Jump to content

Israel


SmokeyBear1861

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

You rattled off a list of popular Western media sources asking me why you aren't seeing this kind of sentiment, at a time when being seen as a pro-Palestinian voice in Western media carries a massive risk of losing your career or worse. We're in a media climate currently where Western media sources routinely flippantly dehumanize Palestinians and push racist, Islamophobic  messaging on a daily basis. We're in a media climate where Piers Motherfucking Pants-shitting Pigfucker Morgan is basically the only "Western media source" (and I say that with, oh, so much irony) that regularly has Palestinian/pro-Palestinian voices on, even if it's just so he can attempt to berate or belittle them while patting himself on the back for how many of them he has platformed. We're in a media climate where Republican lawmakers can shout on live TV that all Palestinians should be exterminated, but does our media apparatus give a shit? Nope.

There are plenty of pro-Palestinian liberation voices within Israel itself, but you're not going to hear from them because they're getting arrested for liking the wrong social media posts or saying the wrong thing in front of the wrong person. I could point to someone like Jon Stewart, who is Jewish, is supportive of Israel's existence, and routinely speaks out in support of Palestinians.....but let's be real here. You're not asking for that kind of pro-Palestinian voice. You come across as wanting Palestinians to parade themselves on Western media outlets and qualify every statement they make about their suffering with repeated condemnations of Hamas and acknowledgment of Israel's right to exist/defend itself/whatever. It's gross. The morality checkpoint system that we've collectively employed to gatekeep all conversation around this subject is gross.

Our collective brains are so full of decades of anti-Arab/Palestinian agitprop that sometimes you can't think of them as anything but animals that can ever do anything but bite the mythical hand that [has never actually] tried to feed them. You can't imagine pro-Palestinian voices (such as my own, mind you) that support the continued existence of Israel. You seem to be unable to wrap your brain around that at all, and it's not even your fault, it's just a thing that Western media has done since before we were born, because Western media ultimately exists to serve the imperialistic purposes of America and other major Western powers, and unconditional support of everything Israel does is fully integrated into that apparatus.

The reality is that Israel exists. There was a fair bit of wrong in how it was created, but it's here, and it's going to continue to exist. Any sort of peace process has to go forward with that as a baseline. Anyone that isn't some kind of radical, fundamentalist psycho understands that.

This is an interesting pro-Palestinian voice to listen to, in my opinion. If you're not familiar, Bassem Youssef is an Egyptian comedian who was a heart surgeon prior to the Arab Spring. His wife is Palestinian, and a large part of her family is currently in Gaza. It's very long, but worth a listen, even if it is on this smarmy shitheel's show.

 

I read this before going on my morning run. On my run, I started going through various counters to your arguments, but really…none of them were worth posting. 
 
Your post has shown a lot of thoughtfulness and sincerity, and displayed a lot of humanity (in the good sense) on the side of this issue that I generally contest. It highlighted complexities in very real ways that can’t be ignored, in good faith, and forces me to consider more points. I thank you for that. 

Edited by statsman
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Is Shell Oil a Jewish corporation? Don’t show us a pic taken out of context. Show us a video. What other symbols get projected on that pig? Are there also crosses and sickles and dollar signs? Those are all symbols, along with the Star of David, that were dropped from airplanes like bombs during Goodbye Blue Sky in Roger’s performance of The Wall. Do you think that collectively those are a message of antisemitism? If you do then you just don’t get it. Or you work for the ADL.

Our addiction to oil, religion (the Abrahamic religions in particular), the military industrial complex, greed and capitalism, they’re why there’s no peace in the Middle East. Jewish, Christian, and Islamic symbols are all fair game, as are dollar signs and corporate logos.

There’s not a context for painting Stars of David on a pig, although additional context is a shithead who has said that maybe October 7 was fake. 
 

It’s time to grow up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is going to be an unpopular post here, but as maybe the one guy that’s dealt most closely with several Middle Eastern parties over the last decade, I thought it was interesting to hear his take on everything. I’m about halfway through it. 
 

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/all-in-with-chamath-jason-sacks-friedberg/id1502871393?i=1000634436355

Kushner interview 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Boss Hogg said:

This is going to be an unpopular post here, but as maybe the one guy that’s dealt most closely with several Middle Eastern parties over the last decade, I thought it was interesting to hear his take on everything. I’m about halfway through it. 
 

