• 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

I agree there is an orthodox media and cultural approach to different conflicts and an attempt to conserve, as you say, a specific narrative, but I think your response is a little tight.

Sudan is a civil war between 2 internal sections of the Sudanese armed forces. Is there a genuine right or wrong side to 'support'?

How much of the perception of what is happening in Yemen is driven by the western hate of Iran and infatuation with Saudi (so automatically say the Houthis are bad)?

Ukraine and Russia - sovereign country invaded by a different country so a whole different situation to the above two. Are the West perpetuating it by supporting agreed International law? What is different between Germany invading Poland in '39 and Russia invading Ukraine?

Palestine is a whole different scenario again. Palestine is not a recognised state so not an equivalence to Ukraine, but is not part of Israel (despite Bibi's wet dreams) so not a civil war. It is a massively one-sided conflict which has historically had an overwhelming media support for the big guy, Israel. It is legally recognised as an occupation yet is tolerated. Many protest it where they don't others not because they are antisemitic but because they can see the inequality and the colonialism involved.


Ironically you could argue that your position criticising anti-Israel criticism is more supporting the hegemonic dominant media narrative than those protesting against it.
 
Lost Mango said:
I agree there is an orthodox media and cultural approach to different conflicts and an attempt to conserve, as you say, a specific narrative, but I think your response is a little tight.

Sudan is a civil war between 2 internal sections of the Sudanese armed forces. Is there a genuine right or wrong side to 'support'?

How much of the perception of what is happening in Yemen is driven by the western hate of Iran and infatuation with Saudi (so automatically say the Houthis are bad)?

Ukraine and Russia - sovereign country invaded by a different country so a whole different situation to the above two. Are the West perpetuating it by supporting agreed International law? What is different between Germany invading Poland in '39 and Russia invading Ukraine?

Palestine is a whole different scenario again. Palestine is not a recognised state so not an equivalence to Ukraine, but is not part of Israel (despite Bibi's wet dreams) so not a civil war. It is a massively one-sided conflict which has historically had an overwhelming media support for the big guy, Israel. It is legally recognised as an occupation yet is tolerated. Many protest it where they don't others not because they are antisemitic but because they can see the inequality and the colonialism involved.


Ironically you could argue that your position criticising anti-Israel criticism is more supporting the hegemonic dominant media narrative than those protesting against it.
Click to expand...

Oft neglected point, Germany invaded Poland from onside and Russia from the other.
Where is the anti Russian narrative.
It's really difficult to argue that we are led to follow a narrative when it comes to the big issues like war.
One side may well have a moral high ground in fighting a war, can anyone really say that the allies standing up to the nazis wasn't the right thing to do, but that high ground is very quickly given up in the methods used to win the war.
 
Jurgen the German said:
I wonder why they don’t protest other injustices or wars like Ukraine for example? It seems like there are some genuine protesters, most likely people who have ties to the region, but the rest of them have latched on to a cause.
Click to expand...
I've yet to see any of them go to China and protest the awful treatment of Uighurs out there. Shame.
 
scaramanga said:
I've yet to see any of them go to China and protest the awful treatment of Uighurs out there. Shame.
Click to expand...

For me the students of the elite colleges and the institutions themselves lost any credibility they had when they failed to condemn Hamas after October 7th. A lot of the student groups blamed Israel for the attacks, blaming the country that got attacked for being attacked! And then the universities hid behind free speech when they claimed the students had a right to say that they wanted to say which is fine but they’ve not been afraid to disinvite speakers at certain colleges because they made the students “feel unsafe”. Can’t pick and choose when you adhere to free speech. If you want to criticise Israel that’s fine I don’t agree with how they deal Hamas and Netanyahu hasn’t done Israel any favours.
 
Lost Mango said:
I agree there is an orthodox media and cultural approach to different conflicts and an attempt to conserve, as you say, a specific narrative, but I think your response is a little tight.

Sudan is a civil war between 2 internal sections of the Sudanese armed forces. Is there a genuine right or wrong side to 'support'?

How much of the perception of what is happening in Yemen is driven by the western hate of Iran and infatuation with Saudi (so automatically say the Houthis are bad)?

Ukraine and Russia - sovereign country invaded by a different country so a whole different situation to the above two. Are the West perpetuating it by supporting agreed International law? What is different between Germany invading Poland in '39 and Russia invading Ukraine?

Palestine is a whole different scenario again. Palestine is not a recognised state so not an equivalence to Ukraine, but is not part of Israel (despite Bibi's wet dreams) so not a civil war. It is a massively one-sided conflict which has historically had an overwhelming media support for the big guy, Israel. It is legally recognised as an occupation yet is tolerated. Many protest it where they don't others not because they are antisemitic but because they can see the inequality and the colonialism involved.


Ironically you could argue that your position criticising anti-Israel criticism is more supporting the hegemonic dominant media narrative than those protesting against it.
Click to expand...

