quote:

Originally posted by occrider edit: For example, you think that melech is racist. Slomo I think so, but melech I disagree. I think that he just becomes extremely passionate about what he believes and he can become inflamed at times. He flames right back at those that flame him and it soon spirals out of control. I don't think that he is racist though.

when he generalizes and indirectly calls all arabs evil i consider that to be a racist remark. a racist and ignorant remarks since i dont think he even knows a single arab perosnally not like it would matter but still you cant judge a whole race like that

quote:

Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit when he generalizes and indirectly calls all arabs evil i consider that to be a racist remark. a racist and ignorant remarks since i dont think he even knows a single arab perosnally not like it would matter but still you cant judge a whole race like that

I agree melech generalizes a lot but if you notice his posts there are two sides really. He starts off with an unbiased question. For example the legitimacy of Palestinian claims to a state when they never clamored for such a state before Israel was created (don't respond to this I'm just using it as an example). I don't have th post right in front of me but it didn't seem offensive, it wasn't inflamatory, he was simply asking for an intelligent reply. What typically happens then is that he gets the usual responce from non "regulars" who post stupid crap that more or less infuriates mike. The flaming progresses such that by the time that the "regulars" are able to respond they are upset with Melech's flaming that they begin to flame melech for what he said. Melech then gets more excited and begins to flame back and so on. It seems like he's not intolerant at all to other races, since it seems that genuine malice is absent from his posts. He just seems impassioned for sticking up for Israel. Would a melech "opponent" care to comment on this? It's just something that I've noticed.

At any rate there are a lot of other people that generalize just as much. However, you have to admit that it seems like melech has toned things down quite a bit as of late and I find that many of his posts are academic.

Btw sorry for talking in front of your face melech ... just giving reasons for why I don't think you're racist

Edit: Essentially I'm saying that melech deserves a voice on these forums as much as any of you or me. Yes he holds dear to his beliefs but I don't think that he satisfies the criteria of somebody getting banned such as Tiesto. Tiesto relied on flaming to get all of his point across, Melech doesn't. Much like anybody else, a grain of salt should be taken when listening to anybody here.

Last edited by occrider on Mar-27-2003 at 06:56

quote:

the legitimacy of Palestinian claims to a state when they never clamored for such a state before Israel was created

actually no! That is a very biased question! if you look into your history book, people living in palestine (palestinians) never get colonialists off their back, before israel who? British! and before? Turks for centuries and before others... etc etc and even all these empires recognized that palestinians are distinct from the others thus having their own province called you guessed it, Palestine. This started with the Romans and onward.

so when someone claims that they never asked for a country it's like implying that these guys never existed, or just living there like some tribes do in amazonia not knowing that others exist around them, which is completly false and disrespectful because palestinians have a history like other people. And sadly, they always been under the rule of some empire.

That's what attracts furious and pointless debates to his threads. He chose to ignore historical facts. He always implies that before Israel, nothingness prevailed and thats why I chose not participate.

___________________
[/IMG]http://i54.tinypic.com/ngycqo.png[/IMG]

one last thing, before, we used to have city-states that would control territories around them by force and extend their control over time.

States and countries as we know it now is newc compared to the history of these territories some call judea or Palestine. I mean even the Germans formed Deutshland recently in the 19th century! It used to be city-states, kingdoms and such.

so asking why palestine never was a country is denying these historical facts.

___________________
[/IMG]http://i54.tinypic.com/ngycqo.png[/IMG]

quote:

Originally posted by ahlamalek actually no! That is a very biased question! if you look into your history book, people living in palestine (palestinians) never get colonialists off their back, before israel who? British! and before? Turks for centuries and before others... etc etc and even all these empires recognized that palestinians are distinct from the others thus having their own province called you guessed it, Palestine. This started with the Romans and onward. so when someone claims that they never asked for a country it's like implying that these guys never existed, or just living there like some tribes do in amazonia not knowing that others exist around them, which is completly false and disrespectful because palestinians have a history like other people. And sadly, they always been under the rule of some empire. That's what attracts furious and pointless debates to his threads. He chose to ignore historical facts. He always implies that before Israel, nothingness prevailed and thats why I chose not participate.

Arrrggghhhh what did I just say??? I said don't reply to that, I was just using it as an example!!! What you just replied to ME should have been what you reply to Melech in his question!!!! If you disagree with his statements ... PROVE HIM WRONG BY USING FACTS!!! Keep in mind that even if you're not able to pursuade melech with what you say, you're also trying to pursuade all of us that you are right! I've given up LONG ago trying to convince specific people that was I say is correct, but my hope is that somebody reads what I say, takes everything into consideration, and gains a different perspective.

i know i know, but I inderctly answered him. I don't want to participate in his debates, I decided to some times ago. His biased questions always attract answers that will either do him justice, or furious replies. So what's the point? its not real debate. its debate a la CNN.

___________________
[/IMG]http://i54.tinypic.com/ngycqo.png[/IMG]

Understandable ... I think we're the only ones up hehe. Well if his questions are biased point out how they are biased. I think that it only hurts your cause if you choose to ignore everything that he says since it seems like you're avoiding the question. At a certain point though I don't bother replying either because you say the same things over and over and over again to the point where it's pointless. I think we're at the same level at opposite ends of the spectrum

what cause? I gain nothing, I don't get paid, no one will give me medals or such hehe. I think you understand what I mean. I'm willing to debate but it has to be a fair debate. When someone starts off badly, the discussion is bound to end sourly. So why waste my time and add more oil to the fire if I know beforehand that this guy (or some others) will keep going in their now known style.

Simply Fuck it!

___________________
[/IMG]http://i54.tinypic.com/ngycqo.png[/IMG]

You get the satisfaction of proving that they're idiots ... that they have no argument. That when you get right down to it, they can't carry on an intelligent conversation without resorting to utter crap or flaiming. I'll argue someone into the ground until I they prove me wrong, I prove them wrong, or we come to some kind of agreement. Half the fun of debating is to use logic and facts to your advantage in proving your case.

hehe i understand and I believe i was able to prove them wrong in the past. But I will be more satisfied if they do justice to themselves and stop posting crap and be fair to themselves and others.

___________________
[/IMG]http://i54.tinypic.com/ngycqo.png[/IMG]

quote:

Originally posted by occrider You get the satisfaction of proving that they're idiots ... that they have no argument. That when you get right down to it, they can't carry on an intelligent conversation without resorting to utter crap or flaiming. I'll argue someone into the ground until I they prove me wrong, I prove them wrong, or we come to some kind of agreement. Half the fun of debating is to use logic and facts to your advantage in proving your case.

lol it seems funny but i hope thats not why you debate.. to get satisfaction that you are smarter than everyone else..

The reason to debate is to come to a resolution that would best satisfy both parties. Bring out the points from both sides and proove your case in a moral and just method. EG saying that the arabs are proving to the world that they are all bad is a pointless flamming generalization.. an argument that will never have any basis

I say the point to debating is to find a sutable resolution


Im hoping there was some rhetoric in your answer occrider