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/all-in-with-chamath-jason-sacks-friedberg/id1502871393?i=1000634436355

Kushner interview 

Steve Harvey Reaction GIF

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Really makes you wonder how much of this is about Palestinians……

image.thumb.jpeg.94a142b8fc35c7b96322dca74991bb87.jpeg

Protesting “Zionism” to end “enslavement of working people,” yikes. 

When I see stuff like this I start thinking that every bad actor (like Dr. Shiva, US Presidential Candidate) is using the war for their own benefit.  

Quote

V. A. Shiva Ayyadurai (born Vellayappa Ayyadurai Shiva[1] on December 2, 1963) is an Indian-American engineer, politician, entrepreneur, and anti-vaccine activist. He has become known for promoting conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, and unfounded medical claims.[2][3][4][5][6] Ayyadurai holds four degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), including a PhD in biological engineering, and is a Fulbright grant recipient.[7]

In a 2011 article published by Time, Ayyadurai claimed to have invented email, as a teenager; in August 1982, he registered the copyright on an email application he had written. Historians strongly dispute this account because email was already in use in the early 1970s. Ayyadurai sued Gawker Media and Techdirt for defamation for disputing his account of inventing email; both lawsuits were settled out of court. Ayyadurai and Techdirt agreed to Techdirt's articles remaining online with a link to Ayyadurai's rebuttal on his own website.[8] Ayyadurai also attracted attention for two reports: the first questioning the working conditions of India's largest scientific agency; the second questioning the safety of genetically modified food, such as soybeans. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Ayyadurai became known for a social media COVID-19 disinformation campaign, spreading conspiracy theories about the cause of COVID-19, promoting unfounded COVID-19 treatments, and campaigning to fire Anthony Fauci for allegedly being a deep state actor.

Ayyadurai garnered 3.39% of the vote as an independent candidate in the 2018 U.S. Senate election in Massachusetts, and ran for the Republican Party in the 2020 U.S. Senate election in Massachusetts but lost to Kevin O'Connor in the primary.[9] After the election, he promoted claims of election fraud that were shown to be false by fact checkers.

 

Edited by Bullneck
  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

When I see stuff like this I start thinking that every bad actor (like Dr. Shiva, US Presidential Candidate) is using the war for their own benefit.  

 

When I see stuff like that posted here, I think about the type of propaganda artist that would post that here and think it was informative to consideration of the positions being taken by the posters here. Really makes you wonder…

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Brisketexan said:


This.

But when you get down to it, that won’t get it done. It won’t satisfy the most common pro-Palestinian refrain. It doesn’t get you “from the river to the sea.”

I mean, I am assured there are lots of pro-Palestinian voices who would accept an Israel continuing to exist, safe from further genocidal attack. I just don’t know where those voices actually are yet.

That's not the saying. The saying is "From the river to the sea [wait for it] Palestine will be free."

There's nothing in there about eradicating anyone, much less Jews.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


Right….it’s about eliminating the Israeli state. Which is a non-starter of a position if peace is the goal.

No. It's about eliminating the apartheid elements of the Israeli state. Equal rights and equal treatment under the law.

Edited by chainsaw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

No. It's about eliminating the apartheid elements of the Israeli state. Equal rights and equal treatment under the law.

You do know that currently under Israeli law Palestinian Israeli citizens share equal rights with Jewish Israeli citizens, right?  
 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. It's about eliminating the apartheid elements of the Israeli state. Equal rights and equal treatment under the law.

Wait….you really think that’s what the slogan means? And not that from the river to the sea will be….Palestine? As in, “it will be Palestine, and not Israel?” Come on, man.
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Brisketexan said:


Wait….you really think that’s what the slogan means? And not that from the river to the sea will be….Palestine? As in, “it will be Palestine, and not Israel?” Come on, man.

"be free" means "be free" I'm not sure how much clearer they need to be. Talk to anyone who uses it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"be free" means "be free" I'm not sure how much clearer they need to be. Talk to anyone who uses it.

Be free….from Israeli rule. Dude. The people chanting it at marches and shit say so. It’s not about Palestinians having equal rights in the Israeli state. Come on, now you’re just being disingenuous, which is a big part of the fucking problem here. Stop.
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


Be free….from Israeli rule. Dude. The people chanting it at marches and shit say so. It’s not about Palestinians having equal rights in the Israeli state. Come on, now you’re just being disingenuous, which is a big part of the fucking problem here. Stop.

