Monday, March 14, 2005

The Electronic Bar

The Beak Speaks as a blog is an electronic bar. We love when you come in and bring your friends. We like it even better when one disagrees with us. Of course every bar caters to a clientele and ours leans to the right. Still as a public establishment we are open to all.

This blog has been seen by people that might surprise you. So please if you are going to be outlandish increase the vollume . Bring your friends relatives and come on down. We even relish personal attack but ask for creativity. Be more creative than troll, bigot is that the best you can do ? Redbeard had the best quote " How is one a troll on his own blog ".

The truth is we have had yet another lesson in cowardice from Mark Jordan and his comrade the Recidivist. Will you invite everyone on this forum to see your wonderful blog Jews Sans Frontieres ? My door is open but if you are looking for a bigot I think you guys should look in the mirror.

1 What constitutes a Palestinian. Language Bzzzzzzzzz They speak Arabic. Religion Bzzzzzzzz they are overwelmingly Sunni Arabs History Bzzzzzzzzzzzzz They date back to 1964. There is zero connection between Phillistines and Palestinians .

2 What is the difference between a Jordanian, Most Saudis , Syrians and residents of the Sunni Triangle ?
Zero They are the descendants of Arab invaders who arrived in the Seventh Century. A vast number were not there for generations. Dershowiz discusses this in Chapter 2 that there were Circasians, Egyptians and others. There were excellent articles on the original post.
3 How is Zionism Racism . Are the Falshas from Mars ? The Shinlung are Asian or a breed of Gerbil ? There are North Africans and Europeans all united by a culture. Every other state has Islam as its official religion and most were defacto ethnically cleansed. Dershowitz Chapter 21.
4Is the Recidivist pathologicaly bigoted against Jews yes. According to Irwin Coter Absolutely. He certainly is against the right of the Jewish people for self determination, he vainly seeks to delegitimize the state of Israel. He has a lengthy blog Zionism is racism. He most likely also falls in to the category of Cultural AntiSemitism. Oh I forgot he can't be that because Arabs are Semitic too. He also holds Israel to standards that do not apply elsewhere except the USA.He also calls anyone who disagrees with him a liar. So If Dershowitz writes a defense of Israel he is a liar or bad joooooo. Chomsky agrees with him good joooooooooo.
5 Why do some Jews agree with the Recidivist. Jews do not lynch Collaborators and Israel is a Western Democracy . Leftist do not care about their culture or justice.The goal is revelution and destruction of the existing order. This is why the Rosenbergs orphaned their kids for the cause. Think of a madness strong enough to sever the bonds between mother and child. This is the world of the extreeme left of Chomsky , Zinn and the Recidivist and his side kick Mark Jordan.

Now if you can repond to those points.

Best Wishes
The Beak

30 comments:

kafkaesq said...

Yikes, nothing personal, but reading this post is like witnessing a trainwreck! Complete sentances and somewhat clear transitions please...

People move in and out of lands constantly throughout history. Maybe the Jews do have a stronger historical claim to Israel. But what about converts to Judaism w/o ethnic ties to Isreal? And what about non-Jews who legitimately have ties to these lands? You can't deny that the Jews displaced a lot of innocent people when they created their modern state. It wasn't like it was a deserted place.

I'm sure you can't trace your family centuries back to New York, yet you would still feel oppressed if you were kicked out of NY becuase the UN decided to make NY a new country for some religious/ethnic group?

Now I'm really late for class...

Craigy B said...

Rather than just making these statements, could you perhaps just this once point us to the exact place where he has denied the Jewish people their right to self-determination? Or where he has shown pathological bigotry against Jewish people in general?

He has show where you are being a bigot, so perhaps it is your turn to deliver the goods with evidence, rather than just ranting on without adding any substance to your claims.

From here it just looks like you are trying to grandstand with rather amusing hyperbolic extensions of flawed logic.

Craigy B said...

Could you also tell us what these cultural standards are that he so unreasonably imposes on Israel - the ones that only exist in the USA?

If you refer to multi-culturalism, then I would like to point out that there are several countries which are far more multi-cultural that the United States are.

London is the the multicultural epicentre of Europe: 33 boroughs, seven million people, 300 languages and enough global cultures to experience a different part of the world every day of the year.

London’s faith communities are a vibrant part of city life, with Muslims, Buddhists, Jews, Catholics, Hindus, Sikhs, Protestants and any number of other faiths going about their business unhindered.

A walk down any High Street in England will give you a flavour of the widest range of cuisines available anywhere in the world - something which only last month has gave Food Magazine in America cause to celebrate London as the cuisine capital of the world.

No citizenship tests. No oaths of allegiance. Social security, irrespective of nationality. $9+/hour minimum wage, irrespective of nationality. Free health cover, irrespective of nationality.

Please don’t assume that America has the market cornered when it comes to an integrated multicultural society.

beakerkin said...

Kafkesqe
I am working on a non ME post but there has been heavy vollume. I do conceede I have to go back for a edit. This was a rush job.

Jews like this blog have an open door a convert has equal status in almost every respect. Thus a convert is part of our house and entitled to dwell there.

The problem is that there were a series of people subjugated under Islamic rule. If Colonialism is evil in 1948 than 1300 years of Islamic colonialism is more so.

A culture should not be rewarded for colonization of indigenous people. There was a defacto population exchange . The Jews settled their refugees and the Arabs didn't. In fact a similar pattern exists in India. Islamic societies have created a series of ethnicaly cleansed states.

The problem should be solved by their Arab bretheren. Israel has no responsibility for this problem.
The myth of Palestinians hurts the refugees they are arabs period and should be absorbed.

There is no such thing as a Palestinian.

beakerkin said...

You can read the posts for yourself and read. Start with the whining American Jew. Work up to Zionism is Racism . Niether Long Range, Red Beard or Donal is Jewish and all have come to the same point. Warren summed it up quite well. I will add his version enters into pathology.
Lets see good jooooos like Chomsky who buy into his version are truthful. Bad Joooooos like David Horowitz are zionist liars . Sorry I don't buy into his leftist fantasy.
In fact the frame work for my counterattack is Zinn. Lets see Colonial Muslims subjugate a range of Indigenous people Jews and Christians. We are supposed to reward this Colonial legacy with a second and maybe a third state.

He has not proven anything I said was racist. He has not proven there is a Palestinian People. He has leveled baseless charges.

Nor has he refuted a single point in the post.Let him come down and start refuting.

I am making an assumption that you care about the Palestinian People.If you are sincere go to the David Project for the truth. Unlike me they favor a partition. The difference is that it is done from an honest view point.Islam is not glossed over and there are serious problems in Islamic socities.

The David project represents all the groups Jews, Christian etc. That only through human rights will we achieve peace.

If he had class he would act civilized on nuetral boards. He seems to think be cause he percieves something it is a fact. A blog that says " George Bush is a Pussy is not objective,".

I invite everyone here to post notice I never delete his comments.
I will be posting non ME stuff and
let us hope for more civilized dissent.

The Disgruntled Chemist said...

Actually, that was me that called George Bush a pussy. And I stand by it 100%. Come over there and prove me wrong...if you can.

I never claimed to be "objective", if you mean (which you seem to) lacking any opinion or slant.

I am a liberal. I have opinions, many of which are liberal in nature, some of which are not. My blog is a personal, subjective enterprise.

Personally, I think that George Bush is a pussy for surrounding himself with yes-men to a degree not seen outside of North Korea or the Soviet Union. The administration's intolerance of dissent is legendary. Bush simply cannot stand up to criticism. Therefore, I conclude that he is a pussy. Intolerant? Not politically correct? Fine. Again, come prove me wrong.

Oh, and one more thing, beakerkin:
"A culture should not be rewarded for colonization of indigenous people."
So, are you enjoying living in the United States? You could cut the irony here with a chainsaw.

beakerkin said...

