ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Israel-Palestine conflict

Reply
Old 8th September 2019, 05:46 AM   #121
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,897
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
I don't have any problem with Jews going whereever. However, given the treatment they recieve on the hands of various activists for peace and equality of nations (most of whom would consider killing all Jews to be an acceptable compromise for peace), I think Israel should be seen as an insurance policy. The world community in general and the Arab world in particular have demonstrated to be untrustworthy and unwilling to treat the Jews with fairness. Therefore the Jews, perhaps uniquely among all nations, must have their own ethno-state, until such time as the rest of the world, in particular the Arab world, redeems itself and proves it is ready and able to treat Jews equal to other nations.

That same world has no problem explicitly granting Palestinians the rights explicitly denied to Jews, in the name of equality. If you don't consider that weird and are not bothered by the disparity, you're one of the many reasons why Israel must stay, come what may.

McHrozni
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
This is all nonsense, impossible to comment on. It indicates that Zionism can no longer be defended coherently.
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
Thwnk you, I knew I would be required to, as I wasn't expecting an answer from you.
I have no idea where this snark is coming from, but let's try a reset to a more civilised tone.
You claim that McHrozni's point about the double standards being applied to Israel makes it impossible to defend Zionism.
How? What about this point removes any justification for the existence of Israel?
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2019, 07:23 AM   #122
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
I have no idea where this snark is coming from, but let's try a reset to a more civilised tone.
You claim that McHrozni's point about the double standards being applied to Israel makes it impossible to defend Zionism.
How? What about this point removes any justification for the existence of Israel?
Thank you for the "tone". The point you refer to may well remove any validity from the Israeli state ideology, namely Zionism. If expressions like "genocide" and "ethno-state" are to be applied to Zionist concepts and conduct, but at the same time are to be considered acceptable because of special circumstances which apply to Israel and to Israel alone of all countries, then Zionism must lie outside the domain of normal reason. That makes it useless as a political philosophy.

But does such uselessness mean that a state having Zionism as its validating principle must be removed from existence? That doesn't immediately follow; it is largely a separate question. Some states are purely ideological in character. That was seemingly the case with the USSR, and it disappeared when the ideology was, by common consent, shown to be refuted. Personally I think, though I am not certain, that Israel is in that situation. If so, I t isn't a state with an ideology, like the USA or France. It is an ideology with a state, like the ex-USSR. But it may still have valid characteristics outside the theoretical field. Is it, for example a refuge for persecuted Jews? A centre of progress in the benighted domain of Arab backwardness. A bearer of Western secular civilisation lodged amid barbarian bigots? All these, and more, virtues are claimed for it, but to establish them would require the production of detailed evidence. It is the absence of this that I find irksome.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2019, 11:00 PM   #123
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
Thank you for the "tone". The point you refer to may well remove any validity from the Israeli state ideology, namely Zionism. If expressions like "genocide" and "ethno-state" are to be applied to Zionist concepts and conduct, but at the same time are to be considered acceptable because of special circumstances which apply to Israel and to Israel alone of all countries, then Zionism must lie outside the domain of normal reason. hat makes it useless as a political philosophy.
My argument states the reason why Israel must be allowed to continue has nothing to do with Zionism, but with anti-seminitism. Indeed, anti-semitism is a useless political philosophy, outside of doman of normal reason. Still, I don't consider killing every anti-semite out there to be an acceptable solution either. The existence of Israel is as good a compromise as we're likely to get.

Quote:
But does such uselessness mean that a state having Zionism as its validating principle must be removed from existence? That doesn't immediately follow; it is largely a separate question. Some states are purely ideological in character. That was seemingly the case with the USSR, and it disappeared when the ideology was, by common consent, shown to be refuted. Personally I think, though I am not certain, that Israel is in that situation. If so, I t isn't a state with an ideology, like the USA or France. It is an ideology with a state, like the ex-USSR.
Considering your entire argument is based on a premise that is manifsetly false I'll just answer with the good old "try rephrasing that using the correct premise, thanks and good luck!".

Quote:
But it may still have valid characteristics outside the theoretical field. Is it, for example a refuge for persecuted Jews? A centre of progress in the benighted domain of Arab backwardness. A bearer of Western secular civilisation lodged amid barbarian bigots? All these, and more, virtues are claimed for it, but to establish them would require the production of detailed evidence. It is the absence of this that I find irksome.
All these are manifestly true.

