Why does the left hate Israel?

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
What an excellent article. This enlightening article, exposes the traits and reasons for much of the moral bankruptcy I see in the left, when it comes to America and Israel. Not only that, but I can actually pin point and name several members who fit the descriptions to a "T". As well as seeing the very cliche's they use to justify their belief systems.

American Thinker: Why Does the Left Hate Israel?

I can't wait to see how the Joo hatin' batflaps take to this...LOL
 
Last edited:

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,666
113
Northern Ontario,
Kind of interesting, that most anti Jews are also anti organized religion and also pro U.N. and ultimately pro world government.....
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
'The left' hates Israel because it gives right wing commentators something to write about, and people on CC something to argue about and call each other names. It's an international conspiracy make-work project carefully co-ordinated out of a secret bunker in Johannesburg.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
'The left' hates Israel because it gives right wing commentators something to write about, and people on CC something to argue about and call each other names. It's an international conspiracy make-work project carefully co-ordinated out of a secret bunker in Johannesburg.
I thought it was in Tel Aviv?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
113,272
12,784
113
Low Earth Orbit
Okay. Nice, another piece that repeats what I already know. Psychs are flexing their weight and creating further division and utilizing more group specific marketing and canidate placement which in the long run all still stay dry under the red or blue umbrella.

"Hey Right ball". "Yes, Left ball? " "Who is the dink in the middle?"
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Okay. Nice, another piece that repeats what I already know. Psychs are flexing their weight and creating further division and utilizing more group specific marketing and canidate placement which in the long run all still stay dry under the red or blue umbrella.
Oh yes, shift the blame.

No, the people who perpetuate the issue by aiding one side or the other in act, can't be to blame. It must be those that identify the driving forces, ideological divides and precursors, that are at the heart of it.

Kind of flies in the face of the popular and effective 12 step program. First step being...
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
What an excellent article. This enlightening article, exposes the traits and reasons for much of the moral bankruptcy I see in the left, when it comes to America and Israel. Not only that, but I can actually pin point and name several members who fit the descriptions to a "T". As well as seeing the very cliche's they use to justify their belief systems.

American Thinker: Why Does the Left Hate Israel?

I can't wait to see how the Joo hatin' batflaps take to this...LOL

Somewhat overgeneralized, but good article overall. Though I don't necessarily consider myself leftist, I still tend to sympathise with the left. I will agree that many on the left appear to hate Israel, and that many want Israel wiped off of the map. I'll also agree that some on the left confound Israel, Israelis, Zionism, and the Jewish Faith, all four of which being distinct from the other in reality (thogh this last point I'd say the right is more guilty of overall, but some on the left are guilty of it too).

My stance is more of a legalist one. The UN has criticized both Israel and Palestine for human rights abuses in the past. Clearly as a legalist, I'd say Israel has a right to exist within its borders as they are recognized in international law. As a legalist, I'd say Israel ought to retreat back to within those borders. As a legalist, I'd say those Palestinians who launch attacks against territory that is recognized by international law as being Israeli territory is wrong. And as a legalist, I'd say any Palestinian attack against Israel on occupied territory beyond its legally established boundaries ought to target soldiers only and no one else, as even some settlers had been paid by the government in the past to move there and so are innocent in my opinion.

Going beyond legalism though, I'd say it would be a nice gesture on the part of Palestine to at least offer the option on the part of settlers beyond legally recognized Israeli territory to remain in the settlements should they accept Palestinian citizenship.

So we can now add to that list of distinctions above (Israel, Israeli, Zionist, and Jew) the ideas of legalism and legalist. We also need to distinuish between Muslim, Christian, Jew, Palestinian, and Arab, since not all Arabs are Palestinian, not all Arabs are Muslim, and not all Palestinians are Muslim either.

So where would the legalist stance fit in? Is it right or left-leaning? I'd have thought it as being a more conservative stance seeing that following the rule of law is generally something conservatives tout.

Kind of interesting, that most anti Jews are also anti organized religion and also pro U.N. and ultimately pro world government.....

I'm not anti-Jew nor anti-Israel (within its legally-mandated borders of course), and am certainly for organized religion (I myself felt a little suffocated in China owing to its restrictions on organized religion). Though I am pro UN at least in principle and unabashedly pro world government (decentralized world federation mind you).

Again, though you may be right about some, you seem to overgeneralize and pigeon-hole too much.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
As for Canada's position, I'd say it too ought to take a legalist stance. In other words, we are allied to none, take no sides, and simply expect all sides to abide by Un Resolutions upholdin international law. If we did this, it would then be difficult for any side to accuse us of taking sides since we'd merely be upholding human rights on all sides irrespective of which side it is.

Why could the right and the left not unite under the common umbrella of legalism? Is the concept of international law that bad? if so, then how about we withdraw from the UN and become isolationist?

As for the reference in the article to anti-Americanism in the Arab world, why care? Some Canadians are anti-China. As long as we abide by the law, is it any of China's business that we're anti-China? So some Chinese are anti-Canada. Again, is it up to us to send our troops to China to force them to like us? As long as a country abides by international law, it's none of our business whether they like us or not. Now as for China restricting certain human rights, that's a lgetimate concern, which Canada's ambassador ought to bring up on the floor of the UN General Assembly, but not a reason for us to meddled into their internal affairs directly nor to hate the Chinese as a people.

The idea of legalism is a universal and universally applicable concept that applies equally to the right and left, all religious and ethnic groups, since it involves established rules we expect all to abide by.
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,666
113
Northern Ontario,
I'm not anti-Jew nor anti-Israel (within its legally-mandated borders of course), and am certainly for organized religion (I myself felt a little suffocated in China owing to its restrictions on organized religion). Though I am pro UN at least in principle and unabashedly pro world government (decentralized world federation mind you).

Again, though you may be right about some, you seem to overgeneralize and pigeon-hole too much.

Because I don't type too well or too fast what, might seem to be overgeneralizing is just my way of expressing my opinion in as few words as possible.
You would appreciate that.....if you met me in person...
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Why could the right and the left not unite under the common umbrella of legalism?
Because the left hasn't clue one what law should be applied, let alone a clue about law. EAO and to some extent, cubby, both listen to the ravings of HRW, AI and the UN. HRW and AI start at the premise all war is illegal. Therefore any action pertaining to it, is illegal.

This is further compounded by the fact that they only wish to apply law, so log as it benefits their agenda. Just look at the debates here, when Galloway is barred entry, it's censorship. Although, as a sovereign nation, we have every legal right to do so. It was a complete affront to their senses.

Israel retaliates to rocket attacks, and it's a crime against humanity.

You following me?

Is the concept of international law that bad?
Not at all. But the left and right have no concept of it. The right runs rough shod over it, and the left haven't clue one what it is.

if so, then how about we withdraw from the UN and become isolationist?
Why do you have to be isolationist if you withdraw from the body that just made it ok for Islamic states to kill you for being gay?

As for the reference in the article to anti-Americanism in the Arab world, why care?
I don't, but that automatically makes the Arab world and the lft buddies.

The idea of legalism is a universal and universally applicable concept that applies equally to the right and left, all religious and ethnic groups, since it involves established rules we expect all to abide by.
Unless viewed and then cited with moral relativism, like the left enjoys doing.

It all comes back to moral bankruptcy and ethically challenged.
 
Last edited:

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
And by the way, for those who through disparagin comments about world governments, consider the camp I as a world fedeeralist stand in. Here is a list of some famous world federalists:

Hugo Grotius

Jean Jacques Rousseau

Immanuel Kant

Karl Krause

Alfred Lord Tennyson:
"For I dipt into the future, far as human eye could see,Saw the Vision of the world, and all the wonder that would be;[SIZE=-2] 120[/SIZE] Saw the heavens fill with commerce, argosies of magic sails,Pilots of the purple twilight, dropping down with costly bales; Heard the heavens fill with shouting, and there rain’d a ghastly dewFrom the nations’ airy navies grappling in the central blue; Far along the world-wide whisper of the south-wind rushing warm,[SIZE=-2] 125[/SIZE]With the standards of the peoples plunging thro’ the thunder-storm; Till the war-drum throbb’d no longer, and the battle-flags were furl’dIn the Parliament of man, the Federation of the world." From Locksley Hall

Ulysses S. Grant: "I believe at some future day, the nations of the earth will agree on some sort of congress which will take cognizance of international questions of difficulty and whose decisions will be as binding as the decisions of the Supreme Court are upon us."

Sir Winston Churchill: "Unless we establish some form of world government, it will not be possible for us to avert a World War III in the future."

Franklin Roosevelt

Eleanor Roosevelt

Harry Truman: "It will be just as easy for the nations to get along in a republic of the world as it is for you to get along in the republic of the United States."

Albert Einstein: "Mankind's desire for peace can be realized only by the creation of a world government. With all my heart I believe that the world's present system of sovereign nations can only lead to barbarism, war, and inhumanity."

Socrates: "I am a citizen, not of Athens, or Greece, but of the World."

Victor Hugo: "I represent a part which does not yet exist--the party of civilization. There will come from it first a United States of Europe, and then a United States of the World...There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come."

W.H. Wells

Mahatma Gandhi, among many others.

So essentially to mock world federalists is to mock all of these great men who've made such a great contribution to our very national cultures, in literature, science, politcs, etc.

...Among other great minds