Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 12 13 14 15 [16] 17
[#] Mon Apr 19 2021 22:55:08 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Most Jews draw a strong definition between "secular Jews" and "religious/practicing" Jews, themselves. 

Honestly, we don't have the kind of Orthodox Jews that exist on the East Coast in the West, or really, anywhere West of Ohio, as far as I've ever personally witnessed. 

Encountering *some* of them at a hotel in New Jersey once - I can kind of see where there is a certain um... stereotype of them. I realized right away that I was dealing with a rough group that didn't eff around if you irritated them. There was that same aura of a group that totally believed in "keeping it real". I had no idea or previous preconception going into that trip that there is a segment of Jewish Orthodox culture that is absolutely hardcore and ghetto. 


I've wondered if some of the flame wars that erupt here come down to a basic difference in experience between growing up in the West vs. the East. 

Anyhow... 


Yeah, Jewish families out here - I've never known one that weren't "secular Jews". They're like the WASPs of California. They live in the affluent suburbs, they blend in. Sometimes around Christmas time they put up blue lights instead of multi-colored ones or there is a Menorah in their window. I mean, they're not *immune* to anti-Semitism out here - but the Anti-Semites have to hit in run - and the entire community is outraged and after them. The large synagogue in Sacramento has been firebombed a couple of times, had some swastikas painted on it - but always at night, and if anyone was caught, they found no sympathy. 

And - they blend out here. They're part of the PTA, their mothers are in the same gossip circles with the Protestant and Catholic moms. They go to the same parties and date the same popular people and have promiscuous sex and go to raves in San Francisco and drop ecstasy.

That is one thing about California... the scene I grew up with - there were a lot of Asians, mostly Chinese, but a lot of Japanese too... a lot of Latinos... really, Mexicans - but that word is evidently racist now. We all lived in a couple of relatively affluent neighborhoods. I lived in the very starter homes - which were the "bad" part of those neighborhoods, and were there because of Fair Share housing laws - and even then, only because my grandmother bought the duplex as an "investment property" and rented one side to us far before market price. My neighborhood was full of either young starting couples that were mostly ethnic or white single women with one kid who had gotten a divorce from their husband in the 70s and were starting over. 

There was a lot of casual racism - I mean, the Chinese and Japanese both don't like each other, and they have total contempt for South East Asians. I had girlfriends who had dads who told them, "white guys are OK to date, but never to marry." And the girlfriend thought it was completely casual and appropriate to mention that to me in passing. I mean, in 8th or 9th grade - and not at all serious relationships. But mostly, we were all pretty much the same. The same values, interests, hobbies, culture, backgrounds. We played with one another on the blacktop in elementary school, and in High School we were getting high and blasted together at house parties. 


There were VERY few black people - and the several I can think of who assimilated fairly well were adopted black girls.

I mean, there were LOTS of black kids. But none of them were part of the popular cliques except for those few girls. Most of the black kids were bussed in from the hoods, and associated only with other black kids. There weren't any living in any of the areas - even my poor part of the neighborhood. There were popular white kids who lived in the border areas of THEIR neighborhoods - and those kids usually ended up into punk and trying to spend as little time at home as possible. 

 
But the Jewish kids, and their families - I suppose they went a little further than "not advertising" that they were Jewish - they actually probably made an effort to be indistinguishable from the WASPs and Catholics. It wasn't until High School that people started to realize, "Oh... Mellissa COHEN... that is a JEWISH last name!" But by then, I don't think anyone really cared about any of that. 

Everyone was kind of "secular" about whatever it was they were. The Catholics were maybe the most up front about their religion - they would send their kids to the parochial schools and tried to insulate their kids from the secular kids going to public schools. It didn't work. They ended up running around with us, too. 

But California is big, too. So my wife, who grew up in Bakersfield, moved up to Sacramento and we started dating, once we drove by a house and I said, "You can totally tell a Chinese guy owns that house." 

And she was offended. Called me racist. 

A few months later we were partying with a group of people, and one of them was a guy who was actually involved in Chinese organized crime - like, whatever the Chinese Mafia version of a "made man" is. And we're driving by a house, and he goes, "Ah, you can totally tell a Chinaman lives in that house!" 

And I instantly looked over at my wife, a grin on my face and asked, "Eric, how can you know that?" 

