...and Democratic?

[Phoenall]

Ethnocracy, simple as...

Wow, that's the most stupid thing I ever read. Again, you and Challenger stick to your little bubble and miss the fact that Jewish parties were also kicked out of the Knesset, for much less than Balad is blamed for.

The most stupid thing I have ever read is... "Can you just leave the freedom of speech thing alone for a minute"

You need to get a grip on yourself and join the rest of the civilized world dear.

And you need to start learning what freedom of speech means before spouting your crap. In this case freedom of speech does not apply as the boundaries have already been breached.

Oh Phoney, thats EXACTLY what free speech is!

There ARE no boundaries!

Silly person...

Only to an ISLAMONAZI, who then place boundaries on what can be said about islam and muslims. There has to be boundaries or we would not have libel and slander laws, that is one set of boundaries. There are others regarding religious and racial matters as well as threats and intimidation. Try looking it up and get the biggest shock of your life

 

[Phoenall]

...Oh Phoney, thats EXACTLY what free speech is! There ARE no boundaries! Silly person...

There are no boundaries to Free Speech, as the term is used to denote a Constitutional Right?

Think again.

A constitutional right?

A human right!

It could be a GOD GIVEN right it does not alter the boundaries inherent in free speech. You cant for example claim that your neighbours wife sold sex to the local football team and that her children are not her husbands without proof. Nor can you say that you have a bomb on an airplane, that is outside the boundaries of free speech.

 

[Humanity]

Ethnocracy, simple as...

Wow, that's the most stupid thing I ever read. Again, you and Challenger stick to your little bubble and miss the fact that Jewish parties were also kicked out of the Knesset, for much less than Balad is blamed for.

The most stupid thing I have ever read is... "Can you just leave the freedom of speech thing alone for a minute"

You need to get a grip on yourself and join the rest of the civilized world dear.

And you need to start learning what freedom of speech means before spouting your crap. In this case freedom of speech does not apply as the boundaries have already been breached.

Oh Phoney, thats EXACTLY what free speech is!

There ARE no boundaries!

Silly person...

Only to an ISLAMONAZI, who then place boundaries on what can be said about islam and muslims. There has to be boundaries or we would not have libel and slander laws, that is one set of boundaries. There are others regarding religious and racial matters as well as threats and intimidation. Try looking it up and get the biggest shock of your life

Get a grip Phoney...

When a state places restrictions of free speech on it's people through constitution that is just wrong...

There are 'perceived' boundaries, one's own moral boundaries....

There are also 'criminal' boundaries, one's constitute libel, slander etc etc...

Three very different things!

 

[Phoenall]

Here is the definitive of free speech

Freedom of speech in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by many state constitutions and state and federal laws. The freedom of speech is not absolute; the Supreme Court of the United States has recognized several categories of speech that are excluded from the freedom, and it has recognized that governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech.

 

[Humanity]

...Oh Phoney, thats EXACTLY what free speech is! There ARE no boundaries! Silly person...

There are no boundaries to Free Speech, as the term is used to denote a Constitutional Right?

Think again.

A constitutional right?

A human right!

It could be a GOD GIVEN right it does not alter the boundaries inherent in free speech. You cant for example claim that your neighbours wife sold sex to the local football team and that her children are not her husbands without proof. Nor can you say that you have a bomb on an airplane, that is outside the boundaries of free speech.

Oh oh, careful on the "GOD GIVEN" thing here Phoney ;-)

And yes, I can say what the hell I like... With or without "proof"... However, I would also have to accept any consequences of false allegations or claims.

Like a great many people do every day... You not heard of the word gossip?

 

[Humanity]

Here is the definitive of free speech

Freedom of speech in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by many state constitutions and state and federal laws. The freedom of speech is not absolute; the Supreme Court of the United States has recognized several categories of speech that are excluded from the freedom, and it has recognized that governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech.

Keep up Phoney...

We did the First Amendment days ago

 

[Beelzebub]

Oh oh, careful on the "GOD GIVEN" thing here Phoney ;-)

And yes, I can say what the hell I like... With or without "proof"... However, I would also have to accept any consequences of false allegations or claims.

Like a great many people do every day... You not heard of the word gossip?

Quite so. And the consequences are more often than not just state imposed punishment for disobedience of a control freakish state. Rather than natural consequences, such as the subject of gossip punching you on the nose.

 

[toastman]

You need to consider a longer historical perspective than that Toasty.

