Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
Discuss.
Larssen
Post limited. Contact Admin to Be Promoted.
+5|291

Dilbert_X wrote:

For the last 50 years at least the world has revolved around Israel and their nutty cult with its end-of-times agenda.
We can thank them for umpteen actual shooting wars and the creation of Arab/muslim terrorism.

Australia's current military priority? Enforcing sanctions on Iran so they can't be a potential threat to Israel - which they weren't going to be but Netanyahu needed to get re-elected so now we have warships in the Gulf again....
Your issue is that you start with a conclusion to then only find supporting evidence. No, world politics hasn't revolved around Israel at all. Definitely not in my continent, national news may bring up the topic of Israel a handful of times throughout the year. On the EU level, during my stint there we discussed Israel directly only a few times, mostly in the context of sanctions. The EU has been wanting to push for several resolutions against Israel for a very long time now with only the US being obstructionist. 'World politics' in our case was far more about Northern Africa, Turkey, Syria, Russia, trade with China, cooperation with the UN & NATO and our relationship with the US.

Perhaps you could make the argument that US politics revolves around Israel, in which case you'd be wrong again as the United States in its support for the country is simply upholding a long-standing policy steeped in its own national interest. Even Kissinger (a jew mind you) consistently advised those in power to ignore Israeli/jewish affairs if it wasn't in the national interest of the United States. The neoconservatives who emerged in the 80s did uphold Israel as a pivotal ally, but the most staunch neoconservatives still considered the Bush administration (their very peak years) as not pro-Israel enough. Evidently policy still deviated from actually revolving around that country.

Has politics in the Middle East orbited Israel? It's undeniable they have a central position in many regional issues but they are also separate from many more. The rivalry between regional players, the internal instability in many middle eastern states, the war on terror, the gulf wars, all of them have very little fundamental involvement from Israel. The Saudis & Iranians aren't exactly basing their foreign policies solely on whatever happens in the Levant. Saddam had also always been much more concerned with Iran than anything Israel was doing. Egypt being a direct neighbour does maintain consistently tenuous relations with that country, though at present it's much more focused on Northern Africa than the Palestinians & Israelis.

It's not that world politics revolves around Israel Dilbert, it's that any time we discuss politics you make it about Israel. Whenever the most vague or far-fetched link could be made to anything Jerusalem, you will jump at the opportunity and no longer see anything else. Your years of obsession with this issue has even made it get to a point where apparently Jewishness is a reason for you to distrust someone. It's pretty disgusting to me that someone else would have to find books on the Middle East by academics who are not ethnically jewish for you to read because you won't bother with anything a jew writes.

I'll also recommend to you the following documentary so that you may expand your narrow worldview a little:

Last edited by Larssen (2019-10-30 11:58:59)

uziq
Member
+175|1856
that's a very good documentary (is it the multi-part one?) but i don't think dilbert could stomach 3-4 hours of a subtitled documentary in hebrew.
coke
Aye up duck!
+436|5113|England. Stoke
why do the Jews even need Israel, when then are living rent free in Dilbert's head 24/7
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,623|4510|eXtreme to the maX

Larssen wrote:

Your issue is that you start with a conclusion to then only find supporting evidence.
Nope.

Perhaps you could make the argument that US politics revolves around Israel, in which case you'd be wrong again as the United States in its support for the country is simply upholding a long-standing policy steeped in its own national interest.
What national interest is that?

t's pretty disgusting to me that someone else would have to find books on the Middle East by academics who are not ethnically jewish for you to read because you won't bother with anything a jew writes.
Would you trust a history of the holocaust written by a card-carrying Nazi?
A history of the gulags written by a member of the communist party?
Sorry, I'm not going to trust a history of Israel-Palestine written by a neo-con jew.

The idea that Arab nationalism and terrorism was going to happen with or without Israel terrorising the Palestinians and stealing their nation is absurd.
What next? Irish nationalism and terrorism just grew organically out of nothing, the Irish being predisposed to violence and murder, it was just bad luck the blameless British caught the hot potato?