And he was like, "Ah dude, look at how the shrubs are done, the landscaping - everything is all feng shui... dude, look at that stone PAGODA. How can you live in this hood your whole life and not know that?" 

Race relations are a *real* regional thing - and THAT is part of the problem with a *national* dialog on race relations. The experience in New York is totally different than in Ohio, or Texas, or Arizona, or Northern California. You can't solve the problems with national dialogs - because in my experience, EVERYONE thinks the experience is universal and monolithic across the US - and it isn't. Not at all.  


Mon Apr 19 2021 09:13:47 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar
To me, it feels like most antisemitism these days isn't really
religion-based, although definitely a chunk of it is.

That's kind of what I noticed. Jews are the first group REAL bigots tend to target when they need "otherkind" to abuse. For what reason -- well, that largely depends on who you believe they really are. For anyone who believes that they are "God's chosen people" it's obvious.

At least when someone openly hates, you don't have to work hard to know they're a bigot. Whether it's Poul-Henning Kamp or Jennifer Ho or anyone else, when it's "anti-THEM" instead of "pro-everyone" you know they're the asshole and you don't have to look any further.

(IGnoring the flame war and wishing y'all would cut it out.)

 



[#] Tue Apr 20 2021 06:57:55 EDT from LoanShark

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

2021-04-18 20:34 from ParanoidDelusions
And LoanShark, not only do I mostly ignore you - but when we do
interact, I pull my punches - because Ig has telegraphed that he
doesn't like the disruption it creates on the BBS when we clash.
Judging by your reaction here - Ig is probably right.  


Do better.

You've got issues. You've kind of obsessed with your own ideology. You inject it into discussions where it's socially inappropriate to do so. We were having a discussion about relationships the other day, and you totally sidetracked it into your own ideological manifesto. That's disruptive.

It absolutely feels like you're following me around the board, pouncing on my every message way to quickly, and following up with personal attacks when I disagree.

It absolutely feels like you're bigoted towards me: "intolerant of others' opinions" is one of the dictionary definitions of bigotry, and you checked that box off pretty good. I'm not talking about one or two isolated instances, I'm talking about a pervasive pattern.

It absolutely feels like I could make a particular point, and you'd pounce on it, but if somebody else on this board were to make the same point, you would give it a pass.

It absolutely feels like a childish personal vendetta, and I know for a fact that I'm not the only person to have noticed this.

You really do pounce on shit way too quickly without bothering to understand the purpose or the point of the post, seizing on some minor part of the argument that doesn't exactly line up 100% with your narrow-minded ideology. You just can't tolerate anything that isn't framed in your terms. In this case, I was pointing out the dual standards of the woke-scold crowd. You don't need to agree with the framing to grasp that point; you just have to understand it. I'd have thought you'd be on board.

As is so often the case with you, you went off half-cocked.

The overall pattern with you is self-centeredness. You're just a loudmouth who likes to hear himself talk. And I am not the only person who has noticed the way you tend to hijack a large number of threads on this board.

[#] Tue Apr 20 2021 07:02:45 EDT from LoanShark

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I addressed the CLAIM, directly. I made NO statements about
Loanshark's position on it. I addressed the phenomenon *broadly* of
someone saying something, and the CONTEXT of it being deciphered
differently depending on your PERSONAL biases on the issue. I wasn't

actually addressing Loanshark or his statements at all, directly or
indirectly. I was joining the discussion in general and stating MY
position on statements of the nature of "X is *transparently
antisemitic*..."

This is something Scott Addams calls out all the time - that people
project a lot of their own personal bias on everything they
witness. 

So a response as ham-fisted as: 

""So @PD would have us believe "oh, he was only referring to the bad

jews, not the majority."



Which is a GROSS oversimplification
of what I said on a very
sensitive subject. 

This is certain to have escalated the conversation towards conflict.

I don't single you out, LoanShark. You bring it on yourself. I'm
*being* charitable to you right this minute. If you've misspoke, if
I've misinterpreted what you said, then stand down, admit it, own
that you dragged me into a direct conflict with you rather than a
general discussion about the nature of cancel culture and wokeness -

and I'd be more than willing to be gracious enough to let this ride.

Online communication is fraught with miscommunication and
misunderstanding. 

Otherwise... ignoring me? You're doing it wrong. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------




You're quoting the wrong part of the discussion. Yes, you didn't personally attack me here. You disagreed, politely enough. In the next messaage, I also disagreed, politely enough. Then, you launched into your ad-hominems about how I'm an "annoying" leftist.

Don't try to rewrite history on this, you asshole.

[#] Tue Apr 20 2021 07:06:10 EDT from LoanShark

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

2021-04-18 20:34 from ParanoidDelusions
And LoanShark, not only do I mostly ignore you - but when we do
interact, I pull my punches - because Ig has telegraphed that he
doesn't like the disruption it creates on the BBS when we clash.
Judging by your reaction here - Ig is probably right.  


You have no sense of perspective on this. You've even mentioned me by name in threads I'm not even involved in.

Do better.

[#] Tue Apr 20 2021 07:14:33 EDT from LoanShark

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Which is a GROSS oversimplification of what I said on a very
sensitive subject. 

You might feel that way. But that's on you. Look, I was making a valid point, however badly you may think I phrased it, which was that your thoughts about how statements like his should be interpreted, your thoughts on that matter cannot be taken as categorically true.

And whether you like it or not, you said something that lent itself to a particular interpretation, which is: who are "those people?" -- well, Varnish-guy is only referring to "right-wing jews who supported Israel's apartheid policy", when he refers to "those people."

It is *crucial to the point* that I then proceed to talk about the near-universality of Jewish support for Israel.

Is is *crucial to the point* that the Labour Left (Corbynites) have been smearing the entirety of the UK Jewish community as "just a bunch of [evil] Tories."

You don't have to like the framing. You don't have to like the way I worded it. You *do* have to stop whining that somebody "twisted" your words. It wasn't a dig at you. It was just somebody (me), building up a particular argument, step by step. Not even necessarily disagreeing with you so much as taking it in a particular direction that you don't share.

Try some patience, sometime.

[#] Tue Apr 20 2021 07:31:04 EDT from LoanShark

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Encountering *some* of them at a hotel in New Jersey once - I can
kind of see where there is a certain um... stereotype of them. I
realized right away that I was dealing with a rough group that didn't
eff around if you irritated them. There was that same aura of a group
that totally believed in "keeping it real". I had no idea or previous
preconception going into that trip that there is a segment of Jewish
Orthodox culture that is absolutely hardcore and ghetto. 

I can see that.

If you choose to walk around with a target (visibly Orthodox clothing) on your back, just to say "I do not hide who I am", you'd better be ready. There's an element of blue-collar pride here. (Did I say something biased? Sue me. Haredim are generally pretty ascetic. Contrary to the negative stereotype, the tendency seems to be that they actually don't have a lot of money.)

[#] Tue Apr 20 2021 07:39:49 EDT from LoanShark

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

2021-04-20 07:14 from LoanShark
Which is a GROSS oversimplification of what I said on a very
sensitive subject.

You might feel that way. But that's on you. Look, I was making a valid

point, however badly you may think I phrased it, which was that your
thoughts about how statements like his should be interpreted, your
thoughts on that matter cannot be taken as categorically true.

And whether you like it or not, you said something that lent itself to

a particular interpretation, which is: who are "those people?" -- well,

Varnish-guy is only referring to "right-wing jews who supported
Israel's apartheid policy", when he refers to "those people."

Look at it this way, PD:

I oversimplified what you said? Maybe. Whatever. That was not central to the point. Because it's not about you. It was about Varnish guy, and certain political trends.

[#] Tue Apr 20 2021 09:48:31 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Dude... 

I responded twice, shortly, about this whole part of it - then moved back to the conversation and moved on. 

You responded maybe a half dozen times, maybe more - I'm not counting line by line - and ONE of them was on topic. Let it go. Move on. We're done with this. I didn't read ANYTHING you said expect the on topic post and this one.

I don't really care. Ig basically asked us to ignore the flamewar. Why don't we just do that?  


Tue Apr 20 2021 07:39:49 EDT from LoanShark
2021-04-20 07:14 from LoanShark
Which is a GROSS oversimplification of what I said on a very
sensitive subject.

You might feel that way. But that's on you. Look, I was making a valid

point, however badly you may think I phrased it, which was that your
thoughts about how statements like his should be interpreted, your
thoughts on that matter cannot be taken as categorically true.

And whether you like it or not, you said something that lent itself to

a particular interpretation, which is: who are "those people?" -- well,

Varnish-guy is only referring to "right-wing jews who supported
Israel's apartheid policy", when he refers to "those people."

