[Palmyrene]

So you are an apostate. Well I hope they never find out, for your sake.

My parents and friends know.

They don't care.

And regardless Syria has no apostate laws. The laws of a country which are imposed upon it's citizens do not reflect it's citizens opinions.

[annatar1914]

Oh yeah you're the apocalyptic. Hope that works out for you.

That's poor English, Palmyrene; ''Apocalypse'' means ''Revelation'' in English from the Greek. Every Monotheistic and several non-montheistic religions, including Islam, have ''End of Days'' scenarios. Mine do not involve any kind of death cult insanity like you'd hear from Hindsite.

No, my ideas on Israel stem from the real world observation that one doesn't nurture a viper coiled on one's bosom. Israel will not exist if it doesn't kick all the Muslims out, like any other healthy and free society in fact if they intend to remain such. Not that Israel is so wonderful, quite the contrary, but I'd rather that the Jews returned where they organically developed in the first place.

I have fairly nuanced opinions politically, I also support the Syrian government in Syria for example.

[Palmyrene]

@annatar1914

I'm not particularly sure humans "organically" emerged from the Middle East. We've actually come from Africa and migrated to the Middle East.

Jews have no greater claim on land than Palestinians. I just support Palestinians because it's them that's having their homes taken away, their children raped, and people used as human shields not Israelis.

Also no society which requires genocide to function is "healthy" or "free".

[annatar1914]

@Palmyrene ;

I'm not particularly sure humans "organically" emerged from the Middle East. We've actually come from Africa and migrated to the Middle East.

I don't buy that. But the point is moot anyway, because the Jewish people developed in the Middle Eastern region and a significant portion is now there again, with fateful consequences.

Jews have no greater claim on land than Palestinians.

Irrelevant to the point I was originally making, about the survival of the Israeli Nation State requiring the eventual removal of all Muslims from the areas I mentioned, at a minimum.

I just support Palestinians because it's them that's having their homes taken away, their children raped, and people used as human shields not Israelis.

I have the distinct feeling that if roles were reversed the Palestinians will not act any better, and maybe worse. I do not believe that a two-state solution is possible, because in the end there can only be one or the other standing. Such is the way of the world.

Also no society which requires genocide to function is "healthy" or "free".

What's your point?

[Palmyrene]

@Palmyrene
I don't buy that. But the point is moot anyway, because the Jewish people developed in the Middle Eastern region and a significant portion is now there again, with fateful consequences.

This obviously clearly means they should genocide the previous inhabitants. This is perfectly align with Christianity I assume? Ah yes, I remember when Jesus said, if you want to get a house, just walk into someone else's and murder them. That makes sense.

Irrelevant to the point I was originally making, about the survival of the Israeli Nation State requiring the eventual removal of all Muslims from the areas I mentioned, at a minimum.

That doesn't lead to why you support them. In fact, that's a good reason not to support them.

I have the distinct feeling that if roles were reversed the Palestinians will not act any better, and maybe worse. I do not believe that a two-state solution is possible, because in the end there can only be one or the other standing. Such is the way of the world.

I highly doubt they would act worse given how this would assume that Israel was never established and so Palestinians would have no reason to hate Israelis or Jews (since Israel would not exist).

But I digress. The sole way to solve this conflict is to remove the mechanisms of domination and subjugation that has permeated all states. Hierarchy will be removed and instead a society built upon free association will begin.

What's your point?

Since genocide and forced killings are par de course for any state (and since no such state can be truly free) we must be rid of them.

[Patrickov]

I'm just interested because I'm not sure anyone other than ZN and Hindsite does.

I do, just that I strongly believe those in power have to change their ways over time, or the people risk annihilation (of the state, not the race) sooner or later.

[annatar1914]

This obviously clearly means they should genocide the previous inhabitants.

Removal is not genocide, so the Israelis may not resort to sterner measures.

This is perfectly align with Christianity I assume?

No, but then again we're talking about Jews and Muslims, are we not?

Ah yes, I remember when Jesus said

No, you 'remember' incorrectly.

, if you want to get a house, just walk into someone else's and murder them.

No, the quote is, with it's context also;

…But if I drive out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. How can anyone enter a strong man’s house and steal his possessions, unless he first ties up the strong man? Then he can plunder his house. He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters.…

Gospel of St. Matthew chapter 12, verses 28 through 30. The Jews were saying that Christ drove out devils by the power of the prince of Devils. He is saying in reply that he is stronger than the Devil (the ''Strong Man'') because He is God. It has nothing to do with killing people, it's only using an analogy drawn from life, that you have to be stronger than the strong man and be able to overpower him if you are to go into his house and take his shit from him...

That makes sense.

Not from what you wanted to make of it, it doesn't.

That doesn't lead to why you support them. In fact, that's a good reason not to support them.

Between the two, I can handle Jews being around, they'll get their mind right eventually. And they don't have plans of eventual world domination and rule, either.

I highly doubt they would act worse given how this would assume that Israel was never established and so Palestinians would have no reason to hate Israelis or Jews (since Israel would not exist).

I was referring to a possible future, after Palestine takes over Israel, and it will.

But I digress. The sole way to solve this conflict is to remove the mechanisms of domination and subjugation that has permeated all states. Hierarchy will be removed and instead a society built upon free association will begin.

Not with mankind as it is. Hierarchy is built into the very structure of the Cosmos and is something good and right, anyways.

Since genocide and forced killings are par de course for any state (and since no such state can be truly free) we must be rid of them.

These things are natural to fallen mankind, and precede the State.

[Palmyrene]

I do, just that I strongly believe those in power have to change their ways over time, or the people risk annihilation (of the state, not the race) sooner or later.

Israel isn't incentivized to change. The entire economy is dependent on aid and money from making survelliance equipment. It wouldn't last a day without it's waterwings.

Israel is a failed state held up by it's masters.

[Palmyrene]

Removal is not genocide, so the Israelis may not resort to sterner measures.

Removal was the original plans Hitler had for Jews. Had the idea to give them a nice little island along the coast of Africa.

Of course, we all know what happened. Hitler did end up deporting them, just to concentration camps.

The isthmus between removal and genocide is thin and wire tight. In the end, they both do the same thing and often go through the same process.

No, but then again we're talking about Jews and Muslims, are we not?

We're talking about your support for Israel which has alot of inconsistencies.

No, you 'remember' incorrectly.

It was sarcasm.

No, the quote is, with it's context also;



Gospel of St. Matthew chapter 12, verses 28 through 30. The Jews were saying that Christ drove out devils by the power of the prince of Devils. He is saying in reply that he is stronger than the Devil (the ''Strong Man'') because He is God. It has nothing to do with killing people, it's only using an analogy drawn from life, that you have to be stronger than the strong man and be able to overpower him if you are to go into his house and take his shit from him...

I didn't actually know there was a verse resembling what I said. I was just being sarcastic.

Regardless I think it wasn't literal worldly strength but spiritual strength. I'm not sure the lesson here is "if you're strong you can take what shit you want". I guess interpretation is to be found in all religion.

Of course you seem to take it that if someone is strong enough they should be able to take your shit. Thus, you would be perfectly fine if I kicked you out of your house and took it since I would be "stronger".

Between the two, I can handle Jews being around, they'll get their mind right eventually. And they don't have plans of eventual world domination and rule, either.

Israel is already a failed state reliant on aid and money from making surveillance equipment. It'll sink without it's mommy holding it up.

And Palestinians clearly are interested in world domination. That makes sooo much sense.

I was referring to a possible future, after Palestine takes over Israel, and it will.

Well you can't be sure of that. The devil is in the details. What type of Palestine are we talking about here?

Not with mankind as it is. Hierarchy is built into the very structure of the Cosmos and is something good and right, anyways.

Yeah ok you do you but just so you know, that won't convince the working class. Quietism never holds.

There is Christian anarchism though. Kropotkin I believe was one.

These things are natural to fallen mankind, and precede the State.

Well you're wrong since primitive communism was key to the development of human society.

[Ter]

Wow like 4 people support Israel. That's more than what I was expecting. You did it guys!

