I find it genuinely amusing that we're here, a page and a half or so later and several posts from FinnAgain, but he still won't tell me what I was lying about.
I pointed out what you were lying about. And you know it. Good bait though.
Especially when faced with facts that go against his world view, like the numbers of "rockets" that Palestinians have fired into Israel in the last year and a half. He likes to think they are raining down on Israel
Cite. Of course, you can't, as you're making it up.
Also good little trick putting the word rocket in hard quotes. You'll sure fool people that way.
I used to get all worked up when you called me an anti-semite or a liar until I realized that was what you did to anyone that criticized Israel.
You can't find one single post where I called you an anti-Semite. And you know it.
You also just admitted that I routinely do not call people who criticize Israel liars, but you discarded them because they aren't kneejerk anti-Israel bigots like you are. So you're lying there too, and you know it there, too.
Why, do you think, you engage in that behavior and folks other than me don't call you on it? Answer your own question. You know you're saying things that aren't true. Why do
you think that it's accepted? Do you think it's be accepted if it was an anti-Palestinian person who was saying it? I'm saying the truth about the anti-Israel coterie, and people are flipping out about it. What if I lied about you people the way you lied about me? You folks like to lie and say things like I call everybody anti-semites, or what have you. How would it be received if I lied and said that you folks routinely call anybody who supports Israel anti-Palestinian? Why, do you think, Amanset's lie above that I'm somehow "anti-Palestinian" or Elvis' lie that I don't think Palestinians are human is accepted, but when people admit that they have an anti-Israel bias that instinctual, people go berserk when it's pointed out that that's bigotry?
As for why your pattern of lying isn't pointed out by others, I'd posit that it's probably for the same reason that the world was up in arms over the war in Gaza and then when Lebanon used indiscriminate artillery fire on a Palestinian refugee camp nobody cared, or how every year we have memorials to Deir Yassin while nobody can quite manage to remember Hama, ever.
you are doing your cause more harm than good.
My cause is honesty and factuality. Obviously many folks aren't interested in either. Just like even though it's been clarified multiple times that the law has been applied several times when there was no promise of marriage and no history of such behavior over a span of time and yet you repeat that error, most folks simply don't care. Or like Giraffe's little spaz fit where he alleged that despite the OP rather blatantly lying and Dio rather obviously engaging in the sort of bigotry we'd object to if his target wasn't Israel but a 'protected' minority. It's the standard behavior we see and not exactly surprising anymore.
It's just what the anti-Israel crowd does. Like the recent Israel blockade thread where Red Fury posted a "transcript" that had entire sentences which were simply fabricated, objectively, not even as a matter of opinion, and not one of the anti-Israel crowd cared because it got in the way of your narrative. It's just what you do.
Dio's bigotry goes without mention and, in fact, has defenders when I point it out. How do you like "[black people] can be counted on to do [negative thing], and I don't have to prove this because, after all, everybody knows that [black people] are bad." would have gone, in comparison? (Leave your admitted anti-Israel bigotry aside for a moment and try to answer it yourself). Why is "black people" not acceptable, but "Israel" is?
Or look at your own admission of bigotry. What do you think the reaction would have been if, instead of Israel, you'd said "I don't think I used to be so knee-jerk [against Palestine] but [people who defend Palestine] are turning me into someone who is instinctualy anti-Palestine. I don't spend time slowly digesting new facts into my gestalt of what is going on [with the Palestinians], instead I find myself trying to figure out how new facts can be incorporated into a narrative against [Palestinians] and I have to make a conscious effort to retain objectivity and that really bothers me. I don't think this was the case before I encountered [people who defend Palestinians]."
Again, do you think that folks would be fine with that? Or they'd object to such bigotry and object to the cowardice the bigot was showing by trying to blame someone else for their own anti-Palestinian bias? Again, forget that it's you saying it, and try to wonder how you'd react if I said the above. Would you be fine with it, or would you think that there was something wrong with being reflexively anti-Palestinian?
Why is it that people routinely lionize people like Jimmy Carter even though his narrative is based on claims that objectively and undisputedly false, in many cases where he provably did or should have known they were false and when they, without fail, serve to demonize Israel and exonerate Palestinian leadership and terrorist factions? What do you think would happen if a well known former President, instead, constructed an obvious campaign of fiction in order to demonize the Palestinians and exonerate the Israeli government of its mistakes? Would that be okay?
Again, look at this honestly and not from your admitted position of reflexive anti-Israel bias. Would the same people who lionize Jimmy Carter be totally fine with him if he flipped his tactics and applied them against the Palestinians instead? Why do people,
by the tens of millions accept anti-Israel lies?
Prove me wrong. Criticize your own self for lying and saying I've ever called you an anti-Semite. You and I both know that you're making that up and I never have. And yet you're still lying. Apologize, and don't do it again. If you refuse to, then there's your answer right there as to why dishonesty is accepted from certain folks and by certain folks.
Why, do
you think it is that your lie will be tolerated by the usual suspects? Take Amanset to task for his lie about rockets, or his rather obvious tactic of putting the term rocket in quotes. That'd be a start. Why, do
you think it is that people will avoid such obvious dishonesty?
Why do you think it is that when the people who I named criticize things about Israel, I'm totally fine with it, but when people do so dishonestly or from ignorance, I'm not? Does "well, they support Israel in other things!" really make sense to you, if your claim (that you already know is false) is that I attack anybody who criticizes Israel, then why is it that the while those folks have criticized virtually every single aspect of Israeli society/culture/policy, I've never said a single harsh word to them? Maybe, just maybe, it's not whether or not someone criticizes Israel, but if they do so from a position of honesty and knowledge? No, no handwaving about how people who criticize Israel but don't do so often enough for you are really "apologists".
Can you approach this honestly?
