Explaining The Middle East via Analogy

[PoliticalChic]

A basic method of instruction used when trying to explain a more complicated process is "analogy."

a·nal·o·gy
əˈnaləjē/Submit
noun
1.
a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification.
"an analogy between the workings of nature and those of human societies"




Study this half of the analogy:

1. "(CNN) -- Two Gonzaga University students could be suspended or even expelled after using a handgun to defend themselves from an intruder in their university-owned apartment, an act which the university says violates the school's weapons policy.

2. Gonzaga University, ...says the students violated the school's weapons policy by having firearms ...

3.... in their apartment when there was a knock on the door. Fagan told CNN affiliate KXLY in Spokane that he opened the door and a stranger, who said he'd just gotten out of jail,... As the man started coming through the door, Fagan said, he yelled for his roommate,...he came to the door with his pistol drawn, and the students said the man turned and ran away.

a. McIntosh has a state-issued permit to carry a concealed handgun,...

4. ...this particular apartment complex isn't gated and secured key cards or codes aren't required for entrance.

5. ....police captured the man, whom they identified as a six-time convicted felon.

6. ...both face suspension or expulsion. Both are seniors and have exemplary records,..."
Students face possible expulsion after fending off intruder with gun - CNN.com






It is eminently simple to prove that (Liberal) "gun free" policies are brainless:
what would a sentient individual with a licensed gun do if a "six-time convicted felon" attempted to invade their premises?






Now, to complete the analogy:

The two students represent Israel...with the need for self-defense

The "six-time convicted felon" is the nations of the Middle East who have at various times and continuously, attacked, declared war on, threatened the tiny nation with destruction.
Senior Iranian official threatens Israel with destruction | JPost | Israel News


Either Obama or the mainstream media are the university administration.
Kerry threatened Israel if it did not leave the door opened, i.e., assume indefensible borders.
"....such borders would be indefensible."
Kerry Arrives in Middle East to Rescue Israeli-Palestinian Peace Talks | TIME.com





Now all analogies have gaps....but I submit that this one is pretty near perfect.

 

[Moonglow]

Sorry, but rules made by a governing body does not reflect upon the ME, or the Jews of Israel.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Sorry, but rules made by a governing body does not reflect upon the ME, or the Jews of Israel.

Sorry....but I'm having the same problem with your post as usual.

I would hope that you would be more articulate....



If you are trying to suggest that other bodies, such as the American administration, or the European Union have no say in Israeli policy....

...you are dead wrong.

 

[Moonglow]

a school has a governing body that makes rules for students and teachers. you will find that those rules are not at all biased against Jews, Israelis or the ME.

 

[Coyote]

Moved to proper forum.

 

[PoliticalChic]

a school has a governing body that makes rules for students and teachers. you will find that those rules are not at all biased against Jews, Israelis or the ME.

The hallmark of Liberalism: bow down to the elites, and never, ever, apply good judgment!



Care to take a shot at this, from the OP?

It is eminently simple to prove that (Liberal) "gun free" policies are brainless:
what would a sentient individual with a licensed gun do if a "six-time convicted felon" attempted to invade their premises?


So.....what would you have done?

 

[Moonglow]

a school has a governing body that makes rules for students and teachers. you will find that those rules are not at all biased against Jews, Israelis or the ME.

The hallmark of Liberalism: bow down to the elites, and never, ever, apply good judgment!



Care to take a shot at this, from the OP?

It is eminently simple to prove that (Liberal) "gun free" policies are brainless:
what would a sentient individual with a licensed gun do if a "six-time convicted felon" attempted to invade their premises?


So.....what would you have done?

Used an Olympic wrestling hold on the intruder, just like I do with drunks at the bar fighting.
Bow down to authority, well if you want to remain on a private college quad then you must obey the rules, same in the military. Did you raise your children to throw off your tyranny as a mother and to revolt and usurp your authority?

 

[irosie91]

just to be annoying----I will comment. I can understand a school policy
outlawing guns------for any student----etc etc -------but judgement should
always be tempered with DISCRETION----Beyond a letter of rebuke----
to be considered a CONFIDENTIAL part of the student file-----I see no
reason to penalize the student at all. The school should review its SECURITY
POLICIES------the school failed ------maybe it is a failure of the locak cops, too.

 

[Moonglow]

just to be annoying----I will comment. I can understand a school policy
outlawing guns------for any student----etc etc -------but judgement should
always be tempered with DISCRETION----Beyond a letter of rebuke----
to be considered a CONFIDENTIAL part of the student file-----I see no
reason to penalize the student at all. The school should review its SECURITY
POLICIES------the school failed ------maybe it is a failure of the locak cops, too.

unfortunately with the zero policy adopted by the War on Drugs idiom does not allow decisions to be tempered, thus the fallacy of the idiom.

