ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Clint's not here right now, but I'm sure Rachamim could fill us in on what Clint id thinking.
palestinian history?
- Thread starter frogwoman
- Start date
Clint's not here right now, but I'm sure Rachamim could fill us in on what Clint id thinking.
coccinelle
Active Member
May I ask a favour? My life has been nicer since I put Rachamim on 'ignore'. But it is spoiled if you reprint all his posts as quotes in yours.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Just flagging up his tendency to use 1,000 words where 10 will suffice.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Exactly. I've never really bought into this idea that he was just some ordinary geezer with a computer bashing out thousands of words off the cuff.
coccinelle
Active Member
Ex military Israeli type, who now has a covert propaganda post. Attempting to spoil discussion forums probably.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
That would explain an awful lot.
coccinelle
Active Member
With all due respect, you are one of the few on these boards who fulfils the 'Colin Powell' role of legitimising his propaganda outpourings by responding to him.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
I don't think I "legitimise" his propaganda at all tbh. If I took his outpourings seriously, then you'd have a point...
bendeus
Bellend Tagline Generator
Clint's not here right now, but I'm sure Rachamim could fill us in on what Clint id thinking.
Ah, but since Rach himself has told me that he's not Clint at all, and that indeed Clint was merely an innocent bystander with a posting style, which while identical to his own, was entirely coincidental. He just found himself in the wrong place at the wrong time. Clint is the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice, regarding which Rach himself has justifiably complained to the Editor.
I know this to be true because, in the words of Rach himself,
Case rested. Free the Clint one!
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Ah, but since Rach himself has told me that he's not Clint at all, and that indeed Clint was merely an innocent bystander with a posting style, which while identical to his own, was entirely coincidental. He just found himself in the wrong place at the wrong time. Clint is the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice, regarding which Rach himself has justifiably complained to the Editor.
I know this to be true because, in the words of Rach himself,
Case rested. Free the Clint one!
I'm so VERY tempted to PM the Ed, just to see if Rachamim's pathological need for honesty extended to actually contacting the Ed, or whether it only extended to saying he had!
E2A: Couldn't resist the temptation, PMed him.
All these posts and not one word on the actual subject save a small post by Laptop, who by the way further proved my point.
Panda, I will respond to you alone just to say that I do hope you will contact Editor. Put your money where your mouth is so to speak.
Panda, I will respond to you alone just to say that I do hope you will contact Editor. Put your money where your mouth is so to speak.
frogwoman
Let them eat newts
Well I started this thread not to have a go at anyone, but because I was interested in the topic, which sadly appears to have been highjacked (my fault as much as anyone's tbh, but even so...)
now i have come to the conclusion that the zionist version of events is correct.
of course palestinians don't have any history. how could i have been so stupid as to think otherwise? i must have been taken in by the conspiracy.
now i have come to the conclusion that the zionist version of events is correct.
of course palestinians don't have any history. how could i have been so stupid as to think otherwise? i must have been taken in by the conspiracy.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
It's hardly a "put your money where your mouth is" matter, is it?
Is your need for honesty so very pathological that you have to turn minor issues into questions of "honour", Rachamim?
Poor you.
BTW, the ed said you did demand an apology. Do you want to elucidate on his response, or should I?
Grandma Death
Reconfiguring & Reconstructing
Because I know the answer to this can I preempt it by saying i'd like you too please VP.
Frog: Instead of trite comments, why not argue your case. Obviously you feel otherwise but instead of facts, you offer witticisms (although I will not touch thatone!).
Panda: "Elucidate on Ed's repponse.": I have already said most of it in another thread in this forum actually Panda. The part I did not say was he said, basically, that I DID bring up old things (meaning Grandma calling my mum a "cun$") and should have been banned for that. In other words, agreeing I should not have been banned for that Clint crap, but for saying Grandma said whatever. IF you know THAT, I would hope he also gave you my response. Either way, again you try to sidestep.
I will be honest (as always), I really do not care what you, or Editor thinks of me and have always said so. IF Editor wished to ban me for something I am correct about it will be no different than banning me for beliveing me to be another poster. I asked for your apology because I wanted to make a point.
You are a person who always argues over "words." One word means this, another means that...and so on. Then, you are constantly calling my honesty into question. You were wrong about Clint, then wrong about believing I did not do what I said I did. I wished to stop your nonsense but of course it only winds you up more. In retrospect, I am sorry I even said anything to you.
You need to think things of me? Think them. Far be it from me to try and change you. It is your world, I am just living in it. On that note, I hope the "Rachamim Show" gets cancelled and discourse replaces it. Up to you (and others).
