MOD ALERT Palestinians - Their hatred is the cause of their misery.

It doesnt metter if you thing its stupid or not, because that is the reality! the Arabs (or as you like to call them- Palestinians) signed Oslo agreement with the acceptnece of the military presence in the Arab cities- this is a fact!

its a fact? how come? Hebron (an Arab city today) was a jewish city, Jericho also, Jerusalem was founded by king David (and you have archiological finds to streghthen it), Judea and Samaria is a Jewish land and thsi is a FACT (not by me but by arachiologists)

[QUOTEI did. I provided you with a legal analysis of ISRAELI JURSIPRUDENCE where the Israeli Supreme Court has ruled the West Bank to be under "belligerent military occupation". And even includes a discussion about the Geneva Conventions and international law as it relates to domestic Israeli law.
][/QUOTE]

I know all about ISRAELI JURSIPRUDENCE, dont worry about me!
I provided you with a existing international agreement, and you still refuse to refer to it.
Occupation territory cant be one if Israel didnt take control over the land from other country (and when Jurden was in control of the West Bank it was never accepted by the world, so because of it Israel is not occupated enything!

The Arabs did accpet that the IDF will be in the Arab cities and will prvide security because they agreeed to Oslo agreement, this is not so dificult!
How ridiculous it is? so you say that an international agreement is just wrong?
Dont try to dissmis FACTS, because you cant do it!

 

They agreed to a phased process.

Judea and Samaria WERE jewish in the ancient past, but what was 2,000 years ago is IRRELEVANT to the political realities of today.

So why are you persisting in this churlish illogical argument?

No, when Jordan was in control of the West Bank, the arabs living there REJECTED annexation and citizenship because they wanted their own nation. How foolish of them to desire their own nation, eh?

You are right its not difficult, its obviously and painfully absurd.

I dont dismiss facts. I guess what is completely over your head is that FACT that as a new signatory of the Geneva Conventions (GC I-IV, and protocol I) the Palestinian Authority is internationally recognized a) as a nation. Therefore you argument that no nation existed prior to the occupation is inapplicable.

I can't decide if its merely English as a second language rendering your arguments so pathetically weak or if you are merely a patriotic youngster attempting to defend the honour and justify the actions of his country while lacking perspective.

Are you one of those schoolkids getting paid to do this?

 

correct, therefore they did agree that the IDF will be in control in the Arabs cities.

There was one waizman that said that if a man dont know his past, his future will be uncertain- mamorize it!

Its not illogical, its very logical!
To tell you the truth? if Israel think that Judea and Samaria is an occupate territory, so they are stupid that dissmis international agreement that said otherwise, simple as that!

I never said nothing about the Arabs who lived in the West Bank when Jurdan was in control, you need to read again what i wrote.
I simply wrote that Jordan wasnt get the acceptnece from the world for tthe control they had over the West Bank, therefore this land was never under a rule of any country, which means that Israel cant occupate anything if the land wasnt under a rule of any country, simple.

Of courese its absurd, and then people like you (I dont blame you) and the vast majority of the world think that Israel is occupated the West Bank, while in reality they dont.

I know that the PA joined to the Geneva Conventions- I already wrote it to you!
And if you dont know, when the PA joined the Geneva Conventions it means that the whole fixtion of this Arab country was getting an acceptnece from the world from the point they joined!

I know my English is not parfect, try to talk Hebrew or write it PERFECTLY as I do without anyone that will teach you (as I learned English) and then come back to me with this childish argument!

I'm not a kid and i'm not getting paid to do it, BOY.

 

You mean they agreed that in certain areas for an interim period the IDF would REMAIN in control.

Either your english is poor or you think nonsense is somehow profound. All humans furture is uncertain.
I prefer John Lennnon, "life is what happens to you while your busy making other plans".

No, illogical. There isn't any international agreement that states that the WB is not occupied territory, your ridiculous interpretation of the Geneva conventions notwithstanding.

That is not true. the offer of annexation and citizenship was rejected by the arab inhabitants of the West Bank. The entire area as defined by the green line.

The issue of whether there was a nation of palestine in 67 is not relevant as it pertains to the issue of the WB.

In fact, Israel ACKNOWLEGES the occupation of the west bank, gaza and east jerusalem in the Oslo Accords. If not, there wouldn't be an oslo accords to begin with.

Look, I get you are a neo-zionist that believes in Eretz Israel from river to sea. But that particular belief is not shared by ANY other nation on the planet and even not all Israelis. You are a small minority in your belief.

Please re-write the above. it does not make sense.

So you claim its your english that is the problem with you presenting such lame argument. I was not criticizing you, but stating the obvious that we both know and that is your command of english is NOT perfect.

Thank you very much. I haven't been called "boy" in almost 50 years.
Of course to me a kid is anyone under 30.

And by the way asking if you get paid is a legitimate question given the Hasbara social media program which pays Israeli students to combat palestinian, muslim and jew hating propaganda is public knowledge.

 

Of course, i'm glad we both agree on it!

Probably you cant get it, i didnt mean to say that in general all human's furture is uncertain, I meant to say that everyone need to know their past, if they want to determine their future (and yes everyone determine which kind of future will it be for them).

4th Geneva, ring you any bell?
Here's what was written there:
This Convention shall not apply to the West Bank- Israel is not occupying a foreign territory, and its relation to legal territory, not canceled since the granting of the mandate. Also, the Geneva Convention deals with an area occupied another country, while in the West Bank Never existed other legitimate sovereignty (Recall Jordanian occupation In 1948-1967 was not recognized as legitimate).

Israeli settlements are not illegal even under the Convention- Geneva Convention includes only forcible transfe, According to precedent Nazi resettlement. Privacy civil initiatives, such as internal migration and Purchase Are denied in the Convention. Besides, the Convention does not preclude the establishment of settlement and population transfer for security purposes if the fabric of the existing population is a danger to the occupier.

Of course, i never said otherwise!
I said that there was no legitimazetion to Jordanian rule in the West Bank, and because of that Israel is not occupate anything (even 4th Geneva recognize it).

Israel made a mistake by acknowlege something its not true.

Small minority? thats why the Israeli government have a majority with my opinions?

I never said it- its your assmption.

I already answered you about it- I'm not getting paid to do this, I'm doing it for free.
I dont need some paycheck to encourage me to do so.

 

not even remotely. but nice try.

No, that is in fact the case. In the instance you attempted to use this old adage, it is not at all necessary to know what happened 2,000 years ago to ancient ancestors to know how to plan the future.

And my Lennon quote speaks directly to your assertion that a person determines his own future. In many instance people do determine their future and it others no matter how determined they are, they never attain their goals.

But no worries, as you get older, you will be able to recognize many more shades of grey.

where exactly is it written in the Geneva Conventions that it will not apply to the West Bank? Please provide a link.

OH really? Might want ot read the damn thing instead of playing schoolyard lawyer. It specifically precludes it.

http://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_cha_chapter38_rule130

Rule 130. Transfer of Own Civilian Population into Occupied Territory
Rule 130. States may not deport or transfer parts of their own civilian population into a territory they occupy.

Summary
State practice establishes this rule as a norm of customary international law applicable in international armed conflicts.

repeating the same thing over and over does not make it true. You appear to have a very small set of arguments that only a small % of people around the world agree with. Why even many of your fellow israelis do not agree with you.

Are you suggesting its okay for Israel to practice its own form of taqqiya? Israel acknowleged the blatant and obvious facts on the ground (to coin a phrase) by signing the accords. Your supreme court acknowledges the occupation as well.

Funny how everyone that doesnt' agree with your infintile argument is making a mistake. Typical.

Okay I exaggerated. But its is a slim majority in the knesset, with roughly a 5 seat gap.

As far as Israeli public opinion is concerned its a slim majority who support the two state solution and waging peace with palestinians. This is an very interesting document you may find surprising.

http://public-consultation.org/pdf/is-pal-report.pdf

No, you explained why your english was not "perfect" (as if anyone's is) while rejecting the suggesting you are a kid. In normal communication that is a form of acknowledgement.

[quote[I already answered you about it- I'm not getting paid to do this, I'm doing it for free.
I dont need some paycheck to encourage me to do so.[/QUOTE]

and I accepted your answer, I was merely explaining why I asked the question in the first place.