Not being disingenuous here. We only want an end to the apartheid (and, of course, the genocide). A pretty low bar.

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not being disingenuous here. We only want an end to the apartheid (and, of course, the genocide). A pretty low bar.

YOU do. The vast majority of those chanting a slogan that MEANS Palestinian control “from the river to the sea” mean…what the slogan means. Stop trying to excuse the slogan. It does not express a goal of equality or compromise. Just like when right-wing Jews chant it - that’s also what THEY mean (all land being Israel from the Jordan to the Med).
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:


YOU do. The vast majority of those chanting a slogan that MEANS Palestinian control “from the river to the sea” mean…what the slogan means. Stop trying to excuse the slogan. It does not express a goal of equality or compromise. Just like when right-wing Jews chant it - that’s also what THEY mean (all land being Israel from the Jordan to the Med).

I'm not sure I can just take your word for it as I've not seen your credentials and qualifications as a spokesperson for people with whom it's clear you disagree. I might change my mind if you can find some credible, objective evidence that the people who use the slogan (and I'm not talking about Likud) want to expel, subjugate, or kill Jews.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Not being disingenuous here. We only want an end to the apartheid (and, of course, the genocide). A pretty low bar.

You’re totally being disingenuous and moving goalposts. 
 

you say they want equal rights under the law. When I point out that Israel has that, you then claim, well they’re not really equal. 
 

come on, man. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I can just take your word for it as I've not seen your credentials and qualifications as a spokesperson for people with whom it's clear you disagree. I might change my mind if you can find some credible, objective evidence that the people who use the slogan (and I'm not talking about Likud) want to expel, subjugate, or kill Jews.

You have got to be kidding me. This has to be a bit.
Seriously, you are not enhancing the credibility of your “side” at all. You’re only further damaging it.

It has plainly genocidal tones and is a core slogan of Hamas in its pledge to drive Jews from the entire levant:
————
“From the river to the sea” echoes through pro-Palestinian rallies across campuses and cities, adopted by some as a call for a single state on the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean.

By 2012, it was clear that Hamas had claimed the slogan in its drive to claim land spanning Israel, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

“Palestine is ours from the river to the sea and from the south to the north,” Khaled Mashaal, the group’s former leader, said that year in a speech in Gaza celebrating the 25th anniversary of the founding of Hamas. “There will be no concession on any inch of the land.”

The phrase also has roots in the Hamas charter.
———-

I gotta tell ya, if I wanted to chant for peace and equality, I PROBABLY wouldn’t adopt a slogan that’s regularly used by genocidal terrorist groups.
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Brisketexan said:


You have got to be kidding me. This has to be a bit.
Seriously, you are not enhancing the credibility of your “side” at all. You’re only further damaging it.

It has plainly genocidal tones and is a core slogan of Hamas in its pledge to drive Jews from the entire levant:
————
“From the river to the sea” echoes through pro-Palestinian rallies across campuses and cities, adopted by some as a call for a single state on the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean.

By 2012, it was clear that Hamas had claimed the slogan in its drive to claim land spanning Israel, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

“Palestine is ours from the river to the sea and from the south to the north,” Khaled Mashaal, the group’s former leader, said that year in a speech in Gaza celebrating the 25th anniversary of the founding of Hamas. “There will be no concession on any inch of the land.”

The phrase also has roots in the Hamas charter.
———-

I gotta tell ya, if I wanted to chant for peace and equality, I PROBABLY wouldn’t adopt a slogan that’s regularly used by genocidal terrorist groups.

You're just repeating yourself. Show me some sources and I might change my mind. I don't buy into your hysterical, paranoid viewpoint on this issue.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

You’re totally being disingenuous and moving goalposts. 
 

you say they want equal rights under the law. When I point out that Israel has that, you then claim, well they’re not really equal. 
 

come on, man. 

Are you, an American, seriously going to argue that equal rights under the law means equal rights in fact? 

Really?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a single viable political force or organization within Palestinian society proposing anything that approximates a liberal democratic governance structure for the Palestinians NOW, let alone that proposes a liberal democratic state that includes a bunch of Jews?  
 

Whatever “Palestine will be free” means, it’s undeniable that there are not any actual political actors in play that have the desire to make it so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're just repeating yourself. Show me some sources and I might change my mind. I don't buy into your hysterical, paranoid viewpoint on this issue.