What does tight mean?

The main point re Sudan is that there are 8 million people displaced from homes, and many more starving. Yet the thing that exercises you and many others is Palastine. Which is okay. You can have your thing, cause. But let’s at least be honest with ourselves that there is a fixation. It is not just about human suffering. Because there is far more need for exposure and humanity in Sudan:

“A lack of funds in South Sudan means 3 million acutely hungry people are receiving no assistance from the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP). Within Chad, a similar dearth of funds means it will have to end support for all 1.2 million refugees inside the country in April.
Officials from WFP warn that throughout the region, nearly 28 million people face acute food insecurity with 18 million in Sudan, 7 million in South Sudan, and nearly 3 million in Chad.”


The right-wrong simplification you try to make is illustrative. It shows how you and many others try to over simplify complex histories into polar black or white realities. And almost always conflicts are never exclusively black or white. There are almost always justifiable grievances on both sides. Each side can dig in with their own narratives, and perpetuate conflict. What this means is that those who can only see things from one side, who are entrenched, are the enemies of peace. On both sides conflict is fuelled by them - effectively people coming up against their mirror image on the other side.

None of the conflicts you outline are black or white. There are weighty geopolitics behind Sudan too. Iran and Russia trying to gain a naval base on the strategically vital Red Sea with the US involved. Ukraine could be compared to Scotland (from a Russian perspective), it was part of the ‘family’ (empire) until 40 odd years ago. Various promises were made when Germany was unified about not extending NATO any further towards Russia - which were then broken. And there are decades of geopolitical manipulation and manoeuvring by the US, Russia (and to some extent the EU) manipulating Ukraine’s politics towards or away from Russia. There has been a milti million or billion campaign behind the scenes perpetuating the Cold War. That Russia dropped the facade of this game and invaded, may not be the done thing old boy (it is unjust), but there is more to these conflicts than your overly simplistic rhetoric. This couldn’t be more true of Palestine as you acknowledge. It’s not part of Isreal, yet people who don’t fully understand accuse Isreal of an apartheid. How could it be when it’s a separate state? Isreal is accepting of all faiths, has mosques and openly gay people. It’s a democracy (which is problematic at the moment as there is a popularist right winger in power).

When I noted the surrounding nations in the Middle East were not as open or inclusive excluding ancient Christian and Jewish communities, your repost - written in this thread - was that Jewish people left their homes and communities in the Middle East because Isreal was advertising !!!! Idk where that came from or whether you wish to retract it? A the very least it shows a clear bias and at worst it’s highly prejudiced.
 
Last edited:
scaramanga said:
I've yet to see any of them go to China and protest the awful treatment of Uighurs out there. Shame.
Click to expand...
I not against this point. I’m against what Israel is doing in Gaza (fudge Hamas by the way) and the West Bank (very little Hamas here) for that matter but there is a strong argument to be said that what China is doing to the Uighurs is actually as bad… but different.
 
I think there's a vibrant monkey torturing group active in the vice den on here, it's an excellent way to meet new (pri)mates.

I guess it's the people who moved on from using magnifying glasses to scorch ants in the summer, it's a bit of a halfway house between eccentric evil nutter to full blown serial killer. It is a funny thought that there are probably lovely people who are quite isolated/ lonely and then you have the monkey botherers with a more lively social life having found their kindred spirits.

It reminds me of an actual serial killer who was in jail for life - A prison guard was found out to be sleeping with him and I'm guessing lost her job as a result. When a known, convicted mass murderer is getting more than you are.....It does make one wonder!
 
Lilbaz said:
www.bbc.com

Kidderminster woman pleads guilty to role in monkey torture network

Holly LeGresley, 37, was a participant in a group that paid people to kill and torture baby monkeys.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com


Seriously wtf? How do even start a group. - hi i'm steve, do you like watching baby monkeys getting tortured? We should form a group.
Click to expand...

These clams should suffer the slowest of reprisals...I'd personally chain them to a wall and let hoardes of angry apes rip their faces off and shove them back up their own arses...was that my inside voice??? I fudging HATE HATE HATE animal abusers (all abusers of course)...again clamS!

p.s. this post has probably placed me as a worthy recipient of the thread title LOL, but honestly, HOW can clams like this be allowed to exist? Who is that piece of brick 'The Torturer' and WHY do they always seem to escape the justice they deserve. Reflectively, I should probably downgrade my emotions to say that they all deserve long prison sentences, but my emotions make me question what the point of them actually is if their contribution to society is 'that'?!!!!! Grrrrrr...
 
SpurMeUp said:
What does tight mean?

