 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Whaleboy
|
 |
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:30
|
|
quote:
So your first point is not mistaken. Someone objected to you saying only intelligent people are liberals, and if intellectual is intelligent as you say here, that is what you meant too
|
No, because if we take that to mean "intelligent people are more likely to be liberal", we include stuff in intelligence that is irrelevant to the cognetive processes behind liberalism.
quote:
When the words don't mean what you wnat them to, change the meanings?
|
When you show me an indisputable, canonical, scientific definition of intelligence, I will be satisfied. Until then, it is a matter for debate.
quote:
How would you know that you are able to learn and understand things if you didn't do anything that involved careful thinking?
|
Look at schools/lessons. Students are taught stuff parrot fashion, and understand what they are taught, but because fewer actual cognetive processes are going on, they can do less stuff with it than those who are able to deduce/induce it for themselves. The latter approach may be discriminated against by the education system, but as we both know, its a damn site more flexible! 
quote:
Take your example of memorizing extremely long sequences of numbers. That is careful thinking.
|
MemoriSing. Didn't you see my americanised spelling thread?  . And no, it doesnt. In fact, the trick there is not to think about it, but to associate each occurance, say, a random card in a shuffled deck, with something abstract like a character from a story. That, and its recollection requires little thought, indeed the part of the brain that handles memory, and many other things are actually seperate from the part that is actived when meditating... the deep thought thing.
Thus quote:
Therefore they are intellectual as well as intelligent.
|
is false.
quote:
Indeed, earlier, you said that intellectual is intelligent, but not necessarily the other way round
|
Correct, and that still stands.
quote:
How do you get highly educated if you are not able to learn things?
|
By remembering them parrot fashion.
quote:
You admit at first that intellectual is intelligent, but then argue the other way later in your post? Seems a little illogical to me
|
Intellectual is intelligent, intelligent is not necessarily intellectual. I dont see the problem with that, its a simple case of necessary vs sufficient conditions. I am not arguing the other way around, I am merely saying that other elements of "intelligent" for want of a better canonical version of that concept, are irrelevant to the only relavent element, which is intellect.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Edan
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Yes, against Israeli, not American, interests. |
Even if you believe that bullshit, wouldn't that mean that there are a lot of Israeli targets in the US?
But then, I guess they wouldn't be US targets if they were Jewish.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:30
|
|
Uk Liberal and prog movement re Israel
seems to me like they make the distinction pretty well.
"WHERE WE STAND on
Zionism & Israel
We recognise the unique role which the Land of Israel has played in the history, prayers and hopes of our people through the ages. We also acknowledge that the discrimination and persecution, culminating in the Holocaust, which have so often been the lot of our people during the centuries of their dispersion, have made the re-establishment of an autonomous Jewish community in our ancient homeland a matter of urgent necessity. We therefore salute the Pioneers of Zionism and the founders and defenders of the State of Israel whose vision and courage have turned that dream into reality.
We reaffirm our love for the Land of Israel, our solidarity with our brothers and sisters who dwell within its borders, and our commitment to the State of Israel. We rejoice in its existence, delight in its achievements, care about its security, seek its welfare, believe in its future, and hope for the ever fuller realisation of the ideals set forth in its Proclamation of Independence, so that it may become more and more a force for good in the life of the Jewish people, of the Middle East region and of humanity.
We also reaffirm our faith in the Diaspora. In spite of the sufferings our people have experienced in dispersion, there have been nations which have welcomed Jews as citizens, and periods of Jewish religious and cultural creativity stimulated by close contact with other religions and cultures. Moreover, as a universal religion, Judaism is in principle at home anywhere on God's earth, and since it has a redemptive contribution to make to the life of humanity (to be 'a light to the nations'), it is positively desirable that there should be a Jewish presence in many lands. We therefore urge the importance of maintaining strong, confident and self- respecting Jewish communities in the Diaspora.
We endorse Rabbi Leo Baeck's perception of the Jewish people as an ellipse having two foci. Israel and the Diaspora have somewhat different roles to play, but they both exist for the same ultimate purpose, defined by Judaism, and should therefore be seen as equal partners in a common task.
We desire to see a constructive relationship, of mutual respect, support and enrichment between Israel and the Diaspora. We believe that the Diaspora has the responsibility of sharing in the upbuilding of the State of lsrael as a haven of refuge and a society where Jews can live in dignity and set an example to mankind. We therefore urge our communities to continue and intensify all appropriate endeavours, including cultural activities, financial support for humanitarian purposes in Israel, and the encouragement of individual and group visits to Israel, towards that end.
We believe that these endeavours should include the presentation of Aliyah as a noble option available to Diaspora Jews, and the encouragement of those who choose to seek their self-fulfilment, and to make their contribution to Jewish life, in that way. However, we reaffirm our belief that full participation in Jewish life in the Diaspora, to ensure its continuation, is equally honourable.
We demand full acceptance of the principle of religious pluralism, with all its implications, both in Israeli law and in the Zionist and communal organisations of the Diaspora. This requires that Progressive Judaism, as well as Conservative Judaism, be accorded recognition and respect, rights and opportunities, on terms of absolute equality with Orthodox Judaism. We regard this as a matter of justice, which is therefore independent of numerical considerations, and unnegotiable.
We believe that the Israel-Diaspora partnership requires mutual respect as well as open, candid and vigorous discussion of common concerns between the partners and within each. Such discussion should not exclude responsible criticism of particular governmental policies or other aspects of Israeli society, expressed with loving concern and due deliberation.
For every possible reason, including its own long-term survival, Israel's greatest need is to 'seek peace and pursue it' (Psalm 34:15). We recognise that there is room for a variety of views as to the best way of attaining that objective, but it seems to us self-evident that the whole ethos of Judaism in general, and of Liberal Judaism in particular, should incline us towards the view of those who would cede territory for lasting peace. Reconciliation between Jews and Arabs is a goal towards which we strive. Concern for secure borders and political and military stability needs to be seen as compatible with justice for all. The legitimate security demands of Israel can - and must - be reconciled with the human and political rights of Palestinian Arabs. It is for all these reasons that we support the concept of territorial compromise. Our endorsement of these principles is in basic accord with a resolution adopted in 1984 by the Central Conference of American Rabbis (CCAR), the world's largest rabbinic assembly, with over 1200 members.
We believe that we have a Jewish religious duty to foster, especially within Anglo-Jewry, a climate of opinion supportive of the quest for peace. This requires us to keep ourselves well informed, to seek an objective understanding of the issues, and to exemplify and encourage the forces of moderation and reconciliation rather than those of strident partisanship.
We applaud all sincere peace initiatives, and believe that such plans should always be sympathetically considered for their possible merits rather than rejected out of hand for their perceived inadequacies. Likewise we welcome all contacts and conversations between the protagonists of the conflict in the Middle East and their respective supporters in Britain which may help to lessen tension, dispel ignorance, overcome mistrust, and build bridges of understanding.
We call upon all States which have not already done so to recognise the State of Israel and establish normal relations with it. We ask all religious communities to try to understand the importance of the State of Israel for the Jewish people. We pledge ourselves to work together with all nations and religions for the achievement of peace in the Middle East, and for the cessation of war, terrorism and all forms of violence, the relief of suffering, and the establishment of justice, in all societies everywhere. "
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
|
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
I have no interest in getting into a discussion over this: suffice it to say that it remains true that Hizbullah has not attacked the US or American citizens dfirectly outside of the ME, much like Hamas hasn't. If you have facts showing otherwise, feel free to post them. |
If your point is that Hezbollah has not attacked US interests outside the mideast, you are correct.
You also said however that Hezbollah does not engage in international terrorism.
Hezbollah attacked an Argentinian target in Argentina. Not Israeli, not American. Argentinian. Hezbollah doesnt consider Jews to be real Argentinians. So what? The Nazis wouldnt have either. The people who were killed considered themselves Argentinians, and, AFAIK, acted as perfectly loyal Argentinian citizens. The govt of Argentina considered them Argentinians. Ergo, Hezbollah attack ARGENTINIAN interests on ARGENTINIAN soil. Ergo Hezbollah engaged in INTERNATIONAL terrorism, and outside the mideast, to boot. QED.
What part of this dont you get. And if you mean to imply in any way that the people killed were not Argentinians because they were Jews, then you have revealed yourself as something i hope you are not. (Besides the fact that many non-Jewish Argentinians were killed as well)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Edan
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Please. Hmmm why would Hizbullah attack a Jewish center in Argentina? Cause they hate those damn Argentines? The ones with an Arab president? If they want to associate Jews and Israel on a one on one basis, their choice. |
Regardless of their reaoning, they hit an Argentinian target outside the Middle East, which contradicts your earlier statements that Hezbollah doesn't act outside of the Middle East.
And even if you want to use that BS argument, why wouldn't Hezbollah attack Jewish targets within the US?
quote:
As I asked LoTM: do you have evidence to the contrary? |
What about TWA 847? Or does that not count cause it was hijacked to the middle east?
Or what about the planned attack on US ships in Singapore six years backs, ala the Cole.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:30
|
|
quote:
Take Hizbullah: the largest and best armed Terror org in the world. It has never hit the US outside of the ME. |
To Edan and LoTM:
Now maybe, just maybe, my education was lacking: maybe I missed the part of the lesson where "world" or anyone" = "US". Please fill me in on that, cause, as far as I can see...looking at that quote, I only see a mention of how HIzbullah has never hit the "US" outside of the ME: a thing acknowledged at least by LoTM.
