Israeli–Palestinian war (2023)

[godslave]

Although it is easy to spot the "fake news" such as videos and the like on social media for those who have eyes to see, there is nonetheless a more insidious and strategic official war on information going on. Strategic lies to manipulate the public opinion are at the heart of all wars and this one is no exception.

A certain amount of injustice and cruel behaviors are "justified" and by moral principle. For instance "It is a moral duty to pay one's debts" principal is accepted by all and justifies the exploitation even by force of those who haven't pay their debts to their creditors. In every cases the situation that led to the indebtedness doesn't really matter since the moral duty of "paying the debt" has high ground over the context, that's the trick.

They said babies decapitated and burned alive. They said pregnant women who had their fetus ripped out and burned in front of their dying mothers. It sounds like something I already heard somewhere...

Israeli official says government cannot confirm babies were beheaded in Hamas attack

No massacre can justify another, we have reached more than 2200 civilians killed in Gaza among them about 800 children. It's over a fourth of the total civilians casualty in Ukraine after a year and a half of war. It has been only a week since this one began. The free world is just saying "You gotta do what you gotta do, I watch your back..". Meanwhile, we're inexorably off to the unthinkable.

[Enters Laughing]

Although it is easy to spot the "fake news" such as videos and the like on social media for those who have eyes to see, there is nonetheless a more insidious and strategic official war on information going on. Strategic lies to manipulate the public opinion are at the heart of all wars and this one is no exception.

A certain amount of injustice and cruel behaviors are "justified" and by moral principle. For instance "It is a moral duty to pay one's debts" principal is accepted by all and justifies the exploitation even by force of those who haven't pay their debts to their creditors. In every cases the situation that led to the indebtedness doesn't really matter since the moral duty of "paying the debt" has high ground over the context, that's the trick.

They said babies decapitated and burned alive. They said pregnant women who had their fetus ripped out and burned in front of their dying mothers. It sounds like something I already heard somewhere...

Israeli official says government cannot confirm babies were beheaded in Hamas attack

No massacre can justify another, we have reached more than 2200 civilians killed in Gaza among them about 800 children. It's over a fourth of the total civilians casualty in Ukraine after a year and a half of war. It has been only a week since this one began. The free world is just saying "You gotta do what you gotta do, I watch your back..". Meanwhile, we're inexorably off to the unthinkable.

I'm not going to watch that video, as I'd probably find it too stressful, but I heard about the Biden story, and have no idea if the alleged incident happened. I think it's going to be very difficult to have strong confidence in any news story regarding this conflict: I think the allsides.com website may be helpful, but they would require accepting they're impartial! https://www.allsides.com/unbiased-balanced-news

I certainly hope that people don't commit atrocities in response to other atrocities (whether real or fake).

[Metamorph]

Sura 8 (Basically saying that disbelieving is the worst thing, makes you worse than an animal, and that Muslims must wage war against those who disbelieve until the entire world is Muslim)

Ah, relying on no one actually reading because the Qur'an is longer than a soundbite and in Arabic yet again.

61 And if they incline to peace, incline to it also, and trust in Allah. Indeed, he, even he, is the hearer, the knower.

[Enters Laughing]

Ah, relying on no one actually reading because the Qur'an is longer than a soundbite and in Arabic yet again.

That's only if they submit to Allah and stop disbelieving, and all religion is for Allah.

38 Tell those who disbelieve that if they cease, what is past will be forgiven them, but if they return, then the example of the men of old is already known.

39 And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah. But if they stop, then indeed, Allah is the seer of what they do.

Disbelief is the worst crime for Allah, and hell is where disbelievers go. And Muslims are to fight the disbelievers (they are referred to this way for a reason), and Allah claims responsible for killing them even if a Muslim did it.

Sura 9:29

29Fight against those do not believe in Allah or the last day, and do not forbid what Allah and his messenger have forbidden, and do not follow the religion of truth, even if they are among the people of the book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.

[Metamorph]

That's only if they submit to Allah and stop disbelieving, and all religion is for Allah.



Disbelief is the worst crime for Allah, and hell is where disbelievers go. And Muslims are to fight the disbelievers (they are referred to this way for a reason), and Allah claims responsible for killing them even if a Muslim did it.

It doesn't say fight them until they convert to Islam though, it says fight them until they stop persecuting the believers. Pretty big difference.

[Enters Laughing]

It doesn't say fight them until they convert to Islam though, it says fight them until they stop persecuting the believers. Pretty big difference.

Sura 9:29

29Fight against those do not believe in Allah or the last day, and do not forbid what Allah and his messenger have forbidden, and do not follow the religion of truth, even if they are among the people of the book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.

Other verses in the quran tells Muslims to wage war against unbelievers during times of peace.

Sura 9:1-5

1 Freedom from obligation from Allah and his messenger toward those of the idolaters with whom you made a treaty.

2 Travel freely in the land for four months, and know that you cannot escape Allah, and that Allah will humiliate the unbelievers.

3 And a proclamation from Allah and his messenger to all men on the day of the hajj, that Allah is free from obligation to the idolaters, and his messenger. So if you repent, it will be better for you, but if you refuse, then know that you cannot escape Allah. Give news of a painful doom to those who disbelieve,

4 Except for those of the idolaters with whom you have a treaty, and who have not been deficient toward you, nor have supported anyone against you. Fulfill their treaty to them until their term. Indeed, Allah loves those who keep their duty.