But if you prefer to be so limited:
Sudan, which became two states.

A wider time scale would see that European State sovereignty has been significantly surrendered to the EU, such that Europe dismissed the Greek government and put a group of technocrats in charge.
Communist Russia / The USSR which was a federated state dissolved not so long back.
You may have heard of Nazi Germany, which was dissolved, and its territory divided between conquering powers and two new states. The DDR being one of them. Which also no longer exists. West Germany might be argued to have been transformed both politically and geographically, such that it is an expanded state - Or a completely different state.

Korea was divided by war and became two new states, ending the state which was Korea.

The UK - a sovereign state - could have been destroyed by Scottish independence. It wasn't but it was closer than many expected.

Going back to antiquity, neither Carthage nor Rome exist now. Nor do the City States of Greece. Nor does the nation of Hebrew people.

Japan lost home rule, massive territory, autonomy and had its culture transformed by outside forces. Is that end of one state and the start of another with a similar name? Quite possibly.

In fact, no modern country has remain unchanged over the last 100 years such that it has the same regime, people, culture, outlook, ethos and politics. While a state tries to protect what it is, "what it is" is revolutionised continuously. So what would be treachery or crime 50 years ago is expected and normal now.

States trying to control their people and limit their freedoms are like the Oceans claiming domination over their water particles. They are not controlling them, they are just drawing imaginary lines and saying that they have power to keep people from crossing them. When the people decide to do something different, it is the state which is transformed. Whether a completely transformed state is the same as the last one could be discussed endlessly.

Chew over The Austrian Empire vs modern Germany if you feel inclined.

Great Job Beezle. You managed to post all of this without answering my question.

Does your mother feel ashamed of you Toasty? Poor woman.

I give you one more chance. Try the second paragraph.
You are welcome.

Reported for bringing up family.

But even after ALL this, you still haven't show me an example of a country being eliminated in the last 20 years. I guess after you realized you failed at answering my original post, you decided that the best way to take the attention off the embarrassment was to resort to bringing up my deceased mother.

 

[Beelzebub]

You need to consider a longer historical perspective than that Toasty.

But if you prefer to be so limited:
Sudan, which became two states.

A wider time scale would see that European State sovereignty has been significantly surrendered to the EU, such that Europe dismissed the Greek government and put a group of technocrats in charge.
Communist Russia / The USSR which was a federated state dissolved not so long back.
You may have heard of Nazi Germany, which was dissolved, and its territory divided between conquering powers and two new states. The DDR being one of them. Which also no longer exists. West Germany might be argued to have been transformed both politically and geographically, such that it is an expanded state - Or a completely different state.

Korea was divided by war and became two new states, ending the state which was Korea.

The UK - a sovereign state - could have been destroyed by Scottish independence. It wasn't but it was closer than many expected.

Going back to antiquity, neither Carthage nor Rome exist now. Nor do the City States of Greece. Nor does the nation of Hebrew people.

Japan lost home rule, massive territory, autonomy and had its culture transformed by outside forces. Is that end of one state and the start of another with a similar name? Quite possibly.

In fact, no modern country has remain unchanged over the last 100 years such that it has the same regime, people, culture, outlook, ethos and politics. While a state tries to protect what it is, "what it is" is revolutionised continuously. So what would be treachery or crime 50 years ago is expected and normal now.

States trying to control their people and limit their freedoms are like the Oceans claiming domination over their water particles. They are not controlling them, they are just drawing imaginary lines and saying that they have power to keep people from crossing them. When the people decide to do something different, it is the state which is transformed. Whether a completely transformed state is the same as the last one could be discussed endlessly.

Chew over The Austrian Empire vs modern Germany if you feel inclined.

Great Job Beezle. You managed to post all of this without answering my question.

Does your mother feel ashamed of you Toasty? Poor woman.

I give you one more chance. Try the second paragraph.
You are welcome.

Reported for bringing up family.

But even after ALL this, you still haven't show me an example of a country being exterminated in the last 20 years. I guess after you realized you failed at answering my original post, you decided that the best way to take the attention off the embarrassment was to resort to bringing up my deceased mother.

Hahaha!

You poor pathetic sop Toasty.

 

[toastman]

Laughing at me for scalding you over bringing up my deceased mother.

Well, I always knew you were scum, so I'm not surprised.

 

[Kondor3]

...Safety does not mean making other people unsafe. That is a fallacious argument...

