Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Israel bans Arab political parties from elections

1246789

Posts

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Honk wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »

    I meant as opposed to banning all arabs, or banning other heavily arab parties (communists, for example.)



    Banning the partiest is a bad thing, but to automatically assume that it was racially motivated, and that the political reasons given are just a smokescreen, is a bit crazy.

    Even if the political reasons given, that it was because they opposed the war, this is still madness.

    Which is why the very first thing that I said was that I really hope the Israeli Supreme Court overturns this.

    Just because I don't think it's racially motivated doesn't mean I'm defending it. It is an incredibly horrible thing to do.

    georgersig.jpg
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS
    edited January 2009
    Sheep wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Yeah, and the South didn't fight the Civil War because they're racists, they just fought it because they believed in states' rights. It was an ideological battle.

    Y'know, states' rights, like the right to own black people.

    It was a war over money.

    No, no... I'm pretty sure Lincoln threw the nation into war for the sake of the black folk he loved so much.

    Lincoln didn't start the war.

    The South was losing money and resources to the North during the industrial revolution. The only way for the South to hold on to power and wealth was through the cotton and farming industry, which were so productive due to slave labor.

    The North wanted to abolish slavery. The South wanted to hang onto it because it provided them with political leverage. By Thanatos' reasonins in this thread, every Southerner is a racist simply because of their government, regardless of whether or not there was a strong anti slavery push during the creation of the Confederacy.

    EDIT
    I mean, the Hamas charter is INCREDIBLY anti-semitic (among other things, it goes so far as to say that Jews secretly control the Masons, the Lions, and the Rotary Clubs).

    I just want to know where lines are being drawn here.

    The excuse in the other thread was that those silly terrorists don't really mean that. They're just sayin...

    QlBGc.jpg
  • MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    ITT we learn (or reaffirm) that Israel has a lot in common with its neighbors.

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Banning the partiest is a bad thing, but to automatically assume that it was racially motivated, and that the political reasons given are just a smokescreen, is a bit crazy.

    I think there were many shitty reasons, of which racism is just one.

    edit: And I don't get why you're so tripped up by this "smokescreen" business. Politicians and governments do things for trumped up reasons as smokescreens all the damned time. Why are you so positive that people are being entirely upfront about their motives here?

    I'm not saying that they are upfront, I am saying that we can't automatically assume that racism is what they are secretly hiding.



    My wording may be a bit off, because I am distracted trying to make sure that I don't end up sounding like I am defending the vote itself.

    georgersig.jpg
  • HonkHonk Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    Honk wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »

    I meant as opposed to banning all arabs, or banning other heavily arab parties (communists, for example.)



    Banning the partiest is a bad thing, but to automatically assume that it was racially motivated, and that the political reasons given are just a smokescreen, is a bit crazy.

    Even if the political reasons given, that it was because they opposed the war, this is still madness.

    Which is why the very first thing that I said was that I really hope the Israeli Supreme Court overturns this.

    Just because I don't think it's racially motivated doesn't mean I'm defending it. It is an incredibly horrible thing to do.

    Well then we are in agreement. Although I do suspect the reasons given are at least not the whole truth.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    And do I hold an Israeli public that votes in racist parties as being racist themselves? Fuck yes I do.
    Does that only go for Israel, or does that apply to any election?
    I've said the same thing about people voting for Southern Republicans in this country.
    Would you say the same thing of the Palestinians?

    I mean, the Hamas charter is INCREDIBLY anti-semitic (among other things, it goes so far as to say that Jews secretly control the Masons, the Lions, and the Rotary Clubs).

    I just want to know where lines are being drawn here.
    I absolutely would. However, whereas I think the racist tendencies in Israel are somewhat understandable, as a people who have historically been oppressed, I think the racist tendencies in Palestine are nigh-completely understandable, as a people who are currently being oppressed by a group which is made up almost entirely of the group they're racist against, and are held in a state of perpetual poverty and ignorance by that group.

  • Vic_viperVic_viper Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Hopefully the Israeli Supreme Court will overturn this decision.

    It needs to be kept in perspective, though, that it is specific parties being singled out, not a specific race. That doesn't suddenly make it okay, but it does make it a different kind of issue.
    This is bullshit, Evander, and as someone who's studied even a little bit of political science, you should know it.

    Seriously, are you familiar with the term "pretense?"
    All political science is bullshit.

