The Political Discussion Thread

[SoulReaver]

My reasoning for asking is it seems a # of people i talk to who are FOR abortion, are also against capital punishment/the death penalty.. Which makes no sense to me, how you can be all for someone ending a life that is innocent of anything, but NOT be for ending a life of a criminal who most assuredly is NOT innocent.

technically ovules & spermatozoids also are innocent
so's my PC

As for me, i feel Abortion is only ok if the life of the mom is in jeopardy from carrying it to term, If she's the victim of rape/incest.. As for capital punishment, I am for it.

spare them earlier so you can kill them later
to execute someone you must make sure they're born in the first place
makes sense

Social welfare.. I am torn. What people THESE days seem to see that as is more wealth redistribution, and a lifestyle, NOT a helping hand UP.. More of a hand out..

hey you forced them into this life - assuming responsibility is the least you could do no?

[Falcon Horus]

Israelis respond to terror attack with "pay it forward" campaign to support Max Brenner

Now, if only he would have extended to all people -- even the ones across the walls and fences.

Perhaps an act of kindness can unite more than just the people of Israel.

I love my people.

A people that can do no wrong, hey... you're the innocent ones. Give me a break! Talk about double standards.

[Gatefan1976]

Of course it does. Mass celebrations in the streets by thousands and a handful of extremists celebrating in secret behind closed doors? It's not apples to apples. It's the kind of manipulative reasoning that is beneath you.

Actually, it is -exactly- the reasoning that should be employed if one side wants to claim innocence. 1 person, 10 people, 1000 people, it does not matter when the question is "does it happen", It happens and scale is irrelevant to that question.
If you want to broaden your question to weather it is more accepted in Israel or Palestine, I would have given you a different answer.
I can't give answers to the "broader implications" of a question unless the question is inherently broad, and yours was not.

It is also nothing like Falcon Horus' own double standard. My observation was that she appears to be incapable of condemning Palestinian atrocities in and of themselves without immediately "balancing" it by claiming that "both sides" commit them. (While she has in the past proven herself quite capable of posting at length about supposed Israeli wrongdoings without any obligatory linking to the Palestinian ones). You have simply added another variation of double standard.

No, I did no such thing. You accused FH of using a "but", then did the same thing. That was the -only- thing I was referring to. FH's greater view of the Palestine/Israeli conflict is beyond my purview, or my knowledge.

And that should tell you something.

It does, It tells me that no matter what the leaders of Palestine say, hardly anyone reports on it, much like most of what happens in the Israel/Palestine conflict is not reported on outside of the region, or dedicated news organizations.

Not what I meant. "Are you for real" was not a short hand for "did it really happen?" but rather for "are you seriously drawing this absolutely outlandish comparison with a straight face?".

It was not a comparison at all Womble, at least in terms of what you appear to be thinking. It was a comparison of -news organizations-, and what their focus is, nothing more.
Israeli media will focus on domestic affairs for the most part, and there is no problem with that, much like Australian media will focus on domestic issues.
Did you know about the attack?
Did you know about the car crashes and shootings we have here?
Do you know about the investigations underway right now about the Lint Café siege and how it may affect our top ranking NSW police officers?
Probably not, but that does not mean you are insensitive to what is going on?
Nope, all it means is that it is not part of your news.

Of course it is. But it is biased in specific ways, and this needs highlighting.

For instance, this article which Yahoo borrowed from AFP. Consider the opening paragraph:

Tel Aviv (AFP) - Two Palestinians opened fire at a popular Tel Aviv nightspot near Israel’s military headquarters Wednesday, police said, killing four people in one of the worst attacks in a months-long wave of violence.

See what they did there? Indeed, the Sarona market is 5 minutes walk from the Kirya base where the Defense Ministry and the IDF headquarters are located. It is also 5 minutes walk from the Azrieli shopping center, the HaShalom railway station and the German embassy, but that was not mentioned because the purpose here is not to indicate location but to "contextualize" the attack to make it appear less of a terrorist act. The article actually reiterates a second time later on, in case anybody missed it, that the Sarona complex is "across the street from Israel’s defence ministry and main army headquarters". The photo which accompanied the article as originally published showed a group of Israeli policemen and soldiers; it was shot in the direction AWAY from the Sarona complex.

