It’s not about politics

Guatemala moved the embassy and not a peep? How did that happen?:crazy:

Thank You for understanding what I thought was a relatively simple point. Untruth attempted to portion some of the blame to Trump for having the temerity to move America's embassy to Jerusalem. Yet as I point out, another country, Guatemala does the same thing and no protests from Hamas or Palestinians. Why? Because at the end of day this is all political theatre and posturing from Hamas. If they truly believed it was disastrous to the peace process when a country moves its embassy to Jerusalem why the silence around Guatemala?
 
You alt-lite people are frighteningly dense. If you can't see why the USA moving its embassy to Jerusalem is *slightly* more significant than Guat-a-f***ing-mala doing it (a country which dances to the beat of the USA's drum anyway), then I don't know what to tell you. The USA is a powerhouse, it plays a central role in the Israel/Palestine debate through its ties with Israel, in fact it has and continues to play a central role in many countries' affairs and its actions matter, whereas anything Guatemala does isn't even a drop in the ocean in comparison.
Finding out that Guatemala is moving its embassy to Jerusalem right after being told the USA is doing it, is like being informed by a doctor that you have an ingrowing toenail right after he notifies you that you have an incurable lung disease.
Guatemala's move would be a minor inconvenience on its own and probably would spark some outcry but surely wouldn't even register with most after learning about the USA's plans. Its relevance is outweighed 100/1.
Other countries which may have caused mass demonstrations if they moved their embassies to Jerusalem: China, Russia, UK, France, Germany, etc.
And now a few countries whose decision to move their embassy would bring about a more muted response (if most of the following countries even have embassies), and likely something more akin to confusion than outrage:
Tuvalu, Micronesia, Solomon Islands, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Comoros, and yes, Guatemala.
I hope this is a bit clearer now. If I sound a bit prickly it's because I found it mildly frustrating to have to try to explain something which I think must instinctively be obvious to most people. But I suppose it's in the alt-lite playbook, laboring over insignificant and obvious points (while brushing away more relevant questions concerning race, genetics and demographics for example, and Israeli influence on US foreign policy, as if the embassy move hasn't made that clear); it's why a farcical thread like this continues on for 30+ pages, mostly discussing illuminati conspiracy tomfoolery and then asking the burning questions like why something Guatemala does isn't as significant as something the USA does.
 
Thank You for understanding what I thought was a relatively simple point. Untruth attempted to portion some of the blame to Trump for having the temerity to move America's embassy to Jerusalem. Yet as I point out, another country, Guatemala does the same thing and no protests from Hamas or Palestinians. Why? Because at the end of day this is all political theatre and posturing from Hamas. If they truly believed it was disastrous to the peace process when a country moves its embassy to Jerusalem why the silence around Guatemala?

You realize that the person who understands your relatively simple point also does not understand why I am paying attention to Israel right?
And you're going to call me "Untruth" while writing "when a country moves its embassy" as if there is no difference between the US and Guatemala.
Sad!
I don't care anymore. I'm disappointed that this is the level you will go to but it does reaffirm to me that you have to be incredibly selective to support Trump.
 
You realize that the person who understands your relatively simple point also does not understand why I am paying attention to Israel right?
And you're going to call me "Untruth" while writing "when a country moves its embassy" as if there is no difference between the US and Guatemala.
Sad!
I don't care anymore. I'm disappointed that this is the level you will go to but it does reaffirm to me that you have to be incredibly selective to support Trump.

o_O
You said that the Guatemala thing was irrelevant because you were an USA citizen and only interested in what your country did. Yet you are going ballistic about what Israel did. Israel=Israel, and USA=USA
you cant be and not be at the same time according to the law of contradiction.:crazy:

Its obvious that you are worried about what Israel did, in shooting the Hamas peeps. Therefore you were not really just interested in what the "USA did". That being the case, why would worrying about what Guatemala did or didnt do be irrelevant? If worrying about Isreal is relevant so is worrying about Guatemala.

Its called logic.:straightface:
 
You alt-lite people are frighteningly dense. If you can't see why the USA moving its embassy to Jerusalem is *slightly* more significant than Guat-a-f***ing-mala doing it (a country which dances to the beat of the USA's drum anyway), then I don't know what to tell you. The USA is a powerhouse, it plays a central role in the Israel/Palestine debate through its ties with Israel, in fact it has and continues to play a central role in many countries' affairs and its actions matter, whereas anything Guatemala does isn't even a drop in the ocean in comparison.
Finding out that Guatemala is moving its embassy to Jerusalem right after being told the USA is doing it, is like being informed by a doctor that you have an ingrowing toenail right after he notifies you that you have an incurable lung disease.
Guatemala's move would be a minor inconvenience on its own and probably would spark some outcry but surely wouldn't even register with most after learning about the USA's plans. Its relevance is outweighed 100/1.
Other countries which may have caused mass demonstrations if they moved their embassies to Jerusalem: China, Russia, UK, France, Germany, etc.
And now a few countries whose decision to move their embassy would bring about a more muted response (if most of the following countries even have embassies), and likely something more akin to confusion than outrage:
Tuvalu, Micronesia, Solomon Islands, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Comoros, and yes, Guatemala.
I hope this is a bit clearer now. If I sound a bit prickly it's because I found it mildly frustrating to have to try to explain something which I think must instinctively be obvious to most people. But I suppose it's in the alt-lite playbook, laboring over insignificant and obvious points (while brushing away more relevant questions concerning race, genetics and demographics for example, and Israeli influence on US foreign policy, as if the embassy move hasn't made that clear); it's why a farcical thread like this continues on for 30+ pages, mostly discussing illuminati conspiracy tomfoolery and then asking the burning questions like why something Guatemala does isn't as significant as something the USA does.

