Trump

[F-ZeroOne]

Just in case anyone has been missing the current Presidents maturity, grace and class:

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/p ... l-assault/

[Mat]

It's either me being thick, or my various privacy / ad blockers preventing me from seeing what video the guy's referring to in the first line of that linked Esquire article, or a combination of both.
Either way, anyone got a link so I can gawp slack-jawed at the latest ignominy thrust upon the USA by Agent Orange?

[Harlequin]

It's either me being thick, or my various privacy / ad blockers preventing me from seeing what video the guy's referring to in the first line of that linked Esquire article, or a combination of both.
Either way, anyone got a link so I can gawp slack-jawed at the latest ignominy thrust upon the USA by Agent Orange?

This?

[zip accident]

The thing about racism that I don't understand is that it only makes sense if the race being supported is inferior, but racists always claim that's not so.

[KlaxonCow]

The thing I don't understand about racism is racism.

[zip accident]

The thing I don't understand about racism is racism.

Well yeah, what is racism?

[Harlequin]

The thing I don't understand about racism is racism.

Well yeah, what is racism?

Is it anything like Brexit?

[F-ZeroOne]

To his credit, Trump has made a plea for how important it is to get measles vaccinations following a number of outbreaks in the US.

We will try to ignore the fact that a couple of years ago he was linking vaccinations with autism and claiming that babies were being injected with the same-size syringes as used for horses and has courted anti-vaccination tropes before.

[PFVA]

The Portuguese cartoonist is being accused of being anti-semitic by Trump because of this cartoon:

Note: I think he shouldn't have placed the keepah on Trump's head because it's a religious symbol. As for the rest: a blind Trump being guided by the PM of Israel it's just a lot of people's opinion about Trump's administration foreign policy and covered under freedom of expression

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... nyahu.html

[KlaxonCow]

I think he shouldn't have placed the keepah on Trump's head because it's a religious symbol.

That, to my mind, is the least troublesome aspect.

Magic hats are not a real thing - be they keepahs, hijabs, a priest's mitre, the monarch's crown or anything else - and blasphemy is a victimless crime.

If only the cartoonist had focused on mocking silly religious ideas - for example, made the point that Yahweh's "promise" of Israel being eternally the property of the Jewish people is null and void, because promises from fictitious magical characters are not legally binding - then that, I feel, is fair game.

To exactly the same degree as any other set of beliefs. Such as, for example, poking fun at people who believe in a flat Earth or the Moon landings were a hoax or that the royal family are secret lizard aliens. I see no-one hesitating to point and laugh at David Icke or Alex Jones proposing the most insane conspiracy theories. Rightly so.

Or, if a socialist comes forward to propose re-nationalising the railways or a free market advocate proposes selling off the NHS to the highest bidder, then we don't consider those sets of beliefs - political beliefs - somehow "sacred" and beyond the realms of all criticism. No, if you don't agree that either of these things is a good idea, then you not only have the right, but also the civic obligation, to protest it and put forward your own counter offer, for consideration in the public sphere of debate.

Indeed, it's so arse backwards that the more out-and-out silly your beliefs then, bizarrely, the more protected and sacrosanct they are from all criticism.

E.g. I think that the tax system should work "bottom up" rather than "top down". You don't pay to central government, who then deems to trickle some of those taxes back for local projects, but that all taxes should be collected by local government for local projects and then, for shared interests, such as a road that goes through two local authority areas, they split the costs. And for nationwide stuff - such as military defence - they all contribute their fair share upwards to central government.

Okay, there you go. That's me proposing a political idea and that's, by default, open to debate. If you disagree, then protest it and tell me why. If you've a better idea then, by all means, put yours out there, so we can examine and debate that one instead.

But now if I propose that a race of magical unicorn aliens came to Earth and dictated to me, personally, their special rules - in their unicorn language, but I could magically comprehend what they were saying because the unicorns have great and powerful magical powers - and I wrote these down on golden tablets, and they propose that after we die, they use their magical "soul sucker" devices to gather up our souls and fly them by space plane to a volcano, where they "implant" these souls into newly born magical unicorn people, and I am the last and final "prophet" of the magical unicorns...

Well, that's utterly ridiculous. Blatantly not true. None of this story works on any level.

Oh, but, wait, it's my religion. I hold these beliefs sacred. It's my firm inner conviction that all of this is true. I wear the magical unicorn hat on Thursdays, the holy day of rest for the unicorn aliens. I've even gone to court and won that special "tax free" status for holding silly unprovable beliefs, so back the fuck off with your questioning of my clearly made-up nonsense!

No, no, no. You believe a magical man in the sky made an eternal real estate deal with his magical "chosen people"?

Sorry, bollocks. Complete and utter bollocks. I rightfully challenge your claim - by all means, show me the magical "title deeds" that this magical man gave you to these lands.

To me, the religious aspects should be perfectly fair game. If a Jew puts on a magical hat to show devotion to a magical fictitious character in an ancient mythology book, then I'm not taking that any more seriously than I would a Trekkie dressing up as a Klingon and speaking the Klingon language to show their devotion to their favourite sci-fi show at a Star Trek fan convention (actually, no, I'd take the Trekkie MORE seriously, because at least they know that Klingons are a work of fiction).

No, that's it. I'm going to get myself a prop "Thor's hammer" and then sue Marvel / Disney for mocking my beliefs in the Norse pantheon. The idea that the scared Mjölnir could ever be destroyed? Blasphemy! Respect my beliefs!!

These ideas are the most silly ones out there. They should be open to criticism - just as any other set of beliefs, including, of course, all of mine as I propose them to you here, as I welcome discussion and debate in the free marketplace of ideas at any and all points - and, the sillier they are, the more deserving of mockery they should be too.

