Good-bye and Good Riddens

Gees Ruben, where have you been? You missed all the funnies, Isaiah started morphing into other personages before our eyes - he was even doing it on CT.

My friend, you need to come join us a bit more often.

 

Let me see if I have this right Ruben because a childs father/mother is a terrorist or a criminal it is justifiable to kill that child and all or any of his or her siblings?
Now Ruben what is a childs guilt? please tell me that how the children are not innocent?
As to me having compasion that is not judgmental it is what I feel and you nor anyone else has the right to question that.
Once you begin on the road of killing without compassion then I am sorry but you are taking the road that Hitler took what next genocide of all Palistinans?

When they hung Haman, they hung all his children as well. This was right. These are not simple matters of criminal activity or human rights. When an entire society becomes corrupted it is misplaced compassion to give mercy to guilty parties regardless of their age or gender

Who pronounces the children guilty of anything Ruben, You? Are you the final arbitrator of life and death over a nation? I humbly sugest that you read the history of your own people Ruben they have sufferd enough of this time and time again oh and dont try calling me a Anti Semite for voicing these concerns because I am not, I have been a long time supporter of Israil but I can not sit here and read a post from a Jewish person saying that the killing of Children is Justified in any context.

 

yeah - I don't like to spend too much time here, because you can say what you want, but it shortly turns into spitting into the wind. Policy is never decided on a mailing list

Ruben

 

That's right under these circumstances. Individuals don't go to war, societies do. I'll go even further and tell you that the utter destruction of Dresden was necessary and justifiable as it broke the back of German nationalism, especially the civilians.

And this aint no BS Midevil European conflict with the knights riding out to the battle field carrying their flags while the Peasantry scrambles to their huts in the fortress, caring less which noblemen or king they pay their taxes to as long as they can keep tilling their soil.

This is a blood feud involving too complete societies, where ever Jew, man, women or child, would be happily publicly executed and hung from poles if the Islamic culture had its chance...just as they have in the past, and they would have no remorse.

They took out this guys whole family? Good. Maybe not good enough because they still have fight in them. It would have been every bit justifiable to have done to Gaza like they did to Dresden.

Let me remind you that this civilization VOTED for Hamas.

Ruben

 

This is the second time you've made this pronouncement as if it was a fact. And your WRONG. There are many circumstances where children are legitimate targets and your moral outrage by it is irrelevant to that fact. Stomp around all you want. Children are used as soldiers, suicide bombers, murderers, fodder for the racist doctrine of societies, drug dealers, leaders in genocide repeatedly throughout history, and the perpetrators of hideous acts of violence in nearly every part of the world, and are in no way exempt from scrutiny, nor are they defactualy innocent just because YOU believe they should in the face of 10,000 years of history to the contrary.

Ruben

 

What PRONOUNCEMENT would that be Ruben? all I have done is ask you a fairly simple question.
Ruben I have to say you seem to be the one stomping not I
You try denying me the right to have compassion!! then you say it is Justifiable to kill Children!! In which case you can not complain if Hamas and its ilk then target Israili children after all those children will one day be given guns!! do you see what you proposse Ruben it can not be right to condone the death of Children

How many of those Children in Gazza were suicide bombers Ruben? how many of them were holding a gun?

I have never said that Children have not been used in acts of terror or war, if a child is holding a gun then it becomes a legitamate target, but what you seem to forget is the Adult who put that Gun in the childs hands and has dehumanized them as happend in Rawanda and many other parts of the globe.
That child was innocent until someone took it away and indoctronated it.

So they voted for Hamas so what that is no justification for your proposed genocide, or is it now a case of vote for who we like or we will kill you all?

Again using your argument should we go out and execute all the family members of drug dealers? how about murderers, lets execute all there family as well

What exactly was justifiable about the bombing of Dresden Ruben? It did not break the will of the German people in fact the reverse was the case it stiffend resolve in the same way the bombing of Coventry did in this country. Dresden had no millitery or political importance at all, even Churchill was appalled by the loss of live after the event. Try looking at Stalingrad if you want to see what realy hit German moral

You might not like the Palistinians Ruben but if you and they do not learn to live with each other in some sort of peace then I fear for your children and there children, sorry if you dont like that

 

I think I made my point on this as clear as I can make it. Saying it over again won't in any way make it clearer.