You mean….me literally quoting the leader of Hamas is not a “source?”
For fuck’s sake, you’re just being a fucking disingenuous asshole. Fuck off.
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:


You mean….me literally quoting the leader of Hamas is not a “source?”
For fuck’s sake, you’re just being a fucking disingenuous asshole. Fuck off.

So if Hamas says something sensible it's off limits for everyone else to say? I'm asking about the overwhelming majority of people who are using it. The people in the streets calling for a ceasefire. The assignment was not to find an antisemite or terrorist who has used the slogan. The assignment was to find evidence that the slogan means what you claim it means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if Hamas says something sensible it's off limits for everyone else to say? I'm asking about the overwhelming majority of people who are using it. The people in the streets calling for a ceasefire. The assignment was not to find an antisemite or terrorist who has used the slogan. The assignment was to find evidence that the slogan means what you claim it means.

Jesus Christ. Google any number of pieces on it - from the AP, NYT, Al Jazeera, and on and on. It has a very mixed history and current usage. Which is incredibly problematic, as an ambiguous slogan can be used by the disingenuous to claim it means different things depending on their audience. There is ZERO question that the slogan has real history of being used by people who intend it as an exclusionary statements…again, INCLUDING Jewish hardliners. Why in the fuck would you use that same slogan for a different meaning? You are ASKING for division and people hearing the other meaning. It either means that you want there to be no Israel, or you’re stupid as fuck for using a slogan that has long carried that meaning when that’s not what you mean.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

So if Hamas says something sensible it's off limits for everyone else to say? I'm asking about the overwhelming majority of people who are using it. The people in the streets calling for a ceasefire. The assignment was not to find an antisemite or terrorist who has used the slogan. The assignment was to find evidence that the slogan means what you claim it means.

Can you find evidence that it means what you want it to mean, outside of some Western college campuses? By all means show me. 

Where is Palestine’s Vaclav Havel or Lech Walesa?  Where is Palestine’s Nelson Mandela? Where is Palestine’s Simon Bolivar? Or Palestine’s Zelenskyy?

The world is littered with freedom fighters— violent and non-violent— who demonstrated that their calls for liberation were based on calls for human dignity, fundamental rights, tolerance, and respect.  I am unfamiliar with any similar political force among the Palestinians.  The best among them can only boast “we are not actively doing terrorism now.” None of them have a vision of equality, liberty, and tolerance for their own people let alone Jews. 
 

Is your argument really that Israel is so much worse than (checks notes)….the Soviet Union, Apartheid South Africa, Putin’s Russia, and Imperial Spain… and so there’s no way for Palestinians to give birth to a political movement that values freedom for THEMSELVES? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

You’re totally being disingenuous and moving goalposts. 
 

you say they want equal rights under the law. When I point out that Israel has that, you then claim, well they’re not really equal. 
 

come on, man. 

If you believe Israel actually has that, answer this question for me: do Arabs have the same rights under its immigration laws as do Jews?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


Jesus Christ. Google any number of pieces on it - from the AP, NYT, Al Jazeera, and on and on. It has a very mixed history and current usage. Which is incredibly problematic, as an ambiguous slogan can be used by the disingenuous to claim it means different things depending on their audience. There is ZERO question that the slogan has real history of being used by people who intend it as an exclusionary statements…again, INCLUDING Jewish hardliners. Why in the fuck would you use that same slogan for a different meaning? You are ASKING for division and people hearing the other meaning. It either means that you want there to be no Israel, or you’re stupid as fuck for using a slogan that has long carried that meaning when that’s not what you mean.

"be free" is not something anyone should ever need to apologize for. I certainly wouldn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"be free" is not something anyone should ever need to apologize for. I certainly wouldn't.

