He probably refuses to debate israelis because they start with arguments like "we wanted peace" while almost universally refusing a peaceful two state resolution to the conflict. They don't want peace, they want land.

A "peace" of land more like it.

But, but, but i thought they were a religion, not a race. Jews are always switching from race to religion then back to race whenever it suits their perfect image as the perpetual blameless victims.

Yeah I've noticed that too. Most of the Israeli's in power are European Jews (Ashkenazi, Khazar). They have ZERO semetic background or genetic heritage. Yet they are the first to scream "antisemetism" at the first hint of criticism.

If there's one thing I can't stand its being mislead to believe someone is a bad person. Despise that kind of stuff. It does look like what you're telling us is true. Thanks.

The question stands, why did he walk out? It kinda proves the other side's point...

I think refusal to engage in a public debate with an individual who may or may not endorse the status quo in Israel hurts Galloway more than anyone. Is this not an opportunity to make his case against the Israeli government? I don't know that he's a racist but such a move hurts his credibility.

I wish he would have said something about him doing it out of protest because unfortunately this will hurt his campaign. I hate the zionists just as much as the next guy.

George Galloway is right. The middle east needs less dialog if we hope to have any resolution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Everybody knows that.

what's a gaza?

Would he have debated a Muslim Israeli? Of course yes.

So it all comes down to him refusing to debate a person based on that person's nationality and religion.

This is the textbook dictionary definition of fascist Nazi racist bigotry.

I am sure if you think it through hard enough you will realise there are two ways to look at this.

1. An act of racism or...
2. An act of protest, everyone knows there is no use negotiating with terrorists.

You probably already understand and approve that no government negotiates with those crazy "muslim terrorists", yet cannot seem to link that form of protest at an individual level.

I have nothing against Jews, I am first and foremost a human being like them. What I do have a problem with is (wealthy) human beings ganging up collectively against other (poorer) human beings to bomb the fuck out of them, most of the time just to get their hands on what little ressources they have.

So it is okay with you if I, at a public debate demand to know the ancestry and nationality of my opponent and if he or she admits to being a citizen of an Arab country I can get up and announce "I don't debate with Arabs" and walk out.

You have no problem with treating Arabs this way and would not charge racism if I refuse to debate an Arab. Good to know.

1) George never DEMANDED to know the ancestry or nationality of his opponent. He asked if he was an Israeli, and was answered willfully.

2) he never said I don't debate with Jews, he said Israeli's. So trying to get your point across using race is mute here.

Okay, so therefore it is perfectly fine with you if during an on campus debate to ask the opponent their nationality and if they answer that they have citizenship in any Arab country to say " I don't debate with anyone of your Arab nationality" and walk out,

And you promise you won't cry bigotry, is that right ?

You keep missing his point. The nationality is only an issue of importance because it is the nation of Israel. Think about it. With all the heat the IDF is getting for the picture of the palestinian boy in the cross hairs (Which that rabbit hole goes deep), they are openly occupying another country, and they keep pushing for more and more, and to do this, they are oppressed. If you want to look into it deeper, look at how far the influence of Israel reaches. America is practically their lackey. We have so many members of congress that serve the israeli lobby to some extent, or hold dual citizenship (or are at least covered under the law of return).

So again, if you have a problem with a nation that is committing crimes against humanity, then by all means, walk out in protest, and you won't hear a whisper about it here. The propaganda is in trying to smear someone walking out for ideals.

Okay so if I object to say, forcing hundreds of thousands of Egyptian Christians to do all of Cairo's garbage collection and live in Cairo's garbage dumps, which practice is obvious textbook Apartheid, so I ask the debate opponent are they Egyptian? And if I say then I don't debate Egyptians you would support my principles?

Or if I object to the Gender Apartheid treatment of women across the Arab world, where they are mostly denied education and the right to work or travel as they wish, and subjected to the terrorism of Female Genital Mutilation and honor killing, I can say on campus " Don't debate Arab citizens" and walk out and no one will say it is bigotry.

Or if I object to Mauritania the last country on planet earth with widespread SLAVERY, where 2 million African Blacks are held by whips and chains by light skinned Arabs and since Mauritania is a full member of the Arab League in good standing I can say during a debate on campus " I don't debate with any Arab citizens" and walk out and you would completely support my principled stand, and not accuse me of bigotry.

Do I understand you correctly ?

[deleted]

"I don't debate with any citizens of any Arab country"

due to:

*the continued membership of SLAVE owning Mauritania in the Arab League

*Gender Apartheid in nearly every Arab country

*Apartheid practiced against Christian garbage collectors in Cairo.

*Apartheid practiced against nearly every minority race or religion in nearly every Arab country, including Christians, Druze, Zoroastrians, Bahai, and Jews

CLEAR?

[deleted]

sure , troll because why?

because you have no fucking answer possible, that's why.

[deleted]

sure, whatever.