Refuge for persecuted Jews, a center of progress,in the benighted domain of Arab backwardness,a bearer of Western civilisation,lodged amid barbarian bigots.

Do you have any more requirements as to what Israel should be in order to be allowed to exist? Because above is evidence for each and every one of the points you claim the evidence to be absent.

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه

Last edited by McHrozni; 8th September 2019 at 11:03 PM.
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 02:21 AM   #124
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,897
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
Thank you for the "tone". The point you refer to may well remove any validity from the Israeli state ideology, namely Zionism. If expressions like "genocide" and "ethno-state" are to be applied to Zionist concepts and conduct, but at the same time are to be considered acceptable because of special circumstances which apply to Israel and to Israel alone of all countries, then Zionism must lie outside the domain of normal reason. That makes it useless as a political philosophy.
The only person on this forum applying the term 'genocide' to Israel is ponderingturtle, and he is clearly wrong to do so. I have challenged this application, and have yet to receive any justification for it. Given that the Palestinian Arab population has increased enormously since 1948, and also given the absence of any attempt at genocide on the part of Israel, it is merely another example of the vicious propaganda war being waged against Israel. No-one here is arguing that genocide is acceptable: this is a strawman erected by ponderingturtle.

As for 'ethno-state', I would disagree that this term only applies to Israel. For example, the 'Syrian Arab Republic' is one: Wikipedia lists a significant number of others. I don't see any real problem with defining a state by the ethnicity of its population: surely that is one of the characteristics of any national identity? I may not agree with this, but this is how the world works, and is a situation by no means confined solely to Israel.
Your conclusion, that as Israel and the situation of the Jews is unique, and as Zionism only applies to Israel and the Jews, the two are therefore 'outside the domain of normal reason', is still opaque to me, I'm afraid. It seems to me that the desire of Jews to have a homeland, situated in their ancestral lands, a claim that is part and parcel of their religious and ethnic identity, is an entirely logical and justified one.
If I have misread or misunderstood your conclusion, then I welcome the correction.
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 03:19 AM   #125
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
T
As for 'ethno-state', I would disagree that this term only applies to Israel. For example, the 'Syrian Arab Republic' is one: Wikipedia lists a significant number of others. I don't see any real problem with defining a state by the ethnicity of its population: surely that is one of the characteristics of any national identity? I may not agree with this, but this is how the world works, and is a situation by no means confined solely to Israel.
We have this all backwards.

The reasoning is the following:
Syrian Arab Republic is an acceptable state and absolutely must be allowed to exist in the borders defined by the foreign empires - Britain and France - because we agreed that should happen. Meanwhle, Israel was created by a foreign empire - Britain - and is thus an illegitemate artifical construct and must be thus destroyed so the equality of all nations must be preserved.

I challenge anyone who thinks Syrian Arab Republic should be allowed to exist but Israel should disappear to prove they have a different reasoning. Justify the existence of Syrian Arab Republic and show the same justification doesn't apply to Israel.

It should be easy enoguh, I can do so for Israel, see above. I don't challenge people to do things I can't do myself. I won't be holding my breath for any response beyond the usual combination of innuendo, insults and pitiful attempts at either baiting me into a penis measuring contest or else switching to a random other topic.

CraigB and others, the ball is in your court. Again the task is: Why should Syrian Arab Republic have the right to exist as a soverign ethno-state and yet Israel should not exist as a soverign ethno-state.

May the odds be ever in your favor!

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 06:39 AM   #126
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
My argument states the reason why Israel must be allowed to continue has nothing to do with Zionism, but with anti-seminitism. Indeed, anti-semitism is a useless political philosophy, outside of doman of normal reason. Still, I don't consider killing every anti-semite out there to be an acceptable solution either. The existence of Israel is as good a compromise as we're likely to get.



Considering your entire argument is based on a premise that is manifsetly false I'll just answer with the good old "try rephrasing that using the correct premise, thanks and good luck!".



All these are manifestly true.

Refuge for persecuted Jews, a center of progress,in the benighted domain of Arab backwardness,a bearer of Western civilisation,lodged amid barbarian bigots.

Do you have any more requirements as to what Israel should be in order to be allowed to exist? Because above is evidence for each and every one of the points you claim the evidence to be absent.