Look at it this way, PD:

I oversimplified what you said? Maybe. Whatever. That was not central to the point. Because it's not about you. It was about Varnish guy, and certain political trends.

 



[#] Tue Apr 20 2021 10:12:39 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I mean - these guys weren't wearing the robes and the Yamika. They were wearing wife-beaters and baggy chinos with wallet chains. The haircuts and the curls were the only thing that told you they weren't sunburned, redheaded, pasty midwestern trailer-park rednecks. Shave any of their heads, and you would have mistaken them for skinheads. Honestly - I felt like the only major difference between them and a gang of skins *were* the haircuts. But I agree, I also got the absolute impression that it was more about economic class. These weren't members of a family of dentists and jewelers.  They were not affluent and privileged. I think *this* is generally the actual root of most ethnic stereotypes. It is poverty and the resulting cycle of ignorance and desperation that is usually the root cause - and people just look at a group in that demographics and ascribe it to the most physically obvious trait that group has in common - *except* for "white people". We assume that middle-class comfort and basic education is the *baseline* for white people and that the anomaly are the ones who are poor and ignorant with white people. But for every other group, every non-member assumes it is ethnicity and race that causes a BASELINE of poverty and ignorance. 

We keep worrying about a race issue, when really it is an economics and opportunity issue. 

And again, my examples above growing up in Northern California illustrate that. Economic position was a far greater indicator of being accepted "in-group" than ethnic or religious background. 

I'm not sure where I am on "visible indicators of in-group member identity" being cause or effect. We don't have that as much on the West Coast. It exists - but in religion, it is usually catholic (nuns and priests) and Mormons and other kind of "cultish sect" branches of Christianity (though not nearly as obvious or frequent as Amish and Mennonite on the East Coast... although Arizona, Colorado and of course, Utah have this a bit more strongly than California, Oregon, Washington, for example). We also have the California/Oregon/Washington coastal home-schooled hippie types - as far as "in-group" fashion identifiers. I guess the point here is - some variation of this DOES exist on the West Coast - 

But it is way different. I could tell an Italian bar from an Irish bar on the East Coast just by walking in. I suppose I could tell the Catholics from the Protestants in a lot of cases out there. The group identities that people try to signal membership in are way different on the West Coast. 

 

Blue Collar and White Collar are also real difficult to distinguish out here. I mean... there isn't as much factory work, manufacturing... Truckers are laborers and oil industry and stuff like that - but just because a person works in an industry like that doesn't mean they're not driving a benz and living in the affluent suburbs - because a lot of those "blue collar" jobs pay *really* well out here. The stratification of income tends to be greater here too - so there is more affluent to poor... and our economy means the affluent person may be cash poor because they live in a house that cost them $1.2 million that would cost $150k in a nice suburb further out East - so they drive an old Honda, while the guy who lives in an apartment in a shitty side of town may be driving a Benz because they're cash poor for housing because they buy nice toys. We see that more out here, too. 




Tue Apr 20 2021 07:31:04 EDT from LoanShark
Encountering *some* of them at a hotel in New Jersey once - I can
kind of see where there is a certain um... stereotype of them. I
realized right away that I was dealing with a rough group that didn't
eff around if you irritated them. There was that same aura of a group
that totally believed in "keeping it real". I had no idea or previous
preconception going into that trip that there is a segment of Jewish
Orthodox culture that is absolutely hardcore and ghetto. 

I can see that.

If you choose to walk around with a target (visibly Orthodox clothing) on your back, just to say "I do not hide who I am", you'd better be ready. There's an element of blue-collar pride here. (Did I say something biased? Sue me. Haredim are generally pretty ascetic. Contrary to the negative stereotype, the tendency seems to be that they actually don't have a lot of money.)

 



[#] Tue Apr 20 2021 10:28:46 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

But - maybe the group identity thing here isn't THAT much different... because again - other than the haircuts, everything else about their fashion just said, "hoodlum identity". 

And we have the same thing out here. The SE-Asian thugs, the black thugs, the Russian thugs, the white thugs - they all share a lot of the same fashion that shows "regardless of whatever OTHER identity I hold, the #1 identity you should be instantly aware of is that IDFA." 

