Netanyahu address to Congress

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 10:50 am

GreenGoo wrote: I'm not a fan of Hillary but it's not because she's Seldom Bin Layed.

Uh.... WTF?

Zekester · Post by **Zekester** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 10:51 am

GreenGoo wrote:
Zekester wrote:
El Guapo wrote:
AWS260 wrote:
El Guapo wrote:
Rip wrote:Nice some pictures of a few dozen at most protesters to counter pictures of tens of thousands demonstrating for the opposite.
You're saying that you are not convinced by someone posting pictures of people protesting as representative of how millions of people feel? I can't say I disagree.

Anywho, none of your pictures featured "tens of thousands" demonstrating. That said, if you really want tens of thousands demonstrating:
Not convinced. You need to post "Iranian" pictures from Egypt and Indonesia, like Rip did.
Hoooo boy do Egyptians hate Americans. Probably because we've spent the last several decades supporting governments that have been oppressing them.

Huh, I'm kind of picking up on a trend here...
ya, we suck.

that's the "in" thing these days, apparently
As a foreigner, I can say that your government has done some questionable things in the last few decades. Mostly it has been to screw over the American people, which is what is the most upsetting. That you can on one hand condemn your government for various things (such as net neutrality) and on the other hand claim that any criticism of your government by others is just a fad of America self loathing is mind boggling to me.

What is your deal? Is the American government beyond reproach or is it the source of all evil? Pick a damn principle and stick with it for more than 5 seconds.

And the US has done many, many good things for many other nations for a long freaking time. Too many foreigners seem to overlook that little fact, for some reason. Like I said....bad-mouthing America is the "in" thing for far too many these days. But Government is not all what America is about. The people is what America is about, despite what too many of our politicians project.

America was founded on breaking away from an omni-powerful tyrannical government. And many conservative Americans feel it should stay that way.

Zekester · Post by **Zekester** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 10:52 am

Defiant wrote:
GreenGoo wrote: I'm not a fan of Hillary but it's not because she's Seldom Bin Layed.
Uh.... WTF?

Easy, now.

I posted a "joke" in the r&p picture thread about Hillary and now a bunch of people's panties are wadded up. I guess it was ok to bash Jesus and Christians, but Hillary was off limits.

Zekester · Post by **Zekester** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 10:53 am

Pyperkub wrote:
Zekester wrote:
Pyperkub wrote:
msduncan wrote:When did "progressives" drop their thinly veiled charade of being pro-Israel and decide to come out of the closet as being vigorously anti-Israel? It's happened sometime in the last 6 years when their beloved and very pro-fundamentalist president decided to charge boldly in that direction.
Anti-nonsensical war is not anti-Israel. Anti-Warmonger is not Anti-Israel. Anti-Netanyahu is not anti-Israel.
anti-Obama is not racism. anti-Hillary is not misogyny. anti-gay agenda is not homophobia.

shall we keep going?
By you logic though, anti Obama is anti American

Many of his policies are anti-American

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 10:54 am

OK, I guess if it's a reference to some other thread, it's less WTF. Still fairly wtf, though.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 11:12 am

Zekester wrote:America was founded on breaking away from an omni-powerful tyrannical government. And many conservative Americans feel it should stay that way.

Economically, sure. There are plenty of conservative Americans that feel, from a social standpoint, that they should be an omni-powerful tyrannical government against those that they don't like.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 11:14 am

<pops his head in>

Oh cool! Now we're comparing America under Obama to a tyrannical empire. This thread is coming along nicely. I'll be back later to collect more data.

noxiousdog · Post by **noxiousdog** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 11:24 am

Zekester wrote:
Defiant wrote:
GreenGoo wrote: I'm not a fan of Hillary but it's not because she's Seldom Bin Layed.
Uh.... WTF?
Easy, now.

I posted a "joke" in the r&p picture thread about Hillary and now a bunch of people's panties are wadded up. I guess it was ok to bash Jesus and Christians, but Hillary was off limits.

Bash Hillary all you want, but "I don't like [woman] so she must be defined by my perceptions of her sexuality and I can call her un-american names" isn't a joke.

I think Hillary is a power hungry hypocrite who isn't fit to govern. See? Easy.

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:28 pm

Zekester wrote:
Pyperkub wrote:
Zekester wrote:
Pyperkub wrote:
msduncan wrote:When did "progressives" drop their thinly veiled charade of being pro-Israel and decide to come out of the closet as being vigorously anti-Israel? It's happened sometime in the last 6 years when their beloved and very pro-fundamentalist president decided to charge boldly in that direction.
Anti-nonsensical war is not anti-Israel. Anti-Warmonger is not Anti-Israel. Anti-Netanyahu is not anti-Israel.
anti-Obama is not racism. anti-Hillary is not misogyny. anti-gay agenda is not homophobia.

shall we keep going?
By you logic though, anti Obama is anti American
Many of his policies are anti-American

Back it up

Zekester · Post by **Zekester** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:34 pm

getting off topic, boys

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:49 pm

I thought you wanted to discuss the gay agenda though?

naednek · Post by **naednek** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:53 pm

hepcat wrote:Sssshhhhh! And if you're the one with the cell phone, turn that damn thing off! It's distracting to the rest of us in this theater!