 

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/9290​

 

Of course it was IDF, the only army protecting jews. "lot of" is your wish. Properly is to say: lot of israely women and chidren were intentionally killed by terrorists, who you called "lethal resistence".

No. All people except terrorists and their supporters are of the same opinion.
Of course Israeli army must do all necessary to protect their citizens. And no, Israel doesn't need any subjugation. It's your fantasy. Israel needs peace.

No, not "but". Here is period. It's a highest priority.

When it is necessary to protect lives of israely innocent civilians. It is the choice of terrorists, not of Israel.

The history taught israelis that their enemies understand only force. Don't kill israelis and there will be no "disproportionate retaliation".

 

and I accepted your answer, I was merely explaining why I asked the question in the first place.[/QUOTE]

You said that the Arabs agreed that the IDF will remain in control in certain areas in the West Bank, which meaens that you agree with me that there is no occupation, because occupation can not be existed if the two sides agree on it.

So all people, according to what you wrote, dont need to learn their history (not just in Israel).

Each person determines his own future, I agree with that, but I reallt didnt get it how it is opposIng what I wrote.

The 4th Geneva Convention doesnt aplly to the West bank because the Convention deals with an area occupied another country, while in the West Bank Never existed other legitimate sovereignty (Recall Jordanian occupation In 1948-1967 was not recognized as legitimate).

1) Beause there was no legitimate sovereignty in the West bank, so Israel cant occupid the West Bank.
2) in the Second Oslo Agreement the two sides agreed that the West Bank will be divided to areas-
Area A- territories under Palestinian security and civil control .
Area B- territories under Palestinain civili control and under Israeli security rule.
Area C- Territories under Israeli security and civil control.
So here you go another evidence that Area C (area that Israel have the full lagitimazition on it and if they want to transfer civilians to it, they can, and the PLO agreed to it too. And this divided areas canccel Rule 130 in 4th Geneva because Area C is no longer occupied, and Oslo Agreement made it an Israeli territory.

Will not make it true? how can a fact could be not true?
This is a fact that there was no legitimazetion to Jordanian rule in the West Bank, it cant be denided!

The Israeli government and the supreme court can anknowledge the occupation, but thats how they do not relate to the facts on the ground that say otherwise. What was written in international agreements cant be cancel, because it is a fact.

I nvever said it, I said that Israel do not relate to the facts on the ground, its all about facts, not right or wrong!

ANd still they are the majority.

for the "two state solution" i have a lot to say but lets first start several videos:

[video=youtube;OE6Eh06bSW0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OE6Eh06bSW0[/video]

[video=youtube;XwBSWN4s9JU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwBSWN4s9JU[/video]

[video=youtube;z5CVISBUNUA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5CVISBUNUA[/video]

Well I'm not 50 or 60 years old but i'm not a kid.

 

What planet are you on?

According to the IDF, Cast Lead killed 300 or so non-combatants of which 89 were under the age of 16 and 49 were women.
Some 3,500 homes were destroyed completely, with more than 20,000 rendered homeless.

The overall ineffectiveness of palestinian lethal resistence is made crystal clear by comparing it to the lethal retaliation of the IDF.

http://www.btselem.org/statistics/fatalities/after-cast-lead/by-date-of-event

I realize that Yaweh mandated an eye for an eye and all that, but he sure as hell didn't say an eye, two arms and two legs for an eye as every comparision of Israeli/Palestinian fatalities and wounded show.
that doesn't sound like reasonable force being used ot protect an occupiers population from the occupied's resistence.

In fact the policy of disproportionate retaliation has been as effective as the palestinians policy of armed resistance.
Neither has stopped the other from persuing what each believes is their god given right.

So, you claim that resistence to belligerent military occupation is terrorism. Well, the last great belligerent military occupation spawned all kinds of resistence movements who everyone except the occupation force deemed heroes, while the occupiers, routinely imposed lethal collective punishment on innocent civilians.

Does it make a difference if those civilians are rounded up lined up against the wall and shot or if a 500lb bomb is dropped on an apartment building?

there is no doubt that the IDF goes out of its way to minimize collateral damage when conducting retalitatory military operations. There is no doubt that without such a policy, the palestinian death toll would be astronomical, instead of merely wholly disproportionate.

so killing innocent civilians is really on the terrorists and not the killers themselves?

