insectman #fundie

insectman #fundie washingtontimes.com

Loony liberals began to destroy our mighty military in the 70s by putting females on warships. In the 2000s it was homosexuals in the barracks. Now it is athiesm trumping anyone else. Women as frontline warriors will finish the job.

29 comments

old comment by Hasan Prishtina

@Swede

Maybe the IDF wouldn't need to inspect ambulances if they weren't regularly used for the transport of fighters, weapons and suicide bombers - a practice pioneered against Israel; ambulances have since been used to deliver death and murder in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. And why would people get pulled off the street? Don't terrorist attack usually happen on the street? Of course, the IDF is famed for having no intelligence services whatever... And we know it's just like apartheid, because Verwoerd and Botha ceded more land to black African states than existed in South Africa, that their opponents not only had judicial power of life and death, recognized by Pretoria, over non-white South Africans, but that these opponents were waging war with Pretoria at the same time armed by foreign powers with defense budgets larger than South Africa's, and because apartheid South Africa always had blacks in its parliament and a black was once its president...oh, wait, none of that is true.

And then a nice cartoon by Latuff, winner of the second prize at the Tehran international Holocaust denial cartoon competition.

old comment by Hasan Prishtina

@Swede

(continued)

Ever wonder why Israel has "one of the most ruthless and fierce armies in the world"? (albeit one whose actions and whose occasional moral lapses are more scrutinized than any other in the world, both within Israel and internationally) Your pictures showed no IDF women, so we'll take the subject as an excuse to post your diatribe - four wars of attempted annihilation with 65 years of murder in between, together with the wariness and brutalization that accompanies it, might explain a little to a reasonable person.

But you don't accept that. You accept that war and violence makes people wary, angry and brutalized - except for the Jews. In their case, you have repeatedly expressed your dismay that they have a Defense Force and refrain to act to those who would, as D Laurier would have it, "drive them into the sea" with the forgiveness, magnitude, trust and understanding you expect from them, you who lives in a country which has not seen the savagery of war for two hundred years. No, your outrage that such people believe they have the right to defend themselves against continued attack is palpable. But Sweden is a country where Social Democratic mayors of major cities deny, in the wake of attacks against Jews, that anti-Semitic hate crime exists, and where Holocaust survivors feel that they are no longer safe. I'm sure that makes for a healthy climate of opinion.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

(emph-ass-is added):

"athiesm trumping anyone else. Women as frontline warriors will finish the job."

And as you're soooooo anti-Atheist, clearly you're a right-wing Fundamentalist Christain; a True Christian, natch. Therefore you 'Support Israel', do you not...?:

image

...however, there's a problem with that: y'see, the most religious Israelis - Hasidim - are Conscientious Objectors, who for 'religious' reasons refuse to be inducted into their IDF, therefore the only ones who are - including those 'frontline Women warriors' you speak of, as per above - by definition, from the mainly secular majority of Jews in that country.

And of course, some of those frontline warriors decide to go career. Can you say 'Krav Maga', insect? I know you can, as these frontline warrior Women crush you into two-dimensionalness under their combat boots. ('Help me! Helllppp meeeeeee!' [/"The Fly"]

So indeed: You are finished. Enjoy your paradox, insectbrain. >:D

(*Puts on k...niggets outfit, affects outrageous French accent*)

I - as an Atheist - trump in your general direction! Your mother was a gnat, and your father smells of 25 hour-old Mayflies! [/Andy Schaftafly] X3

old comment by michael3ov

@Hasan Prishtina

I agree with most of what you said. However, Israel is by no means innocent. They have been brutal when it was not called for and often still do respond disproportionately. The Balfour Declaration was the second slap in the face by the allies in WW1 to the Palestinians who lived there peacefully with the Jews at that time. Of course Israel has a right to defend themselves but knocking down the homes of people who have lived there for generations and pushing the Palestinians into a smaller and smaller area until they have nothing left is not defedning yourself. Neither is setting up massive spy rings in the U.S. Or brutally destroying the U.S.S. Liberty. If it wasn't for the U.S. and Israel's seat on the security council than Israel would have been sanctioned numerous times for war crimes. White phosphurus being the first thing that comes to mind. Like I said, they do have the right to self defense but no person can honestly say that they are just doing what every other country at war does or that they don't have an enormous amount of crimes against humanity on their hands.