5 Then, when the sacred months have passed, kill the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and besiege them, and prepare for them every ambush. But if they repent and establish prayer and give alms, then leave their way free. Indeed, Allah is forgiving, merciful.

[Metamorph]

Sura 9:29


Other verses in the quran tells Muslims to wage war against unbelievers during times of peace.

Sura 9:1-5

Other people already wrote what I could write better.

Violence in the Quran - Wikipedia

Robert Spencer got kicked out of the UK. Why should I listen to him over the experts?

[Enters Laughing]

Other people already wrote what I could write better.

Violence in the Quran - Wikipedia

I have no interest in reading that.

The quran says that I deserved to be tortured for eternity for my views on Islam, and it also supports terrorism amongst other negative things, so it's unlikely for me to see the book as benign.

[Metamorph]

I have no interest in reading that.

The quran says that I deserved to be tortured for eternity for my views on Islam, and it also supports terrorism amongst other negative things, so it's unlikely for me to see the book as benign.

I don't think it supports terrorism and people are only tortured for eternity for not believing in God, not not believing in "Islam," especially all the "Islams" that are based on bad fanfiction and tell people to be as evil as possible. Lots of things in the Qur'an seem way too specific to medieval Arabia, but "believe in God" doesn't seem like one of them, so I can hardly say that this book that just says believe in God and don't pay attention to the fanfictions is horrid just because the fanfictions of it are perhaps the worst thing ever made. What do you think fanfictions of a book that's just tame will look like, anyway? It's interesting how people writing about the Bible make it better but people writing about the Qur'an make it worse.

[Michelle Obama]

Usually its the guy that hits first that gets the blame, right?

Look what happened to the Japanese, and it ended with two Nukes. Was there back up agains the wall and America had them by the balls prior to Pearl Habour? yes. Did they hit first? Yes, therefore they gave America the moral right (deterministic right).



Ethiopia is inconsequential at this point in history. Rome has less influence than they think. Asia won't side with Hamas , and Asia is like 30 countries so..

Egypt hates Hamas regardless and doesn't hold the Palestinians in high regard either which is why they refuse refugees.

Russia is fighting a proxy war with US (although they shouldn't as US won hedgemony a generation ago) and Israel means little to them.

Nope Isreal will get a free pass no matter what awful things they do now and it will only be in retrospect, after this is all said and done, that people will ponder what was right, or wrong.

Btw dude, I think this entire thing is wrong and that one side is going to have to surrender in order for this to stop. Just like you said. But isn't that how it is in your immediate personal world as well?

Look what happened to the Japanese, and it ended with two Nukes. Was there back up agains the wall and America had them by the balls prior to Pearl Habour? yes. Did they hit first? Yes, therefore they gave America the moral right (deterministic right).

A bully that wants to wipe you off the face of the earth doesn't just magically surrender. You have to over power the bully, you don't give him a piece of candy and cross your fingers and hope he doesn't attack again. Talks of "peace" and implementing "tolerance" in this idealistic way is always some kind of trap when it plays out in the real world. Sure, it may work short-term, but when you deal with things like terrorism, it is only a temporary band-aid. I mean yeah, it looks good in the utopian world in your mind, but it never pans out practically in real life because these human kindness ideologies and models don't factor in the complexities of human behavior. If only in the real world we could simply bring our lovely wife some flowers and she'd magically love us unconditionally no matter happens for the rest of our life, eh?

This reminds me of this story I read about that involved a couple. They convinced themselves that evil didn't exist and they went into the middle east to prove that human kindness prevails but then they ended up getting killed by ISIS.

These are also the types of people that would be stabbed at a New York bus stop late at night.

Ethiopia is inconsequential at this point in history. Rome has less influence than they think. Asia won't side with Hamas , and Asia is like 30 countries so..

Egypt hates Hamas regardless and doesn't hold the Palestinians in high regard either which is why they refuse refugees.

Russia is fighting a proxy war with US (although they shouldn't as US won hedgemony a generation ago) and Israel means little to them.

Did I say, "join Hamas?" I was making a reference to Ezekiel from the Nevi'im.

Nope Isreal will get a free pass no matter what awful things they do now and it will only be in retrospect, after this is all said and done, that people will ponder what was right, or wrong.

Even though anti-semitism is rising around the world, how might that be true??? Btw, it's okay if you are pro-palestine. No need to cover it up with this weird statement. The vast majority of people hardly change their views, btw.

Btw dude, I think this entire thing is wrong and that one side is going to have to surrender in order for this to stop. Just like you said. But isn't that how it is in your immediate personal world as well?

Not sure what you are asking here. I'm trying to think of alternative ways this war could end; either Israel stops Hamas, or Hamas gets Israel to "make peace," but then later says "just kidding" and attacks Israel, like it always does.

In life, you can "negotiate" and "make deals." When a terrorist is trying to blow you up, negotiation doesn't work.

[Enters Laughing]

I don't think it supports terrorism

Sura 3:151-152
151 We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve because they ascribe partners to Allah, for which no justification has been revealed. Their dwelling is the fire, and wretched is the dwelling place of the wrongdoers.

