kenway

It's not my logic. Do you think I'm the only one using the term occupied? Would think a dangerous game to try to minimise my input based on a lexicon understood by the majority.

Disconnect the life support of religious Zionism. You will quickly find that Hamas disappears soon after. Only true for some people. The trick is to transcend that. Family is a low consciousness addiction. In order for there to be loved ones, by relative definition there has to be unloved ones, and that is a spiritual mistake. Remember, the trick is not to perfect the animal mindset, but to transcend it. If you love family and fear death, you're doing it wrong. You didn't leave anything. You announced to the world you were sacrificing something, but in truth you pulled out the Israeli civilians, maintained control of the borders, and then over the years that followed you terrorised and killed all that remained. I'm still not convinced Israel is even a Jewish state. I'm told there is a hilarious joke told in Chinese villages:- Q: How do you know Israel isn't a Jewish state? A: Because the Jews are intelligent. It's an inappropriate joke for sure, but the fact that it is commonplace in Chinese villages should tell you a lot. Dahiya doctrine.

On Finkelstein's recent conversations drawing parallels between Hamas and Nat Turner, it's worth revisiting what Malcolm X had to say about Israel / Palestine all the way back from 1964. Such a long time ago, but how so relevant does his words appear today to the extent that they could have just as easily been written today. Zionist Logic By Malcolm X The Zionist armies that now occupy Palestine claim their ancient Jewish prophets predicted that in the "last days of this world" their own God would raise them up a "messiah" who would lead them to their promised land, and they would set up their own "divine" government in this newly-gained land, this "divine" government would enable them to "rule all other nations with a rod of iron." If the Israeli Zionists believe their present occupation of Arab Palestine is the fulfillment of predictions made by their Jewish prophets, then they also religiously believe that Israel must fulfill its "divine" mission to rule all other nations with a rod of irons, which only means a different form of iron-like rule, more firmly entrenched even, than that of the former European Colonial Powers. These Israeli Zionists religiously believe their Jewish God has chosen them to replace the outdated European colonialism with a new form of colonialism, so well disguised that it will enable them to deceive the African masses into submitting willingly to their "divine" authority and guidance, without the African masses being aware that they are still colonized. Camouflage The Israeli Zionists are convinced they have successfully camouflaged their new kind of colonialism. Their colonialism appears to be more "benevolent," more "philanthropic," a system with which they rule simply by getting their potential victims to accept their friendly offers of economic "aid," and other tempting gifts, that they dangle in front of the newly-independent African nations, whose economies are experiencing great difficulties. During the 19th century, when the masses here in Africa were largely illiterate it was easy for European imperialists to rule them with "force and fear," but in this present era of enlightenment the African masses are awakening, and it is impossible to hold them in check now with the antiquated methods of the 19th century. The imperialists, therefore, have been compelled to devise new methods. Since they can no longer force or frighten the masses into submission, they must devise modern methods that will enable them to maneuver the African masses into willing submission. The modern 20th century weapon of neo-imperialism is "dollarism." The Zionists have mastered the science of dollarism: the ability to come posing as a friend and benefactor, bearing gifts and all other forms of economic aid and offers of technical assistance. Thus, the power and influence of Zionist Israel in many of the newly "independent" African nations has fast-become even more unshakeable than that of the 18th century European colonialists...and this new kind of Zionist colonialism differs only in form and method, but never in motive or objective. At the close of the 19th century when European imperialists wisely foresaw that the awakening masses of Africa would not submit to their old method of ruling through force and fears, these ever-scheming imperialists had to create a "new weapon," and to find a "new base" for that weapon. Dollarism The number one weapon of 20th century imperialism is Zionist dollarism, and one of the main bases for this weapon is Zionist Israel. The ever-scheming European imperialists wisely placed Israel where she could geographically divide the Arab world, infiltrate and sow the seed of dissension among African leaders and also divide the Africans against the Asians. Zionist Israel's occupation of Arab Palestine has forced the Arab world to waste billions of precious dollars on armaments, making it impossible for these newly independent Arab nations to concentrate on strengthening the economies of their countries and elevate the living standard of their people. And the continued low standard of living in the Arab world has been skillfully used by the Zionist propagandists to make it appear to the Africans that the Arab leaders are not intellectually or technically qualified to lift the living standard of their people...thus, indirectly inducing Africans to turn away from the Arabs and towards the Israelis for teachers and technical assistance. "They cripple the bird's wing, and then condemn it for not flying as fast as they." The imperialists always make themselves look good, but it is only because they are competing against economically crippled newly independent countries whose economies are actually crippled by the Zionist-capitalist conspiracy. They can't stand against fair competition, thus they dread Gamal Abdul Nasser's call for African-Arab Unity under Socialism. Messiah? If the "religious" claim of the Zionists is true that they were to be led to the promised land by their messiah, and Israel's present occupation of Arab Palestine is the fulfillment of that prophesy: where is their messiah whom their prophets said would get the credit for leading them there? It was [United Nations mediator] Ralph Bunche who "negotiated" the Zionists into possession of Occupied Palestine! Is Ralph Bunche the messiah of Zionism? If Ralph Bunche is not their messiah, and their messiah has not yet come, then what are they doing in Palestine ahead of their messiah? Did the Zionists have the legal or moral right to invade Arab Palestine, uproot its Arab citizens from their homes and seize all Arab property for themselves just based on the "religious" claim that their forefathers lived there thousands of years ago? Only a thousand years ago the Moors lived in Spain. Would this give the Moors of today the legal and moral right to invade the Iberian Peninsula, drive out its Spanish citizens, and then set up a new Moroccan nation...where Spain used to be, as the European Zionists have done to our Arab brothers and sisters in Palestine? In short the Zionist argument to justify Israel's present occupation of Arab Palestine has no intelligent or legal basis in history...not even in their own religion. Where is their Messiah? Taken from The Egyptian Gazette, Sept. 17, 1964:

