probablyaCat

joined 2 years ago
[–] probablyaCat@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No it won't. They would lie while watching a video showing it is a lie. And later they would lie that any of it ever took place.

And his true believers would accept it all.

[–] probablyaCat@kbin.social 11 points 2 years ago (5 children)

I absolutely loathe Otzma Yehudit. They are like MAGA, Vox, National Rally, and the rest of the far right religious assholes. While I understand why Israel separated religious courts and authority from the government (don't like how they did it though), they should have, at the very least, tied voting and government eligibility to national service. So much of the ultra orthodox functions like the extremist Mormon FLDS does in the US. A fucking stain on my people.

[–] probablyaCat@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago

Ah so I got it backwards. They started with noting abuses, but the letter gained them some notoriety(or infamy depending on who you ask). Good to know.

Again, I have mixed (at best) feelings about it. They do these things in public so don't necessarily have a reason to expect privacy. I have experienced harassment on campus, myself. But I'm unsure that it will have the desired long term impact.

[–] probablyaCat@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

This started as a response to the letter (as far as I can tell). But Hillel groups at universities (mine included) were regularly harassed by groups supporting a free Palestine. After the response to the letter, they realized "hey maybe we can do something about shit like that, too" (not a direct quote by them).

I mean we were just trying to hang out, pray, and eat food together. And my gut feeling is all of those people should be shamed. But my slower brain reaction is that I hope some of those people that I regularly talked with started to better understand what they were saying.

[–] probablyaCat@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

If they don't hear it, then it is essentially saying they agree with the lower court ruling. If they want to be against it then they have to hear it.

[–] probablyaCat@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

But these groups and people weren't the same people as the ones that walked across the land bridge. The cultures had long since diverged and were different. Wars had been fought. Whole groups died or merged. And if you go back a little further, they are all closely related. I don't think the point is that the slaughtering and pillaging was OK. It is that you cannot have a good faith argument on fixing current problems by trying to focus only on arbitrary time periods to claim certain privileges. I am very much in favor of doing more to make the lives of the native americans better, but I also will not make the argument that descendants of Europeans or Africans have no claim to the land there either. Because to do so is not in good faith and just ignores reality. Any time period you pick to decide who has a claim to a place is arbitrary. We cannot change the past. We can only change the future (but we are limited by the confines of the present).

[–] probablyaCat@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Yes, but if Minnesota says he is off the ballot it will be appealed to the supreme court who is the authority on constitutional interpretation. If they side with Minnesota, not even the electoral college can put him in. Likely whichever (if any) case goes against him, all other active trials will be put on hold awaiting a response from the USSC. If they decide the 14th does apply (a big if given the state of the USSC), then it is over. In all 50 states. That's why groups are hitting him in multiple states. They just need 1. It isn't an attempt to take him off the ballot. It is an attempt to end his federal political career entirely.

[–] probablyaCat@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

Nah. Don't let the current situation fool you. You've seen that I'm very pro-Israel in my other comments. But there are many of us that are lefties through and through. I mean most Jews in the US lean slightly left of the democrats. I lean further. And David ben Gurion was super leftist. Hardcore socialist commie pinko, that one. If I had been around for the founding of Israel, I'd probably have been kicking back on a kibbutz somewhere.

But the right is definitely not our friend. Most of them support Israel for christo-fascist dreams of the apocalypse. They want to use us. And we should be careful to think that we are the ones using them.

I do not know where you are from, but especially concerning the US and Europe, I do think it's important to understand where this support comes from -- even if they don't actually know it either. It's the underdog problem. Israel is much stronger than in the past. We have won many wars against people who wished to murder us all. We became a force to be reckoned with. And the Palestinian territories are the underdog. And the left has normalized seeing the underdog as the marginalized victim. They are not used to seeing an underdog victimizer. From South Africa to Ireland to PoCs and the LGBT+ communities, they are used to things going one way. And things are not one way. There is a whole 3d plane of possibilities in this world. And that's why I argue more about Israel than anything else on here. To try to help people see that things are not black and white. This isn't a left or right issue. This isn't a David vs Goliath issue. This is something that cannot be boiled down to simple concepts or comparisons. And the more you know, the harder it really is to if not agree with what Israel is doing, to at least understand why they might make the choices they do. And it is not for the sole purpose of ethnic cleansing or genocide. At least not for the majority.

[–] probablyaCat@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This is a lie. Hamas won the vote. The EU, UN, and the Carter Center all called those elections free and fair. If anything, Hamas was an underdog given that Israel, in collaboration with Fatah, kept arresting the politicians in Hamas as they defined Hamas a terrorist organization. Fatah and Israel wanted to delay the elections, but with the encouragement of the US (GWB in particular who felt Hamas would definitely not win), they decided to keep them as they were. Stop making things up to fit your narrative. Hamas still typically wins the popular vote in polling done since then. You have a fucking computer. Just google it. It's all there in black and white.

I mean they did have conflicts with Fatah. But the biggest fights weren't until after they won the election.

[–] probablyaCat@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago (6 children)

There won't be one because he is disqualified from office (if these suits are successful). Not from running. From office. If Mickey Mouse won we wouldn't have a cartoon for president. Second place would win.

Regardless we might have another insurrection attempt, but this time the authorities will be more prepared. So unless the military decides on a coup, a successful suit here would be the end of it for him.

[–] probablyaCat@kbin.social 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That article has such a stupid take. It takes tiny pieces of quotes from a couple of ex-Israeli officials and with one of them is clearly omitting context. Did Israel permit Islamist groups to do stuff like build mosques and have charities? Yes. Did he also say, but it is not mentioned in the article, that they were completely peaceful at the time and that Israel didn't want to be viewed as attacking Islam? Also yes.

See, what you are saying is that Israel created Hamas by not using more oppression to stop these groups at a time when they were not attacking Israel, but the PLO was. And that is just such a simple naive take that it is ridiculous. Yeah if Israel could redo things, they might have decided that was a good idea. But then again, what if it just caused more attacks from the surrounding countries after they were claimed to be "attacking Islam." Then would we also blame Israel for those attacks due to them repressing the Islamist movements?

It even does the same by using cherry picked foresight about Afghanistan. It entirely ignores the situation in Afghanistan and just implies that the US caused Al Qaeda. Things just aren't that simple. It's entirely possible that had the US and other countries not interfered in Afghanistan that the soviet union would've lasted longer and Afghanistan might've been another Chechnya.

At the time, Israel was having to fight against the PLO. They were not fighting against the religious Islamic groups. And knowing the history of the time period and the politics in the region, the very religious groups were not nearly the force that they are now. So they made choices for reasons that absolutely made sense at the time. And we have no way of knowing how things would be different if they made different choices.

We can say that places that aren't Israel still have issues with the Muslim brotherhood or are friendly with them all over the middle east. And Israel certainly didn't create the Muslim Brotherhood. And if Israel didn't exist and it was all a Palestinian state with a secular government, it isn't a stretch to say that they would be in that area too, calling for an Islamist government. As they have done in Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, and more.

view more: ‹ prev next ›