152 Allah indeed made good on his promise to you when you routed them by his permission, until your courage failed you, and you disagreed about the order and you disobeyed, after he had shown you what you long for. Some of you desired this world, and some of you desired the hereafter. Therefore he made you flee from them, that he might test you. Yet now he has forgiven you. Allah is a Lord of kindness to believers.

Sura 8:12-13
12 When your Lord inspired the angels, I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then strike the necks and strike their fingertips.

13 That is because they opposed Allah and his messenger. Whoever opposes Allah and his messenger, indeed, Allah is severe in punishment.

Sura 8:59-60
59 And do not let those who disbelieve suppose that they can get the better. Indeed, they cannot escape.

60 Make ready for them all that you can of force and of warhorses, so that by them you may strike terror in the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others beside them whom you do not know. Allah knows them. Whatever you spend in the way of Allah, it will be repaid to you in full, and you will not be wronged.

and people are only tortured for eternity for not believing in God, not not believing in "Islam," especially all the "Islams" that are based on bad fanfiction and tell people to be as evil as possible. Lots of things in the Qur'an seem way too specific to medieval Arabia, but "believe in God" doesn't seem like one of them, so I can hardly say that this book that just says believe in God and don't pay attention to the fanfictions is horrid just because the fanfictions of it are perhaps the worst thing ever made. What do you think fanfictions of a book that's just tame will look like, anyway? It's interesting how people writing about the Bible make it better but people writing about the Qur'an make it worse.

"only" tortured for eternity for not believing in God...? That is contrary to numerous articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, aside from being the worst act I can imagine. Whenever people believe that millions if not billions of people deserved to be tortured for eternity for "thought crimes", Orwell's writings will not be out of date.

[Metamorph]

Sura 3:151-152
151 We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve because they ascribe partners to Allah, for which no justification has been revealed. Their dwelling is the fire, and wretched is the dwelling place of the wrongdoers.

152 Allah indeed made good on his promise to you when you routed them by his permission, until your courage failed you, and you disagreed about the order and you disobeyed, after he had shown you what you long for. Some of you desired this world, and some of you desired the hereafter. Therefore he made you flee from them, that he might test you. Yet now he has forgiven you. Allah is a Lord of kindness to believers.

Sura 8:12-13
12 When your Lord inspired the angels, I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then strike the necks and strike their fingertips.

13 That is because they opposed Allah and his messenger. Whoever opposes Allah and his messenger, indeed, Allah is severe in punishment.

Sura 8:59-60
59 And do not let those who disbelieve suppose that they can get the better. Indeed, they cannot escape.

60 Make ready for them all that you can of force and of warhorses, so that by them you may strike terror in the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others beside them whom you do not know. Allah knows them. Whatever you spend in the way of Allah, it will be repaid to you in full, and you will not be wronged.

That's saying that God will make people afraid, not that God is telling people to strap on a bomb jacket and kill civilians. People being afraid and terrorism are two rather different meanings of "terror."

"only" tortured for eternity for not believing in God...? That is contrary to numerous articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, aside from being the worst act I can imagine. Whenever people believe that millions if not billions of people deserved to be tortured for eternity for "thought crimes", Orwell's writings will not be out of date.

People send themselves to Hell and torture themselves through their mental state. God isn't throwing people like baseballs into some sort of cosmic Guantanamo Bay. This isn't an argument specific to the Qur'an, Bible, or any other text, this is just common sense. Read someone like Elon Musk's comment, he wants to go to Hell because most humans will be there, and Milton had Satan say "better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven" because he also wanted to go to Hell. People want to go to Hell, but I don't, so if you also don't want to go to Hell, then don't.

[Metamorph]

If you didn't know better, waterboarding at Guantanamo Bay would sound like a fun time.

[Muira]

If you didn't know better, waterboarding at Guantanamo Bay would sound like a fun time.

Okay, that's a bit too extreme? Don't you think? At this point are just trying to provoke Sub?

[Enters Laughing]

That's saying that God will make people afraid, not that God is telling people to strap on a bomb jacket and kill civilians. People being afraid and terrorism are two rather different meanings of "terror."

It literally has Allah telling people to cut off the heads and fingertips of the unbelievers in an act intended to cause terror, and tells them to cause terror amongst the unbelievers.

People send themselves to Hell and torture themselves through their mental state. God isn't throwing people like baseballs into some sort of cosmic Guantanamo Bay. This isn't an argument specific to the Qur'an, Bible, or any other text, this is just common sense. Read someone like Elon Musk's comment, he wants to go to Hell because most humans will be there, and Milton had Satan say "better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven" because he also wanted to go to Hell. People want to go to Hell, but I don't, so if you also don't want to go to Hell, then don't.

I don't want you to believe bullshit, but there's not much more I can say, especially seeing as I think we've discussed this before.

Sura 4:55-567
55 And among them were those who believed in it and among them were those who turned away from it. Gehenna is sufficient for burning.

56 Indeed, those who disbelieve our signs, we will expose them to the fire. As often as their skins are burned up, we will exchange them for fresh skins, so that they may taste the torment. Indeed, Allah is ever mighty, wise.

57 And as for those who believe and do good works, we will make them enter gardens under which rivers flow, to remain in them forever, there are pure companions for them, and we will make them enter abundant shade.

Sura 8:23
If Allah had known of any good in them, he would have made them hear, but if he had made them hear, they would have turned away, averse.

[Socionics Is Not A Cult]

If you didn't know better, waterboarding at Guantanamo Bay would sound like a fun time.