Nonsense. That's one of the most naive remarks I've seem you serve-up yet. One (a person, or a state) does no harm, when practicable, but, when a state is faced with having to protect one's own at the expense of others, the 'others' almost always lose the coin toss. You know that just as well as I do.

...If Israel was interested in the safety of "its people" then it would fix agree borders (1967)...

Oh, it's interested in the safety of its people alright, and it will fix its borders, it's just that the Final Borders will not be the ones that you (and some considerable portion of the rest of the world) want them to accept.

...and make peace, and receive the backing of most of the world, in doing so...

When Israel has the Final Borders that it wants, there will, indeed, be peace, and most of the rest of the world will accept the fait accompli.

On the road to that goal, however, it will continue to have to accept the brickbats of most of that same audience - folks that care little for the defensible or indefensible nature of those borders nor for the sacred nature of Jerusalem in the Jewish mind.

...While a war monger, Israel will have an endless queue of enemies...

If Israel was a war-monger, it would be continually attacking Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt, rather than merely hammering on Hamas, Fatah and Hezbollah from time to time, when those idiots poke the bear once too often with a stick.

As to an endless queue of enemies - other than the pissants of Hezbollah - recently re-armed and better-trained by the Iranians - and other than ISIS-ISIL-IS, which The West has begun to commit to destroying in-place - there is no other credible force even remotely positioned or prepared to challenge the Israelis - and the Israeli land-squeeze will not last more than another decade or two, before they have completed their Reconquista - so it seems unlikely that, once completed, the Israelis will be challenged again seriously.

...If it made peace the whole world would back its security. Even me.

The guarantees of the whole world, related to Israeli security, are - and would be - absolutely worthless - useful only as toilet paper.

The Jews have heard that before - time and again in the past century - and - intelligently - don't believe a word of it.

They've also indulged in Land-for-Peace deals on multiple occasions in the past, which never work out - oh, sure, there's peace and quiet for a few months or years, but then the whole cycle of demands upon Israel begin all over again - requiring that Israel give up more and more and more and more over time. Well, the Jews finally wised-up and no longer believe that horseshit - even when it's served up with delusional best-of-intentions. Good for them.

 

[Phoenall]

...Oh Phoney, thats EXACTLY what free speech is! There ARE no boundaries! Silly person...

There are no boundaries to Free Speech, as the term is used to denote a Constitutional Right?

Think again.

A constitutional right?

A human right!

It could be a GOD GIVEN right it does not alter the boundaries inherent in free speech. You cant for example claim that your neighbours wife sold sex to the local football team and that her children are not her husbands without proof. Nor can you say that you have a bomb on an airplane, that is outside the boundaries of free speech.

Oh oh, careful on the "GOD GIVEN" thing here Phoney ;-)

And yes, I can say what the hell I like... With or without "proof"... However, I would also have to accept any consequences of false allegations or claims.

Like a great many people do every day... You not heard of the word gossip?

And if you bothered to read the link I gave it tells how free speech is not as all encompassing as you believe. Here it is again for you so you can see that your version of freedom of speech is different to the LEGAL VERSION

The freedom of speech is not absolute; the Supreme Court of the United States has recognized several categories of speech that are excluded from the freedom, and it has recognized that governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech.

 

[Phoenall]

Here is the definitive of free speech

Freedom of speech in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by many state constitutions and state and federal laws. The freedom of speech is not absolute; the Supreme Court of the United States has recognized several categories of speech that are excluded from the freedom, and it has recognized that governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech.

Keep up Phoney...

We did the First Amendment days ago

And it seems that you do not know what it entails, and it takes a foreigner to explain to you that it does not cover all bases.

 

[Phoenall]

Oh oh, careful on the "GOD GIVEN" thing here Phoney ;-)

And yes, I can say what the hell I like... With or without "proof"... However, I would also have to accept any consequences of false allegations or claims.

Like a great many people do every day... You not heard of the word gossip?

Quite so. And the consequences are more often than not just state imposed punishment for disobedience of a control freakish state. Rather than natural consequences, such as the subject of gossip punching you on the nose.

Which when taken in context with freedom of speech will result in the assailant getting away on the grounds of provocation

 

[Beelzebub]

...Safety does not mean making other people unsafe. That is a fallacious argument...

Nonsense. That's one of the most naive remarks I've seem you serve-up yet. One (a person, or a state) does no harm, when practicable, but, when a state is faced with having to protect one's own at the expense of others, the 'others' almost always lose the coin toss. You know that just as well as I do.

