Galloway wipes the floor with Sky News anchor

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

You can't compare Canada to the middle East.

Exactly. Which is why trying to parallel the mid east and the native situation in North America just doesn't work, and that was my point earlier in the thread. To even come close to a parallel we have to invent a fictional scenario.

[Hakan]

Originally Posted by peter12

Have you ever researched and sourced material for your own papers? Footnotes mean nothing. Bias means everything. I could twist and manipulate almost any piece of information to support whatever argument I wanted to make.

Have you read any books by Chomsky on the middle east? His research is surprisingly complete using, in most cases, primary documents from the people, organizations and states that he is indicting.

[FlamesAddiction]

[quote=jolinar of malkshor]

I would disagree. Hezbollah makes no attempts to shoot their missles at Israeli military bases. The other day they were all dancing and celebrating the fact that they hit a Israeli home and killed 6 civilians. They don't care much about the military, if they get a chance, sure they will attack them, they just want to kill jews and make terror.

Like I said, they can't attack military bases. The missiles they have are so inaccurate that they can barely even hit cities. They have sent hundreds of missiles over and can barely hit anything.

If they could, they would kill Israeli soldiers. Don't forget, this recent skirmish started because Hezbollah attacked a military target. If all they cared about was civilian death toll, then why are they attacking military targets? If you've been watch the news, not all of Hezbollah's attacks have been on civilians.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Okay. So you don't believe in an objective truth then? Or you believe it's inaccessible? So there's no credible sources on any issue? I'm not sure how we are supposed to practically incorporate this point of yours.

You can't deny there are more credible sources and less credible ones. What makes the more credible ones more credible?

Hmm. Now this gets a bit philosophical. Yes, I do believe in an objective, maybe even absolute truth. Credible sources (the step towards an objective truth) must be as comprehensive and objective as possible and must be seen in their entirety.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Hakan

Have you read any books by Chomsky on the middle east? His research is surprisingly complete using, in most cases, primary documents from the people, organizations and states that he is indicting.

Exactly. How can you dispute de-classified documents from the Israeli and US governments?

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Exactly. Which is why trying to parallel the mid east and the native situation in North America just doesn't work, and that was my point earlier in the thread. To even come close to a parallel we have to invent a fictional scenario.

What I am saying is: You stated that Hezbollah may be justified to regain territory they believe belongs to Syria. From what I am getting from your posts you are saying they have the right to attack Israel to get this land back. If you agree with me that the natives have much more of a claim to land here in Canada then by your logic, they should be more justified in Attacking us to gain their land back.

[Igottago]

Although I can't agree 100% with all of Galloway's points, I really enjoyed that video. At the very least he pointed out the bias problem that exists with many mainstream media outlets. I especially liked the bit at the end about the station not knowing of Palestinian victims. Its blatantly obvious that western media places a higher value on Isreali lives than Palestinian or Lebanese ones.

[jolinar of malkshor]

[quote=FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Like I said, they can't attack military bases. The missiles they have are so inaccurate that they can barely even hit cities. They have sent hundreds of missiles over and can barely hit anything.

If they could, they would kill Israeli soldiers. Don't forget, this recent skirmish started because Hezbollah attacked a military target. If all they cared about was civilian death toll, then why are they attacking military targets? If you've been watch the news, not all of Hezbollah's attacks have been on civilians.

They kidnapped the solidars so they could barter 2 solidars for 200 prisoners. They have always received an alost 100:1 ratio when trading Israeli's for their own, even if the Israel solidar is dead.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

What I am saying is: You stated that Hezbollah may be justified to regain territory they believe belongs to Syria. From what I am getting from your posts you are saying they have the right to attack Israel to get this land back. If you agree with me that the natives have much more of a claim to land here in Canada then by your logic, they should be more justified in Attacking us to gain their land back.

Go back and read my point about whether it's fair to punish people for something their great-great-grandparents did. The parallel fails because of the time elapsed. In Israel's case we are talking one generation. My parents were born before Israel existed as a state and they are still living now. In the Native Americans case we talking about a time lapse of several generations. As such they have less of a right to punish us for stealing their land, less of a right because we didn't actually do it, our ancestors did. We don't punish a mass murderer's grandchild for his crimes, we hold the people responsible for their own actions, not the actions of the ancestors. In this case Israel is responsible for it's actions since it's inception.

Can't you see the difference? It's plain to see.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Hakan

I actually don't agree with this. Hizbullah's surprising attack on a state-of-the-art Israeli gunboat proves that they do have guided missile technology.

Most of the missiles they are using are these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyusha

They are highly ineffective for hitting specific targets.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

They kidnapped the solidars so they could barter 2 solidars for 200 prisoners. They have always received an alost 100:1 ratio when trading Israeli's for their own, even if the Israel solidar is dead.

So if they only cared about killing Israeli civilians (a good deal of whom are armed and have military background as a matter of fact), then why would they kidnap soldiers and not civilians?

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Go back and read my point about whether it's fair to punish people for something their great-great-grandparents did. The parallel fails because of the time elapsed. In Israel's case we are talking one generation. My parents were born before Israel existed as a state and they are still living now. In the Native Americans case we talking about a time lapse of several generations. As such they have less of a right to punish us for stealing their land, less of a right because we didn't actually do it, our ancestors did.

Can't you see the difference? It's plain to see.

There are still many Natives alive that were subjected to Boarding schools and forced to convert to Canadian society. It has only been 20 years since we did away with the Indian agent, I person that governed each reservation. The indians even needed to get permission to leave the reservation from the Indian Agent. Although the land was taken away about a hundred years ago (which is really not that long, there are probably a few natives left)(Treaty 8 signed in 1899)(treaty 10 signed in 1906) they have still been subjected, until quite recently second class citizen living.

Like I said they have much more of a beef than Hezbollah, not to mention the size of land we are talking about here. I don't know how big that land is that they are fighting over but I would guess it is probably the size of the blood reserve.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

So if they only cared about killing Israeli civilians (a good deal of whom are armed and have military background as a matter of fact), then why would they kidnap soldiers and not civilians?

Ok, trying not to be a dick, but re-read what I posted. If they have two Israeli solidars they can trade them for 200 Hezbollah fighters that Israel may have locked up.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

There are still many Natives alive that were subjected to Boarding schools and forced to convert to Canadian society. It has only been 20 years since we did away with the Indian agent, I person that governed each reservation. The indians even needed to get permission to leave the reservation from the Indian Agent. Although the land was taken away about a hundred years ago (which is really not that long, there are probably a few natives left)(Treaty 8 signed in 1899)(treaty 10 signed in 1906) they have still been subjected, until quite recently second class citizen living.

Like I said they have much more of a beef than Hezbollah, not to mention the size of land we are talking about here. I don't know how big that land is that they are fighting over but I would guess it is probably the size of the blood reserve.

I think Natives still have credible grievances and I think we owe them more. However I don't think you can find us all responsible for the original taking of their territory nor do I think you'd think it appropriate for us to hand over large chunks of Canada to them.

As for Natives vs Hizbollah I would say that Natives have not experienced military incursions deep into their territory, they have not experienced Palestinian refugees, etc. They aren't a good parallel. Did we not already agree on that? You said in your own words that we can't compare Canada to the Middle East so why are you continuing to do so?

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

I think Natives still have credible grievances and I think we owe them more. However I don't think you can find us all responsible for the original taking of their territory nor do I think you'd think it appropriate for us to hand over large chunks of Canada to them.

As for Natives vs Hizbollah I would say that Natives have not experienced military incursions deep into their territory, they have not experienced Palestinian refugees, etc. They aren't a good parallel. Did we not already agree on that? You said in your own words that we can't compare Canada to the Middle East so why are you continuing to do so?

So if Israel can hold out for another 60 years then know one else should have a claim? Maybe thats what they should do then, Build one bigass wall around Israel and wait it out. Beacuse we all know that it will still be Israel's fault when they keep shooting missles into their land and do not retaliate.

[White Doors]

Originally Posted by Hakan

You are confusing Egypt and Turkey.

How do you figure?

[Hakan]

Turkey receives more aid than Israel. Not Egypt.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Hakan

Turkey receives more aid than Israel. Not Egypt.

You got a link for that?

I can search google 100 different ways and only come up with complaints about the aid that Israel recieves.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Azure

You got a link for that?

I can search google 100 different ways and only come up with complaints about the aid that Israel recieves.

I don't have any links for you, but I know that not all of the aid turkey receives is in the form of large-sum payouts. Turkish industry enjoys a very benevolent free-trade agreement with the united states, funneling their goods in duty-free through Israel. Mixed with the annual aid payments, various non-annual, 'one-time' payments, are used to bribe the turkish government, most notably with military technology and various forms of debt relief and forgiveness.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by peter12

Have you ever researched and sourced material for your own papers? Footnotes mean nothing. Bias means everything. I could twist and manipulate almost any piece of information to support whatever argument I wanted to make.

Actually footnotes are everything. If you can't source your information, then it is far easier to call it biased. Thats why in academia you are required to always source every single assertion made. Its what makes it credible, 'scientific' if you will.