• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: World Politics

Preston said:
That you're out of control delusionally biased about all things Israel and you have zero ability or self awareness to realize it. It is very concerning to me to see you radicalized.
Click to expand...
Just so I’m crystal clear on this point, if Bill Clinton gave a speech with the same opinion on Israel and I posted it here, that would also make me delusional and the post would lack all credibility?
 
LeafOfFaith said:
Just so I’m crystal clear on this point, if Bill Clinton gave a speech with the same opinion on Israel and I posted it here, that would also make me delusional and the post would lack all credibility?
Click to expand...
No, you lack credibility because you're a red-pilled Zionist Netanyahu shill. Quoting pedos and racists is just putting a hat on a hat.
 
LeafOfFaith said:
Just so I’m crystal clear on this point, if Bill Clinton gave a speech with the same opinion on Israel and I posted it here, that would also make me delusional and the post would lack all credibility?
Click to expand...
Ok fine I'll help. Hypocrisy. It's the hypocrisy that I'm trying to get you to see. I didn't share an opinion on whether the perverts opinion was valid or not. I simply found it funny that you were offended by ch1 posting a Fuentes clip that wasn't even political, but then use this satanic creature to prove a point because he said something that pushes your propaganda. It's funny to me. Sad and scary too, but at its core, funny.
 
Preston said:
Ok fine I'll help. Hypocrisy. It's the hypocrisy that I'm trying to get you to see. I didn't share an opinion on whether the perverts opinion was valid or not. I simply found it funny that you were offended by ch1 posting a Fuentes clip that wasn't even political, but then use this satanic creature to prove a point because he said something that pushes your propaganda. It's funny to me. Sad and scary too, but at its core, funny.
Click to expand...
I think you missed the point while trying so hard to make yours. What I said about Fuentes was why post his crap and help him get his message out (and that was to you). I didn’t say why listen to his food takes or whatever, and was just surprised that he even shows up on your algos so much.

If I can’t post a Dershowitz opinion on Israel because of something he has been accused of, but is not even charged with, or Clinton since we can safely assume he’s done much worse, despite both being very knowledgeable about the subject, what does that have to do with an objection to spreading hate speech by an admitted racist?
 
You know LOF, after I made my post about you being OK with child-raping pedophiles as long as they’re pro-Israel/anti-Palestinian, I actually started feeling bad about posting that in retrospect.

Kinda felt like maybe I’d gone too far and fully expected to come back to white-hot, incandescent outrage to that accusation.

Instead…


LeafOfFaith said:
It seems like it’s only an accusation, but obviously if he did it, it’s a sick and terrible thing.

But it doesn’t have any bearing on an opinion on the Israel situation, which can be true regardless of whatever the case may be with those personal accusations, right?
Click to expand...



…I’m stunned to discover that your actual response is essentially “Absolutely! I’m happy to accept the support of child-raping pedophiles, give weight to their arguments and use them to support my own opinions, as long as they’re as pro-Israel as I am!”

You need to seriously re-evaluate your values and where your addiction to brainrot, bot-farm generated far-right rage-bait social media content has led you.
 
LeafOfFaith said:
I think you missed the point while trying so hard to make yours. What I said about Fuentes was why post his crap and help him get his message out (and that was to you). I didn’t say why listen to his food takes or whatever, and was just surprised that he even shows up on your algos so much.

If I can’t post a Dershowitz opinion on Israel because of something he has been accused of, but is not even charged with, or Clinton since we can safely assume he’s done much worse, despite both being very knowledgeable about the subject, what does that have to do with an objection to spreading hate speech by an admitted racist?
Click to expand...
Speaking of missing the point, you continue to do so. Yes it matters that Alan Dershowitz is such a piece of shit, but he's also obviously as biased as a person could possibly be on a particular subject. He's a Jewish lawyer who's been hobnobbing with Israeli and Mossad leaders for decades, wrote a book called The Case For Israel, and has frequently appeared on television and in op-eds defending Israel 100% without any room for nuance.

If you presented a Bill Clinton argument, he's a different person, and obviously not so fucking biased, therefore the reaction would be different. But if his clip was as clearly absurd as the Dershowitz clip, then it could be called out as such.

The fact that you can't even recognize that the vast majority of Palestinians weren't even born during previous negotiations shows that it's simply impossible for you to be objective. I get why, but the fact that you can't even acknowledge the bias in the Dershowitz video is legitimately disturbing.
 
LeafGm said:
You know LOF, after I made my post about you being OK with child-raping pedophiles as long as they’re pro-Israel/anti-Palestinian, I actually started feeling bad about posting that in retrospect.