If this idea is widely accepted then there'll be no trouble finding multiple non-jewish authors who put their name to it.

I'll also recommend to you the following documentary so that you may expand your narrow worldview a little:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdMjr8cuEy8
Thanks, I saw it when it came out.

Favourite quote: "You can't throw a stone in Palestine without hitting a terrorist"

Best example of even-handedness:
- If a Palestinian commits a terrorist attack its OK to handcuff him then beat him to death, then bulldoze his family's house.
- If an Israeli commits a terrorist attack then he should be asked nicely not to do it again

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2019-11-05 04:55:16)

Epstein didn't kill himself
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,623|4510|eXtreme to the maX
As for Australian politics, why are multiple former Australian politicians being hosted by 'Zionist Friends of Australia'?
http://www.jwire.com.au/cocktail-recept … in-israel/

There's been a creeping push over the years to define Australia as a 'judeo-christian culture' whatever that means, when there's been no significant connection between the two countries or cultures.
President of the ZFA Jeremy Leibler described the delegation as a select group of Australians who have, during their illustrious careers, helped to build and reinforce the relationship between two countries, united by their common morality and ideals.
What common morality and ideals is that?

“In the various political portfolios they have held, across successive Australian governments of different political persuasions, each member of our delegation has made, and faithfully fulfilled, a commitment to the Australian Jewish community and to Israel.”
Sounds pretty weird TBH, why would Australian politicians be making 'a commitment to Israel'?
The muslim community here is a whole lot bigger and we don't see former politicians creeping after them. In fact our PM threw away a trade deal with Indonesia -  a nation of 200m people - over the location of our embassy in Israel. It also cost him a safe seat in Sydney.
Why is Israel - a trivial country on the other side of the world - always the priority, not our businesses, farmers, neighbouring countries etc?

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2019-11-05 16:21:12)

Epstein didn't kill himself
Larssen
Post limited. Contact Admin to Be Promoted.
+5|291
You can read up on the historical ties between Israel and the States on wikipedia Dilbert. Surprise: the Cold War, the security situation in the ME and an avenue for the US to project power throughout the ME (which is oil rich) were major factors in the maintenance of that relationship.

Arab nationalism and radicalism were already being shaped in the late 19th, early 20th centuries. I don't like to argue counterfactual history but it's a certainty (religious) nationalism would've taken hold and still likely terrorism would happen sooner or later. ISIS referred the sykes picot agreement and the colonial legacy in quite a few of its propaganda videos. Your sole focus on Israel is simply unwarranted.

It's also quite typical that in the entire documentary you only made sure to remember that one quote from the oldest guy in the room, opposite all of his peers, more than a few of whom were sympathetic to the palestinian cause and strongly argued against the government's current course of action. If I recall correctly actually all of them were opposed to Netanyahu.
uziq
Member
+175|1856
i also think it’s hilarious that he’s still characterising a macarthur-grant-winning nonfiction writer who was a gadfly to the bush regime as a ‘neo-con jew’. comparing an author with several award-winning books in his oeuvre and critical praise from across the media to a nazi or communist party propagandist — very classy, and VERY rational.

egypt’s regime and entire officer military class had big dealings with the nazis, yuuuuuge dealings.

there were divisions of nazis in the balkans who were ethnically and religiously islamic, with little to nothing to do with israel in their regional conflict.

his basic thesis that a politically extremist and militaristic version of islam was seeded and nudged along by nazi thinking seems to have some valency. anti-semitism’s revival in europe was quite clearly transmitted to burgeoning attempts at nationalism in islamic societies.

there is clear textual evidence of the grand mufti of jerusalem being influenced by nazi propaganda, e.g. the protocols of the elders of zion. of COURSE israel was an issue to the arab world before nazism, but the view that jews should be eliminated and the suspicion – still widely held by many parts of egyptian society today, for example – that there’s some international jewish conspiracy, with them running the world, was planted by nazis via muslim brotherhood and nasser connection.

it is literally a commonplace to describe radical islam as ‘fascist’.

Last edited by uziq (2019-11-06 01:15:50)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,623|4510|eXtreme to the maX
And von Braun had a lot of success in the field of science, the Americans thought he was a great guy, really bigly great, I don't care about his opinion on anything either.
This Berman guy seems to have focused largely on jewish issues, so yeah I'd say he's biased, there being other issues in the world which cover the 99.7% of people who aren't one of the chosen ones.

I'm sure the Arabs were more influenced by seeing their fellow citizens murdered and their land stolen by terrorists than a few pamphlets. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, thats about as far as it goes.
But of course it suits the jews now to rewrite history with the Palestinians as congenital terrorists and nazi sympathisers - thus justifying their ongoing holocaust, because who is going to support nazis against jews these days?

But lets say you're right, its still the case that without zionism we wouldn't have islamism, the nazis would not have gained the traction you say they did in the ME because the arabs would have had no reason to engage with the nazis and no beef with anyone except the British.

As for Australian politics, it is concerning to me that the liberal side of politics, current and former PMs. seems to be putting 0.4% of the Australian population ahead of pretty well everyone else.
Epstein didn't kill himself
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,623|4510|eXtreme to the maX

Larssen wrote:

You can read up on the historical ties between Israel and the States on wikipedia Dilbert. Surprise: the Cold War, the security situation in the ME and an avenue for the US to project power throughout the ME (which is oil rich) were major factors in the maintenance of that relationship.
Saudi Arabia, the source of the bulk of the oil in the ME, has been thoroughly on-side with the US since day one. Same for Kuwait, Qatar, Iraq for a long period etc. Without the excesses of the US-backed Shah and the trouble created by Israel Iran would still be on-side today.

Israel and its surrounding countries have no oil to speak of, oil is not the reason for the US to be engaged with Israel, the US has never used Israel for power projection etc.

Why Australia now feels the need to be involved I don't know either.
Epstein didn't kill himself
uziq
Member
+175|1856
so australia is on fire. the great barrier reef's prospects are 'very poor'.

yet it's also the most valuable coal exporter in the world, and is building new mines/new jerbs based on ... coal?

what excuse do you rational whites have for this? i thought it was all blamed on china and the indians?
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,623|4510|eXtreme to the maX
No excuses whatsoever, Australia shouldn't be exporting thermal coal, not without a large carbon tax on it.
For iron production there's no alternative to coking coal at this point, that could use a carbon tax too, but then China and India will just buy from Brazil and Mongolia and Australia will be broke.

Australia has always been shortsighted and unimaginative - hence the lucky country quote, no real technology economy, little value addition or creation except in farming, dependent on steadily selling off its finite resources faster and faster to stay afloat - and destroying valuable farmland to do so.

Australians think they're pretty clever, selling three tons of coal and two tons of iron ore for a pittance and buying in a Toyota.
Factoring out immigration the economy has been going steadily backwards for about 30 years, productivity has been declining similarly.

Once again we're going through a bushfire crisis, we'll talk again about the need for planned burns and land management, again exactly nothing will happen until the next round of bushfires and again everyone will wail and ask why nothing was done.

It doesn't help that come election time we have a choice between right-wing religious nuts and corrupt union shills, not one of whom gives a shit about anything except the next election cycle, lining up a job outside politics and their pension.
But hey, the most popular and self-serving PM can chug a beer.
https://www.bandt.com.au/information/uploads/2017/04/Bob-Hawke-e1491433605214-1260x840.png

Mining companies have far more clout with the govt than individual farmers, the country representative was more focused on fucking his staff than representing his constituents so thats how we end up with a massive coalmine which will probably give more profit to an Indian company than to Australia, and having poisoned farmland and the sea will likely be a net deficit.