I had to wait for this movie to come to television, and even then I dvr'd it. I'm caught up now

Scraper · Post by **Scraper** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 1:03 pm

hepcat wrote:I thought you wanted to discuss the gay agenda though?

Enough · Post by **Enough** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 1:04 pm

Rip wrote:
Fireball wrote:Please detail the mountain of facts that indicate that rank and file Iranians hate the United States.

This was the first image I reverse searched and found it has been posted online as far back as 2010 and was then posted as Palestinians. Unless you can source the rest I am going to assume none of them are of Iranians.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 1:43 pm

Defiant wrote:OK, I guess if it's a reference to some other thread, it's less WTF. Still fairly wtf, though.

I intended a couple of things. First, the cartoon was offensive and not funny, but not something I personally had a problem with. Second, it was a reference to Hillary being hated on because...well, I'm never quite sure what the reasons behind her being hated on. Obviously some of it is because she's a woman. I mean, it's obvious because some people say it's because she's a woman. Third, it was just a reach around for the Pics thread in this forum, a call back if you will.

If you find the cartoon offensive (it is, but a lot of political cartoons are) then you can be upset. I know ND is unhappy with it (edit: and I see he comment as such). The intention was a little more complex than repeating an unfunny joke, but not much more.

noxiousdog · Post by **noxiousdog** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 1:52 pm

GreenGoo wrote: If you find the cartoon offensive (it is, but a lot of political cartoons are) then you can be upset. I know ND is unhappy with it (edit: and I see he comment as such). The intention was a little more complex than repeating an unfunny joke, but not much more.

FWIW, as meta humor, it's funny.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:04 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Defiant wrote:OK, I guess if it's a reference to some other thread, it's less WTF. Still fairly wtf, though.
I intended a couple of things. First, the cartoon was offensive and not funny, but not something I personally had a problem with. Second, it was a reference to Hillary being hated on because...well, I'm never quite sure what the reasons behind her being hated on. Obviously some of it is because she's a woman. I mean, it's obvious because some people say it's because she's a woman. Third, it was just a reach around for the Pics thread in this forum, a call back if you will.

If you find the cartoon offensive (it is, but a lot of political cartoons are) then you can be upset. I know ND is unhappy with it (edit: and I see he comment as such). The intention was a little more complex than repeating an unfunny joke, but not much more.

My initial reaction was complete bewilderment, because I wasn't aware of the reference.

But yeah, the picture is offensive. But not in the way political cartoons are. Political cartoons can be offensive or not, but are generally target/are relevant to an issue. The photo was attacking her for being a woman, not for anything she may have said or done.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:15 pm

Defiant wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:
Defiant wrote:OK, I guess if it's a reference to some other thread, it's less WTF. Still fairly wtf, though.
I intended a couple of things. First, the cartoon was offensive and not funny, but not something I personally had a problem with. Second, it was a reference to Hillary being hated on because...well, I'm never quite sure what the reasons behind her being hated on. Obviously some of it is because she's a woman. I mean, it's obvious because some people say it's because she's a woman. Third, it was just a reach around for the Pics thread in this forum, a call back if you will.

If you find the cartoon offensive (it is, but a lot of political cartoons are) then you can be upset. I know ND is unhappy with it (edit: and I see he comment as such). The intention was a little more complex than repeating an unfunny joke, but not much more.
My initial reaction was complete bewilderment, because I wasn't aware of the reference.

But yeah, the picture is offensive. But not in the way political cartoons are. Political cartoons can be offensive or not, but are generally target/are relevant to an issue. The photo was attacking her for being a woman, not for anything she may have said or done.

No it wasn't. It was attacking her for being unattractive and undesirable (because of he well known bitch personality). As well as mocking to some degree the mountains of cash she has gotten from questionable middle eastern sources.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:17 pm

Well, as long as it wasn't being misogynistic then!

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:19 pm

Rip wrote: No it wasn't. It was attacking her for being unattractive and undesirable (because of he well known bitch personality).

Well that's so much more relevant.

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:19 pm

Just trying to catch up to the reactions to the Netanyahu address to Congress, so I read through this thread.

What a mistake.

Why do so many people seem to get off on troll-baiting?

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:19 pm

Meanwhile at the Hall of Doom...

