Rabbi: Anti-Zionism is not Anti-Semitism

Ekklesian said:
:ROFLMAO: You were answered. Post # 11. You just don't like the answer. Now if you don't like being dug at, maybe you shouldn't dig at others. :cool:
Click to expand...
I reread post 11. Where in there did you cite examples of his pet doctrine?

You want to be taken seriously? That was a rhetorical question. I don't really think you even genuinely make any effort at interacting with those who oppose your opinions. Kind of like Don Quixote. On the outside shot that you do, here's a helpful piece of advice. Quit answering direct questions with obfuscation, evasion, tap dancing.
 
ALAYMAN said:
I reread post 11. Where in there did you cite examples of his pet doctrine?

You want to be taken seriously? That was a rhetorical question. I don't really think you even genuinely make any effort at interacting with those who oppose your opinions. Kind of like Don Quixote. On the outside shot that you do, here's a helpful piece of advice. Quit answering direct questions with obfuscation, evasion, tap dancing.
Click to expand...
Oops. I meant post 7.
 
*sigh*

Ransom said:
And what do you suppose my "pet poctrine" is? Cite examples, please.

You know what they say about people who assUme.
Click to expand...

In response I posted not only his "pet doctrine," but an example in which he invoked it, as asked.

Ransom said:
"Anti-Zionism" reveals itself to actually be "anti-Jew" fairly quickly.
Click to expand...

I don't see where the confusion is? Is it in the word 'pet'? I was just mirroring his little invective. I get to do that.

Is it in the word "doctrine?" Okay, just substitute "maxim" or "adage" or "answer" or any other word you like.

Either way, his pet rebuttal has been falsified, unless he want's to accuse the jews who oppose Zionists and their lobby of hating the "Joos," too.
 
Ekklesian said:
Your retreat to pedantry shall not avail thee. :p
Click to expand...

Whatever. Asked repeatedly what my "pet doctrine" was, you failed repeatedly. You're full of hot air. Just own your failure, clown.
 
Last edited:
Ekklesian said:
Oops. I meant post 7.
Click to expand...
You mean the post where you used his quote "Anti-Zionism" reveals itself to actually be "anti-Jew" fairly quickly. Just let the activists speak?

How does this support your claim about him having a pet doctrine? What is his pet doctrine? As he already plainly said to you, cite (as many as you like) examples of what he has said in the past that leads you to claim that he holds to this alleged pet doctrine.
 
ALAYMAN said:
You mean the post where you used his quote "Anti-Zionism" reveals itself to actually be "anti-Jew" fairly quickly. Just let the activists speak?
Click to expand...
Yep. But I shoulda just posted his little adage alone. "Anti-Zionism" reveals itself to actually be "anti-Jew,"

ALAYMAN said:
How does this support your claim about him having a pet doctrine?
Click to expand...
See post 24.

ALAYMAN said:
What is his pet doctrine? As he already plainly said to you, cite (as many as you like) examples of what he has said in the past that leads you to claim that he holds to this alleged pet doctrine.
Click to expand...
I only need to post one, and I did, but he knows exactly what I'm talking about. Who cares what you or anyone else thinks about it? If he can't take a dig, maybe he shouldn't be digging at others. Just a thought.
 
Look at the title of the thread. Look at Ransom's little maxim...absolutely obliterated. He mouths off about the anti-Zionist jews being my 'pets,' I mouth back about his little 'pet doctrine.' Now your panties are all in wad over it, and the only thing you can muster is "You said 'doctrine.' You said 'doctrine.' What do you mean 'doctrine.'? You must not know what 'doctrine' means. We now require you to scour the forum and prove I have a pet doctrine using Oxford English Dictionary definition! Or you're just a sneaky fibbin' fibber!"

I really have to thank you guys for the laugh. 😁
 
Ekklesian said:
See post 24.
Click to expand...
Notice how the clown always refers you to some other post? Standard dishonesty tactic #1 of the fundamentalist sophist. Hem and haw about giving a straight answer, then pretend you did, but somewhere else.
 
Ekklesian said:
Yep. But I shoulda just posted his little adage alone. "Anti-Zionism" reveals itself to actually be "anti-Jew,"


See post 24.


I only need to post one, and I did, but he knows exactly what I'm talking about. Who cares what you or anyone else thinks about it? If he can't take a dig, maybe he shouldn't be digging at others. Just a thought.
Click to expand...
So at a minimum you mis-spoke, because a pet doctrine, by normal usage and definition, means an over-emphasis of a thought or one that is being pushed and driven and promoted excessively.

The truth is, Ransom holds no great affinity for the usual earmarks of Zionism as it is put forth in dispensational thought. Just admit that you mischaracterized him and move on, it really is that simple.
 
ALAYMAN said:
So at a minimum you mis-spoke, because a pet doctrine, by normal usage and definition, means an over-emphasis of a thought or one that is being pushed and driven and promoted excessively.

The truth is, Ransom holds no great affinity for the usual earmarks of Zionism as it is put forth in dispensational thought. Just admit that you mischaracterized him and move on, it really is that simple.
Click to expand...
Only slightly less than he mischaracterized me with his pet jew remark, and that was the whole point.

I was digging back, and mildly at that.

I didn’t start this thread with his pet doctrine (and no it's not Zionism) in mind. It just worked that way.

Like I said, if he can't take a dig, he probably shouldn't dig at others.

Therein lies the simplicity. :geek:
 
Ekklesian said:
source.gif
Only slightly less than he mischaracterized me with his pet jew remark, and that was the whole point.

I was digging back, and mildly at that.

I didn’t start this thread with his pet doctrine (and no it's not Zionism) in mind. It just worked that way.

Like I said, if he can't take a dig, he probably shouldn't dig at others.

Therein lies the simplicity. :geek:
Click to expand...
 
Ekklesian said:
Only slightly less than he mischaracterized me with his pet jew remark, and that was the whole point.

I was digging back, and mildly at that.

I didn’t start this thread with his pet doctrine (and no it's not Zionism) in mind. It just worked that way.

Like I said, if he can't take a dig, he probably shouldn't dig at others.

Therein lies the simplicity. :geek:
Click to expand...
Well dig away 🪏 by all means then, but it looks like your excavation doesn't have much traction, comparatively speaking.
 
Oh, okay.

@Ransom , sincere apologies for calling your falsified assertion your "pet doctrine." I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. I thought you'd understand I didn't really think you had a "pet" assertion, and that we were just trading barbs. I did make the mistake of thinking you really believed it...your assertion that is. I thought it was the reference you were making each time you said something like "them dirty Jooos" when something less than fauning was said about the actions of the Zionist state of Israel or their lobby. (It is kinda funny, though, that Shapiro regards Gvir a dirty Joo, dont you think? That he thinks Gvir dirties the beautiful nation of the United States with his mere presence?)

I didn't realize you seriously thought I regarded the anti-Zionist Jews as my pets. I guess that's on me. I thought you were just dismissing them as you dismiss any hint that the Zionists might not be the innocent victims everyone says they are. (Now, I hope that by "everyone" you understand that I don't literally mean everyone ... I mean "the majority." I'm going to try to be more clinical in my wording, and keep a better watch out for trigger words, too.)

Anyway, you have a wonderful support group here, and I thank them for helping me to see that my barb dug too deeply. @ALAYMAN , a mental health professional you are! You're too modest with your handle.
 
That was approximately the least sincere rant I've ever read. Congratulations on making history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top