McHrozni
You have clearly answered your own enquiry where this snark is coming from. More reply from me later, when nothing more pressing commands my attention.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 07:00 AM   #127
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
It doesn't mean that's the sole reason why Israel might want to have a state.
Not that there is a justification for a Palestinian state or anything. You know, the thing you should be pushing if you are to answer the very basic, very simple questions?
Where I am pushing for a palestinian state? I have said that a two state solution is dead. Why are you trying to put words in my mouth otherwise?

Quote:
Why the focus on Rohygya? There is a much more relevant example of acceptable ethnic cleansing: the flight of Jews from the Arab world.
Another clear good thing I guess.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 07:05 AM   #128
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
The only person on this forum applying the term 'genocide' to Israel is ponderingturtle, and he is clearly wrong to do so. I have challenged this application, and have yet to receive any justification for it. Given that the Palestinian Arab population has increased enormously since 1948, and also given the absence of any attempt at genocide on the part of Israel, it is merely another example of the vicious propaganda war being waged against Israel. No-one here is arguing that genocide is acceptable: this is a strawman erected by ponderingturtle.
Ethnic cleansing is considered genocide. It only becomes weasily when one is trying to avoid the use of the word, like the clinton administration with the incidents in Rwanda as being acts of genocide but not actual genocide. As we all know there was clearly no genocide in rwanda.

Ethnic cleansing is a vital part of many of these positions on what Israel needs to do.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 07:14 AM   #129
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Posted in error

Last edited by Craig B; 9th September 2019 at 07:16 AM.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 07:23 AM   #130
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
We have this all backwards.

The reasoning is the following:
Syrian Arab Republic is an acceptable state and absolutely must be allowed to exist in the borders defined by the foreign empires - Britain and France - because we agreed that should happen. Meanwhle, Israel was created by a foreign empire - Britain - and is thus an illegitemate artifical construct and must be thus destroyed so the equality of all nations must be preserved.

I challenge anyone who thinks Syrian Arab Republic should be allowed to exist but Israel should disappear to prove they have a different reasoning. Justify the existence of Syrian Arab Republic and show the same justification doesn't apply to Israel.

It should be easy enoguh, I can do so for Israel, see above. I don't challenge people to do things I can't do myself. I won't be holding my breath for any response beyond the usual combination of innuendo, insults and pitiful attempts at either baiting me into a penis measuring contest or else switching to a random other topic.

CraigB and others, the ball is in your court. Again the task is: Why should Syrian Arab Republic have the right to exist as a soverign ethno-state and yet Israel should not exist as a soverign ethno-state.

May the odds be ever in your favor!

McHrozni
This is another example of your posts' taunting provocative nastiness which is not fit to receive a reasoned (and laboriously composed) response.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 10:32 AM   #131
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,897
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
You have clearly answered your own enquiry where this snark is coming from. More reply from me later, when nothing more pressing commands my attention.
It wasn't his enquiry: it was mine.
When you next deign to respond, perhaps you could pay a little more attention to what was said, and who said it. It will add some credibility to your side of the debate.
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 10:35 AM   #132
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,897
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Ethnic cleansing is considered genocide. It only becomes weasily when one is trying to avoid the use of the word, like the clinton administration with the incidents in Rwanda as being acts of genocide but not actual genocide. As we all know there was clearly no genocide in rwanda.

Ethnic cleansing is a vital part of many of these positions on what Israel needs to do.
Once again, you need to support your claim of ethnic cleansing on the part of Israel. I could care less what Bill Clinton said about Rwanda, but is is hard to see how. It is also hard to see how this relates to Israel. Perhaps you could elaborate on the parallels.
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 10:40 AM   #133
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,497
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
This is another example of your posts' taunting provocative nastiness which is not fit to receive a reasoned (and laboriously composed) response.
Translation: "I got nothing"
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 11:32 AM   #134
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
Translation: "I got nothing"
I got plenty but what's the point? It won't even be looked at. See my post 113
The disappearance of Jewish communities in Egypt and other Muslim countries has been a cultural loss of immense magnitude for the world. Any project to undo this loss has my full support.
What did McHrozni feel moved to write when he read this? See post 114

. Why the focus on Rohygya? There is a much more relevant example of acceptable ethnic cleansing: the flight of Jews from the Arab world.