There are many more but skinster has re-tweeted so many tweets that we have PTSD and had to crawl back under the slimy stones and mouldy caves where we came from.

[annatar1914]

Removal was the original plans Hitler had for Jews. Had the idea to give them a nice little island along the coast of Africa.

Extermination was always the plan for Hitler.

Of course, we all know what happened. Hitler did end up deporting them, just to concentration camps.

Yes.

The isthmus between removal and genocide is thin and wire tight. In the end, they both do the same thing and often go through the same process.

That's history, and I'm not talking about the rightness or wrongness of it, just crude and brutal facts.

We're talking about your support for Israel which has alot of inconsistencies.

No, just nuanced. I think that to survive they would have to take the position that I mentioned in order to do so, I did not say that they will or even could.

It was sarcasm.

I get sarcasm, I really do.

I didn't actually know there was a verse resembling what I said. I was just being sarcastic.

Now you know, which is good, right?

Regardless I think it wasn't literal worldly strength but spiritual strength.

God being God it follows He has the absolute amount of both.

I'm not sure the lesson here is "if you're strong you can take what shit you want". I guess interpretation is to be found in all religion.

It's an analogy He used, to claim that He is more powerful than the Devil, therefore saying to the Jews that He was God.

Of course you seem to take it that if someone is strong enough they should be able to take your shit.

No, not necessarily at all. But being robbed of some material goods could be taken as a kind of punishment if one is too attached to created, material things.

Thus, you would be perfectly fine if I kicked you out of your house and took it since I would be "stronger".

No, but this is the way the world thinks and operates, behind the hypocrisy.

Israel is already a failed state reliant on aid and money from making surveillance equipment. It'll sink without it's mommy holding it up.

I don't disagree.

And Palestinians clearly are interested in world domination. That makes sooo much sense.

1.Islam, not ''Palestine'', as per the distinctions between ''Dar-ul-Harb'' and the ''Dar-ul-Islam''. But i'm not planning on getting into Islamic end goals and eschatology.

2. I will note though that if a Palestinian successor state to Israel got hold of Israel's military equipment such as missiles and nuclear weapons...

Well you can't be sure of that. The devil is in the details. What type of Palestine are we talking about here?

It wouldn't be a secular regime, at least not for very long. In the long run my support of the Syrian government is tempered by the thought that in the long run Islamofascism will quite possibly triumph there, despite all the efforts of mice and men. We'll see, I hope not.

''Not with mankind as it is. Hierarchy is built into the very structure of the Cosmos and is something good and right, anyways.''

Yeah ok you do you but just so you know, that won't convince the working class. Quietism never holds.

The ''working class'' doesn't know itself as a working class, strictly speaking, much less be convinced of anything further.

There is Christian anarchism though. Kropotkin I believe was one.

Yes, And Tolstoy, which I've read quite a bit about. I'm not altogether very distant from that position myself, of ''Christian Anarchism'', but as I have suggested, my beliefs and personal ideas are not simple or easily categorized.

Well you're wrong since primitive communism was key to the development of human society.

Nor was there an absence of hierarchy in that, either. The modern state though? It is something of an abomination, truly.

[Palmyrene]

There are many more but skinster has re-tweeted so many tweets that we have PTSD and had to crawl back under the slimy stones and mouldy caves where we came from.

I'm actually under the impression that not much people support Israel on this forum.

I expect that, after the controversy has died down, anti Israel folks would vote.

[Palmyrene]

Extermination was always the plan for Hitler.

I'm not sure this was the case. The final solution came after they tried everything else.

Not like Hitler would care or that he considered other proposals out of the goodness of heart but because, even, genocide doesn't look good which is why he tried to cover it up.

Israel already covers up it's crimes so I don't see why genocide would be hard for them.

That's history, and I'm not talking about the rightness or wrongness of it, just crude and brutal facts.

So you agree that considerations for removal leads to genocide?

Then, it follows, that supporting Israel would be amoral and Israel would eventually genocide the Palestinian population.

No, just nuanced. I think that to survive they would have to take the position that I mentioned in order to do so, I did not say that they will or even could.

