Latest Carnage in Jerusalem...

[clint999]

Bendeus: You must be very jaded not to consider 19 bloody and injured people a "scene of carnage." ALL victims of an attempted murder, an act of terror. I am a lifelong soldier and I certainly see it so. To each their own.

Garfield: I thought you were one of the 2 or 3 here who claim to have visited my country? If you did the answer would be quite evident. Although we annexed East Jerusalem at the beginning of the 80s, most Arabs of that Sector opted not to accept our citizenship, or our ID Cards although most have softeneed on the latter since the Intifadehs left many without work. This particular "PAlestinian" did have his car rgistered in Israel, i.e. Yellow Plates but that could be work related as I said. Obviously, as shown by his murderous rage, he did not identify as an Israeli "anything."


On the other hand, "Israeli-Arabs" CHOOSE to live in our country. 300,000 returned since 1948, legally, and countless others ILLEGALY so , aside from enjooying the highest standard of living in the entire Mid-East in several kety areas it is safe to say they are Israeli.

BRIEFLY: "Israeli-Arabs" are those Arabs who live within the Greenline and whose families have since Israel's modern inception.

"Palestinians" on the other hand live in Gaza and the so called "West Bank" not to mention a myriad of other Arab Nations throughout the region. The two terms are distinct but do have a source demographic that is one and the same, i.e. "Mandate Era Arabs."


Nino: Keep trying, they say you can relax the gag reflext after a while....Keep up the great work!!! There is always next year!

 

[T & P]

What's with the multiple log-in name then Rach?

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

I wasn't asking for their deferentiation which the reasoning behind is patentely obvious. Indeed you are beig mendious to pretend not to understand the question.

I asked why YOU made the distinction and attempted to deliniate between the claimed legitimacy of 'good' isreali arabs and 'bad' palestinians.

Care to try answer the question posed rather than obfiscating and wriggling?

you answers have not satisfied the question i have asked by deliberately avoiding it. I always find that addressing the question asked is how one answers a question.

Care to try again?

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Just read the "lovenote" from Bendeus and I really have to offer, yet again, my observation that this site seems to have more than its share of hypocrites. Anyone differing more than an iota in opinion is branded this and that. Adult, civil discourse is anathema. Of course this is a site that is based in the wonderful nation that tired to impose an Artistic AND Academic Boycott on Israel in addition to morally policing the world by allowing the arrest and trial of foreign nationals for acts commited in foreign lands against foreigners. How incredibly ironic.

"An apologist for child murdering..." simply because I correctly point out that the poster (Bendeus) supplied a definition that supports MY position and not his/hers! How transparent as well! See Ben, mind if I call you "Ben" since it is raining "buckets of Ben " after all...the operational word is "MURDER" as in Definition #2 of your wonderful hyperlink. You supply it and then I am some kind of of degenerate for echoing it? Riiiiight. Mind if I take a pass on your intellectual accumen on THAT one Ben?


Of course some sharp minded U75ers (they MUST exist) might have already pegged your innate rage at being outed for never even having seen a train wreck up close let alone an act of terroirsm or war, but that still does not offer you an out for labeling me "racist."

Love, I am afraid you have to provide some proof on that little gem. See, as you so intelligently noted, my mastery of the FAQ leads me to contend that your labeling me "racist" is libelous" and needs to be proven...but of course my name is Rachamim and I believe in free speech (not to be confused with 95% of the other posters here who whine when someone says they "talked like a pirate") so....you and I will just call it "our little secret" and wink like ships passing in the night (or hairy love clams being pried open with rusty crowbars).

Bendeus: You must be very jaded not to consider 19 bloody and injured people a "scene of carnage." ALL victims of an attempted murder, an act of terror. I am a lifelong soldier and I certainly see it so. To each their own.

Garfield: I thought you were one of the 2 or 3 here who claim to have visited my country? If you did the answer would be quite evident. Although we annexed East Jerusalem at the beginning of the 80s, most Arabs of that Sector opted not to accept our citizenship, or our ID Cards although most have softeneed on the latter since the Intifadehs left many without work. This particular "PAlestinian" did have his car rgistered in Israel, i.e. Yellow Plates but that could be work related as I said. Obviously, as shown by his murderous rage, he did not identify as an Israeli "anything."


