99.9% of the knuckleheads commenting here negatively about Israel have never read, let alone heard of, books like Andrew Bostom's Legacy of Jihad and Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism. Or From Time Immemorial by Joan Peters. Or a book I just started, A Lethal Obsession by Robert Wistrich. Thing is I'm one of these "hope springs eternal" guys because I keep thinking people are like me who was once about as close to being a card carrying member of the KKK as you can be without actually being one. Until I read some books like Malcolm X. Black Like Me and others. While I was in Jr. High getting jumped by black kids trying to punch and stomp my guts out. The useful idiots limit this "conflict" to simply Muslims against Jews yet its a lot more profound than that:

Supplemental Article “The First and Last Enemy: Jew Hatred in Islam.” by Bostom (Frontpage Magazine archive)
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=28549

People just refuse to acknowledge the Jew-Hatred that is part of a Muslims DNA. Don't believe what those Interfaith frauds tell you. "Moderate" or not; if you don't hate Jews you're not a true Muslim. If you don't believe that please explain the hatred that is like a disease in Gaza. And if you have half a brain you know it's been there LONG before Israel won its Independence.

The Depravity of the Homicide Bomber’s Recruiters (Frontpage Magazine)
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/david-meir-levi/the-depravity-of-the-homicide-bomber%E2%80%99s-recruiters/

Female Homicide Bomber (suicide) You Tube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22XEkJY62VA

Failed Suicide Bomber Hopes for Another Chance to Kill (You Tube)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpXm9hvXroc

Jihad & Terrorism Studies Project September 26, 2002 Special Report No.10 Fiday Sermons in Saudi Mosques: Review and Analysis (MEMRI)
(This is from Saudi Arabia. Same with an article on Islam Sheikh bin Humaid that I read and am submitting below.)
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/736.htm

Islam's Hatred of the Non-Muslim by David Bukay (Middle East Forum)
http://www.meforum.org/3545/islam-hatred-non-muslim

Guest Column: Palestinian TV Teaches Kids The Way to 'Jihad Street' by Abigail R. Esman (Investigative Project)
http://www.investigativeproject.org/4394/guest-column-palestinian-tv-teaches-kids-the-way

Hamas to kids: Shoot all the Jews (Jihad Watch)
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/05/hamas-to-kids-shoot-all-the-jews

Farfour "martyred" by Israelis in final episode (You Tube video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrieBhaGgHM

MEMRI Transcript: Farfour, Hamas' Mickey Mouse Character, Is 'Martyred' in the Final Episode of the "Pioneers of Tomorrow" Children's Show on Hamas Al-Aqsa TV
http://www.memri.org/report/en/print2274.htm

Children as combatants: Motivating children to seek Shahada
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=846

Camp Jihad UN/US Palestine Probaganda and brainwashing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbrafPTe_LQ#at=211

Hamas Summer Camps: Fun, Sun and Guns by Aryeh Savir 7-13-14 (Breaking Israel News)
http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/17721/hamas-summer-camps-fun-sun-guns-photos/#t18RPE7WusjewHqd.97

Michael Coren & David Harris - Palestinian terrorist training camps for kids
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtsZXCLD1Lc

“She's Buried Chest High” (You Tube video)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXdy5Fwwfzg

The "Right of Return" Is Suicide for Israel by Jonathan Schanzer (MEF)
http://www.meforum.org/334/the-right-of-return-is-suicide-for-israel

The History of the Middle East Conflict in 11 Minutes (You Tube)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZY8m0cm1oY

“Letter to the Editor” International Herald Tribune, July 1, 2003 by Giulia Boukhobza (Also in Bostom's “Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism” book: Chapter 68, page 677: "A Libyan Jew Breaks Her Silence 36 yrs after surviving the 67 Tripolitan Pogrom")
Congressional Record
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2003-09-04/pdf/CREC-2003-09-04-pt1-PgE1682-2.pdf#page=1

Congratulations! Your comment on How one black man defeated the KKK with humor and grace has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Basically @RFlagg I see it happening in one of two ways. If Republicans continue to lose elections, especially the white house, if the political fallout from the shutdown is large enough, the Republicans will lose congress as well. Republicans will either: 1) fade into history. or 2) Republicans will whip their low information voters into a frenzy, playing the tyranny card and eventually there *will* be an attempt at an armed revolt, but since it won't have any real popular support, it will fail relatively quickly but it will have the additional effect that Republicans will be blamed for any deaths caused by this revolt and there will be a huge exodus from the GOP and they will be ostracized from American society. They'll still exist of course, but they'll have the same relevance as the KKK, or the people who still think the world is flat and it's just a huge conspiracy.