 

[PoliticalChic]

a school has a governing body that makes rules for students and teachers. you will find that those rules are not at all biased against Jews, Israelis or the ME.

The hallmark of Liberalism: bow down to the elites, and never, ever, apply good judgment!



Care to take a shot at this, from the OP?

It is eminently simple to prove that (Liberal) "gun free" policies are brainless:
what would a sentient individual with a licensed gun do if a "six-time convicted felon" attempted to invade their premises?


So.....what would you have done?

Used an Olympic wrestling hold on the intruder, just like I do with drunks at the bar fighting.
Bow down to authority, well if you want to remain on a private college quad then you must obey the rules, same in the military. Did you raise your children to throw off your tyranny as a mother and to revolt and usurp your authority?

"Used an Olympic wrestling hold on the intruder, just like I do with drunks at the bar fighting."
Absurd obfuscation.




"Bow down to authority,...."
I have no 'authority' beyond my own judgment.

Obviously I'm not Liberal.

 

[PoliticalChic]

just to be annoying----I will comment. I can understand a school policy
outlawing guns------for any student----etc etc -------but judgement should
always be tempered with DISCRETION----Beyond a letter of rebuke----
to be considered a CONFIDENTIAL part of the student file-----I see no
reason to penalize the student at all. The school should review its SECURITY
POLICIES------the school failed ------maybe it is a failure of the locak cops, too.

"Luckily, some years ago, two famed economists, William Landes at the University of Chicago and John Lott at Yale, conducted a massive study of multiple-victim public shootings in the United States between 1977 and 1995 to see how various legal changes affected their frequency and death toll.

Only one public policy has ever been shown to reduce the death rate from such crimes: concealed-carry laws.

You will notice that most multiple-victim shootings occur in “gun-free zones” — even within states that have concealed-carry laws: public schools, churches, Sikh temples, post offices, the movie theater where James Holmes committed mass murder, and the Portland, Ore., mall where a nut gunned down shoppers a few weeks ago.

Guns were banned in all these places. Mass killers may be crazy, but they’re not stupid."
ANN COULTER: We know how to stop school shootings | The Daily Caller


Can we conclude that those behind 'gun free zones,' i.e., Liberals....are stupid?

 

[Moonglow]

The hallmark of Liberalism: bow down to the elites, and never, ever, apply good judgment!



Care to take a shot at this, from the OP?

It is eminently simple to prove that (Liberal) "gun free" policies are brainless:
what would a sentient individual with a licensed gun do if a "six-time convicted felon" attempted to invade their premises?


So.....what would you have done?

Used an Olympic wrestling hold on the intruder, just like I do with drunks at the bar fighting.
Bow down to authority, well if you want to remain on a private college quad then you must obey the rules, same in the military. Did you raise your children to throw off your tyranny as a mother and to revolt and usurp your authority?

"Used an Olympic wrestling hold on the intruder, just like I do with drunks at the bar fighting."
Absurd obfuscation.




"Bow down to authority,...."
I have no 'authority' beyond my own judgment.

Obviously I'm not Liberal.

You must follow authority, you are not in prison and are not free to do as you please in society.

 

[Moonglow]

just to be annoying----I will comment. I can understand a school policy
outlawing guns------for any student----etc etc -------but judgement should
always be tempered with DISCRETION----Beyond a letter of rebuke----
to be considered a CONFIDENTIAL part of the student file-----I see no
reason to penalize the student at all. The school should review its SECURITY
POLICIES------the school failed ------maybe it is a failure of the locak cops, too.

"Luckily, some years ago, two famed economists, William Landes at the University of Chicago and John Lott at Yale, conducted a massive study of multiple-victim public shootings in the United States between 1977 and 1995 to see how various legal changes affected their frequency and death toll.

Only one public policy has ever been shown to reduce the death rate from such crimes: concealed-carry laws.

You will notice that most multiple-victim shootings occur in “gun-free zones” — even within states that have concealed-carry laws: public schools, churches, Sikh temples, post offices, the movie theater where James Holmes committed mass murder, and the Portland, Ore., mall where a nut gunned down shoppers a few weeks ago.

Guns were banned in all these places. Mass killers may be crazy, but they’re not stupid."
ANN COULTER: We know how to stop school shootings | The Daily Caller


Can we conclude that those behind 'gun free zones,' i.e., Liberals....are stupid?