The main point re Sudan is that there are 8 million people displaced from homes, and many more starving. Yet the thing that exercises you and many others is Palastine. Which is okay. You can have your thing, cause. But let’s at least be honest with ourselves that there is a fixation. It is not just about human suffering. Because there is far more need for exposure and humanity in Sudan:

“A lack of funds in South Sudan means 3 million acutely hungry people are receiving no assistance from the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP). Within Chad, a similar dearth of funds means it will have to end support for all 1.2 million refugees inside the country in April.
Officials from WFP warn that throughout the region, nearly 28 million people face acute food insecurity with 18 million in Sudan, 7 million in South Sudan, and nearly 3 million in Chad.”


The right-wrong simplification you try to make is illustrative. It shows how you and many others try to over simplify complex histories into polar black or white realities. And almost always conflicts are never exclusively black or white. There are almost always justifiable grievances on both sides. Each side can dig in with their own narratives, and perpetuate conflict. What this means is that those who can only see things from one side, who are entrenched, are the enemies of peace. On both sides conflict is fuelled by them - effectively people coming up against their mirror image on the other side.

None of the conflicts you outline are black or white. There are weighty geopolitics behind Sudan too. Iran and Russia trying to gain a naval base on the strategically vital Red Sea with the US involved. Ukraine could be compared to Scotland (from a Russian perspective), it was part of the ‘family’ (empire) until 40 odd years ago. Various promises were made when Germany was unified about not extending NATO any further towards Russia - which were then broken. And there are decades of geopolitical manipulation and manoeuvring by the US, Russia (and to some extent the EU) manipulating Ukraine’s politics towards or away from Russia. There has been a milti million or billion campaign behind the scenes perpetuating the Cold War. That Russia dropped the facade of this game and invaded, may not be the done thing old boy (it is unjust), but there is more to these conflicts than your overly simplistic rhetoric. This couldn’t be more true of Palestine as you acknowledge. It’s not part of Isreal, yet people who don’t fully understand accuse Isreal of an apartheid. How could it be when it’s a separate state? Isreal is accepting of all faiths, has mosques and openly gay people. It’s a democracy (which is problematic at the moment as there is a popularist right winger in power).

When I noted the surrounding nations in the Middle East were not as open or inclusive excluding ancient Christian and Jewish communities, your repost - written in this thread - was that Jewish people left their homes and communities in the Middle East because Isreal was advertising !!!! Idk where that came from or whether you wish to retract it? A the very least it shows a clear bias and at worst it’s highly prejudiced.
Click to expand...

Why would I retract it? Israel consistently encouraged Jews from other parts of the World post '47. I'm not sure how that is biased or prejudicial? It isn't even critical of Israel. It was responding to some of the distortions in a video if I remember correctly. Lots of Jews also moved there as they felt threatened (understandably) and now had somewhere they could feel safe but there was encouraged immigration from, amongst others, eastern Europe, Russia and, still is, from America.

Yes, the Great Game is still afoot with lots of players, be it the EU, US, Russia, Iran the Chinese or the Saudis (or UK pretending to still be relevant and just making things worse). I was talking about how the information is sold via politicians, vested interests and the media (in usually very binary fashion - good vs bad) and what I felt people were reacting to and why they reacted and acted on Palestine more than other conflicts or issues.

My point with Sudan wasn't to demean the massive humanitarian issue there but it is hard to protest for or against something when there doesn't appear, on the outside, to be any difference in the two antagonists. There have been, although not on anywhere near to the scale or media coverage, campaigns and calls for a ceasefire but there is no obvious political or social outcome that people can look at and buy into (and it is in Africa and most of Europe show correlating less interest the further away an issue is) as there is with Palestine.

I'll leave your 'historical' equivalencies of Scotland and the Ukraine for what they are.

Israel has a declared policy of Hafrada, which bears striking similarities to South African apartheid. The Bantustans were nominally independent/ not part of the state of RSA, so your argument that Israel can't be doing this in the Occupied Territories because they aren't part of Israel is disingenuous at best and perhaps revealing of the mirror bias you accuse others of. There are over 65 laws in place that discriminate directly or indirectly against Palestinian citizens in Israel and Palestinian residents of the OPT. Israeli Settlers in the 'non-Israel' West Bank can vote in Israeli elections but non-Israeli occupants of the same area can't (nor can Israelis not in Israel in person, so is the Occupied Territory really not part of the State? or just massive non-democratic double standards?). The US State Department also documented issues of institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against non-Israelis, and this is from Israel's staunchest ally.

What Hamas did and does is criminal and barbaric and has been rightly condemned by the majority of people who are protesting Israelis response. But October 7th didn't happen in a vacuum and Israel's treatment of those areas of the region-which-aren't-part-of-their-state should be treated with similar critical appraisal.
 
All very good points from all views and can any of us not have some bias in these conflicts, it's never an issue of which nation or people are right or wrong, it's the partnership of evil bastard that have control power and it doesn't bother them how many people have to die or starve as long as they get their way and the super powers who back these proxy conflicts.
 
