Comments by "" (@TheHuxleyAgnostic) on "The Rational National"
channel.
-
434
-
279
-
161
-
115
-
84
-
82
-
69
-
62
-
53
-
49
-
45
-
45
-
42
-
@jds614 The country needs a deprogramming, like Germany did.
In 1923, 100 years ago, Ze'ev Jabotinsky wrote, The Iron Wall, and a follow up, The Ethics of The Iron Wall (sooo racist towards Africans), in which he fully acknowledged that post Balfour Zionsim was colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the native Palestinian population would resist being colonized until the bitter end. He directly compared it to the colonization of North America. He promoted doing it anyway, claiming Zionist colonialism was a "just" colonialism (he also thought North American colonialists were good guys, so not a great judge of morality), not caring what that meant for the native population.
Ze'ev is important, because his Betar militant youth group helped found the Irgun terrorist group, along with other supporters of his, and the splinter Lehi terrorist group. The Irgun bombed numerous Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who didn't support colonialist Zionsim).
The Irgun are important, because they ended up being led by future Likud PM, Menachem Begin, who bombed the King David Hotel. The King David Hotel was bombed because the British had raided the Jewish Agency and seized numerous documents that may have shown that the terrorists were working with the JA and Haganah (JA liked to pretend that they didn't support the terrorism). The British then stored those documents at their base, in the hotel. That the Irgun terrorists responded to a JA raid, itself seems to prove the connection. That the thousands of Irgun (and Lehi) terrorists were also quickly merged into the new nation's military (IDF) and intelligence (Mossad) agencies, and are still celebrated as "heroes" by Israelis, to this day, also seems to support total collaboration between the groups.
That other terrorist group mentioned, Lehi (also known as the Stern Gang), was considered even more extreme. They even tried to ally with the Nazis, against the British. Lehi ended up being led by Yitzhak Shamir, future Mossad agent, and another future Likud PM. They assassinated Lord Moyne, and others.
In 1945, there was a major land and peoples survey done in Palestine. It showed that the Zionists only owned about 5% of the total land, 20% of the arable land, and owned a majority in zero districts. The partition was not only going to be forced on the native Palestinian majority, but Jews were still going to be a minority, in the part allocated to them. The only possible way to even become a "Jewish state" was going to require getting rid of the actual majority (at least enough so that there'd be a solid Jewish majority, so they could fake being democratic).
This is also shown by the 1948, post Nakba, population of Israel. If there was 716,700 Jews, 156,000+ non-Jews, and approximately 700k non-Jews ethnically cleansed, that means the Jewish population, in the Zionist portion of partition, was originally over 100,000 less than the non-Jewish population. To believe that there was never any intent, by Zionists, to ethnically cleanse away the Palestinian majority would require believing that they never intended to create a "Jewish state". It's a nonsensical notion.
Begin, and those terrorist groups, also opposed partition, but for the opposite reason Palestinians did. Palestinians didn't want to be colonized, at all. The terrorists wanted to colonize it all. "Moderate" Zionists were okay with colonizing half ... for now (what would happen in the future, after partition, was up to them, said Ben-Gurion). The Zionist terrorists were also involved in massacres, and assassinations, during the partition violence (colonialist war against the natives).
Another notable future Likud PM, also started in the military, during the partition fighting. That was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, "Butcher of Beirut".
Menachem Begin, and these other Zionist terrorists, are important because they became involved in Israeli politics, first forming Herut. That was the party that Albert Einstein, and other prominent American Jews, opposed, having a letter printed in the NYT, in December of 1948, when Begin came to visit the US. The letter opened ...
"Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine."
Herut merged with other extremist parties, over the years, and eventually became Likud, in the 70s. Now, people get upset over the slogan "From the river to the sea!", but it's the second part that's most important, "Palestine will be free!". Because "Palestine" isn't defined as an ethno-state, a free Palestine can be a single state, free for all to live in, and return to, free of continuing colonization, free of occupation, free of oppression, etc. Just like a Germany free of Nazism, an Italy free of fascism, a South Africa free of apartheid, or an America free of slavery from sea to shiny sea. It doesn't necessitate purging all the Jews. It just necessitates them giving up on the idea of an ethno-state.
On the other hand, because "Israel" has been defined as an ethno-state, Likud's, "between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty", has no possible good interpretation. It is a declaration of intent to completely colonize, and ethnically cleanse, all Palestine territories. Not only that, but it also claims that they have a "right" to all of the "Land of Israel" (biblical borders that don't mesh with archaeological reality), which is an open declaration of future wars, against Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and possibly even Iraq.
Likud platform ...
1977: "The Right of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel)
a. The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.
b. A plan which relinquishes parts of western Eretz Israel, undermines our right to the country, unavoidably leads to the establishment of a "Palestinian State," jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population, endangers the existence of the State of Israel. and frustrates any prospect of peace."
"Settlement
Settlement. both urban and rural. in all parts of the Land of Israel is the focal point of the Zionist effort to redeem the country, to maintain vital security areas and serves as a reservoir of strength and inspiration for the renewal of the pioneering spirit. The Likud government will call on the younger generation in Israel and the dispersions to settle and help every group and individual in the task of inhabiting and cultivating the wasteland, while taking care not to dispossess anyone."
1999: "The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration, and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs."
"The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."
All Palestine territories are officially considered occupied, by the International Court of Justice, the UN GA, the UN SC, and even in official documents of Israel's own allies. Likud is still using the blueprint for colonizing North America, in the West Bank. Move settlements out into native territory, piss off the natives, the natives retaliate, cry about poor "innocent" colonizing settlers being the "victims" of violent "Savages!", call in the cavalry to put down the native uprising, and eventually expand the borders to include those settlements. Rinse and repeat. In Gaza, Israel is operating an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Them claiming a "right to defend themselves" would be like the Nazis claiming a "right to defend themselves " from the Warsaw ghetto uprising. There's no "war". That they're the occupiers means the "war" part is long over. Those people are actually supposed to be under the occupier's protection.
That partition was forced upon the Palestinian majority, against their will ... that the Zionist portion still had to be forcefully ethnically cleansed of its non-Jewish majority, against their will ... that the millions of occupied Palestinians don't have a say in the government that truly rules over them, Israel's ... means Israel is about as democratic as Nazi Germany after Hitler purged his political opponents and then held elections.
37
-
37
-
35
-
33
-
31
-
Likud's bloody 100 year history ...
In 1923, 100 years ago, Ze'ev Jabotinsky wrote, The Iron Wall, and a follow up, The Ethics of The Iron Wall (sooo racist towards Africans), in which he fully acknowledged that post Balfour Zionsim was colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the native Palestinian population would resist being colonized until the bitter end. He directly compared it to the colonization of North America. He promoted doing it anyway, claiming Zionist colonialism was a "just" colonialism (he also thought North American colonialists were good guys, so not a great judge of morality), not caring what that meant for the native population.
Ze'ev is important, because his Betar militant youth group helped found the Irgun terrorist group, along with other supporters of his, and the splinter Lehi terrorist group. The Irgun bombed numerous Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who didn't support colonialist Zionsim).
The Irgun are important, because they ended up being led by future Likud PM, Menachem Begin, who bombed the King David Hotel. The King David Hotel was bombed because the British had raided the Jewish Agency and seized numerous documents that may have shown that the terrorists were working with the JA and Haganah (JA liked to pretend that they didn't support the terrorism). The British then stored those documents at their base, in the hotel. That the Irgun terrorists responded to a JA raid, itself seems to prove the connection. That the thousands of Irgun (and Lehi) terrorists were also quickly merged into the new nation's military (IDF) and intelligence (Mossad) agencies, and are still celebrated as "heroes" by Israelis, to this day, also seems to support total collaboration between the groups.
That other terrorist group mentioned, Lehi (also known as the Stern Gang), was considered even more extreme. They even tried to ally with the Nazis, against the British. Lehi ended up being led by Yitzhak Shamir, future Mossad agent, and another future Likud PM. They assassinated Lord Moyne, and others.
In 1945, there was a major land and peoples survey done in Palestine. It showed that the Zionists only owned about 5% of the total land, 20% of the arable land, and owned a majority in zero districts. The partition was not only going to be forced on the native Palestinian majority, but Jews were still going to be a minority, in the part allocated to them. The only possible way to even become a "Jewish state" was going to require getting rid of the actual majority (at least enough so that there'd be a solid Jewish majority, so they could fake being democratic).
This is also shown by the 1948, post Nakba, population of Israel. If there was 716,700 Jews, 156,000+ non-Jews, and approximately 700k non-Jews ethnically cleansed, that means the Jewish population, in the Zionist portion of partition, was originally over 100,000 less than the non-Jewish population. To believe that there was never any intent, by Zionists, to ethnically cleanse away the Palestinian majority would require believing that they never intended to create a "Jewish state". It's a nonsensical notion.
Begin, and those terrorist groups, also opposed partition, but for the opposite reason Palestinians did. Palestinians didn't want to be colonized, at all. The terrorists wanted to colonize it all. "Moderate" Zionists were okay with colonizing half ... for now (what would happen in the future, after partition, was up to them, said Ben-Gurion). The Zionist terrorists were also involved in massacres, and assassinations, during the partition violence (colonialist war against the natives).
Another notable future Likud PM, also started in the military, during the partition fighting. That was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, "Butcher of Beirut".
Menachem Begin, and these other Zionist terrorists, are important because they became involved in Israeli politics, first forming Herut. That was the party that Albert Einstein, and other prominent American Jews, opposed, having a letter printed in the NYT, in December of 1948, when Begin came to visit the US. The letter opened ...
"Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine."
Herut merged with other extremist parties, over the years, and eventually became Likud, in the 70s. Now, people get upset over the slogan "From the river to the sea!", but it's the second part that's most important, "Palestine will be free!". Because "Palestine" isn't defined as an ethno-state, a free Palestine can be a single state, free for all to live in, and return to, free of continuing colonization, free of occupation, free of oppression, etc. Just like a Germany free of Nazism, an Italy free of fascism, a South Africa free of apartheid, or an America free of slavery from sea to shiny sea. It doesn't necessitate purging all the Jews. It just necessitates them giving up on the idea of an ethno-state.
On the other hand, because "Israel" has been defined as an ethno-state, Likud's, "between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty", has no possible good interpretation. It is a declaration of intent to completely colonize, and ethnically cleanse, all Palestine territories. Not only that, but it also claims that they have a "right" to all of the "Land of Israel" (biblical borders that don't mesh with archaeological reality), which is an open declaration of future wars, against Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and possibly even Iraq.
Likud platform ...
1977: "The Right of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel)
a. The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.
b. A plan which relinquishes parts of western Eretz Israel, undermines our right to the country, unavoidably leads to the establishment of a "Palestinian State," jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population, endangers the existence of the State of Israel. and frustrates any prospect of peace."
"Settlement
Settlement. both urban and rural. in all parts of the Land of Israel is the focal point of the Zionist effort to redeem the country, to maintain vital security areas and serves as a reservoir of strength and inspiration for the renewal of the pioneering spirit. The Likud government will call on the younger generation in Israel and the dispersions to settle and help every group and individual in the task of inhabiting and cultivating the wasteland, while taking care not to dispossess anyone."
1999: "The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration, and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs."
"The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."
All Palestine territories are officially considered occupied, by the International Court of Justice, the UN GA, the UN SC, and even in official documents of Israel's own allies. Likud is still using the blueprint for colonizing North America, in the West Bank. Move settlements out into native territory, piss off the natives, the natives retaliate, cry about poor "innocent" colonizing settlers being the "victims" of violent "Savages!", call in the cavalry to put down the native uprising, and eventually expand the borders to include those settlements. Rinse and repeat. In Gaza, Israel is operating an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Them claiming a "right to defend themselves" would be like the Nazis claiming a "right to defend themselves " from the Warsaw ghetto uprising. There's no "war". That they're the occupiers means the "war" part is long over. Those people are actually supposed to be under the occupier's protection.
That partition was forced upon the Palestinian majority, against their will ... that the Zionist portion still had to be forcefully ethnically cleansed of its non-Jewish majority, against their will ... that the millions of occupied Palestinians don't have a say in the government that truly rules over them, Israel's ... means Israel is about as democratic as Nazi Germany after Hitler purged his political opponents and then held elections.
29
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
@michaelbeason8856 It seems I didn't say they pioneered simply expanding borders. So, shove your strawman.
If you don't see the similarities between Manifest Destiny, the belief that a god had destined certain people to settle all of America, and the belief that Israelites are a god's chosen people, who gave them a holy land, that's destined to be theirs again, I don't know what to say.
There is also a similarity in exact method. Most border expansions, and conquest, involved conquering a land and ruling over its people, which is why genocides, and ethnic cleansing, are treated somewhat differently. They aren't the norm. Just blathering about border expansions doesn't reflect the exact method of expansion. Moving settlers out into native territory, acting like a victim when you're attacked, then ethnically cleansing the area and expanding your borders, over, and over, and over, for over a hundred years, isn't even some standard method of ethnic cleansing. Attila just plowed through other territories pushing massive populations of Goths ahead of him. No feigning a willingness to live side by side in peace with the Goths. No acting like the victim of Goth aggression.
If you have a better example of something more similar, I'm all ears.
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
Likud's bloody 100 year history ...
In 1923, 100 years ago, Ze'ev Jabotinsky wrote, The Iron Wall, and a follow up, The Ethics of The Iron Wall (sooo racist towards Africans), in which he fully acknowledged that post Balfour Zionsim was colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the native Palestinian population would resist being colonized until the bitter end. He directly compared it to the colonization of North America. He promoted doing it anyway, claiming Zionist colonialism was a "just" colonialism (he also thought North American colonialists were good guys, so not a great judge of morality), not caring what that meant for the native population.
Ze'ev is important, because his Betar militant youth group helped found the Irgun terrorist group, along with other supporters of his, and the splinter Lehi terrorist group. The Irgun bombed numerous Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who didn't support colonialist Zionsim).
The Irgun are important, because they ended up being led by future Likud PM, Menachem Begin, who bombed the King David Hotel. The King David Hotel was bombed because the British had raided the Jewish Agency and seized numerous documents that may have shown that the terrorists were working with the JA and Haganah (JA liked to pretend that they didn't support the terrorism). The British then stored those documents at their base, in the hotel. That the Irgun terrorists responded to a JA raid, itself seems to prove the connection. That the thousands of Irgun (and Lehi) terrorists were also quickly merged into the new nation's military (IDF) and intelligence (Mossad) agencies, and are still celebrated as "heroes" by Israelis, to this day, also seems to support total collaboration between the groups.
That other terrorist group mentioned, Lehi (also known as the Stern Gang), was considered even more extreme. They even tried to ally with the Nazis, against the British. Lehi ended up being led by Yitzhak Shamir, future Mossad agent, and another future Likud PM. They assassinated Lord Moyne, and others.
The two terrorist groups also operated outside of Palestine. The Irgun bombed the British Embassy at Porta Pia, in Rome. The Lehi bombed the British Colonial Club, in London. A timer failed in another bombing attempt, at the Colonial Office, in Whitehall. Two female Lehi operatives were arrested crossing from Belgium to France, with the ingredients for letter bombs. 21 letter bombs were found to be have sent, and were intercepted. They mined the Cairo-Haifa train, in Egypt, twice, killing dozens of civilians, as well as British soldiers.
In 1945, there was a major land and peoples survey done in Palestine. It showed that the Zionists only owned about 5% of the total land, 20% of the arable land, and owned a majority in zero districts. The partition was not only going to be forced on the native Palestinian majority, but Jews were still going to be a minority, in the part allocated to them. The only possible way to even become a "Jewish state" was going to require getting rid of the actual majority (at least enough so that there'd be a solid Jewish majority, so they could fake being democratic).
This is also shown by the 1948, post Nakba, population of Israel. If there was 716,700 Jews, 156,000+ non-Jews, and approximately 700k non-Jews ethnically cleansed, that means the Jewish population, in the Zionist portion of partition, was originally over 100,000 less than the non-Jewish population. To believe that there was never any intent, by Zionists, to ethnically cleanse away the Palestinian majority would require believing that they never intended to create a "Jewish state". It's a nonsensical notion.
Begin, and those terrorist groups, also opposed partition, but for the opposite reason Palestinians did. Palestinians didn't want to be colonized, at all. The terrorists wanted to colonize it all. "Moderate" Zionists were okay with colonizing half ... for now (what would happen in the future, after partition, was up to them, said Ben-Gurion). The Zionist terrorists were also involved in massacres, and assassinations, during the partition violence (colonialist war against the natives).
Another notable future Likud PM, also started in the military, during the partition fighting. That was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, "Butcher of Beirut".
Menachem Begin, and these other Zionist terrorists, are important because they became involved in Israeli politics, first forming Herut. That was the party that Albert Einstein, and other prominent American Jews, opposed, having a letter printed in the NYT, in December of 1948, when Begin came to visit the US. The letter opened ...
"Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine."
Herut merged with other extremist parties, over the years, and eventually became Likud, in the 70s. Now, people get upset over the slogan "From the river to the sea!", but it's the second part that's most important, "Palestine will be free!". Because "Palestine" isn't defined as an ethno-state, a free Palestine can be a single state, free for all to live in, and return to, free of continuing colonization, free of occupation, free of oppression, etc. Just like a Germany free of Nazism, an Italy free of fascism, a South Africa free of apartheid, or an America free of slavery from sea to shiny sea. It doesn't necessitate purging all the Jews. It just necessitates them giving up on the idea of an ethno-state.
On the other hand, because "Israel" has been defined as an ethno-state, Likud's, "between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty", has no possible good interpretation. It is a declaration of intent to completely colonize, and ethnically cleanse, all Palestine territories. Not only that, but it also claims that they have a "right" to all of the "Land of Israel" (biblical borders that don't mesh with archaeological reality), which is an open declaration of future wars, against Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and possibly even Iraq.
Likud platform ...
1977: "The Right of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel)
a. The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.
b. A plan which relinquishes parts of western Eretz Israel, undermines our right to the country, unavoidably leads to the establishment of a "Palestinian State," jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population, endangers the existence of the State of Israel. and frustrates any prospect of peace."
1999: "The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration, and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs."
"The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."
All Palestine territories are officially considered occupied, by the International Court of Justice, the UN GA, the UN SC, and even in official documents of Israel's own allies. Likud is still using the blueprint for colonizing North America, in the West Bank. Move settlements out into native territory, piss off the natives, the natives retaliate, cry about poor "innocent" colonizing settlers being the "victims" of violent "Savages!", call in the cavalry to put down the native uprising, and eventually expand the borders to include those settlements. Rinse and repeat. In Gaza, Israel is operating an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Them claiming a "right to defend themselves" would be like the Nazis claiming a "right to defend themselves " from the Warsaw ghetto uprising. There's no "war". That they're the occupiers means the "war" part is long over. Those people are actually supposed to be under the occupier's protection.
That partition was forced upon the Palestinian majority, against their will ... that the Zionist portion still had to be forcefully ethnically cleansed of its non-Jewish majority, against their will ... that the millions of occupied Palestinians don't have a say in the government that truly rules over them, Israel's ... means Israel is about as democratic as Nazi Germany after Hitler purged his political opponents and then held elections.