On the other hand, "Israeli-Arabs" CHOOSE to live in our country. 300,000 returned since 1948, legally, and countless others ILLEGALY so , aside from enjooying the highest standard of living in the entire Mid-East in several kety areas it is safe to say they are Israeli.

BRIEFLY: "Israeli-Arabs" are those Arabs who live within the Greenline and whose families have since Israel's modern inception.

"Palestinians" on the other hand live in Gaza and the so called "West Bank" not to mention a myriad of other Arab Nations throughout the region. The two terms are distinct but do have a source demographic that is one and the same, i.e. "Mandate Era Arabs."


Nino: Keep trying, they say you can relax the gag reflext after a while....Keep up the great work!!! There is always next year!

outted....

 

[editor]

Clint99 permabanned, Rach18 given weekend ban for having 2 log ins.

 

[DexterTCN]

What was it that gave him away?

I admire your detective skills.

 

[T & P]

Well his rather characteristic posting sytle (the 'quote' button is a stranger to our good old Rach) was a giveaway.

 

[DexterTCN]

I was being sarcastic, you daft twat.

Nice to see the pressure's starting to show on rach. To stoop so low as to pretend to be someone else to back yourself up...dear oh dear.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

not the first time as i recall...

 

[nino_savatte]

I did not say that. IF and WHEN the IDF acts with malice and forethought (although those 2 factors are NOT neccessary for an act of carnage per se) than you might make a better argument.

You are trying to equate a legal armed force, acting in a legal fashion (like it or not, the shelling that killed 18 in Gaza was entirely legal under International Law (IHL and ROW). Turning your sports car up the curb and ramming a crowd of pilgrims has nothing legal about it at all. The best that MIGHT be said is that it was a completle error but given the eyewitness accounts and the pedigree of the car's owner/driver it is safe to say it was anything but accidental.

Tell you what, when the AWOL IDF soldier went bonkers in Galilee with his state issued M16 and killed Israeli-Arabs on a commuter bus, THAT was an act of CARNAGE. However, he was not acting in an institutional capacity. He had absconded with his weapon some days before. When the Kahanist Dr. Goldstein , at the Tomb of the Patriarchs turned his state issued Galil on praying Arabs at the Mosque portion of the Tomb, THAT was an act of CARNAGE. Again, that was not institutional, but an individualistic act...unlike the HAMAS operative driving his BMW. Clear yet?

Individuality and institutionality are not indicative of carnage either way but need to be stressed for fear of some poster trying to morally equate actions, which is what is close to happening when trying to point out the commonality of acts being described.

You've gone into hyperdrive with your excuses.

 

[ViolentPanda]

not the first time as i recall...

Indeed.

Anyway, using a sock-puppet to support your arguments is pretty much the last refuge of the dishonest and the intellectually-bankrupt. It's something we expect from idiots, rather than people who go on and on and on and on about their probity.

 

[DexterTCN]

Indeed.

Anyway, using a sock-puppet to support your arguments is pretty much the last refuge of the dishonest and the intellectually-bankrupt. It's something we expect from idiots, rather than people who go on and on and on and on about their probity.

What?

Are you pointing out that rach says he and is murderous ilk claim to hold themselves to 'higher standards' than normal people, that his honesty, integrity and statements are so without question that he doesn't need to provide links to his assertions....

...and then he makes up a fake log-in, pretends to be someone else, agrees with himself and verbally attacks other posters?

Or is it the fact that he's such a half-witted cunt he can't even vary his grammar, apostrophes and sentence structure when attempting to pull the wool over our eyes?

I still demand a better class of troll. This one's pathetic.

 

[T & P]

What?

Are you pointing out that rach says he and is murderous ilk claim to hold themselves to 'higher standards' than normal people, that his honesty, integrity and statements are so without question that he doesn't need to provide links to his assertions....

...and then he makes up a fake log-in, pretends to be someone else, agrees with himself and verbally attacks other posters?

Or is it the fact that he's such a half-witted cunt he can't even vary his grammar, apostrophes and sentence structure when attempting to pull the wool over our eyes?

I still demand a better class of troll. This one's pathetic.

I've always found it peculiar that he disappears for days and then posts dozens of replies totalling tens of thousands of words in the space of a couple of hours.