That is something else that I found amusing about the NATIONAL race narrative over the last decade or so. This attempt to associate the word "thug" as an exclusive pejorative against black men. 

It started out here, and while rap and hip-hop made the association *more* ethnic - thug always just applied to "a guy who is obviously involved in crime, hustling, and probably a gang." Thug basically always meant "convict" out here. Someone who was in and out of county and may have done some hard time. It *never* had a singular ethnic association out here. 

When I say "that dude looks like a thug," I don't mean a black gangmember. I don't NOT mean a blackgangmember, either. 

Not all thugs are black gangbangers, and not all black gangbangers *are* thugs. But MOST black gangbangers are ALSO thugs. 




[#] Wed Apr 21 2021 11:52:58 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I don't really care. Ig basically asked us to ignore the flamewar.
Why don't we just do that?  

You missed the opportunity. Yesterday was 4/20. Could have just lit up a fat spliff and chilled :)

[#] Wed Apr 21 2021 13:42:06 EDT from zooer

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I was thinking today that there wasn't a big deal about 4:20 this year.  Other years it was all over the place.  It now being legal in NY, I would have thought it would be a major deal.



[#] Fri Apr 30 2021 11:31:18 EDT from triLcat

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

There's so much here that i don't know where to start. I grabbed this because it was especially egregious.

<The "closest thing to a liberal, western-style Democracy" could be Iran or UAE or any of a handful of other regional nations, if not for Israel. That would no more make those nations "liberal, western-style Democracies" than Israel is. Israel is a nation founded on an ethnic/religious identity. If you're not of that identity, you're by definition a second class citizen. >

Iran and the UAE have laws against being gay.

Israel has parades in Tel Aviv, Haifa, and Jerusalem.

Israel has equal voting rights for all citizens, including Muslims. We have Muslim parties in our parliament. I agree that most of Israel is segregated (segregation is not apartheid), which has some drawbacks. I really only come into contact with Muslims in a medical context. Most Israeli pharmacists are Arab. (not sure why - but it's a really popular field among Arab Israelis), my rheumatologist and most of the doctors who work at our local urgent care are Arabs. 

Under Apartheid, blacks weren't allowed to go to white universities, right?  So I went to Bar Ilan, which is a religious Jewish university. Guess what? My instructor for sociolinguistics and the one who taught me language testing were Arab, as were about 8% of my classmates. I never saw anyone be rude to them, though I can't rule that out as a possibility. 

I have to shut down now for the Sabbath, so I'll get to some more points later.... be well. 




[#] Fri Apr 30 2021 16:35:00 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

That doesn't change the fact that without Israel, the closest thing to a liberal western-style Democracy could be Iran or the UAE. 

If you remove enough nations - eventually Northern Korea and Cuba become the closest thing to a liberal, western-style Democracy. 

Beyond that - if the United States was *acknowledged* as a Christian Nation at the Federal level - the rest of the world would lose its shit. They would claim, rightly, that regardless of our institutions and Democratic process and whatever other lip service we pay to equality - that it sets up a two class system of those who are PART of the State and those who are outside it.

That is an apartheid system - India's caste system is an apartheid system (that is still practiced, despite the State's attempts to remove it). 

Separate but equal doctrines are apartheid systems. 

The problem isn't inherently the separate but equal nature of an apartheid system - it is how it is practiced. I made no value judgements about Israel's doctrines as an apartheid state. People project that on the word because they only see the word "apartheid" in the context of South African apartheid. 

It is OK for you to have a Jewish state. It depends on how you handle your two tiered society that draws a distinction between the PEOPLE of the State and those who live in the state but are not represented as PART of the State. That is a fine balance - (more follows). 








Fri Apr 30 2021 11:31:18 EDT from triLcat

There's so much here that i don't know where to start. I grabbed this because it was especially egregious.

<The "closest thing to a liberal, western-style Democracy" could be Iran or UAE or any of a handful of other regional nations, if not for Israel. That would no more make those nations "liberal, western-style Democracies" than Israel is. Israel is a nation founded on an ethnic/religious identity. If you're not of that identity, you're by definition a second class citizen. >

Iran and the UAE have laws against being gay.

Israel has parades in Tel Aviv, Haifa, and Jerusalem.