There is no outrage over that attrocity. Somehow that was accepted as the "OK kind of genocide". Can you justify that attitude?
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 02:44 PM   #135
Aidoneus
Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 168
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
I got plenty but what's the point? It won't even be looked at. See my post 113
The disappearance of Jewish communities in Egypt and other Muslim countries has been a cultural loss of immense magnitude for the world. Any project to undo this loss has my full support.
What did McHrozni feel moved to write when he read this? See post 114

. Why the focus on Rohygya? There is a much more relevant example of acceptable ethnic cleansing: the flight of Jews from the Arab world.

There is no outrage over that attrocity. Somehow that was accepted as the "OK kind of genocide". Can you justify that attitude?
Or see post 115 for the actual response...
Aidoneus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 05:02 PM   #136
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Originally Posted by Aidoneus View Post
Or see post 115 for the actual response...
i have already examined it, and here again is my comment on it.

This is all nonsense, impossible to comment on. It indicates that Zionism can no longer be defended coherently.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 10:15 PM   #137
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Where I am pushing for a palestinian state?
Why don't you explain what your peace plan is first. Then we'll be able to dissect it thorughly.

Let me guess: you don't actually have any proposals. You're just here to criticize Israel, because of Palestinians.

I'm right, aren't I?

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 10:23 PM   #138
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Ethnic cleansing is considered genocide.
We can all have a much more productive debate once you clearly explain why there is no outrage over the genocide over Jews in the Arab world that took place as collective punishment for the creation of Israel. Explain why Palestinians deserve superior treatment to Jews and why the same solution that was used for the Jews - ship them over to a new faraway home - is not good enough for Palestinians.

Here is how you answer:
I think the expulsions of Jews from the Arab world as collective punishment was okay, because __________________ . I think resettling Palestinians in the countries that expelled Jews is not okay, because ___________________ . The key difference between the two groups is ________________________, the evidence for that is _____________________ .

Just fill the lines, if your position is logically sound and based in fact you should have absolutely no problem in answering any of them.

Quote:
Ethnic cleansing is a vital part of many of these positions on what Israel needs to do.
Jews already were ethnically cleansed from the Arab world. If they responded in kind and ran non-Jewish Arabs from the land they fled to into the Arab world you have what we call a population exchange. Arabs ran Jews from their homes without compensation and they fled to Israel, Jews run Arabs away from their homes without compensation and they get resettled in the Arab states that expelled the Jews. Confiscated property is used to compensate the expelled populations and that is that.

Not a good solution, but it worked - among many others examples - well enough in Pakistan and India just two years prior, at a scale twenty times larger than the question of Palestine. It's up to you and any defender of this 'Palestine' to establish why they're a special case.

Thus far no one even attempted to do so. The most common responses are innuendo, denials and baiting of the pathetic sort, such claiming the position is incoherent. If you can't comprahend something this straightforward you probably shouldn't be debating serious topics at all.

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه

Last edited by McHrozni; 9th September 2019 at 10:25 PM.
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 11:05 PM   #139
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
We can all have a much more productive debate once you clearly explain ... Here is how you answer: ... Just fill the lines, ... If you can't comprahend something this straightforward you probably shouldn't be debating serious topics at all.
I have previously called this stuff "incoherent", but now i wonder if a stronger epithet might be more appropriate. At all events such posts don't give the impression that their author intends to engage in normal respectful discussion.

Last edited by Craig B; 9th September 2019 at 11:07 PM.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 11:15 PM   #140
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
I have previously called this stuff "incoherent", but now i wonder if a stronger epithet might be more appropriate.
Here, let me help you:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dic...ish/incoherent

The word you're looking for is:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dic...nglish/painful

I hope this helps!

Quote:
At all events such posts don't give the impression that their author intends to engage in normal respectful discussion.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dic...ish/respectful

Vocabulary can be a bit hard, I know.

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه

Last edited by McHrozni; 9th September 2019 at 11:17 PM.
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 11:59 PM   #141
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
Here, let me help you ... The word you're looking for is: ... Vocabulary can be a bit hard, I know.
Yes, so thank you for the help.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 12:04 AM   #142
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
Yes, so thank you for the help.
Any time

Feel free to answer the question as soon as you're able!

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 12:30 AM   #143
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
Any time

Feel free to answer the question as soon as you're able!

McHrozni
You already have my comments on that. Twice over.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 01:00 AM   #144
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
You already have my comments on that. Twice over.
Yes, but now you understand the meaning of the words you used and thus are invited to try again!

