Total posts: 502
Posted in:
-->
@Username
Can you substantiate your claim that Israel's existence is illegitimate?
Because the land was Palestinian for centuries. Israelis came in as hostile settlers using a vague claim to justify Jewish apartheid.
Created:
-->
@Lemming
@n8nrgmi
I thought my satire was obvious
Created:
-->
@Lemming
It'd lead to a bastardization of our culture, and a disintegration of our country, you mean.
Ur racist
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Hamas attack Israel countlesslyIsrael responds backOH LOOK AT THIS OMG LOOK FREE PALESTINE
Dude I expected better from you, aren't you Orthodox? How can you side with K_kes over Orthodox Palestinians?
Created:
Posted in:
Israel has absolutely no right to its existence and assert a Jewish apartheid, the land rightfully belongs to Palestine.
Amazing how having a foreign people come into your land, kick you out of your properties, impoverish you, seize your homes, repress and threaten your holy sites (FYI stupid evangelicals, many Palestinians are Christians), cut you off from clean water and establish an apartheid is all glossed over but think about MUH ATTACKS on Israel!
I could care less if Tel Aviv is nuked or if a genocide of pesky Israelis occurs. I would prefer it not happen of course... But I find it hard to feel any sympathy to the perpetrators of an apartheid state against the Palestinians.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
I'm intrigued. Go on
Mass importing a bunch of people who have no relation or ties to America will help us understand different perspectives and further enrich our multicultural society. It will certainly not lead to ethnic ghettoization and conflict, nor will it depress wages unlike some racists would say.
This has been successful to some extent but I think the entire populations of Somalia and Mexico should be imported will lead to even greater benefits then we currently see.
Created:
-->
@Nevets
So what are your theories regarding how it all began, and why?
From Allah himself because Christianity is the true religion,
next question?
Created:
We should import the entire population of Mexico and Somalia into America
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
Mahshallah brother
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
And the Prophet (PBUH) raised up his right hand and said: "Heil Hitler!" ~ Surah 14:88:420
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
"Fascism is when you follow the teachings of prophet Muhammed (PBUH)"
~ Adolf Hitler
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
"Da moar Jihads you wage, da moar fascister you get"
~ Benito Mussolini
Created:
LMAO, so Fascism existed in 7th century Arabia I guess 😂😂😂😂
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
If the government takes 8% of the stock owned by billionaires,
That's not how wealth taxes worth
Due to the law of supply and demand, if the supply of stock in the market increases by 8%,
The "supply" of stocks isn't changed
this will cause the rate of increase to the stock to decrease by 8% as well.
That's not even how supply and demand works
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
What makes you conservative then? Conservatives are fiscally libetarian, ie get the government out of everything economic.
You do realize that there are more types of conservatism than modern libertarian capitalism??
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
A 8% wealth tax doesn't equate to taking away 8% of the stock market's growth, where on Earth are you getting such a stupid thought?
Created:
Posted in:
Anyways.
Calling Pascha a pagan holiday for falling in the same month of a pagan celebration is like saying July 4th is in honor of Julius Caesar for beginning on the month of July.
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
I don't. I'm completely in favor of nationalized health care.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Annually, the stock market rises about 10% annually. An 8% wealth tax causes the stock market to only rise by 2% a year.
Wtf you have no understanding of the stock market if you think an 8% wealth tax would reduce the growth of the entire stock market by 5 fold.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
which would cause the stock market to lose almost all its rate of growth
Dude the stock market isn't going to "lose almost all its rate of growth" over a chunk of Amazon and Tesla being sold.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
There's no way a market crash would be induced through selling stocks. It would certainly make a dent on the prices of stocks such as Amazon or Tesla, which may hurt people we don't end up wanting to hurt... I think a "redistribution" of sorts would help justify an action. Those who have ownership in Amazon or Tesla could be compensated by the profits made from government seizing stocks. There certainly is enough inequality to where a sizeable profit can be made from a wealth tax while the affected could be compensated.