First trying to argue an opinion is foolhardy. In truth the way you phrased it hurt your cause. People do not listen to screaming hysterical rhetoric.
I like the President and his Cabinet. I think he has a vision and that history will judge him. Either way it is too early but the situation seems to be improving in the ME.
Dick Cheney, Rumsfield etc are not yes men in any definition. I suggest you watch any interview and reconsider. One may not like tha policy but yes men is an absurd notion.

Back to the ME and Colonialism and Indigenous people. I am playing the game the same way that the left plays it with Israel.
There is no Palestinian ethnicity and there have been zero arguments on that subject. I can not be bigoted or racist as there is no such thing.
Sunni Arabs invaded the region and mistreated a wide variety of indigenous people mostly Christian but the were plenty of Jews.
As far as the Native American goes I think Longrange and Dr Yeagley can speak for themselves. Both of those Native Americans identify with the Jews who were opressed by Muslims and Christians. They have no problems with this country and love it as much as you or I.

I do welcome you and anyone else here vollume is a tad heavy.

Warren said...

Point of clarification!

Longrange are me! :^D

Beakerkin is accustomed to my screen name as well as my given name.

The past is gone and cannot be undone. There is not a square foot of arable land on this earth that has not been taken by right of conquest, then taken again in turn.

The so-called Palestinians are Arabs whose relatives own 97% of the Middle East. They will not even begrudge a people with a far older claim than theirs the measly 3% they presently hold.

We always hear of the displaced Palestinians, (about 726,000 by UN estimates), but we never here of the Jews displaced from Egypt et al, (about 850,000), which were absorbed by Israel, a tiny nation with few resources. They also fled their homes or were driven out.

What about their property and homes that were confiscated by the despots of the Arab nations? An estimated $100 billion, (million, million European numerical convention).

By my reckoning, the Jews are still owed something, but I'm sure they are willing to call it even.

Israel assimilated its people but the Arabs left their displaced cousins in camps and refused to accept them making of them a festering cancer as a beggar will 'enhance' a wound to garner alms.

Howard said...

What strikes me is that you're obviously enjoying this argument with the Recidivist by the amount of time and energy you're putting into the defamation of his character by questioning his arguments on the grounds of his sexuality... which, to me, sounded like you could have been saying, "Why would a white person support civil rights for black people when there's bad things happening in Zimbabwe?"

While I think both parties here have at times made such ad hominem attacks on one another, I think that if you weren't enjoying the opportunity to express your opinions then this argument wouldn't be taking up so much of your online time, would it?

It sounds as though you are both very much entrenched in your opinions and unwilling to accept the points the other makes - and while I can see a certain factual validity in what both of you on here and elsewhere, I don't think it's reasonable for either of you to expect the other to change their opinion.

Just thought I'd pitch in after having been lurking on this for a little while.

kafkaesq said...

Look, everyone has their own revisionist view of history here- to serve their personal opinion on whether Israel is for the Jews or for the Arabs. The indisputable facts are, BOTH groups were there off and on over time. BOTH have a somewhat different yet quasi-legitimate claims to the place. The Jews do seem to be able to trace back further in time, but then they got Israel back in violation of international laws and norms. Who has the better claim? It's tough to say.

The only equitable solution is letting both groups share the land like their ancestors once did. Unfortunately, neither side is willing to accept living side-by-side with the other. Why? ORGANIZED RELIGION. No other cause contributes more to this conflict. And no other institution has caused more needless suffering.

Craigy B said...

As I though, you don't have a single shred of evidence to support your claims, so you simply bluster.

If you had the proof to give us, you would give it to us so that you could claim the victory that you so carve so badly for.

Pathetic little man.

Craigy B said...

I just went over to check the 'Bush is a pussy' post on The Chemists blog.

Are you really claiming that Recidivist was the one who didn't act in a civilsed manner. I you are, then I would venture to suggest that you don't actually have a clue what manners are.

Are you blind to the fact it was YOU who acted like a troll and dragged a wholly unrelated disagreement in to that discussion?