WHAT? Guate-f***ing-mala? So you are dismissing Guatemala simply because they are a brown people country? They dont matter? But white USA does? Thats white supremacy, Neo Nazi Anon.

I take it you been a Neo Nazi anon for many years.:straightface:
 
You realize that the person who understands your relatively simple point also does not understand why I am paying attention to Israel right?
And you're going to call me "Untruth" while writing "when a country moves its embassy" as if there is no difference between the US and Guatemala.
Sad!
I don't care anymore. I'm disappointed that this is the level you will go to but it does reaffirm to me that you have to be incredibly selective to support Trump.

What is he difference between the US and Guatemala moving their embassy to Jerusalem? Where is the consistency of outrage from Hamas and Palestine? Again please don't conflate vegan Cro's understanding of what I was saying to anything they have said in the past. As you said before I probably agree with Hillary when it comes to Israel, doesn't mean I necessarily agree with her on anything else. From what I understand many Middle Eastern countries were supportive of the move as well.

You have this weird obsession whereby if you agree on anyone on any one matter you are somehow endorsing everything they have ever said in the past. It's part of that tribalism we are seeing in politics these days, you have to agree with someone on everything or nothing at all. I don't accept that for one minute. If vegan.cro says something I agree with I'll endorse it and if they don't then I won't.
 
WHAT? Guate-f***ing-mala? So you are dismissing Guatemala simply because they are a brown people country? They dont matter? But white USA does? Thats white supremacy, Neo Nazi Anon.

I take it you been a Neo Nazi anon for many years.:straightface:


Hahaha, very clever I see what you did there :lbf:
 
What is he difference between the US and Guatemala moving their embassy to Jerusalem? Where is the consistency of outrage from Hamas and Palestine? Again please don't conflate vegan Cro's understanding of what I was saying to anything they have said in the past. As you said before I probably agree with Hillary when it comes to Israel, doesn't mean I necessarily agree with her on anything else. From what I understand many Middle Eastern countries were supportive of the move as well.

You have this weird obsession whereby if you agree on anyone on any one matter you are somehow endorsing everything they have ever said in the past. It's part of that tribalism we are seeing in politics these days, you have to agree with someone on everything or nothing at all. I don't accept that for one minute. If vegan.cro says something I agree with I'll endorse it and if they don't then I won't.

The problem with selecting your sources as you do is that unfortunately the reputation of your source does come into play. The problem with pretending that you don't know the difference of the impact of decisions by the US and Guatemala is that your own credibility suffers.
I care what the US does because unfortunately Trump is my President. I care what Israel does partly because US resources are used to fund people who say things like "The IDF has enough bullets for everyone."
I find that statement to be worthy of consideration and protest.
I don't know how much money Guatemala contributes to Israel. Probably nothing.
You create this weird argument that it's okay to gun down unarmed protesters if they are posthumously claimed to be members of a terror organization, by that terror organization, and we must also accept that the nation responsible for murdering them also brands those making the claim you cite as liars.
Justification given for murdering unarmed people? "We can't put them all in jail."
 
The problem with selecting your sources as you do is that unfortunately the reputation of your source does come into play. The problem with pretending that you don't know the difference of the impact of decisions by the US and Guatemala is that your own credibility suffers.
I care what the US does because unfortunately Trump is my President. I care what Israel does partly because US resources are used to fund people who say things like "The IDF has enough bullets for everyone."
I find that statement to be worthy of consideration and protest.
I don't know how much money Guatemala contributes to Israel. Probably nothing.
You create this weird argument that it's okay to gun down unarmed protesters if they are posthumously claimed to be members of a terror organization, by that terror organization, and we must also accept that the nation responsible for murdering them also brands those making the claim you cite as liars.
Justification given for murdering unarmed people? "We can't put them all in jail."

Wow, you're really holding on to that one sentence from that one person aren't you, like it is some type of universal truth. As for America funding IDF I'd be more worried about the effects of the previous administration sending pellets of cash to Iran ,LO. What a pile of hot garbage Obama was, but I digress. Obviously Ben Shapiro has a bias being jewish but having watched and read a lot of this on both sides I prefer his take on what happened.




Jesus even Bill Maher can work out where the blame lies. DISCLAIMER: Even though I don't agree with Bill much on politics I find him more than a straight shooter and he seems to take things case by case:

 
Wow, you're really holding on to that one sentence from that one person aren't you, like it is some type of universal truth. As for America funding IDF I'd be more worried about the effects of the previous administration sending pellets of cash to Iran ,LO. What a pile of hot garbage Obama was, but I digress. Obviously Ben Shapiro has a bias being jewish but having watched and read a lot of this on both sides I prefer his take on what happened.




Jesus even Bill Maher can work out where the blame lies. DISCLAIMER: Even though I don't agree with Bill much on politics I find him more than a straight shooter and he seems to take things case by case:



So to illustrate your point about Israel you link to two Jews, which is like if I wanted to convince you that smoking is good for you so I link you to videos of two guys who own tobacco companies.
The only thing Shapiro and Maher debunk is the idea that they're capable of providing impartial analysis.

Shapiro who says he "couldn't care less about the browning of America", but the thought of the same thing happening in Israel keeps him awake at night. In fact he's fine with Israeli troops injuring thousands of people to ensure no "browning" occurs.
Then he gets the likes of you to cheer him on just because he talks fast and went to Harvard or wherever, and because he "owns" blue haired feminists and BLM supporters from time to time which we know requires such incredible brainpower to do :rolleyes:

And yes, Maher is Jewish too. His mother is a Hungarian Jew which makes him Jewish as well in Jewish law (it's passed down on the mother's side). He was raised in the Catholic church by his father but left the church when he was 13 which was around the same time he found out his mother was Jewish.

