Israel torturing Palestinians in Gaza

......
The key here is not a deal forcing one do what one is not accustomed to doing, it is you voluntarily taking the intiative to be objective in your hypocritical condemnations of Israel, something you are subjectively and habitually not accustomed to doing. Understand?

I have a better idea.

I'll say what I want and if you don't like it feel free to reply.

Please explain how my 'condemnations of Israel' are 'hypocritical' and not 'objective'.

If the truth is condemnations then the guilty party should not have been doing damning things.

I have always be consistant in my platform so how could it be Hypocritical?

Objectivity being neutral what should be changed?

I support Equal rights for all, including the Jews of Israel, and everyone else in the Mid-East, and around the world.

Originally posted by ArchAngel
I have a better idea.

I'll say what I want and if you don't like it feel free to reply.

Aight.

Please explain how my 'condemnations of Israel' are 'hypocritical' and not 'objective'.

If you have the right to simply say what you want, then me explaining the above to you is pointless, for it will make no difference, since you will simply go on continuing to say what you want, correct?

If the truth is condemnations then the guilty party should not have been doing damning things.

Lets be assured of a one thing here: you ideas of truth stand in stark contrast to my ideas of truth.

I have always be consistant in my platform so how could it be Hypocritical?

Consistant in your leveling of one-sided condemnations, you bet, you are one consistant individual. Hypocritical is when you consistently condemn only that one side, while ignoring and not condemning the side that you protect or advocate.

Objectivity being neutral what should be changed?

You simply trying to do such?

I support Equal rights for all, including the Jews of Israel, and everyone else in the Mid-East, and around the world.

Hardly.






seekerof

[edit on 6-1-2006 by Seekerof]

Hypocritical is when you consistently condemn only that one side, while ignoring and not condemning the side that you protect or advocate.

Got a link to where you have been critical of Israels actions is Palestine?

That is where the bias lies in most things, ignoring or excusing the wrongs of those you support.

I did notice that you made no comments on the racist Israeli immigration laws.

One must assume that you agree with it because you ignore it.

Originally posted by ArchAngel
Got a link to where you have been critical of Israels actions is Palestine?

Again, you lack initiative. Do you know how to use the ATS search feature?

That is where the bias lies in most things, ignoring or excusing the wrongs of those you support.

Your speaking double-speak, you know, pot calling the kettle black.

I did notice that you made no comments on the racist Israeli immigration laws.

As I have noticed that you have failed to condemn the Palestinians for anything. Furthermore, virtually any immigration law can be construed as being "racists," hence my lack of commentary on it, hence my not seeing it as an issue. Again, what your ideas of truth are stand in stark contrast to my ideas of truth. Apparently, this would be the same for the difference in our perspectives and interpretations.

One must assume that you agree with it because you ignore it.

Assumptions are like a----well you know this part----, everyone has one.







seekerof

Can we put an end to this verbal(?) masterbation please?

Topic at hand? Probably more interesting than we, as members, are.