• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Sick sick world what is wrong with people

Craig_J said:
View attachment 16713

Here we are.




It's set out clearly in Israel's laws that ONLY Jewish people - and Jewish people alone - are entitled to self-determination.

Non-Jews aren't entitled to self-determine.

Its official state policy that only people of a certain ethnicity/ religion are guaranteed autonomy and freedom.


Israel's national policy explicitly outlines Israel is a racist apartheid nation.
Click to expand...
Yet in the words of the country's Supreme Court (those who will be applying any such law should it be required)..

"...this does not detract from the individual rights of non-Jewish citizens, especially in light of other laws that ensure equal rights to all."

From what I can tell, those most concerned about this law are people who describe themselves as Israeli Arabs. Care to know the difference between an Israeli Arab and an Israeli? An Israeli Arab is someone who describes themselves as such. To be an Israeli, one must simply consider themselves to be Israeli and not an Israeli with caveats. Seems perfectly acceptable to me.
 
Craig_J said:
That was one part I just couldn't justify with a response.

Despite Scara's many faults the one thing I have to credit him for is he doesn't censor anyone on here no matter how heated things get.

But it's appalling to see how far people are prepared to go to justify Israel and it makes no sense too. The scale of oppression is off the chart and it's gone on for so many generations. People from both the left and the right have made clear what this is.

Obama, Cameron, dare I mention Corbyn....

To my surprise I even saw a video clip in which Trump said:



Far left, centre left, centre right, right wing...

All these different UN bodies and international charities.

The sheer commitment to just refuse to accept that Israel has any fault is completely unreal.

It's like arguing with any one who's pro-Russian. The whole world can tell them they've been out of line and there's always a reason, a justification, a denial. Its endless.
Click to expand...

This is a fair point, as long as you know it's like arguing against an AI bot programmed to not have any awareness that what it's saying might not be correct. The persona does not allow for any new points of view to be taken on board as I guess that seems like a weakness instead of the actual strength of being open minded. I'm guessing you already know this but just in case, don't have any hope of getting through. We've lost many a conscientious poster (and moderators) because of this, but as you say the benefit on the other side is that things aren't overly policed.

Raw free speech can be great as it allows people to make an arse out of themselves but if the supposed dude in charge is earnestly suggesting that driving a car in to a protest requesting a ceasefire is a sensible course of action, then it's kind of being pushed to the limit.
 
scaramanga said:
Yet in the words of the country's Supreme Court (those who will be applying any such law should it be required)..

"...this does not detract from the individual rights of non-Jewish citizens, especially in light of other laws that ensure equal rights to all."

From what I can tell, those most concerned about this law are people who describe themselves as Israeli Arabs. Care to know the difference between an Israeli Arab and an Israeli? An Israeli Arab is someone who describes themselves as such. To be an Israeli, one must simply consider themselves to be Israeli and not an Israeli with caveats. Seems perfectly acceptable to me.
Click to expand...

From what I've just read I'm not so sure the Israeli Supreme Court seem to have such a good reputation and it's clinging on by a thread after a 9-8 vote on removing its power.

No one should have to identify as anything other than what they are. I also doubt saying your an Israeli would make any difference if your not Jewish given the law.

If anyone should have to make accommodations identity wise it should be Israeli's identifying as Arab to assimilate into the region they moved to.
 
Craig_J said:
From what I've just read I'm not so sure the Israeli Supreme Court seem to have such a good reputation and it's clinging on by a thread after a 9-8 vote on removing its power.

No one should have to identify as anything other than what they are. I also doubt saying your an Israeli would make any difference if your not Jewish given the law.

If anyone should have to make accommodations identity wise it should be Israeli's identifying as Arab to assimilate into the region they moved to.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying anyone should have to change what they identify as.

I'm simply pointing out that if somebody wants to be considered to be a nationality, then they need to identify as that nationality first.
 
scaramanga said:
I'm not saying anyone should have to change what they identify as.

