Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Will Israel Strike Iran First?      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 76
Will Israel Strike Iran First?Page 4 of 9    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)
well, to dismiss someone's opinion for no other reason than (for example) they are part of the Left, is to prejudge, and that can be the same as wearing blinders. even a stopped clock can be right twice a day, and an idiot can always repeat something smart they heard once. for the intelligent, it only takes a few seconds to listen to someone and decide if that person is headed in the right direction or towards the tinfoil hat brigade.

How can an educated person overlook the character of a poster? focus on the message, not on the deliverer. As the saying goes, don't shoot the messanger for the message they deliver. Focusing on the messanger is great if you want to go ad hominem, but otherwise, just focus on the message, take it on its own values, and debate it that way. there's posters here I don't like, but from time to time they've taught me something. and other times, they'll say something that gets me thinking up a good counter--beats doing Suduko puzzles to exercise the brain.

meanwhile, its interesting to see a lame duck president bring up small yield nuclear bombs in the hands of terrorists. i'm sure it won't be easy going to Russia and saying, "hey, we're still angry about Ukraine, but can you do something so that one of your's doesn't go boom over here?" Building a small dirty bomb has got to be easier than smuggling something bigger out of a former nuclear superpower, i'm surprised (as well as overjoyed) it hasn't been done yet. I think what saves our ass is terrorist groups want big press, and turning one city block into a no-go zone doesn't impress wannabee recruits.
 kj521
Joined: 9/20/2015
Msg: 77
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/1/2016 3:39:10 PM
Mr. BigSal....

Is a colorblind man's perception of yellow any less "true" than the non colorblind man's?

Is the non colorblind man's pereception more "true" based upon the agreement of the majority?

Or is it possible.....just possible......that they may be equally "true" as both men's perceptions are based upon the experience of their reality?


Just a thought. :D
 deetristate
Joined: 12/4/2014
Msg: 78
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/1/2016 3:41:52 PM
There is only one truth. The rest is quibble.
 Bigguysal
Joined: 1/27/2016
Msg: 79
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/1/2016 4:26:41 PM
Ms. KJ, you confuse perceptions with facts. Perceptions is merely what a person perceives to be true perceives to be facts. Facts are facts, truth is truth, regardless of how they are perceived.

Opinions based on false facts or false perceptions are not true, nor are they partially true. They are simply wrong. Opinions based on lies are on the lowest rung of deserving respect.

Opinions based on actual facts can vary, but at least there is a valid basis for said opinion.


There is only one truth. The rest is quibble.


For the most part true. Of course, sometimes the actual truth is unattainable and so people do the best they can in ascertaining what they can ascertain. Regardless, nobody need respect nor buy into another person's "truths" when they are based on lies, bias, manipulation or nonsense. That much is clear.
 kj521
Joined: 9/20/2015
Msg: 80
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/1/2016 4:31:56 PM
But WHO, sir.....decides which facts are true or false?
 Bigguysal
Joined: 1/27/2016
Msg: 81
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/1/2016 5:34:26 PM
Depends on the facts at play. In this thread, the actual facts regarding israel and Iran are available from reputable source documents. When it comes to a leftist who begins salivating over a particular social issue, you can assume they will ignore true facts and perceive those facts justifying their conclusions. When it comes to Donald trump, depending on the definition, he either is or is not suffering from a personality disorder and you make your conclusion the best you can on his given attributes.

There was a supreme court justice in trying to define pornography from legitimate works of art given the protection of the first amendment, stated he could not define the distinction, but knew it when he saw it (in so many words)

So it is with bad character. If a person has a bad character, it is sometimes discernable from their posts. You know it when you see it. Nobody has any obligation to respect or accept the "truths" of a person of dubious character. Just the opposite. They should be taken to be as they portray themselves
 Jo van
Joined: 5/23/2009
Msg: 82
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 5:21:42 AM

There appears to be some truth in the viewpoints of Mr. Justine and Mr. Jo Van. But that is only one truth....now isn't it?
There are many perspectives.....each with their own truth. There is no one true truth.