...If Israel was interested in the safety of "its people" then it would fix agree borders (1967)...

Oh, it's interested in the safety of its people alright, and it will fix its borders, it's just that the Final Borders will not be the ones that you (and some considerable portion of the rest of the world) want them to accept.

...and make peace, and receive the backing of most of the world, in doing so...

When Israel has the Final Borders that it wants, there will, indeed, be peace, and most of the rest of the world will accept the fait accompli.

On the road to that goal, however, it will continue to have to accept the brickbats of most of that same audience - folks that care little for the defensible or indefensible nature of those borders nor for the sacred nature of Jerusalem in the Jewish mind.

...While a war monger, Israel will have an endless queue of enemies...

If Israel was a war-monger, it would be continually attacking Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt, rather than merely hammering on Hamas, Fatah and Hezbollah from time to time, when those idiots poke the bear once too often with a stick.

As to an endless queue of enemies - other than the pissants of Hezbollah - recently re-armed and better-trained by the Iranians - and other than ISIS-ISIL-IS, which The West has begun to commit to destroying in-place - there is no other credible force even remotely positioned or prepared to challenge the Israelis - and the Israeli land-squeeze will not last more than another decade or two, before they have completed their Reconquista - so it seems unlikely that, once completed, the Israelis will be challenged again seriously.

...If it made peace the whole world would back its security. Even me.

The guarantees of the whole world, related to Israeli security, are - and would be - absolutely worthless - useful only as toilet paper.

The Jews have heard that before - time and again in the past century - and - intelligently - don't believe a word of it.

They've also indulged in Land-for-Peace deals on multiple occasions in the past, which never work out - oh, sure, there's peace and quiet for a few months or years, but then the whole cycle of demands upon Israel begin all over again - requiring that Israel give up more and more and more and more over time. Well, the Jews finally wised-up and no longer believe that horseshit - even when it's served up with delusional best-of-intentions. Good for them.

You went to a lot of wordage to serve up your bollocks there Kondom.

When Jews wised up they started speaking out about Israel and its criminal warfaring on everyone in the neighbourhood. And they will not stop. Nor will the rest of us. Israel is doomed, and even if, as in your scenario, it ever won it would be a world pariah, and no person on conscience would have anything to do with it.

It don't matter how much you spend on killing. You cannot stand against the world.

 

[toastman]

...Safety does not mean making other people unsafe. That is a fallacious argument...

Nonsense. That's one of the most naive remarks I've seem you serve-up yet. One (a person, or a state) does no harm, when practicable, but, when a state is faced with having to protect one's own at the expense of others, the 'others' almost always lose the coin toss. You know that just as well as I do.

...If Israel was interested in the safety of "its people" then it would fix agree borders (1967)...

Oh, it's interested in the safety of its people alright, and it will fix its borders, it's just that the Final Borders will not be the ones that you (and some considerable portion of the rest of the world) want them to accept.

...and make peace, and receive the backing of most of the world, in doing so...

When Israel has the Final Borders that it wants, there will, indeed, be peace, and most of the rest of the world will accept the fait accompli.

On the road to that goal, however, it will continue to have to accept the brickbats of most of that same audience - folks that care little for the defensible or indefensible nature of those borders nor for the sacred nature of Jerusalem in the Jewish mind.

...While a war monger, Israel will have an endless queue of enemies...

If Israel was a war-monger, it would be continually attacking Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt, rather than merely hammering on Hamas, Fatah and Hezbollah from time to time, when those idiots poke the bear once too often with a stick.

As to an endless queue of enemies - other than the pissants of Hezbollah - recently re-armed and better-trained by the Iranians - and other than ISIS-ISIL-IS, which The West has begun to commit to destroying in-place - there is no other credible force even remotely positioned or prepared to challenge the Israelis - and the Israeli land-squeeze will not last more than another decade or two, before they have completed their Reconquista - so it seems unlikely that, once completed, the Israelis will be challenged again seriously.

...If it made peace the whole world would back its security. Even me.

The guarantees of the whole world, related to Israeli security, are - and would be - absolutely worthless - useful only as toilet paper.

The Jews have heard that before - time and again in the past century - and - intelligently - don't believe a word of it.

They've also indulged in Land-for-Peace deals on multiple occasions in the past, which never work out - oh, sure, there's peace and quiet for a few months or years, but then the whole cycle of demands upon Israel begin all over again - requiring that Israel give up more and more and more and more over time. Well, the Jews finally wised-up and no longer believe that horseshit - even when it's served up with delusional best-of-intentions. Good for them.

