#Yuyutsu

You ask:
" Are you saying that today there are no longer any Jews who would, if they could get away with it, torture and exterminate all Arabs, men women and children?"

No I am not. Arab-hatred by some Jews does exist and needs to be stamped out - as does Jew-hatred among Arabs.

You distort this evident truth when stating:
"We regret the anti-Semitic education in Palestinian schools, the derogatory songs and ugly pictures of Jews, but we often forget that some sectors of the Israeli society teach Jewish children similar things about Arabs: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ynet.co.il%2Farticles%2F0%2C7340%2CL-1877130%2C00.html

You ignore the following statements in your linked article:
"The director of the public department at the Jewish Action Center for Pluralism, Gilad Karib, sent a letter to the Education Minister demanding she investigate the situation and curb "trends towards radicalization." The head of the Centre, Anat Hoffmann, says that it was pity that a third of the children chose to express patriotism by expressions of hatred towards the hatred. She regarded it as an educational and moral failure.

The head of the Education Committee in the Knesset, MK Zvulun Orlav (National Religious Party MAFDAL) said that the letters reflect an educational failure despite being written in a climate of terrorists attacks. "There is no reason for the Religous-Zionist pupils to express themselves that way" he said.

The Ministry of Education forbade the Heads of the two Schools to comment on the issue. The Ministry commented that the system educated the children to be tolerant. The Head of the Ministry was stunned by the letters. The Ministry promised to investigate the issue and to take steps for better guidance to pupils."
http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/php/art.php?aid=21353

There was an immediate response in Israel of condemnation and revulsion - which you just somehow failed to mention.

Was this an oversight on your part in failing to read the contents of your own link or deliberate concealment?

Which was it #Yuyutsu?

The PLO and Hamas however never condemn the teaching of Jew-hatred in Palestinian schools since it complements the Jew-hatred provisions of their respective Charters.

I was already getting over this thread a few days back, I started to feel like it had run its course.
I still had a few valid points to make but it felt like it would be a effort to try to argue them out and I was going to let it all go.
But David, your comment referring to valid facts I made as 'more distortions and lies' has annoyed me on a level that I am now going to make all of these points... and more.

Firstly my right to speak freely is protected.
If you don't like it take it up with the Australian Government.
I'm tired of you trying to use the law against me when obviously you dont know it.

Making a fair comment, if the comment is an expression of a person’s genuine belief is not against the law if “done reasonably and in good faith”.

http://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/race-discrimination/publications/know-your-rights-racial-discrimination-and-vilification

Also, since this article discusses ending anonymity on the internet and policing (and therefore prosecuting) Australian citizens for infringements of unfavorable speech, and that we've already established that Israel is behind the push for these new laws then that means that ANY AND ALL criticisms of Israel are now fair game on this thread, in an effort to find out what does and does not constitute 'Anti-Semitism' and 'Hate Speech', and how these laws once introduced would create a precedent for more laws that would restrict Australians freedom of speech.

Get it? You can't touch me. So lay off the bs for once.
You dont even take part in the website in the spirit its supposed to be done in.
You don't post articles for reasonable discussion, more often than not you post propaganda which you back up with accusations of 'Anti-Semitism' and 'Hate Speech'.

[cont]
If I want to bring up Leon Bronstein, Jewish Bolshevism and the NKVD (I could relate some sickening stories there), I could. If I want to bring up Johnathon Pollard, or the bombing of the USS Liberty, the Jewish involvement in US immigration laws or the fact Israel profits off the occupation I could. If I want to bring up the nuclear bomb factory under Dimona thats never been acknowledged or the control of western Banking and Media I can. If I want to bring up the Clean Break document, the Zionist Plan for the Middle East document and western involvement in M/E wars backed by Pro-Israel Neocons I can. If I want to state that its my opinion that Israel capitalises more politically off the stabbing of its own people than it would capitalise off genuinely making peace I can. If I want to link to facts in David Duke videos or David Icke videos on Rothschild Zionism I can. If I want to complete all those 1 to 100 examples of genuine Jewish hypocrisy like I started to, I can.

It's all fair comment.
I'm going to finish the first half dozen examples that I started earlier because it creates a context for how these proposed laws might affect Australians.

For all the readers who do identify as Israeli, Jewish or Zionist I want to apologise in advance if I have the terminology wrong when referencing each demographic and I also want to relate that I do not wish to come across as being racist or discriminatory in any way when presenting my arguments, which are my genuine thoughts and I'll try my best to put them forward in a fair and reasonable manner.

I'm going to try to reasonably argue out this whole 'Anti-Semitic' and 'Hate Speech' thing.

Example 1 BDS.
I've already substantiated my argument that the people (representing Judea) did indeed place a boycott upon Germany on 24 March 1933 prior to David's timeline and prior to WWII.

(David could just as fairly be accused of deliberate concealment.)

If Israel claims BDS is Anti-Semitic and a crime against Israel, then by extension should Israel not also accept that (people respresenting Judea) committed a similar crime against Germany and together with a Declaration of War must take some responsibility for provoking Hitler and of the events of WWII, in so much as the way they were ultimately singled out and persecuted?

If Israel refuses to accept BDS as a legitimate non-violent form of protest and considers it a provocation and a form of racial discrimination then it should also accept that their own boycott of Germany was also a provocation and a form of racial discrimination against Germans; which ultimately lead to Jews being singled out and persecuted by Germans during WWII.

If it claims BDS is provocative NOW, it must accept it provoked Germany THEN.
It can't have its cake and eat it too.

Example 2 Holocaust.
Firstly I want to respectfully make a comparison about another event, 9/11 and question why we don't seek to outlaw speech and prosecute people who question that official story?
Why is it that the Holocaust is off limits if other events in which the official story could be questioned are not?
So this is another example of hypocrisy.

I'd like to know how many people read my previous comment and have had their finger half-cocked for several days waiting to discriminate against me with the thought 'holocaust-denier' when I'd not actually said anything controversial?
You we're already discriminating against me and I hadn't even done anything wrong.
I doub't those of you that did would admit it, but you'll have to admit it to yourselves.

I don't even necessarily have to give credit to your intended claims, I don't need to.

I could simply present a factual list of the facilities at Auschwitz and question whether it was intentionally built as a death camp.

I don't need to 'go to the we find this stuff offensive and distasteful' area of questioning the amount of deaths (in connection to purported numbers in Europe at the time), whether deaths were from typhus, or starvation (due to supply lines cut nearing the end of the war) or gas chambers, for which there seems to be no residue of Zyclon B detected on the walls (please don't tell me to drink acid again Toni).

I don't even need to question these other things I just mentioned above, as simply presenting a list of the facilities at Auschwitz would be enough in itself to create doubt to the question of whether the place was built as a death camp, and it surely invoke an 'Anti-Semitic' and 'Hate Speech' response, even though they're simply facts.

I'll continue with this tomorrow...

//On freedom of speech - I have my opinion - you have yours.//

That's nice Dave.

But I asked for your opinions on security and privacy. You're not the sharpest pencil in the box are you Dave?

//I thought we had reached a reasonable compromise when you agreed you could live with some (but not all) web sites containing the following statement//

I didn't 'agree' I 'could live with' some (but not all) web sites containing the following statement. I suggested it. When I asked you to clarify your position:

//You're contradicting yourself, Dave. On Monday it was ALL websites that you wanted to adopt your anti-privacy measures:

//Would you object if the following condition of publication was imposed by all web sites//

But on Tuesday, I am 'spot on' when I say that it would be acceptable if only some websites choose to do it:

//"I don't mind if some websites do it, I can just avoid those websites."

Spot on.//

So which do you really support, Dave? Some websites adopting your idea if they choose to, or all websites being required to adopt your idea whether they like it or not?//

You dodged the question. Which I took to mean that you supported ALL websites requiring your anti-privacy measures, given that that was your initial position.

Would have been easier just to answer the question, wouldn't it Dave?