    What they are doing is forcibly removing people who oppose what they stand for. It's not an attack against arabs, its an attack against opponents of the war.
    No, it's an attack against proponents of Arab interests. The fact that they object to the war is just the excuse they're using.

    Then why are they stopping at those two parties?

    Yes, the Israelis are to be commended for not creating a third party just for the sake of banning it. Truly they are a paragon of reserve and level-headedness.

    I meant as opposed to banning all arabs, or banning other heavily arab parties (communists, for example.)



    Banning the partiest is a bad thing, but to automatically assume that it was racially motivated, and that the political reasons given are just a smokescreen, is a bit crazy.

    The thing is there are no valid political reasons for this. What would you say if Republicans wanted to ban Democrats due to opposition to the Iraq war? I can't see oh this action is justifiable in any way. I don't know much about the positions of every party in Knesset but are there any parties besides these two Arab ones that are against the war?

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    MKR wrote: »
    ITT we learn (or reaffirm) that Israel has a lot in common with its neighbors.

    Essentially.

    They're also asking the Supreme Court to reconsider their decision aginst using Palestinians as "human shields" (not firing from behind them, but sending them in first to attempt to negotiate with militants before troops run in guns-a-blazin').

    georgersig.jpg
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Sheep wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Yeah, and the South didn't fight the Civil War because they're racists, they just fought it because they believed in states' rights. It was an ideological battle.

    Y'know, states' rights, like the right to own black people.
    It was a war over money.
    No, no... I'm pretty sure Lincoln threw the nation into war for the sake of the black folk he loved so much.
    Lincoln didn't start the war.

    The South was losing money and resources to the North during the industrial revolution. The only way for the South to hold on to power and wealth was through the cotton and farming industry, which were so productive due to slave labor.

    The North wanted to abolish slavery. The South wanted to hang onto it because it provided them with political leverage. By Thanatos' reasonins in this thread, every Southerner is a racist simply because of their government, regardless of whether or not there was a strong anti slavery push during the creation of the Confederacy.
    Not a Civil War thread. It was a two-sentence analogy. If you want to discuss it, start a new thread.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Can we now drop the "Democratic" part from the whole "Israel is our Democratic Ally in the region!"??

  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS
    edited January 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Yeah, and the South didn't fight the Civil War because they're racists, they just fought it because they believed in states' rights. It was an ideological battle.

    Y'know, states' rights, like the right to own black people.
    It was a war over money.
    No, no... I'm pretty sure Lincoln threw the nation into war for the sake of the black folk he loved so much.
    Lincoln didn't start the war.

    The South was losing money and resources to the North during the industrial revolution. The only way for the South to hold on to power and wealth was through the cotton and farming industry, which were so productive due to slave labor.

    The North wanted to abolish slavery. The South wanted to hang onto it because it provided them with political leverage. By Thanatos' reasonins in this thread, every Southerner is a racist simply because of their government, regardless of whether or not there was a strong anti slavery push during the creation of the Confederacy.
    Not a Civil War thread. It was a two-sentence analogy. If you want to discuss it, start a new thread.

    I love how when you say something stupid and someone corrects you, you tell them they need to take that to another thread.

    QlBGc.jpg
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Vic_viper wrote: »
    The thing is there are no valid political reasons for this. What would you say if Republicans wanted to ban Democrats due to opposition to the Iraq war? I can't see oh this action is justifiable in any way. I don't know much about the positions of every party in Knesset but are there any parties besides these two Arab ones that are against the war?

    I never said that the reason was valid or justifiable. In fact, in the post that you quoted, I said it was absolutely the wrong thing for them to be doing.

    And I assure you, there were Republicans out there who would have been in favor of banning the Dems from the election. Thankfully no one actually tried to do that (or tried very well, at least.)

    georgersig.jpg
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Does the Supreme Court have any way of enforcing their ruling if they do rule that the parties can't be banned from the elections?

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    Banning the partiest is a bad thing, but to automatically assume that it was racially motivated, and that the political reasons given are just a smokescreen, is a bit crazy.
    I know it's racially motivated because they're banning only parties made up completely of Arabs, and the reasons given are fucking lame.

  • ElldrenElldren 3067-6294-6208Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Does the Supreme Court have any way of enforcing their ruling if they do rule that the parties can't be banned from the elections?

    No.

  • OrganichuOrganichu Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Does the Supreme Court have any way of enforcing their ruling if they do rule that the parties can't be banned from the elections?

    I mean effectually they've been shit on by the IDF in the past but not so much by Knesset, so were a ruling issued it would likely be obeyed.