Yet history has also shown that force is almost the ONLY thing Israelis have used against the palestinians.

BTW as a signatory of the Geneva Conventions, the use of disproportionate force is outlawed. Its even specifically prohibited in Israel’s Law of War Booklet, and yet, it seems to occur every so often regardless.

http://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_cha_chapter4_rule14

I am playing devil's advocate to some extent here as I don't really have a problem with IDF operations that specifically target and successfully take out a leader of a resistence group, even if it kills some civilians.

I also recognize that the only even marginally effective tactic of resistence that the palestinians and their Islamist pals can use amounts to terrorism and if Israel did not occupy palestinian territory and these types of attacks were perpetrated on them it would be universally recognized as terrorism. Operations outside of Israel such as Munich and Argentina et.al are acts of terrorism, operations like the RedArmy's Lod attack are all acts of terrorism.

BUT, when a palestinian group attacks Israelis on or from their own soil, that can legitimately be called resistence to occupation.

 

Your logic is simply wrong. The occupation of certain portions were RECOGNIZED by both sides in the agreement with a plan for a phased approach to ending it. the fact that the palestinians agreed to a phased approach that ended with the ultimate end of Israel occupying any palestinian territory as defined by the final agreement (land swaps for peace, security considerations etc).

this does not mean there was no occupation. Your persistence in this line of argument is illogical and fallacious.

No, it doesn't mean that at all. It means very specifically that what you stated was imprecise at best.

OTOH, all people should learn history, since it is very true that "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it".
What exactly happened to the ancient jews of Israel? Oh yeah.

It means that regardless of a person's determination to achieve a certain future, there are all kinds of extraneous forces in life that can force a totally different one.
That regardless of a person's determination to achieve a certain future, they many not have the ability to achieve it in spite of or because they believe they are legends in the making within their own minds.

Blah Blah Blah. You are a broken record. this lame argument is totally negated by the fact that by agreeing to the OSLO accords Israel recognized their occupation. And is further negated by the HIGHEST LEGAL AUTHORITY IN ISRAEL.

again try this nonsense on somebody that doesn't know better.

Who denied Jordan's position in the West Bank from 49 to 67?
I was referring to the argument you keep repeating inspite of its invalidity.

NO, the facts on the ground say exactly what the government and supreme court have acknowledged.

So you are correct and your government and your supreme court are wrong. It is the perogative of any nation to cancel any international agreements they may have signed - but chances of them doing so with impunity, especially as it pertains to Israel, is between slim and none. (or haven't you been watching the extreme bias against Israel within a majority of the international community?)

You just said it in your response immediately above.
I am very familiar with the strategy of "creating facts on the ground" as it was championed by Sharon and Likud.
As an aside, I was pleasantly dumbfounded when Sharon had his Kadima epiphany with regards to peace with the palestinians.

yes I admitted my error.

I am fully aware of the nature of hate speech emanating from Palestine. I surprised you didn't use the Hamas video about palestinians welcoming death.

I am fully aware that this cycle of hatred continues in the children.
I am not aware of any other nation that would glorify suicide bombers with trading cards and albums, or broadcast children songs about martyrdom against the jews.

Embedding hatred into palestinian culture is as disgusting as it is intellectually and morally bankrupt.

that is not to say there aren't a helluva lot of Israelis that hate the palestinians/arabs as well, but only in certain segments of the population does that hatred even approach a cultural attitude.

If you say so.

 

There is no occupation, period!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Israel fought the Jordanian conquerors that held part of the Jewish Homeland for 19 years and forced them to withdraw behind the Jordan river!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i.e. Some kind of RECONQUISTA...

All the rest does not change the fact that the Jews liberated their country... what Country? The one they lived in from time immemorial... all the rest of your irreverent sloganeering is irrelevant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Tell that to your government and your supreme court. They apparently don't agree with you .

And as an aside, excessive use of the exclamation point doesn't make your opinion any more valid and does nothing for its accuracy or veracity.