I'm not suggesting that he takes 'homework' to a forum of like-minded individuals where the replies are carefully prepared of course. That would be very cynical of me...

 

[laptop]

I'm not suggesting that he takes 'homework' to a forum of like-minded individuals where the replies are carefully prepared of course. That would be very cynical of me...

It would be hard work, though. Rach's posts are quite consistent in their borderline illiteracy, aren't they? So that forum would need a good editor to achieve this...

 

[pk]

LOL @ Rachamimimim..

What a fuckwit.

 

[ViolentPanda]

What?

Are you pointing out that rach says he and is murderous ilk claim to hold themselves to 'higher standards' than normal people...

He has claimed that he doesn't use ad hominem arguments or insults, which implies a higher standard of behaviour.
Of course, he's most often done this on the same page as using ad hominem arguments or insulting someone, so...

...that his honesty, integrity and statements are so without question that he doesn't need to provide links to his assertions....

I suspect that the lack of links has less to do with his probity, and more to do with there being little or no source material (except stuff that is blatantly propagandistic) worthy of the name for him to link to.
He once based a rant against Noam Chomsky purely on a single web-page that was a politically-motivated misrepresentation of the Faurisson incident.

...and then he makes up a fake log-in, pretends to be someone else, agrees with himself and verbally attacks other posters?

Well, that is the kind of thing we expect from Urban's resident idiots rather than from those who trumpet how open and homest they are, isn't it?

Or is it the fact that he's such a half-witted cunt he can't even vary his grammar, apostrophes and sentence structure when attempting to pull the wool over our eyes?

That was a poor move, wasn't it?

I still demand a better class of troll. This one's pathetic.

The problem, at least for politically-motivated trolls, is that most of them don't become a higher class of troll.

 

[bendeus]

Just read the "lovenote" from Bendeus and I BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH rusty crowbars).

Pwned!

You going to get any more of your 'friends' onto me, then?

I might even get one of my friends to rebut your friends. My friend has seen more carnage than yours, donchaknow?

 

[bendeus]

Of course some sharp minded U75ers (they MUST exist) might have already pegged your innate rage at being outed for never even having seen a train wreck up close let alone an act of terroirsm or war, but that still does not offer you an out for labeling me "racist."

'Innate rage'

Lulz!

Do you feel it, Rach? It must be pretty unpleasant to know that your mask has slipped further. How long till a permaban, then? Not long, I reckon

 

[nino_savatte]

It's taken years but finally, Rach reveals himself for what he is. I wonder what all those folk who accused me of "bullying" him will say now?

 

[co-op]

I've never bothered wrangling with Rach - he just made me despair a little for the future of Israel and it was all too depressing, but I was always impressed with those who could be bothered. Who would have guessed he'd score such an amazing OG? LOL @ Rach indeed. Marvellous fayre.

Does anyone think he'll show his face again? It'd take some nerve.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

It's taken years but finally, Rach reveals himself for what he is. I wonder what all those folk who accused me of "bullying" him will say now?

summit along the lines of grow up you precious little twonk...

not to put to fine a point on it but you are in your own way as bad as Rach with your temper tantrums your screaming attacks on others and your hissy fits...

never mind i 'll either be on ignore or have some level of accusation of impropritory thrown at me by you, as usual totally missing the point...

here's hoping that after rach goes you follow quickley... both of you are less than complentary in this forum regardless of the ethics which you proport to have

 

[nino_savatte]

summit along the lines of grow up you precious little twonk...

not to put to fine a point on it but you are in your own way as bad as Rach with your temper tantrums your screaming attacks on others and your hissy fits...

never mind i 'll either be on ignore or have some level of accusation of impropritory thrown at me by you, as usual totally missing the point...

here's hoping that after rach goes you follow quickley... both of you are less than complentary in this forum regardless of the ethics which you proport to have

Turn it in, will you? I've seen your antics and...let's put it this way: you're no paragon of virtue yourself.

I'm sorry that your life is so shite but that's no reason to take it out on me.

Twat.

 

[bendeus]

How's Clint99, Rach? Fighting more key battles for you at other flashpoints on teh interwebsz, no doubt. You realise that the last vestiges of credibility you may have had on these forums no longer exist now, don't you?

 

[ViolentPanda]

How's Clint99, Rach? Fighting more key battles for you at other flashpoints on teh interwebsz, no doubt. You realise that the last vestiges of credibility you may have had on these forums no longer exist now, don't you?

Since when has lack of credibility stopped him airing his opinions?

 

[bendeus]

Granted. I had held out a tiny sliver of hope that his humiliation of last month may have ended his involvement with the boardz. Evidently not, given the long tracts of impassable, tedious propaganda that he's just vomited up.

 

[rachamim18]

TP: Ahhh, "Multiple Log In." I see. I take it then that you were the little whiner who ran to the Mod since they would not have paid enough attention to have seen your post. What exactly is "Multiple Log In?" To be honest, I believe you to mean I have more than one ID? I do! "Rachamim" and "Rachamim18." I have explained that perhaps 30 times. If that was the reason they gave me a 48 hour ban they should be shamed of themselves.


I will say this though TP. Since it is clearly you, and since I have come back you have iniated conversation on it in no less than 2 separate threads (other than this), I would suggest you worry much less about what I do and more on showing up that leaky boat of a world view you are trying to sail


Ohhhhh.....You thought I was some person named "Clint?" Now I have a great reason to run and whine myself. You fool. I would never do soemthing like that. Why would I? I post under my actual name and even give my adress. How stupid an idea but even more stupid that the Mod would ban me without checking ISPs and such. I do believe they have the ability to do so, or at least an Admin would and for them to take your word, of all epople, is just retarded.

 

[rachamim18]

So I PM'd Editor asking for the apology owed to me. TP, if you care about yuor own integrity as well you will apologise as well. Why would I, the only one using my own name then pretend to be another poster? You really are precious. What is sad though, is that what seems to be a new poster, this "Clint" whatever has been perm. nbanned for your b.s. You seriously ought to reconsider the time you waste in this forum.

IF the Mod had bothered, and assuming that he/she could not check ISPs, they could have simply communicated to both myself and that person, and seen that we are not the same poster. Instead they took your word and now one poster is gone for good. If this does not perfectly illustrate the childish BS that passes for discourse here nothing will.


In your defence though, I have just read that person's post and it does seem strangley like my own so my thought actually is that someone is playing games trying to get me banned. One can imagine who would do it but if they choose to keep doing stupid shi% like that, it will be their own loss.


Then again, the poster could simply agree with things I say and be aping my composition style but I tend to think otherwise.

I do not have the time or inclination to play such games and if there is one thing ALL people can say about me is that I have a pthological need for honesty. Ironically, giving out my home adress and place of eployment, in addition to my military info which was at the time against the law in my country, then to be accused of playing transparent games is a really rerarded suggestion and I will leave it at that.

 

[nino_savatte]

Ohhhhh.....You thought I was some person named "Clint?"

You were Clint99 and if you're going to choose to log in under different names, you could at least try to adopt a different syntax.

 

[bendeus]

TP: Ahhh, "Multiple Log In." I see. I take it then that you were the little whiner who ran to the Mod since they would not have paid enough attention to have seen your post. What exactly is "Multiple Log In?" To be honest, I believe you to mean I have more than one ID? I do! "Rachamim" and "Rachamim18." I have explained that perhaps 30 times. If that was the reason they gave me a 48 hour ban they should be shamed of themselves.


I will say this though TP. Since it is clearly you, and since I have come back you have iniated conversation on it in no less than 2 separate threads (other than this), I would suggest you worry much less about what I do and more on showing up that leaky boat of a world view you are trying to sail


Ohhhhh.....You thought I was some person named "Clint?" Now I have a great reason to run and whine myself. You fool. I would never do soemthing like that. Why would I? I post under my actual name and even give my adress. How stupid an idea but even more stupid that the Mod would ban me without checking ISPs and such. I do believe they have the ability to do so, or at least an Admin would and for them to take your word, of all epople, is just retarded.

ROFL! You have become a parody. Paranoid, ludicrous and entirely without credibility.

Bring back Clint!

 

[teqniq]

You were Clint99 and if you're going to choose to log in under different names, you could at least try to adopt a different syntax.

Yeah, go ahead, make my day.