Here's what not real:- The idea that Israel is trying to root out Hamas in order to defend itself, is not real. The idea that Israel sees Palestinian civilians on a parallel with Israel civilians, is not real. The idea that if Hamas didn't exist there would be peace, is not real. The idea that this recent incursion started on Oct 7th is not real. The credibility that when Israel does it, they are called prisoners, but when Hamas does it, they are called hostages, is not real. The credibility that an ethno-state, let alone a genocidal ethno-state, can be a part of an advanced civilisation, is not real. Anything that comes out of Netanyahu's mouth, is not real. The premise that the IDF are heros, is not real. The premise that the IDF are not deliberately targeting hospitals, schools and refugee centers, is not real. * Evil maybe theatre, that's true. But if evil did exist, Israel would embody it with artistic perfection. If not for death and destruction, but for the disrespect and deception. And that isreal.

Good one.

Expressed as a percentage?

Finkelstein doesn't live in Israel. He lives in New York.

BDNF - Brain Derived Neutotrophic Factor ... but it can't be ingested, so you have to synthesize it yourself. Recipe is as follows:- * 45 minutes daily aerobic exercise for 2 weeks 45 minutes daily anaerobic exercise for 4 weeks. 3000mg EPA daily RDA Vitamin B9 (Folic Acid) * After 6 weeks you should have enough BDNF to clean the glymphatic system (brain circulation) as well as regrowing any burned out receptors. You should also probably detox and sauna as frequently as you can.

The letter is almost certainly false. People should be aware that Osama has admitted responsibility for 9/11 just as many times as he denied responsibility. What people have forgotten, or in the case of many Westerners at the time never even realised, was that in the months following 9/11, Osama was pretty active in giving interviews to many Middle Eastern publications where he completely distanced himself from the attacks. For some reason these interviews have been completely overlooked by the sands of time, but they were pretty relevant at the time. In my opinion, the correct Osama testimony is the one as follows, as published by the Ummat Newspaper (Karachi, Pakistan) on the 29th September 2001.

@Nivsch It's not a theory. There has been a demonstrable rise in compassion for the Palestinian cause and a resistance to the demographically-focussed methods of the ultra-Zionist mindset. We're not talking about national executives or leaders of countries here. Rather the changing attitude of the average person, and their capacity to defend themselves against mainstream narratives. These are the ones who are demonstrating. This is also reflected in polls where the majority, at the very least, have been calling for immediate ceasefire, in an environment where their leaders cannot even utter the phrase. Plus, resistance does not equal hate. It is a mistake to parallel protesting against an unjust cause with seemingly abstract and uncontextualized hatred, that to be frank, has no basis in logical reality. Again, despite what you may have read, people don't just randomly wake up in the morning and decide to start hating Jews.

I find it very heart warming, that despite the use of deception and psychological manipulation via the Western media in favor of Israel, the people of the world have still managed to negotiate such a landscape to come out in favor of the Palestinians. During the Israel-Gaza-Lebanon war of 2006, I remember attending a protest in Europe at the time, and only about 500 people showed up. This was in stark contrast to the millions of people that demonstrated against the Iraq war three years earlier. However, fast forward almost twenty years to 2023, and millions of people are out on the streets all over Europe again, standing up against Israel and rightfully declaring that they won't tolerate the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. Again, this is despite the propaganda that has been levied at them.

