Page 138 of 138 FirstFirst ... 3888113128129130131132133134135136137138
Results 2,741 to 2,753 of 2753

Thread: Hamas attacks southern Israel

  1. #2741
    Jozam's Avatar Foederatus
    Join Date
    Jan 2024
    Location
    Arabian Gulf
    Posts
    29

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    Europeans to varying degrees have Neolithic and in some cases Bronze Age ancestry from the Middle East, but lack a sustained conscious cultural connection to that identity. Jews in Europe remained distinct through semi-isolation and endogamy because of the cultural inheritance from the Levant. The arbitrary point isn’t so arbitrary in that it’s the period when Jewish identity coalesced, but I don’t personally care whether or not someone refers to Ashkenazi Jews as European. I would only push back against factually incorrect statements about our historical connection to the Levant.

    What matters as an explanation for how events turned out, is that in the late 19th century and the first half of the 20th century, most Europeans (or at least enough) considered Ashkenazi Jews to be foreign, and while opinions of Ashkenazi Jews themselves may have varied to some degree, many or most identified more with their Levantine-origin ancestry/culture than with the dominant ethnicity of whatever country they lived in. There were assimilationist Jewish movements, such as the Reform movement that sought to recast Judaism as strictly a religion rather than a diaspora ethnoreligious identity, but they were ultimately disabused of the notion that they would ever be accepted as such by the events of the mid-20th century. Jews only seemed to be fully accepted in Europe once there were too few to matter anymore, and by that time Israel had already been founded.

    The pre-state Zionist movement did embrace many European aspects of their culture, which heavily influenced Israel’s institutions, but most wouldn’t have accepted founding a state just anywhere.

    In any case, Ashkenazi identity as separate from Jewish identity is largely irrelevant to the conflict today, except in ways that are generally the inverse of the way Israel’s worst critics tend to mischaracterize it. Specifically, I’m referring to the racialist ideas that ignorant Westerners try to project on it. In brief, the notion of the white European colonizer vs the oppressed indigenous population is belied by the fact the non-Ashkenazi Jews are the voter based of the Israeli right, while male working-class non-Ashkenazi Jews are the base of the far right. The most left-wing Israelis, the type that get excited (or at least used to) about coexistence programs, are the most culturally European Ashkenazi Jews.

    I would also add that most Israelis don’t actually understand Western ideas about race. A good example is this video, the only one that shows an understanding of what being white means in the way that an American would understand it is a guy who is obviously from the US or Canada:

    I can't comment on how people identify, but from a historical and genetic standpoint it's factually correct that Ashkenazis are a European population. "Cultural connection to the Levant" isn't something that can be objectively measured, and skin color is irrelevant; Ashkenazis' European ancestry is primarily Southern and Eastern European and skin color in those regions runs the gamut from very white to very dark and everything in between.

    I don't think it's particularly relevant to the conflict either. Israelis aren't in the wrong because they're Europeans but because they've massacred, displaced and abused the region's native inhabitants. There's nothing wrong with being European and Europeans aren't (or shouldn't be) barred from living in the Middle East.

  2. #2742
    Papay's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Planet Nirn
    Posts
    4,467

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    https://x.com/idanlandau/status/1802298571149959463


    A former Likud MP quotes Hitler to justify genocide in Gaza. This is the reality of Israel these days. The shocking is not that statement. The shocking is that a considerable number of Israelis today would support these policies. He is just another politician that knows his voters

  3. #2743

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    Quote Originally Posted by Papay View Post
    https://x.com/idanlandau/status/1802298571149959463


    A former Likud MP quotes Hitler to justify genocide in Gaza. This is the reality of Israel these days. The shocking is not that statement. The shocking is that a considerable number of Israelis today would support these policies. He is just another politician that knows his voters
    What Feiglin actually said:

    ״איך אמר היטלר, ימח שמו וזכרו, 'אני לא יכול לחיות בעולם הזה אם יש יהודי אחד שנותר בו', אנחנו לא נוכל לחיות בארץ עם איסלאמו-נאצי אחד כזה נשאר בעזה״

    Which is:

    "As Hitler said, may his name and memory be obliterated, 'I cannot live in this world if there is one Jew left in it', we cannot live in a country with one such Islamo-Nazi left in Gaza."

