If I recall correctly… yes.

In fact, reading his post above, he implied they were terrorists, or at the very least, terrorist within the Palestinian people.

J.

How do you know who’s being silent, and who’s being silenced?

And I’d settle for the Palestinians held to ANY kind of standard, instead of the silence that is usually expressed, and in cases like this silence is virtually indistinguishable from assent.

And Duros: thanks for pointing out I had mistaken Rotter’s comment for Strowbridge’s.

J.

Then you say…

The worst atrocity Israel has committed pales in comparison to their enemies’ proudest accomplishments.

Yeah…

So your solution to this problem is to hold Israel to a lower standard, rather than hold Palastinians to a higher one? Gotcha…

It’s a subtle form of racism. We don’t criticize the Arabs because a lot of people think that they’re incapable of acting any more civilized.

Meanwhile, Israel is held to an impossible standard of perfection.

The worst atrocity Israel has committed pales in comparison to their enemies’ proudest accomplishments.

J.

You seem to have to say that a lot Jay Tea.

Strowbridge, I’m sorry. Rotter’s response was phrased in a way that made it seem like a response from you, and I didn’t catch that it wasn’t. That was careless, and I shouldn’t have let it happen.

Kindly strike out the directing of my response to Strowbridge, and I invite Rotter or anyone else to respond.

Strowbridge, kindly inform your lawyer to restrain himself to just the right side of Mongo, my SUV. It could use the rinsing down more.

It’s also the side that’s occasionally electrified.

J.

So trying to be subtle failed.

That wasn’t me. That was someone else. That’s why I bolded “I” in my last post.

You clearly lied about me, repeatedly. So now I’m suing.

My lawyer will be contacting you in the morning.

He’ll be the drunk guy peeing on your car at 3 a.m.

Sure it can. Knock it off.

OK, for the third time:

Jay. Step back. CSS didn’t say anything. Daniel Rotter did.

Do better.

Right back atcha, big guy.

I said that Israel goes to great lengths to reduce civilian casualties, and I have listed quite a few. You interpreted that as “Israel doesn’t do every single thing I think they could.”

If Oliver’s page didn’t support cut and paste, I’d tell you to read up yourself.

Let me spell it out for you:

I said: “Israel is confirmed to have taken great measures to minimize civilian casualties;…”

And you said: If “israeli forces killed Palestinian civilians under permissive rules of engagement,” then no, Israel did not do this.

Your latter statement is utterly fallacious. I said “taken great measures.” Your argument is presuming that I said “guaranteed no civilian casualties.”

I backed up my statement by listing just some of the measures Israel has taken. Curiously, you had nothing to say about that. I also listed some of the tactics used by Hamas. You had nothing to say about that, either. Instead, you keep insisting I repeat my prior point.

This is the third time. If you’re too dense to grasp it yet, you’re on your own. Take the movie off “PAUSE” and continue your flight from reality.

J.

J.G.Thayer: “What DIDN’T you say that was weak?”

Okay… Let me try that again…

What did I say that was weak?

I said that Israel goes to great lengths to reduce civilian casualties, and I have listed quite a few. You interpreted that as “Israel doesn’t do every single thing I think they could.”

Here’s something for you to chew on, Strowbridge:

During the last Gaza fighting, Hamas did the following:

* Moved its leadership into a bunker beneath Gaza’s largest hospital.

* Fired rockets at civilian areas from a school and a UN facility.

* Used mosques and private homes as arms depots

* Rigged a zoo with countless bombs and mines as a boobytrap.

What should have been Israel’s response to these actions?

Here’s a hint: under the rules of law, a protected structure loses its protected status the instant it is used for military purposes — and any harm that befalls it and (and any people in and around it) is entirely the responsibility of the side that militarized it, not the attacker.

I can’t wait to hear what General “Southern Strategy” Strowbridge would counsel in such cases.

J.

What did I say that’s weak?

Oliver’s final statement in the post.

So, the Bush/Cheney style “slightly better than terrorists” standard is not an acceptable response here.

Talk about missing the point, Jay (Tea).

http://www.yourish.com/2009/03/22/7018

“Israel is confirmed to have taken great measures to minimize civilian casualties;…”

If “israeli forces killed Palestinian civilians under permissive rules of engagement,” then no, Israel did not do this.

Here are a few things Israel does to minimize civilian casualties:

* Reduce the size of warheads on missiles

* Maintains positive control over weapons right up until impact/detonation

* Insists on absolute identification before launching attacks

* Develops new weapons that are more and more precise.

Things the Palestinians do to maximize casualties:

* Set up a military command bunker under a hospital

* Use schools as launching pads for missiles

* Use unguided missiles fired in the general direction of civilian populaces

* Lace suicide bombs with nails and rat poison to maximize injuries and prevent victims from being able to coagulate

* Surround themselves with civilians, even children, while launching their attacks

* Use mosques as weapons depots

That’s just a few examples, Strowbridge. I got plenty more.

J.

If “israeli forces killed Palestinian civilians under permissive rules of engagement,” then no, Israel did not do this.

“…there is almost no way to tell a civilian from a terrorist,”

Here’s a way to tell the difference between a terrorist and a civilian: the terrorists are doing things they shouldn’t be doing, the civilians aren’t.

“In war, ugly things happen.”

So you’re an apologist for war crimes now? Sick, just sick.

“It is to be avoided and regretted, but it can’t be avoided.

It is to be avoided, but it can’t be avoided…makes perfect sense (rolls eyes).