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:22 pm

Kurth wrote:Why do so many people seem to get off on troll-baiting?

I don't think anyone is troll-baiting here. I for one am genuinely interested in trying to understand why anyone would think Netanyahu's address was a good thing. I haven't heard or read anywhere anything that suggests the reasoning isn't anything but partisan in nature and that giving him a venue to speak (and the content therein) is secondary to the disrespect it shows the current President and his administration.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:23 pm

Kurth wrote:
Why do so many people seem to get off on troll-baiting?

For me, it's because Zekester is like a Christmas present from the gods. I will sit and read a good Zekester thread for hours (if there's enough content to warrant that and he doesn't flame out at some point).

For others, I think it's because Zekester is like a Christmas present from the gods.

Zekester · Post by **Zekester** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:23 pm

Some of you are unbelievable. You think youre intelligent, yet are not smart enough to even see your own double-standards and hypocrisy.

As the OP of the stupid pic, it was my political joke pic of a political figure making fun of her personality as it looks from our limited point of view. The fact that it might get a rise out of the Hillary fanboys here was just icing on the cake.

The woman has the demeanor of someone who is sexually frustrated.

There was nothing in my joke pic that is negative towards muslims either, despite your hopes. The muslim naming style and the fact that muslims are a big topic these days was the motivating factor behind including with pic.

All this whole stupid uproar shows is that some of you can dish it out but cant take it. And the fact that you see bashing women and muslims in there whereas I do not, makes you what again? Come on, think hard.

Now can we get back to the original topic?

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:25 pm

Crap...he's flaming out! Someone...appease him, for Christ's sake!

Zekester · Post by **Zekester** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:26 pm

Smoove_B wrote:
Kurth wrote:Why do so many people seem to get off on troll-baiting?
I don't think anyone is troll-baiting here. I for one am genuinely interested in trying to understand why anyone would think Netanyahu's address was a good thing. I haven't heard or read anywhere anything that suggests the reasoning isn't anything but partisan in nature and that giving him a venue to speak (and the content therein) is secondary to the disrespect it shows the current President and his administration.

Why it was a good thing? Uhh, how about maybe an attempt to avert war? or having many people killed by oversight?

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:27 pm

hepcat wrote:
Kurth wrote:
Why do so many people seem to get off on troll-baiting?
For me, it's because Zekester is like a Christmas present from the gods. I will sit and read a good Zekester thread for hours (if there's enough content to warrant that and he doesn't flame out at some point).

For others, I think it's because Zekester is like a Christmas present from the gods.

Guess it's all subjective.

I don't think his crap is funny or remotely entertaining. Just stupid. And sad. And counter-productive.

Zekester · Post by **Zekester** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:29 pm

Kurth wrote:
hepcat wrote:
Kurth wrote:
Why do so many people seem to get off on troll-baiting?
For me, it's because Zekester is like a Christmas present from the gods. I will sit and read a good Zekester thread for hours (if there's enough content to warrant that and he doesn't flame out at some point).

For others, I think it's because Zekester is like a Christmas present from the gods.
Guess it's all subjective.

I don't think his crap is funny or remotely entertaining. Just stupid. And sad. And counter-productive.

well good for you.

you can leave anytime.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:31 pm

Kurth wrote:
hepcat wrote:
Kurth wrote:
Why do so many people seem to get off on troll-baiting?
For me, it's because Zekester is like a Christmas present from the gods. I will sit and read a good Zekester thread for hours (if there's enough content to warrant that and he doesn't flame out at some point).

For others, I think it's because Zekester is like a Christmas present from the gods.
Guess it's all subjective.

I don't think his crap is funny or remotely entertaining. Just stupid. And sad. And counter-productive.

For some, it's a reminder of how far out the fringe can be so that we recognize when we're approaching that extreme.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:35 pm

Zekester wrote:Why it was a good thing? Uhh, how about maybe an attempt to avert war? or having many people killed by oversight?

How does his speech attempt to avert war or having people killed? What exactly was supposed to happen when he was given the ability to address Congress? Why did he specifically need to do so? Was there something preventing him from giving the speech elsewhere? For reference, go read up on The Logan Act. I bring this up not to call anyone a criminal but to point out that if they knew this wasn't a good idea in 1799 why is it suddenly super-terrific? Congress is now an acceptable venue to have the leaders of other nations come and speak to Americans without diplomatic oversight from the President?

Zekester · Post by **Zekester** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:39 pm

Smoove_B wrote:
Zekester wrote:Why it was a good thing? Uhh, how about maybe an attempt to avert war? or having many people killed by oversight?
How does his speech attempt to avert war or having people killed? What exactly was supposed to happen when he was given the ability to address Congress? Why did he specifically need to do so? Was there something preventing him from giving the speech elsewhere? For reference, go read up on The Logan Act. I bring this up not to call anyone a criminal but to point out that if they knew this wasn't a good idea in 1799 why is it suddenly super-terrific?