    He's comparing Hamas to Hitler.

    Your source, Idan Landau, notes in his follow-up post: "Feiglin is a political curiosity with no institutional backing; but his opinions are far from a curiosity in Israel." It's probably a fairly small minority who believe it's actually possible to get rid of every last "Islamo-Nazi" in Gaza, but it is a fairly common view that Israel can no longer tolerate leaving Hamas in power.

    What Feiglin is best known for is leaving Likud to form a libertarian party, which made legalizing marijuana and reducing the influence of the rabbinate the focus of their platform. The party failed to make the minimum threshold to enter the Knesset. Although prior to about ten years ago, he expressed some views more inline with the far right parties, and has continued to favor annexing the West Bank.
    Last edited by sumskilz; June 17, 2024 at 01:52 AM. Reason: added links about the traditional curse he used, since it sometimes auto-translates wrong
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  4. #2744
    Muizer's Avatar member 3519
    Patrician Artifex

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    11,199

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    Quote Originally Posted by Jozam View Post
    I don't think it's particularly relevant to the conflict either. Israelis aren't in the wrong because they're Europeans but because they've massacred, displaced and abused the region's native inhabitants.
    I don't see how the bolded parts can logically co-exist tbh. There's little question the Jewish people have the best claim to being the 'natives' as they have cultural and historical continuity tied to the land stretching back farther than any extant people. I don't think anyone arguing for the Palestinian cause should ever go down the path of claiming to be 'native'. In fact it should be the exact opposite: that it is not reasonable to reclaim land with an appeal to being 'native' to a place in a fairly distant past. And if you take both of these, the conclusion will be there is no ideological solution, only pragmatic compromise or enduring conflict.
    "Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -

  5. #2745
    Papay's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Planet Nirn
    Posts
    4,467

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    What Feiglin actually said:

    ״איך אמר היטלר, ימח שמו וזכרו, 'אני לא יכול לחיות בעולם הזה אם יש יהודי אחד שנותר בו', אנחנו לא נוכל לחיות בארץ עם איסלאמו-נאצי אחד כזה נשאר בעזה״

    Which is:

    "As Hitler said, may his name and memory be obliterated, 'I cannot live in this world if there is one Jew left in it', we cannot live in a country with one such Islamo-Nazi left in Gaza."

    He's comparing Hamas to Hitler.

    Your source, Idan Landau, notes in his follow-up post: "Feiglin is a political curiosity with no institutional backing; but his opinions are far from a curiosity in Israel." It's probably a fairly small minority who believe it's actually possible to get rid of every last "Islamo-Nazi" in Gaza, but it is a fairly common view that Israel can no longer tolerate leaving Hamas in power.

    What Feiglin is best known for is leaving Likud to form a libertarian party, which made legalizing marijuana and reducing the influence of the rabbinate the focus of their platform. The party failed to make the minimum threshold to enter the Knesset. Although prior to about ten years ago, he expressed some views more inline with the far right parties, and has continued to favor annexing the West Bank.
    He understood that the Israeli public didnt like his previous opinions so he changed rhetoric. Lets face it:Israeli public is being brainwashed for years now. Politicians in Israel know very well that only extreme far right rhetoric can guarantee electoral gains. Sensible politicians are labelled as traitors. This is the result of 20 years of far right brainwashing and almost absolute control of the media by the hard right. Lets see an article by the esteemed Jerusalem Post

    https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-806441

    So in this article there is a "debate" whether this is a fight between Gog and Magog. I would found it hilarious if it wasnt for the fact that i know that these are articles that are popular today in Israel. But this is the majority of Israel society today. Jews learn that a) are gods chosen people based on religious books written thousands of years ago b) non-jews hate them c) as far as Palestinians are concerned they have the right to impose apartheid and shoot them at will. People say that if Netanyuahu leaves then a more modest politician will come to power. I think the Israeli public will vote in the end someone like Smodrich or Ben Gvir

  6. #2746
    Ludicus's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,176

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    Quote Originally Posted by nhytgbvfeco2 View Post
    @Ludi, 2023, not 2013.
    Since 2013.It's nothing new.Hamad is the exception that proves the rule.Hamad, Netanyahu, Smotrich and Ben Gvir.... birds of a feather flock together, right?

    Fathi Hamad, minister of the interior of the de-facto Hamas 2013...
    Fathi Hamad is one of the most extremist figures in Hamas, close to the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades and a bitter Fatah rival
    ---
    Edit,

    After former Mussolini admirer Meloni's win in Italy, what happens now?Times of Israel

    I don't understand what the Times of Israel is complaining about. The former Mussolini admirer Giorgia Meloni is a staunch supporter of Israel and, like many others, “believes” the war began on October 7.


    Question to Meloni during the G7 meeting, asked by a journalist.
    How many more civilian deaths would it take for the G7 or consider steps likes sanctions or a ban on weapons sales to Israel similar to those taken against Russia?"









    SURREAL!!!

    Last edited by Ludicus; June 17, 2024 at 09:02 AM.
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
    Charles Péguy

    Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
    Thomas Piketty

  7. #2747
    nhytgbvfeco2's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    6,477

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    What Feiglin actually said:

    ״איך אמר היטלר, ימח שמו וזכרו, 'אני לא יכול לחיות בעולם הזה אם יש יהודי אחד שנותר בו', אנחנו לא נוכל לחיות בארץ עם איסלאמו-נאצי אחד כזה נשאר בעזה״

    Which is:

    "As Hitler said, may his name and memory be obliterated, 'I cannot live in this world if there is one Jew left in it', we cannot live in a country with one such Islamo-Nazi left in Gaza."

    He's comparing Hamas to Hitler.

    Your source, Idan Landau, notes in his follow-up post: "Feiglin is a political curiosity with no institutional backing; but his opinions are far from a curiosity in Israel." It's probably a fairly small minority who believe it's actually possible to get rid of every last "Islamo-Nazi" in Gaza, but it is a fairly common view that Israel can no longer tolerate leaving Hamas in power.

    What Feiglin is best known for is leaving Likud to form a libertarian party, which made legalizing marijuana and reducing the influence of the rabbinate the focus of their platform. The party failed to make the minimum threshold to enter the Knesset. Although prior to about ten years ago, he expressed some views more inline with the far right parties, and has continued to favor annexing the West Bank.
    Feiglin being misquoted. Are we back to 2019 or something?
    Also worth noting, Feiglin lost has grandson in Gaza not even a week ago.

    @papay it's amazing how you've read the post telling you he is being misquoted, and yet you continue to pretend like that's what he said.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ludicus View Post
    Since 2013.It's nothing new.Hamad is the exception that proves the rule.Hamad, Netanyahu, Smotrich and Ben Gvir.... birds of a feather flock together, right?

    Fathi Hamad, minister of the interior of the de-facto Hamas 2013...
    The video is dated to 2023, unless you have proof otherwise. He was a minister in 2013, but he's still a senior member of Hamas today.

    SURREAL!!!

    Nothing surreal about it, frankly. Hamas would kill every LGBTQ person they could if it was up to them.

  8. #2748

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    Quote Originally Posted by Papay View Post
    He understood that the Israeli public didnt like his previous opinions so he changed rhetoric. Lets face it:Israeli public is being brainwashed for years now. Politicians in Israel know very well that only extreme far right rhetoric can guarantee electoral gains. Sensible politicians are labelled as traitors. This is the result of 20 years of far right brainwashing and almost absolute control of the media by the hard right. Lets see an article by the esteemed Jerusalem Post

    https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-806441

    So in this article there is a "debate" whether this is a fight between Gog and Magog. I would found it hilarious if it wasnt for the fact that i know that these are articles that are popular today in Israel. But this is the majority of Israel society today. Jews learn that a) are gods chosen people based on religious books written thousands of years ago b) non-jews hate them c) as far as Palestinians are concerned they have the right to impose apartheid and shoot them at will. People say that if Netanyuahu leaves then a more modest politician will come to power. I think the Israeli public will vote in the end someone like Smodrich or Ben Gvir
    Feiglin was in the Knesset from 2013 to 2015. He ran on a libertarian platform in 2019. He hasn't run again since then. He isn't actually saying anything extreme in what you cited, and you're just making stuff up. The most popular news outlets in Israel by a huge margin are Israel Hayom (English version) and Yedioth Ahronoth (English version).

    The Jerusalem Post is obviously not aimed at an Israeli audience considering that there is no Hebrew version. Also note the amount of space in that article devoted to Christian views. The article is just reporting that there are religious figures who are evidently having that discussion, which is kind of silly if you don’t believe in it, but there is nothing extreme in reporting about it, and this is the first I’ve heard of it despite living in Israel and following Israeli media. I assume all those rabbis discussed are Dati Leumi, a movement that represents about 12% of Israeli Jews.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  9. #2749
    Papay's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Planet Nirn
    Posts
    4,467

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    Feiglin was in the Knesset from 2013 to 2015. He ran on a libertarian platform in 2019. He hasn't run again since then. He isn't actually saying anything extreme in what you cited, and you're just making stuff up. The most popular news outlets in Israel by a huge margin are Israel Hayom (English version) and Yedioth Ahronoth (English version).

    The Jerusalem Post is obviously not aimed at an Israeli audience considering that there is no Hebrew version. Also note the amount of space in that article devoted to Christian views. The article is just reporting that there are religious figures who are evidently having that discussion, which is kind of silly if you don’t believe in it, but there is nothing extreme in reporting about it, and this is the first I’ve heard of it despite living in Israel and following Israeli media. I assume all those rabbis discussed are Dati Leumi, a movement that represents about 12% of Israeli Jews.
    What about Netanyuahu referencing Amalekites? Which is his audience?

  10. #2750
    nhytgbvfeco2's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    6,477

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    Quote Originally Posted by Papay View Post
    What about Netanyuahu referencing Amalekites? Which is his audience?
    Lol, this again. He was referring to Hamas. What's wrong about that?

  11. #2751
    Ludicus's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,176

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    Data on casualties | United Nations Office for the ... - OCHA oPt
    Reported impact snapshot | Gaza Strip (12 June 2024)
    Humanitarian Situation Update #179 | Gaza Strip
    ----

    May I ask, how many "7th Octobers" has Israel committed against the Palestinian people?
    ----

    The Enduring and Racist Trope of Palestinian Rejectionism

    Since the beginning of the Zionist project in Palestine, large efforts have been exerted to paint all resistance to its colonial endeavors as irrational and at odds with progress and modernity. From the onset, Theodor Herzl, founder of political Zionism, envisioned that local Palestinian Arabs would welcome the progress brought by Zionist colonizers and greet them with open arms. Those who did not, or the “penniless” ones who could not contribute to this new society, would be “spirited” across the border.
    Contrary to Herzl’s predictions, the Zionist colonial project was largely met with resistance. Rather than understanding this for what it was—the natural response of indigenous people toward colonialism—the majority of Zionist leaders dismissed this opposition as regressive and rooted in a fear of ingenuity and prosperity. Later, Palestinian resistance would be characterized by charges of antisemitism and senseless bloodlust.
    This deliberately manufactured dichotomy between the prosperous and civilized Settler and the regressive and rejectionist Arab standing in the way of progress set the tone for developments between Palestinians and Zionist settlers for decades to come. This commentary explores the nascence of this trope, unpacking its weaponization to deny Palestinians their fundamental rights and demonize their collective aspirations for sovereignty.

    Rejectionism During the Mandate Period

    During the Mandate for Palestine, the British government followed an openly pro-Zionist policy that privileged the new Jewish settlers and bestowed on them perks and preferential treatment that guaranteed their dominance and prosperity over the Palestinian Arabs. Such benefits were not only economic, but also embedded Zionists and those sympathetic to them in positions of power, equipping them with the necessary tools to take control following the mandate’s conclusion.
    In a notable feat of historical revisionism, Israeli leadership uses Palestinian opposition to the Balfour declaration as one of the first examples of Palestinian rejection of coexistence and rights for all.
    That Palestinians had an inalienable right to sovereignty had no bearing on British plans for Palestine. This was articulated in the Balfour Declaration, which promised British government support in establishing a Jewish national home in Palestine. While the declaration also promised not to “prejudice” the rights of the existing “non-Jewish” population, the wording made clear that the indigenous community would simply be an afterthought, denying their very identity as Palestinians. Unsurprisingly, Palestinians wholeheartedly opposed this declaration, which saw an imperial power promise their land to another people. The declaration sparked protests that continue to this day on the anniversary of its issuance. In a notable feat of historical revisionism, Israeli leadership uses Palestinian opposition to the Balfour declaration as one of the first examples of Palestinian rejection of coexistence and rights for all.

