Israel approves plan to uproot 30,000 Bedouin

Discussion in 'Politics' started by S.A.M., Sep 11, 2011.

  1. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    So you agree that legal religious discrimination is immoral?

    For examples:
    1. Taxing someone due to their faith.
    2. Baring someone from certain lines of employment, such as military service.
    3. Destroying someones religious temples.

    You'd agree these are immoral acts?
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    1. I think everyone should have to pay taxes. For examples, if Muslims are paying religious taxes, like zakat they should still pay federal, state and county taxes. Belonging or not belonging to a religion should not mean exemption from civic duties

    2. That depends on the reason for being barred. e.g. criminals and terrorists can be barred from military service - there should also be the option of opting out if you don't wish to serve. The practice in Israel of the compulsory draft for Jews is ridiculous especially since most of them are just 17 or 18 when they are drafted

    3 Yup. In fact it says so right there in the Qur'an

    [They are] those who have been evicted from their homes without right - only because they say, "Our Lord is Allah ." And were it not that Allah checks the people, some by means of others, there would have been demolished monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of Allah is much mentioned.Quran 22:40
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Stoniphi obscurely fossiliferous Valued Senior Member

    This statement is precisely what I perceive you doing here, constantly and consistently.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    I'm curious. What do you perceive Israel doing constantly and consistently? And, are you American?
  8. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Should people be taxed differently depending on their religion?

    Please note that no where in your response do you address this simple and straight forward question. You dance around it. First stating that everyone should pay taxes. OK, yes go on. Then you think the Muslims should not be exempt from paying taxes. OK. Then on to saying that belonging to a religion does not mean you should be exempt from civic duty. OK, go on. .... Oh, wait, you stopped short of actually answering the question. Which is: Should people be taxed differently depending on their religion? My guess is that you DO think that people should be taxed differently depending on which superstition they happen to have.

    See, this is the problem. It's called RELIGION and when it's monotheistic is leads to something called religious discrimination. It's what the people in the ME do best. Why don't people generally support Palestinians? Because they're no different than Jews. If they were in power they'd be more than happy to discriminate against Jews. Just as Jews discriminate against Muslims. They think, just like you and Jews, this it's all good and fare and this is what the One God wants. Which is why there will be no peace in the ME so long as there is religion.

    Incidentally, considering Muslims own more than 10,000 times more land than that shit hold Israel, most people think it's only fare they get that small scrap of land.

    Should people be in any way restricted from military service based on their religion?

    See, again, it seems to me you're leaning towards YES. Yes, the infidel should pay some tax that supports the military but no he should not get a plum military job. He's an infidel and infidels aren't allowed to serve in the military in the Glorious Caliphate

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Ha! It's called HYPOCRITE and it's the next thing the people in the ME do best. AND get this, it's ALSO due to religion! THAT is the problem.
    Oh good, finally we agree on something. Except I grew up Christian SAM, we both know that dickface Jehovah LOVES it when his minions destroy idols! Iconoclasm is one the hightide marks in Islamic mythology. Every good Muslim knows that Mohammad did and/or commanded his henchmen to remove and destroy the idols in the Ka'ba (except the magic meteorite). This is EXACTLY what many fundamental Jews are dreaming of happening to the "Dome of the Rock". Yeah, it's a magical rock too.

    When they do, you can thank religion.

    AND so, the P-I will continue on and on and on for as long as there is religion in the ME. I say, between 80 and 120 years. Today it's removal of Bedouins, tomorrow maybe Palestinians will be shuttled off into Egypt, Syria and Lebanon. Whatever the case, you can thank monotheistic religion.
  9. Gustav Banned Banned


    what the zionists are doing to the bedouin was also done to the jews by the nazis. in the latter case, since we have the advantage of hindsight, was simply part of a process that did culminate in an extermination while in the former, that is not in evidence.

    i see. the distinction b/w primitive vs modern makes the analogy moot and pointless. the mentality of the oppressed is a consideration that renders a comparison of the forced relocation of the modern jew with that of the primitive bedouin invalid. college degrees are deemed pertinent in the equation because self-perceptions of the forcible removal of populations, the loss of land and property are apprehended in different manner. i suppose the more education one has. the less one might emote about such a situation choosing instead to intellectualize the matter which in turn makes the owie go away

    calling upon a peoples historical consciousness, referencing their experience by way of analogy is weak because of the modern/primitive dichotomy. furthermore, our intended audience are not the jews/bedouins. they are instead some 25 year old english speaking punk thus there is no value to seeing matters form a different and relevant perspective

    on the contrary, the nazis did attempt to conceal the final solution with varying rates of success. what was more open were the attempts at relocation. plans were made, some were abandoned since nobody wanted the jews in thier lands

    In Hitler's mind, the solution of the Jewish problem was also linked to the conquest of the eastern territories. These areas had large Jewish populations and they would have to be dealt with accordingly. While at this point there was still no operative plan for mass annihilation, it was clear to Hitler that some sort of comprehensive solution would have to be found. There was also talk of establishing a Jewish reservation either in Madagascar or near Lublin, Poland. When he made the decisive decision to invade the Soviet Union, Hitler also gave instructions to embark upon the "Final Solution," the systematic murder of European Jewry.​

    6 million people? hardly a doomed failure, billy. what interference? i say a little too late

    The response of the Allies to the persecution and destruction of European Jewry was inadequate. Only in January 1944 was an agency, the War Refugee Board, established for the express purpose of saving the victims of Nazi persecution. Prior to that date, little action was taken. On December 17, 1942, the Allies issued a condemnation of Nazi atrocities against the Jews, but this was the only such declaration made prior to 1944.

    Moreover, no attempt was made to call upon the local population in Europe to refrain from assisting the Nazis in their systematic murder of the Jews. Even following the establishment of the War Refugee Board and the initiation of various rescue efforts, the Allies refused to bomb the death camp of Auschwitz and/or the railway lines leading to that camp, despite the fact that Allied bombers were at that time engaged in bombing factories very close to the camp and were well aware of its existence and function.

    Other practical measures which were not taken concerned the refugee problem. Tens of thousands of Jews sought to enter the United States, but they were barred from doing so by the stringent American immigration policy. Even the relatively small quotas of visas which existed were often not filled, although the number of applicants was usually many times the number of available places. Conferences held in Evian, France (1938) and Bermuda (1943) to solve the refugee problem did not contribute to a solution. At the former, the countries invited by the United States and Great Britain were told that no country would be asked to change its immigration laws. Moreover, the British agreed to participate only if Palestine were not considered. At Bermuda, the delegates did not deal with the fate of those still in Nazi hands, but rather with those who had already escaped to neutral lands. ​

    when i see the over the top, 30 standing ovations, i see a defensive psychological mechanism at play. sheer utter, pathology.
    the most fervent are the most suspect. bibi was lucky to get out alive

    thank you, monotheistic religions
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2011
  10. Stoniphi obscurely fossiliferous Valued Senior Member

    As I am sure you are aware I was not addressing the state of Israel. I rather suspect that it (the state of Israel) does not read what is written here so there would be no use in that.

    I suggest that you read slower and try to remember what you have read as you go along, Arfy.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  11. Gustav Banned Banned

    Judeophobia is a psychic aberration. As a psychic aberration it is hereditary, and as a disease transmitted for two thousand years it is incurable.' ... 'In this way have Judaism and Anti-Semitism passed for centuries through history as inseparable companions.'... ...'Having analyzed Judeophobia as an hereditary form of demonopathy, peculiar to the human race, and having represented Anti-Semitism as proceeding from an inherited aberration of the human mind, we must draw the important conclusion that we must give' up contending against these hostile impulses as we must against every other inherited predisposition (pinsker)​

    come to india, my jewish brothers and sisters, for it is just a matter of time
    we love you to death, we find y'all hot and shit

    From India with love

    Study on behalf of Foreign Ministry ranks India, US as most pro-Israel countries. The greatest level of sympathy towards Israel can be found in India, according to international study on behalf of the Foreign Ministry, Yedioth Ahronoth reported Friday.

    According to the study, which was unprecedented in scope and was undertaken by an international market research company, 58% of Indian respondents showed sympathy to the Jewish State. The United States came in second, with 56% of American respondents sympathizing with Israel. ​

    the 42% are muslims and we will deal with them soon enough. i believe they expressed a desire to relocate to pakistan. your expertise in that sort of thing would be most invaluable

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  12. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Ah, I see. So you're adopting the standard cop-out position?

    Or rather, you're only here to point out the flaws in other's ability to read or understand your position, whatever it is? I have to admit I have very little idea since you've pretty much said sweet FA.
  13. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Israelis use that one? Haven't seen that myself.

    Two things - first, I don't think there's a uniform perspective on this. Significant variances in the historical consciousness regarding the natives are visible between, say, Australia and the USA.

    Second, phrasing that as "normalized occupation" prejudices the situation - native Americans aren't "occupied," they're an integral part of the American nation, with the same rights as anyone else.

    This seems bizarre to me - if an Israeli goes up to an American and says "nah, it's cool - the Palestinians are like the Native Americans, and we're going to treat them just like you did!" the result is not going to be for the American to respond "oh, well that's totally cool."

    But, if you have some examples of Israelis advancing such an analogy, I'd love to see them...

    Again, that is not the way your average American relates to the natives. Maybe it was, 150 years ago. But not today. "We're just repeating your mistakes!" is not a line that is going to mollify most Americans.

    To which I'll offer the observation that Germany did not "cleanse" Austria or Poland or France in the way that native tribes were displaced from North America. I.e., the Nazis only cleansed the Jews, and not the larger Austrian/Polish/French populations.

    Except that isn't how the natives are seen by your modern American or Canadian (the Australians, I am less sanguine about).

    And again: whither South Africa? Is that not a potential more accurate, more productive line of comparison?

    You are confusing categories. The Holocaust, and Nazi aggression in Europe generally, were not "colonialism." Europe's Jews were not some foreign people with a country of their own, which the Germans invaded and took over - they were an integrated, long-standing component of European societies, which the Nazis undertook a program to excise. You can see how that is a very different thing, than the conflict between Israel and Palestine, no?

    Citing spidergoat as emblematic of Western political consciousness is the sort of thing that only someone committed to a stilted view of such, and looking for a cheap justification for that, would do. If you're going to structure your rhetoric to spite the most obstinant, belligerent opponent, all you're going to end up with is a perpetual flamebait machine. Which is exactly what we have.
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2011
  14. Gustav Banned Banned


    absolutely nothing wrong with that response since "totally cool" constitutes.......

    ...that :shrug:

    yeah sam
    do not engage the radical jewish zionists. they are irrelevant to ip issues. more importantly it sows the seeds of discord in our little ivory tower making for a toxic environment that upsets our easily offended sensibilities

    the slavs were aryan kin suitable for interbreeding

    After the war, under the "Big Plan", Generalplan Ost foresaw the deportation of 45 million non-Germanizable people from Eastern Europe, of whom 31 million were "racially undesirable", 100% of Jews, Poles (85%), Belorussians (75%) and Ukrainians (65%), to West Siberia, and about 14 millions were to remain, but were to be treated as slaves. In their place, up to 8-10 million Germans would be settled in an extended "living space" (Lebensraum). Because the number of Germans appeared to be insufficient to populate the vast territories of Eastern Europe, the peoples judged to lie racially between the Germans and the Russians (Mittelschicht), namely, Latvians, Estonians, and even Czechs, were also supposed to be resettled there.

    While the Baltic nations like Estonians would be spared from repressions and physical liquidation that Jews or Poles were experiencing, in the long term the Nazi planners did not foresee their existence as independent entitites and they would be deported as well, with eventual denationalisation; initial designs were for Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia to be Germanized within 25 years, however Heinrich Himmler revised them to 20 year​
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2011
  15. unum Registered Member

    Isreal has taken so much, they have pursued an imperialistic and racist policy that knows no bounds, surely religion is involved in this conflict but only insofar as the fact that Isreal uses it to Justify their racist policies. Originally the Jews were given this land because they were abused. Considering that they have become the abusers their charter is now void, in addition if they use the land they must respect the charter. Those who are repressed by Isreal should refuse Isreali rule for as Timothy Matlack wrote:

    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

    Source: archives (.gov)
  16. unum Registered Member

    Also, just to clarify, the native american nations are technically atonomous and therefor not subject to the U.S. government.
  17. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    "That kind of thing" was meant to refer to Israeli efforts to exploit the Holocaust in order to elicit sympathy for their point of view. Sorry for the confusion.

    Actually yes - the appropriate analogy in p&m would be the endless threads on the basic of relativity, animated by cranks who refuse to "get it." The proliferation of such, has long-since dimmed my enthusiasm for that subforum. But p&m is a very different beast - issues there are subject to incontrovertible factual resolution.

    Point isn't thread/topic count, but evident consciousness of the larger world and systemic issues. I.e., if somebody fixates on the Israel-Palestine conflict exclusively, and is obsessed with Nazism, then they're going to see Nazi analogies in the IP conflict everywhere. But those analogies aren't going to tell us anything except that their proponent is fixated on Israel and Nazism. Someone with a broader political consciousness is going to make more instructive, appropriate analogies. And when such a person reaches for a Nazi analogy, it will carry weight.

    A fair criticism, and one I've considered myself from time to time. In the first place, I submit that my strengths run more in the area of "criticism" than in "advocacy," as I think is generally evident from my activities here. In the second place, I tend to find my efforts at proactivity quickly get subsumed into exactly these sorts of partisan-driven shitstorms, which just leaves me grappling with the exact same set of issues/personalities anyway. In the third place, it's difficult to get out in front of the hyper-energetic partisans to begin with.

    Nevertheless, I do consider this a weakness of mine, and will continue to attempt to improve.

    I think she's related her perspective as she sees it, sure.

    Which ease I have long-since identified as a cheap pretense for avoiding my actual points.

    It's "easy" to construe a lot of wrong things about a lot of posters here, particularly when you add in a bunch of self-serving conceits and don't put in much effort.

    Last I checked, all but one or two of those types have long since given up on participating in any discussion of this topic. It's basically down to Geoff and spider, with both of them reduced to a sort of sulky irredentism (in Geoff's case, at least a humorous, bemused irredentism, but still). S.A.M.'s program has been highly effective at sucking all the air out of the topic, in that sense. She defeated the zionist lobby block literally years ago, and by now is the dominant force in the discourse here. Yet she still justifies herself as the underdog - and this is the core of the roadblock. The problem here isn't shutting down Zionists (the few that still stick their heads out of their holes, are the kind better left ignored anyway), it's how to come up with a positive program now that the Zionists and you've got the agency to do so.

    Kind of depends - done as an attack on a person (or identity group), the result is typically a hardening of positions, and the launching of counter-attack. If you can do it inside a framework wherein you've established your basic respect for and commonality with someone, then it can be very effective. What bugs me is that I see a lot of the former here. That may be effective at stirring up fights, making one feel self-righteous, or garnering kudos from those who already agree with you - but it doesn't help with the big roadblocks to peace and progress.

    Othering people is not cool or productive, even if said people themselves have serious problems with doing exactly that. No?

    I'm pretty sure I suggested those examples exactly because they are even closer to the hearts of the audience.

    Again, didn't I also suggest the analogy of "ghetto?"

    And again, if you want to argue the validity of a comparison, answer the main question: what do we learn from this comparison? If this is a defensible contribution to the discourse here, then show me the upside. I'm not seeing it.

    There is no shortage of Israelis or Palestinians that are fluent in English, have internet access, etc. We've had members from various other far-flung places before. So I'm not buying that reasoning.

    ? The "ovens" qualifier is your own. I said "industrialized death camps," which is exactly what the Serbs set up in places like Srebrinica. Why are you presuming that I'd object to comparing the Bosnian Genocide to the Holocaust?

    I'd come to think that you were better than such petty shitheadedness.

    Sure - this is a troll thread. You have to implicate yourself in it, if you want to have any effect. Not sure what you think that's supposed to imply about me, or my basic point. You know all of this, obviously, and frequently troll yourself.

    Good thing that wasn't "the implication," then.

    A discourse is nothing more than a process in which the participants mutually adapt their rhetoric to their collective preferences. It is not possible not to take a side in that - your refusal to pressure S.A.M.'s desired rhetoric (your energetic leap to her explicit defense, in fact) is necessarily an act of pressure against my desired rhetoric.

    If everyone's entitled to their rhetorical preferences and valuable viewpoint, then I'll thank you to kindly fuck off and quit complaining about mine.

    Would one? Because this one can't recall any time that oppression has made an identity group more universalist and liberal in its views. Typically, the result is exactly the cultivation of a reactionary self-pity and persecution complex, and the writing of blank checks to one's self for aggression and self-interest.

    It's everybody else who saw what happened there and said "this kind of stuff is bad, in the general abstract sense." The actual victims, as usual, drew more immediate, self-concerned lessons. For example: "there really is something to this idea that nations need their own exclusive homelands to ensure their safety."
  18. Gustav Banned Banned


    and leave you to rant all by your lonesome self?
    i rather join the party

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  19. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Not what I said.

    Point is that spider is a distraction. He doesn't make much of an advocate for anything, and only seems to pop his head in to throw bombs. He's a defeated man, when it comes to this stuff. The premise that he's some force for Israel that represents America and needs to be actively countered is a canard - the best remedy would be for everyone to ignore him, and not grant him the audience. Yet there's a willingness to leap right past the mainstream of the consciousness and sieze on these few combative extremes, and this drives the discourse into a ditch. The smart, adult people just throw up their hands and leave, and we're left with an endless debased merry-go-round of bombast and flaming.

    And frankly, I do think that S.A.M. cultivates this kind of stuff as a continuing justification for her program of declaring war on Sciforums supposed Zionist concensus, long after that program has lost relevance. She's won, but doesn't seem to know how to consolodate her position. I'd prefer that we all turn to bigger and better pursuits, and lay out a more ambitious, positive program.

    You keep throwing around this "ivory tower" insult - but what is the point of a "science site" or "intelligent community" or whatever having politics fora, if not to attempt to apply that kind of perspective to political issues? If I just want to hear people bitch about politicized topics without any pretense of intellectualism or academic rigor and progress, I can get that pretty much anywhere.

    I'll also thank you to drop the repeated insult about "easily offended sensibilities." As you've noted, I am as willing as anyone to get in the gutter. What I oppose is the debased and counter-productive - and since you don't seem to have any answer to that, how about you stop dressing it up as an accusation of squeamishness on my part?
  20. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    To Gustav on your post 126:

    I cannot tell if you are trolling or just don’t read with much comprehension.
    No, none of that is true. Nazi efforts did not result in extermination of the Jews - just a lot of deaths. AND yes there is plenty of evidence that Israel will extermnate the Bedouins. - For example less than one school bus of school age Bedouins now live. In a generation there will be none.

    Also Israel is stealing the land of the Bedouin but the Nazis were not – only trying to exterminate the Jews (and several other group they considered to be less than fully human) As I stated in first post Israel has already complete destroyed the Bedouin culture but Nazis never came close to doing that. In fact, Nazis did just the opposite of that – they made Hebrew a living language again. Killing 6 million Jews is a lot but a smaller fraction by far of the Jewish race destroyed than Israel has already achieved in effort to totally eliminate the Bedouins. As I noted by several policies, Israel will completely exterminate the Bedouins in about one generation more as only the old and infertile will still be living as Bedouins in Negev concentration camps Israel calls “enclosures”

    I said the Nazi made no pretense that what they were doing was for the good of the Jews or the education of their children. Israel's official reason for confining the Bedouins is so their children can be educated. You replied:
    I’ll be generous and assume you just lack reading comprehension skill, are not trolling.

    as an attempted at extermination the Nazi's rapid and brutal effort was a total failure. - Israel is full of Jews, a strong an prosperous nation. Israel has shown the world that to exterminate a people and avoid "outside interference" or even much notice, you must proceed slowly (several decades) with no gas chambers, ovens, firing squads or toxic showers - just separated the men from the women by offering the young men a way out of the concentration camps if the join the IDF, etc.

    Perhaps instead of trolling or with reading problems you were intoxicated when posting? That could explain why your replies are erroneous and non responsive to my comments.
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 20, 2011
  21. Gustav Banned Banned


    well sure. i should have qualified the "extermination" why are you freaking out? you really think i imagine the jewish people to be extinct? perhaps you simply want to troll?

    a pointless distinction since all jewish possessions and properties were appropriated by the germans in addition to them being slaughtered. why is this so hard to compute? are you high on illegal substances?

    provocative. i rather think it would be a way of life dying out rather than a genocide but.....what would i know

    if you want to quibble......ok. still a bit insensitive to say the least. i would quit being so anal and at least acknowledge that substantial numbers died and the nazi efforts were not a complete failure

    there was an elaborate pretense. people in ghettos were made to write letters to the folks back home about their new found utopias. there probably was an immense amount of propaganda devoted to keeping the death camps a secret

    it could very well be that the nazis never specifically touted the education of jewish children but that proposition is hardly extraordinary. the larger argument stands
  22. Gustav Banned Banned


    a reconciliation of sorts with the facts on the ground would be advisable.

    the fixation is not one of our making. it is one that is already on the table by courtesy of the zionists. for instance....."there really is something to this idea that nations need their own exclusive homelands to ensure their safety."

    nazism/antisemitism is readily built into the "actual victims" proposition. i mean what exactly are they pondering? an abstraction or a historical consideration? the rhetoric emerges from the state in question. are you asking that it all be ignored?

    but not the other faction? why not ignore the other half of the problem?


    what are you talking about? you want us to formulate a peace plan? sing kumbaya?

    there are actual players on the field. one is called israel, another, palestine and despite the alleged death of the local zionistas, there is an ongoing dialogue that takes place outside this forum which by some strange coincidence, remains a place where anyone can comment on this dialogue hopefully without being harangued to death

    separation of church and state in the constitution as a consequence of religious persecution in europe? perhaps other example abounds if one were not so concerned with viewing life thru the prism of one's own rather twisted pathology?

    can you even relate to the concept on an intellectual level. how would you react? the abused must necessarily reason that abusing is the next logical step?

    i see
    the sole nuclear armed nation with their own exclusive homeland in the m.e sees an existential threat.. what did you read from the quoted text? israel has no right to exist?

    have you ever taken spider to task? he is not sexy like sam?

    but not you, right? you are on a mission....... from god?

    what do you have in mind? a peace plan?

    yes and you get to define what passes for all that, yes? after all, you are one of the smartest men alive, yes? as attested to by your friends? nor will we have peace in this forums until you get exactly what you want and that being sam toeing your line

    so you won?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  23. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    I find it highly hypocritical when someone complains about Jews legally delineating Jewish Israelis from non-Jewish Israelis and then turns right around and supports legally delineating Muslim citizens from non-Muslim citizens.

    Only religion is capable of taking an educated liberal individual and twisting their sensibilities so much that they can arrive as such an asinine conclusion.

    Thus there will be no peace in the ME. Further, because Jews only have that small pan-handle size peace of land, they will out of necessity need to maintain their bigoted laws as they float in an ocean of juxtapose bigotry. What else should they do? Role over and live life as a second class citizen? I don't think so. No. They continue to act just as bigoted. My guess is, most people would. You see similar outcomes in all sorts of situations. After all, it's really a case of haves versus have-nots wrapped in a cloak of religious superiority.

Share This Page