You are perfectly chill with supporting Israel while also discussing how Israel could kill or remove the Palestinians as if they weren't human but pests.

And you call yourself Christian. That is the source of inconsistency.

I get sarcasm, I really do.

That's fine then.

Now you know, which is good, right?

Yes it is.

No, not necessarily at all. But being robbed of some material goods could be taken as a kind of punishment if one is too attached to created, material things.

But you just said that the verse justifies taking other people's stuff if you're strong enough.

No, but this is the way the world thinks and operates, behind the hypocrisy.

But you support it with the Bible and give Jesus as an example. Are you saying Jesus was s hypocrite?

I don't disagree.

Then why do you support it?

1.Islam, not ''Palestine'', as per the distinctions between ''Dar-ul-Harb'' and the ''Dar-ul-Islam''. But i'm not planning on getting into Islamic end goals and eschatology.

This isn't the 13th century. A majority of Muslims have never heard of this kind of thing. The only people who care are Islamic scholars who have forgotten the memo that the Caliphate doesn't exist anymore.

This is also vastly oversimplifies internal conflict and politics in the Arab world too which is insulting to someone like me who wants to engage in that politics.

Oh so if I just scream "Dar al Harb" out loud all the Mooozlems in the world will come to me and bow to me as their Caliph? If it was that fucking easy I would've done it.

Also where's my invitation to the Muslim World Domination Council? I should've gotten it by now.

2. I will note though that if a Palestinian successor state to Israel got hold of Israel's military equipment such as missiles and nuclear weapons...

What? They'll nuke themselves? Israel has a higher chance of nuking itself. They have an entire doctrine around that (well maybe, it's just speculation).

It wouldn't be a secular regime, at least not for very long.

I'm pretty sure you can't predict that. Parallel universes and such.

In the long run my support of the Syrian government is tempered by the thought that in the long run Islamofascism will quite possibly triumph there, despite all the efforts of mice and men. We'll see, I hope not.

Actually what triumphs there might surprise you

The ''working class'' doesn't know itself as a working class, strictly speaking, much less be convinced of anything further.

Yeah we'll work on that. Class consciousness is to be built. My idea, to make class consciousness stick, is to create a culture of the working class and to do that we need a narrative or myth. Something which gives people a common sense of solidarity.

In an anarchist society, culture not states will rule. I plan on making a new culture superior to all the others which spreads all throughout the working class.

Yes, And Tolstoy, which I've read quite a bit about. I'm not altogether very distant from that position myself, of ''Christian Anarchism'', but as I have suggested, my beliefs and personal ideas are not simple or easily categorized.

So you're familiar with their arguments then?

Nor was there an absence of hierarchy in that, either. The modern state though? It is something of an abomination, truly.

Depends on your definition of hierarchy.

I see the modern state as an outgrowth of hierarchy. It's the result of hierarchies nesting within other hierarchies until nothing is left but oppression.

[Patrickov]

I'm actually under the impression that not much people support Israel on this forum.

I expect that, after the controversy has died down, anti Israel folks would vote.

I actually don't find the number that bad. If you expect the "No" vote would be skyrocketing, why?

Your strong feeling on Israeli atrocities cannot be an answer, because literally not everybody share the same view as yours.

[Hindsite]

I'm just interested because I'm not sure anyone other than ZN and Hindsite does.

I have no opinion, since I don't know what " UNIRONICALLY" means.

[Palmyrene]

I have no opinion, since I don't know what " UNIRONICALLY" means.

It means the opposite of ironically.

[Palmyrene]

I actually don't find the number that bad. If you expect the "No" vote would be skyrocketing, why?

Your strong feeling on Israeli atrocities cannot be an answer, because literally not everybody share the same view as yours.

I mean everyone else here is pretty positive towards Palestine even some Christian religious people.

I could list names but I'm not too comfortable doing that so I'll just wait until they vote. Hopefully I can get most of PoFo's opinions on things.

Most of my strong feelings on Israeli atrocities are shared. My previous thread on Israel indicates this.

[Patrickov]

I mean everyone else here is pretty positive towards Palestine even some Christian religious people.

