argue is that their treachery was justified, but treachery it was.

Plenty more here:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1464336968

Are you saying you agree with Gandalf Aussie?

I don't read your quote bombs, FD.  No-one does, I reckon.

I think it needs to be said that not only is Yinon Plan a stupid, un-achievable, and undesirable plan, a great many Israelis would reject it.

Aussie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 11:22pm:

I don't read your quote bombs, FD.  No-one does, I reckon.

So you insist on offering your opinion on a subject you remain willfully ignorant of?

Is this the same thing as running away every time?

No, it's simple, I don't read your quote bombs, and there is no way reading them would make me any less 'willfully ignorant.'

Aussie wrote on Mar 9^th, 2018 at 1:31pm:

No, it's simple, I don't read your quote bombs, and there is no way reading them would make me any less 'willfully ignorant.'

You are an idiot of Bwianesque, Karnalian proportions. (ie very low IQ, uncomplicated stupid).

A bunch of mathematicians, charity workers, volunteer fire-fighters, teachers, carers, reformers, being like-minded, are now a 'mindless collective' because you, being an complete idiot, do not understand them.
Same for anyone who is not a wastrel and monomaniac like you. 

And yes, you are a practicing, willfully ignorant fool.

Aussie wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 10:32pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 5th, 2018 at 10:28pm: What do you think of this one Aussie? polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 10:27am: freediver wrote on Dec 5th, 2013 at 8:26am: If you think these 800 people acted as some kind of mindless collective Thats exactly what they were. Wunaway now. No.  No 'wunaway.'  I never do that, as you ought know by now. Show me where he first used this entire phrase.

No wunaway?

Aussie you said you never wunaway. Does retreating into self imposed ignorance on a topic you always feel compelled to comment on count?

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2018 at 8:09pm:

Aussie you said you never wunaway. Does retreating into self imposed ignorance on a topic you always feel compelled to comment on count?

When Gandalf enters the Thread, I'll probably be less ignorant.

But if I quote what he says, you'll refuse to have an opinion?

What's the difference between wunaway and me no read?

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2018 at 8:19pm:

But if I quote what he says, you'll refuse to have an opinion? What's the difference between wunaway and me no read?

He has said loud, long and very consistently that you either misquote him or put words in his mouth, and then post them as his......like 'mindless collective of treacherous Jews.'  You attribute that to him but he never ever said that.

Funnily enough, I believe him.

Aussie wrote on Mar 10^th, 2018 at 8:33pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 10th, 2018 at 8:19pm: But if I quote what he says, you'll refuse to have an opinion? What's the difference between wunaway and me no read? He has said loud, long and very consistently that you either misquote him or put words in his mouth, and then post them as his......like 'mindless collective of treacherous Jews.'  You attribute that to him but he never ever said that. Funnily enough, I believe him.

You believe he never said the things I attribute to him, at the same time as refusing to read what he said?

Tell us Aussie, what is the value of an opinion from someone who remains steadfastly and willfully ignorant on the topic?


Aussie wrote on Mar 5^th, 2018 at 10:32pm:

No.  No 'wunaway.'  I never do that, as you ought know by now.

What's the difference between wunaway and me no read?