Its a country? As recognized by who? The UN? Nope. The US? Nope. Not even the Arab nations surrounding Israel recognize it as a country.
Netanyahu's assault on the courts in Israel. Thoughts?
- Thread starter AC2020
- Start date
lol
First, I do what you say no Democrat will do. Which of course was a flat out false statement by you, especially considering I'm not the first Democrat to take a position on this issue. So I easily prove your claim wrong, once again. And what do you do next? You don't acknowledge how you were wrong, you just whine about the term "different" being used lol!
I got news for you, sometimes things are different. And what is occuring in Israel is different.
If you disagree, then back up your opinion and explain how it isn't different. Go ahead.
Two pesos thinks he's bugs bunny. That left turn at Albuquerque fvcked him up.
I wasn't talking about you, hence I didn't acknowledge you. My full quote:
"Its been ironic reading the left wing sites touch on the topic yet basically quote noone of significance. None of the Dems will go on record against it because its exactly what they want to do here."
I was clearly referring to National Dems of significance.
And it is effectively the same. The Supreme Court and the Country's Leadership have different political views, and thus the Country's leadership wants to make structural changes that would remove the SC as an impediment to executing the leader's desired policies. Now the manner of the change is different. One wants to change the rules to stack the court with 'his teams' members, while the other just wants to change the rules to directly reduce the power of the court. But both are changing the rules to give themselves more freedom to execute their policies.
So, now I have responded with my statement as to why they are the same. Feel free to backup your position on how they are different, and why the Conservative changing the court is bad, while the liberals changing the court is good.
Yes. It is a sovereign state recognized by 138 other countries.
The UN recognizes Palestine as a non-member observer state. The UN recognizes Palestine's representative office as the "The Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the United Nations". All official documents of the UN refers to Palestine as the State of Palestine.
So? The US is just one country. 138 other countries in the world do recognize Palestine.
That is why you can find it on a map.
btw, the USA should officially recognize Palestine. We are being foolish for not doing so.
This is wrong.
Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria recognize Palestine as a country. As does Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Kuwait, Yemen, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, and the UAE.
Last edited:
But you didn't state "national dems of significance." You simply stated "none of the Dems." And I am a Democrat.
With that said, even your new claim of "no national Democrats of significance" is a false claim. National Democrats of significance have spoken out against what is occurring in Israel.
I highlighted a very important sentence in your above response. Notice, what word do you use? Different. Which is what I stated originally that you tried to mock at first. And then you literally respond back with the same word! lol.
I mean, really man?🤣
Yes, the manner of the change is different. It isn't the same type of change!
In this country, Democrats aren't supporting a bill that limits or stops the Supreme Court's ability to rule executive actions or other laws as being unconstitutional. All some Democrats are advocating for in this country is expanding the number of justices on the Supreme Court (as has been done before), term limits for the justices, or having the justices face a popular vote at some point. What these Democrats are advocating for is not an attack on democracy but an attempt to bring more democratic (the system of governance not the political party) ideals and checks and balances to bear on the Supreme Court. This is not what is occuring in Israel.
What is being proposed here in the USA and what is happening in Israel is clearly very different. Different proposals. A different type of change.
I could care less who is behind the changes. I'm looking at the actual changes themselves, what is being proposed. Is it a good idea or a bad idea? Does it encourage more democracy or less? Does it allow the will of the citizenry to be better represented or not?
You apparently are the one focused on the political parties. And this is probably, btw, why you seem so confused about all of this.
Last edited:
You miss nanshee? I've got news fer ya. She's battling the hammertime Paul's skeletons. Ain't no coming back for nanshee. Git over it. 🤣
She feels threatened. Like a bobcat caught in a trap. She'll chew her leg off to escape. I've harvested countless three legged bobcats.
He was an acolyte. Derp.
The "nakba" was fake, btw.
The Grand Mufti’s Nazi connection
It’s no coincidence that just a few months after Nazi Germany surrendered, on November 2, 1945, the anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, many synagogues were burned down in Egypt and dozens of Jews were killed on the streets of Cairo.
www.jpost.com
So the answer is no, Hitler wasn't a Muslim.
He also wasn't a religious acolyte of Islam either. He was simply willing to use Muslims for his own political purposes. Those Muslims that went along with him, of course. The others, he murdered.
Similar threads