    Importantly, Palestinian grievances were reflected in British reports and investigations at the time. For example, the 1921 Haycraft Commission of Inquiry
    dismissed the idea that antisemitism was the driving force behind Arab resistance to the new settlers, instead pointing to the very real threat of Zionist takeover of Palestine as the basis for their reactions. (1)

    Nonetheless, the legitimate grievances of Palestinians highlighted in this and other subsequent reports were largely ignored, with the prevailing narrative claiming that Palestinian rejectionism was the main obstacle in finding a solution between the Arabs and the Jews.

    Meanwhile, as Zionist influence and power expanded in Palestine, the calls to ethnically cleanse the natives grew louder, and multiple proposals were laid out on how to achieve this. For example, the 1937 Peel Commission, which was instigated following the Great Palestinian Revolt, suggested the partitioning of Palestine and the forced transfer of 125,000 Palestinian Arabs to barren lands in order to make room for a Jewish state. This proposal was overwhelmingly rejected by Palestinians, who understood that their right to self-determination over a large part of their land was being stripped away and given to a European settler population. Notably, it was also rejected by large parts of the Zionist community, who felt the proposed Jewish state was too small. In fact, Jewish settlers also rejected offers for a unitary state for all peoples between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea in both 1928 and 1947.
    Decades of propaganda and selective reporting regarding the nature of these various plans during the British Mandate period have distilled into the trope of the unreasonable and rejectionist Palestinians, contrasted with their Zionist counterparts, who are historically positioned as willing partners in peace and compromise. It is this history that gives weight to the racist saying, “The Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity,” which has since become ingrained as a cornerstone of Western analysis on Palestine.

    Rejectionism During the Peace Process

    This framing would come to dominate the modus operandi for how the international community dealt with Palestinians during the peace process years, when a plethora of conferences and peace talks were held under the guise of finding a lasting solution. In reality, these efforts were always, first and foremost, about securing Israeli interests without concern for Palestinian rights. Regardless of how egregious the demands from Israel were during these negotiation efforts—such as including proposals for inequitable land swaps—Palestinian challenges were continuously painted as outright rejections to peace.

    The myth of Palestinian intransigence was weaponized and used to argue that Palestinians could not be reasoned with, and that peace would continue to be rejected no matter how generous their settler counterparts were