One is left with the conclusion that you really are a liar and a troll and are simply here for the joy that you can get from creating a stink.

Maybe you should learn show some good manners by not trying to turn every single discussion in to your pet topic of hate.

Redbeard said...

From Kafkaesq: "The only equitable solution is letting both groups share the land like their ancestors once did. Unfortunately, neither side is willing to accept living side-by-side with the other."Agreed, wholeheartedly, as to the first sentence. The second sentence is a bit more contentious, however.

In 1947 the Jews did, in fact, accept a UN plan that created two separate states, one Jewish and one Arab, on the west side of the Jordan River. The Arabs refused that same plan, ignored the opportunity of having a sovereign Palestinian state for Arabs, and immediately launched an all-out military strike against the new state of Israel, with the goal of "pushing the Jews into the sea."

Since that time, Israel has been under constant attack in one way or another, culminating in a number of shooting wars (1956, 1967, 1973, etc). In the same period, Israel has been under constant verbal attack for what basically amounts to self defense. A great deal of this posturing has come from the floor of the UN, the very body that established Israel in the first place. It's rather puzzling to see the UN used to create a nation, and then watch the UN used as a means to attack the credibility of that new nation.

Seems rather simple when boiled down. If we accept the premise that Israel has the right to exist, then we must also accept the right of Israel to defend that existence.

Craigy B said...

But what Israel didn't have the right to do was to form unilaterally, without the international agreement and to ethnically cleanse the territories that it was to claim as its own.

Nor did it have the right to claim the territories that it did, for they were completely different form the territories which were proposed in any of the suggested solutions.

Finally, it takes agreement to make an agreement - if there isn't the agreement there in the first place, then you can't possibly have rejected it.

The simple truth is that the Jewish negotiators had no intention of settling for an agreement - they were going to take what they wanted, and noone was going to stop them.

The fact that you accept the premise for a the right to exist, does not mean that you have to accept the right to exist in the state that it unilaterally formed itself. Please don’t try to make extensions of flawed logic.

Redbeard said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Redbeard said...

Flawed logic? Are you referring to the non agreement by the Arabs? They refused their state, as created by the UN, so of course there was no "agreement" on their part. That was precisely my point. History just is what it is.

Israel "unilaterally" took land? I'm not sure how that word can be applied to a matter determined primarily by war. War needs two parties at a bare minimum. The boundaries of Israel changed mainly as a result of the shooting war that the Arabs started almost 60 years ago, and during the several other wars since.

Boundaries change as a result of war. California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Texas are cases in point. Should we give those states back to Mexico? For that matter, the creation of the U.S. resulted from a war. Should we give the eastern seaboard back to Britain?

Israel has done many things it should not have done. Can anything else be said about any other nation on earth? Surely that applies to the PA and the other neighboring Arab states as well. The rational discussion of this issue is going to require the acknowledgement of history as a basis for that discussion, and then we can proceed to find solutions to the problem.

beakerkin said...

Zombie welcome to this site

The first person to bring the orientation of the Recidivist. The rationale of a proudly gay man praising a society that persecutes gay men is adressed . Is it logical for a black person to support the klan ? Is it logical for a Jewish person to support Nazi's ? That particular post was picked up by David Horowitz .

The fact is that the Recidivist and the other arguments on this board prove him correct. His basic theme is that there is a mindless obsession with Israel & Jews on the left.

Let start with the post about ethnically cleansing. How does a nation ethnicaly cleanse a population and grow exponentialy at the same time.

Israel has made generous offers on numerous occaisons. The Arabs have refused to accept those offers. These are basic facts that are common in any history of the region.

The Recidivist has called me a bigot, redneck ,senile and a troll.
I have never made any assertion that approached those areas. My arguments are grounded in history.

The first question has never been adressed by anyone. What is a Palestinian ? What is the basis for this ethnicity ? What differentiates them from Sunni Arabs.

