User talk:King leer01

Welcome!

Hello, King leer01, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Hatchmight (talk) 20:13, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Editing restrictions

As I explained to you on several article talk pages, you are not allowed to edit articles related to the Arab-Israeli conflict (broadly construed) per WP:ARBPIA3#500/30. If you continue I will have to report you and you may be blocked from editing entirely.
Also, do you have or have you ever used any other accounts on Wikipedia? No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 20:15, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Can you find a Palestinian or pro-Palestinian editor who'll say the same thing? Do you apply the rule equally, especially when it comes to new posters who're little more then certified hasbara "artists"?

No, I've never had an account here. King leer01 (talk) 20:19, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

You are not allowed to edit articles related to the Arab–Israeli conflict

According to WP:ARBPIA3#500/30, you are not allowed to edit any article or section related to the Arab–Israeli conflit until you reach 500 edits in total and 30 days of usership. You can be involved in discussions in talk pages but not in the articles themselves. So if you want to change anything, feel free to express it in the talk pages. Good day.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 20:16, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Can you find a Palestinian or pro-Palestinian editor who'll say the same thing? It only seems to be Israelis or pro-israel types who're complaining. King leer01 (talk) 20:20, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

LOL of the ten editors who routinly working on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, there are only two including me who are trying to reduce bias toward pro-Palestinian views. I know only two other Israeli editors exept me who edit in the Israeli-Palestinian topic but the two are currently not focused on politics. On the other hand I know at least five others who are biased in my opinion toward the Palestinian view. If you came to spread your pro-Palestinian views within the ambigues boundries of neutral point of view, you came to the right place. Enjoy your staying.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 20:29, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Reducing "bias" in the sense of obfuscating at least a number of facts, sure. "Settlers" are not civilians and are not "victims of terrorism" anymore then someone who breaks into my house and tries to steal my stuff is a "victim of assault".

Likewise, the occupied West Bank (what's left of Palestine) isn't "part of Israel". Neither is Jerusalem, for that matter. That's the standing of the international community.

Yes, I am very pro-Palestinian. I think it's hard not to be when you take an objective look at the "conflict" and who the main instigators and perpetrators of the worst crimes or injustices in the context of Palestine and Lebanon are.

Don't worry-- I'll restrict myself to the talk pages from now on until 30 days are up. King leer01 (talk) 20:34, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Settlers are civilians and "victims of terrorism" is a subjective term but here in Wikipedia we use sources and general consensuses. All of those moral arguments will not change the fact this is a free encyclopedia and not a blog. Your views are your views, and many users here share your ideas, but they edit in the objective way and align themselves with sources and I respect that. But if you base your edits soley on your views and on unreliable sources (non-mainstream pro-Palestinian media for example or WP:SYNTH), I will not respect that and will make sure you will be blocked. Editors with slightly more anti-Israeli point of view then yours were banned because of their agenda of being a "militant editor" while breaking all of the Wikipedia's laws and using 'moral' arguments to justfy their edits. But I don't have to declare war on you, I was like that at the begining but I restrained myself and now, thanks to our great admins, if you or me, want to edit something related to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, we need a résumé of 500 edits and 30 days. So go edit other things, understand the laws of Wikipedia and then you would be able to spread your sourced views. Have a good day.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 20:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

"Settlers" are not "civilians". If they're Israeli civilians and citizens, then they belong in Israel proper. What are they doing in the occupied Palestinian West Bank?

As far as I'm concerned, they're putting their own lives in danger by aiding and abetting the occupation, by stealing more Palestinian land, and in general by acting like abusive asshats to the native Palestinian population. I don't particularly care if they die, at all, and I totally understand the Palestinian desire to stab or shoot or run over "settlers" in motor vehicles. I'd do the same if I were in the position of the Palestinians-- you'd be pretty pathetic otherwise.

"Victims of terrorism" is indeed a subjective term-- but Israel and most Jews around the world like to claim that IDF and Border Police killed in combat are "victims of terror". That makes the term especially meaningless in the context of this conflict.

My edits ARE informed by my political opinion. However, they're also rooted in fact. Jerusalem is not universally considered "part of Israel". The occupied West Bank isn't considered "part of Israel" by anyone in the world barring Israel, considerable numbers of pro-Israel Jews, and their Palestinian-hating non-Jewish sycophants. The "settler" movement is likewise considered illegitimate and in violation of international law by everyone barring the few groups I've already mentioned.King leer01 (talk) 21:07, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Jee I feel like arguing with a 15 year old kid on the Youtube comments of a TYT video ..