    XMSODhjrer45.gif
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Does the Supreme Court have any way of enforcing their ruling if they do rule that the parties can't be banned from the elections?
    Saying "pretty please, with sugar on top?"

  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Sheep wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Yeah, and the South didn't fight the Civil War because they're racists, they just fought it because they believed in states' rights. It was an ideological battle.

    Y'know, states' rights, like the right to own black people.
    It was a war over money.
    No, no... I'm pretty sure Lincoln threw the nation into war for the sake of the black folk he loved so much.
    Lincoln didn't start the war.

    The South was losing money and resources to the North during the industrial revolution. The only way for the South to hold on to power and wealth was through the cotton and farming industry, which were so productive due to slave labor.

    The North wanted to abolish slavery. The South wanted to hang onto it because it provided them with political leverage. By Thanatos' reasonins in this thread, every Southerner is a racist simply because of their government, regardless of whether or not there was a strong anti slavery push during the creation of the Confederacy.
    Not a Civil War thread. It was a two-sentence analogy. If you want to discuss it, start a new thread.

    I love how when you say something stupid and someone corrects you, you tell them they need to take that to another thread.

    Your claim was teh stoopidz! one. This is like Internet 101. The Lost Cause school of history was bullshit. The Civil War was about slavery.

    11793-1.png
    Spoiler:
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    And do I hold an Israeli public that votes in racist parties as being racist themselves? Fuck yes I do.
    Does that only go for Israel, or does that apply to any election?
    I've said the same thing about people voting for Southern Republicans in this country.
    Would you say the same thing of the Palestinians?

    I mean, the Hamas charter is INCREDIBLY anti-semitic (among other things, it goes so far as to say that Jews secretly control the Masons, the Lions, and the Rotary Clubs).

    I just want to know where lines are being drawn here.
    I absolutely would. However, whereas I think the racist tendencies in Israel are somewhat understandable, as a people who have historically been oppressed, I think the racist tendencies in Palestine are nigh-completely understandable, as a people who are currently being oppressed by a group which is made up almost entirely of the group they're racist against, and are held in a state of perpetual poverty and ignorance by that group.

    And Hamas is also a bit more racist (seriously, the Rotary club?) so I'd say it ought to balanced out, by your standards.

    georgersig.jpg
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    And do I hold an Israeli public that votes in racist parties as being racist themselves? Fuck yes I do.
    Does that only go for Israel, or does that apply to any election?
    I've said the same thing about people voting for Southern Republicans in this country.
    Would you say the same thing of the Palestinians?

    I mean, the Hamas charter is INCREDIBLY anti-semitic (among other things, it goes so far as to say that Jews secretly control the Masons, the Lions, and the Rotary Clubs).

    I just want to know where lines are being drawn here.
    I absolutely would. However, whereas I think the racist tendencies in Israel are somewhat understandable, as a people who have historically been oppressed, I think the racist tendencies in Palestine are nigh-completely understandable, as a people who are currently being oppressed by a group which is made up almost entirely of the group they're racist against, and are held in a state of perpetual poverty and ignorance by that group.
    And Hamas is also a bit more racist (seriously, the Rotary club?) so I'd say it ought to balanced out, by your standards.
    Yeah, I can entirely agree that Israel and Hamas are at about the same moral level. No problems, there.

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Banning the partiest is a bad thing, but to automatically assume that it was racially motivated, and that the political reasons given are just a smokescreen, is a bit crazy.
    I know it's racially motivated because they're banning only parties made up completely of Arabs, and the reasons given are fucking lame.

    Find me an Israeli party made up completely of Jews which has the same stances as these two parties.

    georgersig.jpg
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Banning the partiest is a bad thing, but to automatically assume that it was racially motivated, and that the political reasons given are just a smokescreen, is a bit crazy.
    I know it's racially motivated because they're banning only parties made up completely of Arabs, and the reasons given are fucking lame.
    "Look at that group of people dressed in white robes, hanging that black guy. It looks racist, but I'm sure they've got a good reason."

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Banning the partiest is a bad thing, but to automatically assume that it was racially motivated, and that the political reasons given are just a smokescreen, is a bit crazy.
    I know it's racially motivated because they're banning only parties made up completely of Arabs, and the reasons given are fucking lame.
    Find me an Israeli party made up completely of Jews which has the same stances as these two parties.
    Find me two Israeli parties which have the same stances. This is fucking bullshit.

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    And do I hold an Israeli public that votes in racist parties as being racist themselves? Fuck yes I do.
    Does that only go for Israel, or does that apply to any election?
    I've said the same thing about people voting for Southern Republicans in this country.
    Would you say the same thing of the Palestinians?

    I mean, the Hamas charter is INCREDIBLY anti-semitic (among other things, it goes so far as to say that Jews secretly control the Masons, the Lions, and the Rotary Clubs).

    I just want to know where lines are being drawn here.
    I absolutely would. However, whereas I think the racist tendencies in Israel are somewhat understandable, as a people who have historically been oppressed, I think the racist tendencies in Palestine are nigh-completely understandable, as a people who are currently being oppressed by a group which is made up almost entirely of the group they're racist against, and are held in a state of perpetual poverty and ignorance by that group.
    And Hamas is also a bit more racist (seriously, the Rotary club?) so I'd say it ought to balanced out, by your standards.
    Yeah, I can entirely agree that Israel and Hamas are at about the same moral level. No problems, there.

    Not Hamas. Palestine.

    There is a difference between a people and it's government.

    georgersig.jpg
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Seriously, Organichu are you trolling us? Cause not only have you come up with the shitties analogies to defend your standpoint, but you apparently can't see our point at all. That 2 major arab parties are being banned on spurious ground(visiting arab countries, opposing war in gaza) 1 MONTH before the next election, essentialy disenfranchising arab voters of israel.

    You can't see our point of view even a little bit? You can't even apply Occam's Fucking Razor and come to the conclusion that of random happenstance and delibrate deciscion, delibrate decision is by far the simplest solution?

    ARE YOU THAT MUCH IN DENIAL OF YOUR COUNTRY'S DOUCHBAGGERY?

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Banning the partiest is a bad thing, but to automatically assume that it was racially motivated, and that the political reasons given are just a smokescreen, is a bit crazy.
    I know it's racially motivated because they're banning only parties made up completely of Arabs, and the reasons given are fucking lame.
    Find me an Israeli party made up completely of Jews which has the same stances as these two parties.
    Find me two Israeli parties which have the same stances. This is fucking bullshit.

    depending on the issue, sure

    georgersig.jpg
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Yeah, I can entirely agree that Israel and Hamas are at about the same moral level. No problems, there.
    Not Hamas. Palestine.

    There is a difference between a people and it's government.
    Fair enough. So, you wouldn't have any problems with us shipping tanks, rockets, planes, and nuclear weapons to Palestine, right?

  • No-QuarterNo-Quarter Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    And do I hold an Israeli public that votes in racist parties as being racist themselves? Fuck yes I do.
    Does that only go for Israel, or does that apply to any election?
    I've said the same thing about people voting for Southern Republicans in this country.
    Would you say the same thing of the Palestinians?

    I mean, the Hamas charter is INCREDIBLY anti-semitic (among other things, it goes so far as to say that Jews secretly control the Masons, the Lions, and the Rotary Clubs).

    I just want to know where lines are being drawn here.
    I absolutely would. However, whereas I think the racist tendencies in Israel are somewhat understandable, as a people who have historically been oppressed, I think the racist tendencies in Palestine are nigh-completely understandable, as a people who are currently being oppressed by a group which is made up almost entirely of the group they're racist against, and are held in a state of perpetual poverty and ignorance by that group.

    And Hamas is also a bit more racist (seriously, the Rotary club?) so I'd say it ought to balanced out, by your standards.

    The difference is that one of those groups (Israeli gov and Hamas) has utterly absurd power, money, and international influence. Guess which one?

  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS
    edited January 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Yeah, I can entirely agree that Israel and Hamas are at about the same moral level. No problems, there.
    Not Hamas. Palestine.

    There is a difference between a people and it's government.
    Fair enough. So, you wouldn't have any problems with us shipping tanks, rockets, planes, and nuclear weapons to Palestine, right?

    I'm sure we would if they'd make good on a promise not to slaughter Jews, provide them to terrorists, and not use them to shoot a woman who had the unfortunate displeasure of being raped. I'm sure we'd ask them to stop teaching that American's are Satan.

    That'd be nice.

    QlBGc.jpg
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Yeah, I can entirely agree that Israel and Hamas are at about the same moral level. No problems, there.
    Not Hamas. Palestine.

    There is a difference between a people and it's government.
    Fair enough. So, you wouldn't have any problems with us shipping tanks, rockets, planes, and nuclear weapons to Palestine, right?

    to the civilians?

    nope.

    I wouldn't comfortable with shipping any of those things to the Israeli civilians either

    civilians just shouldn't own nukes

    georgersig.jpg
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited January 2009
    Sheep wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Sheep wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Yeah, and the South didn't fight the Civil War because they're racists, they just fought it because they believed in states' rights. It was an ideological battle.

    Y'know, states' rights, like the right to own black people.
    It was a war over money.
    No, no... I'm pretty sure Lincoln threw the nation into war for the sake of the black folk he loved so much.
    Lincoln didn't start the war.

    The South was losing money and resources to the North during the industrial revolution. The only way for the South to hold on to power and wealth was through the cotton and farming industry, which were so productive due to slave labor.

    The North wanted to abolish slavery. The South wanted to hang onto it because it provided them with political leverage. By Thanatos' reasonins in this thread, every Southerner is a racist simply because of their government, regardless of whether or not there was a strong anti slavery push during the creation of the Confederacy.
    Not a Civil War thread. It was a two-sentence analogy. If you want to discuss it, start a new thread.

    I love how when you say something stupid and someone corrects you, you tell them they need to take that to another thread.

    How about when I tell you to take it to another thread?

    Does that also give you a warm fuzzy?

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    No-Quarter wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    And do I hold an Israeli public that votes in racist parties as being racist themselves? Fuck yes I do.
    Does that only go for Israel, or does that apply to any election?
    I've said the same thing about people voting for Southern Republicans in this country.
    Would you say the same thing of the Palestinians?

    I mean, the Hamas charter is INCREDIBLY anti-semitic (among other things, it goes so far as to say that Jews secretly control the Masons, the Lions, and the Rotary Clubs).

    I just want to know where lines are being drawn here.
    I absolutely would. However, whereas I think the racist tendencies in Israel are somewhat understandable, as a people who have historically been oppressed, I think the racist tendencies in Palestine are nigh-completely understandable, as a people who are currently being oppressed by a group which is made up almost entirely of the group they're racist against, and are held in a state of perpetual poverty and ignorance by that group.

    And Hamas is also a bit more racist (seriously, the Rotary club?) so I'd say it ought to balanced out, by your standards.

    The difference is that one of those groups (Israeli gov and Hamas) has utterly absurd power, money, and international influence. Guess which one?

    Right that is the only difference at all. :rotate:

    georgersig.jpg
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    What are the chances this is just election bullshit so that the parties can pretend they are tough on terrorism and use it against those who voted against the measure?

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Yeah, I can entirely agree that Israel and Hamas are at about the same moral level. No problems, there.
    Not Hamas. Palestine.

    There is a difference between a people and it's government.
    Fair enough. So, you wouldn't have any problems with us shipping tanks, rockets, planes, and nuclear weapons to Palestine, right?
    to the civilians?

    nope.

    I wouldn't comfortable with shipping any of those things to the Israeli civilians either

    civilians just shouldn't own nukes
    Okay, then you'd support the government of Israel being placed on the State Department's list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, right? Or Hamas' removal from that list?

  • No-QuarterNo-Quarter Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    No-Quarter wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    And do I hold an Israeli public that votes in racist parties as being racist themselves? Fuck yes I do.
    Does that only go for Israel, or does that apply to any election?
    I've said the same thing about people voting for Southern Republicans in this country.
    Would you say the same thing of the Palestinians?

    I mean, the Hamas charter is INCREDIBLY anti-semitic (among other things, it goes so far as to say that Jews secretly control the Masons, the Lions, and the Rotary Clubs).

    I just want to know where lines are being drawn here.
    I absolutely would. However, whereas I think the racist tendencies in Israel are somewhat understandable, as a people who have historically been oppressed, I think the racist tendencies in Palestine are nigh-completely understandable, as a people who are currently being oppressed by a group which is made up almost entirely of the group they're racist against, and are held in a state of perpetual poverty and ignorance by that group.

    And Hamas is also a bit more racist (seriously, the Rotary club?) so I'd say it ought to balanced out, by your standards.

    The difference is that one of those groups (Israeli gov and Hamas) has utterly absurd power, money, and international influence. Guess which one?

    Right that is the only difference at all. :rotate:

    You're right, one of them also controls the majority of the others' natural resources.

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Yeah, I can entirely agree that Israel and Hamas are at about the same moral level. No problems, there.
    Not Hamas. Palestine.

    There is a difference between a people and it's government.
    Fair enough. So, you wouldn't have any problems with us shipping tanks, rockets, planes, and nuclear weapons to Palestine, right?
    to the civilians?

    nope.

    I wouldn't comfortable with shipping any of those things to the Israeli civilians either

    civilians just shouldn't own nukes
    Okay, then you'd support the government of Israel being placed on the State Department's list of Foreign Terrorist organizations, right? Or Hamas' removal from that list?

    That's enough bait and switch, Thanatos.

    If you read back over our conversation, I believe that we came to the determination that the Israeli PEOPLE and Palestinan PEOPLE were equally racist, with the Palestinian government being WORSE than the Israeli government (evened out by the fact that the Palestinians are in a worse predicament.) All of this falling under you stating that you can understand why they would be that way due to the situations that they are foced to live in.



    And since when does racism get anyone on a terrorist list?

    georgersig.jpg
  • tsmvengytsmvengy Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Banning the partiest is a bad thing, but to automatically assume that it was racially motivated, and that the political reasons given are just a smokescreen, is a bit crazy.
    I know it's racially motivated because they're banning only parties made up completely of Arabs, and the reasons given are fucking lame.

    Find me an Israeli party made up completely of Jews which has the same stances as these two parties.

    How does the socialist/communist party (Hadash?) feel about the Gaza conflict? Because they have a pretty balanced membership. Also they weren't banned.

    Also (to another poster), Organichu isn't trolling, he just lives in Israel (AFAIK) so he sees everything they do through rose-colored glasses. I mean, judging by his earlier analogy his defense of these actions is "well it's not racist because those parties [that got kicked out] represent and are made up of murderers!"

    EDITED to reflect that Origanchu doesn't think it's ok, just that it's not racist.

    steam_sig.png
  • OrganichuOrganichu Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    Seriously, Organichu are you trolling us? Cause not only have you come up with the shitties analogies to defend your standpoint,

    I love how, once I clarified my analogues, no one said shit (but continued to attack them in their original form). I speak English as a third language and there are literally a dozen+ people commenting on what I'm saying, and I'm responding to as many as I can- and yet there are still people in the background, not offering up any arguments, only 'yeah, you're dumb!' shouts over the commotion.

    Now, I clarified exactly what I meant with my analogy, if you search my posts in this thread. If you want to call my analogies stupid, once I've fully clarified them, then quote me and explain what's wrong. I'm doing the best I can to respond to everyone. Go ahead and I'll do my best to explain what I meant, if you're still unclear.
    but you apparently can't see our point at all. That 2 major arab parties are being banned on spurious ground(visiting arab countries, opposing war in gaza) 1 MONTH before the next election, essentialy disenfranchising arab voters of israel.

    You can't see our point of view even a little bit? You can't even apply Occam's Fucking Razor and come to the conclusion that of random happenstance and delibrate deciscion, delibrate decision is by far the simplest solution?

    ARE YOU THAT MUCH IN DENIAL OF YOUR COUNTRY'S DOUCHBAGGERY?

    First of all, stop straw manning me. I'm not denying "my country"'s nebulous activities. My first post in this thread was saying how terrible and deplorable it is what Israel's doing right now. I've condemned the activities fully. I just disagree with the alleged motivation for the activity, and the precise implications.

    I'm also not 'failing to see [your] point'. I understand exactly what you're saying. The timing of this activity is curious, and it leads you to believe that there's 'something more'. I agree that there's something more going on behind the curtain. I believe there's a power play in Knesset to establish a more war mongering and expansive paradigm. I just don't think racism plays as large a role there as many of you choose to believe.

    XMSODhjrer45.gif
  • OrganichuOrganichu Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    tsmvengy wrote: »
    Also (to another poster), Organichu isn't trolling, he just lives in Israel (AFAIK) so he sees everything they do through rose-colored glasses. I mean, judging by his earlier analogy his defense of these actions is "well it's OK because those parties [that got kicked out] represent and are made up of murderers!"

    No, I don't have a defense of these actions. These actions are incredibly wrong as I've said multiple times. I've also clarified that analogy already. I'm not sure why everyone saw my first posts but not the posts following them.

    XMSODhjrer45.gif
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited January 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    And since when does racism get anyone on a terrorist list?
    As soon as they act on it.

    Such as by banning representation for or fireboming the race they're biased against.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. On Hiatus!

    Any gamers in the Danville, PA area? PM me if you're interested in some tabletop gaming.
Sign In or Register to comment.