Let me give you two some advice: read what I have writen before commenting on it. That generally helps make an intelliegent comment, instead of an idiotic assumption (we all know what they say about people who make assumptions, now do't we?)
Now, lets move on to the other "fine points":
Why wouldn't Hizbullah attack Jewish tagerts in the US? cause the US might retaliate, Argentina won;t, cause security is tighter in the US, as opposed to Argentina. Seems obvious to me.
As fpr the target being "argentianian" Can either of you gentlement give me any reason why Hizbulah would attack a purely Argentinian target? Any? Did argentina do anything in Lebanon? Lets not be disingenous for ideological reasons. The center atatcked was attacked because it was full of Jews. Yes, they all happened to be Argentine citizens, but the aim of the terrorist was not just to kill Argetines (they have an Argentine embassy in Lebanon, no?) but Jews. The issue into which you gentlement stepped in so clumsily (again, do me a favor and read) is why terrorist orgs. attack the targets they do. Again, if either of you think Hizbullah attacked that center becuase it was Argentine, give me the reason why/ Ohterwise, be hoinest and acknowledge it was attacked becuase it was a Jewish community Center.
As for the incidents you mentioned: Since the ships were not attacked (have any more info on this?). the statement remains true. As for the plane hijacking, More info would be nice. Did it originate in the US?
And this is for LoTM: I do not for a second appriciate your side comments wondering if I am an anti-semite. I am not, and I am deeply insulted that you would insinuate it. I don;t know hoa far your education took you, but here is a nice lesson: an opinion different from your about a matter that involes Jews does not make one an anti-semite. Seems like a simple statement, but one you do not yet grasp.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Edan
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Now maybe, just maybe, my education was lacking: maybe I missed the part of the lesson where "world" or anyone" = "US". Please fill me in on that, cause, as far as I can see...looking at that quote, I only see a mention of how HIzbullah has never hit the "US" outside of the ME: a thing acknowledged at least by LoTM.
|
You stated that Hizbollah only had national aims and that was why it didn't hit the US outside of the Middle East - because it did not serve a purpose.
But neither did the bombing in Argentina, no matter how you try to rationalize it.
Hezbollah is a terroist group with global reach, not regional reach. (And, of course, Hezbollah also has ties with Al Qaeda (in particular "Mugniyah has been linked to al Qaeda in the past. One al Qaeda member testified in a U.S. court that he helped arrange a meeting between Osama bin Laden and Mugniyah in the 1990's."))
quote:
Why wouldn't Hizbullah attack Jewish tagerts in the US? cause the US might retaliate, Argentina won;t, cause security is tighter in the US, as opposed to Argentina. Seems obvious to me.
|
But that makes little sense because Hizbollah has attacked the US before. They didn't appear to be scared of a retaliation those times.
And wouldn't they also be worried about Israel retaliating, if they were that worried?
quote:
As for the incidents you mentioned: Since the ships were not attacked (have any more info on this?). the statement remains true.
|
They weren't attacked because the plans were stopped by the Singaporians(sp?)
quote:
As for the plane hijacking, More info would be nice. Did it originate in the US?
|
It originated from Athens. The passengers were mostly Americans and at least one American was killed, IIRC.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Edan
You stated that Hizbollah only had national aims and that was why it didn't hit the US outside of the Middle East - because it did not serve a purpose.
But neither did the bombing in Argentina, no matter how you try to rationalize it. |
I see you ignored the question as to why argentina..couldn;t come up with an answer? IIRC, there were several thousand Israeli troops in Lebanon in 1994.... Hizbullahs aim being to remove them form their nation, Lebanon, my statement remains true.
quote:
But that makes little sense because Hizbollah has attacked the US before. They didn't appear to be scared of a retaliation those times.
And wouldn't they also be worried about Israel retaliating, if they were that worried? |
Hizbulah atatcked the US in Lebanon: the US was in eccense already involved, so retaliation was not an issue. But then after most large attacks the US left.
"why would Israel retaliate if what was attacked was argentine????" (No, i won;t point to hypocrasy..) Israel was already in Southern Lebanon in '94 , so again, a no issue. Israel did not need much excuse to attacke Hizbullah then anyway.
quote:
It originated from Athens. The passengers were mostly Americans and at least one American was killed, IIRC. |
Did this happen to occur in the 80's?
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
22-08-2003 01:26
jk And yes.
) that DOES not mean we dont distinguish between our synagogue and the government.
|