But as to the point of your pronouncement, you have repeatedly said that the killing of these children is an immoral act. Its not. Killing these particular children in question was not an immoral act, and neither is targeting children when the circumstances prescribe it an immoral act.

I think I've read rough estimates that about 32% of male children between 8-17 in Gaza are actively involved in armed violence against Jews, and in fact these children have been used for suicide bombings, although that is hardly the only intentional act of attempted genocide that children in both the west bank and gaza use.

Well, your mostly wrong....again. Maybe you haven't raised children, or been stomped on by them in the subway, or seen them carry T-9's on Franklin Avenue, but children are capable of violence of their own accord and can not only be induced into violence, as can adults for that matter, but they can be leaders in violence.

That is another bogus argument. Both children and adults are equally capable of being indoctrinated into violence and that makes them no less legitimate targets in this kind of war. But in addition to that, your just conveniently dismissing the fact that their culture is as war, first with Jews, but also with the West, liberalism, and civilization which refuses to submit to Islamic tenants. This is a desperate, no holds bar, bloody, doctrinally motivated and extremest war that will never stop until it is completely destroyed, until there is ZERO cultural context for it.

The death of the children of this evil family, as collateral damage no less, is not genocide any more than destroying Dresden, which all but saved England,
was genocide against Germany. And Israel hasn't done anything remotely close to that kind of military action, although they would be justified if they did.

This is a long leap in logic on your part, isn't it. I pointed out that drug deals are often children as proof to their ability for violence. The point had nothing to do with this reply on your part. Your reply is not a rational response to my statements.

Your wrong. It is very easy to be appalled by the loss of life and still understand the necessity of act. One doesn't disqualify the other and the importance of Dresden is textbook study at every war college, along with Grant's and Sherman's utter destruction of the south in the civil war and necessary military actions in a war popularly supported by the civillian populations of your adversary. I'm trying to find a polite way of categorizing this statement but the best I can reach for is that it has no grounding in evidence.

My children have been under this threat long before Hamas, and long after Hamas is on the scrap heap of history my children children will still be under lethal threat for the soul reason that they are Jews...so forgive me if I miss your point.

My families specific bloodline has suffered more violent deaths due to hatred and Antisemitism then your entire nation has in its entire, and rather short, history.

BTW - Blood Liable started in England...

just thought I'd through that factoid out there.

Ruben

 

Never said it was Imoral anywere Ruben, or would you like to show me were I did? I said I have compassion for them.

That leaves 68% who are not

Never said that they are not cabable of violence Ruben we are talking about children been armed for war and not unruly teens on the streets of America or the UK there is a great difference

Again I have dismissed nothing, I said I have compassion for children and if you read what you wrote, that is exactly what I said they can be indoctranated!!

Germany was allready on the way to defeat before Dresden Ruben what saved Britain was two fold the Battle of Britain and the Battle of the Atlantic
Dresden was bombed in Feb of 1945

But they do not become Drug dealers Ruben without the active help of Adults now do they? Who supplies the Drugs to the street dealers Ruben a cartel of International drug dealing children? I think not

I again refer you to my above answer on Dresden the war was allready in its final stages, the bombing of Dresden was not necissery at all

I quite agree that your children have been under threat for a very long time prior to Hamas but does that give you the right to advocate Genocide Ruben? if you think it does then I am sorry but you are no better than those you claim to oppose

Now as for Blood liable read the wiki article on it

Blood libels against Jews are false accusations that Jews use human blood in certain aspects of their religious rituals and holidays. Although the first known instance of blood libel against Jews was in the writings of Apion, an early 1st century pagan Greco-Egyptian who claimed that the Jews sacrificed Greek victims in the Temple
I hardly think that you can call the history of the British isles short!! ok it is not as long as the Jewish faith has been around but so what

 

http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_blib2.htm

 

Pre dates yours by quite a while so I do sugest that you read it LOL

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=1641&letter=A

Mentions Blood sacrifices Well the fattening of a Greek so he could be killed and his entrails eaten (I think that couns dont you)

 

It would appear to me as an outsider on the whole situation, that the ones that are still continuing to fire rockets into S. Israel are the stupid ones. For surely it cannot escape them that a response is in the offing, but perhaps that is how they like it - creating innocent martyrs for their cause - sort of a version of the suicide and murder by cop scenario.