A bit like his late friend Christopher Hitchens, he also found out later in life that he had Jewish lineage on his mother's side. There's an interview with him on YouTube conducted shortly before his death where he's asked about anti-semitism and his response is "I think we should do more to deserve it". Not "they", not "you", but "we".
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Maher has a similar attitude, judging by the views he espouses.

That was neo-conservative Christopher Hitchens; Ben Shapiro also has neo-conservative tendencies, as do plenty of other prominent 'conservative' American Jews like Bill Kristol. Neo-conservatism is basically a Jewish ideology, whereby through lies and deceit they invade/sanction/otherwise attack Arab/Middle Eastern countries in "defence" of Israel. That's what happened in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Palestine, and is now happening with Iran and Syria.

If Iran doesn't want new sanctions placed on it, literally all they have to do is say "we support Israel" and the notion of sanctions would disappear almost immediately. Then they can begin trading with USA/Israel, open American banks, open a chain of McDonald's restaurants, and all would be forgiven.

Look how quickly the view of Kim Jong-Un changed in the American (Jewish) media when it began to look like he would hold talks with the USA (Israel's pitbull). Almost immediately it was announced that North Korea may open, you guessed it, a chain of McDonald's. Gotta love that American style freedom and democracy!

It seems you subscribe to a few of the main tenets of neo-conservatism too bhops (and Derek); the alt-lite and neoconservatives aren't so different after all (which is the typical any time American Jews dominate a movement, defence of Israel becomes the front and centre object of concern).

The same with Trumpism, 'America first' became 'Israel first' in the blink of an eye, so fast that most of you who still support him didn't even notice the shift. The defence of Israel's border, the moving of the embassy became of paramount importance while the
wall along the USA's southern border got pushed aside yet again for another while longer, a year and a half into his Presidency.

When the Democrats likely take control of the house in the elections coming up this year, there will be no hope at all of a wall being built. But at least Israel got 'defended'! (Not that Chuck Schumer and co. would have voted against the moving of the US embassy or anything, Schumer praised Trump for it you'll be shocked to learn -- although not shocked if you're aware of Schumer's ethno-religious background and the role that plays in informing his decisions.)

Just like it informs the decisions of black Americans, Hispanic Americans, and every other racial group apart from white people who have been trained/bullied/forced over the years into not think tribally, something which every other group in existence still does and will continue to do, which we often choose to forget/ignore. And which is why all those other groups will survive, while white people will be minorities in many currently majority white countries (including the countries you, I, Truth, and Derek live in), within half a century. At least we moved embassies for other groups and kept our mouths shut so we weren't called racists or "neo nazis", am I right? :highfive:
 
So to illustrate your point about Israel you link to two Jews, which is like if I wanted to convince you that smoking is good for you so I link you to videos of two guys who own tobacco companies.
The only thing Shapiro and Maher debunk is the idea that they're capable of providing impartial analysis.

Shapiro who says he "couldn't care less about the browning of America", but the thought of the same thing happening in Israel keeps him awake at night. In fact he's fine with Israeli troops injuring thousands of people to ensure no "browning" occurs.
Then he gets the likes of you to cheer him on just because he talks fast and went to Harvard or wherever, and because he "owns" blue haired feminists and BLM supporters from time to time which we know requires such incredible brainpower to do :rolleyes:

And yes, Maher is Jewish too. His mother is a Hungarian Jew which makes him Jewish as well in Jewish law (it's passed down on the mother's side). He was raised in the Catholic church by his father but left the church when he was 13 which was around the same time he found out his mother was Jewish.

A bit like his late friend Christopher Hitchens, he also found out later in life that he had Jewish lineage on his mother's side. There's an interview with him on YouTube conducted shortly before his death where he's asked about anti-semitism and his response is "I think we should do more to deserve it". Not "they", not "you", but "we".
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Maher has a similar attitude, judging by the views he espouses.

That was neo-conservative Christopher Hitchens; Ben Shapiro also has neo-conservative tendencies, as do plenty of other prominent 'conservative' American Jews like Bill Kristol. Neo-conservatism is basically a Jewish ideology, whereby through lies and deceit they invade/sanction/otherwise attack Arab/Middle Eastern countries in "defence" of Israel. That's what happened in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Palestine, and is now happening with Iran and Syria.

If Iran doesn't want new sanctions placed on it, literally all they have to do is say "we support Israel" and the notion of sanctions would disappear almost immediately. Then they can begin trading with USA/Israel, open American banks, open a chain of McDonald's restaurants, and all would be forgiven.

Look how quickly the view of Kim Jong-Un changed in the American (Jewish) media when it began to look like he would hold talks with the USA (Israel's pitbull). Almost immediately it was announced that North Korea may open, you guessed it, a chain of McDonald's. Gotta love that American style freedom and democracy!

It seems you subscribe to a few of the main tenets of neo-conservatism too bhops (and Derek); the alt-lite and neoconservatives aren't so different after all (which is the typical any time American Jews dominate a movement, defence of Israel becomes the front and centre object of concern).

The same with Trumpism, 'America first' became 'Israel first' in the blink of an eye, so fast that most of you who still support him didn't even notice the shift. The defence of Israel's border, the moving of the embassy became of paramount importance while the
wall along the USA's southern border got pushed aside yet again for another while longer, a year and a half into his Presidency.

When the Democrats likely take control of the house in the elections coming up this year, there will be no hope at all of a wall being built. But at least Israel got 'defended'! (Not that Chuck Schumer and co. would have voted against the moving of the US embassy or anything, Schumer praised Trump for it you'll be shocked to learn -- although not shocked if you're aware of Schumer's ethno-religious background and the role that plays in informing his decisions.)