I'm simply pointing out that if somebody wants to be considered to be a nationality, then they need to identify as that nationality first.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure they should feel the need to identify with something just to be able to claw human rights together. That wouldn't seem very ethical or genuine. It would seem very forced to say - "We have come, we evicted your grandparents out of the homes they'd had for 1,500 years and slung them out to the streets. We went to war with your parents just to push them back more. Now you have no right to self-determination or to have any political participation unless you identify with our culture and are subsumed by it."

I think that's the kind of answer that would tinkle people off. Maybe it's just me but I just have a hunch there'd be something about the forcible evictions, vacating that which had been home for a millennia and a half then having to identify as the new kids on the block to attain basic human rights - that would really rile people up.

|The simplest solution is go back to the legal borders, give up the illegally occupied land (which even after just 3 years after the formation of Israel was already 50% of all the land allocated to Palestine), and let Palestinian people have their own state.

Israel won't approve the second state so onus is on them to ensure Palestinan people have political representation. Palestinians could identify as zebras first, Arabs second, Muslims third, middle easterns fourth and not Israeli at all. They stil need representation whilst Israel is refuting that.
 
Last edited:
scaramanga said:
ICJ ruling was clear. They said no genocide. Israel said "That's fine, we'll continue what we're doing and continue not genociding".

The ruling obviously changes nothing.
Click to expand...

they have not ruled on genocide yet. They have said there is case to investigate it. they were never ruling on it at this stage. you dont get how the ICJ works or you are disingenuous or most likely both.
 
LutonSpurs said:
they have not ruled on genocide yet. They have said there is case to investigate it. they were never ruling on it at this stage. you dont get how the ICJ works or you are disingenuous or most likely both.
Click to expand...
I just don't care how it works.

Any court that would even entertain a submission such as the one from a SA govt desperate to shore up votes at home is a waste of everyone's time.
 
Craig_J said:
I'm not sure they should feel the need to identify with something just to be able to claw human rights together. That wouldn't seem very ethical or genuine. It would seem very forced to say - "We have come, we evicted your grandparents out of the homes they'd had for 1,500 years and slung them out to the streets. We went to war with your parents just to push them back more. Now you have no right to self-determination or to have any political participation unless you identify with our culture and are subsumed by it."

I think that's the kind of answer that would tinkle people off. Maybe it's just me but I just have a hunch there'd be something about the forcible evictions, vacating that which had been home for a millennia and a half then having to identify as the new kids on the block to attain basic human rights - that would really rile people up.

|The simplest solution is go back to the legal borders, give up the illegally occupied land (which even after just 3 years after the formation of Israel was already 50% of all the land allocated to Palestine), and let Palestinian people have their own state.

Israel won't approve the second state so onus is on them to ensure Palestinan people have political representation. Palestinians could identify as zebras first, Arabs second, Muslims third, middle easterns fourth and not Israeli at all. They stil need representation whilst Israel is refuting that.
Click to expand...
If it were genuinely about land, it would have been solved by now.

If we had a 2 state solution based around any borders, Palestine would still have terrorists whose homophobic sky fairy tells them Israel must not exist in government.

If it's all about territory, how about this as a solution:
Revert to any borders you like, Palestine is established and recognised as its own country. The moment any Palestinian terrorist does any damage to any Israeli citizen, Palestine ceases to exist and all the land "From the river to the sea" as the Allahtards like to call it, becomes Israel in perpetuity.
 
scaramanga said:
If it were genuinely about land, it would have been solved by now.

If we had a 2 state solution based around any borders, Palestine would still have terrorists whose homophobic sky fairy tells them Israel must not exist in government.

If it's all about territory, how about this as a solution:
Revert to any borders you like, Palestine is established and recognised as its own country. The moment any Palestinian terrorist does any damage to any Israeli citizen, Palestine ceases to exist and all the land "From the river to the sea" as the Allahtards like to call it, becomes Israel in perpetuity.
Click to expand...