Panda: "Elucidate on Ed's repponse.": I have already said most of it in another thread in this forum actually Panda. The part I did not say was he said, basically, that I DID bring up old things (meaning Grandma calling my mum a "cun$") and should have been banned for that. In other words, agreeing I should not have been banned for that Clint crap, but for saying Grandma said whatever. IF you know THAT, I would hope he also gave you my response. Either way, again you try to sidestep.
I will be honest (as always), I really do not care what you, or Editor thinks of me and have always said so. IF Editor wished to ban me for something I am correct about it will be no different than banning me for beliveing me to be another poster. I asked for your apology because I wanted to make a point.
You are a person who always argues over "words." One word means this, another means that...and so on. Then, you are constantly calling my honesty into question. You were wrong about Clint, then wrong about believing I did not do what I said I did. I wished to stop your nonsense but of course it only winds you up more. In retrospect, I am sorry I even said anything to you.
You need to think things of me? Think them. Far be it from me to try and change you. It is your world, I am just living in it. On that note, I hope the "Rachamim Show" gets cancelled and discourse replaces it. Up to you (and others).
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Well, that should tell you something right there.
Yeah, par for the course as I always say.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
What? Your 1,000+ word excursions? Yep, par for the course.
Nino, I bet you are asking Santa for a caluclator. Glad to see you care enough to count my words, etc. It wamrs an old man's heart laddie.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
I don't need a calculator. What I need is for people to discuss things honestly and with sincerity. Of course, that is as likely to happen as you suddenly developing a sense of decency.
DexterTCN
Troy and Abed in the morning
Yes that's what he did...he counted your words.
Something about your words must count, surely. Being a surly cunt must count for something.btw is it any coincidence that you are a cunt and you called your alter-ego 'CLINT999' which of course looks like 'CUNT999' (this was what gave you away).....a Freudian Slip! J'accuse le jew!
Imagine calling your own mother a cunt, it goes beyond the pale(stine)! And to imply you want to have sex with her....Jesus Christ man this is a public forum, have you just no (in)decency? Or is your indecency just(ly) suppressed, or unjustly oppressed would be more your MO, imo. Or undressed and just lay, nay? Mummy!
Don't you worry that your (mother) superiors will see this when they do a random audit? They'll tear a (Gaza) strip off you for that.
Rach's uniform in the IDF.
Nino: I AM ALWAYS sincere Nino. Shame on you for thinking otherwise.
Dexter: Sorry to disappoint you but I was not Clint and this was clear to anyone with half a brain. Simply observing that the one post of mine he/she copied was a verbatim copy of a post in that same exact thread should have shown you that but of course I would not imagine that you pay that much attention.
Then, looking at the person's other 16 posts, each one was a verbatim copy of another post in the same thread! Clint picked 17 posts by 17 people and all were copies of a post in the same thread.
I do not engage in alter egos. I post under my real name with all my real particulars feely available and do so in hopes of neutralising internet trolls (not that I know any cough cough).
My IDF uniform? I wear aprons and am a psychiatrist? Sure, you make alot of sense Dexter. Get a grip.
Dexter: Sorry to disappoint you but I was not Clint and this was clear to anyone with half a brain. Simply observing that the one post of mine he/she copied was a verbatim copy of a post in that same exact thread should have shown you that but of course I would not imagine that you pay that much attention.
Then, looking at the person's other 16 posts, each one was a verbatim copy of another post in the same thread! Clint picked 17 posts by 17 people and all were copies of a post in the same thread.
I do not engage in alter egos. I post under my real name with all my real particulars feely available and do so in hopes of neutralising internet trolls (not that I know any cough cough).
My IDF uniform? I wear aprons and am a psychiatrist? Sure, you make alot of sense Dexter. Get a grip.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
And Genghis Khan was a pussycat.
Nino: To some. After all, they samy he has fathered more children than any other man on the planet.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
So what?
Zzz...
"right to a state"? Dear God, won't someone stand up for the anarchists here?
States don't get established or sustained by a conceptual or moral right to one, they get created through political expediency and machination (which I suspect you are actually referring to).The topic you are writing on is actually a really interesting one, although I have nothing useful to add
. I wonder if there is a shift in PLO documents from use of the word "Arab" towards "Palestinian" as time goes on that might be useful/relevant to your essay?A genuine question: do you really think this is likely to be the case? I mean, of all the things the Israeli state could spend security/PR money on, given its relatively small size and the relatively large number of people who (rightly or wrongly) dislike it, do you think that paying people to rant at great length to little effect on niche British leftie bulletin boards is a very high priority?
Or is it more likely that rachamim is just a tedious, Red Bull-fuelled, mouth-foaming fuckwit with a grudge and an internet connection?
Similar threads
