It has been said, with good reason and evidence, that truth is the first casualty of war. That being so, a high regard for truth will be a necessary first step toward the end of war and beginning of peace.
Lies and deception being essential to the prosecution of war, embracing truth implies abandoning war as a method. So I heartily commend Scott for this effort with Mr. Dershowitz, and hope to see him condemn war itself as a bad method--one more act of courage in his life of many acts of courage.
Thank you for doing the debate! For a next time, the possible second debate (hinted at) try bringing this thought into the discussion:
The ONE single step most needed to begin making real progress in bringing peace to the Middle East, would be for each nation (state, government, regime...) to state openly and clearly, with full commitment to their words: We (the state, government involved) commit our country and ourselves to complete freedom of religion, wherein NO religious group of any kind - whether minority or majority of the population - would be allowed ANY privileges that other groups do not have.
This is not enough, of course!!! This statement of purpose would be, MUST be, accompanied by removing the respective wording of the nation's self-description: For example, the muslim states would declare themselves NOT muslim states (or God-States, or whatever the wordings), and Israel would officially remove the wording "jewish" state. Without this change in the description of the country, any promise of upholding complete religious freedom in that society would be a clear - and dangerous - contradiction.
This sounds too simple, at first. But I am convinced that anyone who thinks this through calmly and clearly would see that it makes sense: There is no JUST society in the world (never has been and never can be) where some people are above the law and have more privileges than others. Start with religious freedom, freedom of thought and speech - for every single human individual - and a new day will begin to show itself to all.
Thank you, Scott! You did the right thing.* And it is good that you described how you made your decision. Don't worry, we will keep following you and supporting you, because we can clearly see that you are honest and have high ethical principles - you have heart!
* By deciding for dialogue with someone from the other side, you have managed to jam the imperial machinery of "divide et impera" (divide to rule). Oligarchical elites definitely do not want us to talk to each other respectfully - they want us to be caught in bubbles of the same opinion, without any real knowledge of facts, i.e. without any contact with reality. And they definitely want us to think in black and white terms, without seeing nuances and understanding anything - since ignorant (stupid), self-centred (egoistic) people are the easiest to manipulate and control.
The only way to start a dialogue is for this unthinkable human is for him to smell the death and the stench and hear the jets dropping bombs and the screams of pain that he could never imagine ..otherwise your talking to someone that is retarded in his own way There is no god of any faith that this man could ever believe in so don’t waste your time with a talker , denier , that a lie to him as as good as the truth so don’t belittle yourself to this person of disgrace …
I have yet to see anyone on either side address the truth of their histories: the land of Israel has never been all "Jewish" any more than the Biblical Israelites were, and "Palestine" wasn't a name for the region until the time of the Romans, who were occupying land the called "Judea" inhabited by people know as "Hebrews". The name wasn't changed until after the Bar Kokhba rebellion in 137 AD, and was always under foreign rulership until 1947, so there has never been an independent "Palestinian" people. Deniers of truth can't achieve peace because there is no integrity amongst them...it is written in the Torah that God hates a liar, so how can the Jewish people expect to be blessed when their leader is a habitual liar? The Palestinian Arabs have never controlled this land and need to stop lying to themselves by saying they have, they merely lived here under the various occupiers, so each side is reaping what it has sown.
If they truly want "peace" they must stop lying: the word for "peace" in Hebrew, שלום, comes from a root which implies "wholeness, without lack, and possessing integrity", therefore, is the agreements are entered into with the intent of maintaining the integrity of the agreed upon conditions, there will never be true peace, merely temporary ceasefires.
That’s not all true what you said , and god never chose people above other people just think all the people or else this planet doesn’t have a chance in hell or could it be heaven , hard to tell the difference the way you talk !
Your evilness has shown its self and the world looks down to what people you’ve become Arabs are Jews Christian and moslems not European where you all lived thousands of years may hid forgive you for you no not what you’ve become
I agree that dialogue is paramount and imperative, but in such dialogue outright historical lies cannot be allowed to sit on the table. The historical lies that Dershowitz spewed must be challenged before proceeding to a joint construction of the scaffolding of a meeting of common ground.
One example among scores: Dershowitz's claim that the creation of Israel was an anti-colonial endeavor turns the word on its head. Zionism was and continues to be a settler colonial imperialist movement against the indigenous people that in layman's terms translates into grand theft. Common ground will never be attained if genocidaires are allowed to be deemed victims.
Dershowitz argued that there has to be a statute of limitations for getting land back taken in 1948 and 1967, and that the statute of limitation has passed for Palestinians. Statute of limitations? What about a claim based from 2000 years ago? Talk about exceeding the statute of limitations.
