Current WAR CRIMES Israel - Hamas - Hezbollah - Houthis

[Kurve]

Where you're going wrong is that you have to believe Jews control the world first... If you believe Jews control the world, then the fact that Jewish lobby groups exist at all is evidence that they have undue power in Australian politics.

I also mod on the conspiracy board where it can be a battle so I've been immersed in that environment for a while and probably sensitive.

 

[Jazny]

This isn't at all what people have been saying. It's a trope people like Zidane keep repeating, same as how he claims anyone critical of Israel's actions is pro-Hamas. Or how ZEV labels anything he thinks is critical of Israel as antisemetic.

I notice how you dodge hard questions on the topic. Why? Treating this as a team sport?

 

[DapperDon]

I notice how you dodge hard questions on the topic. Why? Treating this as a team sport?

Can you explain how any of the posts have been anti-semetic or racist?

Not your made up one, posts the actual written words from the post and explain what is anti-semetic / racist about it.

Or just ignore this and put your head in the sand if too difficult

 

[faible]

I notice how you dodge hard questions on the topic. Why? Treating this as a team sport?

What was the question? I recall there being some kind of hypothetical but just skimmed past it. My apologies if you wanted a reply.

 

[faible]

Can you explain how any of the posts have been anti-semetic or racist?

Not your made up one, posts the actual written words from the post and explain what is anti-semetic / racist about it.

Or just ignore this and put your head in the sand if too difficult

I believe it's a strands in the cable type argument, not a links in the chain one.

 

[faible]

There's also fightback.

In the comments:

https://birchgrovelegal.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/ICC-Referral-Australian-Government-Ministers-and-Opposition-Leader-04032024_BLG.pdf

Apparently it's a request from the legal firm for the ICC to investigate, not a referral to the ICC.

 

[sherb]

This isn't at all what people have been saying. It's a trope people like Zidane keep repeating, same as how he claims anyone critical of Israel's actions is pro-Hamas. Or how ZEV labels anything he thinks is critical of Israel as antisemetic.

Or anyone.

 

[ZEV]

This isn't at all what people have been saying. It's a trope people like Zidane keep repeating, same as how he claims anyone critical of Israel's actions is pro-Hamas. Or how ZEV labels anything he thinks is critical of Israel as antisemetic.

False. See below.

Your mate @jason_recliner used anti-semitic tropes to explain why Australia hasn't ostracised Israel.

 

[ZEV]

In the comments:


Apparently it's a request from the legal firm for the ICC to investigate, not a referral to the ICC.

No wonder she got fired. Poor journalistic standards.

 

[faible]

False. See below.

Not at all false. You're quite predictable.

 

[leon123]

Can you bring up a single quote from anyone denying that lobbying influences outcomes?

My apologies, I must have misunderstood. I thought there was debate that 'junkets' did not influence decisions. We all know that junkets are part of a lobbyists arsenal.

The agreed conclusion is that junkets influence decisions as, lobbying influences decisions. Everyone agrees.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

No wonder she got fired. Poor journalistic standards.

If that was the case, why do 90% of journalists still have a job?

 

[DapperDon]

No wonder she got fired. Poor journalistic standards.

This is pretty racist

 

[Kurve]

My apologies, I must have misunderstood. I thought there was debate that 'junkets' did not influence decisions. We all know that junkets are part of a lobbyists arsenal.

The agreed conclusion is that junkets influence decisions as, lobbying influences decisions. Everyone agrees.

Would it not be more that junkets influence opinion? They're essentially a PR exercise are they not?

Lobbying politicians may have some influence on decisions, how much and what pollies might get out of it is another question.

 

[Jazny]

My apologies, I must have misunderstood. I thought there was debate that 'junkets' did not influence decisions. We all know that junkets are part of a lobbyists arsenal.

No, the claim people made and stood by was that junkets to Israel were tantamount to bribes


and they made journalists, through a mechanism that was never explained, produce disinformation on behalf of Israel


Because that debate was completely unwinnable from their side, some people in the argument tried to strawman it to be about junkets influencing decisions. Of course they can influence decisions or opinions. There isn't a single thing I have ever said otherwise. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. Having more information is good, generally, as long as the information is correct and even if it isn't, journalists can fact check, that's what they are paid for.