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
Likud's bloody 100 year history ...
In 1923, 100 years ago, Ze'ev Jabotinsky wrote, The Iron Wall, and a follow up, The Ethics of The Iron Wall (sooo racist towards Africans), in which he fully acknowledged that post Balfour Zionsim was colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the native Palestinian population would resist being colonized until the bitter end. He directly compared it to the colonization of North America. He promoted doing it anyway, claiming Zionist colonialism was a "just" colonialism (he also thought North American colonialists were good guys, so not a great judge of morality), not caring what that meant for the native population.
Ze'ev is important, because his Betar militant youth group helped found the Irgun terrorist group, along with other supporters of his, and the splinter Lehi terrorist group. The Irgun bombed numerous Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who didn't support colonialist Zionsim).
The Irgun are important, because they ended up being led by future Likud PM, Menachem Begin, who bombed the King David Hotel. The King David Hotel was bombed because the British had raided the Jewish Agency and seized numerous documents that may have shown that the terrorists were working with the JA and Haganah (JA liked to pretend that they didn't support the terrorism). The British then stored those documents at their base, in the hotel. That the Irgun terrorists responded to a JA raid, itself seems to prove the connection. That the thousands of Irgun (and Lehi) terrorists were also quickly merged into the new nation's military (IDF) and intelligence (Mossad) agencies, and are still celebrated as "heroes" by Israelis, to this day, also seems to support total collaboration between the groups.
That other terrorist group mentioned, Lehi (also known as the Stern Gang), was considered even more extreme. They even tried to ally with the Nazis, against the British. Lehi ended up being led by Yitzhak Shamir, future Mossad agent, and another future Likud PM. They assassinated Lord Moyne, and others.
In 1945, there was a major land and peoples survey done in Palestine. It showed that the Zionists only owned about 5% of the total land, 20% of the arable land, and owned a majority in zero districts. The partition was not only going to be forced on the native Palestinian majority, but Jews were still going to be a minority, in the part allocated to them. The only possible way to even become a "Jewish state" was going to require getting rid of the actual majority (at least enough so that there'd be a solid Jewish majority, so they could fake being democratic).
This is also shown by the 1948, post Nakba, population of Israel. If there was 716,700 Jews, 156,000+ non-Jews, and approximately 700k non-Jews ethnically cleansed, that means the Jewish population, in the Zionist portion of partition, was originally over 100,000 less than the non-Jewish population. To believe that there was never any intent, by Zionists, to ethnically cleanse away the Palestinian majority would require believing that they never intended to create a "Jewish state". It's a nonsensical notion.
Begin, and those terrorist groups, also opposed partition, but for the opposite reason Palestinians did. Palestinians didn't want to be colonized, at all. The terrorists wanted to colonize it all. "Moderate" Zionists were okay with colonizing half ... for now (what would happen in the future, after partition, was up to them, said Ben-Gurion). The Zionist terrorists were also involved in massacres, and assassinations, during the partition violence (colonialist war against the natives).
Another notable future Likud PM, also started in the military, during the partition fighting. That was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, "Butcher of Beirut".
Menachem Begin, and these other Zionist terrorists, are important because they became involved in Israeli politics, first forming Herut. That was the party that Albert Einstein, and other prominent American Jews, opposed, having a letter printed in the NYT, in December of 1948, when Begin came to visit the US. The letter opened ...
"Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine."
Herut merged with other extremist parties, over the years, and eventually became Likud, in the 70s. Now, people get upset over the slogan "From the river to the sea!", but it's the second part that's most important, "Palestine will be free!". Because "Palestine" isn't defined as an ethno-state, a free Palestine can be a single state, free for all to live in, and return to, free of continuing colonization, free of occupation, free of oppression, etc. Just like a Germany free of Nazism, an Italy free of fascism, a South Africa free of apartheid, or an America free of slavery from sea to shiny sea. It doesn't necessitate purging all the Jews. It just necessitates them giving up on the idea of an ethno-state.
On the other hand, because "Israel" has been defined as an ethno-state, Likud's, "between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty", has no possible good interpretation. It is a declaration of intent to completely colonize, and ethnically cleanse, all Palestine territories. Not only that, but it also claims that they have a "right" to all of the "Land of Israel" (biblical borders that don't mesh with archaeological reality), which is an open declaration of future wars, against Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and possibly even Iraq.
Likud platform ...
1977: "The Right of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel)
a. The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.
b. A plan which relinquishes parts of western Eretz Israel, undermines our right to the country, unavoidably leads to the establishment of a "Palestinian State," jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population, endangers the existence of the State of Israel. and frustrates any prospect of peace."
"Settlement
Settlement. both urban and rural. in all parts of the Land of Israel is the focal point of the Zionist effort to redeem the country, to maintain vital security areas and serves as a reservoir of strength and inspiration for the renewal of the pioneering spirit. The Likud government will call on the younger generation in Israel and the dispersions to settle and help every group and individual in the task of inhabiting and cultivating the wasteland, while taking care not to dispossess anyone."
1999: "The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration, and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs."
"The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."
All Palestine territories are officially considered occupied, by the International Court of Justice, the UN GA, the UN SC, and even in official documents of Israel's own allies. Likud is still using the blueprint for colonizing North America, in the West Bank. Move settlements out into native territory, piss off the natives, the natives retaliate, cry about poor "innocent" colonizing settlers being the "victims" of violent "Savages!", call in the cavalry to put down the native uprising, and eventually expand the borders to include those settlements. Rinse and repeat. In Gaza, Israel is operating an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Them claiming a "right to defend themselves" would be like the Nazis claiming a "right to defend themselves " from the Warsaw ghetto uprising. There's no "war". That they're the occupiers means the "war" part is long over. Those people are actually supposed to be under the occupier's protection.
That partition was forced upon the Palestinian majority, against their will ... that the Zionist portion still had to be forcefully ethnically cleansed of its non-Jewish majority, against their will ... that the millions of occupied Palestinians don't have a say in the government that truly rules over them, Israel's ... means Israel is about as democratic as Nazi Germany after Hitler purged his political opponents and then held elections.
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
@chris.kellly There's zero inconsistency in how herd immunity works. Every vaccinated person, between a high risk person, and a covid carrier, adds an additional line of protection, that the virus has to fight to get through.
Take the flu vaccine. It only has about a 50% efficacy rate, due to the multiple different strains, and it taking some guess work to determine which will be dominant strain this season.
So, at an individual level, the high risk vaccinated person is 50% protected, if they come in contact with a virus carrier. In a group, if you add another vaccinated person between them, and the high risk person is now 75% protected. Another, and they're 87.5% protected. Another, and they're 93.75% protected. That's the science of herd immunity.
Unvaccinated people, on the other hand, provide an unprotected path for a virus to more easily travel.
Not too hard to grasp.
15
-
14
-
@MrIndiemusic101 FYI, in the poll I was referring to, the number was double the national average, at 32%, in Alberta. It was double Ontario, 16%, and more than double Quebec, 11%. But, hey, go ahead and pretend like Alberta isn't our most conservative province. Pretend it's not the province that spewed forth the Reform Party, that wanted a moronic US style senate, private health insurance, anti-gay legislature, etc. In other words, tried to have a US style Republican party, that failed getting enough support in other provinces.
14
-
Likud's bloody 100 year history ...
In 1923, 100 years ago, Ze'ev Jabotinsky wrote, The Iron Wall, and a follow up, The Ethics of The Iron Wall (sooo racist towards Africans), in which he fully acknowledged that post Balfour Zionsim was colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the native Palestinian population would resist being colonized until the bitter end. He directly compared it to the colonization of North America. He promoted doing it anyway, claiming Zionist colonialism was a "just" colonialism (he also thought North American colonialists were good guys, so not a great judge of morality), not caring what that meant for the native population.
Ze'ev is important, because his Betar militant youth group helped found the Irgun terrorist group, along with other supporters of his, and the splinter Lehi terrorist group. The Irgun bombed numerous Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who didn't support colonialist Zionsim).
The Irgun are important, because they ended up being led by future Likud PM, Menachem Begin, who bombed the King David Hotel. The King David Hotel was bombed because the British had raided the Jewish Agency and seized numerous documents that may have shown that the terrorists were working with the JA and Haganah (JA liked to pretend that they didn't support the terrorism). The British then stored those documents at their base, in the hotel. That the Irgun terrorists responded to a JA raid, itself seems to prove the connection. That the thousands of Irgun (and Lehi) terrorists were also quickly merged into the new nation's military (IDF) and intelligence (Mossad) agencies, and are still celebrated as "heroes" by Israelis, to this day, also seems to support total collaboration between the groups.
That other terrorist group mentioned, Lehi (also known as the Stern Gang), was considered even more extreme. They even tried to ally with the Nazis, against the British. Lehi ended up being led by Yitzhak Shamir, future Mossad agent, and another future Likud PM. They assassinated Lord Moyne, and others.
In 1945, there was a major land and peoples survey done in Palestine. It showed that the Zionists only owned about 5% of the total land, 20% of the arable land, and owned a majority in zero districts. The partition was not only going to be forced on the native Palestinian majority, but Jews were still going to be a minority, in the part allocated to them. The only possible way to even become a "Jewish state" was going to require getting rid of the actual majority (at least enough so that there'd be a solid Jewish majority, so they could fake being democratic).
This is also shown by the 1948, post Nakba, population of Israel. If there was 716,700 Jews, 156,000+ non-Jews, and approximately 700k non-Jews ethnically cleansed, that means the Jewish population, in the Zionist portion of partition, was originally over 100,000 less than the non-Jewish population. To believe that there was never any intent, by Zionists, to ethnically cleanse away the Palestinian majority would require believing that they never intended to create a "Jewish state". It's a nonsensical notion.
Begin, and those terrorist groups, also opposed partition, but for the opposite reason Palestinians did. Palestinians didn't want to be colonized, at all. The terrorists wanted to colonize it all. "Moderate" Zionists were okay with colonizing half ... for now (what would happen in the future, after partition, was up to them, said Ben-Gurion). The Zionist terrorists were also involved in massacres, and assassinations, during the partition violence (colonialist war against the natives).
Another notable future Likud PM, also started in the military, during the partition fighting. That was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, "Butcher of Beirut".
Menachem Begin, and these other Zionist terrorists, are important because they became involved in Israeli politics, first forming Herut. That was the party that Albert Einstein, and other prominent American Jews, opposed, having a letter printed in the NYT, in December of 1948, when Begin came to visit the US. The letter opened ...
"Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine."
Herut merged with other extremist parties, over the years, and eventually became Likud, in the 70s. Now, people get upset over the slogan "From the river to the sea!", but it's the second part that's most important, "Palestine will be free!". Because "Palestine" isn't defined as an ethno-state, a free Palestine can be a single state, free for all to live in, and return to, free of continuing colonization, free of occupation, free of oppression, etc. Just like a Germany free of Nazism, an Italy free of fascism, a South Africa free of apartheid, or an America free of slavery from sea to shiny sea. It doesn't necessitate purging all the Jews. It just necessitates them giving up on the idea of an ethno-state.
On the other hand, because "Israel" has been defined as an ethno-state, Likud's, "between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty", has no possible good interpretation. It is a declaration of intent to completely colonize, and ethnically cleanse, all Palestine territories. Not only that, but it also claims that they have a "right" to all of the "Land of Israel" (biblical borders that don't mesh with archaeological reality), which is an open declaration of future wars, against Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and possibly even Iraq.
Likud platform ...
1977: "The Right of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel)
a. The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.
b. A plan which relinquishes parts of western Eretz Israel, undermines our right to the country, unavoidably leads to the establishment of a "Palestinian State," jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population, endangers the existence of the State of Israel. and frustrates any prospect of peace."
"Settlement
Settlement. both urban and rural. in all parts of the Land of Israel is the focal point of the Zionist effort to redeem the country, to maintain vital security areas and serves as a reservoir of strength and inspiration for the renewal of the pioneering spirit. The Likud government will call on the younger generation in Israel and the dispersions to settle and help every group and individual in the task of inhabiting and cultivating the wasteland, while taking care not to dispossess anyone."
1999: "The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration, and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs."
"The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."
All Palestine territories are officially considered occupied, by the International Court of Justice, the UN GA, the UN SC, and even in official documents of Israel's own allies. Likud is still using the blueprint for colonizing North America, in the West Bank. Move settlements out into native territory, piss off the natives, the natives retaliate, cry about poor "innocent" colonizing settlers being the "victims" of violent "Savages!", call in the cavalry to put down the native uprising, and eventually expand the borders to include those settlements. Rinse and repeat. In Gaza, Israel is operating an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Them claiming a "right to defend themselves" would be like the Nazis claiming a "right to defend themselves " from the Warsaw ghetto uprising. There's no "war". That they're the occupiers means the "war" part is long over. Those people are actually supposed to be under the occupier's protection.
That partition was forced upon the Palestinian majority, against their will ... that the Zionist portion still had to be forcefully ethnically cleansed of its non-Jewish majority, against their will ... that the millions of occupied Palestinians don't have a say in the government that truly rules over them, Israel's ... means Israel is about as democratic as Nazi Germany after Hitler purged his political opponents and then held elections.
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
@silver plate And? The super rich, living off stocks and options, don't actually have incomes to tax, anyway, and the US capital gains laws can let them go their whole lives without paying capital gains taxes (which are much lower than Finland's, even when they do).
Finnish conservatives have been underfunding the healthcare system for almost a decade and pushing private healthcare, and changes in tax laws have created a group of super rich tax dodgers. You think it's a positive to aim for being more like the US?
Even still, Finland would be considered commieland, according to US right wingers (Is that who you think you are talking to? If so, wrong channel.). Most progressives (which this channel's audience mainly is) point out that someone like Bernie is actually a centrist, in the real world, so wouldn't consider Finland anything more than that.
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
@IV_97 Right, so they care more about bullshit than they care about working people and their struggles. Are you just concerned the op said they don't care, at all?
And it is bullshit, because they aren't protesting IVF, which ends up not using a ton of fertilized eggs, on top of the many that don't take, killing them. Plus, studies now show that the majority of pregnancies end in spontaneous abortions (miscarriages), so they're actually worshipping a being that, if existed, aborts the majority of pregnancies. They don't actually believe embryos and newborns are samesies. They don't actually believe aborting embryos and fetuses is objectively wrong.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
Yang has always been on the side of corporations. He's bullshitting Americans, telling them a VAT will tax corporations like Amazon, when a VAT is specifically designed to NOT tax them. If you don't have Amazon pay into the UBI, since their share of US consumer spending is 2%, handing consumers $3t will only make Amazon an extra $60b a year. That'd make Bezos something like $6b extra a year, far more than he'd ever personally pay into a VAT. His "plan"would make giant corporations and the super rich even richer, and increase wealth inequality, while leaving some very poor people worse off. He's not a progressive. He's skipping the things other countries do to make corporations pay in, like the things Bernie is proposing.
"a consumption tax because it is borne ultimately by the final consumer. It is not a charge on businesses."
https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/vat/what-is-vat_en
"Final consumers are not entitled to such credits, which means that they pay all the GST on every item purchased. The GST is thus a multi-stage tax on final consumption."
http://publications.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/BP/prb0003-e.htm#A.%20Taxing%20Mechanism(txt)
Even Amazon, who he falsely claims a VAT will tax, has their own tutorial page on "How VAT works in Europe" and "How to claim back VAT", proving him to be a liar.
https://services.amazon.co.uk/services/vat-resources.html
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
Yang's foundation is flawed. A VAT is specifically designed to NOT tax businesses in order to avoid double taxation. It's a sales tax, collected in stages, with all the business stages getting to reclaim their input VAT.
Since his dividend wouldn't actually have corporations paying into it, as the Alaskan dividend does, a corporation like Amazon would only get the benefits of the dividend being spent. Yang would make Amazon extra tens of billions a year, which would make Bezos extra billions a year.
It is only progressive on the surface, but would increase inequality, increase money flowing to the top to be hoarded, increase money being invested into automation, etc. ... all at an even faster rate than is happening now.
How a UBI is paid for matters.
Also, LA has tested a public option, and that doesn't get you universal coverage anytime soon, if ever.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@therationalnational David. Jimmy has a new video out, downplaying the risks of covid, called "Are COVID death rates WILDLY inflated?".
In it, he takes hospitalization rates per total vaccinated (0.01%)and unvaccinated (0.89%) populations and compares it to a 3.4% "death rate", that is clearly a case fatality rate (fatalities per confirmed cases) from a year and a half ago. The case fatality rate is constantly changing, is different for each country, and different for the world.
He claimed he couldn't find a newer rate. Only someone who is completely inept, wouldn't be able to find the current case fatality rate. But, somehow Jimmy managed not to. Only someone who failed grade school math couldn't figure it out themselves. 800k deaths is 1.6% of 50m confirmed cases, in the US. But, somehow Jimmy, or his team, couldn't.
So, he compares these two sets of numbers, that are based on totally different math, to question whether covid deaths are being "WILDLY" inflated. You know, because a 3.4% "death rate" is so much higher than 0.9% hospitalization rate. The comparable "death rate" he should be using is the population mortality rate. 800k deaths is 0.24% of 330m total population. Again, something that's easy to find the latest numbers for, or figure out yourself, but the Dore knob team couldn't manage to do. There's nothing, at all, incompatible with a 0.24% total population mortality rate and a 0.9% total population hospitalization rate.
But, he's using his false equivalency to make out like covid is a lot less harmful than doctors and scientists, worldwide, have stated, and there's some giant worldwide conspiracy to inflate numbers, by over 10x.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
Likud's bloody 100 year history ...
In 1923, 100 years ago, Ze'ev Jabotinsky wrote, The Iron Wall, and a follow up, The Ethics of The Iron Wall (sooo racist towards Africans), in which he fully acknowledged that post Balfour Zionsim was colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the native Palestinian population would resist being colonized until the bitter end. He directly compared it to the colonization of North America. He promoted doing it anyway, claiming Zionist colonialism was a "just" colonialism (he also thought North American colonialists were good guys, so not a great judge of morality), not caring what that meant for the native population.
Ze'ev is important, because his Betar militant youth group helped found the Irgun terrorist group, along with other supporters of his, and the splinter Lehi terrorist group. The Irgun bombed numerous Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who didn't support colonialist Zionsim).
The Irgun are important, because they ended up being led by future Likud PM, Menachem Begin, who bombed the King David Hotel. The King David Hotel was bombed because the British had raided the Jewish Agency and seized numerous documents that may have shown that the terrorists were working with the JA and Haganah (JA liked to pretend that they didn't support the terrorism). The British then stored those documents at their base, in the hotel. That the Irgun terrorists responded to a JA raid, itself seems to prove the connection. That the thousands of Irgun (and Lehi) terrorists were also quickly merged into the new nation's military (IDF) and intelligence (Mossad) agencies, and are still celebrated as "heroes" by Israelis, to this day, also seems to support total collaboration between the groups.
