The bolded part clarifies the sentence before it that is nearly in all capitals. The sentence with capitals DOES and CAN sound like 'no more immigration from anybody anywhere' but as already explained it's not practical. So instead of stopping there, we read the next sentence to see what I'm really saying and what the argument is really about....if he doesn't want others hurting Israel from afar, he also doesn't want them hurting Israel from inside Israel either. WHICH MEANS he is ALSO CLEARLY NOT PRO IMMIGRATION TO ISRAEL. Because THAT IS ONE OF THE WAYS Israel will be harmed. Jews becoming a minority in their own country.
Yes I have already established that even as early as page 4, you wanted to talk about something I said on page 1 that was too vague and too imprecise to glean an exact meaning. We all know you wanted to waste time on basically a non-argument that was ultimately set aside by a newer, more precise and more understandable argument about rabbinic hypocrisy. We all know you and DP were going to dodge calling a Jew a hypocrite as long as you could.I asked you three times on page 4 to provide quotes about open borders.
So wait a minute, Werd, does that mean you know admit that Nessie was indeed asking for sources about a poorly written thing on page 1 and was NOT asking for sources about rabbinic hypocrisy about immigration on page 4? Are you now wrong? Have you been wrong this whole time?
Nope. For the simple reason that even if Nessie didn't INTEND to convey that he was asking for quotes that had already been supplied via the jpost article and the youtube video, that is what his language did. It left no room for anything else.
As I said, that's his problem. He needs to learn to write better.
If Nessie's language clearly indicated he wanted to talk about something moot and outdated on page 1, it's a fallacious red herring.
If Nessie's language clearly indicated he wanted links and quotes about something already given more than once, then it's a dirty lie.
Either way, he's fucked.