What's wrong with Socionics? When I offer to type someone, they'll confess to anything.

[Metamorph]

I don't want you to believe bullshit, but there's not much more I can say, especially seeing as I think we've discussed this before.

Then why did you create this thread to revitalize the site with controversy after it was almost dead?

Sura 8:23
If Allah had known of any good in them, he would have made them hear, but if he had made them hear, they would have turned away, averse.

So, we're talking about waging war on people with literally no good in their hearts whatsoever who run around raping babies and eating them, not as an atheist meme, but for real, and who will turn away in aversion when someone tells them to be a good person. Sounds tame to me.

[Enters Laughing]

Then why did you create this thread to revitalize the site with controversy after it was almost dead?

I like discussing geopolitics and other subjects at various places, especially with people I know. Although posting here is contrary to my hope that Socionics dies a sudden death.

I have to say, I'm rather regretting the thread as it has become quite heated, even though I know the thread would have been made regardless and I would have wanted to post in it.

So, we're talking about waging war on people with literally no good in their hearts whatsoever who run around raping babies and eating them, not as an atheist meme, but for real. Sounds tame to me.

Look at it from my perspective: the book endorses torture, terrorism, and imperialism, and is believed by a significant number of people around the world, including in Hamas and Hezbollah.

The Anarchist Cookbook and The Communist Manifesto have been banned in various places and times for inciting violence (and probably other reasons): I think the Quran is very much of that ilk also.

I do recognize there is a disconnect between people who regard the book as the holy word of their God and who are peaceful citizens who don't recognize it as a terrorist manifesto. But I think it'd be foolish to act like those violent verses don't have a negative influence on the world.

The Old Testament and the New Testament are also problematic, and no doubt other texts that may be tangential relevant to this October 2023 conflict.

[Metamorph]

I like discussing geopolitics and other subjects at various places, especially with people I know. Although posting here is contrary to my hope that Socionics dies a sudden death.

Ah, so you hope this site dies, yet you keep posting here instead of, say, keeping your discussions in Discord. Gotcha. That totally makes lots of sense. Not.

Look at it from my perspective: the book endorses torture, terrorism, and imperialism, and is believed by a significant number of people around the world, including in Hamas and Hezbollah.

The Anarchist Cookbook and The Communist Manifesto have been banned in various places and times for inciting violence (and probably other reasons): I think the Quran is very much of that ilk also.

I do recognize there is a disconnect between people who regard the book as the holy word of their God and who are peaceful citizens who don't recognize it as a terrorist manifesto. But I think it'd be foolish to act like those violent verses don't have a negative influence on the world.

The Old Testament and the New Testament are also problematic, and no doubt other texts that may be tangential relevant to this October 2023 conflict.

Does it really, though? Every time you say it endorses terrorism, torture, and imperialism, you have to open up fanfics like the hadiths, tafsir, and Pact of Umar, because only the Qur'an by itself doesn't say those things. The fact the Bible sounds like it says those things if you don't add an external explanation and the Qur'an doesn't sound like those things unless you do add an external explanation sounds like a point in favor of the Qur'an. Not all religious books have to be the same for us to not just go join the local Satanists in protest of one sounding awful. Why would the solution to a religious book sounding bad be to check yourself into Hell with all the black bitter tears, gnashing of teeth, pain of evil, and drear eye of the Devil, anyway? Surely our reason can save us from such irrationality even if there were no sources claiming to be revelations or the word of God.

Additionally, Old Testament always sounds vaguely awful to me nowadays. Isn't it Hebrew Bible? Jews don't think it's old.

[Enters Laughing]

Ah, so you hope this site dies, yet you keep posting here instead of, say, keeping your discussions in Discord. Gotcha. That totally makes lots of sense. Not.

I know you post here too despite being of the same position, so I'm glad you can sympathize with my predicament.

Does it really, though? Every time you say it endorses terrorism, torture, and imperialism, you have to open up fanfics like the hadiths, tafsir, and Codex of Umar, because only the Qur'an by itself doesn't say those things. The fact the Bible sounds like it says those things if you don't add an external explanation and the Qur'an doesn't sound like those things unless you do add an external explanation sounds like a point in favor of the Qur'an. Not all religious books have to be the same for us to not just go join the local Satanists in protest of one sounding awful. Why would the solution to a religious book sounding bad be to check yourself into Hell with all the black bitter tears, gnashing of teeth, pain of evil, and drear eye of the Devil, anyway? Surely our reason can save us from such irrationality even if there were no sources claiming to be revelations or the word of God.

Additionally, Old Testament always sounds vaguely awful to me nowadays. Isn't it Hebrew Bible? Jews don't think it's old.

The verses I posted were from the Quran.

All religions are based in faith rather than reason: those who believe in them do so even when reason tells them otherwise, which is why I consider faith incompatible with reason: one must trump the other. If people don't use reason, they can attempt to justify anything without consideration for reality.

[Metamorph]

I know you post here too despite being of the same position, so I'm glad you can sympathize with my predicament.

Except I cannot. What you are doing and what I am doing are not the same. You created this thread to make the site more active, while I posted on this thread to make it so there would be nothing else to say and the site would die already.

The verses I posted were from the Quran.

