Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

As deplorable as that news is, but nice attempt at trying to embellish that report by adding that extra lynch factor, which the orginal report no where mentions. Not known as the spin man for no reason now.

P.S : Now its got my curiosity, who is that woman in your Avatar anyway ? Looks a lot like Balki from perfect strangers ?

desertdudeshj wrote:As deplorable as that news is, but nice attempt at trying to embellish that report by adding that extra lynch factor, which the orginal report no where mentions. Not known as the spin man for no reason now.

It was an attempt of mob killing:

As Goldman slowed the car, looking for a way around the trap, several Palestinian Authority terrorists jumped out and began to hurl rocks at the car

I believe that qualifies as lynching. If it makes you happy I can change it to an attempted mob kill. Sad, by the way, that that seems to be your main concern.

FD, I think that Shafique has already said that by throwing stones, the Palestinians do not mean any harm to their victims.

I wonder if Shafique would care to condemn the attempt on the lives of the pregnant woman and her husband who were only trying to get to the hospital to deliver their child safely.

I won't hold my breath.

He has yet to accept my invitation to condemn the kicking to death of the 68 year old man, by the 16 year old black youth, in the recent London riots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxFU-xoobgc&feature=related

And people still wonder why Pali children get hurt and get imprisoned.

Let me be green. This was my first post in this thread.

shafique wrote:There is no excuse for causing the deaths of civilians - and I am glad that those responsible for the deaths have been arrested.

It is interesting to note that more Muslims polled agree with this than many other groups:
dubai-politics-talk/poll-muslims-less-likely-justify-violence-t47068.html

But FD's rant above is bizare. He appears to believe that 498 rock throwers wanted to kill the colonists. Hmm.

That's some mighty assumption - straight out of the Islamophobe's handbook.

sigh.

But of course, to fanbois - those living under occupation are the aggressors, not the victims.

Cheers,
Shafique

Reposting your own posts.

You sure like the sound of your own voice don't you?

Are you as boring in real life?

But the question is whether you read it and understood it this time round?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:But the question is whether you read it and understood it this time round?

Cheers,
Shafique

Trying to push all your posts into everybody's throat again.

Only on those who seem to be slow on the uptake (or could it be denial?).

If there's something gagging your throat, it is not my post. You should be reading with your eyes and understanding it with your brain.
(That was my DearJohn impression - how did I do?)

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Only on those who seem to be slow on the uptake (or could it be denial?).

If there's something gagging your throat, it is not my post. You should be reading with your eyes and understanding it with your brain.
(That was my DearJohn impression - how did I do?)

Cheers,
Shafique

Not slow on the uptake, just bored listening to you repeat yourself time and time and time and time again.

Isn't that a form of brain washing?

If I could be arsed I'd go back and find the gem where you stated the Palestinians didn't mean to hurt anyone with their stone throwing.

Well it's a good thing you aren't going to look for that post, as you wouldn't be able to find it - given you only imagined I wrote that.

Did you really ever get an A for comprehension?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Well it's a good thing you aren't going to look for that post, as you wouldn't be able to find it - given you only imagined I wrote that.

Did you really ever get an A for comprehension?

Cheers,
Shafique

But FD's rant above is bizare. He appears to believe that 498 rock throwers wanted to kill the colonists. Hmm.

That's some mighty assumption - straight out of the Islamophobe's handbook.

sigh.

Is that, or is it not you stating that 498 rock throwers did not intend to kill people?

Bethsmum wrote:If I could be arsed I'd go back and find the gem where you stated the Palestinians didn't mean to hurt anyone with their stone throwing.

shafique wrote:Well it's a good thing you aren't going to look for that post, as you wouldn't be able to find it - given you only imagined I wrote that.

vs

Bethsmum wrote:Is that, or is it not you stating that 498 rock throwers did not intend to kill people?

I was quite clear on what I was saying - FD's delusion that all 498 rock throwing incidents had an intent to kill is 'straight out of the loon handbook'.

You should read more carefully next time.

Cheers,
Shafique

Let me get this straight

I was quite clear on what I was saying - FD's delusion that all 498 rock throwing incidents had an intent to kill is 'straight out of the loon handbook'.

You are claiming that FD stated that 498 rock throwers had an intent to kill, but that his statement was straight out of the loon handbook.

If that is a loon statement, as you describe, then surely you think the opposite to be true. That is that they don't intend to kill anyone?

So throwing stones is an inoccent past time in your book?
The fact that the stone throwers managed to cause the death of a young Israeli father and his one year old child seems lost on you.

Good to see you're practicing with your font colour though. Keep it up.