Can we tell Indian peasants they can't have electric ovens and refrigerators when they can't manage their own grossly overpopulated country at even a basic level?

https://i.dawn.com/primary/2019/02/5c62b4afa890a.jpg
I'd say we can, but then they call us racists and thats annoying so we sell them the coal.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2019-11-13 14:25:48)

Epstein didn't kill himself
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,623|4510|eXtreme to the maX
We have people building matchwood homes in catastrophic fire areas, then refusing to clean up around their homes to reduce the fire threat, what can you do in the face of this kind of shortsightedness.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-17/ … ks/8129232

Our neighbours property has ankle deep leaves and waist deep grass, he won't do anything and chances are the council won't make him, it negates any effort I go to to protect our house.

There's shortsightedness at every level, the top of politics to the lowest homeowner. Intelligence and forward thinking are ridiculed, I don't see it changing.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2019-11-13 14:28:14)

Epstein didn't kill himself
uziq
Member
+175|1856
'Can we tell Indian peasants they can't have electric ovens and refrigerators when they can't manage their own grossly overpopulated country at even a basic level?'

i mean you kind of summed up the inherent problems there. australia was basically a fresh game save of western industrial civilisation, a restart on a huge game board with pretty much infinite land and resources. no surprises that you're doing better at industrialism, refining, processing, etc. than the indians. ditto on pollution and regulations. india and china are pretty much leveraging the biggest transfers of living standards in the history of humanity.  a bit different from a tiny number of white settlers with european tech examining their consciences over coal, when they rightfully know they shouldn't be using it.

but yes, it's grim. it's so much worse when the supposed 'leaders' on the issue are all full of shit and backtrack as soon as some short-term economic gain is possible. canada and the tar sands, UK and fracking, obviously the US and oil, etc. we're still too caught up in the economic game to think beyond 2050.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,623|4510|eXtreme to the maX
Every Western country has been built by burning down forests for pasture and by burning coal, a bit hard to tell developing nations they can't now do the same.

But then Indians will overpopulate India and the rest of world until they're shoulder to shoulder neck-deep in their own shit, they can barely feed themselves now.

Australia is in a unique position, less than 1/10th the population density of America, 1/137th compared with India, huge mineral and other resources other countries are looking at very enviously. If China wanted to invade the Army would last about half an hour.

Politicians, and the average person, are too dumb and lazy to address anything really, climate, defence etc.
Epstein didn't kill himself
uziq
Member
+175|1856
i hadn’t heard the lucky country thing before, but i know a fair amount of ‘manifest destiny’ gets sprinkled around like snoos whenever white people turn up with riches in their eyes (and criminal records in their place of origin...)

you talk a lot about india and china, but by the end of the century with population tends as they are, 3 out of every 4 new humans born will be african. forget the mediterranean refugee crisis. there will be a girder around half the world forming a sahel immigration band. we are telling, with straight faces, the countries which are going to be made inhospitable by climate change that they must modernise and generate incentives for future generations to stay. it’s going to take a lot.

fully automated luxury communism imo.

Last edited by uziq (2019-11-13 23:19:21)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,623|4510|eXtreme to the maX
Africans don't have modern armies or nuclear weapons, when the Chinese have polluted themselves out of their own country they'll be on the move, or looking for farmland at least.
Epstein didn't kill himself
uziq
Member
+175|1856
so long, koalas

https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevornace … 22f73f7bad

on the plus side, australians still don't think climate change is a thing. you died for a good cause.

While the climate crisis has become Australians’ number one concern, both major parties play determinedly deaf and dumb on the issue while action and protest about the climate crisis is increasingly subject to prosecution and heavy sentencing.

In Tasmania, the Liberal government intends to legislate sentences of up to 21 years – more than many get for murder – for environmental protest, legislation typical of the new climate of authoritarianism that has flourished under Morrison. As Australia burns, what we are witnessing nationally is no more or less than the criminalisation of democracy in defence of the coal and gas industries.

Last edited by uziq (2019-11-24 12:38:58)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,623|4510|eXtreme to the maX
The climate is supposedly 'Australians’ number one concern', but no-one is prepared to adjust their lifestyle one bit.
I don't know if the local rag superposes these articles deliberately.
https://i.imgur.com/9VfnH3P.png

Bottom line is the average person in the world expects to enjoy whatever lifestyle they want while 'something must be done' by someone else.
We've reached a problem when the receptionist drives a V8 Landcruiser and flies to Bali four times a year.