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 02:25 AM   #145
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
Yes, but now you understand the meaning of the words you used and thus are invited to try again!

McHrozni
I'm afraid I must decline your invitation. The only word I know you have looked up recently is the one you linked me to: "painful". That doesn't sound like my scene.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 02:32 AM   #146
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
I'm afraid I must decline your invitation. The only word I know you have looked up recently is the one you linked me to: "painful". That doesn't sound like my scene.
I linked three words for you, but thanks for the attempt anyway

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 05:48 AM   #147
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
Why don't you explain what your peace plan is first. Then we'll be able to dissect it thorughly.

Let me guess: you don't actually have any proposals. You're just here to criticize Israel, because of Palestinians.

I'm right, aren't I?

McHrozni
It would be a long process of integration into a single state. Two states are dead, so you need some single state solution that works. But that isn't going to happen so lets just go with ethnic cleansing as the easy solution. Once the palestinians are gone it can be the pure jewish state is always knew it was, and legally now is.

Why does crimes against other jews justify committing these crimes but other crimes against muslims never justify them committing these crimes?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

Last edited by ponderingturtle; 10th September 2019 at 05:54 AM.
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 05:50 AM   #148
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
We can all have a much more productive debate once you clearly explain why there is no outrage over the genocide over Jews in the Arab world that took place as collective punishment for the creation of Israel.
That is also bad. Now why is pretending that the settlements are not permanent expansions of israel a thing?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 12:55 PM   #149
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
... As for 'ethno-state', I would disagree that this term only applies to Israel. For example, the 'Syrian Arab Republic' is one: Wikipedia lists a significant number of others. I don't see any real problem with defining a state by the ethnicity of its population: surely that is one of the characteristics of any national identity? I may not agree with this, but this is how the world works, and is a situation by no means confined solely to Israel.
Your conclusion, that as Israel and the situation of the Jews is unique, and as Zionism only applies to Israel and the Jews, the two are therefore 'outside the domain of normal reason', is still opaque to me, I'm afraid. It seems to me that the desire of Jews to have a homeland, situated in their ancestral lands, a claim that is part and parcel of their religious and ethnic identity, is an entirely logical and justified one.
If I have misread or misunderstood your conclusion, then I welcome the correction.
You have misunderstood my position, but having read your post over again I see that my position is open to misinterpretation, and I will now attempt to clarify my meaning definitively.

Israel is an "ethnostate" not because the majority of the population happened to be "Israeli" at the time of the foundation of that state, as a majority of Syrians were of Arab ethnicity at the time when modern Syria emerged from the French colonial empire. That would be an unexceptionable use of the expression, and it is not what I mean by it. In that form it is "ethno-civic" rather than purely ethnic. I am active in the campaign to secure independence for my own country, currently part of the United Kingdom, and if as independent, it were to take the name Republic of Scots, or something of that kind, I would feel no discomfort, as long as the definition of "Scots" remains civic. That is, it includes any person born or domiciled in Scotland, whatever that person's ethnic origin, skin colour, religious affiliation or first language.

That would be a reference to the territory and to its inhabitants (ethnically defined as residents in that territory), which is fine. I have even invented a term - "ethno-civic" above - to denote it. In fact, when Scotland was formerly an independent monarchy the title of its monarch was not usually rendered King/Queen of Scotland (Rex Scotiae), but King/Queen of Scots (Rex Scottorum) in reference to the population. This was noted as peculiar at the time, but was later replicated in constitutional monarchies, so that we have a "Roi des Belges" (not "de Belgique") and so on.

The theories underlying Zionism and Israeli ethnicity are significantly different from the above principles, as may already be evident. Syria is "Arab" not because a desire of Arabs to have a homeland was fulfilled by their moving to Syria, situated in their ancestral lands, but because the word represented the prime ethnicity of the resident population. Nor do they claim that Syria is the only place where Arabs are entitled to exercise national rights. Nor do they claim that Arab ethnicity supplants local residence in establishing the right to national self determination in that land. Or of they do make any such claims I am strongly opposed to them.

