Silverfox is a politically-motivated drone and will pull any cheap trick to derail the discussion, including trying to correct you on your language. You didn't abuse him and he has no business commenting on your choice of language. If you want to say "fucking shelters", go right ahead. It isn't for a schoolboy to correct you.

That is not abuse. That is a fact. Do you take me for a complete fool?

You have refused several requests by me to deal with the issues raised on this post, and choose instead to deal in spin.

Because you have refused to respect those requests, I intend in future to treat your comments as propaganda.

You're not very good at this, are you?

"At least they have their fucking shelters". Was the abusive language necessary? Would you prefer they didn't?
As far as my "ignorant rant" goes I will not respond in kind. Bock also doesn't like this because of "argument ad hominem". Call it what you want. I am not debating against Robert Fisk. It is a matter of trust of sources, I don't trust that one – I have read and listened to him over the years, and I don't propose to waste time arguing over what he says.
Just to balance your Ben Gurion quote: Here is one from Hamas Charter:
"Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors."
This is who Israel must deal with.
Bock: Abuse is no substitute for argument. I won't respond to that.

As you directed your post to me, this is what i have in response.

My analagy may well be "analogous" and that response is particularly ambiguous.

"you enter war with the purpose of winning"

There are many, many intelligent people who disagree with that statement.
War is about change or defense or force, there are no "winners" in war, but if thats your perception.

"not deliberatly targeting civilians"
No ? when did you last hear of a "terrorist donkey"
On tues last one of the Israeli guided missiles fired on a donkey with a small cart and 2 children, aged 11 and 12, killing all…..one tiny incident in this crisis.

At no time have i suggested "hamas rockets" not lethel…..reread.

"Israelis take to their shelters"
well at least they have fucking shelters.

Your rant of anti-israel/anti-american is just ignorant, it is a wonder of the "free world" that it is not only ok but vital that people can criticise the foreign policy of any government or agency they wish.

I will leave you with a quote from David Ben Gurion
"where we plough our last furrow is where we will put our border"
and on they plough.

That's as neat and dishonest a piece of doublethink as I've seen in a long time. The Vatican would be proud of you.

On your point about Fisk, this ad hominem argument really is becoming tiresome. Instead of labelling people anti-American or anti-Israeli, what about addressing substantive points? Deal with the issues instead of trying to smear the people you disagree with.

There is no substance to anything you've said so far. Just bluster. All you've done since you came here is contradict and deny like a character in a Monty Python sketch.

Which reminds me — it's a crime to deny certain atrocities, but not others. Sauce for the goose.

I don't get the "disproportionate response" argument either. It seems to be some new war rule invented by anti-Israeli commentators. What war in history ever totted up the casualties and agreed to have one for one. You enter a war with the purpose of winning. Yes there are rules, such as not deliberately targeting civilians. You decide which side is in breach of that one. One thing is certain. If Hamas had the military capacity to wipe out all of Israel and it's citizens, it would certainly not hesitate.

I find Robert Fisks opinions so one-sided and predictable as to be valueless. He is anti- American, and anti-Isreali and that colours everything he writes. I read an article of his a day or so after the 9/11 twin-towers bombing and the gloating tone of it sickened me.

I am considering scrapping my 4 mile walk on this lovely day to carry out the research you have suggested…

just passing on to you 2 further articles, i am taking more care this time so hopefully it will be succesful for you.

http://www.clipmarks.com/clipmark/5678e3d3-9938-434b-8d37-5182432642fe
the above came from a google type "neocon calls on obama for "regime change" in iran"
I'm no believer in conspiracy theories, but that one is really frightening.

I am obviously a big "Robert Fisk" admirer so heres another one.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentator/fisk/robert-fisk-welcome-to-palestine-453319.html
hope all that works.

Sarkozy is a power hungry asshole. Like Bertie but with a mind like razor. I would never be so niave as to compare Sakozy to Bush because he is vastly more intelligent. He has mastered the art of spin to the point where Communications agancies use his campaigne as a reference point.
Sarkozy regularily uses De Gaulle's name in his speaches but it is really Bushism (or Chenyism in disguise). He wants a consolidated Europe, not for the benefit of his voters but for the benefit of his "chére compatriots" or his business associates, who he will put in power. That is how he acts in France. If you disagree you are out.
Normaly we would call this Totalitarianism but because it happens in a Developed country we say it is normal. I can assure you from personal experience it is false. Everything Sarkozy says is 'Blah, blah', lip sevice, point. His hate for Arabs is well known. He has expressed it on numerous occaisons. Please I ask all readers to FULLY research Sarkozy and his philosophie before giving him some kind of white knight status. He is REALLY the French Bertie but with alot more intelligence and with much better publicity.

When he goes to Gaza he will say everything that is expected of him, but behind closed doors he will say that these 'terrorists' need to be irradicated. He is one of the most public rascist in France.
Even Jean Marie Le Penn would be proud. After all, by stealing his voters, that's how Sarko won the race.