Sorry to see that Scott agreed with Dershowitz that because the Arabs attacked Israel in May 1948 and lost, Palestinians lost the right of return to their centuries held land. Zero context of the bribes and abnormalities in the creation of the state of Israel in the United Nations to begin with or the illegality of keeping land attained by ethnic cleansing of civilians by the zionist terrorists. Might does not make right. Scott needs to watch the documentary Tantura. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt16378034/
I think you did a great job. And honestly, it was hard listening to some of his crazy opinions, and found myself thinking the same thing, go get him Scott, but your right, handled it with absolute class. Thanks for all you do. And what you stand up for. Truly a Remarkable man that does alot to help the world be a better place.
Scott, I applaud you for trying to speak to a being who has no soul. Words are cheap, actions are everything. It would be very difficult to speak to someone who would be fine killing women, children and medical people for land especially in this day and age. You said that he said an amazing thing, " we spoke to each other with respect" REALLY! He knows the meaning of the word respect. Manipulation is more what he knows.
Maybe as a man and a military person, you can set aside the killings. I can't set aside the screams, the pain, and the loss of family.
I've heard things about Scott Ritter when I was a young man. Now that I see more of him, the significance of what I've heard has come into focus. He can engage in discussion while tracking how his counter-party's interests and assumptions frame their interpretations.
Perhaps more unusual than an intelligent man, is a man prepared to deal with the truth. Mr. Scott Ritter fits that qualification.
Mr. Scott Ritter is a man with a proven track record of exposing dishonesty.
If someone has some opinion on the middle east, his knowledge and thinking about the middle east will among my frames of reference.
With dialogue on this level, value can be derived from the ideas of mistaken thinkers. Over time, it shows to us who acted in good faith.
I noticed your fire withheld. Even when the professor made assuming intitled unjustifiable statements . Knowing how deeply you feel for the innocents being butchered . Which only adds to your previous situation of impotence to stop the Iraq war crime . You've done well in your restraint . Proof. Was unsettled that he couldn't instigate a screaming match .
It has been said, with good reason and evidence, that truth is the first casualty of war. That being so, a high regard for truth will be a necessary first step toward the end of war and beginning of peace.
Lies and deception being essential to the prosecution of war, embracing truth implies abandoning war as a method. So I heartily commend Scott for this effort with Mr. Dershowitz, and hope to see him condemn war itself as a bad method--one more act of courage in his life of many acts of courage.
Thank you for doing the debate! For a next time, the possible second debate (hinted at) try bringing this thought into the discussion:
The ONE single step most needed to begin making real progress in bringing peace to the Middle East, would be for each nation (state, government, regime...) to state openly and clearly, with full commitment to their words: We (the state, government involved) commit our country and ourselves to complete freedom of religion, wherein NO religious group of any kind - whether minority or majority of the population - would be allowed ANY privileges that other groups do not have.
This is not enough, of course!!! This statement of purpose would be, MUST be, accompanied by removing the respective wording of the nation's self-description: For example, the muslim states would declare themselves NOT muslim states (or God-States, or whatever the wordings), and Israel would officially remove the wording "jewish" state. Without this change in the description of the country, any promise of upholding complete religious freedom in that society would be a clear - and dangerous - contradiction.
This sounds too simple, at first. But I am convinced that anyone who thinks this through calmly and clearly would see that it makes sense: There is no JUST society in the world (never has been and never can be) where some people are above the law and have more privileges than others. Start with religious freedom, freedom of thought and speech - for every single human individual - and a new day will begin to show itself to all.
Is it not so? Thanks for listening.
Methinks that that concept is central to calling oneself a democracy.
Thank you, Scott! You did the right thing.* And it is good that you described how you made your decision. Don't worry, we will keep following you and supporting you, because we can clearly see that you are honest and have high ethical principles - you have heart!
