Yeah fuck that

Funny thing: they did so in exchange for other countries recognizing their annexation of the Western Sahara. Their own little Palestine

But how can I do the B if I cannot do the A

Yeah it’llbe interesting to find out who these lawmakers are that need more than money

my family’s political group chat

My head canon for sea-based Kaiju is they have a sack

That’s all the explanation I need

VR racing sim

I just luvved how Cassidy decided time was up and turned against the party whenever I reached the NCR. Had to keep the ol’ fella away from there

And the bugs

And what if it’s the trunk of his car?

Which better relates to the case in the OP, as the lack of a search warrant was never the question here:

Payne conceded that “the use of biometrics to open an electronic device is akin to providing a physical key to a safe” but argued it is still a testimonial act because it “simultaneously confirm[s] ownership and authentication of its contents,” the court said. “However, Payne was never compelled to acknowledge the existence of any incriminating information. He merely had to provide access to a source of potential information.”

If the popo suspect you killed your wife and find you sitting on top of a chest freezer refusing to come off, should they be allowed to force you?

It’s the final phase of parenting

You’ll probably be burnt out of all your ambitions by your 30’s

Well, if you want me to prove that some ultra-zionists chased a Palestinian family of their land in the West-Bank today because the latter had genocided them there yesterday, I agree that that is not the case.

But I hope to make you understand that this is still all part of a larger religious conflict. This isn’t something that suddenly started in 1947. Your claim that they were all living happily together until the 1940’s is too broad, and quite wrong.

There are plenty of examples of how jews were discriminated against, small and large, ancient and recent. I agree that in the relatively sparsely populated Palestininan territories themselves, there wasn’t very much enmity. And that was probably one of the reasons the zionist movement chose it.

The first large waves of immigrants came from Russia and Eastern Europe because of the genocidal religious discrimination they faced there. Later those who experienced the same under catholic and islamic majorities, with the nazis taking the crown, followed suit.

And it’s not like the local muslim population welcomed this stream of immigrants. They themselves were expecting to come out of the Ottoman empire, and later Mandatory Palestine, with an islamic Arab state (where they would remain first class citizens). This led to the first larger clashes following WW1 resulting in both sides polarizing and militarizing, and the creation of Haganah and Irgun. And they’re still fighting the same fight today. Was it ‘wrong’ for all those jews to migrate there? Perhaps. Was it ‘wrong’ for the local muslims not to welcome them? Perhaps. But the history isn’t as one sided as you describe it.

You’re conflating and misrepresenting two of the examples I gave. I wonder why.

I gave you the link these examples come from five posts up. If you can’t be bothered to spend five minutes reading that, why are you so invested in this conflict (and discussion)?

Here’s a bonus one to quench your thirst for whataboutism, from the same article:

He compelled them to wear distinguishing garments, with a very noticeable yellow cloth for a head-covering; from that time forward the clothing of the Jews formed an important subject in the legal regulations concerning them.

So you think historians are lying about what happened under, for instance, the Almohads?

It’s about your bs claim that jews were generally having a great time living under islamic regimes

Ironically you pointing towards the nazis is the whataboutism here

If you don’t see having to choose between conversion or death, with hundreds of thousands killed, as genocide, what would you call it?

What about being killed in the street for wearing shoes as a jew?

What about legally being allowed to genocide jews because one was rumoured to have struck a muslim woman?

That’s a strange idea of religions living peacefully together

Yeah, I think this idea comes from not really knowing much history then.

As long as there are different religions, there’s been religious beef.

Jews living as minorities in predominantly islamic countries have experienced this by various degrees. Islamic law demands that they always be treated as second class citizens and, to no surprise, they have. And in certain periods in certain places, this was spiced up with some forced conversion or genocide.

Read up on this for a nice example. It’s like claiming black African slaves had a nice life in the US until some troublemakers started demanding equal rights.

The mass migration towards Palestine and zionist efforts to create a majority jewish state there aren’t a pinnacle of humanity, but it’s important to know where it comes from

Well she’s got her clothes on so it’s certainly not Denmark

Jews went there on their own. In no small part from predominantly muslim countries where they faced systemic discrimination and, often, persecution.

Those from the Ottoman empire who didn’t were largely genocided by their muslim neighbours to ‘punish’ them for the creation of Israel, which should give you clue that your idea that “different religions didn’t have much beef” is complete bs.

Not to say the zionist jews aren’t among the worst people as well, of course