Typical Israeli attrocity

[cookiebaker]

Gywnedd,

'epidimological sophistry?' this is how my brother would debate something, as much as I love him, he is an intellectual and a skilled debater who can argue for why the earth is really flat, but that doesnt necessarily mean it's so, no matter how big the words, or how high an IQ one has....truth is usually pretty simple, and doesnt require alot of that.

 

[gwynedd1]

Gywnedd,

'epidimological sophistry?' this is how my brother would debate something, as much as I love him, he is an intellectual and a skilled debater who can argue for why the earth is really flat, but that doesnt necessarily mean it's so, no matter how big the words, or how high an IQ one has....truth is usually pretty simple, and doesnt require alot of that.

I corrected the spelling if that helps.

Epistemological sophistry. Ironically you used a tactic you brother, apparently, would be proud of.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Epistemology

What you did was assert that thing cannot be known because someone can make false arguments, which is a false argumet. That is the refuge of people such as your brother were one devolves the argument into how do we know we know? A most famous example is "that depends on what is is" . So when the facts go against a "sophist, grifter, huckster or what ever, they will then attack the very concept of facts themselves.

Instead of simply addressing the scripture you attempted to devolve the argument in a way that is apparently hereditary. The only difference is I don't typically let people get away with any of these.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

I believe you violated this one
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html by using Epistemological arguments, you are challanging me to prove reality.

Now if you can apply this to you brother then perhaps you can go back to reading scripture and referring him to the site I listed as I am sure he violates these on a usual basis.

 

[cookiebaker]

Gywnedd,

thank you, but the spelling really didnt make a difference. My point is that one can use their intellect, (why I used example of my brother) to sway the facts, and if very intellectual type such as he is, and so I am familiar with that type of 'debate'.
There have been times for example where I KNEW the answer was right, but he could argue circles around me, throwing up facts, refernces, etc along the way, almost like a smokescreen .I am not saying facts are a smokescreen by themselves, but depedning on how they're used, they can be. Maybe this is simplistic but i believe truth is generally pretty simple, why Jesus spoke of small chlidren understanding truth, and 'a small child shall lead them' and the boy Jesus at 12, rebuffing the 80 yr old rabbis, etc. THerefore if I sense 'smokescreen' i disengage from the argument, since I know that reciting facts, throwing references around, fancy words and phrases *can* be just a distraction from teh simple truth.

 

[HisdaughterJen]

Rom 11:1 I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin.
Rom 11:11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious.


Rom 11:25 I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in
Rom 11:28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs,
Rom 11:29 for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable.

 

[cookiebaker]

it does seem that GOd's promises are true, I dont see where God writes "or until further revision'

 

[gwynedd1]

Gywnedd,

thank you, but the spelling really didnt make a difference. My point is that one can use their intellect, (why I used example of my brother) to sway the facts, and if very intellectual type such as he is, and so I am familiar with that type of 'debate'.

You cannot have it both ways. You are attempting your own argument that has nothing to do with scripture.

There have been times for example where I KNEW the answer was right, but he could argue circles around me, throwing up facts, refernces, etc along the way, almost like a smokescreen .I am not saying facts are a smokescreen by themselves, but depedning on how they're used, they can be. Maybe this is simplistic but i believe truth is generally pretty simple, why Jesus spoke of small chlidren understanding truth, and 'a small child shall lead them' and the boy Jesus at 12, rebuffing the 80 yr old rabbis, etc. THerefore if I sense 'smokescreen' i disengage from the argument, since I know that reciting facts, throwing references around, fancy words and phrases *can* be just a distraction from teh simple truth.

Its your smoke screen that I decontructed. It was YOUR non-biblical argument. You did not post scripture. You are saying that even though Christ denounced the Pharisees that he is not denouncing them because I can make a false argument on scripture.
I know, just like you, this is false, else their would be no purpose to scripture or this Forum. "Wise as serpents and gentile as a dove".
I have spent the time to discard your kind of argument hence the wise to argue against warmongering for Israel hence the dove.

 

[cookiebaker]

I base my belief on what the Bible says of Israel, period. I am not using fancy or skilled or honed debating skills, but that does not make it any less true. As i said I am familiar with exactly that type of 'debate',...