That other terrorist group mentioned, Lehi (also known as the Stern Gang), was considered even more extreme. They even tried to ally with the Nazis, against the British. Lehi ended up being led by Yitzhak Shamir, future Mossad agent, and another future Likud PM. They assassinated Lord Moyne, and others.
In 1945, there was a major land and peoples survey done in Palestine. It showed that the Zionists only owned about 5% of the total land, 20% of the arable land, and owned a majority in zero districts. The partition was not only going to be forced on the native Palestinian majority, but Jews were still going to be a minority, in the part allocated to them. The only possible way to even become a "Jewish state" was going to require getting rid of the actual majority (at least enough so that there'd be a solid Jewish majority, so they could fake being democratic).
This is also shown by the 1948, post Nakba, population of Israel. If there was 716,700 Jews, 156,000+ non-Jews, and approximately 700k non-Jews ethnically cleansed, that means the Jewish population, in the Zionist portion of partition, was originally over 100,000 less than the non-Jewish population. To believe that there was never any intent, by Zionists, to ethnically cleanse away the Palestinian majority would require believing that they never intended to create a "Jewish state". It's a nonsensical notion.
Begin, and those terrorist groups, also opposed partition, but for the opposite reason Palestinians did. Palestinians didn't want to be colonized, at all. The terrorists wanted to colonize it all. "Moderate" Zionists were okay with colonizing half ... for now (what would happen in the future, after partition, was up to them, said Ben-Gurion). The Zionist terrorists were also involved in massacres, and assassinations, during the partition violence (colonialist war against the natives).
Another notable future Likud PM, also started in the military, during the partition fighting. That was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, "Butcher of Beirut".
Menachem Begin, and these other Zionist terrorists, are important because they became involved in Israeli politics, first forming Herut. That was the party that Albert Einstein, and other prominent American Jews, opposed, having a letter printed in the NYT, in December of 1948, when Begin came to visit the US. The letter opened ...
"Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine."
Herut merged with other extremist parties, over the years, and eventually became Likud, in the 70s. Now, people get upset over the slogan "From the river to the sea!", but it's the second part that's most important, "Palestine will be free!". Because "Palestine" isn't defined as an ethno-state, a free Palestine can be a single state, free for all to live in, and return to, free of continuing colonization, free of occupation, free of oppression, etc. Just like a Germany free of Nazism, an Italy free of fascism, a South Africa free of apartheid, or an America free of slavery from sea to shiny sea. It doesn't necessitate purging all the Jews. It just necessitates them giving up on the idea of an ethno-state.
On the other hand, because "Israel" has been defined as an ethno-state, Likud's, "between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty", has no possible good interpretation. It is a declaration of intent to completely colonize, and ethnically cleanse, all Palestine territories. Not only that, but it also claims that they have a "right" to all of the "Land of Israel" (biblical borders that don't mesh with archaeological reality), which is an open declaration of future wars, against Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and possibly even Iraq.
Likud platform ...
1977: "The Right of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel)
a. The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.
b. A plan which relinquishes parts of western Eretz Israel, undermines our right to the country, unavoidably leads to the establishment of a "Palestinian State," jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population, endangers the existence of the State of Israel. and frustrates any prospect of peace."
"Settlement
Settlement. both urban and rural. in all parts of the Land of Israel is the focal point of the Zionist effort to redeem the country, to maintain vital security areas and serves as a reservoir of strength and inspiration for the renewal of the pioneering spirit. The Likud government will call on the younger generation in Israel and the dispersions to settle and help every group and individual in the task of inhabiting and cultivating the wasteland, while taking care not to dispossess anyone."
1999: "The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration, and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs."
"The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."
All Palestine territories are officially considered occupied, by the International Court of Justice, the UN GA, the UN SC, and even in official documents of Israel's own allies. Likud is still using the blueprint for colonizing North America, in the West Bank. Move settlements out into native territory, piss off the natives, the natives retaliate, cry about poor "innocent" colonizing settlers being the "victims" of violent "Savages!", call in the cavalry to put down the native uprising, and eventually expand the borders to include those settlements. Rinse and repeat. In Gaza, Israel is operating an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Them claiming a "right to defend themselves" would be like the Nazis claiming a "right to defend themselves " from the Warsaw ghetto uprising. There's no "war". That they're the occupiers means the "war" part is long over. Those people are actually supposed to be under the occupier's protection.
That partition was forced upon the Palestinian majority, against their will ... that the Zionist portion still had to be forcefully ethnically cleansed of its non-Jewish majority, against their will ... that the millions of occupied Palestinians don't have a say in the government that truly rules over them, Israel's ... means Israel is about as democratic as Nazi Germany after Hitler purged his political opponents and then held elections.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@Frank-zs1wk I'm not sure that it's even necessarily the fact that he has more right wingers on, but the fact that he has some really extreme right wing people on, and he lets them get away with passing themselves off as moderates or centrists, without challenge. I don't think they do very in-depth research into the background of their guests, so he ends up just taking their word for some stuff.
For example: He just had Andy Ngo on, and let Andy pass himself off as centre-right, a poor middle of the road "reporter" viciously attacked by the far left Antifa.
Andy Ngo works for Quillette, which took Twitter to task for supposed liberal bias against "conservatives". Some they grouped as simply "conservatives":
American Nazi Party
Richard Spencer
National Policy Institute
David Duke
Mike Enoch
Paul Nehlen
James Allsup
League of the South
Proud Boys
The Proud Boys are Andy's personal favorites, who he follows around, and defends. They go looking for fights, and Andy chooses to basically embed with them. Andy, and Quillette, are far from some moderate centre-right. Joe, letting the very far right pass itself off as some moderate middle, makes their positions seem more acceptable.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@Bet Your lunch How did you stop Obama in 2013?
All I've heard Dore knobs blather about is the Steele dossier. Mueller didn't rely on the Steele dossier. The Mueller report included some 200 pages of information sharing (collusion), that didn't amount to criminal conspiracy. Mueller indicted 19 Russians, 3 Russian companies, a bunch of Trump cronies, and only didn't indict Jr and Kushner because he said it would be hard to prove they "willfully" broke the law, not because they didn't. So, are we supposed to believe that Republican investigator Mueller, the DNC, the FBI (run by Republicans for 6 of the past 10 presidential terms), Republicans like Romney, and Australian officials, were all in cahoots to frame Trump and make Pence president? Occam's Razor would suggest it's just a simple fact that Dumpty was getting info from Russians. Also, there was evidence of obstruction, which Republicans onve considered good enough to impeach Clinton over.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Considering the fact that both parties, including all presidents, have supported Israel for decades, and that the vast majority of congress supports Israel (enough to override any presidential veto on the subject), blaming Biden for it all, doesn't really make sense ... and letting Trump win, will just make things worse. He was the first president to go as far as recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital. He was the one who peddled a "peace plan", that ignored Palestinians, and tried to completely normalize Israel's behavior, even amongst Arab countries. He's the one talking about making a pledge of allegiance to Israel, to get in the country, and reintroducing and expanding a Muslim ban. Plus, he would back the same thing, in Ukraine, letting Russia colonize and occupy whoever it wants. Then there's what he could do, domestically. Even if your only presidential options were Mussolini or Hitler ... Hitler is worse. Biden and Trump aren't exactly samesies.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@ruminationstation4200 Canada's testing rate is also 27 people per confirmed case, while the US testing rate is 13.7 people per confirmed case. While it may be accurate to say that mailing tests is a step the US is now taking that the Canadian government hasn't, it would have been more accurate for David to point out that the US still needs to catch up to Canada, and not the other way around.
Total tests and tests per million are kind of irrelevant numbers that are totally disconnected from the covid numbers. Tests per confirmed case tells you how you're doing compared to the virus spread. Dumpty was bragging about totals and tests per million, meanwhile the US was testing at a rate of about 5 people per confirmed case, at the time. Meanwhile, countries like A Korea, Vietnam, Australia, and New Zealand, were testing 50+ people per confirmed case. Testing rates seem to have a strong correlation to how well countries have contained the virus. The US should be increasing testing by a helluva lot more than 500k home tests.
5
-
@loulfw2513 FTV was asking for a 100% guaranteed to fail performance art vote, hypocrite. AOC actively backed 20 other pro-M4A progressives with her platform and PAC, helped add a few more M4A yes votes to congress, and helped remove a few more corporate Dems. Adding enough yes votes is, literally, the only possible way to ever pass a bill in congress. She has been doing the exact thing that needs doing.
On the M4A march day, AOC was campaigning for Nina, promoting M4A while doing so, and again actively trying to increase the number of M4A yes votes in congress. Dore abandoned Nina, he abandoned adding another M4A yes vote to congress, M4A marchers didn't go support her, he then turned around and slandered AOC, claiming she was the one who abandoned M4A. Bush has been focused on the immediate eviction problem, both in her district, and federally.
Your heading is being filled by a lying grifter, who doesn't actually give two craps if anyone gets healthcare. He didn't care if 10m of the poorest Americans were thrown off Medicaid expansion, he didn't care to try and add 40m older Americans to Medicare expansion, he doesn't care that the most popular third party hasn't won a single seat in congress in its near 50 year existence and that that route won't get anyone healthcare in the next century. He doesn't care.
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
@thefreerepublicofadmiralpr2935
How is a peace deal with the UAE, "meaningful"? It didn't resolve anything with regards to Israel-Palestine, and caused tensions between the UAE and other nations.
Trump also removed environmental protections, endangered species protections, etc., that allowed for the killing of more animals and more destruction of their habitat.
Opioid deaths continued to increase. What did Trump do, exactly?
Trump dropped more bombs than Obama. He clearly warred against people and countries.
Oil exports have been increasing, yearly, since 2010. The US was already a net exporter of oil, before Dumpty. Natural gas exports have been increasing, yearly, since 2014. What is it Dumpty did, exactly, that wasn't already happening?
85% of contraband comes through entry points, dumb dumb. Plus, cartels own more planes than Mexican airlines. They also have boats. They also have tunnels. They also have catapults. They don't tend to send their contraband across rivers and deserts, being carried by the most likely people to be picked up by border patrol.
The prices of over 800 drugs went up in 2020. Drug companies are increasing prices on over 1k drugs in 2021. What did Trump do, exactly?
I'm stopping there. You seem to be spewing a load of crap.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@nameisamine Racism isn't strictly about colour, or ethnicity. Racists tend to think their race, or ethnic group, is superior for some reasons, and they assign certain characteristics to their imagined ideal specimen. Most white supremacists, for example, tend to assign Christianity, or at least Christian culture/heritage, as a characteristic of their ideal specimen. You know, claiming Christianity created the Western world, or whatever. So, they don't consider Jews, most of whom are white, to be one of them. Some even specifically assign Protestantism as a characteristic, and don't consider Catholics to be one of them. Likewise for Muslims. Whether those people are actually of a different race, or not, they get treated as if they are. Like, instead of "no Catholics" signs, in the US, places had "no Irish" or "no Italians", treating them as if they were different races, than other Europeans, rather than simply a different religion. So, yes, saying people look like a mailbox could be considered racist.
You could nitpick for it to be called "bigotry" but, either way, it's discriminatory and dehumanizing.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@alexandermiller1741 Greenwald doesn't seem to know what "free speech" is. He ranted about "free speech" because editors, whose jobs have included asking writers for rewrites since the dawn of publishing, asked him for a rewrite. He has gone off about losing "free speech" on social media, when there was never such a thing as "free speech" on someone else's private property (which also applies to his former publisher), to begin with. If you don't have a right to be on someone else's private property, then you don't have a right to be on someone else's private property blathering about whatever you want. I haven't heard him, or "socialist" Jimmy, let people know that free speech would come with public ownership. I haven't heard them criticize the far right for creating giant corporations, with so much power. I haven't heard them defend the left, and point out that giant corporations, run by centibillionaires, some of whom donate more to Republicans and whose algorithms promote more right wing crap, aren't leftist, in the least. I haven't heard them point out that inciting an insurrection isn't even protected speech. Etc. They seem to be coming at it from an entirely right wing "free speech" angle.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@xD4B5x Anti-authoritarian doesn't equate to "left". A majority of black voters voted for Biden, who is clearly a Republican light Democrat, over Bernie. Colonial Americans had protests, riots, destroyed private property, tarred and feathered loyalists, ànd eventually started a war ... against a tax specifically to fund the police/military. One of the last straws, for them, was when red coats, fearing for their lives against violent protesters, shot a bunch of those violent protesters. Do you consider them radical left terrorists?
Can you give an example of a "black supremacist" gathering similar to Charlottesville's Unite the Right gathering? Charlottesville had Nazi flag wavers, Confederate flag wavers, other white supremacist/nationalist flag wavers, KKK speakers, white nationalist speakers, etc.
4
-
4
-
@therationalnational Side note, David: As a Canadian living with a VAT (GST), you should do a bit on how a VAT actually works, for Yang and his gang. They seem to be clueless about the fact that it's built into the system that businesses get paid back for their input VAT. Meaning, Yang's claim that a VAT forces corporations to "pay their fair share" is bogus.
Many gangers also seem to be under the delusion that exempting "staples" means only big ticket luxury items will be taxed. We exempt staples, here in Canada, but that doesn't include the electric bill, phone bill, internet bill, cable bill, toys, games, basically any entertainment with a cost, non staple snacks and pop, personal hygiene products, household cleaning products, home maintenance, vehicle maintenance ... many things that still affect ordinary people.
Since it doesn't actually tax corporations like Amazon, handing consumers $3t, and Amazon's share of consumer spending being 2%, instead of making them pay, he'll make them an extra $60b a year. That would make Bezos something like an extra $12b a year. He'd have to personally blow over $120b a year on goods and services with a VAT to pay in more than he'd get out of the plan. If giant corporations and the super rich get more out of the plan than they pay in, that means someone else is paying in more than they're getting out.
Since it does tax many day to day items, those already getting $1000+ a month in government assistance would be worse off. Opting in or out won't give them any extra money, but they can't opt out of paying a VAT. As an example: any single parent on full SSI disability ($775), that currently stacks with SNAP ($355+ for household of 2+), will be worse off. Yang has neither stack with UBI.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@Bet Your lunch Ummm, infighting is exactly what Jimmy wanted. He started slandering everyone and anyone who didn't go for his "strategy" to get a performance art vote on M4A.
AOC never once ran on paralyzing, or threatening to paralyze, the house. Jimmy lied and pretended she didn't do what she said. AOC did say she wanted to cause a "ruckus" means, based on whatever "ruckus" means to her. Jimmy made up what "ruckus" meant, to him, and again lied that she wasn't doing what she said, as if something is objectively a "ruckus", or not. An old lady, thinking your music is a bit too loud, can think you're causing a "ruckus", ffs. It's a fairly subjective term. AOC backed 20 pro-M4A progressives and helped add a few more M4A yes votes to congress. That actually gets you closer to ever being able to pass the bill than a performance art vote does. On that, alone, she has done more for M4A, in 2 years, than Dore has in his entire lifetime, and more than any third party, that can't win a single seat in congress. Dore made a big deal about where was she on M4A march day, as if she was in hiding. Well, it was public knowledge that she was doing public rallies with Nina Turner, that day, promoting M4A at those rallies, and trying her best to help add yet another M4A advocate to congress. Dore, on the other hand, publicly abandoned Nina Turner, on his show, publicly abandoned trying to add another M4A advocate to congress.
Also, remember, that Dore promoted Trump (platform: toss 10m poor Americans off of Medicaid expansion) over Clinton (platform: add 40m older Americans to Medicare expansion), he promoted Tulsi (platform: public option) over Bernie (platform: M4A), and ran a constant attack ad campaign against Trump's (still wanting to toss millions off of Medicaid expansion) only remaining viable opponent Biden (platform: public option and Medicare expansion). Then, he tries to pass himself off as the one true champion of healthcare. Rofl!
You have got the wrong fraud. Dore is a grifter. He doesn't care if anyone gets, or loses, healthcare. He says one thing, but then proposes the worst healthcare option.
4
-
@Kamfrenchie Prompting Trump as the better option in 2016, could only benefit Trump. Running an attack ad campaign against Trump's only remaining viable opponent in 2020, could only benefit Trump. Going on far right talk shows, just to agree with them, only validates and benefits the far right. Promoting making friends with far right ancap Boogaloos, only benefits the far right. Promoting the third party route, that hasn't won the most popular third party a single seat in congress in its near 50 year existence, that would, at best, peel away enough progressive votes to hand the Dem party totally back to corporate Dems and let Republicans rule for decades, benefits the far right. Slandering progressives, that have done more for M4A in a few years than he has in his entire lifetime, benefits the far right.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
David, he has also been lying from the start about who a VAT actually taxes. A VAT is specifically designed to NOT be a tax on businesses.
"The GST takes into account the cost of inputs – the factors used in manufacturing or production – at each stage of the process to avoid double taxation. Input tax credits enable partnerships, businesses and self-employed workers to recover all GST paid on goods and services purchased for business purposes by deducting them from their GST payments. Final consumers are not entitled to such credits, which means that they pay all the GST on every item purchased. The GST is thus a multi-stage tax on final consumption."
http://publications.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/BP/prb0003-e.htm#A.%20Taxing%20Mechanism(txt)
"a consumption tax because it is borne ultimately by the final consumer. It is not a charge on businesses."
https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/vat/what-is-vat_en
Even Amazon knows. "How VAT works in Europe", "How to claim back VAT".
https://services.amazon.co.uk/services/vat-resources.html
That includes getting credited back input VAT on advertising, which he repeatedly lies about.
https://www.burtonbeavan.co.uk/reclaim-vat-google-adwords/
If he doesn't actually make Amazon pay into the UBI, and their share of US consumer spending is 2%, handing consumers $3t a year will only make Amazon an extra $60b a year. That would, in turn, make Bezos something like an extra $6b a year ... a ton more than he'd ever personally pay into a VAT.
Yang's plan will make giant corporations and the super rich even richer, and increase inequality.
That ad has other subtle diahonesty, because he doesn't have his UBI stack with SSI disability or SNAP, which do currently stack together. A single non working caregiver with a disabled child could now be getting over $1000/month. Even if they opt out of the UBI, they can't opt out of paying a VAT on many things. Non staples, here in Canada: utilities, phone service, internet service, snacks and pop, personal hygiene products, household cleaning products, home maintenance, vehicle maintenance, toys, games, basically any entertainment with a cost ... all kinds of things that would still affect their lives.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@anti-corporatecapture3844 You seem to be using numbers based on two different ways of calculating them. That 0.89% hospitalization for the unvaccinated (and 0.01% hospitalization rate for the vaccinated, an 89x lower rate), seems to be the rate, based on total population, given in a Gallup article. The comparable death rate would be the crude mortality rate, which is 0.088%, in Canada, and 0.27% in the US. But, you morons want Canada to be more like the US, and have people die at a much higher rate, instead of the other way around.
