"private matter"Originally Posted by Lewkowski
"private matter"
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Yeah, where we put our embassy is a private matter between the host state and us.
Sure just like the decision to attack North Korea is a private matter.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Lewk, you're a parody of yourself. Other countries? You mean one country ruled by a comedian who presided over a likely fraudulent election and is accused of large-scale corruption during his short time in office?
Hope is the denial of reality
So far. I suspect there will be more countries who follow suit. While I'm sure most of the morally bankrupt countries of Europe and the Middle East won't I suspect more will go along.
Gee, maybe Togo and Honduras will follow suit?
Hope is the denial of reality
Maybe. Before the American move there was zero countries so really any increase is an infinite improvement from prior to what we did.
It's pretty Zionutty to not admit the results of a 70-year old war. It's also pretty Zionutty for the UN to try and dictate minutiae of bilateral relationships.
However, the UN is primarily a Zionutter organization so it figures.
It's not Zionutty to expect countries to avoid unilateral decisions on explosive topics, especially when there's little to be gained by such a policy change.
Hope is the denial of reality
Loki, it's entirely reasonable to think that the US' action was unwise and simultaneously realize that the UN and global response was borderline farcical.
"When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." - Werner Heisenberg (maybe)
Given the UN's history, the response was measured. And the UN anti-Israel bias isn't new; this degree of American incompetence is.
Hope is the denial of reality
When ur looking for a euphemism to describe "Wall Street" as a powerful cabal trying to punish you for exorbitant debt...
Puerto Rico’s Biggest Newspaper: The U.S. Hasn’t Helped Us Because Of ‘The Jew’
January 10, 2018 By Jeffrey Boxer
It has been nearly three months since Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico, and the island’s recovery has been slow. The U.S. territory is struggling with shortages of food and medical supplies, and a full 45% of residents still don’t have power.
San Juan Mayor Carmen Yul?*n Cruz blames Washington for failing to devote adequate resources to Puerto Rico’s recovery: She recently dubbed President Trump the “disaster-in-chief”. But a journalist for El Nuevo D?*a, the newspaper with the largest circulation in Puerto Rico, has found a different culprit: “the Jew.”
Columnist Wilda Rodr?*guez wrote a piece Monday, titled “What Does ‘The Jew’ Want From The Colony?” According to Rodr?*guez, it is “Wall Street types,” not politicians, that dictate U.S. policy. And, who are the power brokers on Wall Street?
“In the end, Congress will do what ‘the Jew’ wants, as the vulgar prototype of true power is called,” she wrote.
Rodr?*guez added a disclaimer: “No offense to people of that religion.” She even argued that the term is a source of pride for Israeli Jews.
“More than 20 years ago, the Israeli paper Ma’ariv had an article in Hebrew that explained how the Jews control Washington,” she wrote. “For Israelis, recognizing Jewish power over Washington is not an offensive statement. It is the victory of the Diaspora.”
What does “the Jew” want? Rodriguez believes that Wall Street is punishing Puerto Ricans because of the island’s $70 billion debt. “That we could get away without paying would be fatal to Wall Street morale,” she wrote. “The punishment needs to make it clear to the debtor world that Wall Street cannot be manipulated.”
El Nuevo D?*a has since added an editorial note to the top of the article that apologizes to the island’s Jewish community, adding, “we do not promote content that can be interpreted as anti-Semitic.”
Read more: https://forward.com/fast-forward/391...se-of-the-jew/
Israel's very rotten first family.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/28/w...netanyahu.html
Hope is the denial of reality
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/...here-1.6032559
Journalism is not a crime. That's why journalists don't get trials.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I guess we should be grateful to Bibi for reiterating the reasons for the JCPOA even though he clearly got the slides from EduBirdie.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43967600
A columnist once wrote that Israel was blessed with cartoonishly evil enemies. Apparently sometimes they're just cartoonishly offensive.
Last edited by wiggin; 05-02-2018 at 02:35 AM.
"When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." - Werner Heisenberg (maybe)
Sad that with all the valid reasons for criticizing Israel, Abbas had to go with this one. I guess it is hard to teach an old dog new tricks.
Hope is the denial of reality
Just go to Jared. He'll have all the answers, because he's Trump's Jewish son-in-law.
Wait, never mind, Jared is an "expendable" male, according to Trump's lead lawyer Giuliani.
Last edited by GGT; 05-09-2018 at 08:04 AM.
This is as good a place as any: Israel won the ESF.
Congratulations America
And meanwhile they're shooting doctors. No one here will be able to persuade me that being shot by a sniper is an accident.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...estinians-gaza
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Why do you believe the Gazan Health Ministry? Hamas lies.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/o...-protests.html
At the end of 2008 I was a desk editor, a local hire in The Associated Press’s Jerusalem bureau, during the first serious round of violence in Gaza after Hamas took it over the year before. That conflict was grimly similar to the American campaign in Iraq, in which a modern military fought in crowded urban confines against fighters concealed among civilians. Hamas understood early that the civilian death toll was driving international outrage at Israel, and that this, not I.E.D.s or ambushes, was the most important weapon in its arsenal.
Early in that war, I complied with Hamas censorship in the form of a threat to one of our Gaza reporters and cut a key detail from an article: that Hamas fighters were disguised as civilians and were being counted as civilians in the death toll. The bureau chief later wrote that printing the truth after the threat to the reporter would have meant “jeopardizing his life.” Nonetheless, we used that same casualty toll throughout the conflict and never mentioned the manipulation.
Hamas understood that Western news outlets wanted a simple story about villains and victims and would stick to that script, whether because of ideological sympathy, coercion or ignorance. The press could be trusted to present dead human beings not as victims of the terrorist group that controls their lives, or of a tragic confluence of events, but of an unwarranted Israeli slaughter. The willingness of reporters to cooperate with that script gave Hamas the incentive to keep using it.
Oddly enough, Hamas didn't lie this time around. Whether by mistake or design, they admitted that 50 of the 62 deaths were Hamas members (PIJ separately claimed 3, bringing the total to 53). Given that there were some 40k+ people there, it confirms Israel's basic story: that lethal live fire was used quite sparingly to protect the border, and the vast majority of the demonstrators were kept back using non-lethal or less-lethal means. That doesn't preclude the inevitability of collateral damage, mistakes, misses, and misidentifications - the situation was quite fluid with exceedingly poor visibility. But 53 out of 62 isn't terrible, all things being equal.
Khendra, I've chosen not to engage with this until now, but do you honestly think that snipers are perfect? In controlled circumstances, sure, they can be pretty good at the ranges used. But these circumstances were far from controlled. I don't deny the possibility that there were 'bad shoots', where live fire or lethal fire was inappropriately used. It's happened before by the IDF and it will probably happen again. But by and large the evidence suggests that live fire was carefully targeted and lethal targeting was used with a great deal of discretion. Given the evidence, it seems more likely that those who were probably not threats or combatants (e.g. press and doctors and the like) who were injured were the results of mistakes, not targeting.
"When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." - Werner Heisenberg (maybe)
Yes. Strange that a doctor was shot in both his legs by a sniper. You realize that there are also the non-lethal shootings? Also shooting children. Bravo for that. But I'm sure that was an accident, right?
I also fail to see why snipers are needed at all. This fuckery only shows that Israel is well on its way to become the very thing it was founded against. Both sides are acting absolutely despicable and are part of the problem. BOTH.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
This keeps being brought out triumphantly by IDF apologists as some sort of gotcha, but, as gotchas go, it's not a very good one.
1. Contrary to popular opinion among right-wing authoritarians and their apologists, being a "member" of Hamas doesn't automatically deprive a person of all his rights under international law, nor does it release soldiers from all their obligations under international law. See this for one analysis among many of the IDF's hilariously post-modern approach to interpreting laws, and why that approach is questionable at best: https://www.justsecurity.org/56346/c...e-gaza-border/
2. Even if we were to accept the figure as accurate--and we shouldn't, because current figures put casualties at over a hundred--and also accept that that somehow legitimized the killings, the "legitimate" killings must be weighed against the number of injured if you want to make a point about restraint and accuracy. If you kill 50 people but critically injure 300 and injure thousands of others slightly less, you have no plausible claim on accuracy. There's a pervasive myth circulating among apologists about the IDF's character and restraint, but this myth rarely holds up to scrutiny, and the IDF's questionable intent is also exemplified by its unwillingness to adhere to not only international law but also domestic law eg. when it prevents injured from getting necessary care to which they're entitled (see eg. cases of fatalities and amputations that could well have been avoided had the injured been allowed to receive care outside Gaza).
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
In theory it could be, snipers are only human after all. But when you start shooting doctors, paramedics and reporters it's possible you're not the kind of human who should get the opportunity to sit around shooting people with no accountability.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
It's the same as the police here. They're not given orders to do bad things. But some of them are just bad people and will do bad things. Then they're not punished, which pushes even moderately bad people into a bad direction. So orders might not have been given, but they might as well have been given the impunity with which soldiers can do these kind of things.
Hope is the denial of reality
Dread, you're an absolutely despicable human being and I already regret that I read your post.
You asshole.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
So... these members of Hamas that Israel shot.
Were they doing any particularly Hamasy things at the time they were shot, or were they just people who were members of Hamas who happened to be protesting, and the Israel Military is retroactively using that to justify shooting them, US police style?
Because Hamas isn't just a terrorist and/or paramilitary organisation, it also runs the Gaza strip and has a whole social services branch etc.
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Even if they weren't clearly and directly Hamassing it up right next to the border, the Israeli govt. is essentially arguing that there is no such requirement in this situation. See the article I linked to for an overview of their reasoning.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote