• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Israel obeys rump's orders to bar entry of two congresswomen!

I'm not sure about that specific law. I know several laws have been talked about since BDS's popularity so, who knows. But I highly doubt they had Ilhan Omar in mind. People have routinely been turned away at the airport for decades so, it's nothing new.

Some people have political views that support terrorism, such as Michael Savage, an American. The situation doesn't change just because they take an elected position. This isn't unprecedented, and in fact, the same thing happened to Narenda Modi, and he's the PM of the largest democracy.


indeed, I don't understand why someone who boycotts a country, is so obsessed with visiting them. think of this as their way of saying "we support you boycotting us, and staying the hell away".

You are wrong, this is the first time a congressperson from the United States has been bared from entering Israel. I know you hate Dems so it is not surprising you mouth the same stupid crap as your master Trump, but grow up.
 
Just a moment, Craig234, before we begin our particular interlude, I must ask: do you believe Israel has a right to exist?

Because I remember you saying a while back one of the things that you made fun of conservatives for is believing Israel has a right to exist. I would like to know from what angle you are approaching this. Morality or personal malice disguised as morality.

That's a rather curious question for someone like you to ask, given that you do not believe that Palestine has a right to exist.

So, I guess the question for you is....is your "angle" one of "morality" or "malice disguised as morality"?

Are you a proud hypocrite, or are you just a confused right-winger who (like most right-wingers) hadn't previously thought through the issue?

Please, be candid in your response, Felis Leo.
 
I'm not sure about that specific law. I know several laws have been talked about since BDS's popularity so, who knows. But I highly doubt they had Ilhan Omar in mind. People have routinely been turned away at the airport for decades so, it's nothing new.

I had just read that this specific law about banning visits people people for the boycott passed in 2017. Did I say "this was passed with Ilhan Omar in mind"? No, I did not. So why did you say otherwise? Did I say that passed in 2017 isn't all that long before she was elected, to correct your "long before"? Yes, I did, which you ignored. And yes, stopping people for supporting the boycott is apparently a new law.
 
indeed, I don't understand why someone who boycotts a country, is so obsessed with visiting them. think of this as their way of saying "we support you boycotting us, and staying the hell away".

There are all kinds of reasons for them to visit, including to meet with leaders in the Israeli government who disagree with the government's policies (which they planned to), to meet with Palestinians (which they planned to), and many more.

Your argument is like saying everyone entering the US has to swear they support trump, and not Democrats. Someone coming to meet with Democrats about an issue they both disagree with trump on - you can't enter the US!

You know, back when it was more normal for politicians to actually serve the public, unlike today's Republicans, one of our most famous politicians, Robert Kennedy, went to South Africa - not only opposing Apartheid, but to speak out against it in public and encourage opponents. You wouldn't have allowed his historic trip. You can read about it here.

Watch documentary depicting Robert F. Kennedy's visit to South Africa with International Correspondents team, May 10 | National Press Club
 
Israel obeys rump's orders to bar entry of two congresswomen!

tRump is as petty and chicken **** a human being as ever there was one.
 
That's a rather curious question for someone like you to ask, given that you do not believe that Palestine has a right to exist.

So, I guess the question for you is....is your "angle" one of "morality" or "malice disguised as morality"?

Are you a proud hypocrite, or are you just a confused right-winger who (like most right-wingers) hadn't previously thought through the issue?

Please, be candid in your response, Felis Leo.

I shall be candid, ultmd. You may make your judgments as to what, if anything, I am.

First, let me set the stage by saying why I support Israel:

The reason I support the existence of Israel is because I value the existence of free, pluralistic, law-governed democracies. I consider liberty and rule of law axiomatic goods. I thus support Israel because it is a free, pluralistic, law-governed democracy. I thus support Israel's existence against its neighbors and enemies because in a contest between tyranny and democracy, I take the side of democracy. Further, I would support Israel in its struggle against its neighbors whatever the religious/ethnic/racial breakdown. Israel could be a majority-Muslim nation and I would still support its fight for continued existence if it maintained the values that Israel presently maintains.