2016 is going to be an important election, If Dems can still retain the white house for another 8 years, it's going to be another huge blow to the Republicans, especially when their last stated singular goal was to make Obama a 1 term president and failed.

and quite honestly, I'm not sure it will happen like I was sure Obama would get re-elected. Hilary just...shouldn't run IMO, her time is past. Elizabeth Warren would have a good shot at it. But I also think Dems need to find a new voice. Someone who, like Obama, who actually did embrace the internet and social media and used it very much to his advantage.

If you win the internet, you win the vote. They've got to keep the pressure up. Quite honestly, the 2008 and 2012 elections were easy, It was easy to get the left riled up when clueless Sarah Palin or Robot Romney were running. But I suspect the right will eventually learn from their mistake and run someone who actually is semi-relatable

I just think it's very likely Dems will get cocky and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory again. So.....don't get cocky kid.

The KKK became a church after it was refounded by William Simmons in 1915.

And yes, I would, and have, defended their rights to wear whatever absurd shit they want, and call themselves whatever absurd D&D names they want, and vocalize whatever shitty opinions they have.

They are free to swing their fists, but that freedom ends at the tip of another's nose. The same goes for anyone.

If the KKK became a church (which isn't hard to do)

would all of you defend the right to wear the pillowcases for kkk church members, like the Nijab (sp) for a Muslim woman?

If not whats the difference?

(the obvious answers might not be so obvious)


Discuss!!

Wow, you really are the poster child for the low information voter, nothing in your drivel disproves my claims.

Take a look at http://www.270towin.com/

start going back through each of the elections, you'll notice that with very few exceptions, the south is always red.

That is until say...oh...1960. Hrm, I wonder what sort of racial event happened around that time...hrmmmmmm.

From: http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2013/jun/10/stephen-martin/state-sen-stephen-martin-says-democratic-party-cre/

"Martin (Virginia State Sen. Stephen Martin) said the KKK was created by the Democratic Party. He acknowledged he was wrong.

Historians say the KKK consisted of a group of Southern whites after the Civil War who were Democrats. But there’s no evidence the KKK was created by their political party.

It should also be noted that the anti-black Democratic Party of the 1860s and 1870s bears no similarity to the party of today."

Hrm, that's two Republicans now that have admitted they were wrong in regards to claims you also are making.

Do yourself a favor bob, and do some of them book learn'ns You've got a lot of catching up to do if you want to join this century.

You need to learn how to read a story. that is not what it said or implied.

The Republican party can only tale a back seat to Democrats on playing the race card.

Your 2005 article indicates:
"Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman apologized to one of the nation's largest black civil rights groups Thursday, saying Republicans had not done enough to court blacks in the past and had exploited racial strife to court white voters, particularly in the South."

Now where did it say Republican party courted racist for their vote. If that was the case They would have gotten Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson to join the Republican.

As you said "appealing to racists to boost their vote" and exploited racial strife are not the same.

The article went on to say:
"Some Republicans gave up on winning the African-American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization," Mehlman said at the annual convention of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. "I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong."

The root of the Southern Strategy"
"Mehlman's apology to the NAACP at the group's convention in Milwaukee marked the first time a top Republican Party leader has denounced the so-called Southern Strategy employed by Richard Nixon and other Republicans to peel away white voters in what was then the heavily Democratic South. Beginning in the mid-1960s, Republicans encouraged disaffected Southern white voters to vote Republican by blaming pro-civil rights Democrats for racial unrest and other racial problems.



To sum this up: Nixon Blamed Democrats for the racial mess of the mid late 60's in order to pull some white voters to switch from Democrat to Republican in order to gain votes.

And for that you call Republican Raciest??? Don't you really mean Democrats ?

After all Democrats were the south. Democrats kept the plantations. Democrats wanted to keep the salve system in place. Democrats started the KKK to keep blacks and whites from voting Republican.


I am sorry that if for some small amount to years that Republicans used race/ race baiting/ raciest to gain more Republican white votes is it is nothing to what Democrats have done. AT least they did not whip/ chain/ rape/ murder/ or lynch any one to gain or keep their vote.