When it carries the STATED MEANING of “being free….OF something,” then you might oughta.
The area from the river to the sea being free OF Israel? Yeah. That’s a non-starter.
But hey, keep on keeping on. I’m telling you a very plain and direct way that the pro-Palestinian message is encumbering itself with genocidal baggage, either intentionally or foolishly, which is not helpful to the Palestinian cause. I am part of the audience the message is aimed at (I presume that pro-Palestinians would like to influence Americans, as our pressure on our government might make a material difference), and it’s a shit message. It has the opposite effect that I’d think you would want….yet you’re just fine with it being received that way…which sure makes me think that actually, that’s the message you want to send.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


When it carries the STATED MEANING of “being free….OF something,” then you might oughta.
The area from the river to the sea being free OF Israel? Yeah. That’s a non-starter.
But hey, keep on keeping on. I’m telling you a very plain and direct way that the pro-Palestinian message is encumbering itself with genocidal baggage, either intentionally or foolishly, which is not helpful to the Palestinian cause. I am part of the audience the message is aimed at (I presume that pro-Palestinians would like to influence Americans, as our pressure on our government might make a material difference), and it’s a shit message. It has the opposite effect that I’d think you would want….yet you’re just fine with it being received that way…which sure makes me think that actually, that’s the message you want to send.

I don’t know anyone who tries to dissemble and say that the phrase doesn’t mean what it means when it’s pointed out that it appeared in Likud’s founding documents: it meant one nation, Israel, where Palestinians were either gone or politically dominated by Jews.
 

It is bullshit in that context and I don’t understand why it’s cute to play games the other direction about what it really means. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


When it carries the STATED MEANING of “being free….OF something,” then you might oughta.
The area from the river to the sea being free OF Israel? Yeah. That’s a non-starter.
But hey, keep on keeping on. I’m telling you a very plain and direct way that the pro-Palestinian message is encumbering itself with genocidal baggage, either intentionally or foolishly, which is not helpful to the Palestinian cause. I am part of the audience the message is aimed at (I presume that pro-Palestinians would like to influence Americans, as our pressure on our government might make a material difference), and it’s a shit message. It has the opposite effect that I’d think you would want….yet you’re just fine with it being received that way…which sure makes me think that actually, that’s the message you want to send.

You keep insisting that it has the singular meaning of purging Jews and yet have been unable to provide any authoritative evidence of it.

I'll do my best to find the evidence you weren't able to provide.

Regarding the origins of the phrase Wikipedia says:

Quote

The phrase was popularised in the 1960s as part of a wider call for Palestinian liberation creating a democratic state freeing Palestinians from oppression from Israeli as well as from other Arab regimes such as Jordan and Egypt

Wikipedia cites this Nassar article for that

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_river_to_the_sea#cite_note-Nassar_2018_f411-19

Which is here:

https://forward.com/opinion/415250/from-the-river-to-the-sea-doesnt-mean-what-you-think-it-means/

Nassar says:

Quote

That’s how the call for a free Palestine “from the river to the sea” gained traction in the 1960s. It was part of a larger call to see a secular democratic state established in all of historic Palestine.

Quote

Jews who were willing to live as equals with the Palestinians were welcome to stay. In his 1974 speech to the UN, Fatah leader and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat declared, “when we speak of our common hopes for the Palestine of tomorrow we include in our perspective all Jews now living in Palestine who choose to live with us there in peace and without discrimination.”

Here's a really important part I want you, @Brisketexan  in particular, to read, re-read, and then re-read again:

Quote

Most troubling for me, the belief that a “free Palestine” would necessarily lead to the mass annihilation of Jewish Israelis is rooted in deeply racist and Islamophobic assumptions about who the Palestinians are and what they want.

 

Thus, as best I can tell, the phrase got popular in the 1960s, and it had nothing to do with the expulsion, oppression, or murder of Jews. And to answer the specific question you had about what "free" originally meant in this context, the only evidence that would answer it is clear: it means free as in freedom.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Thus, as best I can tell, the phrase got popular in the 1960s, and it had nothing to do with the expulsion, oppression, or murder of Jews. And to answer the specific question you had about what "free" originally meant in this context, the only evidence that would answer it is clear: it means free as in freedom.

Singular meaning? Cool, so you just plain lied about what I said. You are a lying piece of shit, and I’m glad you’ve made it so plain and open - no point in worrying about you anymore. I specifically said it has an AMBIGUOUS meaning. I used that exact word. As in, the opposite of “singular.” It has been used for BOTH MEANINGS. That is plain and undeniable.
And if you want to use a phrase to imply “peaceful freedom, not genocide,” why would you use a phrase that has also carried the meaning of “genocide, not peaceful freedom?” That’s only because you’re either disingenuous, or an idiot.
As for you, you’ve outed yourself as just a garden variety liar. It’s not a great look.