Hipsters aren't the solution either, not when they're travelling to Europe and Macchu Pikachu whenever they want.
This is now the in thing apparently
https://www.auroraexpeditions.com.au/bl … antarctica

As for politicians:

Labor - Craven opportunists have been somewhat interested in environmental issues, probably solely to nullify the 'Green' vote and get themselves on the gravy train. They fucked up by telling the people of Queensland they supported Adani, everyone else the would veto it.

The Liberals - They've been taken over by evangelicals, jews and catholics intent on bringing about armageddon.
A few degrees of warming are nothing when its going to be raining molten sulphur, plus they need the tax receipts.
Epstein didn't kill himself
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,751|5176|USA

uziq wrote:

While the climate crisis has become Australians’ number one concern, both major parties play determinedly deaf and dumb on the issue while action and protest about the climate crisis is increasingly subject to prosecution and heavy sentencing.

In Tasmania, the Liberal government intends to legislate sentences of up to 21 years – more than many get for murder – for environmental protest, legislation typical of the new climate of authoritarianism that has flourished under Morrison. As Australia burns, what we are witnessing nationally is no more or less than the criminalisation of democracy in defence of the coal and gas industries.
Had to look it up. Ended up with a mess of other stuff to filter through on results, sources notwithstanding.

Mason got a much longer sentence than several militants recently convicted of setting fire to logging camps and vehicles in Oregon and Washington states – including Stanislas Meyerhoff who received 13 years for setting 11 fires and causing $30m in damage.

Activist or terrorist? Mild-mannered eco-militant serving 22 years for arson
https://www.theguardian.com/environment … -from-jail
mar 2009
Award-Winning Mongolian Environmentalist Gets 21 Years for ‘Terrorism’
http://world.time.com/2014/01/28/award- … terrorism/
jan 2014
Foster took part in effort on Oct. 11, 2016, to draw attention to climate change by turning off valves on five pipelines that bring Canadian oil south. Foster targeted the Keystone Pipeline in North Dakota. Other activists targeted pipelines in Minnesota, Montana and Washington state.

A jury in North Dakota’s Pembina County on Friday convicted Foster after a weeklong trial of criminal mischief, criminal trespass and conspiracy. He faces up to 21 years in prison when he’s sentenced Jan. 18. The man who filmed his protest action, Samuel Jessup of Winooski, Vermont, was convicted of conspiracy and faces up to 11 years.

Green Activists Face Up To 21 Years In Prison As Judge Rejects Climate Change Excuse
https://www.thegwpf.com/green-activists … ge-excuse/
nov 2017
[…] that makes interfering with pipelines and other oil and gas infrastructure a crime punishable by up to a year in prison and $10,000 in fines. And just the “intent to impair or interrupt” operations could still cost you a $4,000 fine and a year behind bars.

The new legislation raises the risk for landowners hoping to block construction of Kinder Morgan’s $2 billion, 430-mile natural gas pipeline from West Texas’ Permian Basin to the Gulf Coast.

Texans could get a year in prison for protesting pipelines on their own land
https://grist.org/article/texans-could- … -own-land/
may 2019
uziq
Member
+175|1856
and yet people like jay complain about the overweening power of ‘eco-cultists’ and the dangers of people like greta thurnberg. nice to know who has the real power (like i said in the other thread: vast vested interests, private individuals who are normally billionaires and oil companies). a scowling teenager is something to be worried about, but being locked up for 20 years for protesting near a pipeline or on a reservation is a-ok!

business as usual folks!

Last edited by uziq (2019-11-24 16:19:04)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,623|4510|eXtreme to the maX
At this point it may be too late to mitigate climate change, its not going to happen through normal political means, even revolution since individuals are not going to accept reductions in their profligate living standards.
I don't take the boomer attitude - My personal impact is small so it doesn't matter how big it is.