Your 0.02% death rate seems to be the infection fatality rate for underdeveloped countries, where life expectancy is as low as 55. For developed countries it's about 1%. That would be 370k Canadians, or 3.3m Americans, you're willing to sacrifice. That 1% is 4x the fatality rate for motor vehicle accidents, and far more widespread. And yet we still have licensing mandates, light and sign mandates, speed limit mandates, seatbelt mandates, no drinking and driving mandates, vehicle safety standard mandates, line mandates, etc. Should we ditch all those, for freedumb, because motor vehicle accidents are far less common and less deadly, than covid? I mean, if the covid death rate isn't worth worrying about, then why should a lower death rate, right?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@seanmccartney5177 How so? It has been Likud's goal for 100 years, in all its previous forms. Likud's bloody 100 year history ...
In 1923, 100 years ago, Ze'ev Jabotinsky wrote, The Iron Wall, and a follow up, The Ethics of The Iron Wall (sooo racist towards Africans), in which he fully acknowledged that post Balfour Zionsim was colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the native Palestinian population would resist being colonized until the bitter end. He directly compared it to the colonization of North America. He promoted doing it anyway, claiming Zionist colonialism was a "just" colonialism (he also thought North American colonialists were good guys, so not a great judge of morality), not caring what that meant for the native population.
Ze'ev is important, because his Betar militant youth group helped found the Irgun terrorist group, along with other supporters of his, and the splinter Lehi terrorist group. The Irgun bombed numerous Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many Palestinian civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who didn't support colonialist Zionsim).
The Irgun are important, because they ended up being led by future Likud PM, Menachem Begin, who bombed the King David Hotel. The King David Hotel was bombed because the British had raided the Jewish Agency and seized numerous documents that may have shown that the terrorists were working with the JA and Haganah (JA liked to pretend that they didn't support the terrorism). The British then stored those documents at their base, in the hotel. That the Irgun terrorists responded to a JA raid, itself seems to prove the connection. That the thousands of Irgun (and Lehi) terrorists were also quickly merged into the new nation's military (IDF) and intelligence (Mossad) agencies, and are still celebrated as "heroes" by Israelis, to this day, also seems to support total collaboration between the groups.
That other terrorist group mentioned, Lehi (also known as the Stern Gang), was considered even more extreme. They even tried to ally with the Nazis, against the British. Lehi ended up being led by Yitzhak Shamir, future Mossad agent, and another future Likud PM. They assassinated Lord Moyne, and others.
In 1945, there was a major land and peoples survey done in Palestine. It showed that the Zionists only owned about 5% of the total land, 20% of the arable land, and owned a majority in zero districts. The partition was not only going to be forced on the native Palestinian majority, but Jews were still going to be a minority, in the part allocated to them. The only possible way to even become a "Jewish state" was going to require getting rid of the actual majority (at least enough so that there'd be a solid Jewish majority, so they could fake being democratic).
This is also shown by the 1948, post Nakba, population of Israel. If there was 716,700 Jews, 156,000+ non-Jews, and approximately 700k non-Jews ethnically cleansed, that means the Jewish population, in the Zionist portion of partition, was originally over 100,000 less than the non-Jewish population. To believe that there was never any intent, by Zionists, to ethnically cleanse away the Palestinian majority would require believing that they never intended to create a "Jewish state". It's a nonsensical notion.
Begin, and those terrorist groups, also opposed partition, but for the opposite reason Palestinians did. Palestinians didn't want to be colonized, at all. The terrorists wanted to colonize it all. "Moderate" Zionists were okay with colonizing half ... for now (what would happen in the future, after partition, was up to them, said Ben-Gurion). The Zionist terrorists were also involved in massacres, and assassinations, during the partition violence (colonialist war against the natives).
Another notable future Likud PM, also started in the military, during the partition fighting. That was Ariel Sharon, war criminal, "Butcher of Beirut".
Menachem Begin, and these other Zionist terrorists, are important because they became involved in Israeli politics, first forming Herut. That was the party that Albert Einstein, and other prominent American Jews, opposed, having a letter printed in the NYT, in December of 1948, when Begin came to visit the US. The letter opened ...
"Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine."
Herut merged with other extremist parties, over the years, and eventually became Likud, in the 70s. Now, people get upset over the slogan "From the river to the sea!", but it's the second part that's most important, "Palestine will be free!". Because "Palestine" isn't defined as an ethno-state, a free Palestine can be a single state, free for all to live in, and return to, free of continuing colonization, free of occupation, free of oppression, etc. Just like a Germany free of Nazism, an Italy free of fascism, a South Africa free of apartheid, or an America free of slavery from sea to shiny sea. It doesn't necessitate purging all the Jews. It just necessitates them giving up on the idea of an ethno-state.
On the other hand, because "Israel" has been defined as an ethno-state, Likud's, "between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty", has no possible good interpretation. It is a declaration of intent to completely colonize, and ethnically cleanse, all Palestine territories. Not only that, but it also claims that they have a "right" to all of the "Land of Israel" (biblical borders that don't mesh with archaeological reality), which is an open declaration of future wars, against Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and possibly even Iraq.
Likud platform ...
1977: "The Right of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel)
a. The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.
b. A plan which relinquishes parts of western Eretz Israel, undermines our right to the country, unavoidably leads to the establishment of a "Palestinian State," jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population, endangers the existence of the State of Israel. and frustrates any prospect of peace."
"Settlement
Settlement. both urban and rural. in all parts of the Land of Israel is the focal point of the Zionist effort to redeem the country, to maintain vital security areas and serves as a reservoir of strength and inspiration for the renewal of the pioneering spirit. The Likud government will call on the younger generation in Israel and the dispersions to settle and help every group and individual in the task of inhabiting and cultivating the wasteland, while taking care not to dispossess anyone."
1999: "The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river. The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration, and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs."
"The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."
All Palestine territories are officially considered occupied, by the International Court of Justice, the UN GA, the UN SC, and even in official documents of Israel's own allies. Likud is still using the blueprint for colonizing North America, in the West Bank. Move settlements out into native territory, piss off the natives, the natives retaliate, cry about poor "innocent" colonizing settlers being the "victims" of violent "Savages!", call in the cavalry to put down the native uprising, and eventually expand the borders to include those settlements. Rinse and repeat. In Gaza, Israel is operating an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Them claiming a "right to defend themselves" would be like the Nazis claiming a "right to defend themselves " from the Warsaw ghetto uprising. There's no "war". That they're the occupiers means the "war" part is long over. Those people are actually supposed to be under the occupier's protection.
That partition was forced upon the Palestinian majority, against their will ... that the Zionist portion still had to be forcefully ethnically cleansed of its non-Jewish majority, against their will ... that the millions of occupied Palestinians don't have a say in the government that truly rules over them, Israel's ... means Israel is about as democratic as Nazi Germany after Hitler purged his political opponents and then held elections.
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
It's the Republican party. They've given a home to all kinds of extremists, for decades, in their effort to cling to power ... extreme anti-socialist McCarthy types, anti-Civil Rights racists, crony capitalist Reaganomics, religious extremists, extreme gun rights nuts and the NRA, tea party nutters, Trump cultists, insane Qanoners ...
It has become a party of lunatics. They've pushed the party far right authoritarian, and the "centrist" Dems have kept moving to meet them in the "middle", which is now right wing, and towards corporate backers rather than the old union/worker backed party, themselves.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@bluesrockfan36 You're a moron, because I've already included links, verifying I know exactly how a VAT works, verifying you're spouting pure bullshit by claiming it's a tax on businesses. You obviously didn't bother to inform yourself, are clearly pretending you know how a VAT works, but are actually clueless. You're like a Trump cultist, with your alternative "facts" and math.
Fact: Yang acknowledges there are people currently getting $1000+ in assistance that he doesn't have stacking, and that they'll have to choose.
Math: If you gain zero economic benefit from the UBI, but now have to pay 10% more for many things, you're worse off.
Fact: Amazon's share of US consumer spending is 2+% and Bezos' share of Amazon is 10+%.
Math: If you hand consumers $3t, and don't have Amazon pay in, they will make $60b. That would make Bezos $6b. That large shareholder would make a ton more than he'd ever personally pay into a VAT.
Averages don't address that people who are getting full benefits might be getting them because they need the most help, and those are the people you're willing to make worse off, while you make giant corporations and the super rich even richer.
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Christopher Bradley As for Twitter allies. What does Dore do, besides social media? AOC backed Bernie (M4A), on the ground campaigning, when Dore was peddling Tulsi (public option) from his garage. AOC started a PAC, used that PAC, and her Twitter platform, to back 20 other pro-M4A progressives, and ended up helping to remove a few more corporate Dems and add a few more M4A advocates to congress. While Dore was slandering her for no longer supporting M4A, she was on the ground campaigning for Nina Turner, promoting M4A, and trying to add another M4A advocate to congress. Jimmy Dore, the one true champion of healthcare, on the other hand, abandoned Nina Turner on air ... abandoned adding another M4A advocate to congress.
Jimmy basically does jack shit, except bitch on social media, and he promotes actions that benefit corporate Dems and Republicans more than anyone else.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@gudmundursturluson7683 Rofl! The tea party was backed by the Koch brothers, and other far right donors that were pressuring all the Republicans in congress. There were constantly growing numbers of them. Republicans don't actually need to be pushed that hard to move further right. As you can see, the majority are plenty happy to support all out fascism. Plus, the only way a minority within a party can have any power over the majority, is if that majority is unwilling to work with the other party. If the non tea party Republicans had simply worked with enough Democrats, they could have passed whatever they wanted, and totally ignored the tea partiers.
There are zero big donors pushing other Democrats to jump onboard with progressives. New congressional Dems aren't joining the progressive caucus weekly. Corporate Dems have no natural tendency to move left. Plus, the Manchin types are clearly willing to work with Republicans. Expecting similar results to the tea party would be completely moronic. They aren't, at all, samesies.
Justice Dems have increased the progressive vote count. Getting enough yes votes in congress is the only possible way to ever pass a bill. AOC helped add a few more, as well. She was on the ground campaigning for Nina Turner, trying to add another. Dore slanders those progressives, who have done more for M4A in a few years than he has in his entire lifetime. And, he publicly abandoned Nina Turner ... abandoned adding another M4A yes vote to congress.
Other countries don't have the same political system, or similar party divisions. The most popular third party hasn't won a single seat in congress in its near 50 year existence. The most popular progressive third party hasn't won a single seat in congress in its 20 year existence. Even if you magically got a significant percentage of progressives to vote third party, then Republicans would rule for decades to come, due to vote splitting.
"Vote blue" works both ways. The vast majority of those who vote against progressives in the primaries tend to vote for them in the general. Any hope of Bernie becoming president would have relied on "vote blue" working for him. Progressives running as Dems has proven to be the far more effective way to win a seat than going third party has. Plus, you're not guaranteed a third party will only produce perfectly perfect puritan progressives. Green produced Kyrsten Sinema.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@seabass155 CDC: "During March 2020–January 2021, the period that coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic, the risk for myocarditis was 0.146% among patients diagnosed with COVID-19 during an inpatient or hospital-based outpatient encounter and 0.009% among patients who were not diagnosed with COVID-19."
0.146% = 146 per 100000 (COVID)
0.009% = 9 per 100000 (No COVID)
My bad, the age table ...
16-24: 0.098% = 98 per 100000 (C)
16-24: 0.013% = 13 per 100000 (~C)
^But, those would be higher for boys/men.
CTV reporting on Ontario announcement: "The risk of myocarditis in Ontario following the second dose of Moderna in men in the 18 to 24 age group was one in 5,000, the government said. The number is much lower for women.
That number is approximately one in 28,000 for the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine."
1 per 5000 = 20 per 100000 (M)
1 per 28000 = 3.6 per 100000 (P)
So, Pfizer is 3.6x lower than the no covid rate, and 27x lower than the COVID rate.
Moderna is 1.5x the no covid rate, but 4.9x lower than the COVID rate.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Warrenmitchum The rest of the world heard the same things from WHO. The rest of the world heard the same things from China. Fauci is a Reagan appointee, and a Bush medal of freedom honory. He's also not the head of the pandemic response team. The head of that team is ... oh wait, Trump disbanded that team. Changing your stance, as more information becomes available, isn't necessarily a bad thing, and sticking to your empty guns, isn't necessarily a good thing.
Cuomo is also an idiot. I've personally been saying he's as incompetent as Dumpty, all along. Trash him all you want. Whatabout all day long, if you like.
Vietnam shares one of the longest borders with China. They are constantly flooded with Chinese tourism and trade. And yet, they have one of the lowest covid case and fatality rates in the world. The US response was complete incompetence. A response like Vietnam's would have meant under 1k deaths. Even a mediocre response, like Canada's, would have meant hundreds of thousands of fewer deaths. The US response was a total shit show.
3
-
@Bet Your lunch Aaron and Jimmy have blathered on, and on, about 2 dissenting opinions on a single, no fault finding, investigation. 2 dissenting opinions don't debunk that single investigation, let alone the numerous others, that had zero dissenting opinions, or the numerous follow up fault finding investigations that had zero dissenting opinions. That no fault finding investigation, they keep blathering about, didn't even begin until after, the US, and others, had bombed Syria (2018, not 2013), and the final report wasn't out until almost a year later. The report had absolutely nothing to do with anyone's decision to bomb Syria. It's a big nothingburger.
There was a chemical weapons attack, just the month before. It had a no fault investigation, with zero dissenting opinions. It had a fault finding follow up investigation, that faulted Syria, with zero dissenting opinions. There have been hundreds of accounts of Syrian chemical weapons use since 2013. 2 dissenting opinions on a single no fault investigation, doesn't erase all of those.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Fat Cat Rofl. That was a long winded way of shitting on yourself. As I've repeated, I'm using your own "logic", that allows you to claim I hate people I never said I hated, or that I'm okay with actions I never said I was okay with. I pointed at where everything started, and you unloaded with bullshit accusations. You're the one ignoring how the escalation built up, and are pointing at a single bad guy, like a child.
According to your own "logic", you are perfectly okay with Israel escalating from ethnic cleansing, to assault and occupying a holy site, you are perfectly okay with Israel escalating tensions by ignoring Hamas' warning to leave, you are perfectly okay with Israel's escalated response to rocket fire, and you are perfectly okay with them killing Palestinian civilians, because ... again according to your own "logic" ... you hate Palestinians.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Badatallthis Stuff Possibly paralyzing the house, during a pandemic ... delaying new covid relief, new unemployment extensions, new vaccine funding, etc. ... all for a piece of performance art, could have turned plenty of people off of progressives, and their ideas. It was actually a stupid time to suggest possibly doing that rather the best time.
You lot have proven that ftv was sham. Progressives got the $15 to stay in for a round of voting, it actually passed the house and also got a round of senate voting. Suddenly, getting a vote on an important progressive policy is meaningless to Dore knobs. Suddenly, getting a list of no voters is meaningless to Dore knobs. The pathetic good for nothing, hypocrites, just carry on bitching about, and slandering, those who got it to stay in for a round of voting and who voted for it.
Do you idiots even know that Pelosi introduced the M4A bill last session? It died in committees (that Dore doesn't think are important), where 90% of bills die. She has already reintroduced the bill this session. Why aren't you dolts pressuring and marching against committee members, to get them to take up the bill? Why are you wasting your time slandering and marching against progressives who have done more for M4A in a few years than Dore has in his entire lifetime?
3
-
@Badatallthis Stuff You're rewriting history. Most of the women's suffrage movement came in the decades preceding the first federal vote. They had already spent decades protesting, and numerous states had already adopted women's voting rights.
They did not hold the first federal vote for purely performance. They weren't sure how everyone would vote, because the parties weren't as partisan back then. Even the first vote had majority support. The problem was that it was a constitutional amendment and needed supermajority support. They, literally, held off on reintroducing the bill the next session, because they saw absolutely no point in having a purely performance art vote.
They thought they had the second vote, which did have supermajority in the house, but lost supermajority in the senate by only 2 votes.
The third vote passed.
That is not, at all, f*cking equivalent to being 100+ votes short in the house alone, having an even lower percentage of senate support, plus a president who said they'd veto it.
You Dore knobs have no clue what you're talking about.
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Jasondirt The 30 year old broader progressive caucus is about 10 seats away from becoming the majority of house Dems. The 4 year old Justice Dems have replaced about a dozen corporate Dems. AOC has been at it 2 years and has helped replace a few more corporate Dems. Progressives are making steady progress and are close to being able to pick the party speaker candidate. If still the majority party, that also means picking which bills to introduce, picking committee members, etc.
But, hey, sounds like a great time to start from scratch, with zero seats, zero bills introduced, zero amendments added, and zero votes on even a single bill, for the next 50 years.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@marlenechartrand3699 Every election there is a miniscule percentage of voter fraud. When 150m people have voted, taking a dozen votes to court here, or even a hundred votes there, before conceding, is just wasting people's time. That small crap, that doesn't affect the outcome, is usually dealt with behind the scenes, afterwards. He made the same baseless claim of widespread voter fraud, in 2016, then set up his own election integrity commission. They found nothing of the sort. He proved, himself, that his claim was baseless. He's a proven conman ... proven in court ... and you're falling for his con. You're the little old lady who hands over her social security number.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Take it back to Nixon. Nixon was the youngest member of the un-American Activities Commission, as a House representative. When he then ran for the California senate, he used an extremist Red Scare campaign against his opponent Hellen "Pink Lady" Gahagan. Reagan, was an FDR supporting Dem and union leader. He was backing Gahagan, at first. Someone (one account I read said Nancy, another said some other actress he worked with) then got him to go to a Nixon rally, and he dropped his support for her, and was put on the path to crazytown. Not sure if he actually met with Nixon. If so, there could possibly have been threats of black listing involved, as Nixon supported doing to people.
Nixon continued gathering the anti-socialist extremists, and then started playing to the Southern racists, during his presidential run. Nixon is pretty much to blame for starting to gather all the nuts into one basket.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Quantris This question, from an American neighbour, was about Canadian crazies, in general. They are more abundant, as a percentage of the population (which my polling comment was based upon), i.e. more visible, a larger percent of the vote, etc., in Alberta. Kenney is also a shit show, with Alberta currently leading all North American provinces and states, for new covid cases per capita. He, on the other hand, won by a majority of the Alberta vote ... because it's our most conservative province. Arguing against that, is arguing against reality.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
In terms of economics, the far left would actually be complete economic equality for all, and the total eradication of capitalism. Absolutely zero politicians run on such a platform.
The far right would be calling for complete privatization of services ... Ayn Rand. There are politicians actually running on such platforms. Libertarians are far right, and there's no equivalent on the left, in US politics.
Bernie is the centrist, pushing policies like centrist European countries, Canada, etc, where capitalism is still doing quite well. Democrats shifted, and have been right of centre for some time, and Republicans shifted even further right of them. The US still hasn't recovered from McCarthyism and the Red Scare.
The US was also 40% unionized in the early 50s, with those unions lobbying for workers. It's currently at about 10% unionized, with politicians and corporations trying to destroy the largest union left ... the teachers union ... by pushing to privatize schools. There is barely a worker lobby left to go up against the corporate lobby.
2
-
2
-
@jayasri6764 Any of you conservatives pretending like you're Spock, or Data, are complete idiots. That's just a fact. Even those characters weren't accurate to reality. In reality, one's objectivity actually makes zero decisions in life. Every decision is based on what one does, and/or doesn't value ... one's subjectivity. Shapiro values something over people, which is why he doesn't want others to value people.