Just like it informs the decisions of black Americans, Hispanic Americans, and every other racial group apart from white people who have been trained/bullied/forced over the years into not think tribally, something which every other group in existence still does and will continue to do, which we often choose to forget/ignore. And which is why all those other groups will survive, while white people will be minorities in many currently majority white countries (including the countries you, I, Truth, and Derek live in), within half a century. At least we moved embassies for other groups and kept our mouths shut so we weren't called racists or "neo nazis", am I right? :highfive:

Jesus F CHRIST!! Maher mother is a Hungarian Jew! Hitches was a Jew! WTF?
Did you attend KKK University? Majoring in Anti Semite studies?
 
Jesus F CHRIST!! Maher mother is a Hungarian Jew! Hitches was a Jew! WTF?
Did you attend KKK University? Majoring in Anti Semite studies?

Good one.


@4:00 in video
Hitchens: "We should do more to deserve anti-semitism."
Jewish interviewer: "Nicely put."
Hitchens: "Yeah. We should do more to deserve it. Those who hate us or hate [mumbles something, "Israel" maybe?] quite rightly suspect that it's ["it" meaning Judaism seemingly, or Jewish liberal ideals generally - in countries other than Israel] a liberating, emancipating, troubling, upsetting, strenuous thing, and yeah we should do more to earn it."


@1:10 in video
Jewish guy on panel: "Just yesterday there was a new speech, that they believe in which, during the question and answer at Rutger's University, he [Chuck Hagel] claimed that the state department was controlled by the Israeli government, that the Israeli foreign ministry controls the state department."
Bill Maher: "And it's not?"
Jewish guy on panel: "[stutters] Well there's two things wrong with that: one is that it's kind of suggesting that Israeli power is controlling things, number two is that of all the branches of the government, the state department being a pro Is... being the most pro-Israel branch is ridiculous. [Notice here that he doesn't answer the point which he initially raised. The point was that Israel controls the US state department, and this guy instead answers that the state department being the *most* pro-Israel branch is ridiculous.]
Bill Maher: "Based on any statement I've heard out of any Republican in the last two years: the Israelis are controlling our government."
Jewish guy on panel: "Not the state department, that's for sure."
[So Chuck Hagel, Episcopalian, saying that the Israelis control the state department is taboo to this guy, but Bill Maher, who is Jewish on his mother's side, confirming that it's true causes this guy's fake outrage and kvetching to cease immediately.]
 
Good one.


@4:00 in video
Hitchens: "We should do more to deserve anti-semitism."
Jewish interviewer: "Nicely put."
Hitchens: "Yeah. We should do more to deserve it. Those who hate us or hate [mumbles something, "Israel" maybe?] quite rightly suspect that it's ["it" meaning Judaism seemingly, or Jewish liberal ideals generally - in countries other than Israel] a liberating, emancipating, troubling, upsetting, strenuous thing, and yeah we should do more to earn it."


@1:10 in video
Jewish guy on panel: "Just yesterday there was a new speech, that they believe in which, during the question and answer at Rutger's University, he [Chuck Hagel] claimed that the state department was controlled by the Israeli government, that the Israeli foreign ministry controls the state department."
Bill Maher: "And it's not?"
Jewish guy on panel: "[stutters] Well there's two things wrong with that: one is that it's kind of suggesting that Israeli power is controlling things, number two is that of all the branches of the government, the state department being a pro Is... being the most pro-Israel branch is ridiculous. [Notice here that he doesn't answer the point which he initially raised. The point was that Israel controls the US state department, and this guy instead answers that the state department being the *most* pro-Israel branch is ridiculous.]
Bill Maher: "Based on any statement I've heard out of any Republican in the last two years: the Israelis are controlling our government."
Jewish guy on panel: "Not the state department, that's for sure."
[So Chuck Hagel, Episcopalian, saying that the Israelis control the state department is taboo to this guy, but Bill Maher, who is Jewish on his mother's side, confirming that it's true causes this guy's fake outrage and kvetching to cease immediately.]


State Dept controlled by the Israel lobby?:crazy:
Every unemployable left-wing kook finds refuge in the State Dept.o_O
 
So to illustrate your point about Israel you link to two Jews, which is like if I wanted to convince you that smoking is good for you so I link you to videos of two guys who own tobacco companies.
The only thing Shapiro and Maher debunk is the idea that they're capable of providing impartial analysis.

Shapiro who says he "couldn't care less about the browning of America", but the thought of the same thing happening in Israel keeps him awake at night. In fact he's fine with Israeli troops injuring thousands of people to ensure no "browning" occurs.
Then he gets the likes of you to cheer him on just because he talks fast and went to Harvard or wherever, and because he "owns" blue haired feminists and BLM supporters from time to time which we know requires such incredible brainpower to do :rolleyes:

And yes, Maher is Jewish too. His mother is a Hungarian Jew which makes him Jewish as well in Jewish law (it's passed down on the mother's side). He was raised in the Catholic church by his father but left the church when he was 13 which was around the same time he found out his mother was Jewish.

A bit like his late friend Christopher Hitchens, he also found out later in life that he had Jewish lineage on his mother's side. There's an interview with him on YouTube conducted shortly before his death where he's asked about anti-semitism and his response is "I think we should do more to deserve it". Not "they", not "you", but "we".
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Maher has a similar attitude, judging by the views he espouses.

That was neo-conservative Christopher Hitchens; Ben Shapiro also has neo-conservative tendencies, as do plenty of other prominent 'conservative' American Jews like Bill Kristol. Neo-conservatism is basically a Jewish ideology, whereby through lies and deceit they invade/sanction/otherwise attack Arab/Middle Eastern countries in "defence" of Israel. That's what happened in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Palestine, and is now happening with Iran and Syria.