old comment by Hasan Prishtina

@michael3ov

I don't like the practise of knocking people's homes down any more than you, and I'm the last to say that the Israeli government is as pure as the driven snow. I have no time for those who campaign for Jonathan Pollard's release - he is a traitor, and it makes no difference whether he gave secrets to the Israelis or to North Korea. As for the UN, I am rather less sanguine; the UN Human Rights Council, in its eight-year history has condemned only one country, 45 times: Israel. Over that time Sudan, North Korea, Myanmar, Libya, Syria, Turkmenistan and Zimbabwe have been, apparently, much less of a worry in terms of human rights.

As for white phosphorus, having worked with a modern Western army in battle, I know something about this - it's not just an incendiary weapons, but is used for illumination and to create smoke screens. It was used by the UN in both world wars, in Korea, by the US in various conflicts, including in Iraq. There is a legal battle in Israel as the government has announced it is to stop using white phosphorus; which other countries have stopped using it?

old comment by Hasan Prishtina

@michael3ov

(continued)

The fact remains that whatever Israel does to protect itself receives worldwide opprobrium; the security fence was characterized across the world as a "Berlin Wall", despite the fact that the Wall was designed to keep people in rather than out; yet, as a result, the frequent scattering of corpses across Israeli streets as a result of suicide bombings are a thing of the past. There are grounds for criticism, but people sitting in peaceful countries singling out Israel as a "rogue state" or an "apartheid state" while turning a blind eye to the much worse activities of other countries, is a bit much. And people expecting the Israelis, because of the Holocaust, to be moral paragons, while excusing the murderous reaction of their opponents on the grounds that they have been brutalized by violence, is simply spiteful.

old comment by Hasan Prishtina

@michael3ov

(continued)

old comment by Hasan Prishtina

@michael3ov

EDIT: It may be a small thing, perhaps not, but I'm a historian and these things niggle me: The Balfour Declaration wasn't a slap in the face for the Palestinians, because while there is some evidence of a regional identity of Arabs in Palestine at that time, there was no Palestinian national identity. Levantine Arabs in 1917, as in 1948, believed themselves to be Syrian, understanding Syria to include present-day Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the Turkish province of Hatay; many Syrians still believe that these lands all belong to Syria. This is not unnatural; the region was governed by the Ottoman vilayet of Damascus and the first stirrings of Arab nationalism in the Levant came from what is now Syria. At the end of World War I, the conquered territories, with the exception of the Hejaz and Yemen, were divided along a north-south line and granted by the League of Nations as mandates to France (in the north) and Britain (in the south). France hived off the area where Christians were in the majority into the new mandate of Lebanon in 1920 and Hatay was awarded to Turkey in 1939; the British area was divided into the mandate of Mesopotamia, later the Kingdom of Iraq, and the mandate of Palestine. As a result of local Arab objection to Jewish settlement and the pogroms of 1919, this mandate was subdivided in 1921, with the land east of the Jordan forming Transjordania, now Jordan, where Jewish immigration was forbidden.

old comment by Hasan Prishtina

@michael3ov

(continued)

The situation is further complicated by three factors: 1) most of the land in Palestine was not the property of either Arab or Jew, but of the State, passing from the Ottoman Empire, to Britain to its successors. 2) Jewish immigration continued into the smaller Palestine and, before the independence of Israel, these people were usually referred to as "Palestinians." 3) There was considerable Arab immigration, much of it from Egypt, into Palestine during the same period. The evidence for a Palestinian national identity is not strong before the 1960s. That does not in any way mean that it is not genuine or that the Palestinian people are somehow undeserving of self-determination. What it does show is that national identities can grow relatively quickly and the idea that one's nationality is something instinctive is a load of bullshit.

@Jewnior Spokesman

No, I haven't met him, but my fiancée knows him fairly well.

insectman #fundie washingtontimes.com

29 comments

Confused?