comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does effect their reasoning though. Not only a ban on the chant but keffiyehs as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said negate not affect.

See for example your reasoning, removing a Country with nukes will lead to peace.

Hows that working out so far?

comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does effect their reasoning though. Not only a ban on the chant but keffiyehs as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said negate not affect.

See for example your reasoning, removing a Country with nukes will lead to peace.

Hows that working out so far?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is not my reasoning though. Any other stupid assumptions you want continue making ?

And their bias affects their reasoning. It negates it being done on a fair basis. Such that bias unfairly discriminatory against one while much favour is shown to the other.

comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)

There's justified outrage at one and ignorance or turn a blind eye at the other. This level of hypocrisy undermines and legit argument Israel has IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not turning a blind eye at any of that.

I was very clear that religious wars are destructive for this very reason.

You tell me, what exactly do people hope to achieve with these chants against a religiously emboldened country with a comparitively low number of followers presiding over nukes exactly?

comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does effect their reasoning though. Not only a ban on the chant but keffiyehs as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said negate not affect.

See for example your reasoning, removing a Country with nukes will lead to peace.

Hows that working out so far?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is not my reasoning though. Any other stupid assumptions you want continue making ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You didn't say this then?

"Removing Israel would be one of the many steps needed to undo the damage done by western colonial policies. "

A step which results in half the middle east getting wiped out no less.

comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does effect their reasoning though. Not only a ban on the chant but keffiyehs as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said negate not affect.

See for example your reasoning, removing a Country with nukes will lead to peace.

Hows that working out so far?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is not my reasoning though. Any other stupid assumptions you want continue making ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You didn't say this then?

"Removing Israel would be one of the many steps needed to undo the damage done by western colonial policies. "

A step which results in half the middle east getting wiped out no less.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cherry picking a part of a comment and removing context I see. You've done this several times here. So yes, stupid assumptions from you, keep continuing it.

Why not actually read the whole comment and what it was in reply to? This is just disingenuous.

Also said by me in the same thread that you decided to cherry pick from:
"Israel should have never been created in the first place. And the two state solution is dead due to Israel never wanting a two state solution in the first place. This leaves only a one state solution for Equal rights for all it's inhabitants. That does mean the death of Israel as it is now, an ethno Jewish state that has a two tier system where one race is advantaged over others and has practises that put Jim Crow to shame."

But yeah, let's misrepresent the other to make an argument easier to make.

Oh I read it and it's patently obvious you're unaware people are preparing for a full on middle eastern war. I'm not sure what's clear about this. It just seems another uncomfortable truth you'd rather try to gaslight others over than admit.

I think you'll get your wish for the removal of Israel but not through diplomatic means, but by that region becoming inhabitable.

uninhabitable

comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 3 minutes ago
Also said by me in the same thread that you decided to cherry pick from:
"Israel should have never been created in the first place. And the two state solution is dead due to Israel never wanting a two state solution in the first place. This leaves only a one state solution for Equal rights for all it's inhabitants. That does mean the death of Israel as it is now, an ethno Jewish state that has a two tier system where one race is advantaged over others and has practises that put Jim Crow to shame."

But yeah, let's misrepresent the other to make an argument easier to make.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it leaves the region levelled.

La la land.

comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 1 second ago
Oh I read it and it's patently obvious you're unaware people are preparing for a full on middle eastern war. I'm not sure what's clear about this. It just seems another uncomfortable truth you'd rather try to gaslight others over than admit.

I think you'll get your wish for the removal of Israel but not through diplomatic means, but by that region becoming inhabitable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly you did not. I called you out. One can read my comments before and after that. But you do you and keep misrepresenting people. Makes it easier to argue a strawman than the actual point made.

comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 3 minutes ago
Also said by me in the same thread that you decided to cherry pick from:
"Israel should have never been created in the first place. And the two state solution is dead due to Israel never wanting a two state solution in the first place. This leaves only a one state solution for Equal rights for all it's inhabitants. That does mean the death of Israel as it is now, an ethno Jewish state that has a two tier system where one race is advantaged over others and has practises that put Jim Crow to shame."

But yeah, let's misrepresent the other to make an argument easier to make.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it leaves the region levelled.

La la land.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We saw the fall of the USSR with it's Nukes. We're all still here. We saw South Africa change due to international pressure.

No need to be in lala land.

comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly you did not. I called you out. One can read my comments before and after that. But you do you and keep misrepresenting people. Makes it easier to argue a strawman than the actual point made.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've read your comments and you've played down antisemitism in this Country, barrelled headlong into accusing me of being an Israeli supporter for no reason whatsoever, and continue to hold extreme views about what needs to happen to Israel to create peace in the region which isn't remotely possible.

Where's Winston when you need him?

comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
We saw the fall of the USSR with it's Nukes. We're all still here. We saw South Africa change due to international pressure.

No need to be in lala land.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think there's probably a better example of what happens when the Jewish population is threatened.

comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly you did not. I called you out. One can read my comments before and after that. But you do you and keep misrepresenting people. Makes it easier to argue a strawman than the actual point made.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've read your comments and you've played down antisemitism in this Country, barrelled headlong into accusing me of being an Israeli supporter for no reason whatsoever, and continue to hold extreme views about what needs to happen to Israel to create peace in the region which isn't remotely possible.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, you read into my comments that wasn't there.

I didn't play down, I questioned the stats (and I've shown people arrested for a chnat you say the police don't do or people being arrested for materials handed out and then released and do the stars count these or not? Where is the break down?). You also doubled down on Germany and their reasoning for banning the chant amongst other things.

I didn't accuse you, I asked questions that you refused to answer and it was your refusal to answer that led me to make assumptions based on your refusal. You could have stopped that the first time but it took me to ask the same questions several times and then make an assumption based on your refusal to actually answer.

You then misrepresented my comments in this thread and the other, cherry picking things that suit your argument while ignoring the rest.

And you're assuming I am expecting change to happen instantly or overnight is an oversight you have, not me. South Africa didn't happen in a day, nor did the fall of the USSR or the sun setting on the British Empire, etc.

So no, clearly you've not done what you claimed to.

comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
We saw the fall of the USSR with it's Nukes. We're all still here. We saw South Africa change due to international pressure.

No need to be in lala land.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think there's probably a better example of what happens when the Jewish population is threatened.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why are you conflating Jewish with Zionists here? Many Jewish people who marched in the Pro-Palestinian marches also used the chants.

comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)

There's justified outrage at one and ignorance or turn a blind eye at the other. This level of hypocrisy undermines and legit argument Israel has IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not turning a blind eye at any of that.

I was very clear that religious wars are destructive for this very reason.

You tell me, what exactly do people hope to achieve with these chants against a religiously emboldened country with a comparitively low number of followers presiding over nukes exactly?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That was meant generally and not specifically you.

It achieves a lot less than the intend of Ben Gvir and Smotrich's plans for Gaza. Why are the chants of protesters treated with more severity than members of the Israeli governent?

Watch the recent episode of Last Week Tonight with John Oliver on Gaza. Settlers have said and done a lot worse than chant 'from the river to the sea' yet this is ignored by the western world, politicians, allies of Israel etc.

Those in support of a free Gaza, West.Bank and a stop to the oppression of Palestinian people have to shout twice as loud as those vehemently supporting Israel.

comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
We saw the fall of the USSR with it's Nukes. We're all still here. We saw South Africa change due to international pressure.

No need to be in lala land.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think there's probably a better example of what happens when the Jewish population is threatened.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why are you conflating Jewish with Zionists here? Many Jewish people who marched in the Pro-Palestinian marches also used the chants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not all Jews want to associated with what Israel is doing on Gaza.

LWT on the West Bank sorry

comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

I didn't play down, I questioned the stats (and I've shown people arrested for a chnat you say the police don't do or people being arrested for materials handed out and then released and do the stars count these or not? Where is the break down?). You also doubled down on Germany and their reasoning for banning the chant amongst other things.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You didn't question them you practically inferred hardly any Jews were being assaulted or having property damaged and that most of the stats were made up or comprised river to the sea chants. On the basis that you have an example of someone being arrested.

You never answered my question on who these people are attacking Jews and what group they are? They used to be far right, what are they now?

As for Germany, you've pointed out bias, how does that negate their reasoning in the actual decision the court made?

comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
We saw the fall of the USSR with it's Nukes. We're all still here. We saw South Africa change due to international pressure.

No need to be in lala land.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think there's probably a better example of what happens when the Jewish population is threatened.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why are you conflating Jewish with Zionists here? Many Jewish people who marched in the Pro-Palestinian marches also used the chants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non Zionist Jews are pretty rare, I personally don't understand why people keep trying to make the distinction when religion is embedded deeply into this conflict.

comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

I didn't play down, I questioned the stats (and I've shown people arrested for a chnat you say the police don't do or people being arrested for materials handed out and then released and do the stars count these or not? Where is the break down?). You also doubled down on Germany and their reasoning for banning the chant amongst other things.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You didn't question them you practically inferred hardly any Jews were being assaulted or having property damaged and that most of the stats were made up or comprised river to the sea chants. On the basis that you have an example of someone being arrested.

You never answered my question on who these people are attacking Jews and what group they are? They used to be far right, what are they now?

As for Germany, you've pointed out bias, how does that negate their reasoning in the actual decision the court made?

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't infer that. That's you reading into the what I said.

I did answer that. I said that if they attacked them because they're Jews then they're racist. If it is for other reasons then it's that reason for the attack.

Are you telling me that bias doesn't affect judgement? Even one of a court?

comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by mx4 (U23184)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
We saw the fall of the USSR with it's Nukes. We're all still here. We saw South Africa change due to international pressure.

No need to be in lala land.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think there's probably a better example of what happens when the Jewish population is threatened.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why are you conflating Jewish with Zionists here? Many Jewish people who marched in the Pro-Palestinian marches also used the chants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Non Zionist Jews are pretty rare, I personally don't understand why people keep trying to make the distinction when religion is embedded deeply into this conflict.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Zionists aren't limited to Jews. Biden is a famous Zionist and isn't Jewish - he is one of many non-Jewish Zionists. And while they may not be in the majority, they are a growing number. And even the founder of Zionism based it on race rather than religion.

comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)

Are you telling me that bias doesn't affect judgement? Even one of a court?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I said that it doesn't negate it, not affect it.

Whatever reason for people chanting and whatever argument there is for it, and I don't disagree with those reasons, it's still offends a minority group who don't feel safe in this Country. I think it's contentious and as I said before if people get this divided over religion in this Country what hope is there to resolve anything in the Middle East.

I can see why it emboldens people, but I can also see that it alienates people too. I don't think that's a good thing when trying to unite people who want peace, which most people do. And again, I'll refer back to the fact that this is the problem with religious conflicts.