A decent long-run solution would be overhauling economic reforms and large-scale nationalization of industries. Issues of capital flight and massive inequality would be easier to address with a more nationalized economy.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
Define progressive
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
As simple of an answer this is, I don't think it's any deeper than conflicting interests arising out of different beliefs. All else simply stems from that explanation 99% of the time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
I look at Presidents relative to how their policies affect me, personally. Is there a better personal measure? President Obama, after eight years, left me barely above [about 1%, considering my virtual lack of growth above my baseline] where my wealth stood after his inauguration. By contrast, my wealth, by the end of Trump's four years, grew by a factor of 53% increase. Everybody points to Obama's effect of a 10,000 point increase, but that 10,000 was tempered by a 6,000 point loss. He should have gained a full 16,000 points, but did not. To me, Trump was a wildly successful President.
Stfu. Nobody cares about your 401K, old man
Created:
Posted in:
Anybody promoting or supporting passports for an extremely rushed vaccine to combat a slightly stronger Flu can fuck off. Vaccines for more severe diseases might be understandable. This, on the other hand, is stupid.
Created:
Posted in:
Do conservatives still believe in it? If so, what exactly is supposed to be done about it and why do republican politicians seem to expect that you will vote for them over this?
Free market capitalism and social conservatism are in inherent contradiction to one another. It baffles me that conservative morons still defend it in this day and age.
I'll say that tech companies can fuck off and be broken up under antitrust law, I don't care for "capitalism."
Created:
Posted in:
I kind of want Chauvin to be declared guilty, less so because I care about the case but more so that this won't become ammunition for another wave of BLM screeching.
Created:
Posted in:
I'm glad we celebrate Pascha on the Julian Calender. We're too unnoticed for screeching anti-theists to yell about paganism.
Created:
It does slow down the progress of science, but that's not inherently a bad thing. What good is the progress of science in itself? If ethics weren't taken into account, then science could advance into creating a transhumanist techno-dystopia that would eventually become unrecognizable and inhumane. A lack of ethics would also enable human experimentation, as such would provide vast benefits to scientific progress.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nemiroff
The british took that land from the ottomans. It was never self governed. The british promised the land to both the arabs and the Jews, who badly needed a place to live, and were also promising an egalitarian society of freedom and respect for Palestinians. The early Zionists were openly secular and very left wing. I would like to see a reference to palestinians offering freedom to jews, for they never showed up to any talks, and were the first to initiate violence.
On 20 May 1948, Azzam told reporters "We are fighting for an Arab Palestine. Whatever the outcome the Arabs will stick to their offer of equal citizenship for Jews in Arab Palestine and let them be as Jewish as they like. In areas where they predominate they will have complete autonomy." (Copied from Wikipedia)
The early Zionists were "openly secular" yet as soon as they gained power, they used that power to persecute local Palestinians and repress non-Jews. The only reason all out war even happened was because of how skewed the partition plan was to favor the Israeli Jewish minority at the expense of the Arab majority.
If they were such peaceful and enlightened settlers without malicious intents, then why would such a small minority (at the time) feel the need to create an Israeli state in a land that's overwhelmingly Arab?
The jews moved into empty lands and built cities, or bought homes voluntarily from willing palestinians. They literally put up with a decade of violence without retaliation from 1920 to 1930, and even then it was a breakaway group that was declared terrorist by the official settler bodies. Israel as is was established because of Palestinian xenophobia and violence.
All of a sudden, out of nowhere, evil Arab people decided to be xenophobes? Yeah it's not like the Jews weren't kicked out of 109 countries earlier. Regardless, the land belongs to Palestinians as their claim is far more legitimate than that of the Jewish settlers. They shouldn't have been settling there in the first place.
Created:
Nope, the majority of them since JFK's assassination have merely been nothing but neoliberal puppets.
Created:
Posted in:
Stemming from things that US can't even dream of solving so the best
I'm not saying we would suddenly befriend everybody in the middle east but abandoning Israel certainly opens up a great amount of opportunity to improve our relations with other nations there. There's no reason for us to continue supporting Israel.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Israel is not the cause nor a big enough reason for why the US is bad in the middle east.
It's not the only reason but lol it's definitely a reason up there, the vast majority of the middle east absolutely hates and loathes Israel. In return, that carries over to the United States.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Is there but one perspective? Nope. Better understand that rapido-speedo
And of we were to accomodate all perspectives, then the state controlling the land of Palestine would tolerate all faiths. The state proposed by the Arab League would have accomplished this while also allowing tolerance to the Jews in spite of their British-encouraged settlemments flaring up tensions with local Palestinians. The state of Israel, on the other hand, regularly persecutes Arabs - Christian and Muslim alike.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
The Temple Mount is entirely within the area claimed by Palestinians. Their claim, notwithstanding, ignores the proper ownership of the Temple Mount, and its surrounding land which is within the entire area that is, today, East Jerusalem and was the Old City. I say that not as a Christian, though I am, but as an historian aware of property ownership and its historic rights, regardless of duration of time.
The "proper ownership" of Temple Mont from a secular view is heavily disputable considering that there's differing interpretations and the like from various "Abrahamic religions." But from a Christian perspective, the Jews are dissenters against God and do not hold legitimacy in claiming the holy site. It therefore belongs not to the Israelis considering that it's a Jewish state that discriminates against Christians.
That is a blanket statement that is difficult to substantiate by scholarship. You confuse a distinction that is clearly evident in biblical text, and I speak of the most ancient texts, the Torah, and the Greek Septuagint, which both specify the House of Israel as chosen people; "Israel" being, not the political entity today, but the house of the prophet, Jacob, grandson of Abraham and Sarah, re-named Israel, and his twelve sons, one of whom was Judah, father of Jews. Christians, in the first century, consisted of converted Jews AND members of the other tribes, sons of Israel, and daughters, AND converted descendants of Ishmael, son of Abraham and Hagar, Sarah's maidservant and Abraham's concubine, AND converted gentiles [Romans, Greeks, etc.] which are, today, considered spiritually adopted children of the House of Israel [Jacob, not the country] It is this House of Israel who are "chosen people."
You're correct in that the House of Israel is not the poliitical state but rather chosen people, and this does not refute my point one bit. The Christian Church is now the New Israel, it is a continuation of Old Israel. The Jews dissent from from the Christian Churcch and blaspheme Christ in the Talmud. They have therefore been cut off from Israel and will remain so without conversion.
The Church fathers and early Christians recognized this, only now do we have swarms of brainwashed Zionist "Christians" defending the interests of Jews above their own faith. Israel is a state that regularly persecutes Palestinian Christians; no true Christian would be supportive of this apartheid state.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
David purchased, with 50 shekels of silver, Araunah's [a Jebusite king] expansive threshing floor, leveled and cleared from what was once Mt. Moriah, and surrounding land, where Abraham is said to have intended to sacrifice his son, Isaac generations previous, and which David, through his son, Solomon, eventually had built Solomon's Temple, and the place is now called the Temple Mount. Once purchased by David, no subsequent purchase of the property has ever occurred. The Palestinian's, and then others, occupied that property and claim it today. Let them show their deed. They do not have one.A side note: a threshing floor is where wheat grain is separated from chaff [refuse], and the same occurs figuratively in the temple to the human soul.
1. The Temple Mont is not the entire land of Palestine.
2. You're claiming this as a Christian but according to Christianity, God's chosen people are the Christians - not those who reject Christ (modern day Jews). The land therefore belongs to the Christians, of whom the Palestinian Christians are persecuted in by the state of Israeel through their settlement policies.
Jewish claimants to the land are completely null.
It truly is amazing how many so called "Christians" in the west have been brainwashed by Zionist propaganda.
Created:
Posted in:
Nope, BLM has been compromised a long time back. Imagine thinking you're a grassroots movement when you're being bankrolled by the elitist of elites and big corporations.
Created:
-->
@PressF4Respect
I'm not sure, but I imagine the rationale for this will be to legalize discrimination against Asians and Whites
Created:
Note that this would be going through a referendum before it actually applies. Either way, it is quite shocking none the less.
Created:
(a) The State shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.
(b) This section shall apply only to action taken after the section's effective date.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prohibiting bona fide qualifications based on sex which are reasonably necessary to the normal operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.
(d) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as invalidating any court order or consent decree which is in force as of the effective date of this section.
(e) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prohibiting action which must be taken to establish or maintain eligibility for any federal program, where ineligibility would result in a loss of federal funds to the State.
(f) For the purposes of this section, "State" shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the State itself, any city, county, city and county, public university system, including the University of California, community college district, school district, special district, or any other political subdivision or governmental instrumentality of or within the State.
(g) The remedies available for violations of this section shall be the same, regardless of the injured party's race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin, as are otherwise available for violations of then-existing California antidiscrimination law.
(h) This section shall be self-executing. If any part or parts of this section are found to be in conflict with federal law or the United States Constitution, the section shall be implemented to the maximum extent that federal law and the United States Constitution permit. Any provision held invalid shall be severable from the remaining portions of this section.
The following is the section that has been voted to be struck down by the Californian legislature. Thoughts?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Now that is a huge stretch considering all the historical wars Palestine lost before the USA cared.
Um dude, literally all of those historical wars involved non-industrialized countries fighting off a country being given/sold armnaments by Britain (and the US) along with other western states.
If the US currently cut off its support for Israel, it would be wiped off the face of the Earth with the collective might of the Arab states. Different conditions, different times.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
And yeah it's sad the uyghars are doomed to lose the war with China, along with Tibet, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. It's sad, and maybe morally wrong from an arbitrary perspective. But it's inevitable because there has to be a loser for conflict to end.
But the point I'm making here is that Palestine would not be the loser if it weren't for the US backing Israel. The US needs to stop backing Israel, period.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@zedvictor4
That's what happens when you lose a war. Somebody has to lose a war for it to end.I mean sure, it's sad that people lose wars, but people have been losing wars since the dawn of man and will continue to lose wars long after you and I are gone.
Except that there clearly is a right side to the war and a wrong side to the war. Anyhows, the point is that the morally wrong side is being supported by the United States - something that needs to end. Support of Israel is not only immoral but does not benefit the United States what so ever, as it's only created more negative relations with other Arab countries. Not to mention that they manipulate American politics and send their lobbyists to Congress.
Oh!...And regional politics of course.....If the U.S. doesn't support Israel, then Russia or China will be more than happy to step into the U.S's shoes.
Incorrect. Russia generally leans towards Palestine and wouldn't sacrifice its relations with other middle eastern nations such as Syria to support Israel. Plus, Russia generally wouldn't support a state that's hostile to Christian Palestinians since Russia has had a long role with supporting Christians in the middle east - dating back to the Tsarist era. China has friendly relations with countries such as Iran and wouldn't support Israel to sacrifice its relations with Iran or other Arab countries. There's absolutely no way that any power will step in the US's shoes. It's completely feasible for the US to withdraw support of Israel.
And Palestinians and Israelis are essentially the same people, but just in a different religious club.Similarly Judaism, Christianity and Islam are also essentially the same, just the different clubs.
Nobody asked for your fedora tipping.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yep. Israel probably won't suicide its own existing state. Especially if Palestine and Hamas bring nothing to the table but loud words.
What fucking else are they going to bring when the Palestinians have had their land seized, their homes bulldozed, their people put under extreme persecution facing apartheid-like treatment, etc.? The Israelis are living in stolen land, they need to abandon the West Bank and Gaza Strip along with surrounding areas.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
A two state solution shouldn't have ever happened in the first place. In 1947 at the time of the partition, the Israeli Jews were a small minority in the land. It was overwhelmingly Arab. The Arab League wanted to establish a state that would guarantee the rights of Jews in Palestine to citizenship, religious freedom, and local autonomy in areas where they are dominant. However, Zionism has always been about establishing a state in an already inhabited country - inherently leading to the disenfranchisement of the native Palestinian citizens once they got western support. Israel is clearly in the wrong here, if two state peace is not possible then Israel needs to go.
Either way, I'd beg to differ. Two-state peace certainly is possible. However, the only way it will be possible is if concessions are made towards the Israeli side which they do not want to do. Many Jews will have to leave settled land back to the Israeli part of the partition.
Created: