Toronto Girlfriends

In the 21st century, anti-Zionism means anti-Semitism

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
You've been defending apartheid for 160 pages now basketcase.
You have no right to call anyone racist.

...
Ah, the typical distraction techniques from someone with racist ideas that being Jewish in the West Bank makes you a legitimate target because "you can't tell them apart" who also claims to support Palestinian self determination by wanting them forced into a peace that 76% of them detest.

Why are you incapable of admitting that all your rights groups are correct when they say shooting up a car wash, gunning down a kindergarten teacher driving down the road, or firebombing a car for making a wrong turn are completely unacceptable. Sadly you keep calling these actions a Palestinian right.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
In the world where you call all acts of self defence by Palestinians 'terrorism'.
...
It is absolutely disgusting that you call these things "self defence" It shows you have such racist low expectations of Palestinians being incapable of acting morally.

These are terrorism, not self defence.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
...
But I also support Palestinians right to choose for themselves and if they choose to use violence against an illegal occupation that is their choice.
...
As has been said many times, you are a terror apologist. Thanks for admitting it so openly.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
More stories that grandpa never mentions
As I've commented on many times, we both agree that the racist elements of Israeli society are vile and deserve to be condemned. Why is it you're incapable of condemning the vile racist elements within Palestinian society?
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
Ah, the typical distraction techniques from someone with racist ideas that being Jewish in the West Bank makes you a legitimate target because "you can't tell them apart" who also claims to support Palestinian self determination by wanting them forced into a peace that 76% of them detest.

Why are you incapable of admitting that all your rights groups are correct when they say shooting up a car wash, gunning down a kindergarten teacher driving down the road, or firebombing a car for making a wrong turn are completely unacceptable. Sadly you keep calling these actions a Palestinian right.
You've admitted you can't tell militant settlers from civilians yet you expect Palestinians to be able to do it?
Just as you use the same excuse to justify targeting Palestinian civilians?
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
It is absolutely disgusting that you call these things "self defence" It shows you have such racist low expectations of Palestinians being incapable of acting morally.

These are terrorism, not self defence.
If there are legitimate third party investigations from places like HRW, Amnesty, B'tselem or the ICC that label these attacks 'terrorism' then I fully support laying charges.
Just as I support investigations on both sides to end the violence, which you refuse to back.

Your racism comes out when you post lists like this and ignore the fact that there are about 99 settler terrorist attacks each month now.
Yet you refuse to post and condemn those attacks.

That makes you sound too much like Amichai Eliyahu.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
As has been said many times, you are a terror apologist. Thanks for admitting it so openly.
You're calling Palestinian self defence 'terrorism' and Israeli settler colonialism and ethnic cleansing 'self defense'.
That is a form of apartheid.

Different rights based on race = apartheid.
Congrats.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
You've admitted you can't tell militant settlers from civilians yet you expect Palestinians to be able to do it?
Just as you use the same excuse to justify targeting Palestinian civilians?
Wow your lies are pathetic and your racist double standards show how despicable your world view is.

All of your rights groups are 100% clear that even if a territory is occupied, killing kindergarten teachers driving for groceries, shooting an old man getting his car washed, or firebombing someone simply because they made a wrong turn is terrorism.
This is your response to those news stories.
But I also support Palestinians right to choose for themselves and if they choose to use violence against an illegal occupation that is their choice.
You have already admitted you support terrorism and there's nothing else for you to argue.


(and I'm sure that in your deranged thinking, you think supporting violence from Palestinian factions is compatible with your asinine claims to support peace)
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
You're calling Palestinian self defence 'terrorism' and Israeli settler colonialism and ethnic cleansing 'self defense'.
That is a form of apartheid.

Different rights based on race = apartheid.
Congrats.
Pretending attacks on civilians are legitimate self defence is support for terrorism.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
If there are legitimate third party investigations from places like HRW, Amnesty, B'tselem or the ICC that label these attacks 'terrorism' then I fully support laying charges.
...
Ah, the pathetic cop-outs.

Do you not understand how transparently stupid it is when you endlessly condemn Jews and Israel as terrorists based on any random tweet but refuse to criticize Hamas, PIJ, or Al Aqsa gunmen killing Kindervater teachers.

p.s. All those rights groups you refer to and international law are 100% clear that killing Jewish civilians for being in land Palestinians want has absolutely no justification (and they are 100% clear that being a Jew in the West Bank does not remove civilian protections).
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
p.s. Actual international law

The Additional Protocols provided for the specific case of civilians who take a direct part in hostilities in both types of armed conflict (API Arts. 45.1, 51.3; APII Art. 13.3). They confirm that such people retain their civilian status and do not lose the protection that international humanitarian law provides for civilians, except during the period of direct participation in hostilities.

Civilians who take part directly in hostilities keep their status as civilians despite the fact that they directly participate in hostilities. Nonetheless, they temporarily lose the protection provided for civilians for the duration of their direct participation (API Art. 51.3, APII Art. 13.3).


That means that any person directly engaged in violence is an unlawful combatant ONLY WHILE THEY ARE ENGAGED IN THAT VIOLENCE.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
All of your rights groups are 100% clear that even if a territory is occupied, killing kindergarten teachers driving for groceries, shooting an old man getting his car washed, or firebombing someone simply because they made a wrong turn is terrorism.
That's right, 'my' rights groups call out killing civilians, here they are calling out Israel for killing 34 children so far this year.

I'm sure you'll call Israel out for targeting those kids, won't you?
Only racist scum think self defence includes attacking civilians who were not engaged in acts of violence.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
Ah, the pathetic cop-outs.

Do you not understand how transparently stupid it is when you endlessly condemn Jews and Israel as terrorists based on any random tweet but refuse to criticize Hamas, PIJ, or Al Aqsa gunmen killing Kindervater teachers.

p.s. All those rights groups you refer to and international law are 100% clear that killing Jewish civilians for being in land Palestinians want has absolutely no justification (and they are 100% clear that being a Jew in the West Bank does not remove civilian protections).
I call for investigations, charges and trials. On both sides.
You call for killing people.
Then you call me racist for suggesting both sides should be held to the law equally.


 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
p.s. Actual international law

The Additional Protocols provided for the specific case of civilians who take a direct part in hostilities in both types of armed conflict (API Arts. 45.1, 51.3; APII Art. 13.3). They confirm that such people retain their civilian status and do not lose the protection that international humanitarian law provides for civilians, except during the period of direct participation in hostilities.

Civilians who take part directly in hostilities keep their status as civilians despite the fact that they directly participate in hostilities. Nonetheless, they temporarily lose the protection provided for civilians for the duration of their direct participation (API Art. 51.3, APII Art. 13.3).


That means that any person directly engaged in violence is an unlawful combatant ONLY WHILE THEY ARE ENGAGED IN THAT VIOLENCE.
So armed settlers are not civilians? Not until the end of the occupation and the end of the 'hostilities'? Not so long as they are actively colonizing and taking Palestinian land on behalf of the state?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Klatuu

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
  • Like
Reactions: Klatuu
Toronto Escorts