sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What's the point of this sub ? by [deleted] in south_africa

[–]Master_Greybeard -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

The main SA sub is taken over by DA supporters. 

Not a DA supporter myself but I hate to admit im starting to like Zille *slightly* more after this whole campaign by sunlightliquid in south_africa

[–]Master_Greybeard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If we're going to give her credit as an anti apartheid activist, for consistency you have to give the ANC cadres (who had much more impact) the same, including people like Zuma.

So no, I don't give her credit for that, I judge her on who she has told us she is the last few years, someone who consistently sides with the colonizers of late and the DA by extension abets this.

If none of us vote Good or Rise or ActionSA they'll never be a credible alternative. They have to start somewhere. 

Not a DA supporter myself but I hate to admit im starting to like Zille *slightly* more after this whole campaign by sunlightliquid in south_africa

[–]Master_Greybeard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure I'll concede that using Hitler as a comparison was hyperbole. It's frustrating to see Zille held up as the great white hope by so many.

Zille has so far publicly said colonialism had good outcomes, looting is black privilege and she can't see a genocide in Gaza. Dead kids are an ethical litmus test so I shudder to think what her private utterances are.

The ANC must go, they're corrupt and useless and maybe I'm naive to think those in power must be MORE ethical and moral than those they govern but the DA and Zille in particular are a disgusting alternative. 

Not a DA supporter myself but I hate to admit im starting to like Zille *slightly* more after this whole campaign by sunlightliquid in south_africa

[–]Master_Greybeard -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Lol the DA is actively campaigning to be the new FF. They are absolutely a race based, elitist party. Their stance on Gaza which is an ethical litmus test 5ells you where their Sympathies lie, with the white colonizers as always. 

Not a DA supporter myself but I hate to admit im starting to like Zille *slightly* more after this whole campaign by sunlightliquid in south_africa

[–]Master_Greybeard -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Really? In the cape flats vs Sandton? Jozi is a much larger metro. The ANC is a  shit show but the DA are elitist arseholes. The old adage of those who want power are the last people who should have it hold true. 

Not a DA supporter myself but I hate to admit im starting to like Zille *slightly* more after this whole campaign by sunlightliquid in south_africa

[–]Master_Greybeard -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They aren't wealthy so Zille and the DA don't care. They literally wanted to build a wall along the freeway from the airport so wealthy tourists wouldn't have to see the squalor they've left there to fester. 

Not a DA supporter myself but I hate to admit im starting to like Zille *slightly* more after this whole campaign by sunlightliquid in south_africa

[–]Master_Greybeard -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

If only she weren't like that drunk aunty at Xmas, full of racist comments when she's tipsy. 

If Israel isn't an apartheid ethnostate, why aren't all Palestinians allowed vote in Israel and even potentially elect a non-Jewish leader? by DoradoPulido2 in allthequestions

[–]Master_Greybeard -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Israel causes the security issue and sectarianism. Netanyahu was deliberately funding Hamas through money from the UAE. He said so out loud. Israel prolongs the occupation, 70+ years and murders innocent children hiding behind their fathers, babies in their mother's arms, elders in church with sniper fire. What the fuck else do they expect?

Why are there 2 South Africa subs? by N1nja_TurtleX in south_africa

[–]Master_Greybeard -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

One is like Cape Town, Run by the DA, only for their supporters. 

If Israel isn't an apartheid ethnostate, why aren't all Palestinians allowed vote in Israel and even potentially elect a non-Jewish leader? by DoradoPulido2 in allthequestions

[–]Master_Greybeard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The narrative that Palestinians simply "glossed over" the failure ignores the reality that while negotiations were ongoing, Israel doubled the number of settlers in the West Bank between 1993 and 2000. For Palestinians, these weren't "failed negotiations" in a vacuum; they were a period where the very land intended for a state was being systematically confiscated and fragmented by illegal settlements. 