Zionism is a response to the intense persecution suffered by Jews in Europe in the later nineteenth and earlier twentieth centuries. It evolved as a philosophical principle, which was applicable in practice ( through migration to Palestine) by people who approved of the principle; and was duly applied. The reason why so many people in the area are of Jewish origin is that they were induced by the theory to migrate to Palestine, where additionally of course many Jews already resided. In doing so, many of them saved their own lives or the lives of their descendants by removing themselves from current or subsequent genocide. That is clear. People who save their lives in that way, as they are entitled and obliged to do, are refugees. But Zionism does not assert as a principle that Jews in Israel-Palestine are present, or arrived, there as refugees. Zionism asserts that they and they alone are there entitled to self determination by reason of ethno-religious origin, be that to the detriment of non-Jews who are there by "mere" right of birth, property or descent. That is what is different about Zionism. That is what is wrong with it.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 10:04 PM   #150
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
It would be a long process of integration into a single state. Two states are dead, so you need some single state solution that works.
One state solution is dead. It would take a feat of necromancy to resurrect it. Granted, it happened in the region before, alledgedly, but only once and is not a common feature of the region.

Quote:
Why does crimes against other jews justify committing these crimes but other crimes against muslims never justify them committing these crimes?
The issue is not justification, it's a peace plan that is equally unfair to both sides. In retalliation for the creation of Israel, Arabs drove non-Israeli Jews from their homes and confiscated their property. The Jews had to go somewhere, Israel was the natural destination. In order for Israel to remain viable it needs defensive frontiers that don't include too many Arabs whose whole natural culture revolves about killing Jews. The only way to accomplish that is to drive those Arabs, now called Palestinians, somewhere else.

Where? Well, the countries that ejected Jews are the fair destination. They created the problem, the least they can do is to help solve it. They're the guilty party, remember?

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 11:39 PM   #151
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
The theories underlying Zionism and Israeli ethnicity are significantly different from the above principles, as may already be evident. Syria is "Arab" not because a desire of Arabs to have a homeland was fulfilled by their moving to Syria, situated in their ancestral lands, but because the word represented the prime ethnicity of the resident population. Nor do they claim that Syria is the only place where Arabs are entitled to exercise national rights. Nor do they claim that Arab ethnicity supplants local residence in establishing the right to national self determination in that land. Or of they do make any such claims I am strongly opposed to them.
The main problem with Israel is the rank hypocrycy of the world who hold Israel to one standard and their Arab neighbors to a different standard. I'll assume you're just ignorant of the issue.

You might try reading various relevant constitutions before you judge anyone. Syria clearly puts Arabs and Islam in a privileged position and they do claim Arab ethnicitny supplants local residence and prohibity any national self-determination in that land.

Article 1
The Syrian Arab Republic is a democratic state with full sovereignty, indivisible, and may not waive any part of its territory, and is part of the Arab homeland; The people of Syria are part of the Arab nation.


Article 3
The religion of the President of the Republic is Islam; Islamic jurisprudence shall be a major source of legislation; The State shall respect all religions, and ensure the freedom to perform all the rituals that do not prejudice public order; The personal status of religious communities shall be protected and respected.


https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/docs/...stitution2.pdf

But since Jews aren't involved, that's all fine. There is no international outrage over the constitutional discrimination against Syrian Kurds and non-Muslims. It's only Israel that needs to be criticized, because it claims to be democratic and Syria doesn't, right?

You may want to read that Article I again. The unbolded part this time, the first eight words at least.

I'm looking forward to your calls to disassemble Syria.

Unless you're a rank hypocrite, of course.

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه

Last edited by McHrozni; 10th September 2019 at 11:40 PM.
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 11:51 PM   #152
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
The main problem with Israel is the rank hypocrycy of the world who hold Israel to one standard and their Arab neighbors to a different standard. I'll assume you're just ignorant of the issue.

You might try reading various relevant constitutions before you judge anyone. Syria clearly puts Arabs and Islam in a privileged position and they do claim Arab ethnicitny supplants local residence and prohibity any national self-determination in that land.

Article 1
The Syrian Arab Republic is a democratic state with full sovereignty, indivisible, and may not waive any part of its territory, and is part of the Arab homeland; The people of Syria are part of the Arab nation.


Article 3
The religion of the President of the Republic is Islam; Islamic jurisprudence shall be a major source of legislation; The State shall respect all religions, and ensure the freedom to perform all the rituals that do not prejudice public order; The personal status of religious communities shall be protected and respected.


https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/docs/...stitution2.pdf

But since Jews aren't involved, that's all fine. There is no international outrage over the constitutional discrimination against Syrian Kurds and non-Muslims. It's only Israel that needs to be criticized, because it claims to be democratic and Syria doesn't, right?