God says in his Word that he does not change, his promises are not updated EVEN at the pressure or cajoling of christians who want to believe otherwise.....gasp

 

[gwynedd1]

it does seem that GOd's promises are true, I dont see where God writes "or until further revision'

In case there is some confusion "Why doesn't God keep his promise to Israel?" was a rhetorical question. He did keep his promise. The problem is humans don't. I don't know very deeply why God has blinded Jacob but only that he has as Paul said. I do not know how they could miss the prophesy in Daniel. If Christ was not the messiah then it was someone else aroung 30 AD so it is indeed a great mystery. However being blind I will not follow their call to come help fight the Musilim. Nor will I heed a Musilim to come and fight for them. The terminology of the day is Judeo-Christian and Islamo-Fascism. Its an obvious carnal and worldly fiction meant to foment war. I want no part of it.

 

[gwynedd1]

I base my belief on what the Bible says of Israel, period. I am not using fancy or skilled or honed debating skills, but that does not make it any less true. As i said I am familiar with exactly that type of 'debate',...

That is what you did. I posted this

John 8
37: I know that you are descendants of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me, because my word finds no place in you.
38: I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father."
39: They answered him, "Abraham is our father." Jesus said to them, "If you were Abraham's children, you would do what Abraham did,
40: but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God; this is not what Abraham did.
41: You do what your father did." They said to him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God."
42: Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me.
43: Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word.
44: You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

And you made your own argument against it. You did not even address the scripture. My argument is it takes more than being born to have a relationship with God. One must be born again. The promise to Abraham requires faith. Many generations of Israel did not have this faith.

God says in his Word that he does not change, his promises are not updated EVEN at the pressure or cajoling of christians who want to believe otherwise.....gasp

If anyone fails to meet the conditions then all is forfiet just like the scripture says.

 

[HisdaughterJen]

In case there is some confusion "Why doesn't God keep his promise to Israel?" was a rhetorical question. He did keep his promise. The problem is humans don't. I don't know very deeply why God has blinded Jacob but only that he has as Paul said. I do not know how they could miss the prophesy in Daniel. If Christ was not the messiah then it was someone else aroung 30 AD so it is indeed a great mystery. However being blind I will not follow their call to come help fight the Musilim. Nor will I heed a Musilim to come and fight for them. The terminology of the day is Judeo-Christian and Islamo-Fascism. Its an obvious carnal and worldly fiction meant to foment war. I want no part of it.

You can stay home, then. What do muslims yell as they are cutting people's heads off and blowing up people that they consider sub-human...something about...
ALLAH?
It's a holy war. They declared it to be so. They are killing Christians and Jews to please their god because we don't believe in their god. We (Christians and Jews), who are in this holy war whether we like it or not, believe in our God. The ONLY, TRUE, LIVING GOD, YAHWEH/JEHOVAH.

So politicians can bury their heads in the sand but we are being hit because we don't worship ALLAH.

 

[gwynedd1]

You can stay home, then. What do muslims yell as they are cutting people's heads off and blowing up people that they consider sub-human...something about...
ALLAH?
It's a holy war. They declared it to be so. They are killing Christians and Jews to please their god because we don't believe in their god. We (Christians and Jews), who are in this holy war whether we like it or not, believe in our God. The ONLY, TRUE, LIVING GOD, YAHWEH/JEHOVAH.

So politicians can bury their heads in the sand but we are being hit because we don't worship ALLAH.

I am sorry. I believe we have reached an impass in another forum where you simply refused to address scriptures in complete opposition to your statements as if I had not posted them. You are not responsive and I am considering putting you on my ignore list as a result this consistent behavior.
Your attutude is a perfect example of the problem. The US drew first blood in Iran, for example, called operation Ajax so the argument in Iran has more teeth to it against us. God did not ask us to secure Iranian oil at the behest of Britain. He asked us to live peaceably with our nieghbors. If you have not heard such a thing as "Operation Ajax" then you have no business making statements in this regard because you are woefully ignorant. The documentation related to this is declassified status in the National Security Archive's not a wild theory.
However, I will not respond to your posts until I see you address properly, posts made against your positions, though you may choose to not alter your position, you need to address them. It is also true that you tend to paraphrase statements incorrectly and attack them as "strawmen" instead of direct quotes. So again it is not profitable to continue .