Lost Mango said:
Why would I retract it? Israel consistently encouraged Jews from other parts of the World post '47. I'm not sure how that is biased or prejudicial? It isn't even critical of Israel. It was responding to some of the distortions in a video if I remember correctly. Lots of Jews also moved there as they felt threatened (understandably) and now had somewhere they could feel safe but there was encouraged immigration from, amongst others, eastern Europe, Russia and, still is, from America.
Click to expand...

The point was made that Isreal is more inclusive of religions and sexual orientations than other countries in the Middle East. That Jewish communities in places like Syria, Egypt etc which had deep and long lasting communities, were forced out. Synagogues were set on fire and people hounded out of their communities.

Your response was, they left because of Israeli advertising.

There are no more Jewish communities outside of Isreal in the Middle East now*. Meanwhile there are strong Jewish communities in most other parts of the world, who resisted the great magnet of Israeli advertisements!

Such rewriting of history is reminiscent of holocaust deniers, albeit far more subtle. They are prejudiced misrepresentations that seek to present a different (worrying) narrative. That Coptic Christian communities have faced a similar decline in the Middle East suggests it is not a Jewish problem so much as a lack of openness and inclusion within these nations.

Let’s be clear, the many Jewish communities in the middle east were not eradicated by a phenomenal advertising campaign!

*Casablanca the exception that proves the rule.
 
Last edited:
Lost Mango said:
Yes, the Great Game is still afoot with lots of players, be it the EU, US, Russia, Iran the Chinese or the Saudis (or UK pretending to still be relevant and just making things worse). I was talking about how the information is sold via politicians, vested interests and the media (in usually very binary fashion - good vs bad) and what I felt people were reacting to and why they reacted and acted on Palestine more than other conflicts or issues.

My point with Sudan wasn't to demean the massive humanitarian issue there but it is hard to protest for or against something when there doesn't appear, on the outside, to be any difference in the two antagonists. There have been, although not on anywhere near to the scale or media coverage, campaigns and calls for a ceasefire but there is no obvious political or social outcome that people can look at and buy into (and it is in Africa and most of Europe show correlating less interest the further away an issue is) as there is with Palestine.
Click to expand...

You make backing a conflict side sound like a sport. And I would agree, if that is your point. It is often less about human suffering and more about identification. Socialist - I auto support Palestine. *bacon dodger* - I auto identify with my brethren. Jew - I auto side with my tribe.

But there are plenty of Muslims in Sudan. And we could all open a new tab and make a donation to help feed the poor people there. No one is looking out for them. As the media has far more images and stories about Palestine. Not wishing to diminish the plight of Palestine in any way. I wholly condemn the Israeli governments actions (even if I take note of the wider context).

Lost Mango said:
I'll leave your 'historical' equivalencies of Scotland and the Ukraine for what they are.
Click to expand...
Seems a cop out. You’re wedded to one perspective and haven’t justify any rebuttal.

Lost Mango said:
Israel has a declared policy of Hafrada, which bears striking similarities to South African apartheid. The Bantustans were nominally independent/ not part of the state of RSA, so your argument that Israel can't be doing this in the Occupied Territories because they aren't part of Israel is disingenuous at best and perhaps revealing of the mirror bias you accuse others of. There are over 65 laws in place that discriminate directly or indirectly against Palestinian citizens in Israel and Palestinian residents of the OPT. Israeli Settlers in the 'non-Israel' West Bank can vote in Israeli elections but non-Israeli occupants of the same area can't (nor can Israelis not in Israel in person, so is the Occupied Territory really not part of the State? or just massive non-democratic double standards?). The US State Department also documented issues of institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against non-Israelis, and this is from Israel's staunchest ally.
Click to expand...

You yourself flagged that Palestine was a separate state. There is a tit for tat war. Hamas attacked Isreal and they retaliated. In this sense it is very different from South Africa.

Lost Mango said:
What Hamas did and does is criminal and barbaric and has been rightly condemned by the majority of people who are protesting Israelis response.
Click to expand...

I’m not so sure it is always so openly condemned. There are those on both sides that see violence as a valid reaction, and some of those attend marches etc
Lost Mango said:
But October 7th didn't happen in a vacuum and Israel's treatment of those areas of the region-which-aren't-part-of-their-state should be treated with similar critical appraisal.
Click to expand...

There are idiots on both side who perpetuate suffering. But we must condemn these people and those who fuel conlict with sales of armaments.
 
Didn't know where to put this, but as the conflict is horrible and brutal, might as well put it here.
One can say a lot about Pierce Morgan, but as a journalist, I don't know any other that push so hard for answers! Absolutely brilliant! Most other journalists just ask their questions and move on to the next, regardless what bogus answer they get.

I applaud Morgan for his persistence!
https://twitter.com/x/status/1788048532018012361
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back