Knowing what I value, why should I desire the existence of a Palestinian State? The Palestinian governments both in Gaza and the West Bank are currently two lawless, non-democratic tyrannies. One is a theocratic terror organization with openly genocidal designs on Israel. The other is a corrupt nationalist popular front party. Neither of them provide for elections. Both engage in the capricious abuse of power. And these are the negotiating parties we have to deal with when discussing Palestinian statehood. They are not going anywhere, and they will remain in power after the Palestinians achieve statehood. These organizations control the preponderance of deadly force that can be brought to bear against their people. They control the culture, the education, and life chances of the population under their rule.

Even if Israel disappeared tomorrow, or was not an issue in this matter, I would not be for the existence of a Palestinian state, because why should I wish for another lawless, violent tyranny to bloom in the Middle East? Does the world in general or the Middle East in particular need another theocracy like Iran in the Levant? Or a state ruled over by another single-party fascistic tyranny like that of Baathist Syria? Knowing what I value, what would your argument be as to why I should support the creation of a state which, by all the evidence, would be end up looking like one of these two?
 
Last edited:
Well, there you go - you are the problem as much as anyone who wants the 'destruction of Israel'. You are attacking the rights and freedoms of those millions of people as much as people who want to deny the millions of Jewish people who want a state are attacking their rights, and you deserve opposition as much as people who want to 'destroy Israel' do.

I understand that the vast majority of Palestinians want their own state, Craig234. Just as the Basque want their own state at the expense of land claimed by Spain. And as the Kurds want their own state, at the expense of land claimed by Turkey. Is a group of people wanting their own state enough to make the demand that they should have it? Or that it be given to them no matter what they do to achieve it?

As I averred to ultmd:

The reason I support the existence of Israel is because I value the existence of free, pluralistic, law-governed democracies. I consider liberty and rule of law axiomatic goods. I thus support Israel because it is a free, pluralistic, law-governed democracy. I thus support Israel's existence against its neighbors and enemies because in a contest between tyranny and democracy, I take the side of democracy. Further, I would support Israel in its struggle against its neighbors whatever the religious/ethnic/racial breakdown. Israel could be a majority-Muslim nation and I would still support its fight for continued existence if it maintained the values that Israel presently maintains.

Knowing what I value, why should I desire the existence of a Palestinian State? The Palestinian governments both in Gaza and the West Bank are currently two lawless, non-democratic tyrannies. One is a theocratic terror organization with openly genocidal designs on Israel. The other is a corrupt nationalist popular front party. Neither of them provide for elections. Both engage in the capricious abuse of power. And these are the negotiating parties we have to deal with when discussing Palestinian statehood. They are not going anywhere, and they will remain in power after the Palestinians achieve statehood. These organizations control the preponderance of deadly force that can be brought to bear against their people. They control the culture, the education, and life chances of the population under their rule.

Even if Israel disappeared tomorrow, or was not an issue in this matter, I would not be for the existence of a Palestinian state, because why should I wish for another lawless, violent tyranny to bloom in the Middle East? Does the world in general or the Middle East in particular need another theocracy like Iran in the Levant? Or a state ruled over by another single-party fascistic tyranny like that of Baathist Syria? Knowing what I value, what would your argument be as to why I should support the creation of a state which, by all the evidence, would be end up looking like one of these two?
 
Last edited:
I understand that the vast majority of Palestinians want their own state, Craig234. Just as the Basque want their own state at the expense of land claimed by Spain. And as the Kurds want their own state, at the expense of land claimed by Turkey. Is a group of people wanting their own state enough to make the demand that they should have it? Or that it be given to them no matter what they do to achieve it?

No, it's not. You could ask the same question about Israel. The Palestinians, who were there before Israel's modern state, are not analogous to Spain's minority, really. And I actually do support the Kurds getting a state, I guess you don't. Each case is a case by case analysis. It looks like you just lump them all together if you want the answer to be no.