Israelis are not a race, says you, but citizens of the Arab countries ARE a race ?

Yes, No bigotry, you have valid reasons. Hell, everyone does. Lets not forget that there were Irish slaves, there were all sorts of genocides worldwide, every country has it's bloody stories. But do you also stand against it of every nation, and practice in your every day life to bring peace and equality to the world? Do you feel the suffering and pain of those worlds away and know that the source of their pain may be in your backyard (figuratively)? Do you strive to make the world a better place for all, or a better place for you and yours?

My point if you did not notice was that it is bigotry.

Only a close minded pig headed grandstanding buffoon like this punk Galoway would refuse to debate someone who held a certain citizenship by accident of birth.

I am happy to and have many times in the past and look forward to again in the future debating Muslims, Iranians, Pakistanis, and Arabs such as Egyptians, Lebanese and Palestinians.

I'm sure that he would refuse to debate an Arab, Christian, or Jewish Israeli all the same. I'm also sure that he would have debated a Jewish person from another country besides Israel. What seems to be the case is that anytime anyone is critical of the STATE of Israel, Jewish people cry out, "OMG, this person totally hates the RELIGION of Judaism!"

Israel = Judaism about as much as Italy = Roman Catholicism

No my friend, that is not the point I was trying to make. There are many reasons one can choose not to exchange or debate with individuals representing various entities. They are not all related to racism, people are divided by politics, culture, and many other reasons.

The way I understood this fellow`s decision is more to make a political statement. By coincidence it winks at the exact positions taken by western cultures towards Muslim's: We don't deal or negotiate with terrorists. This on a side-note is simply a political slogan carried through the years, because in reality Ben Laden & Al Qaida and all their friends have been backed by CIA for decades by Bush regime. To me, ANY bomb dropped on people is a crime against humanity. Not debating those involved or supporting parties could seem as a way to make that point clear.

You are a little mixed up.

The "We don't negotiate with terrorists" policy is the attitude of nearly all Arab and Muslim countries.

For example last month terrorists took over an oil installation in the Algerian desert with hundreds of western hostages and I did not see any negotiating from the Algerian Army. I saw them go right onto the attack full power, nothing held back, intent on killing every terrorist to the last, hostages be dammed.

This is the attitude of every Arab and Muslim government as far as I know, including Hamas by the way, which has mercilessly slaughtered 100s of members of opposing armed factions inside Gaza over the last several years according to Human Rights Watch.

It is only some weak minded western governments like Germany in the 1970s which would regularly make concessions to end kidnappings by Bader Mienhof or Italy to the Red Brigades. What they found, and it does not take a genius to know this before hand, is that if you negotiate with terrorist kidnappers and make concessions you just encourage more such actions in the future.

In the case of Algeria last month, from the track record of the Algerian Army, everyone knew ahead of time what would happen: no negotiations, no prisoners, every terrorist dead, worry about hostages only afterwards.

I guarantee this is exactly how the Iranians handle hostage taking, which does happen occasionally in Iran, and this is how every Arab Army and Arab government takes care of business when challenged by terrorists and we should all learn from them.

Sure, so in other words you have no problem what so ever with citizens of any Arab country being treated the same way.

If at a debate a person is publicly interrogated and admits citizenship in an Arab state, and then the opponent gets up and says "I don't debate Arabs" and walks out, you promise not to cry racism ?

Citizens of Arab countries are generally referred to as Arabs shocking as it may seem.

If a citizen of any Arab country gets publicly interrogated and reveals their citizenship in an Arab country it is perfectly okay "to say I refuse to debate any citizen of any Arab country" and walk out of the debate and you won't complain or cry racism in any way, is that right ?

I think we have a shill or troll on our hands. not sure...

Whatever he is, he is persistent. Bless his heart

He did not say that on the video, he just racistly bigotedly said said " I don't debate Israelis".

But even if hhe had said that, so that means if an Arab citizen of a state that practices Gender Apartheid, denying 50% of it's population rights because they are women it is fine by you to get up and say "I don't debate citizens of any Arab state" and walk out and that is perfectly fine by you and you won't complain of racism.

This is not to mention even the Arab and Muslim states that oppresses and steal huge amounts of land, 50 times more than all of Israel from Kurds or Berbers,

This is not to even mention keeping millions of Christians citizens in racist apartheid conditions as second class citizens forced in Cairo to collect garbage and live in garbage dumps.

And this is compared to supposed Apartheid Israel where 1.5 million Israeli citizens have all the same democratic rights and freedoms as Jewish Israelis, where all hospitals, universities, public transport, restaurants, all work places, all are 100% integrated Arab and Jew together equally, where Israeli Arabs serve as business leaders, members of parliament, cabinet ministers, Army generals, ambassadors, supreme court justices.

Israelis is not a race. Fuck you are stupid.

"Citizen of an Arab country" is not a race either you mental defective.

sure , troll because why?

because you have no fucking answer possible, that's why.