 

Oslo Agreement soppused to be an agreement htat eventually would let the Arab country that the Arabs want to be dounded, I didnt wrote something that dont say what you wrote here, I simply wrote that there is and never was an occupation be Israel because "the law" (there's not really kind of law but you know what I mean) that a territory would be called occupeid is if country A will take control over the territory that country B rule there, and because until 67 the Jurdanian rule never was accepted from the world, Judea and Samaria never been ruled be any country, therefore Israel cant be occupied this territory, its all facts, dont try to dissmis facts because you cant.

There was never occupation in Judea and Samaria because of historical facts, and not because I like it to be, and this is bother me that you dont want to recognize facts and still writing stuff without refer to the facts.

I didnt wrote that line about the sentence frm Lenon's song! I wrote it according what you said that people have anyway uncertain future so they dont have to know their past.

So to each person there can be some forces that could force on a person a totally diffrent future, ok, but still didnt see how it is opposing what i wrote, sorry.

So please answer me this:
How could it be that when Israel signed ( and the Arabs) Oslo agreement, that of course there youy can find the agreement of the Arabs to the existence of the IDF in certian Arabs cities and also divided the land, are showing the occupation?

OR IN OTHER WORDS:

How can Israel occupied their own territory (because of course Area C is under Israeli juderstriction)? or occupied lets say Area B if there was an agreements to a military existance there?

Several Arab countries denieded Jordan's position in the West Bank, also United Kingdom denided it and also the UN didnt recognized the West Bank part of Jordan.

So you say that Oslo agreement is wrong and 4th Geneva is wrong? good to know!

( I sew all the bias against Israel from the international community, and its bothering me!)

Sharon evecuated all of the Jewish existance from Gaza strip, and the next day the Arabs shooted missiles toward Israel from wher the Jewish existance was the day before.

In schools in the West Bank the Arabs are teaching their children from nazi propoganda and ideas.
Of course there is haters from both sides, but this is not the same. because in Israel the ones who do things against Arabs are going to jail and this Jewish haters are the minority in Israel, in the Arab side the haters are the leaders, this is the differnce.

 

I think this dialogue is not accomplishing anything since you are of the opinion that the international community, international law, the geneva conventions, the Oslo accords, the Israeli government and the Israeli supreme court are all wrong and you are right.

 

I never said it!! why are you consistantly trying to put words that I never said in my mouth?

According to The Geneva Conventions- its talking about territories that one country had control over it and the second country came and took control over it- which means occupation, and because that was never the case in the West Bank, you cant say that this is an occupeid territory.
According to the Oslo Accords- in the accords was written there, black over white, that the PLO agreed that the IDF will control security in Area B, which means there cant be any occupation because they agreed to the current situation!
According to the Israeli fovernment and the Israeli supreme court- they can all recognize something, but the facts that the Israeli government signed cant give the legitimacy to the recognition, simple. its like the Arabs dont want to recognize Israel as the Jwish homepland, and they can do it but the facts cant give the legitimacy to this recognition.
Its like you will go on your street, stop near a junction and will recognize your right that the bus will stop and you could go on the bus, but you dont have the legitimacy that you need to your recognition- if in that specific point in your street would have a bus stop, then you will have legitimacy to your recognition.


This is all facts that alot of people ignore!

 

Okay here's a little lesson in logic and communications.

When one mistakenly interprets a document to bolster their argument, they are in fact stating the misinterpretation. IOW they are saying it.

as to your convoluted insensible argument about bus stops, I'll pass.

So your argument vis a vis the GC and Oslo and the ludicrous dismissal of both your government and the supreme court is actually saying you disagree with their positions.

If you can't comprehend this truly basic point I'm afraid I'll just have to assign your argument to the garbage pile of neo zionist nonsense.

 

I live here and we get along fine... you live in Canada (a conquered land) with majestic outspoken mayor... fuyahhhhhh
Clean your own backyard fella before pointing your arm toward the M.E.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

funny how you revert to such stupid arguments when you can't deny the fact that your government, your supreme court, the oslo accords, international law, the GC and the entire international community disagrees with you.

At least I don't believe there is a single country that has not recognized the occupation, or has supported the settlement program, or has endorsed annexation. Is there?

Canada is a conquered land? Irrelevant
Toronto has a drug addicted clown for a mayor? Amusing, embarassing but irrelevant

Clean up my own backyard before engaging in debate of international politics? Bush league retort

You do like your superfluous exclamation points. Might want to get that looked at.