Sure, the bias can be subtle, I won't deny that.

It's as if they're forcefully trying to direct the reader towards thinking that the attackers were aiming for a "legitimate" military target.

I don't think anyone reading that would think that it was a "legitimate military target", unless the author was a total hack.
If that was the intent, the proximity to the military base would be the opener, not the fact it happened in a "popular Tel Aviv nightspot"

So yes, partisan. But not in general terms. Partisan in a very specific way.

Where are your comments on the 2 battalions of troops that have been sent to "deal with this"?
Where are your posts about informing us about the thousands of travel visa's that have been suspended for Palestinians wanting to travel to Israel for their holy celebrations?
Where are your posts about the Israeli policies on deporting, then destroying Palestinian homes of families associated with terrorists?
Where are your reports of the fact that these two were in the country illegally to begin with?

Yeah, reports are partisan, but don't challenge me to look stuff up and educate myself and then ignore the partisan bias of your own reporting of events, ok.

P.S. The official Saudi media have issued some very strong-worded condemnations of the Sarona complex attack. Al-Arabiya actually referred to the dead and wounded Israelis not as "settlers" as is customary in Arab media, but as "victims", for which it was subjected to harsh criticism on Arab social media because only the Palestinians can ever be called victims. A prominent member of the Saudi Journalists association referred on his Twitter to the attack as "terror and thuggery" and extended his condolences to the victims.

A ray of light in a otherwise crappy situation.

[Womble]

Now, if only he would have extended to all people -- even the ones across the walls and fences.

Perhaps an act of kindness can unite more than just the people of Israel.

If any Palestinians want to step in and support the victims of this attack, no one is stopping them.

Or... did you mean something else? Are you, by chance, trying to find something condemnable in a beautiful act of charity because it is being done by the Israelis?

A people that can do no wrong, hey... you're the innocent ones. Give me a break! Talk about double standards.

No, my friend. I won't give you a break. I have the right to my opinion about your opinions.

And yes, my people are pretty awesome. Not perfect (no one ever is), but they are beautiful, strong and resilient.

I am about to go out, take some photos of Sarona to post in the Israel thread.

[Falcon Horus]

Actually, it is -exactly- the reasoning that should be employed if one side wants to claim innocence. 1 person, 10 people, 1000 people, it does not matter when the question is "does it happen", It happens and scale is irrelevant to that question.

What I tried to say, although my messages are apparently double standards.

...much like Australian media will focus on domestic issues.
Did you know about the attack?
Did you know about the car crashes and shootings we have here?
Do you know about the investigations underway right now about the Lint Café siege and how it may affect our top ranking NSW police officers?
Probably not, but that does not mean you are insensitive to what is going on?
Nope, all it means is that it is not part of your news.

There's very little Australian news in our foreign sections of papers and online newssites (local ones). I have to say that if you or Coco didn't post any links, I wouldn't know much about what was going on Down Under.

Perhaps you should start a war -- that always does get a mention.

If any Palestinians want to step in and support the victims of this attack, no one is stopping them.

I meant, sharing the second bar of chocolate with the Palestinian neighbor. Reach out in friendship, not with stones and knives and bullets and rockets and animosity, but friendship.

Or... did you mean something else? Are you, by chance, trying to find something condemnable in a beautiful act of charity because it is being done by the Israelis?

You'd like that, wouldn't you?

But no, that's not what I'm doing, or wanting or whatever. I think it's a great idea, just make it bigger than just this side of the wall -- or are all "wildlings" bad?

[Gatefan1976]

What I tried to say, although my messages are apparently double standards.

Well, I can't comment on that, all I can do is try and read what you mean.