Yes, and I already responded to and addressed them. The verses say to fight people who fight you and that God won't speak to people with no good in their hearts because they would reject Him anyway. You are relying on people not actually reading what you posted and assuming it must be bad because it said something about fighting and it was too long for them to read.

All religions are based in faith rather than reason: those who believe in them do so even when reason tells them otherwise, which is why I consider faith incompatible with reason: one must trump the other. If people don't use reason, they can attempt to justify anything without consideration for reality.

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence, and I'm not talking about God.

[Enters Laughing]

Except I cannot. What you are doing and what I am doing are not the same. You created this thread to make the site more active, while I posted on this thread to make it so there would be nothing else to say and the site would die already.

I think you said in the chatbox or maybe the forum recently that you were only here to convert or deprogram people from Socionics (I can't remember the word), which is a philosophy I think you inherited from me after I mentioned it to you, before I said essentially that I didn't think there was anymore I could do to persuade people away from something they didn't adopt through reason, and in any case, that I don't consider the community healthy and I didn't want to around there in the future.

Yes, and I already responded to and addressed them. The verses say to fight people who fight you and that God won't speak to people with no good in their hearts because they would reject Him anyway. You are relying on people not actually reading what you posted and assuming it must be bad because it said something about fighting and it was too long for them to read.

Incorrect, I've already explained how that is not the case.

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence, and I'm not talking about God.

You talked of religion, which is faith.

[Metamorph]

I think you said in the chatbox or maybe the forum recently that you were only here to convert or deprogram people from Socionics (I can't remember the word), which is a philosophy I think you inherited from me after I mentioned it to you, before I said essentially that I didn't think there was anymore I could do to persuade people away from something they didn't adopt through reason, and in any case, that I don't consider the community healthy and I didn't want to around there in the future.

Yes, that's totally why you would bask in the attention of members such as hag and try to get the same attention from me, because you don't want to be around here and you want it to die. It's totally not because you're the one responsible for building up this site in the first place.

Incorrect, I've already explained how that is not the case.

By referring to the Islamic fanfics which I posted that the Qur'an opposed pages ago. That is not a valid explanation even if you claim it is.

You talked of religion, which is faith.

The idea that faith is opposed to reason can also be dismissed without evidence. Doesn't mainstream philosophy say knowledge is justified true belief after all?

[Enters Laughing]

Yes, that's totally why you would bask in the attention of members such as hag and try to get the same attention from me, because you don't want to be around here and you want it to die. It's totally not because you're the one responsible for building up this site in the first place.

I enjoy and gain from discussing topics I find interesting with people of a like-mind. The reasons I'd like to avoid being here is because it's about a stagnant topic in a largely stagnant place, and many of them seem to be unaware of the importance of The Scientific Revolution, and many of the people are similar to myself in that they're neurotic, and all that can be very draining to me and seems far from ideal. But even though I can discuss specific topics elsewhere in more appropriate and productive places, I still have an affinity to the connections I have here.

I mean, even when I go to places specifically for politics and geopolitics for example, I still regularly encounter people who are toxic (fascists, alt-righters, Trump supporters etc.). Sometimes I guess I enjoy forums I have long familiarity with.

By referring to the Islamic fanfics which I posted that the Qur'an opposed pages ago. That is not a valid explanation even if you claim it is.

I don't think you've explained why you think that.

The idea that faith is opposed to reason can also be dismissed without evidence. Doesn't mainstream philosophy say knowledge is justified true belief after all?

What is your definition of faith?

My definition of knowledge is something that you know for certain is true, not a belief.

[Metamorph]

I enjoy and gain from discussing topics I find interesting with people of a like-mind. The reasons I'd like to avoid being here is because it's about a stagnant topic in a largely stagnant place, and many of them seem to be unaware of the importance of The Scientific Revolution, and many of the people are similar to myself in that they're neurotic, and all that can be very draining to me and seems far from ideal. But even though I can discuss specific topics elsewhere in more appropriate and productive places, I still have an affinity to the connections I have here.

I mean, even when I go to places specifically for politics and geopolitics for example, I still regularly encounter people who are toxic (fascists, alt-righters, Trump supporters etc.). Sometimes I guess I enjoy forums I have long familiarity with.

You clearly don't want to avoid being here, seeing as you built it up in the first place and have just tried to deflect when I pointed that out or mentioned hag and the others.

I don't think you've explained why you think that.

I explained numerous times: the Qur'an itself says not to use Qur'an fanfics. Since the Qur'an says not to use Qur'an fanfics, and everyone who uses Qur'an fanfics just turns evil, I'm going to respect the Qur'an for knowing that about itself, not say that actually Qur'an fanfics, which the Qur'an says not to use, must be the real authority on the Qur'an just because they are popular. Lots of things that are popular are clearly factually wrong and otherwise bad.

What is your definition of faith?

My definition of knowledge is something that you know for certain is true, not a belief.

Saying that knowledge is something that you know is true is a grammatical derivation of the word know, not a definition of the word knowledge. Have you written a philosophy paper on the nature of knowledge I could reference instead of saying knowledge is a justified true belief and referencing those papers?

[Enters Laughing]

You clearly don't want to avoid being here, seeing as you built it up in the first place and have just tried to deflect when I pointed that out or mentioned hag and the others.

I may be "responsible" for 1.36% of the forum's posts, but I had minimal or no impact on building this site up. I've certainly contributed nothing of value to Socionics.