 

[HisdaughterJen]

I am sorry. I believe we have reached an impass in another forum where you simply refused to address scriptures in complete opposition to your statements as if I had not posted them. You are not responsive and I am considering putting you on my ignore list as a result this consistent behavior.
Your attutude is a perfect example of the problem. The US drew first blood in Iran, for example, called operation Ajax so the argument in Iran has more teeth to it against us. God did not ask us to secure Iranian oil at the behest of Britain. He asked us to live peaceably with our nieghbors. If you have not heard such a thing as "Operation Ajax" then you have no business making statements in this regard because you are woefully ignorant. The documentation related to this is declassified status in the National Security Archive's not a wild theory.
However, I will not respond to your posts until I see you address properly, posts made against your positions, though you may choose to not alter your position, you need to address them. It is also true that you tend to paraphrase statements incorrectly and attack them as "strawmen" instead of direct quotes. So again it is not profitable to continue .

I am sorry. I do not mean to upset you.

I don't see any scriptures here to address.

I don't know anything about Operation Ajax. I am truly "woefully ignorant" on the subject of Operation Ajax so I cannot comment on it.

I do know that muslims chop off "infidels"(Christians and Jews) heads and blow up innocents while screaming ....ALLAH AKBAR or something like that.
I do know they've declared a jihad or holy war on "infidels".
Are you saying it's our fault that they chop off our heads because I thought it was because we don't worship ALLAH?

 

[gwynedd1]

I am sorry. I do not mean to upset you.

I don't see any scriptures here to address.

I don't know anything about Operation Ajax. I am truly "woefully ignorant" on the subject of Operation Ajax so I cannot comment on it.

I do know that muslims chop off "infidels"(Christians and Jews) heads and blow up innocents while screaming ....ALLAH AKBAR or something like that.
I do know they've declared a jihad or holy war on "infidels".
Are you saying it's our fault that they chop off our heads because I thought it was because we don't worship ALLAH?

It does not upset me but it just does not go anywhere.
Here you go

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...EF933A2575BC0A9659C8B63&sec=&pagewanted=print

 

[HisdaughterJen]

It does not upset me but it just does not go anywhere.
Here you go

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...EF933A2575BC0A9659C8B63&sec=&pagewanted=print

This is a quote from the link you just provided:

"The book's subtitle, unfortunately, suggests a less persuasive argument. ''It is not far-fetched,'' Kinzer writes, ''to draw a line from Operation Ajax through the shah's repressive regime and the Islamic revolution to the fireballs that engulfed the World Trade Center in New York.'' Kinzer is right to warn against the unintended consequences of American intervention, but his suggestion here involves far too many causal leaps. After all, the shah needn't have turned out to be such a tyrannical disaster, and 1953 needn't have led to 1979. "


This is a book review....a fictional book based loosely on historical events. It is the author's (Steven Kinser) OPINION that the US is to blame for mid-east/Iran problems. The man writing the review (Warren Bass) debunks the author's claims.

This proves nothing...it is anti-US propaganda.

As I've said to you in other threads, people are evil, they do evil things...ALL people. The US and Israel are not the "Big Satan/Little Satan" and the cause of all the trouble in the world.

 

[gwynedd1]

This is a quote from the link you just provided:

"The book's subtitle, unfortunately, suggests a less persuasive argument. ''It is not far-fetched,'' Kinzer writes, ''to draw a line from Operation Ajax through the shah's repressive regime and the Islamic revolution to the fireballs that engulfed the World Trade Center in New York.'' Kinzer is right to warn against the unintended consequences of American intervention, but his suggestion here involves far too many causal leaps. After all, the shah needn't have turned out to be such a tyrannical disaster, and 1953 needn't have led to 1979. "


This is a book review....a fictional book based loosely on historical events. It is the author's (Steven Kinser) OPINION that the US is to blame for mid-east/Iran problems. The man writing the review (Warren Bass) debunks the author's claims.

This proves nothing...it is anti-US propaganda.

As I've said to you in other threads, people are evil, they do evil things...ALL people. The US and Israel are not the "Big Satan/Little Satan" and the cause of all the trouble in the world.

You never stop. I tried to help you with something more brief.

http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html

 

[HisdaughterJen]

he coup had its roots in a British showdown with Iran, restive under decades of near-colonial British domination."