Shapiro is a hypocritical douchebag that wants policies to have empathy for brainless fetuses, but not for thinking, feeling, developed human beings. Pushing contradictions is an indication he is, factually, an idiot.
2
-
@blogintonblakley2708 Thinking the FBI, the DNC, Australian officials, a Republican investigator, and other Republicans, were all in cahoots to fabricate a Russia story, in an attempt to make Mike Pence president, is the looney conspiracy theory, Dore knob. The Mueller report included some 200 pages of information sharing (collusion), that didn't rise to the level of criminal conspiracy, and stated Jr and Kushner weren't charged with criminal conspiracy because it would be hard to prove they "willfully" broke the law, not because they didn't break the law.
There have also been hundreds of accounts of Syrian chemical weapons use, since 2013. Two dissenting opinions, on a single report, doesn't actually debunk that report, let alone all the other accounts and investigations. That single investigation wasn't even started before the US and others had bombed Syria, it doesn't actually assign blame as per Russia's UN demand, and the final report didn't come out until almost a year after Syria was bombed. That no blame assigning report, that Dore and Mate kept crying about, had absolutely nothing to do with anyone's decision to bomb Syria. There was also another use of chemical weapons, just the month before, which had a no blame assigning investigation with zero dissenting opinions, and also had a follow up blame assigning investigation with zero dissenting opinions that did find Syria to blame.
2
-
@blogintonblakley2708 My bad. You're right. At least one of the studies in the meta analysis (an analysis of data from other "studies" isn't itself a study, ffs) was peer reviewed and found to be fraudulent, and pulled from publications.
Since you seem to have troubles telling the difference between "from the NIH" and from someone else, but in an NIH database ...
From the NIH: "There is insufficient evidence for the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel (the Panel) to recommend either for or against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19. Results from adequately powered, well-designed, and well-conducted clinical trials are needed to provide more specific, evidence-based guidance on the role of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19."
"However, most of these studies had incomplete information and significant methodological limitations, which make it difficult to exclude common causes of bias."
"Because most of these studies have significant limitations, the Panel cannot draw definitive conclusions on the clinical efficacy of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19. Results from adequately powered, well-designed, and well-conducted clinical trials are needed to provide further guidance on the role of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19."
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ZereayM There are plenty of Christians behaving badly, Hindus behaving badly, Jews behaving badly, even atheistic Buddhists behaving badly, socialists behaving badly, capitalists behaving badly, Americans behaving badly, Mexicans behaving badly, etc, etc., etc.
There's a difference between Islamophobes portraying all Muslims and Islam in a singular horrible light, and simply acknowledging that there are some Muslims behaving badly.
2
-
2
-
@seanmccartney5177 Are you actually an ignoramus, or do you just play one on the internet? Richard Spencer, organizer of Charlottesville:
“As someone who understands your identity, who has a sense of nationhood and peoplehood, and the history and experience of the Jewish people, you should respect someone like me, who has analogous feelings about whites. You could say that I am a white Zionist – in the sense that I care about my people, I want us to have a secure homeland for us and ourselves. Just like you want a secure homeland in Israel."
"I have great admiration for Israel's nation-state law. Jews are, once again, at the vanguard, rethinking politics and sovereignty for the future, showing a path forward for Europeans."
2
-
@Christopher Bradley That made no sense, since the reality is that Dore, and others of his ilk, have drawn the hardest lines. If you don't agree with just a single stupid pointless plan, then you get slandered as a "fake", "fraud", "sellout", or whatnot.
Slandering and "self criticizing" are two different things, and if you attack those who are closest to you, the most, and those who want to go completely backwards, the least (if at all), then you end up sounding mich like FOX.
Since when did the left give up on sensible gun control, that works in most other developed nations, including all the ones ranked higher than the US on freedom indexes? Rittenhouse should have never been wandering the streets with a gun, in the first place. He would have been arrested long before the shootings in pretty much every other developed country.
But, since he was, compare it to another case, where a guy shot up a church. A neighbor from down the street ran down to the church with his gun. He didn't see what was going on inside the church. He then shot at the armed gunman who came out of the churh. The gunman, who had been shot then got in his vehicle and sped off. Another man drives up and the neighbor guy jumps in that vehicle, tells him what happened, and they chase after the gunman at 95 mph. The gunman drove into a ditch and died of his gunshot wounds.
US law has allowed people, who didn't witness the crime, but think they're chasing a murderer, to use even deadly force. The Rittenhouse case goes against that. The Rittenhouse verdict would seemingly allow the church gunman to have killed the two men chasing after him, and shooting at him, in "self defense". Ironically, that seems to allow people to shoot "good guys with guns" in "self defense".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Funny how she campaigned for Bernie, backed 20 other pro-M4A progressives, helped add a few more M4A yes votes to congress, and helped remove a few more corporate Dems from office, while Dimwit Dore was peddling Tulsi and then running constant attack ads against Trump's only remaining viable opponent (not quite as bad as him outright promoting Trump as the better option in 2016). Funny how she just helped Bush extend the eviction moratorium, which Dimwit Dore didn't seem to care about (kind of like when he didn't care if 10m of the poorest Americans were thrown off Medicaid expansion). Funny how she was also just campaigning for Nina, promoting M4A, and trying to help increase the M4A yes vote count by one more, while Dimwit Dore was arguing against adding another M4A yes vote to congress (because third parties ... that's the best way to get votes in congress ... and third party candidates are obviously incorruptible and perfectly perfect puritans, like former Green member Sinema).
Oh my, AOC isn't perfectly perfect. Better call her out about a topic not relevant to the video. Maybe cult leader Dore, the one true champion of healthcare, will notice his little knob and give him a shine.
2
-
2
-
@DaraParsavand Before getting to Assange, Dore first agreed with the right wing framing of Trump being banned from social media. He didn't point out that there's no such thing as free speech on someone else's private property. He didn't point out that Republicans are the primary supporters of corporations having so much power. He didn't point out that public ownership would give you free speech rights. He didn't point out that inciting an insurrection isn't even protected speech, under the first amendment. Nope, just agreed with Tucker's right wing framing.
Then, and this interview was just as the second impeachment was getting underway, Dore threw Tucker, and his audience, the off topic bone of letting them know he considered the first impeachment to be a sham, helping to reinforce that, in their minds, for the second impeachment.
Finally, he got to Assange. WikiLeaks has been leaning right, in the information it's collecting and releasing. Right wingers love it. So how, exactly, is Assange an entirely leftist issue, at all? Tucker, himself, had already done multiple pro Assange pieces, starting 2 years before Jimmy was even on. There was no disagreement, or debate, on that topic, either.
What did Dore accomplish, exactly?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@joshualocicero6799 Bernie is centre-left, not far left. He points to centrist European countries to emulate, with mixed economies. He doesn't call for total economic equality and an end of capitalism, which would be the actual extreme left. In reality, there is no extreme left in US politics. On the other hand, there are numerous extreme right, Ayn Randian, politicians in US politics. So, US politics ranges from far right to centre-left, and simply agreeing with a few of Bernie's suggestions doesn't make one a leftist. Conservatives in most developed countries still agree with having a public health care system. They might not be extreme right economically, but they're still on the right. Everything left of far right isn't "left".
Fascists using language to try and sway workers to their side is exactly the way it worked the first time around. Nazis, for one, weren't socialists any more than North Korea is democratic, simply because the word is in their party name. They may not have been extreme Ayn Randian on economics, but they were still right wing. They destroyed unions, and socialists, communists, and unionists, were the first people they tossed into camps. One of their main arguments against Jews, one of the main reasons they hated them, was that a Jew, Marx, came up with socialism. Playing to the workers was just bullshit, the same as when Republicans do it. Fascists were actually backed by leading industrialists, large land owners, and most church leaders. They were leaders in privatization, turning public tax dollars into private profits. But you can't win elections with only those votes. You have to con some idiots to your side.
As well as simply lying about being on the side of workers, which they aren't, they use other rhetoric, like extreme nationalism, including an ideal national identity. That ideal being "brave" white male heterosexual Christians taking back "their" country. But they're actually cowards, afraid of people different than them.
Spencer has heaped tons of praise on Trump. He's not a freaking leftist.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@joshualocicero6799 Ugh ...
1. You have zero clue what an ad hom is ...
https://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html
2. I never personally claimed Marx invented socialism, you daft twat. I stated that's what the Nazis argued, and one of the reasons they gave for hating Jews. That's just a fact, which I am 100% correct about. I already pointed that out to you, but you were too stupid to grasp it. I made a statement about Nazis, not Marx. Please grasp that this time.
3. Seriously ... arguing that people should just accept their lot in life, give up the class struggle, not fight the upper class, and simply work hard to better yourself, is not freaking socialism, in any sense of the word. That's right wing "American Dream" style bullshit, which doesn't tell you that only outliers manage to change their economic position in life. The vast majority stay in the same bracket their entire lives. Turning public tax dollars into private profits is not socialism, in any sense of the word. That's pretty much the opposite. Confiscating the property and businesses of minority citizens and handing them to your big business backers is not socialism in any sense of the word. Handing your industrialist buddies slave labour is not socialism in any sense of the word. Owning people is a capitalist endeavor.
4. Economics that only apply to a few, is far different than economics that apply to everyone. Even if his country was entirely white, I already pointed out that women wouldn't benefit economically. They'd be nobodies without husbands, and then wives. Screwing 50% of the population seems quite different than Bernie, economically. If we were talking democracy, and one said everyone could vote, and the other said every man could vote, those wouldn't be the same thing. If women can't work, and can't benefit from a minimum wage hike, etc., then their economic policies aren't at all the same. Plus, they've outright said that they need to win people over on the left so, like earlier fascists, and like Republican, and many Democrat, politicians, they're likely just full of shit.
What do you consider yourself? Please don't say ancap.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@roberttelford745 As usual? Either you've been stalking me for all of 2 hrs, and this is all you've read, or you're a stalker with terrible timing, who keeps missing all the good stuff.
If someone equates "hold their own accountable in a principled way" to the strawmen, slander, and bullshit, that Dore spouts, then it's like talking to a Trump cultist. Anyone who questions, contradicts, or disagrees on tactics, with Supreme Leader Dore, is a "fake", "fraud", "shill", "betrayer", "coward", "sellout", or whatever, and isn't pure enough to be a "real" progressive anymore. Just like the Trump cult calling people RINOs. You lot should try and get PINO trending.
2
-
@roberttelford745 "Russiagate", with a Republican leading the investigation, produced some 200 pages of documented information sharing (collusion) that didn't amount to illegal conspiracy, and only didn't indict Jr and Kushner because it would be hard to prove they "willfully" broke the law, not because they didn't break the law. Thinking Republicans like Mueller, the DNC, the FBI, and Australian officials, all teamed up to take out Trump, just so Pence could be president, is the nutty conspiracy.
Multiple UN investigations, and numerous NGOs operating in Syria, support the chemical weapons claim. Dore was right, because a single reporter working in Russia, said otherwise?
Arguing "free speech" on privately owned property is a completely garbage argument. There's no such thing, because you don't have a right to be on their private property in the first place. Make an argument for public ownership, if your a "real" leftist, rather than going on Tucker's show and agreeing with the moronic and contradictory right wingers.
And AOC just got done campaigning for Bernie and his M4A, while Dore was backing Tulsi and her "Medicare choice". She used her platform and PAC to back 20 other progressives, helped take out a few more corporate Dems, and helped add a few more M4A yes votes to congress. That's exactly what you need to do to ever pass a bill, exactly what you'd still need to do even if there was a guaranteed to fail vote. Dore, the new one and only true champion of healthcare, didn't give a crap if 10m of the poorest Americans might lose their Medicaid expansion, didn't care to add 40m more older Americans to Medicare, and doesn't give a crap about leading people down the third party route that hasn't won the most popular third party a single seat in congress in 50 years. All or nothing often gets you nothing. One of those MPP puritan leaders even recently left the MPP, because he decided even they weren't pure enough for him. He'll go along way with his party of one. Reducing your number of allies down to as few pure people as possible isn't a winning strategy.
2
-
@roberttelford745 Whatever amount it affected the election outcome is irrelevant to the fact that it happened. 29 Russians indicted, 3 Russian companies, the other things I mentioned above, none of which you refuted. Republicans impeached Bill Clinton for lying to congress, with no underlying criminal charge. Mueller, a Republican, also laid out evidence that could be considered obstruction, but said they couldn't indict a sitting president.
No. Multiple UN inspections concluded there were chemical attacks. HRW and Doctors Without Borders are amongst NGOs that also corroborate chemical weapons attacks. All of which spoke out against the US, when it came to WMDs in Iraq. Now they've all joined the US to spew fake propaganda is what Dore wants you to believe?
FTV was much ado about nothing. You already had a list of names of those in congress that wouldn't sign the M4A bill. If Dore had 100+ viable pro-M4A candidates laying around, why didn't he run them in the election that just happened? When Pelosi introduced the bill to congress, last session, and it quietly died in committees, where 90% of bills die, why wasn't that, at least, used against all the committee members who didn't push it through? Progressives just got the $15 minimum wage to stay in the covid bill for one round of voting. Now you've got a list of those who voted against. So, what's the Dore plan? Oh, to sit on his ass, in his garage, and whine about those who voted for it, rather than those who voted against. Now, getting a vote isn't worth anything, to him. Dore knobs make out like a guaranteed to fail vote was itself M4A. It isn't. And, like I said, you'd then still have to do exactly what AOC did ... work to replace as many as you can with pro-M4A progressives.
Slandering someone as a "fake", "fraud", "sellout", "shill", "betrayer", etc., isn't "a bit of criticism", ffs. It's the kind of thing that got Republicans, who said the election was fine, death threats, when Trump spoke that way about them. Luckily, Dore isn't as influential as he thinks. Trump, who Dore promoted as a better option for progressives than Clinton, not caring if 10m Americans lost their public healthcare, and not caring to add 40m to public healthcare ... and now pretends like he's the one true champion of healthcare. He's a joke. He minimized the risks, claiming even Republicans would join the left in blocking the Trump agenda. Reality is, most followed him into overt fascism. Dore claimed the moon would fall into Lake Michigan, before Trump could fill multiple scotus seats. Reality is, the moon is still where it should be. And, he overestimated the benefits, claiming it would lead to a progressive wave that would, "for sure", take the house, senate, and presidency. Reality is, progressives made slight gains, with no evidence they couldn't have made similar gains without a Trump presidency.
Seriously, minimizing your allies to as few puritans as possible, isn't going to get you anything. At best, you peel off enough progressive voters from the Dem party to hand the party totally back to corporate Dems, and let Republicans rule for decades, while your new third party sits on the sidelines. That benefits progressives how? They're the backwards party. It's the party that wants to move in the completely opposite direction.
There's no such thing as "free speech" on private property. Again, argue for public ownership, if you want that right. Someone claiming to be a far lefty, like Dore, should have public ownership in their repertoire. Instead, he's using contradictory right wing talking points. Also, inciting violence isn't even protected speech, to begin with.
2
-
@roberttelford745 Rofl, I don't watch CNN. Dore would be proud of the strawmanning. I didn't say the DNC was an ally. It's Bernie, AOC, and others who campaigned against the DNC and DCCC backed corporate Dems, who are still allies. But, no, they're no longer pure enough for you lot.
The broader progressive caucus is 30 years old and 10-15 seats away from becoming the majority of house Dems, when they could then pick the party speaker candidate, and run the house, if still in the majority party. Justice Dems are 4 years old and have helped add a few of the most progressive seats in each of the last couple elections. AOC has been around 2 years and just helped add a few of the most progressive seats to congress in the last election. What a perfect time to ditch them all, start from scratch, have no seats, and no ability to introduce a single bill, no ability to add a single amendment, no ability to vote on even a single bill, and likely not have a single seat for decades to come. A winning strategy ... the winners being corporate Dems and Republicans. Weird how Dore strategies benefit those he claims to hate, most.
2
-
Forcing the vote won't get you M4A "now".
At best, you get the vote, it fails, and it gives you ammo to use against anti M4A candidates in 2022, so you can run pro M4A candidates against them (exactly like "shill", AOC, just did with her progressive PAC helping elect more progressives to congress), until you elect enough progressives to pass it.
Worse, you don't get the vote, you paralyze the House, and corporate Dems use paralyzing the house as propaganda against the progressives involved ... like arguing progressives won't let them get minimum wage passed, won't let them get lowering social security eligibility passed, and whatever else they can use to make it look like progressives are hurting the people.
Worst, if corporate Dems truly would rather lose to Republicans than give concessions to progressives (as Jimmy himself just argued), they could even orchestrate losing the speakership to McCarthy, and blame progressives. It's majority of votes cast, not majority of the house.
Jimmy's plan isn't 100% risk free.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Cha4k No. It means he twists things to suit a narrative. Rogan did not make clear that he was only talking about Moderna. Rogan did not make clear that he was only talking about a second shot of Moderna. So, it is not right, to say that Rogan was right, and that paper doesn't show Rogan was right, because Rogan wasn't talking about just a second shot of Moderna. Plus, there are studies from Denmark, Israel, other UK studies, data from Canada, and Japan, all of which seems to show some variance in myocarditis rates, and don't show Moderna rates over the covid rates, which means one UK study isn't the definitive answer.
2
-
2
-
@kdemetter How do you feel about feudalism, which even appeared on the US' Western frontier, with cattle barons hiring private armies of cowboys, and throwing their weight around, with little to no government intervention? It was only government law, and enforcers of said laws, finally moving in, that ended conflicts between private citizens.
Why do you pretend like private citizens can't coerse each other? There are, literally, blackmail and extortion laws, to stop private citizens from coercing each other, because they do.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Pierre has been on the road talking about vehicle thefts, as well. He tells the story of a man who tracked his stolen vehicle with AirTags, followed it to a shipping yard, and ended up being fined for trespassing as his vehicle was leaving. Problem is, this story was reported on. The police, texting with the man, were the ones who ended up at the shipping yard. They didn't have the authority to have the two possible container candidates opened. It was the private railway "police" who were then contacted, and didn't even respond that night, allowing the containers to be shipped. The man wasn't in the yard, and the railway "cops" didn't even show up that night, to be able to fine anyone.
2
-
It was a long war. I'm not sure when it started, but it sure as hell escalated, back in 1942, with that Irving Berlin and Bing Crosby song, Happy Holiday. Sad, that we lost the war, but glad it's finally over. Bing, Andy Williams, Jackie Gleason, Peggy Lee, Johnny Mathis, and more, were all valiant warriors for the cause.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Warrenmitchum Rofl. You're the one who deflected from Trump, to whatabout these other people, dummy. By your own "logic", that means your ideas are failing.
Democratic states, like Japan, S Korea, Australia, New Zealand, who all had great responses? Democratic states like Norway, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Canada, who had mediocre responses, that still would have saved hundreds of thousands of American lives? It was countries with shit responses that were hit hardest.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@brusher79 If your starting hospitalization numbers are based on the total population, then you want to compare it to the crude mortality rate, not case fatality rate, not infection fatality rate ...
