Comments by "Digital Nomad" (@digitalnomad9985) on "Mass exodus in the wake of strike outside Al-Shifa hospital’s outpatient clinic" video.
-
3
-
2
-
1
-
"reminds me of the olden days, cruel as genghis khan, the crusaders, and oh, Hitler the irony of becoming the oppressor after being the oppressed"
Yet somehow your reminding forgets that Islam conquered, butchered and enslaved to acquire all these lands in the first place. If the Crusades hadn't struck back, the darkness, ignorance, wickedness, oppression, and backwardness that is Islam would have choked all of Europe, Asia, and Africa. It's not like Muslims happened to be oppressors. Islam IS OPPRESSION. There is no freedom at all in the Islamic world, no rights, no democracy, no equality, no freedom of religion. Women are mutilated tarp covered chattel. Children with outrageous regularity are brides, or simply sex slaves. For centuries their pirates with the sponsorship and open approval of their governments marauded, pillaged and enslaved the seas and coastlines of the Mediterranean, Africa, and the eastern Atlantic until Christendom finally defeated their pirates and shut down their slave markets.
I don't know what point you think you're making by mentioning Hitler, Islam's ally, or Genghis Kahn, even more Islam's prosecutor than her persecutor in his own words: "O people, know that you have committed great sins, and that the great ones among you have committed these sins. If you ask me what proof I have for these words, I say it is because I am the punishment of God. If you had not committed great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you."
The very Koran and Hadith enjoin them to violence and oppression, the early verses of tolerance (when Islam was weak) being abrogated by later injunctions to the contrary demanding the conquest and suppression of other religions and atheists alike. For passages where one becomes a martyr by killing people, we have:
Koran 4:74 "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers. The word martyr is not used in this passage, but a death richly rewarded by God is pretty much the definition of martyrdom.
Similarly,
Sahih Bukhari 55:44 A man came to Allah's Apostle and said, "Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward)." He replied, "I do not find such a deed."
As for injunctions to violence toward kaffir, apostates, and hypocrites, pretty much throughout:
Koran 2:191-193
2:216
3:151
4:76
4:89
4:95 "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home).Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward " This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is this Arabic word (mujahiduna) used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad, which would not make sense if it meant an internal struggle)
This is one of the references of the "fighting with money" escape clauses for the rich.
4:104
8:12
8:39
8:67
8:59-60
9:5
9:14
9:20 "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war.
9:29
9:38-39
9:41
9:73
9:88
9:111
9:123
33:60-62
47:3-4
47:35
48:17
48:29
61:4
66:9
Sahih Bukhari 52:117
52:220
52:256
Abu Dawud 14:2526, 2527
And many more.
1
-
@AlphaOmega1025 "maybe you should learn history about the khazarians,"
That crap isn't history, its some part of an insane libel by Jew haters. "Yea, sure guys I have this idea. Lets pretend to be Jews in late Roman Europe and the middle-east so we can be persecuted instead of converting to Christianity, so we can become a part of mainstream Roman and Byzantine society. I don't foresee any problems with this plan." What possible MOTIVE could anyone have had to do that? "I have this plan to subvert the world and take over. Step one is to join a persecuted minority." NOT.
"international banking cartel"
I'll bend over backwards in your favor on this one and simply grant, for the sake of argument, that at the center of the international banking system is an oppressive conspiracy. That doesn't take you where you want to go with this. Certainly not all international bankers are Jews. Certainly not all Jews are international bankers. There are certainly many conspiring to undermine our freedom and steal our stuff for fun and profit. Some of them are even Jews. None of them are Zionists.
A fundamental absurdity of Jew haters, after the absurdity of calling an ethnicity a conspiracy is equating anti-Zionist leftist political organizations, George Soros, SPLC, ACLU, BLM, Antifa with Zionists and Israel that all these groups are doing their best to destroy. The "party line" of these morons is that that is all a cover and that they are all on the same side. And the only argument they have to support their party line is "They are all run by Jews", in other words, they have no argument at all. The most cursory investigation of the Israel policies of these organizations shows that they have the SAME Israel policy as the "Jews are destroying the world" conspiracy theorists. In fact, every day in every way the "racist right" supports the same things the "cultural Marxists" support, from the centrality of "group identity" through the abolition of the civil rights enumerated in the Constitution (all of them, without exception) through segregation, to the ideal/goal of limited government and freedom itself.
You groypers contradict yourself. You say that it is the Jewish religion that prompts Jews to hostility and domination plots toward gentiles and Christians and that Zionism is part of the plot, then when you list subversive Jews in places of power you list atheist Jews whose family has never darkened the door of a synagogue, sometimes for generations, and who are more hostile to Israel than you are. You say the Jews are to be blamed because they killed Christ, then you say modern Jews are not descendants of the Old and New Testament Jews. You deny the historical holocaust by way of trying to improve the image of Nazis, then call for a holocaust. If a holocaust is bad, why are you calling for one? If it is not bad, why do you spend so much energy trying to deny the 20th century European one? Not only are each of your claims unsupported and absurd in isolation, they don't even fit together into a consistent lie.
"the USS liberty"
You contrive to characterize all of US/Israel relations of a single friendly fire incident many decades ago. Do you have any notion of how often such a thing happens in every major military confrontation?
"look into who owned the trade towers and conveniently wasn’t there on 9/11"
I don't know what would be the point of that. It is perfectly legal to own a building and not live in it. It is even legal to leave one's home. Convenient things happen every day. Insurance or no, destroying ones own building is not generally a power move. Does thinking like that hurt your head?
1
-
popdavid-dd4lx "we don’t have it here and we could get it with the exact amount of money we send Israel"
This is absurdly wrong. Even as much as Israel is required by its unfortunate neighborhood to spend an unusually large percentage of their national budget on defense, they spend much more on their health care system. The notion that the US, with 35 times as many people could do the same thing for 15% (NOT 20%) of Israel's defense budget is way wrong. When you just make up assertions without checking facts, that's lying. When you do so in an evil cause, that's worse.
<enter sarcasm>
So, you're telling me that cutting out aid to Israel will let us dip a billions dollar bucket out of Biden's 1.4 TRILLION dollar deficit? And all it would cost me is another genocide larger than the mid-20th century one, betraying an ally, and placing Europe an the US on the front line of a rampant, energized, and loot empowered jihad? Where do I sign?
<exit sarcasm>
Since when are Democrats deficit hawks? We're not dealing with fiscal responsibility here. It's something a great deal darker.
And no, we don't want socialized medicine here in the US. One of the ads I keep getting on vids is soliciting charitable funds to send a young Israeli girl to the US to get a life saving heart operation. Don't tell me Jews don't make good doctors. Israel is at the forefront of many tech fields, disproportionately for its size. Socialism has ruined Israel's health care. There is a reason why the world goes to the US for advanced health care. Ours is the best, because the government DOESN'T CONTROL IT. (Unless you want a still-beating heart transplant fresh from a Uighur, a house church Christian, or a dissident; in which case try China, they have a form for you to sell your soul, just sign on the line, never mind the ink) At least Israel LETS its citizens leave for medical care. The UK is in the habit of letting its health care bureaucracy PROHIBIT British subjects from going abroad for care. When they've determined your daughter must be put down, they won't ALLOW a second opinion. There was a prominent example of this last hear and another pending this year. Italy has offered the child Italian citizenship to pry her loose so she can get a chance at treatment, no joy so far.
Every time you take something that the free market CAN provide and place it under the government you lose freedom. The more aspects of our life you place under the same organization that we must have to enforce our laws and defend our national interest, the closer that organization bends to tyranny. The common thread, is that to the libertarian sensibility essential freedom is freedom TO (to act), and to the socialist is freedom FROM (from responsibilities, uncertainties). Democracy may well be necessary for freedom, but it is certainly insufficient and is not an end unto itself. Democracy was just one of the many MEANS the founders employed to serve the END of spreading out power within the government. Equally necessary is limiting the SIZE of the thing as a whole. Size both in terms of categories of jurisdiction and activity and in terms of budget. It is not just that government spending inflates our currency and allocates resources away from productive endeavors, the spending power would be dangerous even if the value were donated by well meaning space aliens. Creeping socialism is the characteristic cancer to which democracies are prone. It killed Venezuela. James Madison in Federalist 51, states the problem:
"The great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions."
A common fallacy of utopian ideologues is that human nature is inherently good, but is being held back by some flaw in the social contract. To the communist free markets; to the anarchist government; to the New Atheists religion, to primitivists agriculture or technology, to racists whites or blacks or Jews or whoever; is the root of all evil. The first part of Genesis DOES have something to say about this because it NEGATES the common assumption of each of the above "isms". Regardless of how literally you take the text, the MORAL of the account is plain as a pikestaff. The clear, harsh, intolerable, and absolutely vital and central message of the fall is that WE ARE OUR PROBLEM, not any externality or construct. As the song says, "You can run from yourself, but you won't get far. 'Cause wherever you go --- There you are." This is the starting point of clarity in history, sociology, and psychiatry; every study which pertains to the nature of humanity. In fact, the same flawed, imperfect, selfish, stupid nature that infests the lord, or the "capitalist", infests the politician and the bureaucrat. "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." The "capitalist" AS SUCH, can only hire or bribe. An unchecked authoritarian government can do that (with other people's money), plus arrest, torture, and kill you or your family. It is incoherent to fear the former and not fear the latter. No "angel" is available to bear this power benignly.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1