Bethsmum wrote:Let me get this straight

I was quite clear on what I was saying - FD's delusion that all 498 rock throwing incidents had an intent to kill is 'straight out of the loon handbook'.

You are claiming that FD stated that 498 rock throwers had an intent to kill, but that his statement was straight out of the loon handbook.

Well, FD was quite explicit:

Flying Dutchman wrote:Throwing rock at cars with intend to kill is attempted murder, 498 times in this case.

Bethsmum wrote:If that is a loon statement, as you describe, then surely you think the opposite to be true. That is that they don't intend to kill anyone?

Yes, it is clearly a loon statement. To claim that 498 incidents were all attempted murders - all with intent to kill. The 'attempt to kill' part makes it attempted murder. Loon statement - as loons like to exagerate any incident carried out by some Muslims to all or a greater percentage than is the case.

Do share the loon belief that all 498 incidents were attempted murder?

Cheers,
Shafique

Well, in Holland at least, throwing stones at moving cars is considered a crime against life. People doing that have been convicted for first, second or whatever degree murder.
The fact that people do indeed die from this, is apparently flying staight over her head, Shafster.

A subtle back pedal there FD.

You didn't cite any legal definition in your earlier statement - you said that all 498 cases were with intent to kill.

It was this hyperbole that I took exception to - assuming (or perhaps presenting as fact) that all 498 cases were with intent to kill.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:You didn't cite any legal definition in your earlier statement

You want the sub paragraph of the penal code?

shafique wrote:you said that all 498 cases were with intent to kill.

Yes, I do. Throwing stones at moving cars is intended murder (whatever degree).

Your problem FD is that your words were quite clear:

Flying Dutchman wrote:Throwing rock at cars with intend to kill is attempted murder, 498 times in this case.

You stated that in all 498 cases the intent was to kill. Now you've been called out, you're now saying - 'no, no - what I meant was that legally if you throw rocks at a moving car then your intent is to kill under the law..'

But you statement is clear - and indeed implies that if the rock throwers did not intend to kill, then it would not be attempted murder. You stated that in all cases the intent was to kill, and all are attempted murders.

Fail.

10/10 for creativity. 0/10 for credibility.

Cheers,
Shafique

Wow, yes you caught me, I meant it in a legal way.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Yes, it is clearly a loon statement. To claim that 498 incidents were all attempted murders - all with intent to kill. The 'attempt to kill' part makes it attempted murder. Loon statement - as loons like to exagerate any incident carried out by some Muslims to all or a greater percentage than is the case.

Do share the loon belief that all 498 incidents were attempted murder?

Cheers,
Shafique

So throwing ROCKS is not an attempt to kill someone?

Please can you explain what throwing a ROCK at someone is designed to do?

I wonder if we have any doctors on the forum who could explain to you (in simple terms) the injuries that could be inflicted when receiving a ROCK to the head.
Or in this case by a rock which caused the death of a man and his baby.

Bethsmum wrote:
So throwing ROCKS is not an attempt to kill someone?

Yep.

But please have a word with FD - he's correctly used the term 'throwing stones' in the post on this page - he should know that you're now turning this into 'rocks'.

And Bora helpfully put a photo of 'rocks' on the first page of this thread.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:

Bethsmum wrote:
So throwing ROCKS is not an attempt to kill someone?

Yep.

But please have a word with FD - he's correctly used the term 'throwing stones' in the post on this page - he should know that you're now turning this into 'rocks'.

And Bora helpfully put a photo of 'rocks' on the first page of this thread.

Cheers,
Shafique

You do think you are such a clever little man don't you?

I'll quote you the OP as you seem to have left it behind somewhere in your tiny mind.

The Shin Bet security service has arrested two Palestinian citizens from Halhoul who admitted to throwing a rock that caused a fatal crash near Kiryat Arba on September 23rd. 25-years-old Asher Palmer and his one-year-old son Yonatan were killed after their vehicle flipped over.

Throwing ROCKS is what I'm talking about here, the one that was thrown and resulted in the death of a young Israeli man and his baby son.

While I see you are trying to down grade the seriousness of the crime by suggesting the throwers were just lucky, I maintain that throwing rocks at vehicles or people is an attempt at killing them.

TV is a wonderful thing, do they have it, yet, in Mauritius? You may like to tune in to the news where you can regularly view Palestinians throwing ROCKS at Israelis.

I won't be having a word with FD but you may like to have a word with yourself and ask how you would react to people throwing rocks at your family while you visited the UK?