Its true and YOU know it.

Where's the love. I not hear to say that the Republican are morally superior in today's society.

I'm not implying that the Republicans are in the same groove as Lincoln. But still they freed the slaves , set up black Colleges and the the NAACP.

While the Democrats wiped their slaves, formed the KKK and hindered the civil rights for as long as possible. Democrats are despicable. They promote equal rights only if you view is the same as theirs. They have enslaved the poor for over 50 years, telling them keep voting for us and well keep giving you substandard living. That's not freedom that's enslavement.

All of this and the media of today hails the Democrat party as the greatest party of mankind. What blind sheep.



Even worse if you are a black republican. You are deemed an Uncle Tom by the left. That's the exact opposite of the original meaning.

By far the Republicans are the lessor of 2 evils. Both parties are corrupt beyond any sense of the measure.

Both are so far from the ideals founding fathers and the Constitution.

I don't disagree about the snooping since 2001. As far as the koch brothers and the Tea Party, you don't know what the fuck your talking about.

They just want the Constitution follow or at least print current laws back towards it.

Instead of watching biased Democratic sucking media, go to an actual event .

They are not raciest, or the desire to go back to slavery as the media puts forth. . That's Bullshit. B.W.Y. the slavery shit and the KKK was the Democrat south doing its thing, not Republicans. MLK was Republican.


Today the Republican party is nothing more than a cheap intimation of the Democrat party. They will never win fighting that way. The Tea Party is they way to go.


FYI a little history ... Since you had a public education and hence only learned skewed left leaning revised history...


http://www.humanevents.com/2006/08/16/why-martin-luther-king-was-republican/

"
It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.

It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s.

During the civil rights era of the 1960s, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation. Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman’s issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.

Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act... And after he became President, Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican.

The Democrats were loosing the slavery battle and civil rights were breaking through and JFK/Johnson the

Given the circumstances of that era, it is understandable why Dr. King was a Republican. It was the Republicans who fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860s, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. Republicans also started the NAACP and affirmative action with Republican President Richard Nixon’s 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher) that set the nation’s fist goals and timetables. Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system, affirmative action was begun by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs.

Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans."


Democrats are still in the slavery business. They just use the welfare system to keep the poor poor and use the shallow promise of If you vote Democrat we will keep giving you a little cheese.

The Democrat party has been the most destructive political party to date.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by oritteropo.

I agree with you that Israel has taken away the freedoms of the people in Palestine, however I feel that that freedom was lost by the people because of their continued backing of Hamas and Hamas's continued attacks against Israel.
I think that both parties are at fault to some degree, but I also believe the burden of the blame rests with Hamas and their continued requests for the destruction of Israel. To answer your questions directly:
1b. Do you disagree with any of, "The core Hamas themselves are (generally speaking) just haters like WBC or the KKK and they get support now from the citizens because they're all collectively being severely oppressed by Israel." ?
I agree that Hamas are just hater racists. I believe that they have integrated themselves into the Palestinian people with a hate and blame based marketing campaign that has the Palestinian children learning how to kill Jews in class. This campaign is reinforced by some of the policies of the Israeli government as an unintended consequence. I have consistently seen any positive developments towards peace wind up being corrupted by the outrageous demands of Hamas that they will not settle for anything but the complete elimination of Israel and the refusal to recognize the Israeli state.

"2b. Do you think, if a free Palestinian state were created with the 1946 borders, that Hamas would retain enough support from the people to continue fighting with Israel, which would keep their lives constantly under threat, just as is the case in Israel now? Personally, if the citizens weren't being oppressed, I don't think they would favour killing anybody, and would choose a live-and-let-live policy so they could raise a family in peace and seek success in the world."
Perhaps, but Hamas has stated many times that their goal is not just reverting back to the 1946 borders, but the elimination of Israel. They've ingrained that into the people of Palestine and as we are discussing this I fear that this may be a situation where peace can not be brokered because of the constantly reinforced hatred towards the Jewish people. I pray it doesn't revert to a situation like that of WW2 where entire cities were eliminated in order to get Germany to eventually collapse. (We didn't just do it to the Japanese, although the comparison may be more accurate) Besides reverting back to the 1946 borders isn't really feasible, or justified, but that is a WHOLE different discussion. (There weren't borders in 1946 as all of Palestine was under British control from WW1)

"Can you substantiate that? Celebration alone makes someone a terrorist? And "blight on humankind" doesn't even have meaning. They ARE humankind. They're not an affliction."