Case fatality rate (CFR):
The CFR is easy to calculate. You take the number of people who have died from the disease, and you divide it by the total number of people diagnosed with the disease. So if 10 people have died, and 100 people have been diagnosed with the disease, the CFR is [10 / 100], or 10%.
Crude mortality rate
The crude mortality rate – sometimes also called the crude death rate – measures the share among the entire population that have died from a particular disease. It’s calculated by dividing the number of deaths from the disease by the total population. For instance, if there were 10 deaths in a population of 1,000, the crude mortality rate would be [10 / 1,000], or 1%.
Infection fatality rate (IFR)
The IFR is the number of deaths from a disease divided by the total number of cases. If 10 people die of the disease, and 500 actually have it, then the IFR is [10 / 500], or 2%.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Xpistos510 The basic VAT formula for a business is ...
x = input VAT (collected on sales)
y = output VAT (paid on expenses)
x - y = z
If z > 0, the business repays itself for y from the x it collected, and sends z to the government. It has paid 0 in the end.
If z < 0, the business keeps all of x it collected, and gets a refund for z from the government. It has paid 0 in the end.
It is only the final consumer that doesn't get paid back, so ends up paying the entire VAT.
Paying the businesses back is based on the basic principle that, if you leave it as a cost, they'll include it in their price anyway, and then the next stage would end up paying taxes on taxes. You find that in some places where businesses don't get a sales tax exemption. They'll pay sales tax on an expense, add that sales tax they paid into their own sale price, and then a portion of the sales tax on their sale is a tax upon a tax. After multiple stages, you get cascading taxes upon taxes upon taxes... So, even if Yang didn't use the VAT formula, and did use a sales tax, attempting to tax businesses, it would actually end up being even worse. Consumption taxes aren't the way to go, to attempt to tax businesses.
So, then you get Yang cultists, like SR, arguing price elasticity, or whatnot, claiming that, even though the VAT might not directly tax businesses, businesses will adjust their pre tax prices down, effectively eating some of the tax, paying some indirectly. But, Yang's own linked to pass through rate study totally debunks that argument. If you actually read it, it shows an almost 100% pass through on standard rated (20% VAT) goods and services. It was only by including lesser rated (8% VAT), and zero rated (0% VAT), goods and services, that the overall pass through rate dropped to around 50%. Yang mistakenly took that to mean that businesses were paying half the tax, when it actually means that there was less tax, or no tax, on most of the sales (the zero rated category is for staples, the necessities that people buy most), and that consumers were paying the entire tax, on what was taxed. The lesser rated category even showed that not only did businesses mark up their price to include the entire 8% VAT, but they marked it up even a bit more, for a little added profit.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Banana_Split_Cream_Buns It was very high testing rates that was the saving grace for New Zealand, Australia, S Korea, Vietnam (one of the longest borders with China), and a few others who responded very well. Be grateful of your leadership, and not just grateful you're on an island. Look up tests per confirmed case rates. Those countries tested in the high double digits to hundreds of people per confirmed case. Meanwhile, countries like the US, UK (an island nation), Italy, and others with the highest death rates, had low testing rates throughout much of the pandemic. Countries like Canada, Germany, Denmark, Norway, had higher testing rates than the second group, but lower testing rates than the first group, and had medium results.
Canada and the US are effectively islands, relative to China, which is an ocean away. The US' troubles weren't caused by people walking the virus in from Canada and Mexico. It flew in, and the response was terrible, and what we're considering bad, here in Canada, is a 3x lower death rate than the US. Even though our response was mediocre, we've done a lot better. Canada's deaths per million rate would translate into 300+k fewer deaths in the US, if they had had a mediocre response, like ours.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@anti-corporatecapture3844 Blah, blah, blah. You're lying. You're original stance was simply crying about mandates being against an individual's constitutional rights. You did not build an argument about the OSHA specifically. You're moving the goalpost to make yourself out to not be a raving lunatic.
So, your new argument is that it doesn't violate someone's individual constitutional rights, if they're receiving federal money? So, the government can mandate vaccines to farmers receiving aid, anyone on Medicaid or Medicare, any company receiving grants, anyone working for the government, schools, etc., etc., etc.?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@morphor Some video obviously taken well before he and wife publicly stated they stopped donating to her, and promoted never again donating to any Democrat or Republican, progressive or not, is irrelevant. Also, what Nina said doesn't, at all, debunk that Dore abandoned her. You'd have to show something Dore said, showing that he was supporting her to the end, which can't be done, not her showing him some support. Not knowing exactly what the "some things" he says that she can't, that she likes, also makes what she said kind of meaningless.
Rofl. Dore is "outraged" for a profit.
2
-
2
-
@Darke_Exelbirth The only possible way to ever pass M4A is to add enough yes votes to congress. So, someone like AOC, who is actively helping to add M4A yes votes to congress, is the one actually fighting for M4A.
You Dore knobs have mistaken fighting for a 100% guaranteed to fail performance art vote for fighting for M4A. They aren't the same thing. AOC, and Bernie, were just actively trying to add another M4A yes vote to congress, in Nina Turner. Dore, on the other hand, abandoned Nina and abandoned trying to add another M4A yes vote to congress.
Progressives got the $15 to stay in for a round of voting, it actually passed the house (M4A didn't have a chance in hell) and also go a senate vote. Suddenly, you moron Dore knobs think just getting a vote on important progressive policy is useless, and getting a list of no voters is useless. You're pathetic useless hypocrites, who benefit the far right most.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Jasondirt Rofl. No, AOC is not a major reason Pelosi got to remain speaker of the house. The party speaker candidate is chosen by simple majority of the party caucus. Even the entire broader progressive caucus doesn't yet have the majority needed to pick a different speaker candidate. A failed house speaker vote doesn't require the party to pick someone new. The non progressive majority could keep picking Pelosi over and over and over. Or, they could pick someone worse. Then what? Keep paralyzing the house?
Sure, AOC is one of 217 reasons why the house wasn't paralyzed. How long do you suggest paralyzing the house for, during a pandemic ... no new covid relief, no new unemployment extensions, no new vaccine funding, etc.?
Look, I get it, Dore knobs would rather see Republicans in the majority and progressives in a minority party, or in a party with zero seats, at all.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Badatallthis Stuff Rofl. You should take your own advice, and use the internet to learn what 1881a can actually do. It doesn't cover everyone for everything. It only covers those afflicted with the emergency disease, disaster, or whatnot. It would have been good, at the start of the pandemic, when everyone was more vulnerable to covid. Now, you'd mostly just be rewarding all the anti-mask and anti-vax morons, who catch covid, with Medicare coverage, while not getting it for cancer patients, or anyone with non covid illnesses or injuries.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@borealssb1384 What are you talking about? There's not a 50/50 chance a gene from each parent will be carried over. There's a 100% chance a gene from each parent will be carried over. The point is that one of those genes will be dominant. There's not a 50/50 chance one gene will be dominant over the other. There's a 100% chance the darker gene (hair, eyes, skin) will be dominant, which is what the poster is obviously referring to. Not a literal "battle" maybe, buy one gene's trait is overpowering the other gene's trait. Even two evenly mixed skin tone, hair colour, or eye colour, parents, each with a dominant gene and a recessive gene, won't give a child a 50% chance at having lighter skin, hair, or eyes. It'd be a 25% chance of getting a recessive gene from both parents, a 50% chance of getting 1 dominant gene from either parent, and a 25% chance at getting 2 dominant genes from both ... 75% chance of a darker skin tone, hair colour, or eye colour. You'd need one parent with 2 recessive genes, and a parent who has a dominant gene as well as a recessive gene, to get you a 50% chance of getting 2 recessive genes.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Socialism for corporations and the rich comes in many more forms.
If Apple ships a million phones from China, using trade lanes protected by the navy, and I buy one of those phones, they have benefited from that protection a million times more than me.
If Amazon sends out a transport truck full of goods, it is using the roads 3x as much, on average, than a car owner. Not only do they use the road more ... let's say that truck has moved 10000 items, and I buy one, they have benefited 10000x more than me from the road. And they pay no taxes.
If my education makes me $100k a year, but it makes my employer $1m a year, then they have benefited 10x more than me from that education.
If first responders are protecting a community of 10000 workers, they benefit 10000x more than each individual worker does.
Etc.
Etc.
Etc.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@High8Studio Well, it's somewhat like religion. A whole lot of people have subjective beliefs that aren't based on any kind of reality, and some people take a more objective approach.
For example, it's really just an objective fact that universal healthcare is doable (plenty of countries do it), is cheaper (as is the case in those countries and supported by numerous studies), doesn't lead to Venezuela or all out communism (most countries with universal healthcare aren't bankrupt or communist countries), and amongst developed countries gets better overall results (the US has the highest infant mortality rate, highest maternal mortality rate, and lowest life expectancy, in the developed world).
So, yeah, anyone spouting any of that bullshit against it, is kind of mental.
Likewise, it's just a fact there's scientific consensus on global warming, it's just a fact that the rich don't put their tax cuts back into the economy, etc, etc, etc.
1
-
1
-
Frank Boguszewski Nope. Christians tended to offer conversion, death, or exile, for centuries. Muslims didn't tend to force convert for centuries. That's why most of Hispania was still Christian, when it was reconquered. The new Christian rulers then offered Muslims and Jews the conversion, death, or exile options. The vast majority of the Jews went to the Ottoman Empire, with the Muslims, where they could keep practicing their religion. The Ottoman Empire decriminalized homosexuality when many Christian majority countries still considered it a crime or mental disorder. European women traveling throughout the Empire also reported that they thought Muslim women were freer, could own property, could initiate divorce, ...
You're thinking of ultra-conservative Wahhabism, which is newer, and which the US has supported financially and militarily, for decades, as it has spread. Turkey is the last remnants of the Ottoman Empire, not Saudi.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There's a difference between Dore's claimed positions and what he actually does.
He promoted Trump as the better option in 2016, which could only benefit Trump. He clearly didn't care if 10m of the poorest Americans were thrown off Medicaid expansion, and didn't care to try and add 40m older Americans to Medicare expansion. He vastly overestimated the benefits, claiming it would leads to progressives "for sure" taking the house (wrong) and senate (wrong), in 2018, and the presidency (wrong), in 2020. He vastly underestimated the risks, claiming Republicans would join the left and vote against a Trump agenda rather than follow him into all out fascism (wrong), and he claimed Trump filling multiple scotus seats was as likely as the moon falling into Lake Michigan (wrong). All of that only benefited the far right.
During the 2020 primaries, he backed Tulsi over Bernie, which didn't benefit the most progressive candidate and didn't benefit M4A.
During the 2020 general, he ran a constant attack ad campaign against Trump's only remaining viable opponent, which could only benefit Trump, the far right.
AOC, meanwhile, campaigned for Bernie, and backed 20 other pro-M4A progressives with her platform and PAC. She helped add a few more M4A yes votes to congress, as did the Justice Dems. Adding enough yes votes is the only possible way to ever pass the bill. Because they didn't support his half baked plan to get a 100% guaranteed to fail performance art vote, Dore slandered people who have done more for M4A in a few years than he has in his entire lifetime. That is of no benefit to progressives and benefits the far right.
After spending weeks slandering people over a disagreement over a secondary tactic, making out like they aren't allies, he turns around and promotes far right ancap Boogaloos, who basically disagree on all economics, are the complete economic opposites to socialists, as potential allies, because they agree on a few anti-authoritarian issues. And, I have to say, for someone his age to be shocked and amazed that ancappers agree on some anti-authoritarian issues with ansocs, means he is a complete ignoramus. That only benefits the far right, and is how you wind up on the wrong end of a Night of the Long Knives.
He doesn't simply go on Tucker. He largely agrees with Tucker, and doesn't challenge him. That only benefits Tucker and the far right.
AOC and Bernie were just campaigning for Nina, promoting M4A, trying hard to add another M4A yes vote to congress. Dore abandoned Nina, abandoned adding another M4A yes vote to congress, and slandered AOC and Bernie with a video stating they both abandoned M4A. In fact, it was Dore and M4A marchers that abandoned Nina, who was having rallies with AOC, both promoting M4A, that same day. Abandoning Nina, and abandoning adding more votes to congress, is of no benefit to progressives.
After weeks of making out like just getting a vote on an important progressive policy would be great, making out like getting a list of no voters on an important progressive policy would be great ... progressives got the $15 to stay in for a round of voting, it passed the house (M4A didn't have a chance in hell) and also got a senate vote ... Dore and his knobs turn around and make out like a vote and list of no voters is useless, and just keep bitchimg about, and slandering, those who got it to stay in for a round of voting, and who voted for it. He, and his knobs, proved they're nothing but a bunch of pathetic useless hypocrites, that are of no benefit to progressives.
The 30 year old broader progressive caucus is about 10 seats away from becoming the majority of house Dems. The 4 year old Justice Dems have replaced about a dozen corporate Dems. AOC, who has been at it 2 years, helped replace a few more corporate Dems. Dore promotes a third party route that hasn't won the most popular third party a single seat in congress in its near 50 year existence, that hasn't won the most popular progressive third party a single seat in congress in its 20 year existence. Zero seats, zero bills introduced, zero amendments, and zero votes on even a single bill, for what? For some fantasy that a third party candidate, like Kyrsten Sinema was, is going to be perfectly perfect and incorruptible?
And, there's more. Dore is a joke.
1
-
Dore and Greenwald ... Them ranting about "free speech" is ridiculous. There's no such thing as "free speech" on someone else's private property. You don't have a right to be on their private property, to begin with, so you never had a right to be on their private property spewing whatever you want. Glenn whining about "free speech" and editors asking for editorial rewrites (literally part of the job of editors, since the dawn of publishing) is outright moronic. If Dore was an actual leftist, he should be using the absence of free speech on social media to promote public ownership, instead of just agreeing with Tucker over the poor treatment of Trump (incitement isn't even protected speech in a public forum, but Dore didn't argue Trump did anything wrong).
Dlore and Mate ... Aaron is being an idiot. There have been hundreds of accounts of Syrian chemical weapons use since 2012. There have been dozens of UN investigations, that didn't assign blame, that had zero dissenting opinions. There have been dozens of follow up, blame assigning, investigations, that assigned blame to Syria, that had zero dissenting opinions. There have been hundreds of victim witnesses, dozens of healthcare worker witnesses, multiple NGO witnesses, independent investigations, legal human rights groups investigating on behalf of victims, etc. In 2018, alone, there was a chemical weapon attack, just the month before the one Aaron whines about. It had an investigation, that didn't assign blame, with zero dissenting opinions. It had a follow up, blame assigning investigation, that assigned blame to Syria, with zero dissenting opinions. Then there's the investigation Aaron is going on about ... Israel, the US, the UK, and France, had all started bombing before inspectors even made it to the sites. The final report, which didn't assign blame, wasn't released until almost a year later. The report had absolutely nothing to do with anyone's decision to bomb Syria, and 2 dissenting opinions doesn't even debunk that single investigation, let alone all the previous chemical weapons uses, including the one just the month before, that could have been used as grounds for war crimes violations. Aaron's Syrian "scandal" is much ado about nothing.
They're all loons.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stevenshumate3430 McConnell blocking Democrat bills that come from the house, looks good in the eyes of Republicans. Corporate Dems could use progressives paralyzing the house to blame them for no new covid relief, and not being able to pass anything in the platform that other Democrats just voted for, making them look bad in the eyes of other Democrats, and Republicans.
Jimmy has also argued that corporate Dems would rather work with Republicans than progressives. That's actually an argument against his own plan, not for it. If true, Pelosi could make a quiet deal with Republicans, in exchange for enough of them abstaining, or being absent, to lower the threshold needed to win, dodging the house being paralyzed, and making progressives look stupid.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@klauskinski5969 So, Dore and Aaron have clearly explained the fact that the report they kept blathering about didn't actually assign blame, as per Russian UN demands on every first round investigation? They clearly explained that the investigation didn't even start until after the US, and others, had already bombed Syria? They clearly explained the fact that the no fault final report didn't even come out until almost a year after the bombings? Meaning, it's a blatantly obvious fact that the report was never used by anyone as grounds to bomb Syria.
They've clearly explained the fact that there have been several of these no fault finding investigations, with zero dissenting opinions, since 2013? They've clearly explained the fact that there have also been several fault finding follow up investigations, with zero dissenting opinions, most finding fault with Syria, since 2013? They've clearly explained that, just the month before the incident they keep blathering about, there was another chemical weapons attack, which went through both rounds of investigations, with zero dissenting opinions, and found fault with Syria?
You know it's possible to both not support the US, and others, unilaterally deciding to bomb whoever they want, as well as accept the fact that the Syrian government is complete shit, and has committed numerous human rights abuses, including using chemical weapons on its own citizens? Dore and Aaron seem to make out like it has to be one, or the other. If you don't agree with them, that Syria did no wrong, then you're a US government shill, or something.
1
-
@klauskinski5969 1. What's wrong?
2. "Honest" = reports you like, I take it. Dozens of reports, with zero dissenting opinions, have shown Syria to have been using chemical weapons, since 2013, including an attack just the month before the one Dore and Aaron keep blathering about.
3. Aaron wasn't on the ground, sniffing clothes, at the time. There were, however, other reporters who were on the ground, at the time, who did smell chlorine. Yes, I think inhumane dictators can do all kinds of "retarded" shit. Why do you have so much faith that inhumane dictators are very smart and sane?
4. You're dodging that, going on and on, raging, about a report that was completely irrelevant to the decision to bomb, is idiotic. And, like I said, you can both accept that Syria commits terrible human rights abuses, including using chemical weapons, and still be against the US unilaterally bombing other countries.
5. No, it's blatantly obvious that you have a bias against dozens of reports, that had zero dissenting opinions, judging them "honest" based on your desired outcome. I've addressed exactly what they have talked about. You're the one creating some strawman, that I didn't argue.
1
-
@klauskinski5969 1. That doesn't clarify what you're talking about.
2. No. UN inspectors never said Saddam had nuclear weapons, and I didn't say to take the US' word for anything. You're either ignorant, or dishonest ... quite possibly both.
3. It was 9 days after the incident, ffs. Just how long do you think chlorine sticks around in the air for? Non white doctors, and rescue crews, were in there before that.
Rofl. History has shown plenty of dictators doing stupid or insane things, and plenty of things that get them bombed, or attacked.
4. You have severe reading comprehension problems, on top of being ignorant. I didn't take Dore and Mate's positions. They're the ones that keep rambling on about a specific report, as if it affected anyone's decision making. It didn't. It's a nothingburger they keep going on and on about. That was what I said from the start, so have no idea how it magically turns into a contradiction.
5. UN inspectors didn't support the US' claim that Saddam still had WMDs, dimwit. Dissenting opinions, in that case, would have said there were WMDs. You seem to know nothing about what happened, leading up to the war with Iraq. Look at who is funding? The UN was funding inspections. They do not have a history of supporting the US' other WMD claims, and Russia (Assad supporter) could veto whatever it wanted (and did veto a bunch of proposals). The multiple incidents that went through two rounds of investigations is because even Russia accepted the conclusions of the first round.
"Risk publicly their life"?! Rofl!!! Who has been killed, or even harmed, for having a dissenting opinion, or endlessly blathering support for dissenting opinions? You're a loon.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@blogintonblakley2708 You invented that I used the words to describe the article, because you're completely dishonest. Much like you invented that I stated your article, specifically, wasn't peer reviewed. I made a comment about the database, in general, pointing out the fact that simply being in it is not an endorsement 'from the NIH", which you also lied about.
Problematic, biased, and even fraudulent studies, aren't actual evidence, ffs. I get that you think fraudulent studies are evidence, but you're wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Israel is objectively the aggressor by every measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, that the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "your" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jamespoon2656 AOC backed 20 other pro-M4A progressives, and helped add a few more M4A yes votes to congress, in the last election cycle. She was just campaigning for Nina, promoting M4A while doing it, trying to add another. Adding enough yes votes to congress is the only possible way to ever pass the bill. Jimmy took the opportunity to yet again slander her and say she abandoned M4A, meanwhile it was him who abandoned Nina and abandoned trying to add another yes vote to congress. Did the people "behind closed doors" want Nina elected? If so, then they don't sound too bad. If not, then you're spouting nonsense.
Jimmy didn't care if 10m of the poorest Americans were thrown off Medicaid expansion, didn't care to try and add 40m older Americans to Medicare expansion, promoted Tulsi and her "Medicare choice" over Bernie and M4A ... for him to turn around and portray himself as the one true champion of healthcare, and slander anyone who disagrees with him on even a single secondary tactic, as "fakes", "frauds", "sellouts", "betrayers", etc., is the joke. It's a lousy "fighter" that punches those closest to his claimed position the most, and promotes those far removed from his position as allies, the better option, or just doesn't punch them at all.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Israel is objectively the aggressor by every relevant measure (modern history, law, and current events) ...
Modern history: With the Balfour declaration, Zionsim converted from something like immigration to colonization. 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the native Palestinians would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors, when it comes to the native population.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed colonialist Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those Irgun terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority in zero districts. Israel was formed by going against the will of the majority population. Its foundation is completely undemocratic. Even then, Jews were still a minority, in "their" half. The only possible way to actually become a Jewish ethno-state, would be to ethnically cleanse away the actual majority. And, that's exactly what happened. Israel has never allowed those people to return.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@barkrussell4083 @Bark Russell But you keep acting like those rules mattered in every election ever, when that's objectively just not the case. They've only mattered 5 times. The 2 times it happened in modern history, produced 2 of the dumbest presidents in US history. What was the upside?
You also keep inserting your subjective opinion about people, and accusing them of just being sore losers, when they accepted multiple losses, before, when electoral and popular gave the same result. The popular still would have given you Reagan and Bush Sr. It's specifically the fact that the electoral has trumped the popular, twice in the past 20 years, that people have a problem with. You can't seem to grasp that that happening makes people feel disenfranchised. It puts a spotlight on just how many millions of their votes don't matter. If you think feeling that way is simply being a sore loser then, again, I have to say you're not too bright for continuing to repeat it, and that has nothing to do with simply disagreeing on the mechanics of it all.
Also, the founding fathers weren't perfect. They disenfranchised over half the population (women and minorities, and even allowed for disenfranchising white men who didn't own property), and they didn't even require states to let the general population vote for president. Their rules allowed for state assemblies to just elect the president for everyone in the state, which happened in numerous states at the beginning. People in 1920 could have simply said that not letting women to vote has "worked" for 130 years, why change the rules now? Because the rules sucked.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sassyviking6003 The main "other" for fascists were socialists, communists, and unionists. Socialism was the primary thing that Mussolini argued fascism was opposed to, in the doctrine of fascism. His black shirts went after socialist enclaves throughout Italy, before his march on Rome. It's the main reason the King accepted him instead of fighting them off with the military. Musk has proven he is anti-union and anti-socialist.
Mussolini also argued fascism was opposed to democracy and that it wasn't pacifist. Musk has supported an anti-democratic coup by authoritarian military and police, that Morales, and many others, considered to be a fascist coup.
Fascists are fascists even before they attain positions of power, to control the media, or whatnot. Being in power is not an actual requirement. Even so, most MSM promotes capitalism and criticizes socialism. It may not be personally controlled by Musk, but it is controlled by those like him. So, it's already promoting the broader message someone like him would want it to promote.
Fascists were backed by large landowners, leading industrialists, and religious extremists. Musk being on multiple Trump task forces, and saying he was undecided who he would vote for in September, means he wasn't outright opposed to a cult leader that constantly trashed the media.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jessea5044 Holy hell, I can see how you'd be a Dore fan. Those are simply facts, associated with being vaccinated. They are all included in the word "vaccinated". Being "vaccinated" means: having reduced odds of catching and carrying the virus (only breakthrough cases will possibly catch and carry the virus); having reduced viral load, even if you are a breakthrough case that catches the virus (the vaccine tends to make it a much milder case), and also a reduced time of being contagious (the vaccine speeds up recovery rates for breakthrough cases).
So, is it accurate to say, "You are not protecting anyone else, by getting vaccinated, you propagandist at The Hill."?
Is it not a fact that, all those things included with the word "vaccinated", does protect others, as well as yourself? If you are less likely to catch and carry the virus, aren't you less likely to pass it on to others? If you do have a breakthrough case, which is milder, with less of a viral load, aren't you less likely to pass on a severe case of the virus? If you do have a breakthrough case, but are contagious for a shorter period of time, aren't you less likely to spread it to as many people as an unvaccinated carrier?
Isn't that statement, by Jimmy, completely inaccurate?
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cmoney2400able Paralyzing, or threatening to paralyze, the house during a pandemic isn't actually very bright. And, forcing a vote when it's 100+ votes short in the house alone, is pretty pointless. Pelosi introduced the M4A bill just last session. It died in committees, where 90% of bills die. She has already reintroduced it this session, and it has gone to committees again. Put some pressure on committee members, if you want them to take up the bill. Pressuring (slandering) someone who has done more for M4A in 2 years than Dore has in his entire lifetime, is moronic.
Not her constituents money. Her PAC money. Oh no, she doesn't want progressives to be part of a minority party, with Republicans running the house. I get it. "Real" progressives prefer Republicans in charge (still waiting for the years late massive progressive wave that Dore said a Trump presidency would "for sure" lead to, and for the moon to fall into Lake Michigan).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@qinby1182 Dore and Mate have been blathering on and on about a completely irrelevant report. Not only do 2 dissenting opinions not actually debunk the report, the investigation didn't start until after Syria was bombed, the report didn't assign blame, and it didn't come out until almost a year after the fact. The report had absolutely nothing to do with anyone's decision to bomb Syria.
There have been dozens of investigations into chemical weapons attacks, including an attack just the month before the one they keep whining about, that went through two rounds (no fault finding, and fault finding) of investigations. Almost all found fault with Syria. None had dissenting opinions.
You'd have to believe that UN inspectors (which didn't support the US' Iraq claims), numerous uninvolved countries (that opposed US interventions elsewhere), the Russian security Council member (who could have vetoed a ton more resolutions about Syrian inspections), numerous NGOs and human rights groups (that haven't supported US interventions), hundreds of Syrian victim witnesses, and dozens of Syrian healthcare worker witnesses, are all in cahoots to frame Syria, to think Syria hasn't been dropping chemical weapons on their own people, since 2013. That's beyond ridiculous.
1
-
@qinby1182 Those "consequences" weren't based on the report.
Why do you think UN inspectors suddenly care if the US, or others, look bad? They did not care if the US, UK, and their little "coalition of the willing" looked bad in Iraq. In your fantasy, when did the US take over OPCW, exactly? What's the evidence ... just that you don't like their rulings against Syria?
No. It was not "doctored". Leaving things you don't think are relevant, from the final report, isn't "doctoring" it. The final ruling of the supreme court doesn't have to include everything that was said, and done, in the courtroom. And, dissenting opinions on the ruling don't actually debunk the ruling.
Oh geez. Doctors Without Borders have provided their own witnesses before, and regularly communicate with hospitals and healthcare workers, not ISIS, ffs. Other major NGOs (that have opposed US interventions) have communicated with people on the ground. There are human rights legal groups, working out of neutral countries, building cases for victims. Just how big is your fantasy conspiracy, of all these people working with ISIS? How many countries and organizations, exactly? Is it just anyone who disagrees with you must be working with ISIS? Is that how it works?
1
-
@qinby1182 I didn't ask why it was in the US', and others', interests, I asked about UN inspectors. UN inspectors did not support the US and UK, before, in Iraq. Why is it in their interests to flip and suddenly support them? If the dozens of UN inspections were all fake, why didn't Russia veto more resolutions?
The US hadn't bombed Syria for each of the other dozens of chemical weapons attacks, including the one just the month before (which, again, went through two rounds of investigations, with zero dissenting opinions). Why would they think anything would be different?
You bring up the point that it would still be a war crime for the US to unilaterally bomb Syria. That's the thing that Dore and Mate don't seem to get, that they're two seperate issues. Someone can both accept that Assad is a horrible dictator, that has committed numerous human rights abuses, including using chemical weapons, and also not support countries unilaterally deciding to bomb other countries. They seem to think that if anyone accepts the former, then they're automatically in favor of US bombing, some kind of CIA shill, or whatnot.
What was the evidence that numerous NGOs, human rights groups, neutral countries, UN inspectors, dozens of Syrian healthcare workers, and hundreds of Syrian victims, have been working in cahoots with ISIS, to frame Syria, this whole time?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If you notice the date, when the US housing prices went down, it's because we didn't have that 2008 housing market crash, or banking crisis, here in Canada. Our recession wasn't quite as bad. So, there's both bad, and good, that goes with that. A lot of Americans lost their homes, due to foreclosure, which didn't happen here. We definitely need to provide more affordable housing, though. This is unsustainable.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joshualocicero6799 Feudalism started up outside the boundaries of a state. With no government of the people above them, private individuals, with their private armies, claiming private property, went around doing whatever the hell they liked. You do know that monarchies are private enterprises, right?
It happened again in the US, on the Western frontier. Beyond the rule of law and government, some nice little settlements popped up, but so did cattle barons. They hired their private armies of cowboys, and threw their weight around. They got into wars with farmers and sheep herders. It only came to an end with the law and military moving in. Some places it went on into the 20th century. Without that intervention, it would have just continued.
1
-
@joshualocicero6799 Me: explains how capitalist communities without law and order also devolved into feudalism on the Western frontier.
You: you didn't explain how ancap devolves into feudalism.
An absolute monarchy is not really a government. It is a form of governance not much different than a private corporation. The owner of the company claims property and resources. They can make rules for living on their private property. They can charge whatever rent they want on their private property. They can hire private security to enforce the rules and collect the rent on their private property. They can hire private militaries to protect their private property and interests. Etc. There are zero rules against any of that in ancap. It's like owning a very large apartment building without government interference. To say none of that is okay under ancap is to say people can't own apartment buildings, set rent, make rules, and protect said apartment, under ancap.
Now, if two of these folks have differences, there is no legal body they have to answer to, to settle the dispute. They can settle it anyway they want. If they can't come to a private agreement, then they may pit their private armies against each other. If one apartment owner claims the neighbouring apartment is also theirs, what governing legal body will settle the dispute? None.
If the US switched to ancap tomorrow, is there any rule saying Amazon, and other corporations, can't buy up as much of the US military as they can afford? No.
What is wrong with a direct democracy? How would you ever decide to go ancap without at least one vote? Lol
1
-
@joshualocicero6799 Well, these corporations already exist, and already own tons of property and resources. What would you do, force them to disband, before going ancap? And, they're either paying billions a year in taxes, which they could divert to security without a tax system in place, or they're already dodging taxes and accumulating billions a year, which they could divert to security. They wouldn't have to pay employee health care, and could divert that, as well. They wouldn't be required to follow safety or environmental regulations, and could cut costs by using cheaper less safe materials, or methods, and dump waste in the nearest river, or whatnot, and divert that money, as well. It's also giant corporations making the vast majority of weapons and military equipment. Why wouldn't those corporations team up with other corporations to keep the elite in power, even without a government? It seems, to me, that they'd likely form alliances, and wouldn't go down without a fight, including fighting alternative markets and small competitors.
Would this also happen in a bubble, on a global scale, or would there be foreign governments they could also team up with, to help throw their weight around? Would it be somehow illegal, and somehow enforced, to team up with foreign militaries?
1
-
@gbangerlove I proved exactly what I said about Nazi propaganda was not wrong, with a factual quote, you daft twatwaffle. Joshua proved he has no clue what an ad hom is, proved he has reading comprehension problems, proved he doesn't actually know how Musollini defined fascism ... which I also provided factual quotes for, proving what I said ... proved he doesn't know how fascism played out in action, proved he doesn't know Spencer's position on everything relevant to economics, etc. Not sure what you're reading. Lol
If you think all the other developed countries in the world, which have public health care ... if you think all their conservative parties, which also support said public health care ... which Bernie wants to emulate, are far left, then you're dumber than a fucking stump. Spain has communist politicians in its Left United coalition, that outright want to work towards ending capitalism outright. That's far left you twit. Bernie has never said anything even remotely close.
Those are the facts. You must just be so far right that you can't see beyond centre and think that's far left.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@roberttelford745 Manchin has more power because of math, btw. There are zero extra votes to be gained moving left, because there's nobody to the left of the most progressive members. There is the entire Republican party on the right. If push comes to shove, the right side wins. For example, if the $15 min went into house-senate negotiations, with Manchin pushing $11, and a number of Republicans willing to sign on for $10, guess which way negotiations would go? And, if $11 or $10 were passed, then minimum wage would likely be considered dealt with, until 2025. As is, now people should be pressuring Manchin, and the other 7 conservative senators. Then, reintroduce a stand alone minimum wage bill, if you can push them left, rather than let them take negotiations right.
I wouldn't hold your breath, while you're waiting for Jimmy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
In those hours, did he mention that a VAT was a way to tax giant corporations, like Amazon? A VAT is actually specifically designed to NOT tax businesses in order to avoid cascading taxes upon taxes. Businesses get to reclaim their input VAT from their output VAT. Only the final consumer can't do that and ends up paying the entire VAT.
In those hours, did he compare his dividend to the Alaskan dividend, which is entirely paid for by corporations? Yang already admits that giant corporations aren't paying taxes through standard taxation, and he proposes a different tax that also won't tax them, so giant corporations wouldn't be paying for, or even into, his dividend, at all. They'd only get the benefits of extra trillions a year being spent, funneling money to them, and their big shareholders, faster than ever before.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@clintholmes2061 If a house speaker isn't elected, the house is paralyzed. The clerk can only hold the house speaker election. No bills would be brought up to vote on. Corporate Dems could just keep putting up Pelosi as their candidate for speaker, and if you keep making protest votes for someone else, the house will stay paralyzed. No bills being voted on is not samesies with one bill not being voted on, dumb dumb. That's what would bring more media attention and magnify the intensity of the propaganda, so not samesies on that front, either.
It's majority of votes cast, not majority of the house. You don't need any Dems to vote for McCarthy. You just need enough no shows, or abstentions, to lower the threshold needed to win. Have 9 corporate Dems play sick. Have 3 threatening to abstain. If all Dems present don't vote Pelosi, McCarthy could win. If those 3 think you'll fold and end up voting Pelosi, and you do, then they vote Pelosi too, and she wins. If they think you'll stick to your guns, and you do, they abstain, and McCarthy wins (assuming he gets all Republican votes).
Not sure someone who doesn't know how the government works can swat away anything on the topic.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johnkosowski3321 If you need, and get, a loan (which I never included, but you keep including, because it's the only way your system works it seems), you're still on the hook for paying off the loan, whether your venture is successful, or not. Banks don't require inspections for mortgages. They don't care if your new venture is risky, if you give them collateral, and already have the income to pay them back.
There have also been numerous collapses during building itself. If there's no set standard, showing the builder cut corners, if no way is an outright wrong way to do things, then there's no real grounds to sue them for damages.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@OliverCaesar If adding more M4A yes votes to congress ... exactly what you'd still need to do even after a failed show vote
... is "inaction", then you've reduced ftv to simply having a failed show vote followed by inaction. It's a moronic argument that makes ftv even more pointless and moronic than it already was.
You think this guy Jimmy interviewed, who has praised shooting antifa, and blm, protesters won't praise people shooting you?
"In fact, a Michigan anti-fascist group had followed this Boogaloo member for months and had previously revealed that Dore’s interviewee had publicly defended fascist Kyle Rittenhouse. The Boogaloo member said that other people should “learn how to do that,” referencing Rittenhouse’s murder of two anti-police violence demonstrators in Kenosha, Wisconsin in August 2020. The individual also praised fascist militia gun range sessions, called “Rittenhouse drills,” and defended Steve Baca, the fascist who shot anti-police violence protesters in New Mexico in June 2020."
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/01/29/dore-j29.html
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
LudVan 2 77 Seriously, if you really want to get all nitpicky ...
Knowledge is a justified true belief, so yes, it's perfectly fine to say you believe in evolution, without it being a religion, or without you adhering to it like a religion. If you've accepted something as true, then you must, in fact, believe it's true. If you think you know something, then you must, in fact, believe that something is true, and that you're justified in believing that something is true. To show something is, in fact, knowledge, you should be able to show that justification to others. Knowledge is beyond just a belief, but you can't attain knowledge without belief.
Aside from that, I don't think that "subscribe" properly describes the average religious mindset. Believers in creation don't simply not subscribe to evolution ... they outright believe it is false ... believe that evolution is the fairy tale, and that the truth comes from old stories passed down by hundreds of years old desert wanderers that lived thousands of years ago. You are giving them too much credit, as if they've seriously investigated it, studied the science, simply don't think the science backs the claims, so made a perfectly rational decision not to subscribe to the theory.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AstroMortuum Here's what's not considered "staples", in Canada: electricity, phone, phone service, computers, internet service, personal hygiene products, household cleaning products, home maintenance, vehicle maintenance, and all kinds of things poor people will have to pay extra for. Sure, if you sit in the dark and watch stars for fun, you won't be at all affected by a VAT.
Yang's revenue projection was also originally based on the entire economy. The more he exempts, the larger the shortfall he'll have, and his plan already starts with almost a trillion dollar deficit.
1
-
1
-
@WiseWeeabo It's not about total government revenue generated, because a 10% federal sales tax would do about the same thing. A VAT only keeps track of the exchanges along the way better, so it's harder to dodge the final step, but likewise ends up being a tax on the final consumer.
If you're handing consumers $3t, who paid the VAT is what matters. If Amazon still paid no taxes, but has a 2% share of US consumer spending, then you've made them $60b extra dollars a year, and they're still not paying in.