As I averred to ultmd:

The reason I support the existence of Israel is because I value the existence of free, pluralistic, law-governed democracies. I consider liberty and rule of law axiomatic goods. I thus support Israel because it is a free, pluralistic, law-governed democracy. I thus support Israel's existence against its neighbors and enemies because in a contest between tyranny and democracy, I take the side of democracy. Further, I would support Israel in its struggle against its neighbors whatever the religious/ethnic/racial breakdown. Israel could be a majority-Muslim nation and I would still support its fight for continued existence if it maintained the values that Israel presently maintains.

Knowing what I value, why should I desire the existence of a Palestinian State? The Palestinian governments both in Gaza and the West Bank are currently two lawless, non-democratic tyrannies. One is a theocratic terror organization with openly genocidal designs on Israel. The other is a corrupt nationalist popular front party. Neither of them provide for elections. Both engage in the capricious abuse of power. And these are the negotiating parties we have to deal with when discussing Palestinian statehood. They are not going anywhere, and they will remain in power after the Palestinians achieve statehood. These organizations control the preponderance of deadly force that can be brought to bear against their people. They control the culture, the education, and life chances of the population under their rule.

Even if Israel disappeared tomorrow, or was not an issue in this matter, I would not be for the existence of a Palestinian state, because why should I wish for another lawless, violent tyranny to bloom in the Middle East? Does the world in general or the Middle East in particular need another theocracy like Iran in the Levant? Or a state ruled over by another single-party fascistic tyranny like that of Baathist Syria? Knowing what I value, what would your argument be as to why I should support the creation of a state which, by all the evidence, would be end up looking like one of these two?

Nice speech. I don't believe it. As I've posted here again and again, the right shows itself the enemy of democracy. Democracy is a card they pull out only when it's convenient, such as to defend Israel in their false, idealized argument about it.

You tell a largely false version of the history and situation - and offer exactly zero solution for the rights and freedoms of the Palestinians, who appear to care zero about. If they continue to live under tyranny forever, that's what you want. 'The beatings will continue until morale improves.' 'Tyranny will continue until resistance ends.'

The organizations supporting the Palestinians have broad Palestinian support. If it weren't for them the Palestinians would suffer even more. Israel is certainly happy for them to lose their lives to neglect.

This issue has a lot more to it than your biased, simplistic, one-sided argument cares about. Your argument is no better than a paid lawyer hired to argue one side and distort the truth. In short, your only answer is 'oppress the Palestinians until they're all killed', but you just will refuse to admit it. That appears to be Israel's plan: gradually take more and more land and drive out Palestinians, until they're gone, over decades.

Your position is based on the position that Palestinians have no rights. Easy to negotiate that: they simply get to shut up and do as they're told. Your 'love of democracy' clearly is very selective, as is Israels democracy, where they increasingly legalize discrimination and treat Palestinians terribly, ignoring international law. They've manipulated the US into being their 'muscle', abusing our UN veto to protect them from the world's condemnation. You love it.
 
Israel already has enough hate going on there, why would they want to have more visit?

Exactly.
And these two fanatical hate mongers deny Israel the right to exist.

Why should any country allow anybody in who denies that very country the right to exist?
 
I shall be candid, ultmd. You may make your judgments as to what, if anything, I am.

First, let me set the stage by saying why I support Israel:

The reason I support the existence of Israel is because I value the existence of free, pluralistic, law-governed democracies. I consider liberty and rule of law axiomatic goods. I thus support Israel because it is a free, pluralistic, law-governed democracy. I thus support Israel's existence against its neighbors and enemies because in a contest between tyranny and democracy, I take the side of democracy. Further, I would support Israel in its struggle against its neighbors whatever the religious/ethnic/racial breakdown. Israel could be a majority-Muslim nation and I would still support its fight for continued existence if it maintained the values that Israel presently maintains.

Knowing what I value, why should I desire the existence of a Palestinian State? The Palestinian governments both in Gaza and the West Bank are currently two lawless, non-democratic tyrannies. One is a theocratic terror organization with openly genocidal designs on Israel. The other is a corrupt nationalist popular front party. Neither of them provide for elections. Both engage in the capricious abuse of power. And these are the negotiating parties we have to deal with when discussing Palestinian statehood. They are not going anywhere, and they will remain in power after the Palestinians achieve statehood. These organizations control the preponderance of deadly force that can be brought to bear against their people. They control the culture, the education, and life chances of the population under their rule.