I can actually, celebration of an innocents death in my opinion shows a lack of a soul and a lack of sympathy towards other human beings. Celebrating the death of a child is about the most evil thing I can think of, yet Islamic extremists do it on a regular basis. It makes you a monster and puts you outside of humankind. So yes it makes you very much an affliction on humankind. Unfortunately it is very likely a symptom of humankind as well, but like an infection is a symptom of being alive, sometimes it must be abraded and removed completely.
As humans we have to value life and celebrate life, not death. I feel the same way about the KKK or any other organization that divides the human species into groups and has devalued one of those groups to the point where the death of one of them is something to be celebrated. That is hate and it is evil. Evil, real evil, exists in this world and it can be seen in the video above.

Celebrating the death of innocents isn't in and of itself something that makes a person a terrorist, it merely reinforces the fact that Hamas is a terrorist organization.

All this yet I still like to play FPS. Huh...gonna have to dwell on that.

I've interacted with sb a hell of a lot on VS, and he has a habit of avoiding questions. He's also one of maybe three people on the Sift mature enough to actually accept criticism, agree with it, and change. There's a significant chance that he'll agree and answer my questions.

As for your answers, thanks for them. I think you're mostly right in your answers, and where we differ is inconsequential (but I'm assuming you agree that Israel has taken away the freedom of Palestinians in Gaza). There's all sorts of assumptions in my mind that clearly didn't make it to the screen, and I also conflated groups of people that should remain distinct. I think Hamas are probably, at their heart, a group of hateful war-like bigots who have found popular support against a clearly-defined enemy in a fight for freedom. So:

1b. Do you disagree with any of, "The core Hamas themselves are (generally speaking) just haters like WBC or the KKK and they get support now from the citizens because they're all collectively being severely oppressed by Israel." ?

2b. Do you think, if a free Palestinian state were created with the 1946 borders, that Hamas would retain enough support from the people to continue fighting with Israel, which would keep their lives constantly under threat, just as is the case in Israel now? Personally, if the citizens weren't being oppressed, I don't think they would favour killing anybody, and would choose a live-and-let-live policy so they could raise a family in peace and seek success in the world.

3. Point conceded to you and BRM.

4,5. Those were directed only at sb's justification for his position based on a video of a journalist celebrating dead bodies. I don't take great issue with anything you said there, except one place:

celebrating the killing of an innocent makes you a terrorist and a blight on humankind

Can you substantiate that? Celebration alone makes someone a terrorist? And "blight on humankind" doesn't even have meaning. They ARE humankind. They're not an affliction.

Give me a phone and I vote for you. Such low expectation. If I give you 2 phones would you vote for me?

She is so ignorant of her situation that she does not even realize how screwed she is.

Give her a little bit of government cheese and put her up in the projects with murder, rape, drugs everywhere, and she is a loyal democrat voter.

Truly sad. She can do so much better, if she turns her back on government and learns to be self dependent.

Welfare, just another form of slavery, brought to her by the caring,loving KKK founding Democrat party.

Oh Bob. Seriously, you need to improve those reading comprehension skills. My post just went right over your head, didn't it.

>> ^bobknight33:

Republicans are the party of Lincoln. Vodoov, You are correct. For once.
Democrats are the party of KKK.
One party wanted to free the slaves and the other wanted to keep them on the plantation.
Why would a Black man vote Democrat or be Democrat is beyond me.

>> ^VoodooV:
Republicans are fiscally responsible.
Another myth....BUSTED!
Republicans are the party of Lincoln.
Another myth....BUSTED!
Republican have lots of ideas
Another myth....BUSTED!

Republicans are the party of Lincoln. Vodoov, You are correct. For once.
Democrats are the party of KKK.

One party wanted to free the slaves and the other wanted to keep them on the plantation.

Why would a Black man vote Democrat or be Democrat is beyond me.



>> ^VoodooV:

Republicans are fiscally responsible.
Another myth....BUSTED!
Republicans are the party of Lincoln.
Another myth....BUSTED!
Republican have lots of ideas
Another myth....BUSTED!