Israel Should Consider Assassinating Obama

[lighthorseman]

There would be absolutely no harm done at all to the Germans if they were forced out of the Middle East. They're quite wealthy (average wage 30,000 or so), so they'd easily be able to buy a house in some other country. No harm done.

 

By that logic, there really shouldn't be any problem kicking all non-natives out of Australia.

True. However, Indigenous Australians have full rights as citizens, can live wherever they like, and can claim very limited Native title over some land. White Australia's treatment of our indigenous population remains a travesty, but at least we haven't repeatedly made them homeless in the last 50 years and refused to do anything about it.

Nor do the owners of this land want us to go. That would be a major economic shock to their society.

So you get to stay because they need you. If that's all it takes then just give Israel another 100 years to catch up and create some legitimacy.

They don't need shit. We're not hurting them, so they have no problem with us sticking around. If there were an organised Indigenous group with majority support calling for white Australia to piss off (like, say, Hamas) I'd have no choice but to join them, because that's clearly their right. They haven't exercised that right, because we live peacefully alongside.

It's almost like there's some kind of lesson here for the relics of colonialism.

Thats a... unique...line of reasoning.

[Lt. Fred]

There would be absolutely no harm done at all to the Germans if they were forced out of the Middle East. They're quite wealthy (average wage 30,000 or so), so they'd easily be able to buy a house in some other country. No harm done.

 

By that logic, there really shouldn't be any problem kicking all non-natives out of Australia.

True. However, Indigenous Australians have full rights as citizens, can live wherever they like, and can claim very limited Native title over some land. White Australia's treatment of our indigenous population remains a travesty, but at least we haven't repeatedly made them homeless in the last 50 years and refused to do anything about it.

Nor do the owners of this land want us to go. That would be a major economic shock to their society.

So you get to stay because they need you. If that's all it takes then just give Israel another 100 years to catch up and create some legitimacy.

They don't need shit. We're not hurting them, so they have no problem with us sticking around. If there were an organised Indigenous group with majority support calling for white Australia to piss off (like, say, Hamas) I'd have no choice but to join them, because that's clearly their right. They haven't exercised that right, because we live peacefully alongside.

It's almost like there's some kind of lesson here for the relics of colonialism.

Thats a... unique...line of reasoning.

On what basis do whites in Australia own land? We have no basis.

[lighthorseman]

There would be absolutely no harm done at all to the Germans if they were forced out of the Middle East. They're quite wealthy (average wage 30,000 or so), so they'd easily be able to buy a house in some other country. No harm done.

 

By that logic, there really shouldn't be any problem kicking all non-natives out of Australia.

True. However, Indigenous Australians have full rights as citizens, can live wherever they like, and can claim very limited Native title over some land. White Australia's treatment of our indigenous population remains a travesty, but at least we haven't repeatedly made them homeless in the last 50 years and refused to do anything about it.

Nor do the owners of this land want us to go. That would be a major economic shock to their society.

So you get to stay because they need you. If that's all it takes then just give Israel another 100 years to catch up and create some legitimacy.

They don't need shit. We're not hurting them, so they have no problem with us sticking around. If there were an organised Indigenous group with majority support calling for white Australia to piss off (like, say, Hamas) I'd have no choice but to join them, because that's clearly their right. They haven't exercised that right, because we live peacefully alongside.

It's almost like there's some kind of lesson here for the relics of colonialism.

Thats a... unique...line of reasoning.

On what basis do whites in Australia own land? We have no basis.

Not really looking for a flame war, but IMHO a white Australian born here has precisely the same amount of claim to the country as an aboriginal person born here. I don't believe heritage affects where one is from, if you take my meaning. If you're born in America, you're American, if you're born in Australia, you're an Australian, if you're born in outer Mongolia, you're an outer Mongolian. Regardless of whether your family has been in the country you were born in for 40 minutes or 40,000 years, its still you're country. I don't believe in degrees of citizenship, you're either an Australian or you're not, its a kind of dichotomy.

[Lt. Fred]

I don't believe heritage affects where one is from, if you take my meaning.

A person inherits that property that their parents owned. Clearly, our ancestors did not own this land. By right of discovery and first colonisation, the Indigenous population did. Our claims to fee simple are always based on the alleged right of conquest, a right that does not exist. Therefore, 100% of this land is owned by the descendants of the owners.

[lighthorseman]

I don't believe heritage affects where one is from, if you take my meaning.

A person inherits that property that their parents owned. Clearly, our ancestors did not own this land. By right of discovery and first colonisation, the Indigenous population did. Our claims to fee simple are always based on the alleged right of conquest, a right that does not exist. Therefore, 100% of this land is owned by the descendants of the owners.

So... what of non indiginous people born here?

[DasFuchs]

There would be absolutely no harm done at all to the Germans if they were forced out of the Middle East. They're quite wealthy (average wage 30,000 or so), so they'd easily be able to buy a house in some other country. No harm done.

 

By that logic, there really shouldn't be any problem kicking all non-natives out of Australia.

True. However, Indigenous Australians have full rights as citizens, can live wherever they like, and can claim very limited Native title over some land. White Australia's treatment of our indigenous population remains a travesty, but at least we haven't repeatedly made them homeless in the last 50 years and refused to do anything about it.

Nor do the owners of this land want us to go. That would be a major economic shock to their society.

So you get to stay because they need you. If that's all it takes then just give Israel another 100 years to catch up and create some legitimacy.

They don't need shit. We're not hurting them, so they have no problem with us sticking around. If there were an organised Indigenous group with majority support calling for white Australia to piss off (like, say, Hamas) I'd have no choice but to join them, because that's clearly their right. They haven't exercised that right, because we live peacefully alongside.

It's almost like there's some kind of lesson here for the relics of colonialism.

Honestly, are you pulling an "It's ok when we do it" move?
If you want to force one people to move from a region because they are not the native local population, then that qualifies you too, whether you did your overtaking better or worse.

[N. De Plume]

I don't believe heritage affects where one is from, if you take my meaning.

A person inherits that property that their parents owned.

And that property always goes down the line, oh so broken. Always transferred, and always intact?

I really should hope not. I don’t have enough room for all my stuff plus all my dad’s stuff plus all my granddad’s stuff, plus all my great-granddad’s stuff, plus all my great-great-granddad’s stuff, plus…

Clearly, our ancestors did not own this land. By right of discovery and first colonisation, the Indigenous population did. Our claims to fee simple are always based on the alleged right of conquest, a right that does not exist. Therefore, 100% of this land is owned by the descendants of the owners.

My distant ancestors came from Norway and Germany. I have never been to Norway or Germany. I’ve only ever seen those countries in photographs and film. Hell, I count myself lucky when I can get out of Wisconsin, and I live on a border town!

My mother was born in Michigan. So that’s closer than Norway and Germany. But other than that, my connection to Michigan is no stronger than any place in Europe.

I really don’t see what any of those places have to do with me just because someone I may happen to share a few stray chromosomes with happened to eat and sleep on some farmstead there.

[Canadian Mojo]

Honestly, are you pulling an "It's ok when we do it" move?
If you want to force one people to move from a region because they are not the native local population, then that qualifies you too, whether you did your overtaking better or worse.

It certainly looks like that is what he is saying.

First 'they don't want us to go, it would be a major economic shock' then a little later it's, 'they don't need shit.' Two justifications for not handing Australia back that are in direct conflict with one another.

Keep trying Fred, maybe we can come up with an honorable reason rather than be forced to admit that we won't give the land back to our indigenous peoples because it would be impossible to now since so much has changed. The wars are over, they lost, we shattered their civilizations and built up ours in their place while only allowing them as much re-building as suited our needs and whims. Pandora's box was opened, there is no closing it now.

The difference with Israel is that it's in its infancy and  there is still an opportunity to reverse what is happening. That and the world half-way gives a shit.

[Lt. Fred]

I don't believe heritage affects where one is from, if you take my meaning.

A person inherits that property that their parents owned. Clearly, our ancestors did not own this land. By right of discovery and first colonisation, the Indigenous population did. Our claims to fee simple are always based on the alleged right of conquest, a right that does not exist. Therefore, 100% of this land is owned by the descendants of the owners.

So... what of non indiginous people born here?

We're squatters. If the owners tell us to bugger off, off we shall bugger.

I don't believe heritage affects where one is from, if you take my meaning.

A person inherits that property that their parents owned.

And that property always goes down the line, oh so broken. Always transferred, and always intact?

I really should hope not. I don’t have enough room for all my stuff plus all my dad’s stuff plus all my granddad’s stuff, plus all my great-granddad’s stuff, plus all my great-great-granddad’s stuff, plus…

Yeah. That's not controversial at all. You inherit. It happens. It's a thing. I don't remotely understand your complaint here at all. Are you arguing that inheritance isn't real?

I really don’t see what any of those places have to do with me just because someone I may happen to share a few stray chromosomes with happened to eat and sleep on some farmstead there.

If you've got a better system than inheritance, please do tell the government. Maybe they can replace a thousands year old system because you haven't been to Norway.

[Jack Mann]

Of course, one problem is that he hasn't any right to live in Norway, either.

[Lt. Fred]

First 'they don't want us to go, it would be a major economic shock' then a little later it's, 'they don't need shit.' Two justifications for not handing Australia back that are in direct conflict with one another.

Nonsense. The claim that indigenous Australians 'need' White Australia implies some kind of welfare function, a function that does not exist. In the long run, they would be happily living without white society. However, it would cause temporary dislocation, a pain in the arse.

we won't give the land back to our indigenous peoples because it would be impossible to now since so much has changed.

Because they don't want us to go, because we don't abuse them like the IDF.

The wars are over, they lost, we shattered their civilizations and built up ours in their place while only allowing them as much re-building as suited our needs and whims.

Not a legitimate claim.

[DasFuchs]

Because they don't want us to go, because we don't abuse them like the IDF.

I suppose that boils down to who you ask as well. There's natives everywhere that want people gone, don't care, or want them to stay. Stop applying double standards

[Canadian Mojo]

Of course, one problem is that he hasn't any right to live in Norway, either.

Another problem is that the number of Norwegians and their descendant living abroad probably far exceeds the carrying capacity of Norwegian society to maintain. Send 'em all home and watch the country implode.

Then there's that whole problem of most countries recognize some form of squatters rights...

[Canadian Mojo]

The wars are over, they lost, we shattered their civilizations and built up ours in their place while only allowing them as much re-building as suited our needs and whims.

Not a legitimate claim.

Sure it is, it would

cause temporary dislocation, a pain in the arse.

[N. De Plume]

I really should hope not. I don’t have enough room for all my stuff plus all my dad’s stuff plus all my granddad’s stuff, plus all my great-granddad’s stuff, plus all my great-great-granddad’s stuff, plus…

Yeah. That's not controversial at all. You inherit. It happens. It's a thing. I don't remotely understand your complaint here at all. Are you arguing that inheritance isn't real?
[/quote]
Well, if I inherit everything that has ever been in my family, I should probably have a few deeds for some farmsteads near the fjords is all I am saying.