Jump to content
Radio Shack Killa

God save us....

Recommended Posts

Quote

Gail Sheehy's new book on Hillary Rodham Clinton is not something I would normally cover in this space, but one little item revealed in the text is a veritable blockbuster: it seems that Hillary hadn't spoken to Bill for quite some time after l'affaire Lewinsky, but that she finally broke down and phoned him to demand that he start the bombing of Yugoslavia tout de suite! In a chat with Dateline. Sheehy reveals that Hill refused to speak to the President for eight solid months – but broke her silence, one day in March of this year, and took on her aspect as Hillary the war goddess – demanding Serb blood as the price of their reconciliation. According to Sheehy, "The day after she said that, he [Bill Clinton] announced that he was informing his NATO allies that he was recommending a bombing campaign."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The US-led NATO operation that began on March 24, 1999 was launched under the “responsibility to protect” doctrine asserted by President Bill Clinton and UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. For 78 days, NATO targeted what was then the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia – which later split into Serbia and Montenegro – over alleged atrocities against ethnic Albanians in the southern province of Kosovo. Yugoslavia was accused of “ethnic cleansing” and “genocide” as bombs rained on bridges, trains, hospitals, homes, the power grid and even refugee convoys.

 

NATO’s actions directly violated its own charter, the UN Charter (articles 53 and 103), the 1975 Helsinki Final Act and the 1980 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The war was a crime against peace: pure and simple.

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Prime Minister of Israel has denied visas to two American Representatives, because they are Muslim and critical of Trump and Israel, at Trump's behest.  Wow.  On a number or levels.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Duquesne Frog said:

The Prime Minister of Israel has denied visas to two American Representatives, because they are Muslim and critical of Trump and Israel, at Trump's behest.  Wow.  On a number or levels.

 

Well, since they are going there for a photo op to promote themselves, I will choose to express my selective outrage on a different issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont really care what their intent for going there was.  Still a diplomatic slap in the face that does nothing but aid the boycott movement and further belies the religious/cultural bigotry both Bibi and Trump have used to get and stay in power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Duquesne Frog said:

I dont really care what their intent for going there was.  Still a diplomatic slap in the face that does nothing but aid the boycott movement and further belies the religious/cultural bigotry both Bibi and Trump have used to get and stay in power.

 

Would being anti-Israel also be religious/cultural bigotry?

 

I don't have a side here, I just don't see this a big political theater, it small potatoes in my eyes... (pun intended)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, will Jeffery Epstein be included in the Friends We've Lost segment at the next Oscars?

  • Haha  (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unacceptable nicknames:

Fredo

Pocahontas

 

Acceptable nickname:

Hitler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will we still be able to travel to Greenland? Where's RSF when you need him...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Duquesne Frog said:

I dont really care what their intent for going there was.  Still a diplomatic slap in the face that does nothing but aid the boycott movement and further belies the religious/cultural bigotry both Bibi and Trump have used to get and stay in power.

 

Well based on those two politicians beliefs here, they should be able to just sneak across the Israeli border and then get free education and healthcare.  Can’t have it both ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Army Frog Fan said:

 

Well based on those two politicians beliefs here, they should be able to just sneak across the Israeli border and then get free education and healthcare.  Can’t have it both ways.

 

Don't remember that in their platforms, actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Rothbardian said:

 

Would being anti-Israel also be religious/cultural bigotry?

 

Ignoring the loaded language of "anti-Israel" for the moment, not necessarily.  I think the conflation of anti-Semitism and criticism of the actions of the Israeli state is a pretty pernicious case of political correctness in our current discourse.  I said on here before that I think Omar definitely danced up to the line of anti-Semitism, if not crossing it, with her 'Benjamins' comment.  But the fact that two Muslim American Congress(wo)men might be concerned with the treatment of the Muslim minority in Israel (particularly when one of them has a Palestinian grandmother still living there) is certainly no different than, say, two Christian Congressmen going to Saudi Arabia to photo op/express concerns/investigate the treatment of Christians there.  And if the Saudi government denied entry of those Congresspeople on such a mission, the Chrsitian-right in this country would probably not find that to be small potatoes ...

 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Army Frog Fan said:

 

Well, since they are going there for a photo op to promote themselves, I will choose to express my selective outrage on a different issue. 

Tlaib:  I just want to visit my dying Grandma

Israel: Ok, so long as you don't engage in protests.

Tlaib: That's oppression and I am not coming. Sorry, Grandma, but you don't really mean that much to me. 

 

So I stand by my original analysis of this situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Duquesne Frog said:

 

Ignoring the loaded language of "anti-Israel" for the moment, not necessarily.  I think the conflation of anti-Semitism and criticism of the actions of the Israeli state is a pretty pernicious case of political correctness in our current discourse.  I said on here before that I think Omar definitely danced up to the line of anti-Semitism, if not crossing it, with her 'Benjamins' comment.  But the fact that two Muslim American Congress(wo)men might be concerned with the treatment of the Muslim minority in Israel (particularly when one of them has a Palestinian grandmother still living there) is certainly no different than, say, two Christian Congressmen going to Saudi Arabia to photo op/express concerns/investigate the treatment of Christians there.  And if the Saudi government denied entry of those Congresspeople on such a mission, the Chrsitian-right in this country would probably not find that to be small potatoes ...

 

 

If a Christian-right Congressmen supported the elimination of the Saudi Prince and was denied entry into SA, that would be expected. BDS supports the elimination of Israel. Would entry denial also be expected? Which one is racist and which one is not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Rothbardian said:

 

If a Christian-right Congressmen supported the elimination of the Saudi Prince and was denied entry into SA, that would be expected. BDS supports the elimination of Israel. Would entry denial also be expected? Which one is racist and which one is not?

 

BDS does not call for the elimination of Israel. I am also unsure as to how asking a country to comply with international law is racist just because the country is Israel. The country of Israel, after all, is not all Jewish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rothbardian said:

 

If a Christian-right Congressmen supported the elimination of the Saudi Prince and was denied entry into SA, that would be expected. BDS supports the elimination of Israel. Would entry denial also be expected? Which one is racist and which one is not?

 

If Tlaib/Omar (or BDS, as Newf points out) were calling for the elimination of Netanyahu (or the Israeli state), then I could agree with your addition to the analogy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NewfoundlandFreeFrog said:

 

BDS does not call for the elimination of Israel. I am also unsure as to how asking a country to comply with international law is racist just because the country is Israel. The country of Israel, after all, is not all Jewish.

 

Put another way...I am also unsure as to how asking [migrants] to comply with [American law by entering the country through proper channels] is racist just because the [President is Trump].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Army Frog Fan said:

 

Put another way...I am also unsure as to how asking [migrants] to comply with [American law by entering the country through proper channels] is racist just because the [President is Trump].

 

No. That request is not racist. Calling them "animals" may not be racist, but it certainly isn't very "humanist".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, NewfoundlandFreeFrog said:

 

BDS does not call for the elimination of Israel. I am also unsure as to how asking a country to comply with international law is racist just because the country is Israel. The country of Israel, after all, is not all Jewish.

 

Oh, it most certainly does. It calls for a one-state solution without Israel.

 

My previous question is how can you call someone racist for trying to keep people out who promote your elimination...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Duquesne Frog said:

 

If Tlaib/Omar (or BDS, as Newf points out) were calling for the elimination of Netanyahu (or the Israeli state), then I could agree with your addition to the analogy.

 

BDS calls for the elimination of Israel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BDS Slogans...

 

“From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!”

 

"There is only one solution — intifada revolution!”

 

“The people of Palestine will wipe the Zionist entity off all the world maps!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quotes from BDS leadership

 

“The real aim of BDS is to bring down the state of Israel….That should be stated as an unambiguous goal. There should not be any equivocation on the subject. Justice and freedom for the Palestinians are incompatible with the existence of the state of Israel.”

 

“I think the BDS movement will gain strength from forthrightly explaining why Israel has no right to exist.”

 

“Ending the occupation doesn’t mean anything if it doesn’t mean upending the Jewish state itself…BDS does mean the end of the Jewish state."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sources?

 

From their website: https://bdsmovement.net/faqs#collapse16233

 

The BDS movement aims to pressure Israel to respect international law by:

1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall
International law recognises the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, Gaza and the Syrian Golan Heights as occupied by Israel.

2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality.

3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194.

These are three basic rights without which the Palestinian people cannot exercise its inalienable right to self-determination.

The BDS movement does not advocate for a particular solution to the conflict and does not call for either a “one state solution” or a “two state solution”. Instead, BDS focuses on the realization of basic rights and the implementation of international law.

 

I'm sure there are individuals within the movement that may have the views you quoted.  But they are not the "official" position of the group, and more to the point, they are not the expressed view of Tlaib or Omar..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Duquesne Frog said:

Sources?

 

From their website: https://bdsmovement.net/faqs#collapse16233

 

The BDS movement aims to pressure Israel to respect international law by:

1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall
International law recognises the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, Gaza and the Syrian Golan Heights as occupied by Israel.

2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality.

3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194.

These are three basic rights without which the Palestinian people cannot exercise its inalienable right to self-determination.

The BDS movement does not advocate for a particular solution to the conflict and does not call for either a “one state solution” or a “two state solution”. Instead, BDS focuses on the realization of basic rights and the implementation of international law.

 

I'm sure there are individuals within the movement that may have the views you quoted.  But they are not the "official" position of the group, and more to the point, they are not the expressed view of Tlaib or Omar..

 

I wonder if Israeli Jews who oppose present Netanyahu government policies are "anti-Semitic"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...