Let's be real here. Israel is not a democratic nation. If the only way you can call yourselves a democracy is by putting away large portions of the "ethnically undesirable" parts of the population, into large military controlled ghettos, then not only are you a functioning fascist state, you're also operating at the level of defacto apartheid. It's called "the demographic problem" for a reason.

Iceland is a good example of something close to a post-sex society. It is one of the most sexually liberal places on Earth. If you try pickup out here people will just think you're weird. It would be like speaking to someone for four hours just to ask them for a cigarette.

It's one of the impossible questions. It's like trying to think of a color that you've never seen before. If you don't know it, then you cannot begin to even imagine it. But once you know it, then it becomes obvious... and you wonder how you ever forgot such a thing in the first place...

Maths Test: Question 14 1 Israeli civilian is equal to 1 Palestinian civilian. Hamas kills 1500 Israeli civilians. Israel kills 15,000 Palestinian civilians. How much more terrible and unacceptable is Israel relative to Hamas?

If it's fun and it doesn't cause suffering, then what's the problem? Mostly, people's aversion to homosexuality stems from a lack of sexual experience or sexual vocabulary. After all, you can't make sense of something that you have no experience of. The precursor to this lack of experience seems to be fear, or some kind of fear-based cultural programming. It's a shame, because it's akin to keeping a society in a state of medieval peasantry, but rather than denying them the ability to read or write, instead denying them a basic sexual lexicon, including recreational homosexuality. The solution for you personally, would be to go out and get some recreational sexual experiences. Not only would lead to greater understanding, but would also lead to greater empathy and compassion.

Yes, because it accelerates the arrival of a post-sex society. And to be clear, a post-sex society isn't marked by a society that no longer has sex - quite the opposite. It's a society that regards sex as trivial and of little importance. Sex, specifically recreational sex in all its forms, would be no different from going to the cinema, visiting a restaurant, or playing golf. Funny little things we do for fun, but nothing more than that. Gone is the stigma and taboo. It's just sex. Nothing more.

A good man is the one who doesn't fear weakness in himself.

Consider the following theoretical exercise:- You have a 5-year old daughter of whom you know very well, and who has recently been kidnapped by gangsters. At the same time, these gangsters have also kidnapped a random homeless man, of whom you know nothing. The gangsters have informed you that they are planning on killing one of these people and letting the other go, and that you are the one that has to decide who dies and who is released. To be clear, they are either going to kill your 5-year old daughter and let the homeless person go, or they are going to kill the homeless person and let your 5-year old daughter go. This is a theoretical exercise, so there are no other options available to you. You cannot abstain, nor can you kill yourself, nor can you suddenly turn into an action hero and attempt to take on the gangsters. You only available options are:- 1. 5-year old daughter dies and the homeless person is freed. 2. Homeless person dies and the 5-year old daughter is freed. 3. Flip a coin. What do you do, and how do you reason your decision?

In that case, suppose the homeless person is your father and is someone that you know well and in affectionate terms. In contrast (in this case) you know nothing of the 5-year old girl - she is merely a random 5-year old living in a different part of the world belonging to a totally different culture than your own. How would that change things? I agree that the survival instinct gives stability to temporal finite experiences. I’m not convinced that it affects things spiritually. The magnitude of love experienced might be enough to emulate or uncover a kind of euphoric bonding, but it’s still fundamentally anchored to the animal experience. It doesn’t change any underlying ontology. You cannot convince God to not love the homeless person in the same way that you love your daughter. Hence the issue of how you identify. God or human after all?

Because that's not one of the options available as laid out in the exercise. The point of the exercise is to bring to the fore the reality of how you identify with yourself, and your loyalties and priorities that expand out of that identity. Do you identify as human, or do you identify as God? By forcing to make a choice in who lives and dies, you are exposing the extent to which your animalistic programmings are a significant force relative to your angelic instincts or spiritual understandings. In addition to preference, it also exposes the ontologically meaningless instinct to survive, relative to the greater understanding that you are eternal by default.

Probably the same thoughts as the daughter of the homeless guy.... who loves her father very much and wants nothing else than him to return home where it's warm and safe.

That's true, I don't. But I can't see how that would add any extra spiritual or ontological information. It would be akin to saying that the animal instinct is greater than the angel instinct, which is not necessarily the case. To me, not doing anything other than flipping a coin represents a failure to transcend the animal instinct in an area that matters the most.

Well... because for me, I'd flip a coin, even between my daughter and one homeless stranger. I wouldn't even think twice about it. The premise being that I am my daughter, and I am the homeless person. For me, there's no space here for group preference at all, and given that there is no such thing as death, it makes no difference (to me) either way. But I was just wondering how others viewed it.