That part of it I'm totally fine with.

What actually worries me with this cartoon is not the religious symbols, but the racist ones. Because the Jewish people are different from most other religions in that their - itself, deeply prejudicially racist (but it's a religion, so everyone gives it a free pass) - rules on marriage does mean that Judaism, the religion, maps to Judaism, the race.

It's the subtext of playing up to "the Protocols of the Elders of Zion" - a proven hoax - that the Jews secretly control the world and all that bollocks. A dangerous bit of bullshit propaganda - as we've so unfortunately seen in the synagogue shootings - peddled by racists, as it seemingly justifies such violent actions to attempt to break the non-existent "secret control" that the Jewish people supposedly have.

(Indeed, I'm minded to think that if the Jews really did sit down and plan "we will secretly take over the world" and they actually succeeded in doing that then, fair play to them, that arguably does demonstrate some superiority on their part. As if a conspiracy for world domination is as easy to pull off - and keep completely below the radar at all times - just because you wrote it down in a "protocol" beforehand. If only that worked. Give us a minute, while I write a "protocol" that says I'll become a billionaire by next week.)

Of course, the idea that there's anything wrong with the Jews in the first place - besides the silly religious beliefs - is itself another silly religious idea that I don't take seriously. The Jews killed Jesus? Well, first of all, surely it was mostly the Romans. Crucifixion was a Roman punishment. It was a Roman court of law, ran by the Roman Pontius Pilate. Second of all, Jesus himself was technically a Jew as well, you blithering idiots.

Third, even if it were all true - which I very severely doubt - then "the sins of the father are visited upon the sons" is a logically invalid doctrine anyway. Some historical Jews did that. We have no idea whether, in the same position, today's Jews would have done the same thing. Today's Jews are no more to blame than, well, if we dug deep enough down into yours or anyone's family tree, then you'd eventually find a murderer (or manslaugtherer) at some point, than you would personally be to blame for some historical murder that some distant ancestor of yours possibly committed.

Our courts of law - our modern sense of justice - prosecutes individuals for their own crimes. We do not prosecute whole racial and religious groups, because you can find one member of these groups who did wrong. Nor prosecute descendants for stuff they personally never did, just because a distant ancestor of theirs might have done it, maybe.

Again, a silly religious idea. It does not hold up and it deserves much mockery and satire to help dislodge this "bad meme" from people's minds as being in any way whatsoever even marginally valid.

Basically, as a humanist, the way I see it is that everyone's a human being. That's first and foremost.

Racism is factually invalid. It has no biological basis. Even if it did, mind you, I'd still be against it anyway, as it's a logical nonsense. Even if you could demonstrate that black people were a different species - which you absolutely cannot do, as that's perfectly provably not true - then I see no justification, based on that, to be any kind of arsehole about it anyway.

Cats and dogs are not human either. But you're still a psychopath if you want to systematically harm them, for no more reason than they're biologically not like you. No, for those who've had their pet cats and dogs pass on, those tears shed for a genuine "member of the family" are no crocodile tears, but genuine grief. Same thing if an adopted child has their foster parents die. The biological "blood" link is not required to make it a genuine relationship.

Racism is not factually correct. Even if it was, then racism would still not be logically correct.

Silly ideas are fair game for criticism and even mockery, I believe. But targeting some arbitrary grouping of people with an encouragement of their unfounded prejudices? Well, that's just bollocks. So stop being so bloody stupid, I say.

Though, for me, "freedom of speech" still holds. You don't censor them. You challenge their stupidities - use your own "freedom of speech" as a "right of reply" to point out why someone's being a total idiot.

(And don't take that too personally, as all of us are total idiots at some point - indeed, please tell me when I'm being a total idiot, as I'd like to know, so I can stop doing it. Which is why we have "freedom of speech", to let others tell us when we're wrong, because that's good for us to know. The kid in the crowd must be allowed to shout "the Emperor is naked!", because the Emperor actually is naked and the person who benefits most from being informed of how he's been rather viciously defrauded is the Emperor himself, right? Let people tell you that you're wrong, because that's the best route towards getting things right. That's why we should defend "freedom of speech", even when we don't like it. In fact, when we don't like what we're hearing is the most important speech to defend being voiced, as we're probably not liking it for the fact that it's rightfully pointing out where we've clearly fucked up.)

[Little stoned kiwi]

Totally different can of worms to open here, but criticism involving the Israeli state is not anti-Semitic.

Also...Donald Trump becomes first sitting US president to pray at Western Wall

[merman]

Trump recognises the Israeli "possession" of the Golan Heights (captured during the Six Days' War).

Israel announces the first grants of drilling & mineral rights in the Golan Heights.

The first license goes to a US firm connected to former vice-president Dick Cheney.

That's how the world works now.


Netanyahu's narrow electoral victory is also the signal for more Jewish settlements in Palestinian areas.
And that will prompt more violence in the Middle East, benefitting American arms exporters.

[skab]

That's how the world works now.

No, that's how it always worked. Think about previous corkers like Nixon or Reagan. Or a while back, Warren G. Harding, who was actually a decent guy with a fatal tendency to nepotism.

Or actually anyone in power. That's how we humans are, bascially naked apes with just as bad manners as a bunch of chimps, only a thin veil of morality and ethics keeping us from cracking each other's skulls.

[Harlequin]

I feel that the U.S. has had a far more special relationship with Israel than with the U.K. for a great many decades now.

[Rubisco]

Totally different can of worms to open here, but criticism involving the Israeli state is not anti-Semitic.

Yes but if there are several houses in your street that have untidy lawns, and you spend more time and energy criticising the untidy lawn that belongs to the Jewish family than you do criticising other lawns, some of which are less tidy, it's a fair question to ask why that is, even if the criticism itself is justified.