BM - when you untwist your knickers and you re-read what I wrote, you'll see that FD's loon theory was that ALL 498 stone throwing incidents were attempted murder, because ALL 498 instances the intent was murder.

Now, I know it is very difficult to overcome your cartoon view of Palestinians and Muslims as all being wild-eyed, crazed, anti-Semitic, blood thirsty baby killers - but at least read what is written in posts before embarrassing yourself with wild theories that all 498 incidents involved boulders or small mountains against poor defenceless angels. (Hyperbole intended)

How would I react to people throwing stones at my car? I wouldn't assume they are trying to kill me and embarrass myself by stating that this is my belief.

Cheers,
Shafique

TV indeed is a wonderfull thing, I gew up watching news coverage of Palestenians throwing rocks trying to defend themselves at Israeli tanks and armoured personal carriers with bullets and shells being fired in return . Izzies do have reputaion of bringing a nuke to a fist fight.

Next being pelted with eggs will be considered an assault with a deadly weapon with intent to cause grave bodily harm if lobbing stones are being considered at the very least second degree murder !

P.S : Its too late to untwist the panties, I'm afraid the wrinkles have already set in !

desertdudeshj wrote:TV indeed is a wonderfull thing, I gew up watching news coverage of Palestenians throwing rocks trying to defend themselves at Israeli tanks and armoured personal carriers with bullets and shells being fired in return . Izzies do have reputaion of bringing a nuke to a fist fight.

Next being pelted with eggs will be considered an assault with a deadly weapon with intent to cause grave bodily harm if lobbing stones are being considered at the very least second degree murder !

P.S : Its too late to untwist the panties, I'm afraid the wrinkles have already set in !

try to be a bit more individual munchkin. I can see you have changed knickers to panties and wrinkles but you need to up the game a bit to insult me. What ever happened to calling me a whore? It was much more fun

-- Tue Oct 11, 2011 9:34 am --

shafique wrote:BM - when you untwist your knickers and you re-read what I wrote, you'll see that FD's loon theory was that ALL 498 stone throwing incidents were attempted murder, because ALL 498 instances the intent was murder.

Now, I know it is very difficult to overcome your cartoon view of Palestinians and Muslims as all being wild-eyed, crazed, anti-Semitic, blood thirsty baby killers - but at least read what is written in posts before embarrassing yourself with wild theories that all 498 incidents involved boulders or small mountains against poor defenceless angels. (Hyperbole intended)

How would I react to people throwing stones at my car? I wouldn't assume they are trying to kill me and embarrass myself by stating that this is my belief.

Cheers,
Shafique

Why the fasination with my knickers? You really need to get over that and stop embarrassing yourself on a public forum. Having said that, I suppose you constantly mentioning my underwear is an improvement from you constantly having a light hearted dig at my sick daughter.

Now back on topic.
Just to reiterate, I'm talking about Palestinians throwing ROCKS as stated in the OP and causing the death of a young father and his baby.
I can see you're attempting to down play the murder by saying you wouldn't assume anyone was trying to kill you if they threw stones at your car but what if they were rocks? What if they threw rocks at your car while you were driving with your family? What if those rocks were big enough that they made you lose control of the vehicle? What about that? Would that frighten you and your family enough to think your lives were in danger.

Take five before you hit the keyboard.

I've no problem with people condemning anyone who is out to commit murder. I have no problem in people condemning those who commit murders (or killings, accidental or otherwise) of civilians.

I do have a problem with someone stating that ALL 498 instances of stone throwing were with intent to kill and therefore attempted murder.

I really can't make it simpler for you BM.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I've no problem with people condemning anyone who is out to commit murder. I have no problem in people condemning those who commit murders (or killings, accidental or otherwise) of civilians.

I do have a problem with someone stating that ALL 498 instances of stone throwing were with intent to kill and therefore attempted murder.

I really can't make it simpler for you BM.

Cheers,
Shafique

Seems pretty clear and logical to me!

shafique wrote:I've no problem with people condemning anyone who is out to commit murder. I have no problem in people condemning those who commit murders (or killings, accidental or otherwise) of civilians.

I do have a problem with someone stating that ALL 498 instances of stone throwing were with intent to kill and therefore attempted murder.

I really can't make it simpler for you BM.

Cheers,
Shafique

Why did you never condemn the 16 year old black youth that kicked the 68 year old white man to death during the recent London riots?
You were invited to do so on many occasions.

Rocks are what we are discussing here, not stones.

I can't make it simpler for you Shafique.

-- Tue Oct 11, 2011 3:41 pm --

kanelli wrote:Seems pretty clear and logical to me!

Who rattled your cage?