To bring more attention to it. Politicians are not always the brightest people around, and im sure some actually learned something from the speech. Theres one good thing.

Maybe also to shine the light a little brighter on Iran and keep them from slinking around in the dark and up to no good.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:41 pm

Rip wrote:
hepcat wrote:One of the photos he posted of the Iranian protests was actually from a Japanese whaling demonstration.
Hey I hate those guys too.
You want me to dog up some authentic Iranian pictures? It isn't that hard. I'm just lazy.

Actually, would you mind going back to your mountains of evidence and pulling something out that's not a picture?

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:42 pm

So diplomatic protocol and the Constitution don't matter - the end justifies the means? I'm still not clear on exactly why he needed to speak before Congress. What was stopping him from giving the same speech in Israel and having it broadcast worldwide?

Zekester · Post by **Zekester** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:44 pm

Smoove_B wrote:So diplomatic protocol and the Constitution don't matter - the end justifies the means? I'm still not clear on exactly why he needed to speak before Congress. What was stopping him from giving the same speech in Israel and having it broadcast worldwide?

Wouldn't have had the worlds ear. would you have listened to it had it not been done the way it was?

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:48 pm

This was a campaign stunt first, and an honest attempt to open a dialog over Iran a distant ninth. He acted more like one of the Housewives of Atlanta than he did the head of a sovereign nation.

If he had concerns, he has the UN and numerous other outlets in which to voice them. This was meant as an attempt to ally himself with what he believes to be the dominant party in the United States right now so that he can go home to his political campaign and say, "Hey, I've got major mojo on the political front in the U.S.!". But it was a shortsighted stunt that may bite him in the ass if the Republicans don't put a man in the Oval Office.

I'm hoping Israel rebukes him for this self serving act come election time.

Enough · Post by **Enough** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:51 pm

El Guapo wrote:
Rip wrote:
hepcat wrote:One of the photos he posted of the Iranian protests was actually from a Japanese whaling demonstration.
Hey I hate those guys too.
You want me to dog up some authentic Iranian pictures? It isn't that hard. I'm just lazy.
Actually, would you mind going back to your mountains of evidence and pulling something out that's not a picture?

Here's an interesting study I came across,

Views of the United States, especially the U.S. government, continue to be quite negative. These appear to be related to past and present U.S. policies toward Iran much more than to cultural and religious differences. Nonetheless, large majorities favor making efforts to mitigate the conflicts between Iran and the United States and support a variety of confidence building measures. A slight plurality has a positive view of the American people and people-to-people confidence building measures are viewed even more positively. A majority thinks that it possible for Islam and the West to find common ground.

Edit: And here's how the world feels about Iran:

Of note (though not really surprising), Muslim countries do not hold a monolithic view of Iran, with many in the unfavorable camp.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:52 pm

Zekester wrote:Wouldn't have had the worlds ear. would you have listened to it had it not been done the way it was?

I only know about it because of the ridiculous breach of protocol that occurred, not because he was saying something he thought I should know. Are there situations where Prime Ministers or other heads of state give a public address and aren't surrounded by the press? I'm just having a hard time imaging this:

If Netanyahu announced he was going to give the same address from his office.

Fireball · Post by **Fireball** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:53 pm

Zekester wrote:
Smoove_B wrote:
Kurth wrote:Why do so many people seem to get off on troll-baiting?
I don't think anyone is troll-baiting here. I for one am genuinely interested in trying to understand why anyone would think Netanyahu's address was a good thing. I haven't heard or read anywhere anything that suggests the reasoning isn't anything but partisan in nature and that giving him a venue to speak (and the content therein) is secondary to the disrespect it shows the current President and his administration.
Why it was a good thing? Uhh, how about maybe an attempt to avert war? or having many people killed by oversight?

The course of action supported by Netanyahu makes a war far more likely.

Zekester · Post by **Zekester** » Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:55 pm

Fireball wrote:
Zekester wrote:
Smoove_B wrote:
Kurth wrote:Why do so many people seem to get off on troll-baiting?
I don't think anyone is troll-baiting here. I for one am genuinely interested in trying to understand why anyone would think Netanyahu's address was a good thing. I haven't heard or read anywhere anything that suggests the reasoning isn't anything but partisan in nature and that giving him a venue to speak (and the content therein) is secondary to the disrespect it shows the current President and his administration.
Why it was a good thing? Uhh, how about maybe an attempt to avert war? or having many people killed by oversight?
The course of action supported by Netanyahu makes a war far more likely.

Completely disagree