Nah, there you see people screaming about how there are "no Palestinians" and otherwise doing things like trying to justify the cowards of the IDF flipping over cripples in wheelchairs.

King leer01 (talk) 21:38, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Listen buddy, supporting delibrate assaults against civilians and non-combatants is not a thing that I belive is accepted in Wikipedia. I"ve yet to find any Israeli on wikipedia who supported the Duma attack. And I really don't give a shit about your opinions. Just bring reliable sources. Following your "I don't particularly care if they die" statement, I am going to keep an eye on you. Such words that come from the mouth of an (I assume) educated person, especially a studint of history, are making me feel sad.

You support the actions of the army of occupation. Also apparently the "settler" movement and the Israeli policy when it comes to the Gaza Strip. That means, in effect, that you support both of those things you accuse me of-- which is fairly par the course for the more active pro israel editors on wikipedia.

No, you just don't give a shit about reigning in the people who caused it. That's the same with your government and your "Jewish state" in general. As I said, we also see crocodile tears about Duma and in the same breath apologia par excellence when it comes to the burning or blowing up of scores of families at a time in the Gaza Strip when Israel attacks.

No, I don't particularly care if the "settlers" die. I apply the same logic that Israelis and Jews around the world do to Palestinians when Israel kills them out of hand; that they "brought it on themselves" or otherwise "deserved it". That's a vacuum that you lot created, so you get to deal with it being applied to yourselves in turn.

King leer01 (talk) 21:38, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Again, be carefull, cause you can be banned with a blink of an eye and you"ll go back to whining about Israel outside Wikipedia--Bolter21 (talk to me) 21:29, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

As I said-- I'm sticking to the talk pages for the forseeable future. And the only "whiners" on wikipedia when it comes to this issue are Israeli or otherwise anti-Palestinian or anti-Arab. True facts. King leer01 (talk) 21:38, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Stop it

I strongly suggest you self-revert this nonsense before I report you and you will likely be barred from editing. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 21:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Didn't you already do that much? I'm totally right about him, though. I do love how you recommended Khaled Abu Toameh as a "reputable" source on that page, though, while attempting to attack Blumenthal-- KAH is an actual example of someone who's self-hating. A self-hating Palestinian who spits Likudnik propaganda and demonizes Palestinians.

There's your lesson on who is and who isn't "self hating". Blumenthal just wants to see Israel held to a fair standard when it comes to Israel's actions in Palestine and Lebanon. KAH, on the other hand, would justify Israel ethnically cleansing the remaining Palestinians, or outright attempting to exterminate them. King leer01 (talk) 21:30, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

In case I haven't made this clear already, Wikipedia is WP:NOTAFORUM and I'm not going to be engaging with your political opinions, so you may as well not waste the effort. If you do not self-revert that talk page nonsense I linked to above, I will report you and you will most likely be blocked. This is your last warning. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 21:33, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Battle_of_Shuja%27iyya#Removal_of_Max_Blumenthal_reference

As I've said, it looks like it's already been reverted.

Additionally, it's fairly audacious to accuse me of using wikipedia as a forum considering your kvetching on that talk page over what is and isn't a legitimate source.

I understand that you're just going to ignore what I said, but it seems that's kind of a pattern for you per the talk page that we're going on about. Luckily most people who don't have your issues realize that Blumenthal isn't "self-hating", whereas Khaled Abu Tomeah is little more then a puppet for the Likud and other categorically anti-Palestinian parties in Israeli Jewish society. King leer01 (talk) 21:43, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Speaking as an uninvolved editor uninterested in who's "right" or "wrong" on this article, please do not refactor others' comments to make personal attacks. GAB^Hello! 21:46, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough. He's already made it plain that he's a lying scumbag with his untampered posts there as it is. This Avery person, I mean. King leer01 (talk) 21:47, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

You were reported for personal offense

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 21:57, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Uh, you're digging around in our interaction on a page that has nothing to do with what I posted or tried to post regarding actual articles. King leer01 (talk) 22:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

March 2016

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Drmies (talk) 03:14, 14 March 2016 (UTC)