You may want to read that Article I again. The unbolded part this time, the first eight words at least.

I'm looking forward to your calls to disassemble Syria.

Unless you're a rank hypocrite, of course.

McHrozni
You are incapable of expressing yourself without puerile threats and taunts and on that ground alone I will make no reply. Get it into your head that I don't care what you think and unless you can conduct a discourse courteously and positively I will have no contact with you.
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th September 2019, 12:08 AM   #153
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by Craig B View Post
You are incapable of expressing yourself without puerile threats and taunts and on that ground alone I will make no reply.
Those "puerile threats and taunts" are properly called "Constitution of the Syrian Arab Republic".

Don't worry, it's a common mistake.


PREAMBLE

(...)

B) Lebanon is Arab in its identity and in its affiliation. It is a founding and active member of the League of Arab States and abides by its pacts and covenants. Lebanon is also a founding and active member of the United Nations Organization and abides by its covenants and by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Government shall embody these principles in all fields and areas without exception.

Article 1
Lebanon is an independent, indivisible, and sovereign state. Its frontiers are those which now bound it: (...)

Article 2
No part of the Lebanese territory may be alienated or ceded.


https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/l...lb/lb018en.pdf

They're much lighter Islam though, so that's a plus. Lebanon favors two faiths - Islam and Christianity - and treats them as equal, discriminating just against all others.

I'm looking forward to your outrage!

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th September 2019, 09:11 AM   #154
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
One state solution is dead. It would take a feat of necromancy to resurrect it. Granted, it happened in the region before, alledgedly, but only once and is not a common feature of the region.
Got it so there is no solution but genocide? Well why should I pick one side over the other when they are both bent on the extermination of the other?


Quote:
The issue is not justification, it's a peace plan that is equally unfair to both sides. In retalliation for the creation of Israel, Arabs drove non-Israeli Jews from their homes and confiscated their property. The Jews had to go somewhere, Israel was the natural destination. In order for Israel to remain viable it needs defensive frontiers that don't include too many Arabs whose whole natural culture revolves about killing Jews. The only way to accomplish that is to drive those Arabs, now called Palestinians, somewhere else.

Where? Well, the countries that ejected Jews are the fair destination. They created the problem, the least they can do is to help solve it. They're the guilty party, remember?

McHrozni
Got it no one can ever hold Israel responsible for their actions. They are by definition both morally superior and morally equal to everyone else depending on what is most convenient at the time. We just have to stop pretending there is any thing to choose in terms of being better between the government of israel, egypt and saudi arabia. They are all morally equal.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th September 2019, 10:17 PM   #155
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Got it so there is no solution but genocide? Well why should I pick one side over the other when they are both bent on the extermination of the other?
For starters, because the type I proposed doesn't involve exterminating anyone. It involves moving a populace to a new permanent home. It fits the definition of the genocide by the UN, but it doesn't fit the usual mental image we have of genocide (crematoria et.al.).

Furthermoe, there is ample precendens for this sort of action, of this scale and in the same historical period the events sorrounding Israel are. The partition of India is a prime example, it happened less than two years prior to the creation of Israel and involved forced relocation of approximately ten times as many people. By some estimates more people died in the partition of India than were evicted by both sides combined in the Israeli-Arab conflict.

Quote:
Got it no one can ever hold Israel responsible for their actions.
Nonesense. Israel is the single most scrutinized and penalized country of all history. No other country, not in the last century and probably not in all recorded history, was ever penalized for winning defensive wars. Israel is subjected to relentless accusations, UN resolutions, condemnations, divestment, boycotts and more, because it won wars against imperialist aggressors who had the intent of comitting genocide over the inhabitants of Israel. Israel answers for their actions constantly, above and beyond what was ever required of any nation in a remotely similar situation. There are literarily more condemnations of Israel than all other violators of human rights in the world combined.

On the other side, Palestinian side is never held responsible for their actions by any actor other than Israel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palest...acks_on_Israel

I challenge you to find me a country that endured hundreds of rocket attacks on their own civilians and responded in a more restrained manner than Israel does.
Then find me one that endured thousands of such attacks, like Israel did, and still acted in a more restrained manner.

Go on, show me how normal this is. I'll wait.

If you can't, at least justify the double standard. How do you justify that Arabs in general and Palestinians in particular are never held responsbile for their actions? Please answer in the following format:
Arabs and Palestinians shouldn't be held responsible for their attacks against Israel, because _______________________ .