    This narrative was particularly prevalent during the 2000 Camp David negotiations, where the trope was widely employed by the US government and media in an attempt to bully Palestinians into accepting nominal self-autonomy in place of a sovereign state. The supposedly generous offer that Palestinians rejected during the negotiation process was in fact a quasi-state that would have no control over its borders and no sovereignty over its capital, airspace, or natural resources. Additionally, vast swathes of land were to be annexed, dissecting the West Bank into non-contiguous cantons, with a permanent Israeli military presence. The rights of Palestinian refugees were entirely sidelined, and Israel would hold the authority to invade the West Bank at any time it desired. The proposal was so dismal and unjust that even then-Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs Shlomo Ben-Ami later admitted that he would have rejected it had he been Palestinian.
    Despite this, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was willing to concede and accommodate the majority of the demands, as unpopular as they were with the Palestinian grassroots. Indeed, the PLO’s counterproposal gave up nearly 80% of Palestine by accepting 1967 borders; authorized the presence of US or international peacekeepers in the Palestinian state; yielded on the right of return for virtually all refugees; and gave up control over large swathes of East Jerusalem. Still, even with the PLO’s willingness to surrender critical rights and sovereignty, negotiations ultimately failed as Israel’s list of demands relentlessly expanded.
    As expected, Palestinian reluctance to accept the ever-increasing demands of Israeli leadership—particularly regarding sovereignty over East Jerusalem and its holy sites, as well as the final borders of the Palestinian state—was added to the growing pile of their supposed “missed opportunities.” Indeed, the myth of Palestinian intransigence was weaponized and used to argue that Palestinians could not be reasoned with, and that peace would continue to be rejected no matter how generous their settler counterparts were. This argument has been used as a pretext to Israel’s indefinite military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.
    Of course, the same standard has not historically been applied when Palestinians have made negotiation offers or counterproposals that are then rejected by the Israeli regime. As was the case in 1928, 1948, and 2000, among other instances, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert rejected yet another counteroffer in 2008 made by Palestinian negotiators, who pushed for 1:1 swaps of West Bank territory with land of equal quality within the Green Line. Olmert had also previously refused the very concept of sharing control of Palestinian holy sites in Jerusalem, despite the protection of Palestinian sovereignty over the sites under international law. After replacing Olmert in 2009, Benjamin Netanyahu refused to continue the ongoing negotiations process and insisted on starting from a new hard-right baseline.
    In the decades that have followed the peace process era, blame for the demise of the two-state solution continues to be placed squarely on the Palestinians for failing to be “partners in peace.” This is regardless of the Israeli regime’s continued annexation campaign across the West Bank and successive Israeli prime ministers promising to thwart the creation of a Palestinian state under their tenure.
    Rejectionism After October 7th
    In the wake of October 7th and the ensuing Israeli genocide in Gaza, the international community is grappling with the reality that it cannot “shrink the conflict” indefinitely. Long-dormant speeches about the two-state solution have been resurrected, accompanied by a stream of patronizing analysis that blames Palestinian rejectionism for the current status quo.

    By repeatedly peddling the false connection between the myth of Palestinian rejectionism, the rise of 'extremism,' and the current assault on Gaza, blame is implicitly placed on Palestinians themselves for the genocide being waged

    The swift and widespread deployment of this trope immediately following October 7th was remarkable, as if in lockstep a deluge of pundits joined in the chorus to regurgitate the same talking points from decades past. For example, in an op-ed for the Times of Israel, Deputy National Director of the Anti-Defamation League Kenneth Jacobson stated that “the ideology of Palestinian rejectionism, which has only disdain for Israel and the Jewish people, is at the root of this extremism.” The Spectator, a British newspaper, published a piece that claimed: “Seven wasted decades should be more than enough but many of the incentives in Palestinian politics and civil society remain geared towards extremism and rejectionism.”
    Additionally, a piece published in the Jewish News Syndicate (JNS) compared Palestinians to a “troublesome child” that should not be rewarded for “terrorizing” its parents. The JNS likewise issued a piece that pushed the all-too-familiar myth that “Ehud Barak offered Arafat everything he claimed he wanted.” While the content of Barak’s offer was never spelled out, the crux of the argument remains that Palestinians cannot be reasoned with.

    It is important to underscore the dangerous message that policymakers and analysts alike are advancing here: By repeatedly peddling the false connection between the myth of Palestinian rejectionism, the rise of “extremism,” and the current assault on Gaza, blame is implicitly—or at times, explicitly—placed on Palestinians themselves for the genocide being waged against them.
    We see a similar utilization of this trope during the coverage of negotiations with Hamas concerning a ceasefire and the possibility of a prisoner exchange. Despite Hamas signaling from early on in the war that it was open to negotiation and the release of hostages in exchange for prisoners, Netanyahu was adamantly against the idea. Still, whenever Israeli leaders reject a proposal by Hamas, they are framed as rational, making the decision due to a proposal’s unacceptable terms and threats to Israeli security and interests. When Hamas members reject Israeli proposals for failing to ensure a lasting ceasefire, their decision is positioned as a rejection of peace and desire to prolong the war, informed by ingrained bloodlust and antisemitism.
    Conclusion
    Since the beginning of the Zionist settler colonial project, Palestinians have rarely been treated like rational actors. Rather, they are continuously expected to fall in line with US and Israeli interests and accept offers that deny their sovereignty and inalienable rights. This is part of a larger anti-Palestinian framework, which relies on the creation and proliferation of racist and dehumanizing tropes to legitimize and advance Zionist settler colonialism. This framework feeds into an immense asymmetry of power that is wielded by the West to impose a solution on Palestinians, regardless of what it means for their rights and political aspirations. Versions of this resolution have changed over the years, but they hold in common the primary concern of assuaging Israeli demographic and security anxieties without heed to Palestinian lives or dignity. This has resulted in dozens of proposals that amount to aesthetic or nominal reformulations of limited autonomy and continued occupation.
    Ultimately, the very premise of compromising with colonizers and their settler colonial goals is unjust—and, as history shows, futile. However, even when Arabs and Palestinians have signaled a willingness to accept a certain level of injustice for the sake of resolution, it has been deemed insufficient. What is evident, then, is that the issues at hand have never been about details or parameters of dialogue, but rather about extinguishing resistance and Palestinian identity as a whole. No matter how many rounds of negotiation commence, nor how many Palestinian rights are ceded, the Israeli regime will never be satisfied. Indeed, it is impossible to appease settler colonial systems through compromise when their only goal is indigenous erasure.
    It's easy to fool those who don't know the history of Palestine during the British Mandate: and who knows it better than the British? (1) 1921 Haycraft Commission of Inquiry
    p.50