I think it's be better if I didn't post at this site, and it'd be better for the world if it didn't exist, but that doesn't mean I don't value some features of it.

I explained numerous times: the Qur'an itself says not to use Qur'an fanfics. Since the Qur'an says not to use Qur'an fanfics, and everyone who uses Qur'an fanfics just turns evil, I'm going to respect the Qur'an for knowing that about itself, not say that actually Qur'an fanfics, which the Qur'an says not to use, must be the real authority on the Qur'an just because they are popular. Lots of things that are popular are clearly factually wrong and otherwise bad.

I quoted from the Quran. I have no intention of respecting the quran's wishes. I can see for myself that it contains verses that blatantly promote violence.

Saying that knowledge is something that you know is true is a grammatical derivation of the word know, not a definition of the word knowledge. Have you written a philosophy paper on the nature of knowledge I could reference instead of saying knowledge is a justified true belief and referencing those papers?

That's because "Knowledge" and "know" relate to the same thing. A belief is not something you know, contrary to what you claimed, that's merely what I was pointing out.

A definition of knowledge: "The fact of knowing about something; general understanding or familiarity with a subject, place, situation etc. [from 14th c.]"
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/knowledge

Etymology of know:
From Middle English knowen, from Old English cnāwan (“to know, perceive, recognise”), from Proto-West Germanic *knāan, from Proto-Germanic *knēaną (“to know”), from Proto-Indo-European *ǵneh₃- (“to know”).

definitions of "know", the verb:

know (third-person singular simple present knows, present participle knowing, simple past knew or (nonstandard) knowed, past participle known or (colloquial and nonstandard) knew)

(transitive) To perceive the truth or factuality of; to be certain of or that.

I know that I’m right and you’re wrong.
He knew something terrible was going to happen.

(intransitive) To be or become aware or cognizant.

Did you know Michelle and Jack were getting divorced? ― Yes, I knew.

(transitive) To be aware of; to be cognizant of.

Did you know Michelle and Jack were getting divorced? ― Yes, I knew.
She knows where I live.
I knew he was upset, but I didn't understand why.

(intransitive, obsolete) To be acquainted (with another person).
(transitive) To be acquainted or familiar with; to have encountered.

I know your mother, but I’ve never met your father.

(transitive, archaic, biblical) To have sexual relations with. This meaning normally specified in modern English as e.g. to ’know someone in the biblical sense’ or to ‘know biblically.’

(transitive) To experience.

Their relationship knew ups and downs.

To understand or have a grasp of through experience or study.

Let me do it. I know how it works.
She knows how to swim.
His mother tongue is Italian, but he also knows French and English.
She knows chemistry better than anybody else.
Know your enemy and know yourself.

(transitive) To be able to distinguish, to discern, particularly by contrast or comparison; to recognize the nature of.

to know a person's face or figure
to know right from wrong
I wouldn't know one from the other.

(transitive) To recognize as the same (as someone or something previously encountered) after an absence or change.
(intransitive) To have knowledge; to have information, be informed.

It is vital that he not know.
She knew of our plan.
He knows about 19th century politics.

(transitive) To be able to play or perform (a song or other piece of music).

Do you know "Blueberry Hill"?

(transitive) To have indexed and have information about within one's database.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/know

Again, my definition of knowledge is something that you know for certain is true, not a belief. If you still want my definition of "know", let me know.

[Metamorph]

I may be "responsible" for 1.36% of the forum's posts, but I had minimal or no impact on building this site up.

...Yes, you deleted lots of your old posts and anyway, you're way more than 1 in 100 people, which is a low estimate for that percentage. Additionally, that's a big [Citation needed], you posted lots of the popular content back in the day and DMed most people I knew often. No one who's here is here because of mu4, and you also yourself owned the site at one point.

I quoted from the Quran. I have no intention of respecting the quran's wishes. I can see for myself that it contains verses that blatantly promote violence.

You mean promoting that people who are in a war continue fighting in a war instead of giving up? It also very explicitly says not to fight people who are peaceful with you and you should know because you quoted that as well.

That's because "Knowledge" and "know" relate to the same thing. A belief is not something you know, contrary to what you claimed, that's merely what I was pointing out.

A definition of knowledge: "The fact of knowing about something; general understanding or familiarity with a subject, place, situation etc. [from 14th c.]"
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/knowledge

Etymology of know:
From Middle English knowen, from Old English cnāwan (“to know, perceive, recognise”), from Proto-West Germanic *knāan, from Proto-Germanic *knēaną (“to know”), from Proto-Indo-European *ǵneh₃- (“to know”).

definitions of "know", the verb:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/know

Again, my definition of knowledge is something that you know for certain is true, not a belief. If you still want my definition of "know", let me know.

...You just posted Wiktionary use a lazy circular definition saying that knowledge means to know, this would not be an acceptable source on your epistemology paper just like Wikipedia is not an acceptable source, even though the philosophy papers I cited would be.

[Enters Laughing]

...Yes, you deleted lots of your old posts and anyway, you're way more than 1 in 100 people, which is a low estimate for that percentage. Additionally, that's a big [Citation needed], you posted lots of the popular content back in the day and DMed most people I knew often. No one who's here is here because of mu4, and you also yourself owned the site at one point.

I don't think I did delete a lot of my posts. And maybe 10-20% of my posts are in the moderator section.