Imagine if we lived in a World where we actually opened our eyes to validity of another's truth....knowing that it in no way has to compromise our own but can lend to an understanding and a mutual respect. Crazy thought....

Ms KJ
It's not at all that I'm unsympathetic to the "people-who-think-that-they're-jews", or even, more relevantly; the "people-who-the-nazis-thought-were-jews".
There were some terrible things done, because of that belief.

But if you really 'open your mind', and completely remove the belief in a "jewish-race";
what gave the "people-who-think-that-they're-jews", the "right" to take away the lands and homes of hundreds of thousands of Arabs, based purely on their own "biblical mythology"..?

They asked the Arabs, -who (naturally?) said "no", but then they went ahead, and did it anyway, using force.
-And as if that wasn't bad enough, ever since then, they've been lying, and covering it up.
I can't think of any 'excuses" for that.

I fully understand the horrors of the 'holocaust', (better than many, as I've heard first-hand accounts, from people actually involved, both victims, and perpetrators) but the "zionist" project began long before that.

I understand the "jews'" belief that they were only doing what they thought was 'best'. (For them, obviously)

The British Empire was also built with such delusions, those people also believed that they were doing "good work", they thought that they "civilised" the "barbarians", who believed in "other gods", by forcing christianity on them, and building an infrastructure, from the proceeds of slavery, and patriotic plundering of their stolen precious resources.
With the benefit of hindsight, few but a handful of 'nationalist' and 'racist' types, would still insist that such colonialisations were at all beneficial, to the countries taken over.

We now know that you have to consider the views and opinions of the inhabitants.
We now have recognised "human rights".

If the mythology of another religion claimed that 3,000 years ago THEIR "god" had "given them Florida", and about 20 million followers of that religion (scaled-up, for comparison) arrived in Florida, and began bulldozing existing homes, and building new ones, would you be so understanding about that?

The truth is in the history books. It's all on record, and can be checked, and cross-referenced.

The zionist "jews" decided to recreate the biblical holy lands. They felt they "deserved it", and it was felt by the mostly "christian" west, to be such a "noble cause", (-because it was all about religion, and how could religions ever be anything but "noble"?) that they threw their support behind it.
Their feeling was, that the existing population of Arabs' opinions and wishes counted for nothing.
This was a colonial mindset.
And "WE" had the weapons, and military strength, to force it through.

Israel has only survived there, on stolen land, surrounded by the hostile neighbours from whom they've stolen land, because the USA, Britain, France, Germany, even Russia to an extent, have funded, armed, and supplied them with support.

I think opinions are changing, slowly, as more people become aware of the history.
There is no justice in what has been done to the Palestinians, and for no good reason. (Other than to fulfill a religious fantasy, only dreamt-up in the late 19th century)

http://ifamericansknew.org/history/origin.html
Read it Ms KJ
It won't take long....
And then verify it, elsewhere.

If it's all "lies", why do so many people who identify as "jews", denounce the occupation?



Can you point out any true truths in the words of Mr. Justine or Mr. Jo Van? I mean something that can be argued as being in the least factually correct which can be supported by actual source information or atleast reputable media information?

I cited all my sources.
I note you simply claim it's "all lies", but failed to provide any supporting evidence, of the type you describe.
In other words, it's just your opinion.

-Which you're perfectly entitled to hold.
But please don't try to pass them off as "factual", when they clearly aren't.


Why in the world would any intelligent, educated person open their eyes to the validity of another's "truth", when that truth is nothing but falsehood based on bias, manipulation and false information. To assume that everybody's opinion has merit is folly. There are "dichotomous thinkers" on this board beyond doubt. The Leftists are among them . . . they always think the same way and react like Pavlov's dogs, as are the liars and manipulators.

Luckily, I haven't fallen prey to the "folly" of considering your opinions to have any merit.
They are weak, and unsupported, just ad-hominem, nothing more.