Kafka

You are about half right in your post. The problem is not Organized religion but Islam. Islam does not have a clear delination between Mosque and State. This concept does exist in the Shiite sect. The Iranian revolution was an aberation of this notion. This view of the Shiite sect comes from Stephen Schwartz a Muslim himself.

There is a reason that an overwhelming religious conflicts involve Islam. If one believes Stephen Schwartz the problem is the Saudi funding of Nihilistic Wahabism . If one believes in the work of Alvi Schmidtt is that the societies created as a consequence of Islam were subject to the differences between Jesus and Mohammed. If one reads Fred P Isaac the behavior is part of a pattern of colonization.Isaac is an Assyrian Christian. If one reads the Malady of Islam the problem is the removal of Islam from the world of commerce.
The best assesment came from a young Moroccan Muslim friend who disagrees with me on almost everything. Certain ethnicities and cultures submit to authority better than others. Toss a broom at an American and tell him to sweep. The American will turn around and say screw you. Do the same thing with a Jew and he will get into a legal debate or hire help. Do the same thing in his country and the person will sweep until told to stop. His point was that Islam itself is not evil. However it is vulnerable to abuse by people acting with evil intentions.
My friend was a Moroccan Communist but he left that movement. He came to understand the cycle of instability , violence and despotism hurts his people. He learned that the key is secularization and stability leads to investment. We still disagree on Palestine and Bush.

Craig B

What differntiates a Palestinian from any other Sunni Arab ? In general throughout history who opressed whom Jew or Muslim ? Are you aware of the Jim Crowe Dhimmi laws that Jews , Christians, Zoroastrians and others were subject too.

I find it amazing that when I use the lefts own technique to indict a society you scream bigotry. This is the technique used by Zinn and others when they attempt to place Israel and America on trial. The evidence of colonization, ethnocide and genocide under Islam is overwhelming . Minorities are persecuted today under Islam. The Jewish People have a tiny space that they won via wars they did not start. If you read history see what Islam does when it conquers an area.

However if you go to the David project they talk about the entire region . They dispense with your absurd " ethnic cleansing "and other rhetoric. They seek peace in the ME for all. They do not white wash Islamic history and treatment of minorities. That should be the starting point if you are sincere.

Anonymous said...

Who's 'we'?

beakerkin said...

If you are more specific I will be happy to respond ? A name would also be nice . I welcome opposing views.

Craigy B said...

You are a hypocrite.

You have called Recidivist an idiot, mindless, a racist, an anti-Semite and a Jew hater; all of which you have failed to substantiate. You also repeatedly called him English, which I am sure that he would argue is a far worse insult).

What is more, you were the one to start the name calling. So for you to claim that you "haven't made any assertion that approached those areas" makes you a liar and a hypocrite.

Your arguments are not based on grounded in history, they are based on a selective view of history mixed with an equal measure of fiction. What is more you have failed to back up even one single one of your "historical facts", whereas your opposition has provided the historical facts and has given his reasoning for his views.

If you feel that you are being unjustly portrayed as a bigot and a troll, then I politely suggest that you only have yourself to blame.

Much of what you say about Islam is true, but that doesn't invalidate any claim that the Palestinian people, who are ethnically and culturally different from Arabs, have for a nation of their own - on reasonable terms that are not dictated by Israel.

The simple truth is that sooner or later the world community will make sure that they get that state on reasonable terms, wether Israel likes it or not.

I note that you continue to fail provide a single shred of evidence to support your claims, despite repeated challenges. This can only be because you know that you are wrong and can't bring yourself to admit it.

Finally, you now claim that recidivist has praised a society (by which one presumes that you mean either muslim, arab or Palestinian) - can you kindly show us where he has done this, because he hasn't done it one either your blog or his own blog. I suggest that such 'praise' is a figment of your prejudiced imagination.

beakerkin said...