Churches are gun free zones not all but the majority are, so are religious people stupid also?

 

[PoliticalChic]

just to be annoying----I will comment. I can understand a school policy
outlawing guns------for any student----etc etc -------but judgement should
always be tempered with DISCRETION----Beyond a letter of rebuke----
to be considered a CONFIDENTIAL part of the student file-----I see no
reason to penalize the student at all. The school should review its SECURITY
POLICIES------the school failed ------maybe it is a failure of the locak cops, too.

unfortunately with the zero policy adopted by the War on Drugs idiom does not allow decisions to be tempered, thus the fallacy of the idiom.

Poorly written....again.
It makes no sense.

Is there some other language in which you have more facility....???

Occitan?

Perhaps some Hittite, with a layer of Akkadian....?


What the heck is wrong with you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

just to be annoying----I will comment. I can understand a school policy
outlawing guns------for any student----etc etc -------but judgement should
always be tempered with DISCRETION----Beyond a letter of rebuke----
to be considered a CONFIDENTIAL part of the student file-----I see no
reason to penalize the student at all. The school should review its SECURITY
POLICIES------the school failed ------maybe it is a failure of the locak cops, too.

"Luckily, some years ago, two famed economists, William Landes at the University of Chicago and John Lott at Yale, conducted a massive study of multiple-victim public shootings in the United States between 1977 and 1995 to see how various legal changes affected their frequency and death toll.

Only one public policy has ever been shown to reduce the death rate from such crimes: concealed-carry laws.

You will notice that most multiple-victim shootings occur in “gun-free zones” — even within states that have concealed-carry laws: public schools, churches, Sikh temples, post offices, the movie theater where James Holmes committed mass murder, and the Portland, Ore., mall where a nut gunned down shoppers a few weeks ago.

Guns were banned in all these places. Mass killers may be crazy, but they’re not stupid."
ANN COULTER: We know how to stop school shootings | The Daily Caller


Can we conclude that those behind 'gun free zones,' i.e., Liberals....are stupid?

Churches are gun free zones not all but the majority are, so are religious people stupid also?

Whosoever makes the decision of enforcing the gun-free designation should, at the very least, have to carry indemnity insurance.


Case in point:

"With 12 dead and 58 wounded, the July 20th shooting at the Cinemark Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado was sure to result in a lawsuit. On Friday, the first suit was announced, claiming Cinemark has “primary responsibility.” The theater did have responsibility for the attack, but not for the reasons that the lawyers bringing the case think.

So why did the killer pick the Cinemark theater? You might think that it was the one closest to the killer’s apartment. Or, that it was the one with the largest audience.
Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned. In Colorado, individuals with permits can carry concealed handgun in most malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But private businesses can determine whether permit holders can carry guns on their private property."
Read more: Did Colorado shooter single out Cinemark theater because it banned guns? | Fox News



To return to the theme of the OP, pressure put upon the tiny nation of Israel to halt checkpoints, give the Golan to Syria, return to indefensible borders are akin to depriving individuals of the right of self protection.


It would take a Liberal not to see that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Used an Olympic wrestling hold on the intruder, just like I do with drunks at the bar fighting.
Bow down to authority, well if you want to remain on a private college quad then you must obey the rules, same in the military. Did you raise your children to throw off your tyranny as a mother and to revolt and usurp your authority?

"Used an Olympic wrestling hold on the intruder, just like I do with drunks at the bar fighting."
Absurd obfuscation.




"Bow down to authority,...."
I have no 'authority' beyond my own judgment.

Obviously I'm not Liberal.

You must follow authority, you are not in prison and are not free to do as you please in society.

As I have not been charged with any crimes....the use of good judgment has served in every endeavor.....

...you might consider that in your decisions.


Of course....you might be incapable of good judgment.

 

[Moonglow]

"Luckily, some years ago, two famed economists, William Landes at the University of Chicago and John Lott at Yale, conducted a massive study of multiple-victim public shootings in the United States between 1977 and 1995 to see how various legal changes affected their frequency and death toll.

Only one public policy has ever been shown to reduce the death rate from such crimes: concealed-carry laws.

You will notice that most multiple-victim shootings occur in “gun-free zones” — even within states that have concealed-carry laws: public schools, churches, Sikh temples, post offices, the movie theater where James Holmes committed mass murder, and the Portland, Ore., mall where a nut gunned down shoppers a few weeks ago.

Guns were banned in all these places. Mass killers may be crazy, but they’re not stupid."
ANN COULTER: We know how to stop school shootings | The Daily Caller


Can we conclude that those behind 'gun free zones,' i.e., Liberals....are stupid?