There's very little Australian news in our foreign sections of papers and online newssites (local ones). I have to say that if you or Coco didn't post any links, I wouldn't know much about what was going on Down Under.

You are not missing much, a few Drop bear attacks, the occasional pile up of Kangaroo's on the major highways, toilets spinning clockwise indicating the end of the world...........
Not much

Perhaps you should start a war -- that always does get a mention.

Nah, wars cost more than a round of beers, and everyone knows that if it costs more than a round of beers, it's probably not worth the effort............

I meant, sharing the second bar of chocolate with the Palestinian neighbor. Reach out in friendship, not with stones and knives and bullets and rockets and animosity, but friendship.

That would be an Australian response
Wait a minute!!!............................

You'd like that, wouldn't you?

But no, that's not what I'm doing, or wanting or whatever. I think it's a great idea, just make it bigger than just this side of the wall -- or are all "wildlings" bad?

They prefer vegemite, sorry.

[Falcon Horus]

Actually, it is -exactly- the reasoning that should be employed if one side wants to claim innocence. 1 person, 10 people, 1000 people, it does not matter when the question is "does it happen", It happens and scale is irrelevant to that question.

What I tried to say, although my messages are apparently double standards.

...much like Australian media will focus on domestic issues.
Did you know about the attack?
Did you know about the car crashes and shootings we have here?
Do you know about the investigations underway right now about the Lint Café siege and how it may affect our top ranking NSW police officers?
Probably not, but that does not mean you are insensitive to what is going on?
Nope, all it means is that it is not part of your news.

There's very little Australian news in our foreign sections of papers and online newssites (local ones). I have to say that if you or Coco didn't post any links, I wouldn't know much about what was going on Down Under.

Perhaps you should start a war -- that always does get a mention.

If any Palestinians want to step in and support the victims of this attack, no one is stopping them.

I meant, sharing the second bar of chocolate with the Palestinian neighbor. Reach out in friendship, not with stones and knives and bullets and rockets and animosity, but friendship.

Or... did you mean something else? Are you, by chance, trying to find something condemnable in a beautiful act of charity because it is being done by the Israelis?

You'd like that, wouldn't you?

But no, that's not what I'm doing, or wanting or whatever. I think it's a great idea, just make it bigger than just this side of the wall -- or are all "wildlings" bad?

[aretood2]

What I tried to say, although my messages are apparently double standards.



There's very little Australian news in our foreign sections of papers and online newssites (local ones). I have to say that if you or Coco didn't post any links, I wouldn't know much about what was going on Down Under.

Perhaps you should start a war -- that always does get a mention.



I meant, sharing the second bar of chocolate with the Palestinian neighbor. Reach out in friendship, not with stones and knives and bullets and rockets and animosity, but friendship.



You'd like that, wouldn't you?

But no, that's not what I'm doing, or wanting or whatever. I think it's a great idea, just make it bigger than just this side of the wall -- or are all "wildlings" bad?

Maybe it's just the way you are saying it, or maybe it's predisposed assumptions of what you would say that I am making in my mind somewhere...But I see it too. I mean, you easily misread my comments about the X-Men poster (probably because you associated me with "meninists" due to previous conversations) it happens.

But to be fair, I saw nothing in Womble's post about limiting the action to Israelis, so that begs the question as to what exactly you mean. Are you saying that Israelis are actively excluding Palestinians from such things? If not, what's the point of mentioning it? Are you just commenting on the conflict at large? If so, is it realistic to expect people to always act based on that?

[Annoyed]

Social welfare.. I am torn. What people THESE days seem to see that as is more wealth redistribution, and a lifestyle, NOT a helping hand UP.. More of a hand out..

hey you forced them into this life - assuming responsibility is the least you could do no?

What the hell are you talking about? How did garhkal or anyone else force them into "this life"?? Did he force the woman to have sex with the sperm donor?

[aretood2]

technically ovules & spermatozoids also are innocent
so's my PCspare them earlier so you can kill them later
to execute someone you must make sure they're born in the first place
makes sense hey you forced them into this life - assuming responsibility is the least you could do no?