If Iran doesn't want new sanctions placed on it, literally all they have to do is say "we support Israel" and the notion of sanctions would disappear almost immediately. Then they can begin trading with USA/Israel, open American banks, open a chain of McDonald's restaurants, and all would be forgiven.

Look how quickly the view of Kim Jong-Un changed in the American (Jewish) media when it began to look like he would hold talks with the USA (Israel's pitbull). Almost immediately it was announced that North Korea may open, you guessed it, a chain of McDonald's. Gotta love that American style freedom and democracy!

It seems you subscribe to a few of the main tenets of neo-conservatism too bhops (and Derek); the alt-lite and neoconservatives aren't so different after all (which is the typical any time American Jews dominate a movement, defence of Israel becomes the front and centre object of concern).

The same with Trumpism, 'America first' became 'Israel first' in the blink of an eye, so fast that most of you who still support him didn't even notice the shift. The defence of Israel's border, the moving of the embassy became of paramount importance while the
wall along the USA's southern border got pushed aside yet again for another while longer, a year and a half into his Presidency.

When the Democrats likely take control of the house in the elections coming up this year, there will be no hope at all of a wall being built. But at least Israel got 'defended'! (Not that Chuck Schumer and co. would have voted against the moving of the US embassy or anything, Schumer praised Trump for it you'll be shocked to learn -- although not shocked if you're aware of Schumer's ethno-religious background and the role that plays in informing his decisions.)

Just like it informs the decisions of black Americans, Hispanic Americans, and every other racial group apart from white people who have been trained/bullied/forced over the years into not think tribally, something which every other group in existence still does and will continue to do, which we often choose to forget/ignore. And which is why all those other groups will survive, while white people will be minorities in many currently majority white countries (including the countries you, I, Truth, and Derek live in), within half a century. At least we moved embassies for other groups and kept our mouths shut so we weren't called racists or "neo nazis", am I right? :highfive:

"It seems you subscribe to a few of the main tenets of neo-conservatism too bhops (and Derek); the alt-lite and neoconservatives aren't so different after all (which is the typical any time American Jews dominate a movement, defence of Israel becomes the front and centre object of concern)."

I'm not a neo-conservative (or alt-lite, whatever that's supposed to be) lol.

"When the Democrats likely take control of the house in the elections coming up this year, there will be no hope at all of a wall being built."

The wall is being built. And... HAHAHA. The Democrat Party is finished. Mark my words.

"...white people will be minorities in many currently majority white countries (including the countries you, I, Truth, and Derek live in), within half a century."

European countries are white countries and should remain that way (for example, England is English and I think it should stay that way), similar to how Japan is Japanese and should stay that way. Canada, America, and New Zealand are not white countries... whether you like it or not, they are experiments and could go in many different directions. The wall, for instance, is not about race and never has been.
 
So to illustrate your point about Israel you link to two Jews, which is like if I wanted to convince you that smoking is good for you so I link you to videos of two guys who own tobacco companies.
The only thing Shapiro and Maher debunk is the idea that they're capable of providing impartial analysis.

Shapiro who says he "couldn't care less about the browning of America", but the thought of the same thing happening in Israel keeps him awake at night. In fact he's fine with Israeli troops injuring thousands of people to ensure no "browning" occurs.
Then he gets the likes of you to cheer him on just because he talks fast and went to Harvard or wherever, and because he "owns" blue haired feminists and BLM supporters from time to time which we know requires such incredible brainpower to do :rolleyes:

And yes, Maher is Jewish too. His mother is a Hungarian Jew which makes him Jewish as well in Jewish law (it's passed down on the mother's side). He was raised in the Catholic church by his father but left the church when he was 13 which was around the same time he found out his mother was Jewish.

A bit like his late friend Christopher Hitchens, he also found out later in life that he had Jewish lineage on his mother's side. There's an interview with him on YouTube conducted shortly before his death where he's asked about anti-semitism and his response is "I think we should do more to deserve it". Not "they", not "you", but "we".
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Maher has a similar attitude, judging by the views he espouses.

That was neo-conservative Christopher Hitchens; Ben Shapiro also has neo-conservative tendencies, as do plenty of other prominent 'conservative' American Jews like Bill Kristol. Neo-conservatism is basically a Jewish ideology, whereby through lies and deceit they invade/sanction/otherwise attack Arab/Middle Eastern countries in "defence" of Israel. That's what happened in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Palestine, and is now happening with Iran and Syria.

If Iran doesn't want new sanctions placed on it, literally all they have to do is say "we support Israel" and the notion of sanctions would disappear almost immediately. Then they can begin trading with USA/Israel, open American banks, open a chain of McDonald's restaurants, and all would be forgiven.

Look how quickly the view of Kim Jong-Un changed in the American (Jewish) media when it began to look like he would hold talks with the USA (Israel's pitbull). Almost immediately it was announced that North Korea may open, you guessed it, a chain of McDonald's. Gotta love that American style freedom and democracy!

It seems you subscribe to a few of the main tenets of neo-conservatism too bhops (and Derek); the alt-lite and neoconservatives aren't so different after all (which is the typical any time American Jews dominate a movement, defence of Israel becomes the front and centre object of concern).

The same with Trumpism, 'America first' became 'Israel first' in the blink of an eye, so fast that most of you who still support him didn't even notice the shift. The defence of Israel's border, the moving of the embassy became of paramount importance while the
wall along the USA's southern border got pushed aside yet again for another while longer, a year and a half into his Presidency.

