I get a wonderfully calming feeling at the prospect that this thread will continue until the 2020 election, as long as certain dumbass Democratic politicians are unable to STFU.
Yes, saying absolutely nothing is a very effective way to stop people maliciously misquoting you. In the same way suicide is a very effective way to get people stop telling you to kill yourself. :rolleyes:
I don’t see evidence of “misquoting”.
Once again we have an ass who thoughtlessly (or more likely, maliciously) said stupid and misleading shit and got called on it, out of genuine outrage and for political gain.
It’s oh so nice that Rep. Tlaib’s angst :dubious: over the Holocaust is relieved by her perceptions of injustice done to Palestinians as a result, and even niftier that she loves the idea that her people were made sacrificial lambs in that way. :dubious::dubious:
If she and similar Democratic dodos want to provide the opposition with useful fodder, they should keep yammering on.
What’s the significance of your link? It appears to be using Tlaib’s comments as a launching-off point to talk about the history of Jewish refugees in Palestine, but you’re presenting it here as some sort of rebuttal or deconstruction of what Tlaib said, and I’m not sure how you’re getting that from the piece you linked.
Not sure what the “dubious” smilies are about, there. It seems you’re suggesting that Tlaib does not actually feel bad about the Holocaust. That’s a pretty strong accusation by itself, but I’m not sure how that squares with your, “Dumbass Democrats need to shut up before they sabotage the whole party,” stance - do you think Tlaib should not be expressing remorse over the Holocaust? Even if she’s insincere, that seems like the sort of message we would want Democratic politicians sending out.
I’m not really understanding your overall objection, here. What specifically do you think Tlaib was saying? Maybe answer without the sarcasm? Because I think it’s obscuring your argument.
AIPAC isn’t a trope. AIPAC’s and Zionist political influence on American politics isn’t a trope; it is a reality.
The problem that Israel has, the problem it will always have, is that** Israel’s gains were someone else’s losses**, and that is what a new class of Democratic congresswomen have been sullied for pointing out in the short time that they have served in congress. If you think the problems with Israel and Zionism are strictly about the Bibi Netanyahu era, you are wrong.
FTR, I am a supporter of the 2-state solution but I can already tell that people doubt that and have probably written me off as an anti-semite simply because I have harshly criticized not only Israel but Israel’s support from the United States. And on that note, I don’t think it is entirely unreasonable to question the loyalty of some - not all, but some - pro-Zionist politicians.
Why, for example, is AIPAC and why are Zionists interested in supporting laws that prohibit American businesses and even individuals from boycotting Israel? Since when did Israel and anything related to Israel become a vital economic or political concern of the United States?
Here we have an Israeli-American political organization that is actually pushing for legislation that infringes on the free speech rights of Americans - even to the point of getting them fired from their jobs and denying them economic freedom in the process. And people can’t question they’re loyalty? I can, and I will. I question the loyalty of Zionists who would support such laws.
p.s. Yes, I realize I quoted from an editorial authored by a rabbi, and I don’t question his loyalty for a moment. I want more of that, and less of AIPAC. I’m fine with Jews being Jews, just like I’m fine with Christians being just Christians and Muslims being just Muslims. But when you make your religion and your ‘story’ more important than my country, my rights, my people, I’m going to criticize it. Don’t give a fuck what you have to say about it.
asahi, do you think of yourself as a persuasive person? If so, I can assure you that your efforts, at best, come off as a fixation; at worst, they come off as anti-semitic. Neither which are very persuasive.
Of course my comments come off as “anti-semitic” – because nobody in this country knows shit about the history of, well, pretty much anything but especially Israel. I don’t think I’ve had anyone seriously challenge the historical accuracy of what I’ve posted in this thread; they just don’t like the words I’ve used in phrasing it.
I don’t care if I sound antisemitic - I am not, for whatever that’s worth and to the extent that anyone here truly believes me (which I doubt). People have it in their minds that to criticize Israel, to criticize their support of their Jewish homeland is an attack on Jewry, but what I’m saying is that I find it peculiar. The two are separate. Israel and Jews are two separate matters. But for whatever reason they are not.
If you think everyone in the SDMB believes that you are an antisemite, I now understand why you use such emotive and harsh language.
asahi, a discussion requires feeling that you are receiving good faith engagement. You need to feel that the SDMB is giving you good faith engagement for you to give it in return. Try assuming that everyone doesn’t hate you. You’ll find yourself making better arguments, your rhetoric will be more skilled, and you might be more persuasive.
I have several times, actually.
Ok, if you dont want to come off as anti-semitic, why dont you clearly and unreservedly condemn the terrorism used by Hamas? Because you haven’t, in fact you excused it.
We have agreed that Israel has done some bad things. Tell us the bad horrible things done by the PLO and Hamas. **Condemn the terrorism. ** Because anyone who *doesn’t- is *a racist anti semitic.
I don’t support firing missiles at Israeli’s people’s houses, like, at all. Hamas is shit. They do this to establish and maintain political legitimacy among Palestinians. That doesn’t necessarily justify Israel’s responses.
Very close, but you did justify it a bit. Good try and thank you. But I like "Hamas is shit’, on this we agree.
And I agree, sometimes Israel’s responses are too much. But they are *responses. *No terrorist rockets, etc- no responses.
Literally in my last post that revived this thread, I cited Congresswoman Liz Cheney as well as Fox News.
I’ve challenged your accuracy, IIRC, because earlier in the thread you said some bullshit history about the formation of Israel.
And you’ve said some bigoted bullshit as well (in earlier posts, not this one). You are not immune to bigotry just because current Israeli policy is and has been monstrous in many ways.
I’m pretty sure I responded to those challenges, iiandiii. IIRC, I believe CarnalK questioned your characterization of my posts.
https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=21587201&postcount=415
What claims were “bullshit”? Just calling it bullshit isn’t an argument or a refutation of the facts.
People are conditioned to respond to harsh criticism of Israel as though it’s an attack on Jews in toto, and that is in part because we have been conditioned to feel guilt for what happened to European Jews. Don’t get me wrong - we should feel guilt for what happened to European Jews. But that doesn’t give Israel a pass to abuse other people, which they have, and it doesn’t mean we should remain silent about it. Criticizing Israel, pointing out the complicated truth about Israel’s formation as a country, and pointing out Israel’s meddlesome politics and also the activism of American Zionists is not an attack Jews. It is no more an attack on Jews anymore than criticizing the Vatican is an attack on Catholics and Christians as a whole.
I go back to the reason this thread was created and apparently resurrected, which is that Muslim Americans seem particularly vulnerable to completely baseless charges of antisemitism whenever they attempt to present the non-Israeli point of view with regard to the Israel/Palestine conflict. It is so completely obvious that there is a bias here, and I’m tired of putting up with it. Last time I looked, we live in America, not Israel.
You most certainly did not; you gave us the usual Fox News talking points, which I’m not interested in discussing. Do some credible research on your own and then we’ll talk.
Iran backs al-Qaeda and the Talibans???
Ok, maybe I’m not up to date, but Iran was the first country to actively fight the Talibans and provide support to the Afghan opposition when the USA, for instance, was all too happy to let Pakistan give them support. It was the only country concerned about them and doing something about them when everybody else was ignoring them (that is, until 9/11).
If Iran now supports the Talibans and Al Qaeda, then it’s a 180° turn in their policies.
I somehow missed that one, but when someone posts that kind of Sean Hannity horse shit, it’s pretty clear that it doesn’t merit a response.
Also, since I have been called a “racist” multiple times on this thread, can someone please explain to me how criticizing Zionism makes me a “racist”? When did Zionists become a “race” of people?
This was bigoted bullshit:
This was arrogant bullshit, in response to my calling out of your bigoted bullshit:
Here’s some more arrogant bullshit:
Here’s some more bigoted bullshit (not the criticism of Netanyahu – that’s very reasonable, but the blanket bullshit about Zionism):
This is partially ahistorical bullshit (there were indeed pro-Israeli atrocities during the establishment of the country, as well as anti-Jewish atrocities. This was a clash of two desperate people – not colonists or the wealthy exploiting the weak and poor… it was Jews with literally nowhere on Earth to go safely going to the only place that they thought they had a chance to not be murdered. When desperate people clash, terrible things happen. That doesn’t justify atrocities on either side, but this is just how humans behave when they’re put in the kind of desperate circumstances that Jews were in the aftermath of the Holocaust. The ultimate blame goes to those who put the Jews in those circumstances. And the same goes for the Palestinians – they were desperate people in their own desperate circumstances, with another group of the desperate trying to make homes alongside and sometimes in conflict with theirs):
I’m not sure if this is arrogant or bigoted, but IMO it demonstrates a serious misunderstanding of the history of the Jews and the creation of Israel, for the same reasons as my previous criticism – you don’t acknowledge that the Jews after the Holocaust had literally zero safe options, and zero options that wouldn’t be violently conflicted by others, and they made a choice to try and survive. That doesn’t justify atrocities, but it also doesn’t justify your implication that they had some other choice they could have possibly known about that would have resulted in less suffering:
This is ahistorical bullshit, which I called out at the time – colonialism involves the powerful exploiting the powerless. Not the truly desperate in conflict with other desperate people:
You’ve made plenty of reasonable and nuanced critiques of the current Israeli government’s policies that were not anti-semitic, not bigoted, and not bullshit, IMO. So you’re clearly capable of being a nuanced critic of Israeli policy. But that doesn’t excuse your bigoted bullshit and misstatement of history. The arrogant bullshit is just silly and not a huge deal, but it makes your arguments weaker.
IMO, you seem to have a serious problem with criticism. Which is extremely common, of course. It puts you in the same company of a lot of other posters who occasionally say bigoted or otherwise dumb things (like almost everyone) and then gets really defensive when it’s called out. I’ve probably made the same sort of mistakes myself.
And of course you’re not the only one who’s posted bigoted and ahistorical posts in this thread. There have been just as many, if not more, ahistorical and bigoted posts about Palestinians. But that doesn’t justify your bigoted and ahistorical posts.
Nice motivation. But you could also see Zionists as Europeans who felt that Palestine, like the rest of the world, was up for grab and that displacing a bunch of brown people so that they could replace them wasn’t a problem at all. And Zionism as being originally entirely a colonial enterprise started with the blessings of a colonial power. Which isn’t even contradictory with what you say.
Really wanting something doesn’t allow you to take it. Having been victimized doesn’t allow you to victimize others. I’m not sure how your explanations as to why Zionists wanted to create a Jewish state in Palestine justify Zionism or make Zionism looks good as you seem to think they do.
Absolutely nothing in those posts is “ahistorical” or historically inaccurate. Not an iota. There might be some facts that I left out because I didn’t have the time to write a research paper, but you or anyone else is free to contribute and add context, as you all have. You can re-litigate it if you so desire but we’ve already done this, and I don’t have the time to do that with you right now. Maybe later in the day.
ETA: If you don’t like the word “colonialism”, we can try another, like “invading and occupying.” If you want to change the semantics, be my guest. The words don’t change the consequences, though.