 

Using as argument a reference to b'tselem is a good joke.
Yes, I'm exactly from this planet. And what about you? How many innocent civilians were killed by "humanitarian" west armies while their population was not under any threat? The "humanitarian" crying in case of Israel is both amoral and stupid

It is a bad idea to refer to Yahweh. Just look what was done to enemies of israeli people according to directives of God.
It is not important how it sounds for you. It is not about your citizens, but about israelis. And it is up to Israel do decide how prevent killing of innocent citizens.
Killing intentionally children and women and after that crying about "disproportional" retaliation is ideology of bastards.

100% anti israel propaganda. Nothing to discuss.

Now find a contradiction.

Of course yes, if by "killers" you mean IDF soldiers.

It's only your history, not real one.

Again: it is not important what seems to you. It is up to Israel, as a sovereign state, to protect their citizens.
Geneva Convention is considering retaliation on terrorist attacks from terrorist entity? Terrorists attacks from densely populated areas?
As israeli I don't care about these stupid and hypocritical charges.

Yes, you are continuing with legalization of terrorism. Actually it is not important. You already were told numerous times that there are no actually occupied territories. There are disputed territories and their fate shoud be decided on peace talks.
As for my opinion it doesn't matter if somebody barks about occupied Jerusalem. It is a jewish soil. And I hope it will be.

 

how come I stated misinterpretation if all what I said about Oslo agreement is true? I mean look at what was written in Oslo Accords and then come back.
It was all written in there, and the Arabs never dissmised the fact that they signed this agreement, they are just ignore what was written there and the Israeli government jjust tagging along.
Same to Geneva Conventions- the conventions only refering to teritories that one country agressively took control over them from other country- and history tells us that that is not the case in the West Bank.

As far as I know in a damocratic country people can disagree with their governments positions, am I wrong? there is alot of Americns that dont want Obama to be their president because they feel he doesnt do good to America.
yes i disagree with my government and sepreme court about that specific issue, yes, but I never said that the only thing that right is my opinions- people can think whatever they like to think, as long they refering to the whole facts.
I dont care what you think, this is your issue, but yes its bothering me that you have opinions about issue that you dont want to recognize the whole facts about it.

 

Oh look a red herring and a two wrongs logic fallacy.

Its up to Israel? Really? too hell with international Law, so mass murder of others innocent civlians is okay if Israelis decide that's the best way to prevent the killing of a few of their citizens? Has history taught you nothing?
I'm not surprised you are intimately familiar with the ideology of bastards.

Truth is not propaganda.

You think that dropping a 2,000 lb bomb on an apartment building at 1 am to assassinate a single man (Shehadeh) killing his entire family for a total of 13 deaths, while injuring more than 30 innocents (some maimed) and of course completely destroying the apartment building isn't the ideology of bastards?

YOur apparently complete ignorance of the history of the last 100 years or so is either convenient or appalling. I can't decide which.

What contradiction?
Attempting to minimize "collateral damage" is the right thing and the smart thing to do and necessary for Israeli international PR.

However, it sure as hell doesn't excuse those deaths and injuries and destruction of civilian property.

That kind of justification is some sick crap, despite its regular use throughout the ages.
Was it on jewish bankers? Was it on chinese intellectuals? Was it on cambodia civilians?

thanks for the display of amoral arrogance.

So far you have failed to demonstrate a grasp on history, so impress me and tell me why I am wrong and force is not "almost" the only thing Israel has used "against" the palestinians.

So now, the GC is irrelevant despite it originally being a cornerstone of your bogus argument wrt the occupied territories.

If you aren't a kid, you sure seem to debate and express yourself like one. This idiotic insistence that there isn't an occupation is as outrageously ridiculous and stupid in the face of facts as palestnian claims of aparthied and gaza concentration camps, and all the rest.

 

Its bothering you that my opinions arent based on whole facts? (there aren't half facts or quarter facts).

funny, but apart from naive misinterpretations, you are the one that doesn't seem to be in command of the facts and simply keeps regurgitating the same lame argument over and over.

 

I didn't find any not stupid or not insulting statement.
Go to hell with your "support".