When the Democrats likely take control of the house in the elections coming up this year, there will be no hope at all of a wall being built. But at least Israel got 'defended'! (Not that Chuck Schumer and co. would have voted against the moving of the US embassy or anything, Schumer praised Trump for it you'll be shocked to learn -- although not shocked if you're aware of Schumer's ethno-religious background and the role that plays in informing his decisions.)

Just like it informs the decisions of black Americans, Hispanic Americans, and every other racial group apart from white people who have been trained/bullied/forced over the years into not think tribally, something which every other group in existence still does and will continue to do, which we often choose to forget/ignore. And which is why all those other groups will survive, while white people will be minorities in many currently majority white countries (including the countries you, I, Truth, and Derek live in), within half a century. At least we moved embassies for other groups and kept our mouths shut so we weren't called racists or "neo nazis", am I right? :highfive:

Goodness and you call Derek a conspiracy theorist? There is so much liberal conspiracy nonsense along with half baked assertions (PLEASE link to me where ben Shapiro says he wants to keep Israel white) that it makes my head spin. I can imagine you'd go downa riot in those secret Zionist-hating Corbyn/Labour facebook groups.
 
Goodness and you call Derek a conspiracy theorist? There is so much liberal conspiracy nonsense along with half baked assertions (PLEASE link to me where ben Shapiro says he wants to keep Israel white) that it makes my head spin. I can imagine you'd go downa riot in those secret Zionist-hating Corbyn/Labour facebook groups.

https://townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2003/08/27/transfer-is-not-a-dirty-word-n976781
"Here is the bottom line: If you believe that the Jewish state has a right to exist, then you must allow Israel to transfer the Palestinians and the Israeli-Arabs from Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Israel proper. It's an ugly solution, but it is the only solution."

[...]

"For anyone who lived through the Holocaust, or who has relatives who died in it, being called a Nazi is unspeakably terrible. That is the secret weapon of the Arabs. Any time the Jews get wise and threaten mass expulsion of Arabs, the Arabs pull out their big stick, equating Nazism with Zionism."

[...]

"The Jews don't realize that expelling a hostile population is a commonly used and generally effective way of preventing violent entanglements. There are no gas chambers here. It's not genocide; it's transfer. It's not Hitler; it's Churchill."

[...]

"Arab-Jewish conflict is exponentially more volatile than German-Polish conflict ever was. And the solution is far easier. If there was "room in Germany for the German populations of East Prussia and of the other territories," as Churchill stated, there is certainly room in the spacious Muslim states of the Middle East for 5 million Palestinians and Israeli Arabs. If Germans, who had a centuries-old connection to the newly created Polish territory, could be expelled, then surely Palestinians, whose claim to Judea, Samaria and Gaza is dubious at best, can be expelled.

It's time to stop being squeamish. Jews are not Nazis. Transfer is not genocide. And anything else isn't a solution
."

^^ The words of Ben Shapiro. This article was written a long time ago and he has learned to modify his language a bit since then so it goes down better with his non-Zionist onlookers but his beliefs are still fundamentally the same.

And I never said Shapiro wants to "keep Israel white", as Israel isn't white, it's Jewish. I said the "browning" of Israel terrifies him, which it does. But in contrast here's what Shapiro had to say recently about the 'browning' of his place of birth, the USA.

"And by the way, I don't give a good damn about the so-called "browning of America." Color doesn't matter. Ideology does."


Significantly different to his view of Israel, you'll agree. No calls for deportations or the 'transfer' of people or anything like that. Essentially he doesn't care what happens to it as long as the 'ideology' remains the same, whatever that is. Being pro-Israel, I suppose.

And none of my assertions are half baked because I can back up everything I say. If I can't back it up I don't say it, something Derek could learn from. I don't just write these things for the hell of it. The only "half baked assertion" you pointed to was your twisting of what I said about Shapiro, which I just cleared up, so tell me what else I said which you think is a 'conspiracy' or a not fully developed assertion on my part, and I'll be happy to clarify about whatever you bring up. Make sure you don't twist my words this time though, so I can clarify about what I've actually said.

As for Corbyn/Labour, I wouldn't vote for anyone who wants to continue a policy of mass immigration into a country. He also briefly brought Munroe Bergdorf into the party as an advisor who has said that "the white race is the most violent and oppressive force of nature on earth." All that rules out ever voting for Corbyn/Labour, even though I don't disagree with him on a personal level about everything, but as long as the lunatic mass immigration experiment from the Blair years remains a policy (which began under the auspices of the Jewish immigration minister Barbara Roche in the late '90s - I can back that up too), then placing a vote for him and his party would not be on the cards.

The reasons why I couldn't vote for his party are greater than the reasons why I could. That is, if I were from the UK or lived there and could vote there, which I'm not, so this is just hypothetical.
 
https://townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2003/08/27/transfer-is-not-a-dirty-word-n976781
"Here is the bottom line: If you believe that the Jewish state has a right to exist, then you must allow Israel to transfer the Palestinians and the Israeli-Arabs from Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Israel proper. It's an ugly solution, but it is the only solution."

[...]

"For anyone who lived through the Holocaust, or who has relatives who died in it, being called a Nazi is unspeakably terrible. That is the secret weapon of the Arabs. Any time the Jews get wise and threaten mass expulsion of Arabs, the Arabs pull out their big stick, equating Nazism with Zionism."

[...]

"The Jews don't realize that expelling a hostile population is a commonly used and generally effective way of preventing violent entanglements. There are no gas chambers here. It's not genocide; it's transfer. It's not Hitler; it's Churchill."

[...]