I could list names but I'm not too comfortable doing that so I'll just wait until they vote. Hopefully I can get most of PoFo's opinions on things.

Most of my strong feelings on Israeli atrocities are shared. My previous thread on Israel indicates this.

The problem is "I condemn Israeli atrocities", "I am positive towards Palestine" and "I support Israel" are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Being strong in the first two does not automatically mean the opposite of yhe latter.

[Hindsite]

It means the opposite of ironically.

Would that mean in a normal truthful way? If so, then of course I support Israel. But I have already voted No Opinion. So that is really ironic, I guess.

[annatar1914]

@Palmyrene ;

I'm not sure this was the case. The final solution came after they tried everything else.

IMO, the historical evidence suggests otherwise, dating at the very least the intention of mass murder from around the time 'Mein Kampf' was written.

Not like Hitler would care or that he considered other proposals out of the goodness of heart but because, even, genocide doesn't look good which is why he tried to cover it up.

Even mass murder is something that has to be built up and developed.

Israel already covers up it's crimes so I don't see why genocide would be hard for them.

They have non-Jewish citizens and removal of all the Muslims, while being the most logical option for their ideology of Zionism, isn't going to happen.

So you agree that considerations for removal leads to genocide?

No, can't say that I do, given the history I have before me of my own region of the United States, of the removal of American Indian peoples from East of the Mississippi River to ''Indian Territory'', now the State of Oklahoma. Genocide was not the intent and while some died along the way, many more did not and their tribes were more or less intact.

Then, it follows, that supporting Israel would be amoral and Israel would eventually genocide the Palestinian population.

I support the state of Israel insofar as it protects the Jewish people and to that degree it does so, primarily.

You are perfectly chill with supporting Israel while also discussing how Israel could kill or remove the Palestinians as if they weren't human but pests.

No, I am looking at the situation as dispassionately as possible. If the Israelis were consistent with their Zionist ideology they would act entirely as I said, but I don't believe they will.

And you call yourself Christian. That is the source of inconsistency.

My Christianity doesn't rise or fall with the outcomes of the future regarding Islam or Judaism or their adherents. I can find inhumanity deplorable and still be able to describe the facts around that inhumanity with a measure of both objectivity and humility.

But you just said that the verse justifies taking other people's stuff if you're strong enough.

No, I absolutely did not. I went to some pains to describe it as being in the context of Christ's theological dispute regarding His Authority and His Identity, with the Jews who opposed Him.

But you support it with the Bible and give Jesus as an example. Are you saying Jesus was s hypocrite?

See above. You are mistaken and perhaps confused, which might be a fault laid to my door if I haven't been more clear than I could have been. The irony of the analogy Christ used is that the ''Strong Man'' of his illustration (Satan) really has no right to the ''goods'' (human souls) that he tries to steal. Christ is taking from a thief, by cleansing a human mind from demonic possession. This is the context of the quote.

Then why do you support it?

See above. My support is qualified.

This isn't the 13th century. A majority of Muslims have never heard of this kind of thing. The only people who care are Islamic scholars who have forgotten the memo that the Caliphate doesn't exist anymore.

Oh, there's people out there aplenty willing to bring it back, stronger than ever.

This is also vastly oversimplifies internal conflict and politics in the Arab world too which is insulting to someone like me who wants to engage in that politics.

I think the ''simplification'' is a result of the nullity of secular politics in the region, in fact, anywhere really. I however find tribes and clans to be important political factors, in reality also everywhere.

Oh so if I just scream "Dar al Harb" out loud all the Mooozlems in the world will come to me and bow to me as their Caliph? If it was that fucking easy I would've done it.

Now who's 'simplifying'?

Also where's my invitation to the Muslim World Domination Council? I should've gotten it by now.

Have you looked for it?

What? They'll nuke themselves?

No, how do you get that from what I said? I'm talking about a future Palestinian State 'inheriting' what Israel has, militarily and otherwise.

So you're familiar with their arguments then?

I am. Not entirely persuaded, but i'm familiar with them and their arguments, especially Tolstoy.