I actually owned the site twice, once outright, and once as a third share. But it was "only" for a few months at a time, and the first time it was supposed to be communal ownership or something.

I doubt I've said anything meaningful on Socionics in more than 10 years that was exclusively about the dogma on its own terms that was intended as an attempt at clarification (rather than say trying to make sense out of it with external influences like the Big Five).

You mean promoting that people who are in a war continue fighting in a war instead of giving up? It also very explicitly says not to fight people who are peaceful with you and you should know because you quoted that as well.

No, it has later verses such as "Fight against those do not believe in Allah or the last day, and do not forbid what Allah and his messenger have forbidden, and do not follow the religion of truth, even if they are among the people of the book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued. " and "Then, when the sacred months have passed, kill the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and besiege them, and prepare for them every ambush. But if they repent and establish prayer and give alms, then leave their way free. Indeed, Allah is forgiving, merciful. ", which is hardly a god that is peaceful, but one that wants to seek out peaceful populations to fight until religion is all for Allah and they all pay their taxes. I understand that Allah is supposed to be an universe-wide god, not just one that wants "religion all for Allah" in the environs of Mecca and Medina. In any case, there are holy books that tell people for example "You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. " and "But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either. Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them." and "Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword".

And let's not get started on the eternal torture business. I hope those ideologies die.

...You just posted Wiktionary use a lazy circular definition saying that knowledge means to know, this would not be an acceptable source on your epistemology paper just like Wikipedia is not an acceptable source, even though the philosophy papers I cited would be.

I was merely given by definition of it, because if we don't know where each other is coming from, there's no point in discussion. I don't need to quote Wiktionary to know what I mean by a word. When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less. I thought the topic was more about what we understood by the concept of knowledge rather than the dictionary definition of it. I regard knowledge and belief as two distinct things, and I don't find the concept of knowledge to be meaningful - for me, things are true by definition, which doesn't feel like true knowledge, but merely semantics, or they're beliefs at best.

[Enters Laughing]

18,899 (my post count) /1,391,541 (forum's existing posts) = 1.36%
Forum's highest post number = 1,580,957 = 11.98% of the forum's posts are deleted, that doesn't say how many of mine are though.

[Finaplex]

A bully that wants to wipe you off the face of the earth doesn't just magically surrender. You have to over power the bully, you don't give him a piece of candy and cross your fingers and hope he doesn't attack again. Talks of "peace" and implementing "tolerance" in this idealistic way is always some kind of trap when it plays out in the real world. Sure, it may work short-term, but when you deal with things like terrorism, it is only a temporary band-aid. I mean yeah, it looks good in the utopian world in your mind, but it never pans out practically in real life because these human kindness ideologies and models don't factor in the complexities of human behavior. If only in the real world we could simply bring our lovely wife some flowers and she'd magically love us unconditionally no matter happens for the rest of our life, eh?

This reminds me of this story I read about that involved a couple. They convinced themselves that evil didn't exist and they went into the middle east to prove that human kindness prevails but then they ended up getting killed by ISIS.

These are also the types of people that would be stabbed at a New York bus stop late at night.

I'm agreeing with you, bro. lol.

Did I say, "join Hamas?" I was making a reference to Ezekiel from the Nevi'im.

lol, my bad. I have no clue what the reference refers to this time.

Even though anti-semitism is rising around the world, how might that be true??? Btw, it's okay if you are pro-palestine. No need to cover it up with this weird statement.

I'm not pro-palestine. I'm anti-destruction.

The vast majority of people hardly change their views, btw.

Tell me about it.

Not sure what you are asking here. I'm trying to think of alternative ways this war could end; either Israel stops Hamas, or Hamas gets Israel to "make peace," but then later says "just kidding" and attacks Israel, like it always does.

I guess we as a civilization still have not evolved beyond "final solutions".

In life, you can "negotiate" and "make deals." When a terrorist is trying to blow you up, negotiation doesn't work.

I fell in love with a drug addicted, alcoholic, narcissist. You are preaching to the choir. I think there is a solution here, but the probability of that happening in reality is next to nothing. It involves the kind of forgiveness and personal power that an idealougue, therapy, mediation, cannot provide. Probably only time outside of the acute phase. This conflict and the years following being the acute phase. I guess it all circles back to your final solutions.

[Michelle Obama]

I'm agreeing with you, bro. lol.




lol, my bad. I have no clue what the reference refers to this time.


I'm not pro-palestine. I'm anti-destruction.


Tell me about it.



I guess we as a civilization still have not evolved beyond "final solutions".



I fell in love with a drug addicted, alcoholic, narcissist. You are preaching to the choir. I think there is a solution here, but the probability of that happening in reality is next to nothing. It involves the kind of forgiveness and personal power that an idealougue, therapy, mediation, cannot provide. Probably only time outside of the acute phase. This conflict and the years following being the acute phase. I guess it all circles back to your final solutions.

oh you're female, makes sense.

initially you gave off RINO republican vibes, kinda like the weasley, morally shady bro. Like if I went away on vacation, and I came home and you were having lunch with my chick I would be like "Oh, this bro's trying to get with my chick" kinda vibes.