Israel has equal voting rights for all citizens, including Muslims. We have Muslim parties in our parliament. I agree that most of Israel is segregated (segregation is not apartheid), which has some drawbacks. I really only come into contact with Muslims in a medical context. Most Israeli pharmacists are Arab. (not sure why - but it's a really popular field among Arab Israelis), my rheumatologist and most of the doctors who work at our local urgent care are Arabs. 

Under Apartheid, blacks weren't allowed to go to white universities, right?  So I went to Bar Ilan, which is a religious Jewish university. Guess what? My instructor for sociolinguistics and the one who taught me language testing were Arab, as were about 8% of my classmates. I never saw anyone be rude to them, though I can't rule that out as a possibility. 

I have to shut down now for the Sabbath, so I'll get to some more points later.... be well. 




 



[#] Fri Apr 30 2021 16:42:56 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Potentially more troubling than being an APARTHEID state is the tendency of a State that identifies as the State of a RELIGIOUS tradition to be biased toward becoming a theocracy - especially if its orthodox members get their way. It is a question that obviously is a reoccurring theme when discussing Israel. 


If the United States *DID* identify as a SPECIFIC Christian Nation, a singular Christian nation - one with a national, unified Church - the rest of the world would become obsessed with the fear of the United States becoming a theocracy ruled by fundamentalists. There are hugely profitable fictional stories exploring the concept - and they don't paint the outcome of such a development in a positive light. 

Iran is basically a theocracy with the guise of a Democracy wrapped around it. 

Additionally If Israel is a secular nation - there would be no reason for it to identify as a JEWISH Nation. 

Many of the points that apply to Israel in a discussion such as this apply equally, and just as validly, to the United States. We're a little less outspoken about proclaiming we are a CHRISTIAN Nation, or that we are a white European nation - and there are strong elements working to undermine those identities and reverse them - but the idea that there are two classes of US citizen is not a foreign concept. 

I support Israel's right to exist, and I don't *really* care how they decide to govern themselves, or if they are just or unjust to other citizens that are not recognized the same as their *preferred* citizens. 


"Hey, we even recognize and work along side Muslims. As long as they acknowledge it is a JEWISH State." 

That is the bottom line. "They're completely equal to the rest of us, but... it is OUR State." 

An apartheid system. 





[#] Sat May 01 2021 18:55:04 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Andrew Klavan was right: the entire middle east should just be one big Israel.



[#] Sun May 02 2021 19:12:36 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

😂😂

The Jews don't run the United States - just Hollywood. ;) 

 

Sat May 01 2021 18:55:04 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

Andrew Klavan was right: the entire middle east should just be one big Israel.



 



[#] Sun May 02 2021 19:13:36 EDT from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

But, I'm fully behind the Jews running the entire Middle East. All we need to do is to have the Arab/Muslim States try to invade again, get their asses kicked, and lose more territory. 

You would think after the 6 day war, the Middle East would have learned their lesson. 

 



[#] Mon May 03 2021 17:16:45 EDT from LoanShark

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

2021-04-21 11:52 from IGnatius T Foobar
I don't really care. Ig basically asked us to ignore the flamewar.

Why don't we just do that?

You missed the opportunity. Yesterday was 4/20. Could have just lit

up a fat spliff and chilled :)



Like, a gig. Get stoned. ;-p

[#] Mon May 03 2021 17:24:14 EDT from LoanShark

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


I'm with triL on this.

I have no malice towards PD just because he thinks the apartheid comparison is apt. Because he has no malice towards Israel. PD, your worldview is somewhat accepting of bare-knuckle politics. You're like, if I may paraphrase, "Israel has an apartheid-like system, but they can do that. That's life."

And that is exactly the point.

Japan is full of Japanese, and I can tell you from experience travelling there, that they do not treat gaijin fairly at all times and in all contexts. But we don't call them an apartheid state.

Ireland is full of Irish, and they have an immigration policy that explicitly favors the return of ethnic Irish, but we don't call them an apartheid state.

Italy is full of Italians, and they have an immigration policy that explicitly favors the return of ethnic Italians, but we don't call them an apartheid state.

Meanwhile, the UN member nations that voted for the UNHRC "apartheid blacklist" are mostly tyrannies who are trying to distract from their atrocious human-rights record.

So it goes.

Israel does one thing inside the green line. If you're inside the green line, you're a citizen of jewish majority state organized along reasonably Western principles. Like I said, I'm with triL.

Go to page: First ... 12 13 14 15 [16] 17