Many innocents and Fatah members will continue to die, and face it, Hamas people are not normal rational individuals. They are lead by rampaging zealots that really do not have the creation of a Palestinian state as much of their agenda as the destruction of Israel.

For it's part, Israel is coming to an apex in the next decade. At the rate of population growth, Jews in Israel will be the minority, and Muslims will be the majority. When and if Israel can find rational Palestinian negotiators, that can back up their commitments with action, she should let the formation of an independent Palestinian state residing peacefully along Israel begin. But therein is the crux of the dilemma, Israel has to find rational people, not zealots, to have to deal with.

In reality, peace could be a very prosperous ideal for that region, not only would savings be reaped from armaments not having to be purchased, but think of the business creation in that important part of the world that could result. Unfortunately Israel has shown time and time again that in reality, they are the only ones truly willing to commit to peace - their minority zealots aside.

 

I like to think I am emboldened by the statements I make here, and I believe to, that you can share your thoughts and inspire creative and insightful discussion herein.

 

Yeah - right. Listen, when was the last time you actually walked the halls of Congress? Have you ever been in the Raymond building?

Ruben

 

Blood Libel specifically is the myth that Jews use the blood of Christian Children in the Matza, was an English invention. The Good Samaritian story was an anti-semetic Roman invention.

Ruben

 

The Good Samaritan parable appears only in the Gospel of Luke (10:25-37). Most Biblical scholars consider the author of Luke (also the author of Acts) a well educated Jew, rather than a Greek or Roman. "Luke" might even have been a close associate of Saul of Tarsus (i.e. the Apostle Paul), a Benjaminite Pharisee. The closest thing to anti-semitism in the parable is that Jesus used Jewish examples to prove that possession of wealth or power or knowledge doesn't guarantee righteousness. Considering that Jesus was speaking to a Jewish audience at the time, his use of Jewish characters isn't surprising.

 

No - it is a pronounced anti-semetic and OBVIOUS smear, as is quite a bit of the entire Christian religion. It certainly does not need to be an educated Jew to write it. Good anti-semitism has been written by non-jews of all type of education. Some of it quite good.

Ruben

 

So the Jewish encyclopidia is wrong then Ruben LOL

 

they try their best..

 

But you know the truth LOL I do think that you should tell them and the historians of there mistake, that they have it wrong show them the truth Ruben, re write the history books

 

This is why I don't like participating too much here. This is not a unique kind of response in flame wars and my flame war days are largely past me, and trust me, I've been one of the best.

If you reread my post, you'll see I'm quoting other sources, so its not my own independent research and I'd appreciate it if you didn't talk to me as if I'm an uneducated agitator pulling facts out of me rear end.

If you look at the two sources, yours and mine, I think you'll find that they are slightly different objects of investigation. The history of blood libel seems to be steeped in a longer historical course of events, but that as was posted, the oldest recorded "Blood Libel", specifically the accusation of children's blood in Matza, is first recorded in England as I quoted from the source I gave. And FWIW, that is not the only source that supports that observation. If you have sources otherwise and can support it with research, either of your own or of others, then by all means, be responsible and contact the authors of the source.


In another matter, did you hear the interview with the Iraqi terrorist on NPR today? The terrorist said that he is raising his children to be terrorist and is proud to do so. So it underscores what I originally said which is that in this kind of war, children are OFTEN legitimate targets.

I don't mind having this conversation, but lets try to keep it respectful. Strangly enough, you can even insult me and still remain respectful

Ruben