Kinda felt like maybe I’d gone too far and fully expected to come back to white-hot, incandescent outrage to that accusation.

Instead…






…I’m stunned to discover that your actual response is essentially “Absolutely! I’m happy to accept the support of child-raping pedophiles, give weight to their arguments and use them to support my own opinions, as long as they’re as pro-Israel as I am!”

You need to seriously re-evaluate your values and where your addiction to brainrot, bot-farm generated far-right rage-bait social media content has led you.
Click to expand...
But it’s not the way you’re framing it. The guy is a legal scholar and extremely active in politics for decades. I’m not accepting his support. I’m sharing a view that I think is factual and correct. What he may or may not have done in his personal life doesn’t change it.

Even if he was charged and convicted, does it change the validity of the point? If the same words come out of someone else’s mouth who wasn’t accused of what he’s accused of, does that make them any more or less true?

It’s like the whole artist and separating art thing. Is the Cosby Show just not funny anymore because of what Cosby was actually convicted of? When Theo died a few months ago, was it wrong to post that famous clip of him and Cosby?

You guys are taking things way too far with this gaslighting nonsense. If Dershowitz had said fuck the blacks, they are a lower race and don’t deserve equal rights, then okay, who gives a shit about his opinion on the Israel situation. This is not that.
 
axlsalinger said:
Speaking of missing the point, you continue to do so. Yes it matters that Alan Dershowitz is such a piece of shit, but he's also obviously as biased as a person could possibly be on a particular subject. He's a Jewish lawyer who's been hobnobbing with Israeli and Mossad leaders for decades, wrote a book called The Case For Israel, and has frequently appeared on television and in op-eds defending Israel 100% without any room for nuance.

If you presented a Bill Clinton argument, he's a different person, and obviously not so fucking biased, therefore the reaction would be different. But if his clip was as clearly absurd as the Dershowitz clip, then it could be called out as such.

The fact that you can't even recognize that the vast majority of Palestinians weren't even born during previous negotiations shows that it's simply impossible for you to be objective. I get why, but the fact that you can't even acknowledge the bias in the Dershowitz video is legitimately disturbing.
Click to expand...
This point you keep trying to make is the absolute pinnacle of illogic and absurdity.

And Dershowitz can have bias and still be correct. He’s not wrong because he’s Jewish.
 
LeafOfFaith said:
If I can’t post a Dershowitz opinion on Israel because of something he has been accused of, but is not even charged with, or Clinton since we can safely assume he’s done much worse, despite both being very knowledgeable about the subject, what does that have to do with an objection to spreading hate speech by an admitted racist?
Click to expand...

The issue is credibility. If someone has fucked children in their personal life, they stop being a credible member of society that should be listened to on anything tbh. There are certain "scarlet letter" offences in a society where if you commit it, you need to spend the rest of your life out of the public eye (if you manage to avoid jail, consequences, etc). Take your money if you have, buy a spot in a quiet beach town and just live out your days without feeling the need to put your face in front of a camera or microphone ever the fuck again.
 
MindzEye said:
The issue is credibility. If someone has fucked children in their personal life, they stop being a credible member of society that should be listened to on anything tbh. There are certain "scarlet letter" offences in a society where if you commit it, you need to spend the rest of your life out of the public eye. Take your money if you have, buy a spot in a quiet beach town and just live out your days without feeling the need to put your face in front of a camera or microphone ever the fuck again.
Click to expand...
But to this point, he’s denied it and hasn’t even been charged, correct?
 
MindzEye said:
The issue is credibility. If someone has fucked children in their personal life, they stop being a credible member of society that should be listened to on anything tbh. There are certain "scarlet letter" offences in a society where if you commit it, you need to spend the rest of your life out of the public eye (if you manage to avoid jail, consequences, etc). Take your money if you have, buy a spot in a quiet beach town and just live out your days without feeling the need to put your face in front of a camera or microphone ever the fuck again.
Click to expand...
But if the children were 14 or 15, and we just change the age of consent to 14, then they weren't actually "children", amirite? #AskingForAFriend
 
LeafOfFaith said:
But to this point, he’s denied it and hasn’t even been charged, correct?
Click to expand...

OJ denied it too bud.

iu


Just stop. This dude is wrapped very, very tight in the Epstein scandal/files and not just because he acted as his attourney at times.

Just stop and ask yourself this....would you accept a massage from a teenage girl? You alone in a room even in just your underwear with a random teenage girl? Now, add into that equation that the girl in question was absolutely a victim of sex trafficking. How about now? Would you accept that from a rich and powerful friend of yours? If not, what kind of man would? Dershowitz admits freely to all that I just wrote, but claims that he kept his underwear on the whole time.

Yeah.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top