Palestinian lobby groups exist and have taken journalists on tours of the West Bank, outlined in the Crikey article. Nobody should have a problem with this. It seems people only cry about lobbying groups if the lobby group is lobbying for something they don't like... or if Jews are doing it.

 

[leon123]

Would it not be more than junkets influence opinion? They're essentially a PR exercise are they not?

Lobbying politicians may have some influence on decisions, how much and what pollies might get out of it is another question.

As stated, junkets are a part of a lobbyists arsenal

 

[DapperDon]

journalists can fact check, that's what they are paid for.

This is where your argument falls apart

The days of main stream journos fact checking things are a thing of the distant past. They write what their editor tells them to write or the are gone. The editor gets told what to put in articles by the suits above, these suits share the same barber with the other suits in power and have a good old chat about what stories to put our there and how to express it.

If you don't believe the right have a strong grasp on how the media tells stories then you really do have your head in the sand, or are just happy to accept it as it suits your personal views.

 

[jason_recliner]

UN chief says north Gaza 'untenable' for life as Egypt proposes two-day ceasefire deal​

The UN's chief has described northern Gaza's humanitarian situation as "untenable" and called for Israel to allow crucial aid into the besieged enclave. "The devastation & deprivation resulting from Israel's military operations in North Gaza are making the conditions of life untenable for the Palestinian population there," Antonio Guterres wrote on X. "This conflict continues to be waged with little regard for the requirements of international humanitarian law."

Israeli authorities were hampering efforts to deliver food, medicine and other essential humanitarian supplies, putting lives at risk, he said. Israel says its forces operate in accordance with international law, and accuses Hamas of using civilians as human shields — a claim it denies. Israel also denies blocking humanitarian aid to Gaza, blaming international organisations for problems distributing it and accusing Hamas of stealing from aid convoys.

Dozens of people were killed in northern Gaza on Sunday, where Israeli troops say they are trying to stop militant group Hamas from regrouping. The largest of the Gaza Strip's eight historic refugee camps, Jabalia has been the focus of an Israeli military offensive for more than three weeks.

At least 20 people were killed following an Israeli air strike on a house in Jabalia, medics and Palestinian news agency WAFA said. Another Israeli air strike on a school sheltering displaced Palestinian families in Shati camp in Gaza City, killed nine people and wounded 20 others, with many in critical condition, medics said.

Footage circulated on Palestinian media, which Reuters could not immediately verify, showed people rushing to the bomb site to help evacuate the casualties. Bodies were scattered on the ground, while some carried wounded children in their arms before loading them in a vehicle.

The Israeli military said it was looking into the report on the strike on the school.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-10-28/un-chief-north-gaza-life-untenable-israel/104525252

 

[leon123]

No, the claim people made and stood by was that junkets to Israel were tantamount to bribes
View attachment 2153128

and they made journalists, through a mechanism that was never explained, produce disinformation on behalf of Israel
View attachment 2153130

Because that debate was completely unwinnable from their side, some people in the argument tried to strawman it to be about junkets influencing decisions. Of course they can influence decisions or opinions. There isn't a single thing I have ever said otherwise. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. Having more information is good, generally, as long as the information is correct and even if it isn't, journalists can fact check, that's what they are paid for.

Palestinian lobby groups exist and have taken journalists on tours of the West Bank, outlined in the Crikey article. Nobody should have a problem with this. It seems people only cry about lobbying groups if the lobby group is lobbying for something they don't like... or if Jews are doing it.

yep all good, and ill repeat. Lobbying does influence outcomes, junkets are a tool that lobbyists use.

The more resourced the lobbyist, the more likely the incidence of influence... none of this is surprising.

Should lobbyists be allowed to 'entertain' policy/decision makers is a fair debate. Ultimately, it is the well resourced/networked that typically have the most impact, often at the expense of the less resourced

 

[faible]

yep all good, and ill repeat. Lobbying does influence outcomes, junkets are a tool that lobbyists use.