Even if Israel disappeared tomorrow, or was not an issue in this matter, I would not be for the existence of a Palestinian state, because why should I wish for another lawless, violent tyranny to bloom in the Middle East? Does the world in general or the Middle East in particular need another theocracy like Iran in the Levant? Or a state ruled over by another single-party fascistic tyranny like that of Baathist Syria? Knowing what I value, what would your argument be as to why I should support the creation of a state which, by all the evidence, would be end up looking like one of these two?

You make a lot of assumption, I'll give you that. Do you have any understanding of how violent the new state of Israel was in its inception? The Sergeant's Affair, kidnappings, summary executions, booby-trapping bodies, the bombing of the King David hotel by Israeli terrorists, entire Arab villages massacred-these are the same terrorist events that you clearly accuse Palestinians of, and yet Israel developed into a democracy.
I guarantee you this; if you were around in 1947 reading of these theocratic terrorist atrocities as they unfolded, you wouldn't be much in support of Israel either.
Israel is condemned globally for routinely violating the laws and conventions which, by becoming signatory to the UN Charter, it vowed to observe and abide by.
As an interesting aside it appears even AIPAC, among other Jewish groups, has condemned Netanyahu's decision.

AIPAC, pro-Israel U.S. lawmakers rebuke Netanyahu over Omar-Tlaib ban - U.S. News - Haaretz.com

AIPAC breaks with Netanyahu over Omar-Tlaib decision | TheHill

Jewish Groups Condemn Israel For Denying Omar, Tlaib Entry: 'Plays Into Trump's Goal of Politicizing Support For Israel'

It appears the only support Israel gets is from far-right evangelical lunatics, their idiotic biblical 'second coming' imperative, and some nonsense about 'the rapture'.
 
Last edited:
Sovereign nation bars two people; liberals lose it.

This thread focuses too much on Israel's politics. Most Americans could care less about Israel's politics. Bottom line in the U. S. we believe in freedom of speech and Trump certainly uses his freedom to spout a bunch of Bull-sh...t.

And now, Trump wants to muzzle others and use a foreign Nation to do his dirty work.

Becoming clear tephlon Don has another minion to take a fall for him, Israel's Prime Minister Netanyahu

Tally of Tephlon Don's fall guys

1. Cohen
2. Flynn
3. Manafort
3. Sarah Sanders
4. Barr
5. Stone
7. Whitaker
8. Rosenstein

All took the fall so Trump can live large really large, golf, and be King
 
I can point out countless hateful things twump has said and done

With these two? Not even remotely.

“We’re going to impeach this mother****er!”

Can't get much more hateful than that!
 
According to their own itinerary , Ilhan Omar and Rahida Tlaib chose to refer to Israel as " PAlestine"
Their trip was little more than than a self-indulgent ploy to de-legitimize and malign the Jewish State from within its borders.
#truth

ECBu4X9X4AI5LNP.jpg
 
According to their own itinerary , Ilhan Omar and Rahida Tlaib chose to refer to Israel as " PAlestine"
Their trip was little more than than a self-indulgent ploy to de-legitimize and malign the Jewish State from within its borders.
#truth

View attachment 67262029

You're really stretching. It's fun to watch.
 
You're really stretching. It's fun to watch.

.........And here I though you were going offer up some rational explanation for this overtly provacative act, seeinz how there is no such country as Palestine and all that.
 
No, it's not. You could ask the same question about Israel. The Palestinians, who were there before Israel's modern state, are not analogous to Spain's minority, really. And I actually do support the Kurds getting a state, I guess you don't. Each case is a case by case analysis. It looks like you just lump them all together if you want the answer to be no.

