Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Responding to Wired's ad hominem hatchet job

paranoia.dubfire.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 170 posts

Re: Responding to Wired's ad hominem hatchet job

#141

Post by [deleted] »

philwelch wrote: post #72
crag wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An the same goes for antisemitism. In America, [publicly] write anything critical of the Israeli government and you are labeled an anti-Semite.

Criticizing the actions of any government is what it is, but many critics of Israel go so far as to say there should be no Jewish state, which in effect means the Jews should be a people without a homeland, forever vulnerable to extermination by the Gentiles they are forced to live amongst as an eternal minority. That alone is suspicious as it carries the shadow of antisemitism, but once you throw in explicit support…

[deleted]

Re: Responding to Wired's ad hominem hatchet job

#142

Post by ta12121 »

philwelch wrote: post #72
crag wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An the same goes for antisemitism. In America, [publicly] write anything critical of the Israeli government and you are labeled an anti-Semite.

Criticizing the actions of any government is what it is, but many critics of Israel go so far as to say there should be no Jewish state, which in effect means the Jews should be a people without a homeland, forever vulnerable to extermination by the Gentiles they are forced to live amongst as an eternal minority. That alone is suspicious as it carries the shadow of antisemitism, but once you throw in explicit support…

There are many nationalities and ethnic groups that no longer have their own sovereign nation. Are they all "vulnerable to extermination by the Gentiles"?

Re: Responding to Wired's ad hominem hatchet job

#143

Post by smackfu »

sn0rd wrote: post #122
tesseractive wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this your pet theory, or do you have some way of documenting that it was staged? And do you have examples of records on the internet where this attack was discussed before? I'm not saying that you are mistaken, nor am I saying that you are lying. But I can't accept an assertion like that at face value without seeing some supporting evidence.

I can accept that. I don't have anything that I'm willing to share. To be sure, I'm not suggesting that any of the companies (Apple, Google, Etc.) were willing participants. Likewise, if you're looking for a discussion of this exact implementation of exploiting the trust relationships created by users of cloud services, you'll not find it. That said, exploiting trust relationships that users naturally create in the c…

Ha!

>I don't have anything that I'm willing to share.

That's a great phrase than can truthfully mean both:

"I have stuff that I'm not willing to share." and "I don't got nothing."

Re: Responding to Wired's ad hominem hatchet job

#144

Post by sn0rd »

smackfu wrote: post #143
sn0rd wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can accept that. I don't have anything that I'm willing to share. To be sure, I'm not suggesting that any of the companies (Apple, Google, Etc.) were willing participants. Likewise, if you're looking for a discussion of this exact implementation of exploiting the trust relationships created by users of cloud services, you'll not find it. That said, exploiting trust relationships that users naturally create in the c…

Ha! >I don't have anything that I'm willing to share. That's a great phrase than can truthfully mean both: "I have stuff that I'm not willing to share." and "I don't got nothing."

I'm going to channel Harry Reid on this one and ask that my claims are disproved. Let's see the logs. Let's see the communications with "The Hacker".

Re: Responding to Wired's ad hominem hatchet job

#145

Post by philwelch »

ta12121 wrote: post #142
philwelch wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Criticizing the actions of any government is what it is, but many critics of Israel go so far as to say there should be no Jewish state, which in effect means the Jews should be a people without a homeland, forever vulnerable to extermination by the Gentiles they are forced to live amongst as an eternal minority. That alone is suspicious as it carries the shadow of antisemitism, but once you throw in explicit support…

There are many nationalities and ethnic groups that no longer have their own sovereign nation. Are they all "vulnerable to extermination by the Gentiles"?

That depends. Do we have a long history of trying to exterminate those other nations? We have a very long history of trying to exterminate the Jews, or oppressing them regardless.

Re: Responding to Wired's ad hominem hatchet job

#146

Post by philwelch »

AkThhhpppt wrote: post #138
philwelch wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never justified the settlements, I just think anti-Israeli sentiment wouldn't be improved any by removing the settlements. It almost doesn't matter if Israel does everything right or wrong anyway, because that's not the reason the world hates them.

Why do you think the world hates them, then? (aside: There's a long distance between "please stop allowing or encouraging your government to treat other human beings in this terrible, terrible manner. Please think about the crimes done to them by your parents and grandparents - and by you. Please consider how you can encourage peace," and "we hate you." Or there should be, anyway; there are some very invested people.…

The bulk of the reason is antisemitism, with a good dose of groupthink on the side. In other words, it's become fashionable to hate Israel regardless of their actions.

When they make settlements it disturbs the peace process; when they unilaterally remove settlements, it also undermines the peace process. When they bomb or occupy a neighboring country it's an overreaction, but when that neighboring country is firing rockets into Israeli neighborhoods it isn't their responsibility. When a terrorist hate group takes control of Gaza and breaks away from the Palestinian Authority, they aren't disturbing the peace process, but when Israel and Egypt jointly declare a blockade on Gaza and Israel captures a "flotilla" trying to run the blockade, Israel are the oppressors--even though the supplies carried on the flotilla were merely inspected and passed through to Gaza anyway.

It's generous, and likely accurate, to say that those who hate Israel aren't thinking critically. Most people who take up intellectual fashions aren't thinking critically--that's why they take up intellectual fashions in the first place. But the more passionate ones are likely antisemitic. There are fair criticisms to be made, but there are also plenty of double standards at play as well.

Re: Responding to Wired's ad hominem hatchet job

#147

Post by AkThhhpppt »

philwelch wrote: post #146
AkThhhpppt wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think the world hates them, then? (aside: There's a long distance between "please stop allowing or encouraging your government to treat other human beings in this terrible, terrible manner. Please think about the crimes done to them by your parents and grandparents - and by you. Please consider how you can encourage peace," and "we hate you." Or there should be, anyway; there are some very invested people.…

The bulk of the reason is antisemitism, with a good dose of groupthink on the side. In other words, it's become fashionable to hate Israel regardless of their actions. When they make settlements it disturbs the peace process; when they unilaterally remove settlements, it also undermines the peace process. When they bomb or occupy a neighboring country it's an overreaction, but when that neighboring country is firing…

When a terrorist hate group is the elected government of the Palestinian Authority, we expect you to deal with them as the elected government. Not to like it, but to do it. Martin McGuinness, former member of the IRA army council, is Deputy Minister of Northern Ireland - a country he ran bombing campaigns to destroy (I'm not exaggerating: the explicit aim of the 30-year PIRA campaign was a reunited Ireland). Nelson Mandela is a convicted terrorist. We expect so much from you, yes. No-one expects this much from people they hate.

That tar-brush you're waving around is very, very wide.

Re: Responding to Wired's ad hominem hatchet job

#148

Post by ta12121 »

philwelch wrote: post #145
ta12121 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many nationalities and ethnic groups that no longer have their own sovereign nation. Are they all "vulnerable to extermination by the Gentiles"?

That depends. Do we have a long history of trying to exterminate those other nations? We have a very long history of trying to exterminate the Jews, or oppressing them regardless.

The Romani have been historically oppressed, and were the victims of genocide along with Jews in the Holocaust. Where should their sovereign state be located?

I hope I'm not being a jerk, but there were lots of Jews in the first half of the 20th century that were opposed to Zionism. I assume you wouldn't accuse them all of being antisemitic.

Re: Responding to Wired's ad hominem hatchet job

#149

Post by philwelch »

ta12121 wrote: post #148
philwelch wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends. Do we have a long history of trying to exterminate those other nations? We have a very long history of trying to exterminate the Jews, or oppressing them regardless.

The Romani have been historically oppressed, and were the victims of genocide along with Jews in the Holocaust. Where should their sovereign state be located? I hope I'm not being a jerk, but there were lots of Jews in the first half of the 20th century that were opposed to Zionism. I assume you wouldn't accuse them all of being antisemitic.

Obviously not. But it's not up to Gentiles to decide the best strategy for the Jews to defend themselves from us, either. Likewise, what the Romani do to protect their nation is up to them.

Re: Responding to Wired's ad hominem hatchet job

#150

Post by philwelch »

AkThhhpppt wrote: post #147
philwelch wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bulk of the reason is antisemitism, with a good dose of groupthink on the side. In other words, it's become fashionable to hate Israel regardless of their actions. When they make settlements it disturbs the peace process; when they unilaterally remove settlements, it also undermines the peace process. When they bomb or occupy a neighboring country it's an overreaction, but when that neighboring country is firing…

When a terrorist hate group is the elected government of the Palestinian Authority, we expect you to deal with them as the elected government. Not to like it, but to do it. Martin McGuinness, former member of the IRA army council, is Deputy Minister of Northern Ireland - a country he ran bombing campaigns to destroy (I'm not exaggerating: the explicit aim of the 30-year PIRA campaign was a reunited Ireland). Nelson M…

How do you propose Israel deal with a group whose charter calls for the destruction of Israel?

Perhaps McGuinness is reformed (you did say former member of the IRA army council). Does he continue to call for the destruction of Great Britain? If not, you can negotiate with that. Israel has long negotiated with Palestinian factions that endorse a two-state solution, such as Fatah. Mandela accomplished the destruction of apartheid, and it was only by De Klerk's agreement to the end of apartheid that he and Mandela could deal with each other. With Hamas, only the destruction of Israel will suffice. What exactly is there to deal with?

Post reply on HN