Suarez challenge

Someone fetch him a box of tissues.

Grow a pair and jog on.

 

i agree with you there...but what i meant was i wont elaborate on them..and nothing wrong with dogs.....i refer to Parker as our pitbull in the centre....however some dogs need muzzles...

 

[video=youtube;OiwDHHcHPh0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiwDHHcHPh0[/video]

Now that's bringing up a tragedy.

 

.

 

And what of the Liverpool team on the pitch, with their kicking, fouling antics. And their crowd calling for every 'handball' 'foul' penalty' under the fog, when they were clearly non-existent. Simply trying to put pressure on the ref, to give them a 'soft decision'. Also booing a player like Bale for having the temerity to be kicked, almost leg broken by Skrtl. How nice was that?

What is it with Skrtl, does he always like play like this? his antics against us in the last two games, is it a personal vendetta, or his normal playing style?

 

If a challenge like Skirtel's on Bale had been done by Dawson on Bellamy , what do you think the crowd would have been screaming for and probably got?

 

Parker is too intelligent and balanced to be a Pitbull, Charlie Adam is a Pitbull.

Parker is more of a GSD; intelligent, faithfull, agile, useful and dedicated. Suarez is no more than an ill bred terrier with a massive inferiority complex.

 

I'd dread to think. They were crying for a foul when Ekotto shoulder barged one of their lads over (was Suarez or Kelly I think).

 

I think the Liverpool fans would have been screaming for a red card, and knowing them for a penalty too, because they seem to claim for penalties at regular intervals regardless of the nonsense that most of these claims are.

But when you've won so many games like Liverpool have over the years by intimidating officials, it's obviously a fruitful tactic.

One key difference is of course that Dawson isn't a dirty player like Skrtel seems to be , on the evidence of his last two games against us anyway.

 

Actually no I don't.

Perhaps if you were to provide a link that substantiates your comment the non Jewish Spurs fans (Goys) would be able to see for themselves exactly what you are trying to say.

 

You call that an "easy" misinterpretation?

 

Any chance of an example where the term dog can be shown to be contemptuous?

As a point of interest I eat with my dog - does that make me a gentile?

 

Reversed and refutted; click here

 

You twat!

 

I was going to get involved but this pretty much sums up what I was going to say. Thanks for saving me the time and trouble!!

 

Upon returning from work today, I was both shocked and appalled to discover the numerous inflammatory and potentially inciting comments made by a certain 'Davidako' in a thread concerning the actions of Suarez in last nights' game. He wrote:

and...

Now, given the fact that anti-Israel and anti-Jewish sentiment is perhaps at an all-time high in the modern era, I took the time and effort to investigate Davidako's sources and find out if his claims are actually true. If they are false, I feel it my duty as a practising Jew to quash these rather dangerous accusations, to paint myself and my co-religionists on this board in a more favourable light in the eyes of our fellow posters.

For a start, Davidako is citing quotes from the following website: http://www.missionislam.com/nwo/talmud.htm
Now, to any reasonably impartial and intelligent reader of these posts, the name of said website would imply that it's authors probably have one heck of an agenda. A brief perusal of their 'Mission Statement' confirms this:

http://www.missionislam.com/mission/index.htm

So, we have our dear Davidako here, making outlandish and potentially racially damaging comments about the Jewish religion, and his primary source is a fundamentalist Islamic website dedicated to spreading Shariah Law throughout the world in response to a 'global conspiracy' to exterminate Islam?!

Pardon my french, Davidako, but F*CK. ME. !

As for the quotes themselves (see above), I happen to be fluent in both Hebrew and Aramaic (something which the authors of the site clearly AREN'T), and spent some time investigating these quotes in their ORIGINAL form.

- The 2 quotes chosen by Davidako are simply non-existent. If anyone doubts me on this, send me a PM and we'll set up a skype link do that I can read to you the ENTIRE page from whence these supposed quotes 'came', in the original Aramiac text. Ain't there, I'm afraid.

- Another example displayed prominently on this site is the classically misinterpreted line from the Babylonian Talmud:

Warped entirely out of context by a merry band of Islamists with a global chip of their shoulders, the original quote is located in the midst of a particularly complicated Talmudic debate regarding ritual impurity imparted by contact with a human corpse. It's TRUE conclusion is:

"The grave of a gentile does not impart impurity upon contact, only that of a Jew...for a Jew is called 'Adam' [in comparison to the first man], whereas a gentile is not called 'Adam' [in this respect]."

The Talmud does NOT conclude with "They are beasts", nor- to my mind- does it seem to adopt ANY notion of discrimination against non-Jews: Gentile corpses DO NOT impart IMPURITY! Yes, you heard me right: DO NOT!

Another gem from this s***hole of a website is:

Again. False. False. F'ing False. The true quote there is:

"Rabbi Joshua son of Levi said: The good deeds performed by a Jew in this world, stand and accuse a gentile (who did not perform them), in the world to come."

These people's misrepresentations are so warped they'd make Star Trek orgasmic.

I won't even go into the opinions cited on this website about the Jewish religion itself, suffice to say that NONE of them reflect an inkling of the religion I have proudly practised for almost 3 decades...

Ladies and Gentlemen, I leave it up to you. All I can say is that this is the second time a Liverpool fan has made my blood boil by publicly and rashly levelling completely warped and inflammatory accusations or beliefs against my religion, and the f***ing buck stops here. This git has cast a pall over myself and my co-religionists based on falsified and bigoted readings of our holiest and most sacred scriptures. He has waded into a FOOTBALL dedicated discussions using RELIGION as his highly blunt, clumsy and rusty weapon. In doing so, he has risked stirring anti-jewish sentiment on a FOOTBALL dedicated site.

I very rarely lose my cool on here, and thank you (whoever's still reading!) for allowing me the time and space to "defend our corner" against the comments and remarks of some impossibly bigoted, narrow-minded and reckless individuals.

Thank You.

(Liverpool mods who wish to remove this thread from your board- go ahead; I frankly couldn't give a flying s**t.)

 

I don't really care?

 

Hello Mate: sorry to see you upset, hope no offence was intended by any LFC supporter, obviously can't & won't speak on anyone's behalf.

I (for one) fully admit to knowing very little about the Jewish faith, despite being a student(well was) of modern history. I have my own opinions on organised religion and it's involvement in political states over the centuries but this shouldn't be confused with individual faith in my opinion.

And obviously being from where I am I'm wary of any mix of sport and religion while supporting people of faith being active in said sports.

Anyway; might go do a bit of reading.

On the subject of Arametic; is it still widely taught in Jewish schools outside students of ancient history/religion?

 

As a practising, Orthodox Jewish, Spurs supporter, all I can say is: thank you for quashing these ridiculous misquotes taken out of context simply to try and label Judaism as racist and elitist.

A football forum should consist solely of football topics, other than in designated sections that permit otherwise. Racism and false accusations towards anything should not be tolerated.

Not really. Its mainly taught so as to understand certain quotes and passages in the Talmud, but one wouldn't generally study Aramaic in Jewish schools.

 

Davidako was attempting to make a point about misinterpreting comments through the lens of someone else's culture, to be fair to him.
I don't think that he was being negative about Judaism, though he does appear to be using false information to make his point.