Indeed. My analysis is case-by-case. I am certainly more supportive of the Kurds because the Kurdish regions of Iraq, Turkey and Iran could probably form a free, law-governed democratic state. The Kurdish region of Iraq certainly provides the nucleus of a such a potential state. But, again, I am supportive of the Kurds based on the quality of their nascent state, not simply based on the fact that they are an oppressed minority within these regions.

Nice speech. I don't believe it. As I've posted here again and again, the right shows itself the enemy of democracy. Democracy is a card they pull out only when it's convenient, such as to defend Israel in their false, idealized argument about it.

So you believe that I do not want a Palestinian state, but you do not believe the reasons I give for not wishing to see one? I am taking you at your word that you believe what you say you believe, and I do not presume that your motivations for protesting Israel is because you want to see the Jews of Israel exterminated.

Again, I do not argue for nor do I claim to value democracy in and of itself. Again, I only value free, law-governed democracies. Simple democracy is not the sina qua non that I respect. Plenty of tyrannical nations have extend the franchise to their subject populations and hold elections, such as Iran, North Korea, Russia and Venezuela.

To reiterate: For me to want to advocate for the creation or continued existence of a state, that state must be (1) democratic, i.e., provides for regular fair and open elections so that the citizenry can make the ultimate decision as to who governs them; (2) the state must be free, i.e., the provides for the protections of the personal liberty of its citizens, most importantly those citizens who are political opponents of the sitting government; and (3) law-governed, i.e., the government is restrained through rule of law and cannot exercise arbitrary power against its citizenry. If you disagree or think that these principles are of little to no practical value, please explain to me why and we can have it out on that basis.

You tell a largely false version of the history and situation - and offer exactly zero solution for the rights and freedoms of the Palestinians, who appear to care zero about. If they continue to live under tyranny forever, that's what you want. 'The beatings will continue until morale improves.' 'Tyranny will continue until resistance ends.'

The organizations supporting the Palestinians have broad Palestinian support. If it weren't for them the Palestinians would suffer even more. Israel is certainly happy for them to lose their lives to neglect.

This issue has a lot more to it than your biased, simplistic, one-sided argument cares about. Your argument is no better than a paid lawyer hired to argue one side and distort the truth. In short, your only answer is 'oppress the Palestinians until they're all killed', but you just will refuse to admit it. That appears to be Israel's plan: gradually take more and more land and drive out Palestinians, until they're gone, over decades.

Your position is based on the position that Palestinians have no rights. Easy to negotiate that: they simply get to shut up and do as they're told. Your 'love of democracy' clearly is very selective, as is Israels democracy, where they increasingly legalize discrimination and treat Palestinians terribly, ignoring international law. They've manipulated the US into being their 'muscle', abusing our UN veto to protect them from the world's condemnation. You love it.

Again, this is all a perfectly fine personal attack against me. None of this indicates why I or anyone else (including you for that matter) should want a Palestinian state to come into existence. Again, knowing what we know about the nature of the Palestinian leadership, what is your argument for the necessity of a Palestinian state? Because you seem to treat it as some axiomatic law of the universe that the Palestinians must have a state. What I am asking for is what principles lead you to concluding that a Palestinian state must be founded? And would these same arguments apply to any other group, such as the Kurds of Turkey and Iraq, the ethnic Russians of Eastern Ukraine, or any other ethnic minorities who make claims to statehood?
 
Last edited:
What a load of crap. That land belonged to the people living in Palestine for hundreds of years. Most Jews living in Israel today ancestors came form other countries and areas including Europe and Russia. In fact some of the families forced off the land have lived on the land for more than a thousand years. So you if you believe all of thee propaganda put out by Israel than maybe you should read some history.

No, it belonged to the British. When the land was given to the Jews, the British gave up their land. There were Arabs and Jews living in the region at the time. Today, there are thousands of Muslim Palestinians living in the main part of Israel and don't want to live in the West Bank run by Hamas. They have jobs and a good life. They have all the rights Jews have in Israel. They don't want Hamas or any other terrorist group to take over Israel and lose their good lives they have. Anyway, you should study some real history because you should have known the land was run by Britain.
 
Back
Top Bottom