* By deciding for dialogue with someone from the other side, you have managed to jam the imperial machinery of "divide et impera" (divide to rule). Oligarchical elites definitely do not want us to talk to each other respectfully - they want us to be caught in bubbles of the same opinion, without any real knowledge of facts, i.e. without any contact with reality. And they definitely want us to think in black and white terms, without seeing nuances and understanding anything - since ignorant (stupid), self-centred (egoistic) people are the easiest to manipulate and control.
dershowitz is a worthless eater
The only way to start a dialogue is for this unthinkable human is for him to smell the death and the stench and hear the jets dropping bombs and the screams of pain that he could never imagine ..otherwise your talking to someone that is retarded in his own way There is no god of any faith that this man could ever believe in so don’t waste your time with a talker , denier , that a lie to him as as good as the truth so don’t belittle yourself to this person of disgrace …
I have yet to see anyone on either side address the truth of their histories: the land of Israel has never been all "Jewish" any more than the Biblical Israelites were, and "Palestine" wasn't a name for the region until the time of the Romans, who were occupying land the called "Judea" inhabited by people know as "Hebrews". The name wasn't changed until after the Bar Kokhba rebellion in 137 AD, and was always under foreign rulership until 1947, so there has never been an independent "Palestinian" people. Deniers of truth can't achieve peace because there is no integrity amongst them...it is written in the Torah that God hates a liar, so how can the Jewish people expect to be blessed when their leader is a habitual liar? The Palestinian Arabs have never controlled this land and need to stop lying to themselves by saying they have, they merely lived here under the various occupiers, so each side is reaping what it has sown.
If they truly want "peace" they must stop lying: the word for "peace" in Hebrew, שלום, comes from a root which implies "wholeness, without lack, and possessing integrity", therefore, is the agreements are entered into with the intent of maintaining the integrity of the agreed upon conditions, there will never be true peace, merely temporary ceasefires.
That’s not all true what you said , and god never chose people above other people just think all the people or else this planet doesn’t have a chance in hell or could it be heaven , hard to tell the difference the way you talk !
What's not true within what I said?
Your evilness has shown its self and the world looks down to what people you’ve become Arabs are Jews Christian and moslems not European where you all lived thousands of years may hid forgive you for you no not what you’ve become
Why won't you answer my question?
I agree that dialogue is paramount and imperative, but in such dialogue outright historical lies cannot be allowed to sit on the table. The historical lies that Dershowitz spewed must be challenged before proceeding to a joint construction of the scaffolding of a meeting of common ground.
One example among scores: Dershowitz's claim that the creation of Israel was an anti-colonial endeavor turns the word on its head. Zionism was and continues to be a settler colonial imperialist movement against the indigenous people that in layman's terms translates into grand theft. Common ground will never be attained if genocidaires are allowed to be deemed victims.
Dershowitz argued that there has to be a statute of limitations for getting land back taken in 1948 and 1967, and that the statute of limitation has passed for Palestinians. Statute of limitations? What about a claim based from 2000 years ago? Talk about exceeding the statute of limitations.
Sorry to see that Scott agreed with Dershowitz that because the Arabs attacked Israel in May 1948 and lost, Palestinians lost the right of return to their centuries held land. Zero context of the bribes and abnormalities in the creation of the state of Israel in the United Nations to begin with or the illegality of keeping land attained by ethnic cleansing of civilians by the zionist terrorists. Might does not make right. Scott needs to watch the documentary Tantura. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt16378034/
I think you did a great job. And honestly, it was hard listening to some of his crazy opinions, and found myself thinking the same thing, go get him Scott, but your right, handled it with absolute class. Thanks for all you do. And what you stand up for. Truly a Remarkable man that does alot to help the world be a better place.
Scott, I applaud you for trying to speak to a being who has no soul. Words are cheap, actions are everything. It would be very difficult to speak to someone who would be fine killing women, children and medical people for land especially in this day and age. You said that he said an amazing thing, " we spoke to each other with respect" REALLY! He knows the meaning of the word respect. Manipulation is more what he knows.
Maybe as a man and a military person, you can set aside the killings. I can't set aside the screams, the pain, and the loss of family.
I've heard things about Scott Ritter when I was a young man. Now that I see more of him, the significance of what I've heard has come into focus. He can engage in discussion while tracking how his counter-party's interests and assumptions frame their interpretations.
Perhaps more unusual than an intelligent man, is a man prepared to deal with the truth. Mr. Scott Ritter fits that qualification.
Mr. Scott Ritter is a man with a proven track record of exposing dishonesty.
If someone has some opinion on the middle east, his knowledge and thinking about the middle east will among my frames of reference.
With dialogue on this level, value can be derived from the ideas of mistaken thinkers. Over time, it shows to us who acted in good faith.
I noticed your fire withheld. Even when the professor made assuming intitled unjustifiable statements . Knowing how deeply you feel for the innocents being butchered . Which only adds to your previous situation of impotence to stop the Iraq war crime . You've done well in your restraint . Proof. Was unsettled that he couldn't instigate a screaming match .
All Jewish people are not the same, some are and some lie and falsely claim to be.
Thank you Scott, very well done!