It is currently Mon Nov 25, 2024 1:49 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 570 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ... 19  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:11 pm
Posts: 3612
Location: Home of Dick Tracy Days
pizza_Place: Georgio's--Crystal Lake
long time guy wrote:
Harvard Dan wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
That's false. I told people where believed it should have been created and they didn't agree with me. Also when you say predate all others prove it. Palestinians were the dominant group in the region by a wide margin when Israel was created. The vast majority of Jewish people had to migrate from other parts of the world in order for there to be a sizable population. Those are facts.
You don't believe Israel has a right to exist right now in the Middle East. You won't say where it should be "moved to" either. This is why people consider your view on this to be anti-semetic.

I didn't say it predated all others. I'm saying that it predates many groups in the Middle East who have a country. The Jews were forced to flee many Middle Eastern areas and that is why populations were low. To blame them for that, is well, there could be a word for that.
long time guy wrote:
No matter how you or anyone chooses to portray it a nation state was created on land inhabited by another group of people.
There were mistakes made when it was created. That doesn't change the fact that you believe that Israel, as a country, should not exist anywhere in the Middle East and if you had the power to do so you would dissolve Israel right now and you won't even say where it should be moved. We aren't talking about how it was created. We are talking about what should be the modern status of the country. You have an answer that certainly can be considered anti-semetic.


Do you believe that the Indians deserve a nation state on land found within the Continental U.S.?


They probably do, or proper reparations.


They haven't been afforded their own nation though.


No, they haven't. I suppose if we want to carry this comparison through we would need the U.S. to be defeated as a nation state by foreign powers and then have the Natives return to their ancestral lands. I guess the closest that would have happened in U.S. History would have been during WWI when Germany offered to help Mexico gain back territory lost to the U.S. if Mexico allied with Germany.

_________________
An unjust law is no law at all--St. Augustine of Hippo

Cause tried and true
I see the light in you
Oh, can you dig in my soul?
Could you smell my whole...
life?--Gener and Deaner


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:23 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79557
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
That's false. I told people where believed it should have been created and they didn't agree with me. Also when you say predate all others prove it. Palestinians were the dominant group in the region by a wide margin when Israel was created. The vast majority of Jewish people had to migrate from other parts of the world in order for there to be a sizable population. Those are facts.
You don't believe Israel has a right to exist right now in the Middle East. You won't say where it should be "moved to" either. This is why people consider your view on this to be anti-semetic.

I didn't say it predated all others. I'm saying that it predates many groups in the Middle East who have a country. The Jews were forced to flee many Middle Eastern areas and that is why populations were low. To blame them for that, is well, there could be a word for that.
long time guy wrote:
No matter how you or anyone chooses to portray it a nation state was created on land inhabited by another group of people.
There were mistakes made when it was created. That doesn't change the fact that you believe that Israel, as a country, should not exist anywhere in the Middle East and if you had the power to do so you would dissolve Israel right now and you won't even say where it should be moved. We aren't talking about how it was created. We are talking about what should be the modern status of the country. You have an answer that certainly can be considered anti-semetic.


Do you believe that the Indians deserve a nation state on land found within the Continental U.S.?
I'm just trying to explain why many find you to have anti-semetic views. You believe the state of Israel, which exists today, should not exist in any form on the land it currently exists on, or anywhere in the Middle East, and also won't even say where it should be moved which leads to the obvious conclusion that you don't think it should exist anywhere. Therefore, there is no reason to answer your attempt at deflection as no matter what my answer is it doesn't change the discussion.



Do you believe that Israel should have been created on land where the VAST majority of people were Palestinians?



You don't know as much about the subject as you think you do. The idea of a "Palestinian" as we understand it now didn't even exist at the time Palestine was partitioned.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:05 am
Posts: 28664
pizza_Place: Clamburger's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
That's false. I told people where believed it should have been created and they didn't agree with me. Also when you say predate all others prove it. Palestinians were the dominant group in the region by a wide margin when Israel was created. The vast majority of Jewish people had to migrate from other parts of the world in order for there to be a sizable population. Those are facts.
You don't believe Israel has a right to exist right now in the Middle East. You won't say where it should be "moved to" either. This is why people consider your view on this to be anti-semetic.

