Dear David S,

You keep asking questions that I have already answered so it is apparent that you really don't care what I or anybody else say but just want to push your views.

I don't think a judge would let you argue that way in court.

However, I will post next time I see an article from you. I don't expect you to listen, but I like to let others know that I don't agree. It isn't likely that you will post much that I find agreeable.

Dear Mr Singer,

The reason for my tardy reply is twofold; firstly I have been overly busy but more importantly I did not want to interrupt the conversation between yourself and davidf. I felt what he had to say was important and uplifting so I suppose a small thank you must go to yourself for getting him to so clearly voice his position. He has almost brought me around to a single state solution.

Thank yous aside I am not going to apologise to you. You may have misunderstood me so I will be quite clear, I used my web browser Firefox to look over your last six contributions to Online Opinion and found you have used neither the word Palestinians nor the term Palestinian Arabs within them. That was my contention and I offered you the chance to refute it but nothing was forthcoming except a reference to other works.

You said;

"The use of loose language is too frequent in any discourse regarding the ongoing conflict between Jews and Arabs. I try to avoid that in my articles and warn against it whenever I can."

Bull! How more loose could one possibly get than using the words Jews and Arabs in describing the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis?

In your own words "Language regrettably can be misused or abused or simply misinterpreted.", indeed!

Finally to your statement, "I am still waiting for an apology from you for alleging I have never used the term "Palestinian Arabs" in any of my articles. The clear innuendo that I am a liar is defamatory and should be withdrawn by you.".

Please don't use legalese to try and intimidate anyone on a discussion forum. I regard it as cowardly and I don't think I would be alone in that view. A more careful reading of what I have said in earlier posts would show exactly what I was referring to and as a lawyer careful reading should be your craft.

#csteele

Is it that hard for you to say:
"I now note that you frequently used the term "Palestinian Arabs" in many articles written by you and my suggestion that you have not used that term - based on my scrutiny of your last six articles - was incorrect"

You also state:
"How more loose could one possibly get than using the words Jews and Arabs in describing the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis?"

I am being very precise in my use of that language. This dispute has always been one between Jews and Arabs - of Jews - seeking to reconstitute their national home in Palestine for themselves and future generations of Jews as sanctioned by the League of Nations - opposed by Arabs - those then living in Palestine and also those living in the former Ottoman Empire which now comprises 21 Arab States. Only two - Jordan and Egypt - have been prepared to recognise Israel during this ongoing conflict which has lasted 90 years.

I will not stop using this language to define the conflict. It started long before 1948 and is ongoing in 2010.

Why do you refer to the use of such language as "loose"?

Also how do you define the terms "Palestinians" and "Israelis" as used by you in the statement above?

Dear Mr Singer,

You said; “I prefer to use the term "Palestinian Arabs" in my articles as another search by you on Firefox will no doubt establish.” in a blatant attempt to deflect from my very salient point that you managed to write 6000 words on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict without using the word Palestinians.

In my view you were implying that you had instead used the term "Palestinian Arabs" in those articles which was not correct and have since been trying to wriggle your way out of it by saying you were referring to different articles altogether.

It is up to others whether or not they buy it but I'm not.

You ask;

Also how do you define the terms "Palestinians" and "Israelis" as used by you in the statement above?

An interesting question, should I be lumping the Mizrahi Jews living in Palestine before the formation of Israel with their then Arab neighbours as Palestinians? This would mean describing the colonising European refugees, determined to form their own state, as Israelis. Not sure I'm entirely comfortable with this but it will do for a start.

How am I doing?

#csteele

Your "very salient point" was not worth the paper it was written on. Just a lot of hot air based on an incomplete analysis of the many articles I have written. Better to wipe the egg off your face now than continue to walk around with it plainly visible for all to see.

Trying to discredit me on the basis of my last six articles without bothering to look at all my articles may have seemed attractive to you at the time. Given the explanation I gave you I would have expected a retraction. I regret you are not big enough to do so.

It further appears from your uncertain response that you use the terms "Palestinians" and "Israelis" without really knowing what you mean.

Instead of asking my advice why don't you just define both of these terms - as you understand them.

Otherwise I may take the view that you don't really know what you are talking about and are simply mouthing the words of others without understanding their meaning.

When you tell me what you mean then maybe we can continue this conversation. Until you do we are wasting each others time.

I have given you my meaning of "Jews" and "Arabs" in defining the conflict as being one between these two groups.

Is it that difficult for you to do the same in relation to your defining the conflict as one between "Palestinians" and Israelis"?

I ask once again - who do you include in the term "Palestinians" and who do you include in the term "Israelis"?

Dear Mr Singer,

I was finding you concerning but now I think you are amusing, as my grandfather would say with a hint of admiration in his voice, “What a bloody hide!”, usually followed with “Does he have no shame?”

However 'concerning' was also interesting, 'amusing' less so therefore we had best leave it there until your next contribution to OLO.

And yes I will find it interesting to see if you have included the word Palestinians. From where I sit not to do so will certainly discredit you.