What I posted wasn't just my opinion,
they were factual, well-documented quotes, from reputable sources.

Eg. The New York Times interview with Moshe Dayan,
or Noam Chomsky, the eminent "jewish" linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist, historian, logician, social critic, and political activist. Sometimes described as "the father of modern linguistics," Chomsky is also a major figure in analytic philosophy, and one of the founders of the field of cognitive science. He has spent more than half a century at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he is Institute Professor Emeritus, and is the author of over 100 books on topics such as linguistics, war, politics, and mass media.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky

^^ I consider this man's opinion to have great merit.
He's a very clever man. IMHO
Purely coincidentally, Professor Chomsky and I, also agree, about "zionism".

I can't see how anyone could look at the facts of it's establishment, objectively, and NOT come to the conclusion that (with hindsight) a terrible injustice has been inflicted, on an entirely innocent population.
There can be no progress, towards peace, until those facts are at least, acknowledged, and past mistakes, admitted.
"The truth will set you free".
JMO
 caballerosiempre
Joined: 12/5/2015
Msg: 83
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 7:05:42 AM
Few people who believe in the "truth" will acknowledge that they have a special hatred reserved for Jews/Zionists/people who wear little caps on their heads..it's generally unfashionable in polite society to admit that. .doesn't change the fact of the special irrational hate reserved for that one group, above all others.
 Bigguysal
Joined: 1/27/2016
Msg: 84
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 7:25:02 AM
Yes, it is the bad character issue in play here. We all know it when we see it. We should never even partially validate the opinions of these people. To even suggest they speak partial truths deserving respect helps to empower them.
 _mungojoe_
Joined: 10/1/2014
Msg: 85
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 9:12:07 AM

Yes, it is the bad character issue in play here. We all know it when we see it. We should never even partially validate the opinions of these people. To even suggest they speak partial truths deserving respect helps to empower them.

And yet, I have yet to see you post any facts to support these claims of "the character" of others...

Or even one fact which demonstrates the falseness of what they have posted...

Just lots of OPINION about their "character" and the "quality" of their claims... but NO facts relating to them...

I am strongly reminded of "marilyn" attempting, unsuccessfully, to sound "nice" and "studious" rather than "typical" and "unintelligent"...

Why is that...?
 Bigguysal
Joined: 1/27/2016
Msg: 86
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 9:37:40 AM
Marilyn? who is marilyn?

I simply am suggesting that the character of the people have to be taken into account before consideration of whether they have any truths to offer. I suggest people of bad character and people who are nothing more than pavlov's dogs, the type who automatically foam at the mouth at a given social situation, have little to offer by way of opinion or truth and that their "truths" are not truths at all, either in whole or in part.
 kj521
Joined: 9/20/2015
Msg: 87
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 10:05:38 AM
Mr. Jovan.....

I would like to thank you for taking the time and effort you put forth that is so very evident in your post to me. :)

I read your link which was no easy task for me....as it required much disapline! Not sure if you realized this but I am more drawn to the pursuit of love. It's my opinion that learning history would so much more palpable in the context of a torrid rommance! And.....for goodness sakes....there was not even a HINT of a love interest in that story! Sheesh!

But.....that was not the sole source of my disappointment. It was the very self evident biased nature of the link, regardless or not, of the religious leanings of the source quotes. I am sure you will disagree....and I respect that. I could pick out specifics and do some research to find counter expert opinions which you could then counter and it would go and on. But what purpose would that serve? It wouldn't bring peace to Israel and Palestine nor you or I closer to love! I suggest that if you could cast aside your own personal biases and looked at that link as a whole....it is possible that you may see its' slant. That is not to say there isn't truth in it.....just not the complete truth.

So even though my disappointment is somewhat eased by your bolding my name..(insert small hint of a smile and coquestishly lowered eyelashes emoji) I stand by my premise.....there is no ONE true truth....so I shall continue my search to find an objective one as is humanly possible. :)
 _mungojoe_
Joined: 10/1/2014
Msg: 88
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 10:50:38 AM

I simply am suggesting that the character of the people have to be taken into account before consideration of whether they have any truths to offer.

And "suggesting" is ALL you are doing...

Again, you haven't presented anything close to a "thesis" on the matter, no facts, no evidence, not even a reasonable basis for "What constitutes "bad" vs. "good" character" sufficient to support the dichotomy (what makes this even more "funny" are your complaints about "dichotomous thinkers" all the while establishing your own "dichotomous thinking" with an undefined "good vs. bad character" claim)... And certainly NOTHING to establish "bad character" on the part of anyone or that it is automatically evidence of "falseness" or a "lack of truth"...

If you were to establish that a particular person is likely holding a personal bias relevant to the issue (a racial bias, for instance)... then you would have grounds to consider that person's opinions should be "taken with a grain of salt" (i.e. "investigated" further)... but even that does not lead inherently or automatically to a rational belief that every opinion is necessarily "not true" ...

By way of example: A racist can state a number of things that are "true" of a broad group such as "1/4 of all American blacks live in poverty" and "only 1/10th of American whites live in poverty"... Those are "true" statements, regardless of what the person's bias is and that "truth" can be confirmed... The effect of the bias doesn't enter into the "truth" of that until the person makes claims regarding WHAT THAT MEANS ABOUT, or WHAT SHOULD BE DONE TO/ABOUT, that broader group based on the bias...

I haven't seen any of that in your posts... Just some unsupported statements about some undefined "good vs. bad character"...

Marilyn? who is marilyn?

I find it quite humourous that you could claim to know all about the "character" of Jo van or Justinelle without ever having encountered "marilyn"...

Surely you MUST have read back far enough in the thread to have a rational and reasonable basis for your claims about "character"... Or did you NOT do that (which would mean you are "pulling this out of your a$$")...?

And if you DID read back, how could you possibly have missed the "character" of "marilyn", making the same claims about their "character" as you, in doing so...?
 Bigguysal
Joined: 1/27/2016
Msg: 89
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:12:08 AM
Mr. Mungojoe, let's not over think this. People who are inherently biased, including too far left or too far right, can simply not be relied on to be trustworthy. Trustworthy people search out the real truth, not imagined truths. They rely on real facts, not imagined or dubious facts or fabricated facts supported by dubios websites and dubious links.

When people are untrustworthy. When they are biased. When they are unable to support their opinions with reliable and credible sources, than their "truths" are not truths at all, and should not be accepted or respected, in whole or in the smallest part, by people who are interested in the real truth.

There are real truths out there. Absolute truths out there. Perceptions, opinions never change the true facts.

As for Mr. Jovian, I referred to his post because Ms KJ521 seemed to suggest his truth must be considered with all others. It took me only seconds to recognize his poor character and his untrustworthy nature, thus the recognition his "truth" deserves no consideration or respect, which ms kj apparently verified by pointing out the questionable nature of his sources.

Same with Pavlovs dogs. Regardless of the facts, they will always respond the same way to a given stimuli, thus evidencing the untrustworthy nature of their "truths".
 kj521
Joined: 9/20/2015
Msg: 90
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:28:01 AM
"Perceptions, opinions never change the true facts."


It does in my colorblind vs. non colorblind analogy, Mr. Sal.

The only true fact is that each person's anatomy & physiology is different.

It doesn't change the "truthfullness" of each owns' construct of "yellow".


Just sayin. :)


And....I really dislike the word never. Must be the oppositional/deviant 2 two year old inside me. :D


*****My opinion is nothing more than that. I do not claim to know the truth about much of anything. And it should be noted that mine are based much more so on feeling rather than logic and reasoning.
 high-ground
Joined: 6/16/2013
Msg: 91
view profile
History
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 11:54:45 AM
Jo van,

Following link is pretty impressive history of Palestine and its occupation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Palestine

Now in the USA we fly a Flag that is suppose to be independent of religion, but bias has always been in the elected body and its courts. Although not perfect many people from around the world migrate in hopes to live here permanently.