Churches are gun free zones not all but the majority are, so are religious people stupid also?

Whosoever makes the decision of enforcing the gun-free designation should, at the very least, have to carry indemnity insurance.


Case in point:

"With 12 dead and 58 wounded, the July 20th shooting at the Cinemark Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado was sure to result in a lawsuit. On Friday, the first suit was announced, claiming Cinemark has “primary responsibility.” The theater did have responsibility for the attack, but not for the reasons that the lawyers bringing the case think.

So why did the killer pick the Cinemark theater? You might think that it was the one closest to the killer’s apartment. Or, that it was the one with the largest audience.
Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned. In Colorado, individuals with permits can carry concealed handgun in most malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But private businesses can determine whether permit holders can carry guns on their private property."
Read more: Did Colorado shooter single out Cinemark theater because it banned guns? | Fox News



To return to the theme of the OP, pressure put upon the tiny nation of Israel to halt checkpoints, give the Golan to Syria, return to indefensible borders are akin to depriving individuals of the right of self protection.


It would take a Liberal not to see that.

The theme of the OP is deviously worded to imply that the poor, poor Israelis are being made to stop doing something that they are doing today? i doubt that since your analogy is weak at best.
The idea that Israel give back lands and have their original borders is nothing new.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Churches are gun free zones not all but the majority are, so are religious people stupid also?

Whosoever makes the decision of enforcing the gun-free designation should, at the very least, have to carry indemnity insurance.


Case in point:

"With 12 dead and 58 wounded, the July 20th shooting at the Cinemark Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado was sure to result in a lawsuit. On Friday, the first suit was announced, claiming Cinemark has “primary responsibility.” The theater did have responsibility for the attack, but not for the reasons that the lawyers bringing the case think.

So why did the killer pick the Cinemark theater? You might think that it was the one closest to the killer’s apartment. Or, that it was the one with the largest audience.
Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned. In Colorado, individuals with permits can carry concealed handgun in most malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But private businesses can determine whether permit holders can carry guns on their private property."
Read more: Did Colorado shooter single out Cinemark theater because it banned guns? | Fox News



To return to the theme of the OP, pressure put upon the tiny nation of Israel to halt checkpoints, give the Golan to Syria, return to indefensible borders are akin to depriving individuals of the right of self protection.


It would take a Liberal not to see that.

The theme of the OP is deviously worded to imply that the poor, poor Israelis are being made to stop doing something that they are doing today? i doubt that since your analogy is weak at best.
The idea that Israel give back lands and have their original borders is nothing new.

You're pedaling as fast as Ed Begley, Jr., trying to make a piece of toast.


The operative word is "defense," and it's relationship to "indefensibility."

 

[Moonglow]

Whosoever makes the decision of enforcing the gun-free designation should, at the very least, have to carry indemnity insurance.


Case in point:

"With 12 dead and 58 wounded, the July 20th shooting at the Cinemark Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado was sure to result in a lawsuit. On Friday, the first suit was announced, claiming Cinemark has “primary responsibility.” The theater did have responsibility for the attack, but not for the reasons that the lawyers bringing the case think.

So why did the killer pick the Cinemark theater? You might think that it was the one closest to the killer’s apartment. Or, that it was the one with the largest audience.
Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned. In Colorado, individuals with permits can carry concealed handgun in most malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But private businesses can determine whether permit holders can carry guns on their private property."
Read more: Did Colorado shooter single out Cinemark theater because it banned guns? | Fox News



To return to the theme of the OP, pressure put upon the tiny nation of Israel to halt checkpoints, give the Golan to Syria, return to indefensible borders are akin to depriving individuals of the right of self protection.


It would take a Liberal not to see that.

The theme of the OP is deviously worded to imply that the poor, poor Israelis are being made to stop doing something that they are doing today? i doubt that since your analogy is weak at best.
The idea that Israel give back lands and have their original borders is nothing new.

You're pedaling as fast as Ed Begley, Jr., trying to make a piece of toast.


The operative word is "defense," and it's relationship to "indefensibility."

Israel has the best defense the US can afford.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The theme of the OP is deviously worded to imply that the poor, poor Israelis are being made to stop doing something that they are doing today? i doubt that since your analogy is weak at best.
The idea that Israel give back lands and have their original borders is nothing new.

You're pedaling as fast as Ed Begley, Jr., trying to make a piece of toast.


The operative word is "defense," and it's relationship to "indefensibility."

Israel has the best defense the US can afford.

I understand....you have a bias against the state of Israel, and you'd rather avoid the question posed by the OP...

OK.