Thanks!

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه

Last edited by McHrozni; 12th September 2019 at 12:14 AM.
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2019, 11:33 AM   #156
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
For starters, because the type I proposed doesn't involve exterminating anyone. It involves moving a populace to a new permanent home. It fits the definition of the genocide by the UN, but it doesn't fit the usual mental image we have of genocide (crematoria et.al.).
Then I have it, we carve a palestinian state out of germany!
Quote:
Nonesense. Israel is the single most scrutinized and penalized country of all history. No other country, not in the last century and probably not in all recorded history, was ever penalized for winning defensive wars.
Best way to conquer territory. Remember the soviets deserved east germany for winning the defensive war. Talking about it like some immoral occupation would be crazy.

But I like some of the ideas we clearly need to bomb saudi arabia for the actions of 9/11. That would be getting into the spirit of things.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2019, 11:49 AM   #157
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 19,641
The Palestinians want their own country. There’s just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It’s a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like ‘Wiccan,’ ‘Palestinian’ sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in the 1967 war, Gaza was Owned by Egypt , the West Bank was owned by Jordan , and there were no ‘Palestinians.’

As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the ‘Palestinians,’ weeping for their deep bond with their lost ‘land’ and ‘nation.’... Larry Miller
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2019, 07:38 PM   #158
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,716
Originally Posted by applecorped View Post
The Palestinians want their own country. There’s just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It’s a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like ‘Wiccan,’ ‘Palestinian’ sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in the 1967 war, Gaza was Owned by Egypt , the West Bank was owned by Jordan , and there were no ‘Palestinians.’

As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the ‘Palestinians,’ weeping for their deep bond with their lost ‘land’ and ‘nation.’... Larry Miller
When does Larry Miller say that the expressions "Palestine" and "Palestinian" came into use? It's not clear from that, because it was certainly employed during the League of Nations British mandate period, when it referred to the Jewish as well as the Muslim and Christian population. So when did the giant magic oranges start to be grown, in this historical schema?
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2019, 10:21 PM   #159
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Then I have it, we carve a palestinian state out of germany!
Why Germany? Jordan and Egypt lost "their" homeland to a country they invaded. Germany never ever came close to holding the territory.

Quote:
Best way to conquer territory. Remember the soviets deserved east germany for winning the defensive war. Talking about it like some immoral occupation would be crazy.
Soviet Union did lots of crazy things, true. But Poland recieved the core territories of Germany, the very land that created Germany - Prussia. They chased off some 12 million Germans from their land as part of the reparations for the war.

If the same rules were followed for the Israel-Palestine conflict, Israel would be granted the right to chase Palestinians into Jordan, who would have the responsibility to give them citizenship and assimilate them into their own lands.

Quote:
But I like some of the ideas we clearly need to bomb saudi arabia for the actions of 9/11. That would be getting into the spirit of things.
Nonesensical diversions such as these just go to show the case for Palestine can no longer be coherently defended.

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th September 2019, 10:26 PM   #160
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,350
Originally Posted by applecorped View Post
The Palestinians want their own country. There’s just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It’s a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like ‘Wiccan,’ ‘Palestinian’ sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in the 1967 war, Gaza was Owned by Egypt , the West Bank was owned by Jordan , and there were no ‘Palestinians.’

As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the ‘Palestinians,’ weeping for their deep bond with their lost ‘land’ and ‘nation.’... Larry Miller
That's true, however we can't claim a nation can't spring out from another nation. Manifestly it can, in our case it was Jordanians who emerged from Palestinian Arabs when the kingdom of Jordan was founded as the Arab portion of Palestine mandate. Then the remaining Arabs decided they too want a separate state from what was left of the mandate and began claiming they're totally different from Jordanians and they too want their own land.

Then Jordan, the occupying power of what was now "Palestinian land" launched an aggressive war of conquest against neighboring Israel, losing the "Palestine" in a humiliating defeat, leaving newly patented "Palestinians" in the hands of Israelis.

In any other scenario I'd recommend Jordan takes care of the Palestinian refugees and that would be it. However, if Palestinians are indeed special and need a homeland because of reasons, I recommend Egypt and Jordan, the two countries who held "their" land and then lost it due to their own unprovoked attempts of conquest grant them viable portions of their present territory to create a state.

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:22 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.