Oh….and does the phrase carry the genocidal meaning I referenced? Gee…it’s a mystery….I mean, unless you CONTINUE TO READ THE SAME FUCKING WIKIPEDIA ENTRY YOU LINKED:

“Use by militant groups
"From the river to the sea" has been adopted by several jihadist militant groups, Islamic fundamentalist groups, and terrorist organizations in the Near East and Middle East. Hamas, as part of its revised 2017 charter, rejected "any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea", referring to all areas of former Mandatory Palestine and by extent, the elimination of Jewish sovereignty in the region.[25][26] Islamic Jihad declared that "from the river to the sea — [Palestine] is an Arab Islamic land that [it] is legally forbidden from abandoning any inch of, and the Israeli presence in Palestine is a null existence, which is forbidden by law to recognize.[8] Islamic supporters have utilized a version stating "Palestine is Islamic from the river to the sea", with certain Islamic scholars declaring that the Mahdi — a redemptive apocalyptic figure central to Islamic eschatology — will declare "Jerusalem is Arab Muslim, and Palestine — all of it, from the river to the sea — is Arab Muslim."[27][28]

The phrase has been linked to Hamas since their founding in 1988 with their founding charter seeking "to confront the Zionist invasion and defeat it", however the phrase did not feature in Hamas's official positions until 2017.[29] The first usage of the phrase was as part of its 2017 revised platform where they state "Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea [...] along the lines of the 4th of June 1967".[30][31][22]”
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

If you believe Israel actually has that, answer this question for me: do Arabs have the same rights under its immigration laws as do Jews?

You’re moving goalposts again. I said their laws provide for equal rights for all of its citizens. 

I’m done trying to discuss with you. Your tactics are disingenuous and approach trolling. 
 

 

IMG_0613.jpeg

Edited by DDD Dad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:


Singular meaning? Cool, so you just plain lied about what I said. You are a lying piece of shit, and I’m glad you’ve made it so plain and open - no point in worrying about you anymore. I specifically said it has an AMBIGUOUS meaning. I used that exact word. As in, the opposite of “singular.” It has been used for BOTH MEANINGS. That is plain and undeniable.
And if you want to use a phrase to imply “peaceful freedom, not genocide,” why would you use a phrase that has also carried the meaning of “genocide, not peaceful freedom?” That’s only because you’re either disingenuous, or an idiot.
As for you, you’ve outed yourself as just a garden variety liar. It’s not a great look.

I thought you were interested in the origin. Are you now saying you're interested in something broader? I didn't dispute that it's been used by Hamas or other militant groups. And I already said it makes no sense to abandon a sensible slogan just because someone else you don't like has used it. What is the issue here?

1 minute ago, DDD Dad said:

You’re moving goalposts again. I said their laws provide for equal rights for all of its citizens. 

I’m done trying to discuss with you. Your tactics are disingenuous and approach trolling. 

But they don't. And you know it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they don't. And you know it.

That you “don’t see the issue” in using a slogan that 1) a terrorist group has used to call for genocide (it’s not just “used by someone I don’t like,” it is used by them to convey the exact problematic message we’re taking about)….2) when that exact terrorist group just committed an act of genocide….well, that explains how the pro-Palestinian cause is its own worst enemy.
I might ask…if you are trying to get the world to view your cause as just, and not genocidal, what kind of absolute idiot would repeatedly chant a slogan that has baggage of being the genocidal creed of a terrorist group associated with your cause that just committed an act of genocide against the very people and country you now insist you’re not genocidal about? Seriously. It’s either evil or breathtakingly stupid.
Your arguments here sure have me leaning towards it being the first option. Because nobody can be that stupid.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


That you “don’t see the issue” in using a slogan that 1) a terrorist group has used to call for genocide (it’s not just “used by someone I don’t like,” it is used by them to convey the exact problematic message we’re taking about)….2) when that exact terrorist group just committed an act of genocide….well, that explains how the pro-Palestinian cause is its own worst enemy.
I might ask…if you are trying to get the world to view your cause as just, and not genocidal, what kind of absolute idiot would repeatedly chant a slogan that has baggage of being the genocidal creed of a terrorist group associated with your cause that just committed an act of genocide against the very people and country you now insist you’re not genocidal about? Seriously. It’s either evil or breathtakingly stupid.
Your arguments here sure have me leaning towards it being the first option. Because nobody can be that stupid.

The slogan is much older than Hamas. Sorry but I'm not buying the Zionist propaganda about it. And fuck anyone who censured Tlaib over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...