That's a quote from part of the article in the new link.
Then I remembered that Britain named Iran and Iraq because they controlled that area for awhile. They used to be called "Persia & ??".
So, in 1953, when the leaders of Iran were threatening to nationalize oil, that meant they were going to threaten Britain's supplies.
It is right or wrong that they did what they did? I don't know...it's complicated. Britain has national interests and had agreements with Iran. Iran decided to throw out those agreements which would threaten Britains national interests.

By the way, Venezuela is threatening to do the same thing. If oil is controlled by one dictator (megalomaniac) at the top who intends on using it as a weapon against our economy, it is in the US's best interests (since we get oil from there) to do something. Is it right or wrong? It's both and it's complicated.

BUT...that still doesn't make the US and Israel evil and the cause of all the bad stuff in the world.

 

[cookiebaker]

gywnedd,

Do you often take your information and/or base it on what the New York Times says? just curious, noticed both links there were from NY Times

 

[gwynedd1]

he coup had its roots in a British showdown with Iran, restive under decades of near-colonial British domination."

That's a quote from part of the article in the new link.
Then I remembered that Britain named Iran and Iraq because they controlled that area for awhile. They used to be called "Persia & ??".
So, in 1953, when the leaders of Iran were threatening to nationalize oil, that meant they were going to threaten Britain's supplies.
It is right or wrong that they did what they did? I don't know...I still don't have all the facts.

The British empire, inventors of the concentration camp? Britain was the father of apartied colonialism in both Israel and South Africa. Gold and diamonds in South Africa and a pro-British Zionist state to protect the eastern flank of the suez.

http://mwcnews.net/content/view/12954/42/
http://www.boer.co.za/boerwar/hellkamp.htm

Looks famliar to the Nazi ones does it not? Considering the same internationalist "financieres" located in Britain and New York funded Rhodes, the Bolsheviks and I.G Farben it is not surprising. Its their unique style and contibution to humanity.
The British people natually could not help that thier country was the first one looted by the swindle of their baninking system with the bank of England.

 

[HisdaughterJen]

The British empire, inventors of the concentration camp? Britain was the father of apartied colonialism in both Israel and South Africa. Gold and diamonds in South Africa and a pro-British Zionist state to protect the eastern flank of the suez.

http://mwcnews.net/content/view/12954/42/
http://www.boer.co.za/boerwar/hellkamp.htm

Looks famliar to the Nazi ones does it not? Considering the same internationalist "financieres" located in Britain and New York funded Rhodes, the Bolsheviks and I.G Farben it is not surprising. Its their unique style and contibution to humanity.
The British people natually could not help that thier country was the first one looted by the swindle of their baninking system with the bank of England.

More anti-West, anti-Israel propaganda....what's the point in digging up stuff like that? What about Saladin? What about Hitler? What about communism, radical Islam?

I know you said that you read the Koran a few years ago but where did you say you are from?

 

[gwynedd1]

More anti-West, anti-Israel propaganda....what's the point in digging up stuff like that? What about Saladin? What about Hitler? What about communism, radical Islam?

I know you said that you read the Koran a few years ago but where did you say you are from?

You are trying to characterize a conflict of the "Good Christian and Jew" against "evil Islam". It is somewhat interesting that Islamic countries in the past were more tolerant of Jews than Chritiandom. and so it was at a time Islam/Jew against Christian or so called. My view is different. I see Zionist zealots, Crusaders and Jihadis on one side and Christ on the other.

Romans 12

2: Rejoice in your hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer.
13: Contribute to the needs of the saints, practice hospitality.
14: Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them.
15: Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep.
16: Live in harmony with one another; do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly; never be conceited.
17: Repay no one evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all.
18: If possible, so far as it depends upon you, live peaceably with all.
19: Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God; for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord."
20: No, "if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head."
21: Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

What I read is not really relavent is it? If you flippently discard the facts I present again I will need to put you on the ignore list and my apologies for having to do this but I cannot spent time essentially discussing what you think absent any fact.

As to communism that was yet another round of labor Zionism against the pro-exile Jewish conservatives among other things. Jew against Jew.

Edit: I will dump that reference
for this

http://www.whale.to/b/communism_q.html