The more resourced the lobbyist, the more likely the incidence of influence... none of this is surprising.

Should lobbyists be allowed to 'entertain' policy/decision makers is a fair debate. Ultimately, it is the well resourced/networked that typically have the most impact, often at the expense of the less resourced

There was a writeup a while back in the language used when describing actions taken by Israel versus Hamas, or to Israeli civilians versus Gazans.

There's a big distinction in how things are reported, that shapes how it's viewed by the public.

When it comes to media reporting on Israel-Palestine, there is nowhere to hide

Journalistic ethics demand ‘objectivity’ in reporting – but language forces us to take a position.

theconversation.com

This wasn't the specific article, but a quick search finds a number all discussing this kind of thing.

 

[Jazny]

Can you explain how any of the posts have been anti-semetic or racist?

Not your made up one, posts the actual written words from the post and explain what is anti-semetic / racist about it.

Or just ignore this and put your head in the sand if too difficult

Utter trash. Do you think life was easy for anybody thousands of years ago? We are all here because our ancestors fought to stay alive. Only most of use don't use it as an excuse to bully the less powerful and wealthy, and commit war crimes and crimes against humanity.

It took me a while to explain the antisemitism built into this one, but eventually Lunchlady before he drifted into a total bad faith actor in this thread did admit that this claim was about Jews.

This is arguing Jews use their history of persecution as an excuse to bully the less "powerful and wealthy". Completely antisemetic on multiple levels. Throw in an irrelevant antisemitic trope about wealth for good measure. Feel free to go back and read the dialogue tree on this one if you don't think its antisemitic.

Show me some DNA of current Jews to those of 1000 years ago who lived the land and I'll donate all my belongings to Bibi by hand.

Obsession with Jewish DNA. What has DNA got to do with a person's right to exist in a place? Racist antisemetic idea that Jews don't belong in Israel because of their DNA.

Most Jews in Israel have middle eastern origins, for what it's worth.

Pre-dates the origin of the word apartheid, and not relevant in the context of this conversation really.

Could go back a bit further to when the Israelites got bored of Egypt and came back to kill the caananites and reclaim "their land"

Interestingly caananite DNA lives on in modern day Palestinians. I presume most modern Israelis have European DNA, like Bibi, the Spaniard.

Again, obsession with Israeli DNA. As though the DNA of a person makes a difference as to where they belong. Imagine calling a second generation Australian whose parents migrated from Sudan, for example, "the Sudanese". Like he doesn't belong here or he is less Australian.

Yes, after Israeli Operation Magic Carpet, to mass migrate Yemenite Jews to Israel, Ashkenazi Jews stole Yemeni babies and gave them to white Jews to raise.

A racist conspiracy theory with not a shred of evidence that Ashkenazi Jews stole Yemini babies. I wouldn't blame someone for being conned by misinformation, but standing by the claim with not a shred of evidence is truly bizarre and suggests a level of bias against the group.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the only evidence of antisemitic thought you will accept is someone saying "I HATE JEWS!!!!" you are probably not going to find it here. Overt racism isn't the only form of racism. When Pauline Hanson says Halal money goes towards terrorism, most people on the planet who aren't racist will correctly recognise the racism inherent in the statement even though she is not saying "HEY EVERYONE! I HATE MUSLIMS". But when it comes to Jews, people who normally recognise this stuff suddenly instead find themselves agreeing with the racism.

Ghost Patrol claiming that money from Jewish lobby groups funds terrorism without a shred of evidence didn't have most people in the thread rightly calling out the antisemitism, instead they agree with him. Why? Probably because, like Pauline Hanson voters, they actually agree with the racist statement due to an internal bias against the group - in this case Jews.

Don't believe me? Do a thought experiment, imagine some right-winger comes in here grifting about Australian Halal money funding terrorism. You think you would push back on it? Then why wouldn't you with GP's claim? Why was I the only one? If your answer is 'because GP is right', then show me the evidence of this ever happening. If you have none, and just automatically believe the claim without evidence, it shows a level of antisemitic bias.

This doesn't mean all the above people hate Jewish people or are personally racist. I can't read their minds. But what they and others have said, and this is only a small example, does hint at a level of antisemitic bias or belief in antisemitic narratives.

 

[jason_recliner]

This is arguing Jews use their history of persecution as an excuse to bully the less "powerful and wealthy".

Lol! It was this exact argument that Jews have been the victims by ZEV to which I was responding! That's too funny!!!

As to your dim and irrelevant attempt at a gotcha, about motivation, it's not about their motivation, it's what they (Israeli Jews) are doing. So no, you can piss off with trying to be clever (forget about that one) about me being anti-semitic. The other accused can no doubt point out the holes in all your whinging arguments.

 

[faible]

It took me a while to explain the antisemitism built into this one, but eventually Lunchlady before he drifted into a total bad faith actor in this thread did admit that this claim was about Jews.

This is arguing Jews use their history of persecution as an excuse to bully the less "powerful and wealthy". Completely antisemetic on multiple levels. Throw in an irrelevant antisemitic trope about wealth for good measure. Feel free to go back and read the dialogue tree on this one if you don't think its antisemitic.

Obsession with Jewish DNA. What has DNA got to do with a person's right to exist in a place? Racist antisemetic idea that Jews don't belong in Israel because of their DNA.

Most Jews in Israel have middle eastern origins, for what it's worth.

Again, obsession with Israeli DNA. As though the DNA of a person makes a difference as to where they belong. Imagine calling a second generation Australian whose parents migrated from Sudan, for example, "the Sudanese". Like he doesn't belong here or he is less Australian.

A racist conspiracy theory with not a shred of evidence that Ashkenazi Jews stole Yemini babies. I wouldn't blame someone for being conned by misinformation, but standing by the claim with not a shred of evidence is truly bizarre and suggests a level of bias against the group.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the only evidence of antisemitic thought you will accept is someone saying "I HATE JEWS!!!!" you are probably not going to find it here. Overt racism isn't the only form of racism. When Pauline Hanson says Halal money goes towards terrorism, most people on the planet who aren't racist will correctly recognise the racism inherent in the statement even though she is not saying "HEY EVERYONE! I HATE MUSLIMS". But when it comes to Jews, people who normally recognise this stuff suddenly instead find themselves agreeing with the racism.

Ghost Patrol claiming that money from Jewish lobby groups funds terrorism without a shred of evidence didn't have most people in the thread rightly calling out the antisemitism, instead they agree with him. Why? Probably because, like Pauline Hanson voters, they actually agree with the racist statement due to an internal bias against the group - in this case Jews.

Don't believe me? Do a thought experiment, imagine some right-winger comes in here grifting about Australian Halal money funding terrorism. You think you would push back on it? Then why wouldn't you with GP's claim? Why was I the only one? If your answer is 'because GP is right', then show me the evidence of this ever happening. If you have none, and just automatically believe the claim without evidence, it shows a level of antisemitic bias.

This doesn't mean all the above people hate Jewish people or are personally racist. I can't read their minds. But what they and others have said, and this is only a small example, does hint at a level of antisemitic bias or belief in antisemitic narratives.

I didn't even write any of those posts and don't remember reading them, but can tell the context most were written in and how far you've removed them from that context.

I'd expect a post like this from ZEV, maybe Zidane. From you it's genuinely disappointing.

 

[Jazny]

I didn't even write any of those posts and don't remember reading them, but can tell the context most were written in and how far you've removed them from that context.

I'd expect a post like this from ZEV, maybe Zidane. From you it's genuinely disappointing.

Explain to me how I have removed them from the context. You can go and read the dialogue trees for yourself. This is a knee jerk defense from you. Just tell me how I am wrong.

 

[jason_recliner]

Explain to me how I have removed them from the context. You can go and read the dialogue trees for yourself. This is a knee jerk defense from you. Just tell me how I am wrong.

OT, but what do you think makes some people form anti-semitic views?