How does one force life? I mean...life just kinda happens.

[SoulReaver]

How does one force life? I mean...life just kinda happens.

ask the Prolifers

generally speaking I doubt anyone remembers choosing to be born
though you're right in a way it happens (to you)

incidentally does the bible explicitly forbid abortion?

[Womble]

I meant, sharing the second bar of chocolate with the Palestinian neighbor. Reach out in friendship, not with stones and knives and bullets and rockets and animosity, but friendship.

Perhaps you have missed that little detail, but it was our people getting killed by theirs. Basic decency would dictate that the Palestinians be the one to "reach out in friendship".

I wonder if somewhere deep in your subconscious, where the last remains of your moral sanity lie buried under the layers of politically correct silt, you don't find it at least a little bit obscene to suggest that we go reach out to the Palestinians with chocolates before we're even done grieving for our dead and before they are done celebrating the murder. I believe it was Eric Hoffer who observed that for some inexplicable reason, everyone expects the Jews to be the only real Christians in this world, forever turning the other cheek. And I don't recall you reaching out in friendship to the brethren of the guys who blew up the airport in Brussels. Perhaps you should have.

[Womble]

Ynet has published the story of how one of the terrorists was apprehended. He apparently ran up to an Israeli couple as they were entering their apartment, and begged them for water, so the Israelis, who saw a frightened thirsty man, let him into their apartment and gave him water. The Israeli man, who happened to be a police investigator, grabbed his service weapon and ran to the scene of the attack, where he saw the arrested terrorist in a suit that was exactly like the suit of the man he left home one on one with his wife. So he ran back home and arrested the killer.

One thing this story reveals is that the terrorist knew that Israelis are not bad people, or he wouldn't have asked them for help. His murder spree was not emotion-driven. It was cold-blooded, calculated execution of people he knew were innocent.

[Annoyed]

I don't think Hillary would know the truth if it swam up and bit her in the arse.

Idiot thinks she can rewrite history by editing her book.


Paperback version of Clinton's 'Hard Choices’ omits her former TPP trade pact support

People say Trump is going to be bad for the rest of us on the right. Well, if I was a Democrat, I'd be embarrassed as hell to say Hillary is my choice.

The paperback version of Hillary Clinton’s memoir “Hard Choices” fails to include her support of the international trade pact TPP that rivals Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump have opposed, raising criticism about Clinton “reinventing herself” for the general election race.

The paperback version of Clinton’s 2014 book, which details her work as secretary of state for President Obama, omits the passage in which she touts her efforts to get the country to support the 12-nation trade deal, which she once referred to as the “gold standard” for such agreements.

“We worked hard to improve and ratify trade agreements with Colombia and Panama and encouraged Canada and the group of countries that became known as the Pacific Alliance -- Mexico, Colombia, Peru, and Chile -- all open-market democracies driving toward a more prosperous future to join negotiations with Asian nations on TPP, the trans-Pacific trade agreement,” Clinton says in the hardback version about a 2009 effort.

[garhkal]

If you listen to a lot of pro choice people, their position is often predicated on what is deemed "alive". For many, and I dare say most, that is when the foetus is capable of living independently of it's mother without aid. Once that point is reached, most pro choice people will say that abortion is no longer an option.
It's not this "open slather" terminate at any stage that pro life people seem to feel it is.

Which i understand, but its the strange double standard which i see wrong..

In other words, until age 16 or so.

Unless you're Jewish, in which case a foetus is not considered alive until it gets married and graduates from medical school.

Judging by how many young adults these days are STILL living at home with mom into their late 20s/early 30s, that age bracket just went up!!

hey you forced them into this life - assuming responsibility is the least you could do no?

So everyone else should be responsible for some' else's choice of opening their legs up??

I don't think Hillary would know the truth if it swam up and bit her in the arse.

Idiot thinks she can rewrite history by editing her book.

Doesn't surprise me one bit...