My claims are supported in the post below ant there are articles. The Recidivist has failed to prove that Palestinians are anything other than Sunni Arabs.
I welcome you to point out the distortions in the original blog that is still being worked on . It was 1/3 of the way done . I assure you it gets worse.
The monofocus and bigotry of the recidivist are clear. I have yet heard exactly defined what was posted that was bigoted. My points were on history and current events

I steered clear of the religion itself. I also point out one can not be bigoted against a phantom culture.

David Horowitz perused these boards and came to the same conclusion.

Craigy B said...

Still you refuse to post evidence.

David Horowitz comes to the conclusion that anyone who doesn't actively promote Israel is anti-Semitic - even Jews.

As an aside, I am just reading your latest hilarious contribution to your blog. Do you even actually know what 'Jews Sans frontieres' means? One suspects not, otherwise you wouldn't actually accuse them of being anti-Semitic. And why do you keep accusing Recidivist of being associated with them?

Finally, why should anyone prove that Palestinians are anything other than Sunni Arabs, when you have as yet failed to even try to show us that they are.

Good to see that you don't deny the charges made against you though.

And just for your information, because you fraudulently claim that You claim that only Jews are semitic

The American Heritage Dictionary says:

Semite

. A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.
. Bible. A descendant of Shem.

adj : of or relating to or characteristic of Semites; "Semite peoples" [syn: Semite, Semitic] n : a member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Middle East and northern Africa [syn: Semite]



Wikipedia says: properly used to refer to the cultures of people who have traditionally spoken Semitic languages, or to such ancient peoples themselves and their modern descendents. The Semitic languages are the Asiatic northeastern subfamily of the Afro-Asiatic languages. The word derives from Shem, one of the three sons of Noah.


The Semitic Museum at Harvard says: we are one of the Harvard University Museums, housing collections of archaeological materials from the Ancient Near East. Our current exhibits explore everyday life in ancient Israel during the Iron Age; a 2nd millennium BCE Hurrian city, located in modern-day Iraq; and the history of ancient Cyprus through ceramics and metal objects.

The Journal of Semitic Studies says: Semitic Studies has always been understood by the editors to include the modern as well as the ancient Near (Middle) East, with special emphasis on research into the languages and literatures of the area.

Collin’s English Dictionary (the official dictionary of Scrabble) says:

Semitic or less commonly Shemitic noun
1. a branch or subfamily of the Afro-Asiatic family of languages that includes Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic, Amharic, and such ancient languages as Akkadian and Phoenician
2. adjective denoting, relating to, or belonging to this group of languages
3. denoting, belonging to, or characteristic of any of the peoples speaking a Semitic language, esp the Jews or the Arabs


WE SAY THAT YOU ARE FULL OF PISS AND WIND.

You are acting like a spoilt little brat who can't admit that he is wrong. You just stamp your feet and scream I AM RIGHT, but you don't back it up with anything and you just ignore or refuse to accept any evidence that is put to you.

Your blind bigotry and hatred for anything Muslim is plain for all to see. Your claims to the contrary are dripping with insincerity.

Redbeard said...

Kafkaesq, I hope you're still out there reading this thread. I wanted to compliment you, even at the risk of coming off sounding just a bit condescending.

Discussion boards can be unpleasant places, particularly when the discussion turns political. I assume you and I would not find much political ground in common, but you have a good grasp of what it takes to carry on a civil debate, and I thank you for that.

Gotta run. I'm late for the VRWC meeting. ;)

beakerkin said...

Craig You keep on failing and not adressing my Central contention.
The definition of a Semite is note the issue.
What is the basis for Palestinian ethnicity ? The truth is there is no such thing as Palestinian ethnicity.
You can go to the original post and you have yet to point out the fiction or a single inaccuracy. Numerous sources are posted and responding to all the inaccuracies of the Recidivist would require a book.
Again What is the basis for this Palestinian identity.
As far as his charges of bigotry I could care less. People who read my posts where I defend various cultures would laugh at you.

Craigy B said...

Numerous posts have not shown the evidence. They have simply commented agreement.

Numerous posts have also agreed with recidivist.