"Arab-Jewish conflict is exponentially more volatile than German-Polish conflict ever was. And the solution is far easier. If there was "room in Germany for the German populations of East Prussia and of the other territories," as Churchill stated, there is certainly room in the spacious Muslim states of the Middle East for 5 million Palestinians and Israeli Arabs. If Germans, who had a centuries-old connection to the newly created Polish territory, could be expelled, then surely Palestinians, whose claim to Judea, Samaria and Gaza is dubious at best, can be expelled.

It's time to stop being squeamish. Jews are not Nazis. Transfer is not genocide. And anything else isn't a solution
."

^^ The words of Ben Shapiro. This article was written a long time ago and he has learned to modify his language a bit since then so it goes down better with his non-Zionist onlookers but his beliefs are still fundamentally the same.

And I never said Shapiro wants to "keep Israel white", as Israel isn't white, it's Jewish. I said the "browning" of Israel terrifies him, which it does. But in contrast here's what Shapiro had to say recently about the 'browning' of his place of birth, the USA.

"And by the way, I don't give a good damn about the so-called "browning of America." Color doesn't matter. Ideology does."


Significantly different to his view of Israel, you'll agree. No calls for deportations or the 'transfer' of people or anything like that. Essentially he doesn't care what happens to it as long as the 'ideology' remains the same, whatever that is. Being pro-Israel, I suppose.

And none of my assertions are half baked because I can back up everything I say. If I can't back it up I don't say it, something Derek could learn from. I don't just write these things for the hell of it. The only "half baked assertion" you pointed to was your twisting of what I said about Shapiro, which I just cleared up, so tell me what else I said which you think is a 'conspiracy' or a not fully developed assertion on my part, and I'll be happy to clarify about whatever you bring up. Make sure you don't twist my words this time though, so I can clarify about what I've actually said.

As for Corbyn/Labour, I wouldn't vote for anyone who wants to continue a policy of mass immigration into a country. He also briefly brought Munroe Bergdorf into the party as an advisor who has said that "the white race is the most violent and oppressive force of nature on earth." All that rules out ever voting for Corbyn/Labour, even though I don't disagree with him on a personal level about everything, but as long as the lunatic mass immigration experiment from the Blair years remains a policy (which began under the auspices of the Jewish immigration minister Barbara Roche in the late '90s - I can back that up too), then placing a vote for him and his party would not be on the cards.

The reasons why I couldn't vote for his party are greater than the reasons why I could. That is, if I were from the UK or lived there and could vote there, which I'm not, so this is just hypothetical.


doh:

Are you posting from Hamas HQ?
Never seen a more bizarre hardcore Neo Nazi Anti semite before.:crazy:
 
https://townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2003/08/27/transfer-is-not-a-dirty-word-n976781
"Here is the bottom line: If you believe that the Jewish state has a right to exist, then you must allow Israel to transfer the Palestinians and the Israeli-Arabs from Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Israel proper. It's an ugly solution, but it is the only solution."

[...]

"For anyone who lived through the Holocaust, or who has relatives who died in it, being called a Nazi is unspeakably terrible. That is the secret weapon of the Arabs. Any time the Jews get wise and threaten mass expulsion of Arabs, the Arabs pull out their big stick, equating Nazism with Zionism."

[...]

"The Jews don't realize that expelling a hostile population is a commonly used and generally effective way of preventing violent entanglements. There are no gas chambers here. It's not genocide; it's transfer. It's not Hitler; it's Churchill."

[...]

"Arab-Jewish conflict is exponentially more volatile than German-Polish conflict ever was. And the solution is far easier. If there was "room in Germany for the German populations of East Prussia and of the other territories," as Churchill stated, there is certainly room in the spacious Muslim states of the Middle East for 5 million Palestinians and Israeli Arabs. If Germans, who had a centuries-old connection to the newly created Polish territory, could be expelled, then surely Palestinians, whose claim to Judea, Samaria and Gaza is dubious at best, can be expelled.

It's time to stop being squeamish. Jews are not Nazis. Transfer is not genocide. And anything else isn't a solution
."

^^ The words of Ben Shapiro. This article was written a long time ago and he has learned to modify his language a bit since then so it goes down better with his non-Zionist onlookers but his beliefs are still fundamentally the same.

And I never said Shapiro wants to "keep Israel white", as Israel isn't white, it's Jewish. I said the "browning" of Israel terrifies him, which it does. But in contrast here's what Shapiro had to say recently about the 'browning' of his place of birth, the USA.

"And by the way, I don't give a good damn about the so-called "browning of America." Color doesn't matter. Ideology does."


Significantly different to his view of Israel, you'll agree. No calls for deportations or the 'transfer' of people or anything like that. Essentially he doesn't care what happens to it as long as the 'ideology' remains the same, whatever that is. Being pro-Israel, I suppose.

And none of my assertions are half baked because I can back up everything I say. If I can't back it up I don't say it, something Derek could learn from. I don't just write these things for the hell of it. The only "half baked assertion" you pointed to was your twisting of what I said about Shapiro, which I just cleared up, so tell me what else I said which you think is a 'conspiracy' or a not fully developed assertion on my part, and I'll be happy to clarify about whatever you bring up. Make sure you don't twist my words this time though, so I can clarify about what I've actually said.

As for Corbyn/Labour, I wouldn't vote for anyone who wants to continue a policy of mass immigration into a country. He also briefly brought Munroe Bergdorf into the party as an advisor who has said that "the white race is the most violent and oppressive force of nature on earth." All that rules out ever voting for Corbyn/Labour, even though I don't disagree with him on a personal level about everything, but as long as the lunatic mass immigration experiment from the Blair years remains a policy (which began under the auspices of the Jewish immigration minister Barbara Roche in the late '90s - I can back that up too), then placing a vote for him and his party would not be on the cards.

The reasons why I couldn't vote for his party are greater than the reasons why I could. That is, if I were from the UK or lived there and could vote there, which I'm not, so this is just hypothetical.


