lol @ oikophobic liberals angry at free market dynamics

12/14/2011 10:23:23 AM

^^^
Not at all equivalent.

[Edited on December 14, 2011 at 10:25 AM. Reason : .]

12/14/2011 10:24:45 AM

When did purchasing advertising space on a TV networking become "donating money"?

12/14/2011 10:57:53 AM

^^ At least as equivalent as your question.

12/14/2011 1:28:01 PM

Here's the problem with what Lowes did. I'm not under any illusion that Lowes either cares about or hates Muslims, and when they pulled the ads they did it as a business decision.

But as a business decison it was TERRIBLE.

They agreed to advertise on that show in the first place because they believed it would increase business. Many other corporations did the same. Instead of doing what all these other corporations did and ignoring some random hate group nobody outside of the Florida Tea Party has heard of, they pulled their ads from the show (a show they had previously determined was worth advertising on).

Who are these other corporations? I have no idea, you have no idea, only Lowes is facing any media/public backlash.

12/14/2011 1:40:13 PM

How do you know the CEO of Lowes didn't watch the show and realize how preachy and full of bullshit it was and decide he didn't want to be associated with such oikophobic garbage?

12/14/2011 2:05:07 PM

Portraying normal American Muslims as being normal, American, and Muslim is oikophobic now?

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but Muslims make up 7 million, or about 2.2% of the US population. How many of them do you think are terrorists?

12/14/2011 3:43:21 PM

I am terrified of oikos too.

12/14/2011 3:44:30 PM

^^^^
No, they most likely advertised on a block, then decided to pull this show rather than face constant harassment from idiot far-right wingers. They already give back a TON to the community, including to minority groups, so it's just ridiculous to be upset over such a small thing.

[Edited on December 14, 2011 at 3:53 PM. Reason : .]

12/14/2011 3:52:27 PM

Quote :

""

too bad there is no such place as "palestine." The place, as a country, never existed. Thus, to say "palestinian land" is specifically absurd.

Quote :

"They agreed to advertise on that show in the first place because they believed it would increase business."

but, they didn't agree to advertise on that show. They had blanket advertising for the network. there's a difference.

12/14/2011 9:40:19 PM

^There was a country called Palestine before the modern Israeli nation that was formed after WWI. Where you are correct, though, is that it was NOTHING like what that graph is portraying. 'Palestine' was set up by the British government after the fall of the Ottoman Empire for the sole purpose of allowing Zionists to move back to 'the Holy Land'.

So... there never was a Palestinian Nation in the modern sense of the word. In that respect, the phrase uttered by a famous/infamous GOP presidential candidate that the Palestinians are an 'invented people' is actually pretty spot on. As nationals, the idea of 'Palestinians' is totally an invented thing, with respect to the modern world.

12/15/2011 8:50:40 AM

By that logic, Israelis are an invented people too

All nationals are invented, not sure what distinction you're trying to make. Whether the Palestinians recently got that name or not is irrelevant, what's important is that they lived on that land and the British colonizers gave the Zionists something they had no business giving away. We shoulda given em a patch of land in Utah.

[Edited on December 15, 2011 at 10:03 AM. Reason : .]

12/15/2011 10:00:06 AM

It's just weird and slightly fascinating (in a disturbing way), to watch the rise of anti-semitic attitudes occuring in american society. I remember reading about the kind of shit that happened in Europe and America back in the early 20th century when I was in high school and wondering how stuff like that could gain traction. It's just interesting to see history repeat itself.

12/15/2011 1:59:46 PM

Ah yes a discussion about Israel wouldn't be complete without someone conflating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.

Unless when you say anti-Semitism you're including against Palestinians and other Muslim Arabs, then yes I agree that it's been on the rise for awhile now.

[Edited on December 15, 2011 at 2:08 PM. Reason : .]

12/15/2011 2:06:09 PM

^^^No, the Israelis would have been an invented people prior to 1917. IIRC, the phrase "invented people" was suppose to refer to the "nation of Islamic Palestine" that some refer to in the media and in the debate over whether to recognize a Palestinian nation, but it technically doesn't really exist.... hense it is invented. That would mean the United States would have been invented if someone in Great Britian had a similar conversation about "the nation of the colonies" back in 1774.

12/15/2011 3:45:37 PM

Quote :

" His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

Ohhh if he only knew...

12/15/2011 3:57:22 PM

ITT, people who claim that they are not anti-semites question Israel's right to exist.

12/15/2011 4:28:29 PM

you can't deny that the creation of the modern country of Israel was, on the whole, a bad freakin idea and quite immoral

12/15/2011 4:30:39 PM

^^ As a libertarian, I question every political associations right to exist.

People have rights. Not these intangible imaginary objects we call states.

12/15/2011 4:42:27 PM

ITT, I have learned that the sovereign nation of Israel is merely a "political association"

"GUYS GUYS ITS ANTI-ZIONISM!!"


I love how the people who are "anti-zionists" are slinging around "hate group" accusations...

[Edited on December 15, 2011 at 4:45 PM. Reason : ]

12/15/2011 4:44:02 PM