You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #64: ashiebr......instead of remarks...how about answers? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-04-04 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. ashiebr......instead of remarks...how about answers?
Edited on Sat Dec-04-04 07:13 PM by pelsar
I noticed that instead of anwering many of the questions, you tend to make remarks....

when talking about the jews and israel i was refering to it in relation to israel and judaisim...thats what the conversation was about, thats how it got started and thats what my reference point was. And when talking about israel to jews, our past is ever present.

the mitchel commission, what is hard to understand...they admit that they information was tainted, they admit they did no research....what does that make their report for even a pre law student? in the world of facts, its makes it useless....your attempt at using a tainted piece of secondary information as "proof" is at best foolish.
Do you believe it would stand up in a court of law (try answering the question this time)


you should like this:
The Palestine National Authority has accepted the report of the Mitchell Commission on the causes of the Palestinian Intifada, calling the document ?balanced?.

However, the document is only ?balanced? because on most contentious issues it states the positions of both sides in ?balanced? fashion without taking sides.


http://www.mediamonitors.net/michaeljansen2.html

I dont really understand...if one rejects a non violent solution in a violent war...how is the conclusion that you are for violence mistaken? I dont know of any gray area here.

again try answering the question with a understanble answer and not with a remark which really doesnt mean anything......

I also noticed that you kind of skipped over the empericle evidence that showed the intifada II was initially limited to a few select westbank cities, which suggests that it wasnt "spontanous" as was intifada I. I realize your response will be "that proves nothing" and it dosesnt but it does suggest that unlike intifada I, it was organized (the mitchell report seem to deemed this bit of info "not worthy of mentioning...I guess for the usual poiltical reasons, give the character of the report).

this time...really try to keep with questions as opposed to simplistic remarks which really have no value......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC