Israel

[David Dennison 19591]

22 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

You’re totally being disingenuous and moving goalposts. 
 

you say they want equal rights under the law. When I point out that Israel has that, you then claim, well they’re not really equal. 
 

come on, man. 

Are you, an American, seriously going to argue that equal rights under the law means equal rights in fact? 

Really?

[956 Worldwide 35670]

Is there a single viable political force or organization within Palestinian society proposing anything that approximates a liberal democratic governance structure for the Palestinians NOW, let alone that proposes a liberal democratic state that includes a bunch of Jews?  
 

Whatever “Palestine will be free” means, it’s undeniable that there are not any actual political actors in play that have the desire to make it so. 

[David Dennison 19591]

NM

Edited November 12, 2023 by David Dennison
Derp.

[Brisketexan 107121]

You're just repeating yourself. Show me some sources and I might change my mind. I don't buy into your hysterical, paranoid viewpoint on this issue.

You mean….me literally quoting the leader of Hamas is not a “source?”
For fuck’s sake, you’re just being a fucking disingenuous asshole. Fuck off.

[chainsaw 10341]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

You mean….me literally quoting the leader of Hamas is not a “source?”
For fuck’s sake, you’re just being a fucking disingenuous asshole. Fuck off.

So if Hamas says something sensible it's off limits for everyone else to say? I'm asking about the overwhelming majority of people who are using it. The people in the streets calling for a ceasefire. The assignment was not to find an antisemite or terrorist who has used the slogan. The assignment was to find evidence that the slogan means what you claim it means.

[Brisketexan 107121]

So if Hamas says something sensible it's off limits for everyone else to say? I'm asking about the overwhelming majority of people who are using it. The people in the streets calling for a ceasefire. The assignment was not to find an antisemite or terrorist who has used the slogan. The assignment was to find evidence that the slogan means what you claim it means.

Jesus Christ. Google any number of pieces on it - from the AP, NYT, Al Jazeera, and on and on. It has a very mixed history and current usage. Which is incredibly problematic, as an ambiguous slogan can be used by the disingenuous to claim it means different things depending on their audience. There is ZERO question that the slogan has real history of being used by people who intend it as an exclusionary statements…again, INCLUDING Jewish hardliners. Why in the fuck would you use that same slogan for a different meaning? You are ASKING for division and people hearing the other meaning. It either means that you want there to be no Israel, or you’re stupid as fuck for using a slogan that has long carried that meaning when that’s not what you mean.

[956 Worldwide 35670]

6 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

So if Hamas says something sensible it's off limits for everyone else to say? I'm asking about the overwhelming majority of people who are using it. The people in the streets calling for a ceasefire. The assignment was not to find an antisemite or terrorist who has used the slogan. The assignment was to find evidence that the slogan means what you claim it means.

Can you find evidence that it means what you want it to mean, outside of some Western college campuses? By all means show me. 

Where is Palestine’s Vaclav Havel or Lech Walesa?  Where is Palestine’s Nelson Mandela? Where is Palestine’s Simon Bolivar? Or Palestine’s Zelenskyy?

The world is littered with freedom fighters— violent and non-violent— who demonstrated that their calls for liberation were based on calls for human dignity, fundamental rights, tolerance, and respect.  I am unfamiliar with any similar political force among the Palestinians.  The best among them can only boast “we are not actively doing terrorism now.” None of them have a vision of equality, liberty, and tolerance for their own people let alone Jews. 
 

Is your argument really that Israel is so much worse than (checks notes)….the Soviet Union, Apartheid South Africa, Putin’s Russia, and Imperial Spain… and so there’s no way for Palestinians to give birth to a political movement that values freedom for THEMSELVES? 

[chainsaw 10341]

47 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

You’re totally being disingenuous and moving goalposts. 
 

you say they want equal rights under the law. When I point out that Israel has that, you then claim, well they’re not really equal. 
 

come on, man. 

If you believe Israel actually has that, answer this question for me: do Arabs have the same rights under its immigration laws as do Jews?

[chainsaw 10341]

18 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Jesus Christ. Google any number of pieces on it - from the AP, NYT, Al Jazeera, and on and on. It has a very mixed history and current usage. Which is incredibly problematic, as an ambiguous slogan can be used by the disingenuous to claim it means different things depending on their audience. There is ZERO question that the slogan has real history of being used by people who intend it as an exclusionary statements…again, INCLUDING Jewish hardliners. Why in the fuck would you use that same slogan for a different meaning? You are ASKING for division and people hearing the other meaning. It either means that you want there to be no Israel, or you’re stupid as fuck for using a slogan that has long carried that meaning when that’s not what you mean.

"be free" is not something anyone should ever need to apologize for. I certainly wouldn't.

[Brisketexan 107121]

"be free" is not something anyone should ever need to apologize for. I certainly wouldn't.

When it carries the STATED MEANING of “being free….OF something,” then you might oughta.
The area from the river to the sea being free OF Israel? Yeah. That’s a non-starter.
But hey, keep on keeping on. I’m telling you a very plain and direct way that the pro-Palestinian message is encumbering itself with genocidal baggage, either intentionally or foolishly, which is not helpful to the Palestinian cause. I am part of the audience the message is aimed at (I presume that pro-Palestinians would like to influence Americans, as our pressure on our government might make a material difference), and it’s a shit message. It has the opposite effect that I’d think you would want….yet you’re just fine with it being received that way…which sure makes me think that actually, that’s the message you want to send.

[956 Worldwide 35670]

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

When it carries the STATED MEANING of “being free….OF something,” then you might oughta.
The area from the river to the sea being free OF Israel? Yeah. That’s a non-starter.
But hey, keep on keeping on. I’m telling you a very plain and direct way that the pro-Palestinian message is encumbering itself with genocidal baggage, either intentionally or foolishly, which is not helpful to the Palestinian cause. I am part of the audience the message is aimed at (I presume that pro-Palestinians would like to influence Americans, as our pressure on our government might make a material difference), and it’s a shit message. It has the opposite effect that I’d think you would want….yet you’re just fine with it being received that way…which sure makes me think that actually, that’s the message you want to send.

I don’t know anyone who tries to dissemble and say that the phrase doesn’t mean what it means when it’s pointed out that it appeared in Likud’s founding documents: it meant one nation, Israel, where Palestinians were either gone or politically dominated by Jews.
 

It is bullshit in that context and I don’t understand why it’s cute to play games the other direction about what it really means. 

[chainsaw 10341]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

When it carries the STATED MEANING of “being free….OF something,” then you might oughta.
The area from the river to the sea being free OF Israel? Yeah. That’s a non-starter.
But hey, keep on keeping on. I’m telling you a very plain and direct way that the pro-Palestinian message is encumbering itself with genocidal baggage, either intentionally or foolishly, which is not helpful to the Palestinian cause. I am part of the audience the message is aimed at (I presume that pro-Palestinians would like to influence Americans, as our pressure on our government might make a material difference), and it’s a shit message. It has the opposite effect that I’d think you would want….yet you’re just fine with it being received that way…which sure makes me think that actually, that’s the message you want to send.

You keep insisting that it has the singular meaning of purging Jews and yet have been unable to provide any authoritative evidence of it.

I'll do my best to find the evidence you weren't able to provide.

Regarding the origins of the phrase Wikipedia says:

Quote

The phrase was popularised in the 1960s as part of a wider call for Palestinian liberation creating a democratic state freeing Palestinians from oppression from Israeli as well as from other Arab regimes such as Jordan and Egypt

Wikipedia cites this Nassar article for that

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_river_to_the_sea#cite_note-Nassar_2018_f411-19

Which is here:

https://forward.com/opinion/415250/from-the-river-to-the-sea-doesnt-mean-what-you-think-it-means/

Nassar says:

Quote

That’s how the call for a free Palestine “from the river to the sea” gained traction in the 1960s. It was part of a larger call to see a secular democratic state established in all of historic Palestine.

Quote

Jews who were willing to live as equals with the Palestinians were welcome to stay. In his 1974 speech to the UN, Fatah leader and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat declared, “when we speak of our common hopes for the Palestine of tomorrow we include in our perspective all Jews now living in Palestine who choose to live with us there in peace and without discrimination.”

Here's a really important part I want you, @Brisketexan  in particular, to read, re-read, and then re-read again:

Quote

Most troubling for me, the belief that a “free Palestine” would necessarily lead to the mass annihilation of Jewish Israelis is rooted in deeply racist and Islamophobic assumptions about who the Palestinians are and what they want.

 

Thus, as best I can tell, the phrase got popular in the 1960s, and it had nothing to do with the expulsion, oppression, or murder of Jews. And to answer the specific question you had about what "free" originally meant in this context, the only evidence that would answer it is clear: it means free as in freedom.

[Brisketexan 107121]

 
Thus, as best I can tell, the phrase got popular in the 1960s, and it had nothing to do with the expulsion, oppression, or murder of Jews. And to answer the specific question you had about what "free" originally meant in this context, the only evidence that would answer it is clear: it means free as in freedom.

Singular meaning? Cool, so you just plain lied about what I said. You are a lying piece of shit, and I’m glad you’ve made it so plain and open - no point in worrying about you anymore. I specifically said it has an AMBIGUOUS meaning. I used that exact word. As in, the opposite of “singular.” It has been used for BOTH MEANINGS. That is plain and undeniable.
And if you want to use a phrase to imply “peaceful freedom, not genocide,” why would you use a phrase that has also carried the meaning of “genocide, not peaceful freedom?” That’s only because you’re either disingenuous, or an idiot.
As for you, you’ve outed yourself as just a garden variety liar. It’s not a great look.

Oh….and does the phrase carry the genocidal meaning I referenced? Gee…it’s a mystery….I mean, unless you CONTINUE TO READ THE SAME FUCKING WIKIPEDIA ENTRY YOU LINKED:

“Use by militant groups
"From the river to the sea" has been adopted by several jihadist militant groups, Islamic fundamentalist groups, and terrorist organizations in the Near East and Middle East. Hamas, as part of its revised 2017 charter, rejected "any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea", referring to all areas of former Mandatory Palestine and by extent, the elimination of Jewish sovereignty in the region.[25][26] Islamic Jihad declared that "from the river to the sea — [Palestine] is an Arab Islamic land that [it] is legally forbidden from abandoning any inch of, and the Israeli presence in Palestine is a null existence, which is forbidden by law to recognize.[8] Islamic supporters have utilized a version stating "Palestine is Islamic from the river to the sea", with certain Islamic scholars declaring that the Mahdi — a redemptive apocalyptic figure central to Islamic eschatology — will declare "Jerusalem is Arab Muslim, and Palestine — all of it, from the river to the sea — is Arab Muslim."[27][28]

The phrase has been linked to Hamas since their founding in 1988 with their founding charter seeking "to confront the Zionist invasion and defeat it", however the phrase did not feature in Hamas's official positions until 2017.[29] The first usage of the phrase was as part of its 2017 revised platform where they state "Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea [...] along the lines of the 4th of June 1967".[30][31][22]”

[DDD Dad 14675]

59 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

If you believe Israel actually has that, answer this question for me: do Arabs have the same rights under its immigration laws as do Jews?

You’re moving goalposts again. I said their laws provide for equal rights for all of its citizens. 

I’m done trying to discuss with you. Your tactics are disingenuous and approach trolling. 
 

 

Edited November 12, 2023 by DDD Dad

[chainsaw 10341]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Singular meaning? Cool, so you just plain lied about what I said. You are a lying piece of shit, and I’m glad you’ve made it so plain and open - no point in worrying about you anymore. I specifically said it has an AMBIGUOUS meaning. I used that exact word. As in, the opposite of “singular.” It has been used for BOTH MEANINGS. That is plain and undeniable.
And if you want to use a phrase to imply “peaceful freedom, not genocide,” why would you use a phrase that has also carried the meaning of “genocide, not peaceful freedom?” That’s only because you’re either disingenuous, or an idiot.
As for you, you’ve outed yourself as just a garden variety liar. It’s not a great look.

I thought you were interested in the origin. Are you now saying you're interested in something broader? I didn't dispute that it's been used by Hamas or other militant groups. And I already said it makes no sense to abandon a sensible slogan just because someone else you don't like has used it. What is the issue here?

1 minute ago, DDD Dad said:

You’re moving goalposts again. I said their laws provide for equal rights for all of its citizens. 

I’m done trying to discuss with you. Your tactics are disingenuous and approach trolling. 

But they don't. And you know it.

[Brisketexan 107121]

But they don't. And you know it.

That you “don’t see the issue” in using a slogan that 1) a terrorist group has used to call for genocide (it’s not just “used by someone I don’t like,” it is used by them to convey the exact problematic message we’re taking about)….2) when that exact terrorist group just committed an act of genocide….well, that explains how the pro-Palestinian cause is its own worst enemy.
I might ask…if you are trying to get the world to view your cause as just, and not genocidal, what kind of absolute idiot would repeatedly chant a slogan that has baggage of being the genocidal creed of a terrorist group associated with your cause that just committed an act of genocide against the very people and country you now insist you’re not genocidal about? Seriously. It’s either evil or breathtakingly stupid.
Your arguments here sure have me leaning towards it being the first option. Because nobody can be that stupid.

[Neonmoon 38130]

3 hours ago, chainsaw said:

"be free" means "be free" I'm not sure how much clearer they need to be. Talk to anyone who uses it.

You’re not this stupid 

[chainsaw 10341]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

That you “don’t see the issue” in using a slogan that 1) a terrorist group has used to call for genocide (it’s not just “used by someone I don’t like,” it is used by them to convey the exact problematic message we’re taking about)….2) when that exact terrorist group just committed an act of genocide….well, that explains how the pro-Palestinian cause is its own worst enemy.
I might ask…if you are trying to get the world to view your cause as just, and not genocidal, what kind of absolute idiot would repeatedly chant a slogan that has baggage of being the genocidal creed of a terrorist group associated with your cause that just committed an act of genocide against the very people and country you now insist you’re not genocidal about? Seriously. It’s either evil or breathtakingly stupid.
Your arguments here sure have me leaning towards it being the first option. Because nobody can be that stupid.

The slogan is much older than Hamas. Sorry but I'm not buying the Zionist propaganda about it. And fuck anyone who censured Tlaib over it.

[Neonmoon 38130]

2 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

The slogan is much older than Hamas. Sorry but I'm not buying the Zionist propaganda about it. And fuck anyone who censured Tlaib over it.

Anyone that uses the term “Zionist propaganda” should be taken seriously 
 

[chainsaw 10341]

Just now, Neonmoon said:

Anyone that uses the term “Zionist propaganda” should be taken seriously 
 

But that's exactly what it is.

[Brisketexan 107121]

The slogan is much older than Hamas. Sorry but I'm not buying the Zionist propaganda about it. And fuck anyone who censured Tlaib over it.

“Zionist propaganda.”
You cited a Wikipedia article as authoritative on the matter.
The article….the very one you cited… plainly discussed the genocidal meaning and usage of the term. Actual usage. By actual groups. One of which is runs the government of Gaza. And just murdered over 1,000 innocents.

But you’re “not buying it.”

This is going really well for you.

[chainsaw 10341]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

“Zionist propaganda.”
You cited a Wikipedia article as authoritative on the matter.
The article….the very one you cited… plainly discussed the genocidal meaning and usage of the term. Actual usage. By actual groups. One of which is runs the government of Gaza. And just murdered over 1,000 innocents.

But you’re “not buying it.”

This is going really well for you.

I did that because I'm watching a game and it's not my job to find the evidence you couldn't find. Show me the evidence that supports your viewpoint and I might change my mind (I've been saying this over and over). So far, though, I gotta say the case for "it's a call for genociding jews" is very, very thin.

[956 Worldwide 35670]

If it’s just a call for one nation between the Jordan and Med where everyone lives in a nice secular democracy with equal rights and no discrimination……

Then why aren’t they chanting “Israel shall be free?”  They could likely get a lot more traction with that one. 

[Brisketexan 107121]

I did that because I'm watching a game and it's not my job to find the evidence you couldn't find. Show me the evidence that supports your viewpoint and I might change my mind (I've been saying this over and over). So far, though, I gotta say the case for "it's a call for genociding jews" is very, very thin.

You mean…other than the case plainly stated in the very source you cited.

You are embarrassing yourself here. You should probably stop.

[chainsaw 10341]

2 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

If it’s just a call for one nation between the Jordan and Med where everyone lives in a nice secular democracy with equal rights and no discrimination……

Then why aren’t they chanting “Israel shall be free?”  They could likely get a lot more traction with that one. 

Beats me. Probably because that's like saying "ALL LIVES MATTER" when the oppressed people aren't the Israelis.

[DDD Dad 14675]

Why are you guys continuing to engage with chainsaw. It’s clear he isn’t participating in good faith. 

[chainsaw 10341]

I think at this point it's clear you can't find support for your position. Which is fine, but why belabor it?

[DDD Dad 14675]

2 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I think at this point it's clear you can't find support for your position. Which is fine, but why belabor it?

I don’t have anyone on ignore but you’re making a really strong case to be the first. 

[956 Worldwide 35670]

7 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Beats me. Probably because that's like saying "ALL LIVES MATTER" when the oppressed people aren't the Israelis.

Not really. If they want to live in a free, secular, tolerant Israel they could just say so. Clearly an important part of this is “Israel” going away and something called “Palestine” replacing it.  The most charitable reading involves eliminating a country. 

 

[Brisketexan 107121]

I think at this point it's clear you can't find support for your position. Which is fine, but why belabor it?

Except for the Wikipedia article that you cited. And a piece from Al Jazeera acknowledging that usage. And a piece from the AP. And the actual words of Hamas leaders. Etc etc.
Other than that, no support for the point that the slogan has been used with a genocidal meaning. Yep. You got us.

[chainsaw 10341]

1 minute ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Not really. If they want to live in a free, secular, tolerant Israel they could just say so. Clearly an important part of this is “Israel” going away and something called “Palestine” replacing it.  The most charitable reading involves eliminating a country. 

 

What's wrong with "From the river to the sea Palestine will be free" there is nothing in there about eliminating anyone or anything. It was conceived as, and always has been, a call for freedom. Has it been misappropriated by bad actors? At times, sure. (I include Likud with that). That doesn't change what the slogan means.

[Neonmoon 38130]

There has never been a “Palestine” because Palestinians spend too much time trying to kill Israelis and less time trying to build a prosperous Palestine in the West Bank or Gaza. There is literally 73 years of evidence. 

[chainsaw 10341]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

Except for the Wikipedia article that you cited. And a piece from Al Jazeera acknowledging that usage. And a piece from the AP. And the actual words of Hamas leaders. Etc etc.
Other than that, no support for the point that the slogan has been used with a genocidal meaning. Yep. You got us.

That usage is not what the majority of people mean, though. Definitely not Tlaib. It's a fine slogan.

[Brisketexan 107121]

That usage is not what the majority of people mean, though. Definitely not Tlaib. It's a fine slogan.

Keep thinking that way. Slogans and statements are meant to persuade.
Usage of the slogan is costing the cause much persuasion. If the pro-Palestinian cause wants to keep marginalizing itself, by all means, stick with saying something that alienates a good chunk of the very people it should be persuading.

[txhorns 2421]

6 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

That usage is not what the majority of people mean, though. Definitely not Tlaib. It's a fine slogan.

Tlaib also supported the paragliders flying into the music festival with guns.

[chainsaw 10341]

Just now, txhorns said:

Tlaib also supported the paragliders flying into the music festival with guns.

Okay ben shapiro

[txhorns 2421]

6 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Okay ben shapiro

Are you denying that she posted on X in support of Hamas and the paragliders?

[956 Worldwide 35670]

Whatever else Tlaib says or does, she has a problem with posting demonstrably false takes and then refusing to climb back down even when proven wrong.
 

 

[Anastasis 23739]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

"Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea [...] along the lines of the 4th of June 1967".[30][31][22]”

What did the genocide river to the sea map look like on June 4 1967?

[chainsaw 10341]

18 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Whatever else Tlaib says or does, she has a problem with posting demonstrably false takes and then refusing to climb back down even when proven wrong.
 

 

"demonstrably" gtfo that was bombed by Israel

Edited November 12, 2023 by chainsaw

[txhorns 2421]

5 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

"demonstrably" gtfo that was bombed by Israel

Biden’s administration says otherwise.

[DDD Dad 14675]

Just now, txhorns said:

Biden’s administration says otherwise.

As does NSC and multiple independent forensic analyses. 

[txhorns 2421]

Just now, DDD Dad said:

As does NSC and multiple independent forensic analyses. 

And all evidence from the scene.

[Da Fino 2822]

37 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

"demonstrably" gtfo that was bombed by Israel

Are you thinking about a different one? Are you just hoping people forgot about the truth one that one?

[HRSchenker 2346]

1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

That usage is not what the majority of people mean, though. Definitely not Tlaib. It's a fine slogan.

Do you believe Israel is illegally occupying what people call "Palestine"? If so, what percentage of Israel is on that land?

[Brian Fantana 6882]

2 hours ago, HRSchenker said:

Do you believe Israel is illegally occupying what people call "Palestine"? If so, what percentage of Israel is on that land?

God damn I can't wait for the Ben Shapiro talking points to come out of this one.

[Nivek 17479]

14 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

You have got to be kidding me. This has to be a bit.
Seriously, you are not enhancing the credibility of your “side” at all. You’re only further damaging it.

It has plainly genocidal tones and is a core slogan of Hamas in its pledge to drive Jews from the entire levant:
————
“From the river to the sea” echoes through pro-Palestinian rallies across campuses and cities, adopted by some as a call for a single state on the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean.

By 2012, it was clear that Hamas had claimed the slogan in its drive to claim land spanning Israel, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

“Palestine is ours from the river to the sea and from the south to the north,” Khaled Mashaal, the group’s former leader, said that year in a speech in Gaza celebrating the 25th anniversary of the founding of Hamas. “There will be no concession on any inch of the land.”

The phrase also has roots in the Hamas charter.
———-

I gotta tell ya, if I wanted to chant for peace and equality, I PROBABLY wouldn’t adopt a slogan that’s regularly used by genocidal terrorist groups.

6 million more.... should be Apple's new slogan.  They want to sell 6 million more iPhone 15s.   /chainsaw as a Marketing Manager.  Wondering why his only clients are bald with Indian tattoos, and white laced boots.   

[Nivek 17479]

....

[Nivek 17479]

....

Edited November 12, 2023 by hayden_horn
Reasons

[Brian Fantana 6882]

I'm fine, I freaked out a bit last night, but loaded my dogs up and took something of an impromptu road trip to clear my head. I haven't had an episode like that in years, I sincerely apologize guys.