Calling me a Socialist

[Red Flag]

Would be accurate, as my ideology and the system I advocate are socialist in nature. Likewise, calling a Conservative a Conservative is accurate if they support the status quo or the status quo ante- the very definition of conservatism.

So why, other than because certain people can't defend what they advocate in honest discourse, is it against the rules to say one who supports Zionism a Zionist? Is it also against to the rules to call someone a Republican if they are a member of the GOP, a republican if they support a republican form of government, or Keynsian if they adhere to Keynisan economics?

Or are only Zionism and the current form official story of the sacred sacrifice (well, it's latest incarnation) off-limits to honest examination?

Furthermore, if 'Holocaust denial' is against the rules, how can 'Accusations of genocide, ethnic cleansing, or variations thereof' also be against the rules? It seems Tash, in her attempts to stifle honest examination of the facts surrounding historical events, has already contradicted herself.

Also, I'd like to know how she plans to enforce the rules when discussing U.N. rulings:

U N I T E D N A T I O N S

General Assembly

Distr.
GENERAL

A/RES/3379 (XXX)
10 November 1975

Thirtieth session
Agenda item 68

RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
[on the report of the Third Committee (A/10320)]

3379 (XXX). Elimination of all forms of racial discrimination
​

The General Assembly,

Recalling its resolution 1904 (XVIII) of 20 November 1963, proclaiming the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and in particular its affirmation that "any doctrine of racial differentiation or superiority is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous" and its expression of alarm at "the manifestations of racial discrimination still in evidence in some areas in the world, some of which are imposed by certain Governments by means of legislative, administrative or other measures",

Recalling also that, in its resolution 3151 G (XXVIII) of 14 December 1973, the General Assembly condemned, inter alia, the unholy alliance between South African racism and zionism,

Taking note of the Declaration of Mexico on the Equality of Women and Their Contribution to Development and Peace, 1/ proclaimed by the World Con-ference of the International Women's Year, held at Mexico City from 19 June to 2 July 1975, which promulgated the principle that "international co-operation and peace require the achievement of national liberation and independence, the elimination of colonialism and neo-colonialism, foreign occupation, zionism, apartheid and racial discrimination in all its forms, as well as the recognition of the dignity of peoples and their right to self-determination",

Taking note also of resolution 77 (XII) adopted by the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African Unity at its twelfth ordinary session,2/ hold at Kampala from 28 July to 1 August 1975, which considered "that the racist regime in occupied Palestine and the racist regimes in Zimbabwe and South Africa have a common imperialist origin, forming a whole and having the same racist structure and being organically linked in their policy aimed at repression of the dignity and integrity of the human being",

Taking note also of the Political Declaration and Strategy to Strengthen International Peace and Security and to Intensify Solidarity and Mutual Assistance among Non-Aligned Countries,3/ adopted at the Conference of Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Non-Aligned Countries held at Lima from 25 to 30 August 1975, which most severely condemned zionism as a threat to world peace and security and called upon all countries to oppose this racism and imperialist ideology,

Determines that zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.

2400th plenary meeting
10 November 1975
​

_____________
1/ E/5725, part one, sect. I.

2/ See A/10297, annex II.

3/ A/10217 and Corr.1, annex, p. 3.

A/RES/3379 (XXX) of 10 November 1975


If honest discussion and consideration of the evidence is Verboten, why does the forum exist in the first place?

Indeed, it seems even reality itself is Verboten according her majesty, the Arch Duchess of the Ministry of Truth. These rules make zero sense, not only because they're stupisd and clearly intended to silence any valid criticism of Isra-El and prevent honest discussion, but because they are mutually exclusive and following one rule necessarily means violating another.

I'm not going to allege that someone with their location and sig line in Hebrew might be sympathetic to Zionism, but I am saying that these rules are, by design, impossible to follow and are clearly intended to silence any opposition or criticism and I question her intentions

 

[soccerboy22]

So basically you broke the rules and are pissed out getting in trouble for it?

 

[Fiddytree]

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Moderator's Warning:

Closed. Criticizing specific moderator actions is not allowed outside of the paths detailed in the rules.

Debate Politics Rules.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/forum-rules/28594-forum-rules.html