I say this because you don't straight up say where you stand, like you give off the impression you are folding. you come off more like "i'm against non-violence!" and be part of the club

but since you're a female, that kinda of energy makes sense

[theum nathair]

I say this because you don't straight up say where you stand

have they put chemicals in American water that make brainless sock puppetry seem appealing? How could an independent thinker concisely describe where they stand in your country? there's a single, common perspective, and yet you're not at all certain of what that might be, are you?

[xerx]

Is Israel really planning a ground invasion of Gaza? Right now, the army most capable of launching an urban assault is the Russian army... and it took them months to get it right, in towns that are less densely packed than Gaza and only after suffering enormous casualties (in the tens of thousands!). I suppose (I don't have any proof) that the second most capable army is by now the Ukrainian.

I'm not predicting how this situation will unfold, I don't know. But there are two things that are worth noting:

* Previous ground assaults on Gaza have not ended the ongoing stalemate between Israel and Hamas.

* The Israeli army is famously casualty-averse, whereas urban warfare (and the rescue of hostages, especially) cannot be decided by air strikes alone.

[Michelle Obama]

have they put chemicals in American water that make brainless sock puppetry seem appealing? How could an independent thinker concisely describe where they stand in your country? there's a single, common perspective, and yet you're not at all certain of what that might be, are you?

we westerners sure have a problem.

iran is not belgum. hamas is not luxembourge.

we are dealing with people whose value system tells them life has no value, that it is okay to die, that it is a form of worship to die in the name of Jihad. In fact they view it as heroic for their children to be killed as martyrs. they do not value life they're willing to kill innocence and their goal is pretty simple; they want every jew out of the middle east, either dead or gone. that is the state and purpose of hamas and we westerners have this problem - we don't believe these people when they say this stuff, we just think it's propaganda and talking points, we don't actually believe they mean it.

in the case of iran, they're trying to acquire nuclear weapons, what do we think they're going to do with those weapons??? they will use them, to commit these sorts of atrocities.

israel can't coexist with these guys, they have to be destroyed because they follow the same playbook. not just them btw, hezbollah and others. they attack israel, they kill a bunch of jews, then they take off running and hide in gaza, and they hide behind civilians. israel responds. unfortunately civilians die because hamas uses them as shields. they then go running to the global press and they say "look what israel is doing!" "look how terrible it is!!" then everyone puts pressure on israel to stop before the job is done. then what happens?? those guys survive, come back, and kill more jews in israel. and that plays out over and over again. that's their playbook.

[SlaveChildOfSlaanesh]

[Sol]

Some territories are close to be provoked to actions(?) against Israel / USA. It's Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon + mb Yemen.
Turkey should join to USA club. Egypt may stay neutral. Saudi most probably on USA side.

Why in near time? Because comes so called humanitarian catastrophe, - when civil people in Gaza region may get conditions for mass dieing without supplies, the coming of which was blocked by Israel army.

As the situation looks as organised by USA from the beginning, the tactical consequences I expect as not good for those who will try to help civil population of Palestina.
In later time wars may spread wide from this point. The 1st wish of USA to make destructive chaos in Midterranean and Africa regions goes to become real. Turkey will can't stay in peace, being near. Then mb touched Middle Asia republics of USSR, China, Pakistan, India.

The solution would be to concentrate opposing efforts on who all that have started - USA and its suborderies. It will take a time to understand who is the real problem and for innertia for decisions.
The task of USA is to create wars and opposing inside of competing region and between competing for USA territories. There are no serious conflicts between those territories, if to exclude USA factor and its liberal agents inside.

I doubt most people of Israel will get profits from what happens. For they support officials which do genocid and occupation of near territories for many years will be asked a pay.

[theum nathair]

we westerners sure have a problem.

Perhaps I was too subtle before. You've so immersed yourself in proselytisation that you'd need me to convert my criticism to a more familiar format.

Your efforts are wasted of course; I don't read yank rants.

[Michelle Obama]

Perhaps I was too subtle before. You've so immersed yourself in proselytisation that you'd need me to convert my criticism to a more familiar format.

Your efforts are wasted of course; I don't read yank rants.

Do you not understand how war works???

The rules of war, however harsh this sounds.... And I'm mostly talking to the liberal morons who read this post today, (I sometimes get their death threats),

Do you understand how war works???

The generally accepted rules of war is that you don't deliberately target civilians. Nowhere in the rules of war, is there anywhere in history, where civilians, under no circumstances should be killed???

There is always going to be innocent people who die in war. Always. You don't deliberately target civilians.

Now. Which side is doing that???

Again, the blood thirsty Hamas savages who in their charter, say "KILL THE JEWS"

People like AOC talk about "collective punishment". But collective punishment is exactly what the savage hamas, murder, pig-dogs are doing to the Israelies. Infants. 4 year olds. Yeah. Hamas is like they look like soldiers to me, lets get em.

Your efforts are wasted of course; I don't read yank rants.

Then what the hell are you doing??? Is that your answer to everything???

Let me get this straight, you're a terror simp who loves the Hamas-bloodthirsty-lets-get-the-jews-terrorists??? Why don't you go to the front line then??? Oh, you don't either??? You don't wanna do shit. You just wanna sit there in your mom's basement with your lubrithermo all day while you blame the 70 year old man with a red MAGA hat "insurrectionalist" tweeting dumb shit on twitter.

I'm so sick of idiots we're in real trouble.

[Enters Laughing]

The Cycle of Violence: Is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a case of "an eye for an eye"?

[Enters Laughing]