I didn't say it predated all others. I'm saying that it predates many groups in the Middle East who have a country. The Jews were forced to flee many Middle Eastern areas and that is why populations were low. To blame them for that, is well, there could be a word for that.
long time guy wrote:
No matter how you or anyone chooses to portray it a nation state was created on land inhabited by another group of people.
There were mistakes made when it was created. That doesn't change the fact that you believe that Israel, as a country, should not exist anywhere in the Middle East and if you had the power to do so you would dissolve Israel right now and you won't even say where it should be moved. We aren't talking about how it was created. We are talking about what should be the modern status of the country. You have an answer that certainly can be considered anti-semetic.


Do you believe that the Indians deserve a nation state on land found within the Continental U.S.?
I'm just trying to explain why many find you to have anti-semetic views. You believe the state of Israel, which exists today, should not exist in any form on the land it currently exists on, or anywhere in the Middle East, and also won't even say where it should be moved which leads to the obvious conclusion that you don't think it should exist anywhere. Therefore, there is no reason to answer your attempt at deflection as no matter what my answer is it doesn't change the discussion.



Do you believe that Israel should have been created on land where the VAST majority of people were Palestinians?



You don't know as much about the subject as you think you do. The idea of a "Palestinian" as we understand it now didn't even exist at the time Palestine was partitioned.


Good argument. Enjoy the long quotes.

_________________
Nardi wrote:
Weird, I see Dolphin looking in my asshole


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Jbi11s wrote:

Good argument. Enjoy the long quotes.

:lol: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:05 am
Posts: 28664
pizza_Place: Clamburger's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Jbi11s wrote:

Good argument. Enjoy the long quotes.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously, I don't get why people can't just start their response with the poster's name they are talking to instead of these long ass quotes. It's as fucking obnoxious as having an Israel/Palestine debtate.

_________________
Nardi wrote:
Weird, I see Dolphin looking in my asshole


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:41 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79557
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
Jbi11s wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Jbi11s wrote:

Good argument. Enjoy the long quotes.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously, I don't get why people can't just start their response with the poster's name they are talking to instead of these long ass quotes. It's as fucking obnoxious as having an Israel/Palestine debtate.



It's so people who are actually interested can follow the discussion. But I understand that some people just prefer to post idiotic GIFs.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Jbi11s wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Jbi11s wrote:

Good argument. Enjoy the long quotes.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously, I don't get why people can't just start their response with the poster's name they are talking to instead of these long ass quotes. It's as fucking obnoxious as having an Israel/Palestine debtate.



It's so people who are actually interested can follow the discussion. But I understand that some people just prefer to post idiotic GIFs.

I like the discussion and Im following it but I gotta say, it makes me less likely to keep reading when it's that repetitive.

LTG's post has been quoted Nine times, since he posted.

Nine times

No matter how you or anyone chooses to portray it a nation state was created on land inhabited by another group of people.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:05 am
Posts: 28664
pizza_Place: Clamburger's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Jbi11s wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Jbi11s wrote:

Good argument. Enjoy the long quotes.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously, I don't get why people can't just start their response with the poster's name they are talking to instead of these long ass quotes. It's as fucking obnoxious as having an Israel/Palestine debtate.



It's so people who are actually interested can follow the discussion. But I understand that some people just prefer to post idiotic GIFs.

I highly doubt anyone reads anything but the last post or two within those orgies of old man banter.

_________________
Nardi wrote:
Weird, I see Dolphin looking in my asshole


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:05 am
Posts: 28664
pizza_Place: Clamburger's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Jbi11s wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Jbi11s wrote:

Good argument. Enjoy the long quotes.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously, I don't get why people can't just start their response with the poster's name they are talking to instead of these long ass quotes. It's as fucking obnoxious as having an Israel/Palestine debtate.



It's so people who are actually interested can follow the discussion. But I understand that some people just prefer to post idiotic GIFs.

I like the discussion and Im following it but I gotta say, it makes me less likely to keep reading when it's that repetitive.

LTG's post has been quoted Nine times, since he posted.

Nine times

No matter how you or anyone chooses to portray it a nation state was created on land inhabited by another group of people.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Give those who follow these threads a little more credit at keeping up with the discussion JoRR.

_________________
Nardi wrote:
Weird, I see Dolphin looking in my asshole


Last edited by Jbi11s on Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
rogers park bryan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Jbi11s wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Jbi11s wrote:

Good argument. Enjoy the long quotes.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously, I don't get why people can't just start their response with the poster's name they are talking to instead of these long ass quotes. It's as fucking obnoxious as having an Israel/Palestine debtate.



It's so people who are actually interested can follow the discussion. But I understand that some people just prefer to post idiotic GIFs.

I like the discussion and Im following it but I gotta say, it makes me less likely to keep reading when it's that repetitive.

LTG's post has been quoted Nine times, since he posted.

Nine times

No matter how you or anyone chooses to portray it a nation state was created on land inhabited by another group of people.

It's pretty common for people to only read the last page of a thread though. I mean, some times you say something like "I would be concerned trading Chris Sale for Kyle Schwarber because of his injury and how it may effect his power" and it gets turned into "KYLE SCHWARBER HAS NO POWER!".

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
He showed he was a singles hitter in the World Series.


Anyway, the Jews and Pals should work it out. Everybody is just tired of that thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:31 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Wanting Israel to exist on Christian land makes you an antisemite?

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:05 am
Posts: 28664
pizza_Place: Clamburger's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
That's false. I told people where believed it should have been created and they didn't agree with me. Also when you say predate all others prove it. Palestinians were the dominant group in the region by a wide margin when Israel was created. The vast majority of Jewish people had to migrate from other parts of the world in order for there to be a sizable population. Those are facts.
You don't believe Israel has a right to exist right now in the Middle East. You won't say where it should be "moved to" either. This is why people consider your view on this to be anti-semetic.

I didn't say it predated all others. I'm saying that it predates many groups in the Middle East who have a country. The Jews were forced to flee many Middle Eastern areas and that is why populations were low. To blame them for that, is well, there could be a word for that.
long time guy wrote:
No matter how you or anyone chooses to portray it a nation state was created on land inhabited by another group of people.
There were mistakes made when it was created. That doesn't change the fact that you believe that Israel, as a country, should not exist anywhere in the Middle East and if you had the power to do so you would dissolve Israel right now and you won't even say where it should be moved. We aren't talking about how it was created. We are talking about what should be the modern status of the country. You have an answer that certainly can be considered anti-semetic.


Do you believe that the Indians deserve a nation state on land found within the Continental U.S.?
I'm just trying to explain why many find you to have anti-semetic views. You believe the state of Israel, which exists today, should not exist in any form on the land it currently exists on, or anywhere in the Middle East, and also won't even say where it should be moved which leads to the obvious conclusion that you don't think it should exist anywhere. Therefore, there is no reason to answer your attempt at deflection as no matter what my answer is it doesn't change the discussion.



Do you believe that Israel should have been created on land where the VAST majority of people were Palestinians?



You don't know as much about the subject as you think you do. The idea of a "Palestinian" as we understand it now didn't even exist at the time Palestine was partitioned.



Nas wrote:
Wanting Israel to exist on Christian makes you an antisemite?


Yes, apparently.

_________________
Nardi wrote:
Weird, I see Dolphin looking in my asshole


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
Nas wrote:
Wanting Israel to exist on Christian land makes you an antisemite?
What is Christian land? Why do Jews have no claim to any land in the Middle East?

Would you get rid of Israel as it exists today? Where would you move it?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:03 pm
Posts: 43570
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Would you get rid of Israel as it exists today? Where would you move it?

Skokie

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I am not a legal expert, how many times do I have to say it?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 8:10 pm
Posts: 38609
Location: "Across 110th Street"
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Nas wrote:
Wanting Israel to exist on Christian land makes you an antisemite?
What is Christian land? Why do Jews have no claim to any land in the Middle East?

Would you get rid of Israel as it exists today? Where would you move it?


Mississippi, the Carolinas, Alabama, Indiana, Kansas? And extend them dual citizenship

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:43 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Nas wrote:
Wanting Israel to exist on Christian land makes you an antisemite?
What is Christian land? Why do Jews have no claim to any land in the Middle East?

Would you get rid of Israel as it exists today? Where would you move it?


The United States? I'm just trying to get confirmation on if that makes them antisemitic. Does it?

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
That's false. I told people where believed it should have been created and they didn't agree with me. Also when you say predate all others prove it. Palestinians were the dominant group in the region by a wide margin when Israel was created. The vast majority of Jewish people had to migrate from other parts of the world in order for there to be a sizable population. Those are facts.
You don't believe Israel has a right to exist right now in the Middle East. You won't say where it should be "moved to" either. This is why people consider your view on this to be anti-semetic.

I didn't say it predated all others. I'm saying that it predates many groups in the Middle East who have a country. The Jews were forced to flee many Middle Eastern areas and that is why populations were low. To blame them for that, is well, there could be a word for that.
long time guy wrote:
No matter how you or anyone chooses to portray it a nation state was created on land inhabited by another group of people.
There were mistakes made when it was created. That doesn't change the fact that you believe that Israel, as a country, should not exist anywhere in the Middle East and if you had the power to do so you would dissolve Israel right now and you won't even say where it should be moved. We aren't talking about how it was created. We are talking about what should be the modern status of the country. You have an answer that certainly can be considered anti-semetic.


Do you believe that the Indians deserve a nation state on land found within the Continental U.S.?
I'm just trying to explain why many find you to have anti-semetic views. You believe the state of Israel, which exists today, should not exist in any form on the land it currently exists on, or anywhere in the Middle East, and also won't even say where it should be moved which leads to the obvious conclusion that you don't think it should exist anywhere. Therefore, there is no reason to answer your attempt at deflection as no matter what my answer is it doesn't change the discussion.



Do you believe that Israel should have been created on land where the VAST majority of people were Palestinians?



You don't know as much about the subject as you think you do. The idea of a "Palestinian" as we understand it now didn't even exist at the time Palestine was partitioned.



Regardless of what they were called they were still the group that resided within the country. Zionism as a guiding philosophy behind Israel's creation is far more contrived than the term Palestine and yet that never seems to bother you. While we are at it we are arguing for the necessity of creating a country based on the religious beliefs of a select group. That doesn't bother you as an atheist?

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Harvard Dan wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Harvard Dan wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
That's false. I told people where believed it should have been created and they didn't agree with me. Also when you say predate all others prove it. Palestinians were the dominant group in the region by a wide margin when Israel was created. The vast majority of Jewish people had to migrate from other parts of the world in order for there to be a sizable population. Those are facts.
You don't believe Israel has a right to exist right now in the Middle East. You won't say where it should be "moved to" either. This is why people consider your view on this to be anti-semetic.

I didn't say it predated all others. I'm saying that it predates many groups in the Middle East who have a country. The Jews were forced to flee many Middle Eastern areas and that is why populations were low. To blame them for that, is well, there could be a word for that.
long time guy wrote:
No matter how you or anyone chooses to portray it a nation state was created on land inhabited by another group of people.
There were mistakes made when it was created. That doesn't change the fact that you believe that Israel, as a country, should not exist anywhere in the Middle East and if you had the power to do so you would dissolve Israel right now and you won't even say where it should be moved. We aren't talking about how it was created. We are talking about what should be the modern status of the country. You have an answer that certainly can be considered anti-semetic.


Do you believe that the Indians deserve a nation state on land found within the Continental U.S.?


They probably do, or proper reparations.


They haven't been afforded their own nation though.


No, they haven't. I suppose if we want to carry this comparison through we would need the U.S. to be defeated as a nation state by foreign powers and then have the Natives return to their ancestral lands. I guess the closest that would have happened in U.S. History would have been during WWI when Germany offered to help Mexico gain back territory lost to the U.S. if Mexico allied with Germany.



Britain also extended the same offer to Indian tribes during the War of 1812

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:05 am
Posts: 28664
pizza_Place: Clamburger's
:lol:

_________________
Nardi wrote:
Weird, I see Dolphin looking in my asshole


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Do you believe that Israel should have been created on land where the VAST majority of people were Palestinians?
I have no problem with Israel being created on at least some of that land. There would have been better ways to accomplish it but the Jews also have a long history in that land even if for reasons mostly out of their control they had to leave or die.


It isn't that had to leave either. Judaism at its core is a religion. People have to subscribe to it. They aren't born into it. The vast majority of Jewish people in the world have no connection to Israel. It was that way in 1948 also. They aren't an ethnic group and thus there isn't any such thing as an "ancient homeland".

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
12!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17217
pizza_Place: Pequods
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Do you believe that Israel should have been created on land where the VAST majority of people were Palestinians?
I have no problem with Israel being created on at least some of that land. There would have been better ways to accomplish it but the Jews also have a long history in that land even if for reasons mostly out of their control they had to leave or die.


It isn't that had to leave either. Judaism at its core is a religion. People have to subscribe to it. They aren't born into it. The vast majority of Jewish people in the world have no connection to Israel. It was that way in 1948 also. They aren't an ethnic group and thus there isn't any such thing as an "ancient homeland".

This is the dumbest fucking thing I read all day.

Common language: Check
Common history: Check
Common culture: Check
Common genetics: Check (don't believe me, look no further that various diseases Jews are more prone to due to a shared genetics)

How is that not an ethnic group?

While we are on the subject of ethnic groups. What makes the Palestinians a distinctive ethnic group different from the other Arabs in the levant?

Also, Judaism is a lot more than a religion. You can be an atheist/agnostic and still be Jewish. You can't be an atheist and still be a Catholic.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Last edited by Ogie Oglethorpe on Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:19 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:05 am
Posts: 28664
pizza_Place: Clamburger's
rogers park bryan wrote:
12!

LTG is just showing off.

_________________
Nardi wrote:
Weird, I see Dolphin looking in my asshole


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:19 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79557
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
long time guy wrote:
Regardless of what they were called they were still the group that resided within the country. Zionism as a guiding philosophy behind Israel's creation is far more contrived than the term Palestine and yet that never seems to bother you. While we are at it we are arguing for the necessity of creating a country based on the religious beliefs of a select group. That doesn't bother you as an atheist?


The point is the term "Palestinian" as it is currently used is nothing more than a political cudgel with which to beat Israel. The reason that is the preferred term rather than the correct "Arab" is simply because that would lessen the case for the elimination of Israel. The fact that the "world community" gives political heft to the idea of a country that never actually existed says more about the world's contempt for Jews than anything else. After all there are 22 or 23 Arab countries that have pushed out Jews or at a minimum made them second class citizens.

Which leads into the second part of your post. Yeah, in an ideal world I don't think nations should be formed around religions. But we live in an actual world, one in which Jews have been hounded out of every land they have ever called home. If you're asking me whether I believe God deeded land to Jews, I think my answer to that would be obvious, but we're way beyond that now with regard to a tiny slice of land in the Middle East that was nothing but desert and not important to anyone until Jews formed a nation there, and not by throwing anyone out either.

Pakistan was formed on the same principle, albeit in that case that a Muslim minority would be persecuted by the Hindi majority. But the "world community" isn't obsessing over the refugees caused by that partition, are they? Why is that? What is the difference? Isn't it obvious?

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:22 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Nas wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Nas wrote:
Wanting Israel to exist on Christian land makes you an antisemite?
What is Christian land? Why do Jews have no claim to any land in the Middle East?

Would you get rid of Israel as it exists today? Where would you move it?


The United States? I'm just trying to get confirmation on if that makes them antisemitic. Does it?


Bump

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
Nas wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Nas wrote:
Wanting Israel to exist on Christian land makes you an antisemite?
What is Christian land? Why do Jews have no claim to any land in the Middle East?

Would you get rid of Israel as it exists today? Where would you move it?


The United States? I'm just trying to get confirmation on if that makes them antisemitic. Does it?
It's certainly anti-semetic to think Israel doesn't have a right to exist where it does, or in the Middle East, and then not even say where you think we should move Israel.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Regardless of what they were called they were still the group that resided within the country. Zionism as a guiding philosophy behind Israel's creation is far more contrived than the term Palestine and yet that never seems to bother you. While we are at it we are arguing for the necessity of creating a country based on the religious beliefs of a select group. That doesn't bother you as an atheist?


The point is the term "Palestinian" as it is currently used is nothing more than a political cudgel with which to beat Israel. The reason that is the preferred term rather than the correct "Arab" is simply because that would lessen the case for the elimination of Israel. The fact that the "world community" gives political heft to the idea of a country that never actually existed says more about the world's contempt for Jews than anything else. After all there are 22 or 23 Arab countries that have pushed out Jews or at a minimum made them second class citizens.

Which leads into the second part of your post. Yeah, in an ideal world I don't think nations should be formed around religions. But we live in an actual world, one in which Jews have been hounded out of every land they have ever called home. If you're asking me whether I believe God deeded land to Jews, I think my answer to that would be obvious, but we're way beyond that now with regard to a tiny slice of land in the Middle East that was nothing but desert and not important to anyone until Jews formed a nation there, and not by throwing anyone out either.

Pakistan was formed on the same principle, albeit in that case that a Muslim minority would be persecuted by the Hindi majority. But the "world community" isn't obsessing over the refugees caused by that partition, are they? Why is that? What is the difference? Isn't it obvious?



Ok so you say all of this to say that a "real world" is a world where it is ok for Jewish people to settle on land in which they were overwhelmingly the minority and establish a nation state. I could much more find bias in your views towards Arabs/Muslims than you'd ever be able to find in mine towards Jews.

Also as I previously stated the greatest amount of historical persecution of Jewish people has occurred in countries located throughout Europe. Martin Luther wasn't an Arab and neither was Hitler. The Pogroms were also carried out in European countries.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Last edited by long time guy on Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17217
pizza_Place: Pequods
Nas wrote:
Nas wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Nas wrote:
Wanting Israel to exist on Christian land makes you an antisemite?
What is Christian land? Why do Jews have no claim to any land in the Middle East?

Would you get rid of Israel as it exists today? Where would you move it?


The United States? I'm just trying to get confirmation on if that makes them antisemitic. Does it?


Bump

Wanting to ethnically cleanse the Jews from a land they have lived for 3000 years would make someone an antisemite and yes there has been an un-interrupted Jewish presence in Jerusalem, Tzfat, Hebron, Tiverya, and Beersheva (with the exception of the 60 year Babylonian exile 2500 years ago)

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hillary Clinton
PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92050
Location: To the left of my post
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Do you believe that Israel should have been created on land where the VAST majority of people were Palestinians?
I have no problem with Israel being created on at least some of that land. There would have been better ways to accomplish it but the Jews also have a long history in that land even if for reasons mostly out of their control they had to leave or die.


It isn't that had to leave either. Judaism at its core is a religion. People have to subscribe to it. They aren't born into it. The vast majority of Jewish people in the world have no connection to Israel. It was that way in 1948 also. They aren't an ethnic group and thus there isn't any such thing as an "ancient homeland".
They don't have a connection to it because many were forced to flee! My grandparents had to leave their homeland too or face being shipped to Siberia or worse. I guess the Russians should be the only ones to a claim anywhere there!

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 570 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ... 19  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group