freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2016 at 10:15am:


Rubbish. The intervention and occupation by the west has been front and centre of his argument, starting with:

Aussie wrote on May 2^nd, 2016 at 11:30am:


and ending with...

Aussie wrote on May 7^th, 2016 at 8:46pm:


I did note though your constant efforts to put words into his mouth, constantly bringing up skin colour, godwin's law (train rides), and forced eviction (presumably thats where the ethnic cleansing bit comes in) - all of which he denied.

FD if you could pretend you were someone else, looking at all this objectively, do you think you'd find it pretty amusing watching your hysterics over this, as well as shouting down anyone who disagrees with you that its "blatant racism" as an apologist and hypocrite? Especially given how you refuse to acknowledge how labelling 100% of the male muslim population as dirty, intellectually retarded psychopaths who squat to urinate is a case of "blatant racism"?

freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2016 at 10:50am:


Indeed it was - well done, you might actually be getting the hang of this.

freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2016 at 10:50am:


hmmm, or in other words "can you explain to me why not agreeing with me that its racism makes it not racist" 

Why isn't moses's quote racist FD? Is it because you agree with moses's bigotry?

freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2016 at 11:21am:


Because saying 'arabia for arabs' in the context of saying westerners should stop meddling in arabia for imperialistic purposes (not racist) is very different to your bs version that its all about "ethnic cleansing" people on the basis of their skin colour. (racist)

You literally had to put words into Aussie's mouth to create the racist context that never existed.

freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2016 at 11:46am:


You asked him what those arabs should do, he said they can stay or go for all he cared. Sliiiighly different to your spin. He also went to great pains to say his stance wasn't racial - that he was talking about 'Israelis', not 'jews'. Moreover he went out of his way to explain how his beef was one about nation states, not individuals.

Admittedly, Aussie was clumsy in his insistence on the phrase 'arabs for arabs' while at the same time making it clear his issue was with the political layout of the region in terms of nation states, rather than the ethno-religious composition of the region. And he certainly became less coherent the more you verballed him and put words in his mouth. But you do excel at that - pushing and pushing someone in a deliberate attempt to get them riled up so they inevitably end up stumbling and contradicting themselves. So rather than get Aussie to properly explain his position - by, for example, asking him about what individual jews could do after the state of Israel was removed (funny how you didn't think of that one, I wonder why?), you simply provoke him to go on the defensive and baricade himself with statements like "arabia is for arabs, and nothing is going to change my view on that". And that, of course, is mission accomplished for you.

Karnal wrote on May 15^th, 2016 at 12:25pm:


http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1463277300

FD has excelled himself to a whole new level by accusing me of being the hypocrite and resorting to hyperbole. 

Mr Hammer wrote on May 15^th, 2016 at 12:27pm:


I don’t think.so, Homo. Is Uncle invading any of Whitey’s lands?

freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2016 at 12:54pm:


Of course he did. He is clearly inadvertently conflating a nationalist/political identity with ethnicity when using the term 'arab'. The term has always been vague and ambiguous anyway. But his non-racist position is set out pretty clearly here:

Quote:


Asking him specifically where he thought individual jews would fit in with his scheme would have cleared it all up. Since elsewhere he had clearly inferred that his beef was not against any religious/ethnic or racial group. Just because he contradicted himself doesn't make him a racist.

How fascinating!  How come no-one bothered to ask me?  Gandalf has it right.  FD is creating windmills for his mate Sancho.

Why bother delving into what I say about a simple historical fact, looking for some sinister motive?  We plonked Israel into a hive of already intrinsically hostile territory and expected there to be peace in our times!   (Even after doing so, Israel decided to muscle into its neighbour's lands.)

Absurd.

I say it is not too late to fix that, goodwill prevailing, and make Arabia less of a flash point to the possible destruction of the entire Planet.

What is wrong with Tasmania, which would welcome the economic boost?  FD's response to that is ~ "Oh, how could we possibly safely migrate those Isrealis who were willing to get to Tasmania"

I say ~ a decent logistician and a willing migrant would make it work.

If what I say is 'racist,' I'll wear that tag on this matter.  Guess that would say I am a Jew Hater, which is totally absurd.  I'm not.  I am a strong sympathiser.

My mind works on the basis that it made sense Gandhi's India be partitioned.

Same common sense principle.

(The Lawrence of Arabia video was symbolic of many of my thoughts about square pegs and round holes,)