Since it is impossible to prove a negative - which you clearly know and which is why you refuse to provide the proof - your continued refusal to provide the proof just shows you up as the hypocrite that you accuse others of being.

It is also amusing how you keep changing what the "central issue" is. Is this just another of your avoidance 'techniques'?

As I said before: You just stamp your feet and scream I AM RIGHT, but you don't back it up with anything and you just ignore or refuse to accept any evidence that is put to you. That isn't debate, it is just an excuse for you to wage a childish vendetta because that is the only way that you can discredit an anti-Zionist who knows his history better than you do.

Warren said...

He didn't ask you to prove a negative, he asked you to show evidence that there is a difference between the so-called Palestinians and Suni Arabs. If there is a difference you should be able to cite some evidence of historical or cultural differences between them that came before 1948.

I know, I know, logic and intelligence are tools of oppression, but help us out here! Pretend we are asking you a legitimate question and come up with a legitimate answer.

Try and convert us to your cause and cease and desist from your lame rhetoric.

beakerkin said...

Craig show me a Palestiian artifact
from 1600 ? Palestinian artist 1600?

http://rosenblit.com/Palestine.htm
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?/ARTICLE-ID=22564

http://gamala.org.il/english/farrah/1.htm

While you were at it could you refute my account of histoty.Even you conceeded that my facts are in order.

The Recidivist is a coward and has resorted to folktales. He has no ground to stand on

Warren said...

Zombiecoterie said:
"What strikes me is that you're obviously enjoying this argument with the Recidivist by the amount of time and energy you're putting into the defamation of his character by questioning his arguments on the grounds of his sexuality... which, to me, sounded like you could have been saying, "Why would a white person support civil rights for black people when there's bad things happening in Zimbabwe? "

It is not his character that is questioned it is the logic of his judgment or lack there of. We are not speaking of personal prejudice but law. In other words, government sanctioned 'real' oppression

Recidivist was the one who initially brought his sexual orientation into the post, that makes it fair game.

Your analogy is fatally flawed. A fairer analogy would be, 'Why would a black person oppose civil rights for black people...', or why would a white South Africa farmer support the government of Zimbabweian President, Robert Mugabe. The question is, why does a self described, "unashamedly gay man", support a society that is brutally oppressive to homosexuals? You turned the question on its head.

If the question is one of Civil Rights, why does Recidivist ignore the violation of civil rights against Arabs by their own governments in deference to an obsession with the State of Israel which, by any sane accounting, is the most free country in the Middle East?

I think that if you weren't enjoying the opportunity to express your opinions then this argument wouldn't be taking up so much of your online time, would it?
Non sequitur.
I believe that Beakerkin was bemoaning the fact that he didn’t have enough time not complaining that it was taking up too much .

Nothing personal, please do post again and enter the debate

Howard said...

I'm not sure where it was said that questioning the behaviour of Israel in the Palestine is being supportive of Islam. It's being supportive of a tiny percentage of the world's Muslims, surely, and being critical of a tiny percentage of the world's Jews.

beakerkin said...

Zombie I respect your wit and your independence.
There are rougly 15,000,000 Jews in this world. About 1/3 of whom live in a tiny state. This state is our home and central to our existance. If you get a chance to visit a temple count the references.
The point is that if one can not establish a distinct Palestinian identity their is no need for a state. If my contention that Palestinians are no diferent from any other group a crime against humanity has been commited . The crime was commited by the Arabs who used their brothers as hockey pucks.
The exclusive vilification of the worlds only Jewish State is bigoted. Has the Recidivist spoken about PA lynchings or other abuses?
Has he devoted a paragraph to the Copts or Assyrians ?
To clear up a matter on Homosexuality. It is not my business what consenting adults do in the privacy of their homes as long as nobody gets hurt.
I am in favor of Civil Unions as the word marriage conotates a religious ceremony. This position is held by the majority of Americans.
My usual resonse when a NY tells me he is gay is "and". The truth is that it does not define you nor does heterosexuality define you.
We define ourselves hopefuly for the better.
The Beak