The quote you've provided isn't a pretty one I'll admit, but I do have to factor in that it was made back in 2003, the dude was literally in nappies at that point in his life. As I'm sure you'll appreciate your ideas from adolescence to adulthood change radically over those next few years. I'd certainly be interested to see how Ben responds to that quote now and I'll happily concede that if he still holds true to it then my opinion of him would alter. It would be interesting to see someone hit him up with that in one of his Q & A's. I'm not a Shapiro acolyte BTW there is literally a ton of stuff I disagree with him on.

The idea that 'he gets the likes of you to cheer him on just because he talks fast and went to Harvard or wherever, and because he "owns" blue haired feminists and BLM supporters from time to time which we know requires such incredible brainpower to do,' is actually totally redundant. You have literally ZERO understanding as to why I might or might not have quoted Shapiro over this particular issue (Hamas and the border shootings), you can't get in my head as I can't get in yours.

As for Bill Maher, c'mon dude you and I both know that regardless of Bill's parentage he is pretty much a hardcore atheist. The notion that Bill is pro Israel on this issue due to his Jewish blood I'm not sure I really lend any credence to that.

As for Iran, it's not a case of Iran 'supporting' Israel it's probably more a case of saying that they don't want to wipe them off the map all the while yelling 'death to America!' I see that according to the NYT's they have potentially discovered that Iran has built a secret missile base. This is the same Iran that only wants nuclear power to use for domestic energy. Obviously this report is still at the exploratory stage would it surprise you if it turns out to be true? Iran has some really insidious plans for Israel beyond not simply 'supporting' it and I really doubt America would roll out a McDonald's chain just because they say they now like Israel.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/23/world/middleeast/iran-missiles.html

And what is it with you and McDonald's? I think there was literally one article of Kim talking about one day having a McDonald's in Nth Korea and now that means what exactly???

Trump campaigned on having a strong relationship with Israel, he didn't just 'slip' it in there. He openly campaigned on moving the embassy to Jerusalem. And you are surprised because............................he actually kept his promise???? I know it's strange thing for a politician to do, LOL.

Are the Dems really gonna retake the house? Is the Blue wave really coming and is it as big and significant as you think?
 
Last edited:
https://townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2003/08/27/transfer-is-not-a-dirty-word-n976781
"Here is the bottom line: If you believe that the Jewish state has a right to exist, then you must allow Israel to transfer the Palestinians and the Israeli-Arabs from Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Israel proper. It's an ugly solution, but it is the only solution."

[...]

"For anyone who lived through the Holocaust, or who has relatives who died in it, being called a Nazi is unspeakably terrible. That is the secret weapon of the Arabs. Any time the Jews get wise and threaten mass expulsion of Arabs, the Arabs pull out their big stick, equating Nazism with Zionism."

[...]

"The Jews don't realize that expelling a hostile population is a commonly used and generally effective way of preventing violent entanglements. There are no gas chambers here. It's not genocide; it's transfer. It's not Hitler; it's Churchill."

[...]

"Arab-Jewish conflict is exponentially more volatile than German-Polish conflict ever was. And the solution is far easier. If there was "room in Germany for the German populations of East Prussia and of the other territories," as Churchill stated, there is certainly room in the spacious Muslim states of the Middle East for 5 million Palestinians and Israeli Arabs. If Germans, who had a centuries-old connection to the newly created Polish territory, could be expelled, then surely Palestinians, whose claim to Judea, Samaria and Gaza is dubious at best, can be expelled.

It's time to stop being squeamish. Jews are not Nazis. Transfer is not genocide. And anything else isn't a solution
."

^^ The words of Ben Shapiro. This article was written a long time ago and he has learned to modify his language a bit since then so it goes down better with his non-Zionist onlookers but his beliefs are still fundamentally the same.

And I never said Shapiro wants to "keep Israel white", as Israel isn't white, it's Jewish. I said the "browning" of Israel terrifies him, which it does. But in contrast here's what Shapiro had to say recently about the 'browning' of his place of birth, the USA.

"And by the way, I don't give a good damn about the so-called "browning of America." Color doesn't matter. Ideology does."


Significantly different to his view of Israel, you'll agree. No calls for deportations or the 'transfer' of people or anything like that. Essentially he doesn't care what happens to it as long as the 'ideology' remains the same, whatever that is. Being pro-Israel, I suppose.

And none of my assertions are half baked because I can back up everything I say. If I can't back it up I don't say it, something Derek could learn from. I don't just write these things for the hell of it. The only "half baked assertion" you pointed to was your twisting of what I said about Shapiro, which I just cleared up, so tell me what else I said which you think is a 'conspiracy' or a not fully developed assertion on my part, and I'll be happy to clarify about whatever you bring up. Make sure you don't twist my words this time though, so I can clarify about what I've actually said.

As for Corbyn/Labour, I wouldn't vote for anyone who wants to continue a policy of mass immigration into a country. He also briefly brought Munroe Bergdorf into the party as an advisor who has said that "the white race is the most violent and oppressive force of nature on earth." All that rules out ever voting for Corbyn/Labour, even though I don't disagree with him on a personal level about everything, but as long as the lunatic mass immigration experiment from the Blair years remains a policy (which began under the auspices of the Jewish immigration minister Barbara Roche in the late '90s - I can back that up too), then placing a vote for him and his party would not be on the cards.

The reasons why I couldn't vote for his party are greater than the reasons why I could. That is, if I were from the UK or lived there and could vote there, which I'm not, so this is just hypothetical.


You and Untruth (probably the same person) are practically indistinguishable in your thinking. Commo-fascists!
 
Back
Top Bottom