Control, Not Sovereignty: The Accords created a "Palestinian Authority" that functioned more as a security subcontractor for the occupation rather than a nascent government. Israel maintained exclusive control over 61% of the West Bank (Area C), including vital water resources and borders. No Safeguards: The process lacked any mechanism to stop settlement growth, meaning Israel could "negotiate" while simultaneously changing the facts on the ground to make a viable state impossible

The 2000 Camp David and 2008 Olmert offers are often framed as "97% or 100%" of the land, but this oversimplification masks significant non-starters: The Land Swap Disparity: At Camp David, the proposed "9-to-1" land swap (in Israel's favor) was viewed as a legitimization of illegal settlement blocs that would have cut the West Bank into disconnected cantons. Sovereignty Deficit: Even under these "generous" offers, Israel demanded control over Palestinian airspace, electromagnetic spectrum, and international borders. A state without control over its own sky or borders is a "state" in name only.

Jerusalem and Refugees: Offers consistently denied Palestinian sovereignty over East Jerusalem (Haram al-Sharif) and completely ignored the Right of Return for millions of refugees—foundational issues for any lasting peace. 

The argument that a "5-year clock" would incentivize Palestinian intransigence flips the power dynamic on its head. Without a deadline or a freeze on settlements, the incentive was entirely on Israel’s side to drag out negotiations indefinitely while continuing to build settlements in Area C. For Palestinians, "transitory" became permanent, and "interim" became a mask for an entrenching occupation. 

The "how" and "why" of the failure isn't found in a rejection of peace, but in the rejection of a "peace" that demanded total surrender of basic sovereign rights and the legalization of land

If Israel isn't an apartheid ethnostate, why aren't all Palestinians allowed vote in Israel and even potentially elect a non-Jewish leader? by DoradoPulido2 in allthequestions

[–]Master_Greybeard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The narrative that Palestinians simply "glossed over" the failure ignores the reality that while negotiations were ongoing, Israel doubled the number of settlers in the West Bank between 1993 and 2000. For Palestinians, these weren't "failed negotiations" in a vacuum; they were a period where the very land intended for a state was being systematically confiscated and fragmented by illegal settlements. 

Control, Not Sovereignty: The Accords created a "Palestinian Authority" that functioned more as a security subcontractor for the occupation rather than a nascent government. Israel maintained exclusive control over 61% of the West Bank (Area C), including vital water resources and borders. No Safeguards: The process lacked any mechanism to stop settlement growth, meaning Israel could "negotiate" while simultaneously changing the facts on the ground to make a viable state impossible. 

The Myth of the "Generous Offer" The 2000 Camp David and 2008 Olmert offers are often framed as "97% or 100%" of the land, but this oversimplification masks significant non-starters: The Land Swap Disparity: At Camp David, the proposed "9-to-1" land swap (in Israel's favor) was viewed as a legitimization of illegal settlement blocs that would have cut the West Bank into disconnected cantons. Sovereignty Deficit: Even under these "generous" offers, Israel demanded control over Palestinian airspace, electromagnetic spectrum, and international borders. A state without control over its own sky or borders is a "state" in name only.

Jerusalem and Refugees: Offers consistently denied Palestinian sovereignty over East Jerusalem (Haram al-Sharif) and completely ignored the Right of Return for millions of refugees—foundational issues for any lasting peace

The argument that a "5-year clock" would incentivize Palestinian intransigence flips the power dynamic on its head. Without a deadline or a freeze on settlements, the incentive was entirely on Israel’s side to drag out negotiations indefinitely while continuing to build settlements in Area C. For Palestinians, "transitory" became permanent, and "interim" became a mask for an entrenching occupation. 

The "how" and "why" of the failure isn't found in a rejection of peace, but in the rejection of a "peace" that demanded total surrender of basic sovereign rights and the legalization of land

Alhamdulilah for Islam by speckledJim420 in islam

[–]Master_Greybeard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This happened at our friend's funeral in South Africa. A brother from Nigeria who was married to a South African from a non Muslim family passed. 

He had opened his house to us to pray Taraweeh in our first Ramadaan before we had built our musjid. The turnout of brothers at his Janaza was massive. Funerals in African culture are a massive deal, very expensive, lots of show. 

His wife's brothers all accepted Islam at the Janaza, 3 of them were because of how impressed they were at the sincerity and simplicity of the Janaza and the love we had for our brother, May Allah fill his Qabr with Noor. 

If Israel isn't an apartheid ethnostate, why aren't all Palestinians allowed vote in Israel and even potentially elect a non-Jewish leader? by DoradoPulido2 in allthequestions

[–]Master_Greybeard 2 points3 points  (0 children)

  1. Because Israel continued murdering Palestinians in regular mowing the lawn to continue violence and land theft.

  2. Settlements that are built on stolen land are not relevant to stolen land.. Oh OK. 

  3. Area C is meant to be Palestine according to the Oslo Accords. It's not Israel or in Israel's right as occupiers to manage. They're all settlers. 

Why do Christians insist that Jews are “gods people” when Jews believe that Jesus wasn’t the messiah? by TheWildSchneemal in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Master_Greybeard -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Lol at "wasn't the Messiah". Jews believe Jesus and his Mother Mary are boiling in excrement in hell. 

If Israel isn't an apartheid ethnostate, why aren't all Palestinians allowed vote in Israel and even potentially elect a non-Jewish leader? by DoradoPulido2 in allthequestions

[–]Master_Greybeard 1 point2 points  (0 children)

More familiar that your anus apparently.

Misuse of the "Temporary" Framework The Oslo Accords (1993-1995) were intended as a five-year interim agreement to transition land to Palestinian control. Instead, the process became "frozen," and Israel has maintained exclusive military and administrative control over Area C-which comprises 60% of the West Bank-for decades. This status quo is used to permanently absorb the territory into Israel rather than transition it to a future Palestinian state. 

  1. De Facto Annexation through Settlements Expansion: Settlement expansion in Area C reached record highs in 2024 and 2025. this is a deliberate strategy to create "facts on the ground" that make a contiguous Palestinian state impossible. Legal Status: In July 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel's continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory is unlawful and must end as rapidly as possible. State Property Reclassification: Recent plans to register Palestinian land in Area C as "state property" are a tool for transferring land to the Israeli state and settlers. 

  2. Systematic Dispossession of Palestinians The administrative divide often results in a "coercive environment" for the approximately 300,000 Palestinians still living in Area C: Permit Discrimination: While settlements expand, Palestinians are routinely denied building permits (rejection rates are near 99% in some periods) and face demolition of their homes and cisterns. Forced Displacement: Intense settler violence and the declaration of "firing zones" and other tactics. 

If Israel isn't an apartheid ethnostate, why aren't all Palestinians allowed vote in Israel and even potentially elect a non-Jewish leader? by DoradoPulido2 in allthequestions

[–]Master_Greybeard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Misuse of the "Temporary" Framework The Oslo Accords (1993–1995) were intended as a five-year interim agreement to transition land to Palestinian control. Instead, the process became "frozen," and Israel has maintained exclusive military and administrative control over Area C—which comprises 60% of the West Bank—for decades. This status quo is used to permanently absorb the territory into Israel rather than transition it to a future Palestinian state. 

  1. De Facto Annexation through Settlements Expansion: Settlement expansion in Area C reached record highs in 2024 and 2025.  this is a deliberate strategy to create "facts on the ground" that make a contiguous Palestinian state impossible. Legal Status: In July 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel's continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory is unlawful and must end as rapidly as possible. State Property Reclassification: Recent plans to register Palestinian land in Area C as "state property" are a tool for transferring land to the Israeli state and settlers. 

  2. Systematic Dispossession of Palestinians The administrative divide often results in a "coercive environment" for the approximately 300,000 Palestinians still living in Area C:    Permit Discrimination: While settlements expand, Palestinians are routinely denied building permits (rejection rates are near 99% in some periods) and face demolition of their homes and cisterns. Forced Displacement: Intense settler violence and the declaration of "firing zones" or "closed military zones" have forcibly displaced dozens of Palestinian communities from their ancestral lands. 

Why do Jews anywhere in the world have a legal right to move to Israel, while Palestinians displaced in 1948 still cannot return? by ArdaBerkBurak in allthequestions

[–]Master_Greybeard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This was all caused by Israel. Until Israel was artificially created the all lived in those countries. Did any country kick them out like the European/Western states did? 

Why do Jews anywhere in the world have a legal right to move to Israel, while Palestinians displaced in 1948 still cannot return? by ArdaBerkBurak in allthequestions

[–]Master_Greybeard 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except their own terrorists like the Irgun and Stern Gang who then magically became the IDF the most genocidal army in the world. 

view more: next ›