Quote:


Yes fd he really did say "Israelis could live as good neighbours". As opposed to saying Israel should be wiped off the map. You seem to be now making a conscious effort to discredited yourself.

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 19^th, 2016 at 6:59am:


No no, that’s just your Muslim.spin. What you’re really saying is that you agree with Falah, who wants Israel wiped off the map, a jihad against the rest of the world, and a fatwa placed on FD for putting up that Charlie cartoon.

It’s not your fault, G. You don’t understand the example of your sinister prophet. We blame Islam here.

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 19^th, 2016 at 10:17am:


That’s right. You’re brainwashed by that sinister prophet of yours.

Moslem == a follower of Islam.

So why does FD keep asking you questions?

freediver wrote on Mar 20^th, 2016 at 9:53am:


Correct - it only took a few minutes to find where he said Israelis could live as good neighbours if they removed themselves from occupied Palestinian land. That is the very definition of "peaceful coexistence". Whereas you've been digging for about a week now and haven't produced anything about wiping Israel off the map. That he thinks that the state of Israel can still exist is heavily inferred by his use of the word "Israelis" - ie citizens of the state of Israel. Of course he *COULD* mean "Israelis" to be stateless jews being oppressed under a muslim state, but there simply isn't any evidence to suggest that. Not his use of the words "total victory" or "never surrender" or even "[the occupiers should] go back to wherever they came from".

Sorry, G, it’s spin. You can only listen to "what Muslims themselves say" when they don’t actually say it.

Remember this in future, okay? It’ll help you to understand things like wiping Israel off the map and executing gays who do it Mardi Gras-style.

You people are so cunning, you know. Whenever a quote’s pulled up it always says the exact opposite of what FD says. How do you do it? I tried Googling taqiyya, but that didn’t give your tricks away either.

freediver wrote on Mar 20^th, 2016 at 2:47pm:


Yes of course its "typical muslim spin" to not understand how "Israeli could live as good neighbours" is really code for 'wipe Israel off the map'.

freediver wrote on Mar 20^th, 2016 at 9:35pm:


You have indeed. What a shame thats not what we're arguing about.

So getting back to your favourite theme of spin, would you categorise equating "hostility to Israel" to wanting to wipe Israel off the map as a definition of spin? Would you at least agree that taking the position that "Israelis could live as good neighbours" is - at least on the surface - somewhat inconsistent with being hell-bent on wiping Israel off the map?

Finally, do you not think its a little weak to state so categorically that someone wants Israel wiped off the map, and despite what has obviously been a lot of digging, not be able to come up with a single quote saying such a thing? And instead only come up with quotes that indicates that person's hostility towards Israel's occupation and aggression towards its neighbours?

freediver wrote on Mar 20^th, 2016 at 10:22pm:


So what your saying is there is a context to Falah's quotes in the OP, and we can't really be expected to understand the true meaning of those quotes  without knowing that context? And yet, when you were posting those quotes specifically to make a point about how obvious the meaning of them were - it never actually occurred to you to provide any of the necessary context then? Instead you wait until almost 4 pages in before you spill the beans and admit that the OP is completely meaningless without the context which you only now reveal?

freediver wrote on Mar 20^th, 2016 at 10:22pm:


The opposite?? You'll have to explain that to me FD. Look back on the quotes in the OP that you dug up. Even if we ignore the inconvenient sentiments about the possibility of Israelis being good neighbours - he talks non-specifically about zionist occupation, full victory and not surrendering. I opined that he was referring to the occupation of the West Bank. Agree or disagree with that - but how on earth can you rationalise that as "attempt[ing] to spin it into the opposite of what he said"?

What would even be the "opposite" of calling for an end to the occupation of the West Bank anyway?

Talk about spin!