So, in the case of Israel and its government, a democracy (not perfect) it is not governed by religious laws, although again there is bias. If you were given a choice to live in any Arab or Muslin governed country, or Israel, which would you choose and why? Remember the link above said there were many of the Jewish faith already in Palestine, before Israel was formed.

I wrote the above because a man at the local Gym from Iran and I got to talking. Then I asked if he was Muslim, but he said he was Zoroastrianism, a religion dominant in the Iran region before 800 AD. Due to biased laws, most were forced to gradually convert or move, or live in the shadows. Nothing remains the same, but I do know the difference between honey and vinegar.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroastrianism
 Bigguysal
Joined: 1/27/2016
Msg: 92
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 1:30:34 PM
The color perception is not a fair analogy Ms KJ521. That is because color does not exist independent of its perception. The brain perceives color and we have no idea if your blue is my blue, nor if you will smell the same rose aroma as I will smell. . That does not vitiate against the existence of absolute facts in the political and scientific arenas.

Just because a person, for example, believes a conspiracy theory, and claims the words of witnesses proves the conspiracy does not mean the conspiracy theory is factual. Especially when that person is of bad character and/or one of Pavlov's dogs. Character and bias must be given great weight.
 _mungojoe_
Joined: 10/1/2014
Msg: 93
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 1:51:10 PM

Mr. Mungojoe, let's not over think this.

Neither should we "under-think" the question... That leads far more quickly to this "dichotomous thinking" you were referring to than "over-thinking" ever will...

People who are inherently biased, including too far left or too far right, can simply not be relied on to be trustworthy.

And this is a prime example of "under-thinking" in action... Even the "untrustworthy" (this is a value judgement, not a fact) will hit on the "truth", quite often actually... The problem lies in how that "truth" is interpreted (this is the perception part)...

The "untrustworthy" can be "fact checked" to ascertain the elements which are "true" and how that "truth" compares when juxtaposed with the interpretation being imposed on that truth...

Again, by example: The biased individual asserts "black Americans are lazy, irresponsible, ne'er-do-wells"... and follows this with "1/4 of all black Americans live in poverty" as proof of the assertion... It is by analysis of the "truth" that the bias of the opinion becomes obvious in that, the stated "truth" does not support the assertion derived from this "truth"...

Just because a person, for example, believes a conspiracy theory, and claims the words of witnesses proves the conspiracy does not mean the conspiracy theory is factual. Especially when that person is of bad character and/or one of Pavlovs dogs. Character must be given great weight.

But it DOES NOT mean that the witness statements are not themselves "true"... That "truth" is independent of the "truth" of the conspiracy assertion...

However, your assertion attempts to link these independent "truths/non-truths" as if they were one and the same, intrinsically linked but they aren't...

This "character" which you are assigning so much weight does NOT change the "truth" of the witness statements simply because the possessor of that "character" uses them to assert an "untrue" conclusion...

Assuming otherwise is EXACTLY the kind of "dichotomous thinking" you are ascribing to others...
 Bigguysal
Joined: 1/27/2016
Msg: 94
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 2:03:40 PM
No, the truth is the truth regardless of who speaks it and the bad character of the person speaking it. That is the whole point. And truth is not determined by how much a person believes something to be true.

On the otherhand, we still have to consider the character of the speaker in considering whether their truths are worthy of consideration or respect. For example, Mr. Jovian spoke what he claimed was truth. I did not bother looking at his sources because his bad character convinced me that his truths were false, as confirmed by Ms KJ521, who claims he uses biased sources.