The only solution is an authoritarian technocracy.
Global warming would be excellent for Russia, they are probably working on that basis.
China is the front-runner, I don't see anything else. The question is whether they will do it, whether they decide its in their interests.
Epstein didn't kill himself
uziq
Member
+175|1856
Bottom line is the average person in the world expects to enjoy whatever lifestyle they want while 'something must be done' by someone else.
We've reached a problem when the receptionist drives a V8 Landcruiser and flies to Bali four times a year.

Hipsters aren't the solution either, not when they're travelling to Europe and Macchu Pikachu whenever they want.
also this is such disingenuous nonsense. your receptionist is not the 'average person' by a long shot, the last time i checked your average family weren't even going on one international holiday a year let alone four; and i don't know many hipsters going to peru, either. i thought the stereotype was to drive up property prices in east london, not to go backpacking for several years (is there any nation in the world, except for young israelis with national service upcoming, that holds a candle to australians for senseless backpacking?)

australia is set to become the 6th biggest contributor to fossil fuel emissions by 2030. it is the number one exporter.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment … ate-crisis

what's the population of australia again? how can you have the temerity to talk about 'the average person' in these sorts of discussions? australia's policies are absolutely indefensible tbh. every country in the world doing something to lower its emissions could use the 'but china!' get out card.

Last edited by uziq (2019-11-24 16:22:57)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,623|4510|eXtreme to the maX
I'm talking about the average person in developed countries.

How many air miles have you racked up in the last 10 years for example?
If its more than two then your lifestyle is the one thats unsustainable.

And yes, Australians have unsustainable lifestyles, thats what I'm complaining about.
Epstein didn't kill himself
uziq
Member
+175|1856
i've taken 2 short continental flights in the last 5 years. i think i'm good. definitely not jetting to bali. i'm not even sure what taking 'more than 2 air miles' means - are there even any flights for that distance anywhere in the world? i haven't had a car in 5 years so my 'land miles' contribution in private transport is zero. i either work from home or commute to the office each day -- a 10 minute walk. tell me some more how my lifestyle is unforgivable.

my point is that your 'average person' bullshit is not applicable to most of europe. you are taking australians' standards as universal and using it to scaremonger. but the last time i checked, australians driving V8's everywhere and going to bali 4 times a year is not the fucking 'average'. that's just an absurd claim to make. people can moderate their lifestyles and accept climate policies without immiserating themselves.

you have this stupid pessimistic attitude which isn't really very intelligent. 'people are dumb and want to go to peru, hurr durr nothing short of world empire will solve it'. well actually your country could start by lowering its ambitions to be the world's biggest emissions superpower?

Last edited by uziq (2019-11-24 16:29:06)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,623|4510|eXtreme to the maX
i've taken 2 short continental flights in the last 5 years.
You've used about 10 times your lifetime allocation of air travel already then. Congrats, no more air travel for you.

I agree that US and Aus lifestyles and attitudes are the worst in the world in respect of climate change.
Australia does have energy intensive industries which do account for some of it.

Europeans aren't much better, Luxembourg is somehow ahead of Australia for example, Norway, Belgium and Germany not far behind, when they do little farming or mining by comparison. How much Aluminium does Luxembourg smelt?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c … per_capita

In an oil-driven world $ Cost=CO2 emitted.
Picking on you the premium you're prepared to pay for a Macbook does get used by Californians to build mansions in flammable parks and fly to work by helicopter.
Is it really worth it just to get the perfect level of clackiness in the keys and daily eyegasms when you'd get on OK with a Toshiba at 1/4 of the environmental impact? The engineers will have to eat noodles and drive Priuses, no steak and Hummers - pity them.

Yes, people are stupid, selfish and shortsighted. Look at the recent elections across the developed world.
I don't see people, on the average, crimping their aspirations. Not when everyone expects to be an instagram influencer whizzing about by private jet so they can take photos of themselves in obscure locations.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2019-11-24 17:45:59)

Epstein didn't kill himself

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2019 Jeff Minard