Play Nice The NM Devil's Chessboard Thread - Part II

[Chadwiko]

And to answer your question...

(Proceeds to not actually answer the question)

 

[ferball]

Also weird that someone who claims everyone should vote Yes associates the concept of treaties with conspiracy theorist cookers.

 

[Grogg]

Hamas. Hamas everywhere.

Insert.woodygif.com

 

[Chadwiko]

Also weird that someone who claims everyone should vote Yes associates the concept of treaties with conspiracy theorist cookers.

Nope, you're conflating the wrong parts.

Fully support the process of treaty - I have actually worked quite closely on parts of the ongoing state-level treaty process here in Victoria.

Suggesting that Australia is illegitimate as a modern nation state because the British documents they signed in the 1800s establishing Australia were invalid? That's straight out of the sov-cit playbook though.

 

[ferball]

(Proceeds to not actually answer the question)

You asked me if I was a sovereign citizen cooker. I said wtte of "Not only do I know a few, I've never cooked them."

(Hint, if I'd said "never cooked any of us" you could assume I was one.)

If you applied your mind to comprending what you read instead of constantly looking for heresies and unorthodoxies you could attack you might have been able to work that out.

 

[Chadwiko]

(Hint, if I'd said "never cooked any of us" you could assume I was one.)

...so in your mind, if I said the following;

"I've known a few Jews, but I've never cooked one" you would take that to mean I'm not Jewish?

Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaah I don't think you should be the one criticising anyone's "comprending" here, pal.

 

[ferball]

Nope, you're conflating the wrong parts.

Fully support the process of treaty - I have actually worked quite closely on parts of the ongoing state-level treaty process here in Victoria.

Suggesting that Australia is illegitimate as a modern nation state because the British documents they signed in the 1800s establishing Australia were invalid? That's straight out of the sov-cit playbook though.

Maybe they read the Mabo decision properly too.

The clear implication is that because terra nullius doesn't exist the federal government's existence is not valid. However the High Court is unable to rule itself invalid. If it did it would be a logical absurdity cos the ruling would have been made by an invalid institution and would therefore be invalid itself. Thus the high court would become valid again its ruling would be valid as well. It creates an absurd legal strange loop.

Australia isn't going away but if we want to do our country the right way we need to address this legal absurdity and treaties are the logical way to do that.

After all no one wants some angry blackfella appealing to Iran, or even Russia and saying "these illegitimate invaders stole our country., our culture and even our kids, can you fund us while we fight them off." Or to China, in return for more access to our mineral resources.

 

[ferball]

...so in your mind, if I said the following;

"I've known a few Jews, but I've never cooked one" you would take that to mean I'm not Jewish?

Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaah I don't think you should be the one criticising anyone's "comprending" here, pal.

You asked me if I was a Sovereign Citizen cooker.

You're implying I'm a cannibal who cooks sovereign citizens.

....

Ohhh I get it. You couldn't just say "sovereign citizens". You had to add some form of bigoted signifier implying their brains are cooked. I thought we'd moved beyond stigmatising the mentally ill to be honest.

Now back to the question at hand.

Do you see a difference between Sinwar, Begin and Shamir and if you do can you actually justify it?

 

[Chadwiko]

Maybe they read the Mabo decision properly too.

blah blah blah

This wall of text really goes a long way to providing cover for sovereign citizens. Some of which it sounds like you're mates with.

Hmm.

Ohhh I get it. You couldn't just say "sovereign citizens". You had to add some form of bigoted signifier implying their brains are cooked. I thought we'd moved beyond stigmatising the mentally ill to be honest.

And now you're defending them.

And you still haven't come out and actually denied being a sovereign citizen, either.

At first I was just shit-talking but now I'm starting to have legitimate concerns about you.

Do you see a difference between Sinwar, Begin and Shamir and if you do can you actually justify it?

Sure, there's differences.
I mean, all three are horrible.
But there's differences.

For example, Begin and Shamir were both democratically elected by their citizenry. Sinwar was never democratically elected by Palestinians for any position of power.

Despite their obvious issues and their role in various conflicts and acts in their various histories (the 1948 war, assassinations, etc), both Begin and Shamir demonstrated a willingness to find peaceful solutions with Palestine. Sinwar, on the other hand, repeatedly stated his only goal was the total eradication of Israel, and a total refusal to engage in any reconcililation efforts.

Just a couple of differences, off the top of my head.

 

[travelli]

bit boring for a friday night fellas...

 

[ferball]

This wall of text really goes a long way to providing cover for sovereign citizens. Some of which it sounds like you're mates with.

Hmm.

Yeah I'm mates with some. What of it?

And now you're defending them.

And you still haven't come out and actually denied being a sovereign citizen, either.

At first I was just shit-talking but now I'm starting to have legitimate concerns about you.

You missed your calling. Spain a few centuries ago and you'd have been set.

If you came up with stupid nicknames for people who suffer some form of mental illness or at the very least have some form of neurodivergence but didn't express it thru weird politics everyone would rightly think you were a ****wit. Because these people basically hold a harmless political philosophy you think its okay to shit on them.

Even the feds designate them "mostly harmless".

They're not Nazis, they don't advocate violence against people or even the government. They just ignore it in the hope it'll go away. But you want to attack them - you're as cooked as they are.

Sure, there's differences.
I mean, all three are horrible.
But there's differences.

For example, Begin and Shamir were both democratically elected by their citizenry. Sinwar was never democratically elected by Palestinians for any position of power.

There's no Palestinian state to grant citizens to democratically elect Sinwar but he has been "elected" many times by members of Hamas, the group he led.

Despite their obvious issues and their role in various conflicts and acts in their various histories (the 1948 war, assassinations, etc), both Begin and Shamir demonstrated a willingness to find peaceful solutions with Palestine. Sinwar, on the other hand, repeatedly stated his only goal was the total eradication of Israel, and a total refusal to engage in any reconcililation efforts.

Just a couple of differences, off the top of my head.

When did they do this?

Begin started the settler movement in the occupied territories specifically to prevent a Palestinian State then invaded Lebanon causing the birth of Hezbollah. Shamir tried to form an alliance with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy during WW2!!! FFS! He maintained a hard line against any form of Palestinian self determination throughout his life.

You got an AI to write that paragraph didn't you.

One of the reasons people like Sinwar have the anti Israeli attitudes they have is because of the attitudes and actions of Perez and Shamir while they were in power.