The point being that we need not, indeed should not accept or consider false "truths" as originally suggested by Ms Kj521. And a person of bad character is far more likely to speak a false truth, although yes, even a broken clock tells the correct time at least twice a day. Bad character, Pavlovs dogs, just a filtering mechanism to help a person recognize real truths and false truths.
 caballerosiempre
Joined: 12/5/2015
Msg: 95
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 2:19:39 PM
rock on Jew-haters..it is at least entertaining to read your foaming at the mouth denunciations of Israel, coupled with the humorous denials that hating Jews has anything at all to do with the reason multiple threads are focused on denouncing Israel, with none about many other countries with atrocious murderous dictatorships..yeah yeah I know..¨´öff-topic¨still interesting..just like the UN has denounced Israel far more times than any other country, although objectively many trample far more on human rights and kill thousadns or millions.
the UN can always count on paragons of virtue & human rights like Saudi Arabia, Libya, Zimbabwe & many other slaughter-houses to ´denounce´Israel..but never their own countries, they are exempt. Mass killers such as Mugabe are acceptable, it appears that when those identified as ´black´kill other ´blacks´´, all is good.

interesting..it says a lot about the inner beliefs of many, even though few will admit their hate..cotter even has suggested that Israel assassinated a US President- JFK-in order to further their nuclear weapons program..interesting even if 100% unsubstantiated..anyone can accuse.
 Bigguysal
Joined: 1/27/2016
Msg: 96
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 2:31:34 PM
Exactly why caball, these false truths are not worthy of respect, consideration or acceptance. Based on the bad character of the speaker, it is almost a given that they speak lies. Nobody need treat a bad character person such as Mr. Jovian with respect.

Nobody need accept the nonsense of a salivating dog as speaking partial truths. Any person of good character, for example, of intellect, will recognize the absolute and well known truth of the politicalization of the UN. When they don't, when they use it to their advantage, they are by definition disingenuous people of bad character, and they deserve to be treated as such.
 _mungojoe_
Joined: 10/1/2014
Msg: 97
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 2:39:18 PM

No, the truth is the truth regardless of who speaks it and the bad character of the person speaking it. That is the whole point.

Which is not at all the point you have been making... but it is the point I have been trying to get across to you... I'm glad that you "see" that (well, sort of "see" it, acknowledging and practicing are two different things)...

On the otherhand, we still have to consider the character of the speaker in considering whether their truths are worthy of consideration or respect.

And this is what led me to "well, sort of"... All truth is truth, you yourself acknowledge this... and all truth is worthy of consideration and respect regardless of one's personal perception of the "character" of the speaker...

This assumption of yours... that "character" determines whether truth is worthy of consideration and respect is exactly the opposite of "truth is truth regardless of who speaks it"... And your abject rejection of it without assessing the difference between "truth" and "opinion" is again, a prime example of "dichotomous thinking", that truth only deserves respect and consideration IF you like the "character" of the speaker...

real truths and false truths.

There is no such distinction of truth... either it is true or it isn't... and that isn't changed by the "character" of the speaker or even the form in which the speaker presents it (e.g. rhetorical vs. dialectic)... Even pathological liars are capable of stating a truth, and such truths are not wholely invalidated merely by virtue of that "character"...
 Bigguysal
Joined: 1/27/2016
Msg: 98
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 2:44:30 PM
We agree Mr. Mungojoe. Again that has always been my point. But you dismiss another element I have added to the mix...character. Every person's character must be considered in evaluating whether we accept that persons words as more or less likely true. In other words, the character speaks to the weight to put on a person's words. If a person is of poor character, their words are less likely to be true. Simple concept really.
 Onyx49
Joined: 3/6/2016
Msg: 99
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 3:41:34 PM
This thread has gone off the tracks...all of you fccker's are acting like you're on meet the press...back to the topic please.

Go Carolina Tarheels
 aj17225
Joined: 1/20/2016
Msg: 100
Will Israel Strike Iran First?
Posted: 4/2/2016 8:03:41 PM
"Noam_Chomsky

^^ I consider this man's opinion to have great merit."


^^^^^^^^^ Jovan, you may want to do some more in-depth reading about Mr Chomsky. Or maybe you have and prefer to still admire this person. If so, it speaks volumes.....IMO
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Will Israel Strike Iran First?