I get that many gangers fantasize that the VAT will only tax yachts and stuff, but non-staples include phones, phone service, computers (even cheap ones), internet service, TVs, cable, games, toys, basically any entertainment with a cost, personal hygiene products, household cleaning products, home maintenance, vehicle maintenance ... all kinds of crap. A lot of countries exempt staples. Corporations still aren't the ones paying the tax. Consumers are.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mircogam Now you're making up fake crap for what he supposedly really means, but never said. No, almost no gangers I've come across know how a VAT actually works, let alone most Americans. No, he outright claims on his VAT page, and in multiple interviews and rallies, that a VAT is a way to make corporations "pay their fair share", not their owners. He had an absolutely ridiculous rally, where he both claimed Google was moving money to its EU headquarters in Ireland to avoid paying taxes, and that a VAT wouldn't let them get away without paying taxes. Ireland has a freaking 23% VAT rate. They obviously don't give a shit about the VAT, because they don't pay it. They're there for Ireland's low corporate tax rate. Plus, what you, a supposed account, aren't seeming to grasp is that, if you make Amazon an extra $60b a year, then you're making Bezos something like an extra $6b a year. He'd have to personally blow through over $60b on goods and services with a VAT to pay in more than you're making him, which would never happen. He could by a new $1b yacht every year, pay $100m in VAT, and still be in the plus $5.9b, from Yang's plan. Meanwhile, yes, there will be some poor people who will get zero economic benefit from the UBI but will still have to pay the VAT on many things. And, it doesn't matter if someone already getting $1000+ in assistance opts in or out. They can't opt out of paying the VAT. They'd be worse off, having to pay 10% more on numerous things.
No, a business doesn't need to absorb part of the VAT, if it doesn't want to. Only the smallest of businesses aren't required to register for the VAT, which aren't competition. Or, the business is in a VAT exempt or zero rated sector, and also isn't competition. These giant tech companies are already operating in countries with a VAT. They don't absorb shit. When the EU switched from seller's VAT rate to buyer's VAT rate, they started charging the buyer's full VAT rate.
Yang is skipping many of the things other countries do to make corporations and the rich pay in. The UK has higher marginal income tax rates, a higher minimum wage, double the union participation to negotiate better wages for workers, a stamp tax, etc. Scandinavian countries have ridiculously high union participation, so high they don't even need the government involved in setting minimum wages, higher marginal tax rates than the UK, paid parental leave, more paid vacation days, Norway owns a 60+% share in their oil production, Sweden has businesses pay into a retraining program with an 80+% success rate, etc. They also have about double the percentage of the population working decently paid government jobs, than the US doea. Then those countries tax their better paid, higher standard of living, consumers with a VAT. A VAT doesn't make corporations pay in. If you think Bezos only being able to recover half the VAT on his cell phone, because he uses it half the time for personal calls, is him "paying his fair share", then you're an idiot.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Tsudico Man, you have zero clue what you're talking about. It was a £24 VAT on top of a £120 charge (24 is 20% of 120). The ad buyer paid £144. Google collected the £24 and sent it to the government. The remaining £120 goes into Google's pocket. The business who initially paid the £24 then gets it credited back from the government, along with any other VAT they've paid on business expenses. You're completely fabricating some other VAT payment, not able to figure out who pays it, and then deciding Google must have. There's no magical other £18 VAT payment Google has made to nobody, paying £96 for nothing.
If Google does have some business expense they paid input VAT on, during the same VAT collection period, they would reclaim that amount, just like the business paying for the ad. Say Google bought a $12 computer chord, and paid £2.40 in VAT on top of that. Then, instead of sending the government the full £24, they'd keep £2.40 and send the government £21.60.
Fun fact: Even of a business pays more input VAT than they collect in output VAT, they will still get their input VAT credited back to them. Meaning, a company having a bad sales period will be credited back their input VAT by the consumers of businesses that had a good sales period.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@klauskinski5969 AOC never once promoted paralyzing the house, or even threatening to paralyze the house. That's Dore knob slander.
Dore's was a "plan" to get a performance art vote, that doesn't get you anywhere closer to ever passing M4A. Actually adding M4A yes votes to congress, as Justice Dems and AOC have helped do, actually gets you closer to ever being able to pass the bill. He used that performance art "plan" to slander anyone who didn't go along with him.
He lied to everyone, that his unamended wouldn't have handed the speakership to McCarthy. It would have. He slandered anyone who pointed it out. Dore's unamended "plan" was to have 15 progressives simply "withhold" their votes, to "not vote for" Pelosi. His original wording, repeated numerous times, before others amended it, implied simply abstaining. He never mentioned a need to cast protest votes. For every 2 empty seats, absentees, or abstentions, the threshold needed to win is lowered by 1. 2 empty seats, plus 15 abstentions, would lower the threshold to 210. Even if every other Dem voted Pelosi, she could only get 207. If every Rep voted McCarthy, he'd have gotten 211, and won. Dore is a complete and utter moron. A "good lefite" that has repeatedly promoted handing power to Republicans.
1
-
@klauskinski5969 No. Dore shows her saying one thing, claims she said something else, and morons lap it up. Show me a single speech, or video, where AOC ever ran on paralyzing, or threatening to paralyze, the house.
Votes on bills are not samesies as impeachment votes, ffs. Every new session of congress, you already get a new list of names of members of congress who won't sign on to the M4A bill. There was already a list of names of those who wouldn't sign onto the bill, during a pandemic. Pelosi actually introduced the M4A bill, last session. The parliamentarian sent it to committees. You also have a list of names of committee members who let the bill die, during a pandemic. The bill has been reintroduced, this session, and is again sitting in committees. You've got a list of names of committee members who are currently sitting on the bill, that you could be harrassing to take the bill up. Instead, you lot just keep slandering M4A's most ardent congressional supporters.
How has letting Republicans win, again, and again, instead of keeping them out of power, benefitted anyone who isn't rich?
Now you're slandering this, and other channels. The idea is stick to trying to take over the party. The 30 year old broader progressive caucus is about 15 seats away from becoming the majority of house Dems. The Justice Dems have replaced about a dozen corporate Dems, in just 4 years. AOC used her platform and PAC to back 20 other pro-M4A progressives, and helped add a few more to congress, in just 2 years. Dore promotes a route that hasn't won the most popular third party a single seat in congress in its near 50 year existence, hasn't won the most popular progressive third party a single seat in congress in its 20 year existence. He promotes a fantasy, that the third party route would be quicker, and also promotes the fantasy that some third party will only ever produce perfectly perfect incorruptible puritan progressives, when we have former Green candidate, Kyrsten Sinema, as evidence that's not true.
The cycle has been to give up on Dems and let Republicans win, over and over. It's moronic. Treat the primaries as the major progressive battlefield, but still vote in the general to never have Republicans in power again, even if you lose the primaries. You would have wanted Clinton or Biden voters to turn around and vote Bernie, vote blue no matter who, if he had won the primaries, right? Or would you have wanted to see Bernie lose in the generals, and see Trump win, like a "true" progressive?
1
-
Rofl! The most popular third party hasn't won a single seat in congress in its 50 year existence. Green hasn't won a single seat in congress in its 20 year existence. Even if the entire progressive caucus was third party, that would hand Republicans the house, senate, and presidency. It could take centuries, for a third party to get the numbers to actually pass anything. There's nothing more incremental than voting third party.
On the flip side, the 30 year old progressive caucus is about 15 seats away from becoming the majority of house Dems, when they'd have the ability to set the party agenda, and pick the party speaker. The 6 year old Justice Dems have 11 seats. Whatever you think of those progressives, it clearly shows that the method, of running within the party, is the faster way to take them out. That's because, if a progressive can make it through a primary, then they get the benefit of vote blue no matter who, when it comes to defeating the Republican, in the general.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheRedStateBlue Israel is objectively the aggressor, by every measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, that the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "your" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@britishrocklovingyank3491 I said "right", not specifically Trumpists. That could include anyone voting for corporate Dems, to moderate Republicans, to independents that lean in one of those two directions, to Libertarians, to the outright fascists. The younger voters, who vote the least, have been specifically targeted by progressives, to try and get them out, a ton. Independents have been specifically targeted, before, as well.
M4A is consistently gaining support. More pro-M4A candidates were just added to congress. It was barely even being talked about, in mainstream conversation, pre 2016.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JonathanRootD By every measure, Israel is objectively the aggressor ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "your" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The Greater Good Dimwit. It was Trump's DoJ that said Epstein killed himself. The AP is non profit, and has been calling elections since 1948, with certification simply being a formality. And, scientists, doctors, and governments, across the world, have been saying the virus is deadly, and if you think they're all in league together then, yes, you're a nutbar.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"Forcing the vote" doesn't actually guarantee you a vote. Pelosi, and corporate Dems, could let progressives go ahead and paralyze the house and then blame progressives for no new covid relief, no minimum wage increase, no Medicare age decrease, and whatever else that would make progressives look bad in the eyes of the people.
Or, if Dore is right, in that corporate Dems would rather work with Republicans than progressives, that actually goes against his plan, because it reduces the leverage. Pelosi, and corporate Dems, could make a quiet deal with Republicans, in exchange for enough of them abstaining or being absent, to reduce the threshold needed to win, simply dodging the progressive threat and pushing corporate Dems and Republicans closer together.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Cuomo is as incompetent as Trump. New York is testing at a rate of 2 extra people per positive result. That's below the already pathetic US rate of testing 5 extra people per positive result. Countries that quickly contained the virus with mass testing, like S Korea, Australia, and New Zealand, have been testing at a rate of 50+ extra people per positive result. Countries that seem to be flattening, but not as quickly, like Norway and Iceland, are testing at a rate of 20+ extra people per positive result. Canada is testing at about 15 per, Germany 13 per, Italy 7 per, Spain 5 per, UK 4 per, France 3 per ... much of the developed world, and world leading countries, have failed miserably at virus containment. New York state has one of the worst testing rates in the world. The US is so far behind the virus, I don't think they can catch up to it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kylequest A public option is not as good as M4A. Also, Bernie did not propose a total ban on private insurance. Just no duplicate coverage, exactly how Medigap isn't allowed to offer and charge people for things their Medicare already covers.
Let's say someone is already collecting full SSI disability benefits, plus SNAP, which are currently stackable. They could easily already be getting $1000+ a month in assistance. Okay, so Yang doesn't have UBI stack with SSI, only SSDI, and they opt out of getting UBI, but they can't opt out of paying a VAT. Unless you expect them to live a life with no phone service, no internet, no electricity, no transportation, and numerous other things that don't get counted as basic necessities, then their cost of living will increase. You will have made someone already living in poverty effectively poorer, while handing upper middle class and lower end rich people more per year than they'll pay into a VAT (someone would have to be spending $120k a year on VATable goods and services to be even, $240k for a couple). That makes little sense. Plus, he never made it sound like new people could opt in to the old programs (which he wants phased out), so new disabled people might just be stuck with the $1000 a month. And, no, getting people off programs with jobs, but keeping the programs for safety, isn't the same as wanting to totally phase out programs. I mean, on his own, the guy originally thought it was a great ideas to not have UBI stack with anything and get rid of everything, including social security. It took a bunch of negative feedback for him to change his plan. He's not really as caring or smart as people think he is.
And, again, he doesn't seem to have a clue how a VAT actually works. He will make giant corporations extra tens of billions a year, making their owners and large shareholders extra billions a year. They'll be more than happy to pay whatever thousands a year extra on personal products, for that exchange. Yang would have money flowing to the very top faster than ever before. He needs a different method to pay for the UBI, one that will have those at the top paying in more than they'll make back, and won't be a burden on some of the poorest people.
1
-
1
-
@kylequest As for saying that companies wouldn't make more money, you're being a complete idiot. The whole point is that, if you hand people money, they will spend it. You'd have to be braindead not to think companies will benefit. Part of Yang's stated method for paying for his almost $1t starting deficit is that the economy will expand, and pay for it, ffs.
If you hand Americans $3t, and they spend a third of their money on retail, and Amazon's share of US retail is 4%, the UBI just made Amazon an extra $40b a year. That would, in turn, make Bezos extra billions a year. He could buy a brand new $1b yacht, every single year, pay the $100m in VAT, and still come out way ahead.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@julianbluefeather8491 But, it's not smart. It comes down to math. If you take 5% of the vote (Nader got 4%), mostly from Dems, then Republicans will win. And, they'd keep winning, for the foreseeable future, with any higher percentage. Even if the entire progressive caucus was third party, that would hand the house, senate, and presidency, to Republicans. You would never get a chance to pass anything, until you got all of the Dem votes, anyway, so why not just leave the Dem votes where they are, and try and change the party?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheRedStateBlue Israel is objectively the aggressor by every relevant measure ...
Modern history: 100 years ago, in 1923, Ze'ev Jabotinsky fully acknowledged that Zionism is colonialism, and that, based on the entirety of history, the natives would fight it until the bitter end. He just didn't care what would happen to them, and promoted doing it anyway. Colonizers are never not the aggressors.
On top of the colonialist nature of Zionism, the Zionists also formed terrorist organizations, like the Irgun and Lehi. They bombed many Palestinian markets and other public places, murdering many civilians, including children, even including Palestinian Jews (who opposed Zionism). Israel merged those terrorists into the new nation's military and intelligence agencies. Israelis elected Menachem Begin, leader of the Irgun, child murderer, Jew murderer, and bomber of the King David Hotel, as PM. Israelis, to this day, celebrate those terrorists as "heroes". Zionists literally taught their neighbours that terrorism is a valid path to independence and statehood, and that terrorists are to be celebrated.
In 1945, it is well documented that Zionists owned just 5% of the land and were a majority nowhere. Israel was formed by actually going against the majority population. It's foundation is completely undemocratic. Then, becoming a majority, in "your" new nation, by ethnic cleansing the actual majority, and then claiming to be democratic, is utter nonsense.
Law: Israel is considered an occupier by the International Court, the UN GA, and the UN SC. Occupiers are also never not the aggressors. Those occupied actually have a right to resist occupation. On the flip side, it is illegal for the occupier to settle occupied lands, and illegal to use collective punishment. Israel is a rogue nation, that doesn't abide by international law. What it has been doing, and is doing now, is illegal.
Current events: This year, alone, prior to Oct 7 ... Israel held over 1200 Palestinian hostages without charges ... over 200 Palestinians had been killed by the IDF and settlers ... over 1000 Palestinians had been displaced by Israel's neverending colonization of the West Bank ... and, Israel continued to operate an open air WWII style fascist ghetto. Even ignoring modern history and law, in no reality did Hamas "start" anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RecMike Bullshit.
The civil rights act was preceded by years of protests. The bill had majority support. The bill was introduced late in the session and a minority filibustered until the end of session. The bill was immediately reintroduced the next session, they filibustered about 50 more days, and then the majority passed it. It didn't fail a vote.
Women's suffrage was also preceded by years of protests and activism. Multiple states had already given women voting rights. The first vote was not purely for show, but to find out how everyone would vote. The parties weren't as partisan as they are now. It was brought up for a vote by the majority who supported it, not some minority of congress threatening to paralyze the house if it wasn't. It also got a majority of the vote but, being a constitutional amendment, it needed a super majority, which it didn't get. The bill was literally held back the next session, because they didn't think they had enough votes, and saw absolutely no reason to have a purely performance art vote. They thought they had enough votes the next session, but it failed by 2 votes. It passed the following session.
And, in neither of those cases did the movements constantly attack and slander its biggest congressional supporters. Those examples are totally false equivalencies. Dore knobs have endless false equivalencies, bullshit strawmen, and slander.
The current parties are quite partisan. You know absolutely no Republicans will vote for M4A. And, most of corporate Dems have also openly campaigned against it, and refuse to cosponsor the bill. There's no big mystery as to how everyone will vote. No chance it might pass. You've got a list of members who won't cosponsor the bills. Convert or replace them. Where were the extra 100+ viable progressive candidates Dore has laying around, that he could have run in the election that just happened? You've also got a list of committee members, who are currently sitting on the bill (Pelosi has already reintroduced the bill to congress ... she introduced it to congress last session, as well, where it died in those committees). Pressure and protest them, until they take up the bill, instead of slandering and protesting M4A's most ardent congressional supporters, people who have done more for M4A in a few years than Dore has in his entire lifetime. Do something constructive instead of destructive.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anti-corporatecapture3844 To catch you up to date, Dore knob ...
Jimmy's doctor of nursing practice (not an actual MD), friend, from across the pond has been debunked already.
1. What's going on in one country can't just easily be applied to another. The US excess mortality rate was higher than its covid death count, not lower, like the UK. Something completely different is going on. It was stupid of the doctor of nursing to suggest this.
2. An excess mortality rate, that is higher or lower than the covid death count, doesn't automatically mean something is off with the covid death count. You have to count up all the pluses and minuses from all other things people died of. Only if all those other deaths don't match the difference, then there's something off with the covid count. If you straight up take it at face value, and claim the UK is overcounting, that would mean the US is undercounting.
3. The second number is the official number used for deaths due to covid by the government, and the media. No other.
4. The third number, if you read the paper, says "with covid". It does not say covid "contributed" to the death, as the dishonest doctor of nursing stated. That simply means there were some 20k people, on top of the second number, who died of other things, but had covid. Not the government, nor the media, use that number as the covid death count.
5. Not counting people listed as dying due to covid, simply because they had comorbidities, is disgusting. People with asthma tend to live about as long as anyone else. Not counting them as a human being, because they had a precondition, is disgusting. You and Dore are as bad as private for profit insurance companies. Someone with type I diabetes, doesn't count as a human being? You're writing them off as the walking dead, like complete loons.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bodhisattva3774 The final bill passed 418-11, and it only paid back the capitol police budget for the extra $70m it used. It paid back the national guard $521m. $300m went for security upgrades. $42.1m went to added covid protocols. And over $1b went for Afghan refugees. Both the capitol police and national guard had budget shortages, because of Jan 6, and the added security weeks after. There was going to be a bill passed, to fill those budget shortages. If the original bill hadn't passed the house, to be amended by the senate, the senate would simply have come up with their own bill. So, her first vote didn't really matter, because the senate would have introduced a bill anyway, and her no vote on the final bill didn't really matter, because it passed by a longshot. You're a total ignoramus, for repeatedly saying it's $2b for the capitol police.
And, again, they aren't even like real cops. They aren't going to pull someone over for a taillight and then shoot them. They aren't going to choke someone out for selling smokes. They aren't going to be called to a swimming pool and toss young black girls around. Etc. They're more like the secret service, which has field offices around the country that still don't make them anything like normal cops.
1
-
1
-
@cogen651 If you separate authoritarian and non-authoritarian from capitalism (right) and socialism/communism (left), and use a two axes model, it's better than a straight line. So, while Ayn Rand types might be more "liberal", in tolerance for different people and behaviour in society ... are less authoritarian ... they are still as far right as one can be. There's nothing to the right of Ayn Rand. There are multiple US politicians that espouse her writings. There are basically no US politicians left of Bernie, and he's only a centrist, pointing to centrist European countries to emulate. Zero politicians are calling for an end to capitalism, equal ownership of everything, and economic equality for all ... zero politicians that are as far left as possible. Most Democrat politicians are right of centre, and somewhat authoritarian. Republicans are even more right, and even more authoritarian. US politics ranges from far right to centre.
Where does Peterson fall in that? While he may not be in the more authoritarian groups, he's still pretty far to the right.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1