You went to a lot of wordage to serve up your bollocks there Kondom.

When Jews wised up they started speaking out about Israel and its criminal warfaring on everyone in the neighbourhood. And they will not stop. Nor will the rest of us. Israel is doomed, and even if, as in your scenario, it ever won it would be a world pariah, and no person on conscience would have anything to do with it.

It don't matter how much you spend on killing. You cannot stand against the world.

Ya, Israel is so doomed that ..oh wait.

After 70 year of hearing "this will happen to Israel" and "that will happen to Israel", it tops losing meaning.

How about you let u know when any of that ACTUALLY happens to Israel. Because in case you haven't notice Weezle, none of Israels' enemies predictions have come true yet.
Must suck to be you

 

[Beelzebub]

Grief! I've made the mistake of passing comment with a school kid again!

Toastman - please would you change your nic to Toastboy or add your age to your profile, just to remind me that I am talking with a juvenile.

Thanks.

 

[Kondor3]

...You went to a lot of wordage to serve up your bollocks there Kondom...

Ahhhhh, yet another Militant Muslim apologist and propagandist who decided to begin using denigrating references and name-play in our exchanges.

So be it... your choice... I felt no such compulsion, but, what the hell... OK, pissant.

I also see that the verbiage (a) was wasted on you but (b) not wasted on the audience and (c) left largely intact.

...When Jews wised up they started speaking out about Israel and its criminal warfaring on everyone in the neighbourhood. And they will not stop. Nor will the rest of us...

Only the weaklings, the ones who are afraid to stand resolutely as their grandparents, fathers, and mothers and siblings have done, and the ones who started strong but lost their nerve, the ones whom Israel is better off without, anyway.

There are Benedict Arnolds and Vidkun Quislings and Pierre Lavals and Phillippe Petains in every generation, not to mention the Neville Chamberlains, as well as sincere, well-intentioned souls and peace-niks, who would be the first ones fed into the sausage grinder of the Muslims, should they ever overrun Israel.

...Israel is doomed...

Hardly, but, please - stop it - you're scarin' the dogs in the back yard.

...and even if, as in your scenario, it ever won it would be a world pariah...

Israel will, indeed, win - it will complete its Reconquista in the very near future - and it may, indeed, become a pariah, for a few years, subtly supported behind the scenes by a few of its true friends, but that will be very temporary, in the grand scheme of things.

Israel, as a polity and as a people, complete and restored to their full extent, and at rest and at peace behind permanent and defensible borders, is far too modern and West-friendly and innovative and important to research and development and to world commerce, to be sidelined for more than a brief reactionary period, at the conclusion of the Reconquista.

...and no person on conscience would have anything to do with it...

This is also extremely naive and short-sighted.

Money talks, and bullshit walks.

...It don't matter how much you spend on killing. You cannot stand against the world.

Your childish insistence that it is a matter of 'standing against the world'; is naive, charming and delightful.

The truth is that most of the rest of the world - beyond the domains of Islam, anyway, and not even all of that - really don't give a rat's ass about the Palestinians, and will not inconvenience themselves overly much, in pursuit of Israel, when the Palestinians bring nothing to the table, and when Israel brings so much, in the long run.

But, do keep trying to convince people that Israel is doomed - Lord Haw-Haw and Tokyo Rose played that game for years, too, in a different context and setting - not that it did them - or their masters - any good, when all was said and done, and the smoke cleared, and the Real World asserted itself, in the End-Game.

Do keep trying.

Allah loves try-ers, too.

 

[toastman]

Grief! I've made the mistake of passing comment with a school kid again!

Toastman - please would you change your nic to Toastboy or add your age to your profile, just to remind me that I am talking with a juvenile.

Thanks.

Weezle resorting to personal attacks instead of responding to what I said.

Maybe you can answer this. Why is it that whenever I dismantle your "logic", you resort to personal attacks? If you can't handle being wrong all the time, maybe you should go post in another forum. It just seems like everything I prove you wrong, you can;t come up with a proper rebuttal. I would love to hear your answer as to why that is ?

 

[toastman]

Grief! I've made the mistake of passing comment with a school kid again!

Toastman - please would you change your nic to Toastboy or add your age to your profile, just to remind me that I am talking with a juvenile.

Thanks.

BTW, a juvenile is someone who laugh's at another person for scalding them over bringing up their deceased mother just like you did