And Israel will still have its homophobic racist sky fairy tell them they have to take back all the land that they abandoned 2,000 years ago despite the fact they never gave a brick about it enough to return once in the 2 millenia since - and despite the fact they should count themselves lucky they were given half without having to work for it.
 
Difference between Israel and the arab people is the arab people had homes their.##

Israel's claim is the one based of ridiculous manifest destiny crap written in some severely mistranslated scroll thousands of years ago.

Palestine's claim is based in the physical world and property. Things of sustance and proof. Israel's is on some ancient time before the pyramids - (if it even ever happened at all)
 
Craig_J said:
And Israel will still have its homophobic racist sky fairy tell them they have to take back all the land that they abandoned 2,000 years ago despite the fact they never gave a brick about it enough to return once in the 2 millenia since - and despite the fact they should count themselves lucky they were given half without having to work for it.
Click to expand...
Israel is a democracy - it is not controlled by religion. The current government lean that way but that hasn't and won't always be the case.

That land didn't mean anything to anyone until some people showed up that they didn't like. The population density pre-WWII was virtually nil, nobody built it up, nobody had any form of anything resembling a city there. It only became important when the people who believed some paedophile who told them his imaginary friend hates Jews didn't want the Jews there.
 
Craig_J said:
Difference between Israel and the arab people is the arab people had homes their.##

Israel's claim is the one based of ridiculous manifest destiny crap written in some severely mistranslated scroll thousands of years ago.

Palestine's claim is based in the physical world and property. Things of sustance and proof. Israel's is on some ancient time before the pyramids - (if it even ever happened at all)
Click to expand...
That's not how claiming land works. Anyone can pick any particular date in history and use that to show that a part of land belongs to a particular group.

Picking a random date, most of Southern England belongs to Italy, pick another and it belongs to Denmark, etc, etc.
 
scaramanga said:
ICJ ruling was clear. They said no genocide. Israel said "That's fine, we'll continue what we're doing and continue not genociding".

The ruling obviously changes nothing.
Click to expand...

ICJ ruling mentioned
scaramanga said:
I just don't care how it works.

Any court that would even entertain a submission such as the one from a SA govt desperate to shore up votes at home is a waste of everyone's time.
Click to expand...
Now doesn't care when he is proven to be a liar.

This is you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jrh
scaramanga said:
Israel is a democracy - it is not controlled by religion. The current government lean that way but that hasn't and won't always be the case.

That land didn't mean anything to anyone until some people showed up that they didn't like. The population density pre-WWII was virtually nil, nobody built it up, nobody had any form of anything resembling a city there. It only became important when the people who believed some paedophile who told them his imaginary friend hates Jews didn't want the Jews there.
Click to expand...

Israel's presence there has nothing to do with Judaism? That's a pretty massive leap.

The whole area is blighted by religious conflict, you can't just use it to tar one 'side' of the conflict.

It's a question of respecting basic humanity, regardless of colour or creed. I'm afraid the Israeli government fail this in just about every possible way.
 
jrh said:
Israel's presence there has nothing to do with Judaism? That's a pretty massive leap.

The whole area is blighted by religious conflict, you can't just use it to tar one 'side' of the conflict.

It's a question of respecting basic humanity, regardless of colour or creed. I'm afraid the Israeli government fail this in just about every possible way.
Click to expand...
Of the two sides involved in the conflict, one is hiding their military amongst the injured in hospitals, the other is evacuating civilians before attacking.

There's only one side here trying to respect humanity here and it's not the one you seem to think it is.
 
LutonSpurs said:
ICJ ruling mentioned

Now doesn't care when he is proven to be a liar.

This is you.
Click to expand...
I think you've misunderstood my initial post there.

When I said ICJ ruled "No genocide" I was pointing out that they're saying don't do any genocide. Hence my phrasing of the Israeli response as "We'll continue to not do any genocides"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back