    The grievances put before us by Arabs and others as having contributed materially to the state of exasperation... The principal ones are contained in the following allegations:—
    a) That Great Britain, when she took over the administration of Palestine, was led by the Zionists to adopt a poHcy mainly directed towards the establishment of a National Home for the Jews, and not to the equal benefit of all Palestinians.
    (b) That in pursuance of this policy the Government of Palestine has, as its official advisory body, a Zionist Commission, bound by its ideals and its conception of its role to regard Jewish interests before all others, and constituted by its singular prerogatives into an imperium in imperio.
    (c) That there is an undue proportion of Jews in the Government service.
    {d) That a part of the programme of the Zionists is the flooding of Palestine with a people which possesses greater commercial and organising ability than the Arabs and will eventually obtain the upper hand over the rest of the population.
    (e) That the immigrants are an economic danger to the population because of their competition, and because they are favoured in this competition.
    (f) That immigrant Jews offend by their arrogance and by their contempt of Arab social prejudices.
    (g) That owing to insufficient precautions immigrants of Bolshevik tendencies have been allowed to enter the country, and that these persons have endeavoured to introduce social strife and economic unrest into Palestine and to propagate Bolshevik doctrines.
    P. 56,

    It is important that it should be realised that what is written on the subject of Zionism by Zionists and their sympathisers in Europe is read and discussed by Palestinian Arabs, not only in the towns but in country districts. Thus a witness from Tulkeram, who appeared before us in the course of the Khedera inquiry, quoted as an instance of provocative writing the following passage from a book entitled " England and Palestine," by H. Sidebotham* :—

    " It is desired to encourage Jewish immigration by every means, and at the same time to discourage the immigration of Arabs..." The book from which this quotation was taken was published as far back as 1918; but our attention has been called to other not less provocative statements appearing in Zionist publications since the disturbances, whilst we were sitting. Thus the Jewish Chronicle, No. 2,720, of the 20th May, 1921, makes the following statement in the course of its leading article: —

    " Hence the real key to the Palestine situation is to be found in giving to Jews as such, those rights and privileges in Palestine which shall enable Jews to make it as Jewish as England is English, or as Canada is Canadian. That is the only reasonable or, indeed, feasible meaning of a Jewish National Home, and it is impossible for Jews to construct it without being accorded a National status for Jews." Again, Palestine, the official organ of the British Palestine Committee, in its issue of the 4th June, 1921, in discussing the question of Jewish immigration, describes Palestine as a " deserted, derelict land." This description hardly talHes with the fact that the density of the present population of Palestine, according to Zionist figures, is something like 75 to the square mile.*f On the 14th May there appeared in The Times a letter from Mr. V. Jabotinsky, a member of the Executive of the Zionist Organisation, in which he urged that, in view of the Jaffa disturbances, Jews alone should have the privilege of military service in Palestine, Arabs being excluded from the right to bear arms.
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
    Charles Péguy

    Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
    Thomas Piketty

  12. #2752
    Papay's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Planet Nirn
    Posts
    4,467

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    Quote Originally Posted by nhytgbvfeco2 View Post
    Kyriakos, if that's how people worked, why aren't Jews today murdering Germans on sight for what they did during the Holocaust? Why aren't the Germans still fighting the British and Americans for Dresden? The Japanese killing every American they see?
    Yes, destroying Hamas would make every single Jew in the world safer. Allowing it to remain in power in Gaza is a threat to the life of every Jew, Israeli or not. Once it is gone a more moderate entity can take control over Gaza, be it the PA or something new. Then we can move on towards peace, and not a moment earlier.
    Sure, we see it on west bank what kind of "peace" Israel has in its mind

  13. #2753
    Ludicus's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,176

    Default Re: Hamas attacks southern Israel

    Quote Originally Posted by Papay View Post
    Sure, we see it on west bank what kind of "peace" Israel has in its mind
    War on Gaza: Israel's army spokesman says Hamas cannot be eliminated.

    Comments by Daniel Hagari highlight growing rift between military and political leadership over war's future.

    In an interview with Israeli Channel 13, Daniel Hagari said Hamas "was an idea, a party", that is "rooted in the hearts of the people".

    "Anyone who thinks we can eliminate Hamas is wrong," he said, adding that the war's aim of destroying the Palestinian armed group was "throwing sand in the eyes of the people".

    Netanyahu was quick to rebuff Hagari's comments, with his office saying the destruction of Hamas was one of the security cabinet's war goals, and that the military were "obligated" to execute it.
    -----

    A dream in waiting: hundreds and hundreds of municipal rabbis at the expense of local authorities. Haredim threaten to bolt coalition as PM pulls Rabbis Bill from Knesset Agenda


    But, in one way or another, the theft of Palestinian land continues with impressive efficiency IDF transfers powers in occupied West Bank to pro-settler civil servants.
    anyone who thought the question of annexation was foggy, this order should end any doubts.

    Furious White House cancels meeting with Israel to protest Netanyahu’s latest accusations...

    Meanwhile, a senior Israeli official told Axios: “The Americans are fuming. Bibi’s video made a lot of damage.”

    Netanyahu tells U.S

    It’s inconceivable that in the past few months, the administration has been withholding weapons and ammunition to Israel,” Netanyahu said in the video. “Israel, America’s closest ally, is fighting for its life, fighting against Iran and our other common enemies.”
    “During World War II, UK leader Winston Churchill told the United States, ‘Give us the tools, we’ll do the job,’” the Prime Minister added. “And I say, give us the tools and we’ll finish the job a lot faster.”
    ---

    Here's someone who thinks he's a new Churchill. In fact, Churchill delivered three speeches at the American Congress. For Netanyahu, it will be his fourth time, at the end of July. Anyway, it’s a curse: Democratic American leaders are prostrating themselves daily to please the racist and his terrorist government, which refuses to end the illegal occupation or accept a two-state solution.

    And yet... Biden's Israel policy may hasten Trump's rise, US allies fear-POLITICO

    President Joe Biden’s support for Israel’s war in Gaza has caused him no shortage of political troubles back home. And the rest of the world is noticing. Diplomats and world leaders...have begun to worry that Biden’s reluctance to more fully break with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could cost him the election in November.

    Their concerns, which were relayed by five foreign policy experts and former U.S. government officials in touch with foreign officials, have been conveyed largely behind closed doors,

    Biden allies in the U.S., as well as diplomats abroad, now increasingly see a cease-fire in the Middle East as necessary to paving a way toward a permanent end to the war and to helping stave off a Trump win that threatens to upend relations with allies worldwide.

    “We really want it to succeed,” one senior European official said of the U.S.’s push for a deal.
    Biden's abiding support for Israel will lose him the election The Hill

    He is losing support among some of his core constituents — young voters and people of color — in no small measure owing to his unwavering support for Israel’s brutal assault on Gaza.

    By vigorously denouncing the International Criminal Court after its prosecutor called for arrest warrants to be issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Biden has just taken another step in risking not only his own presidency but the future of American democracy.

    The conventional wisdom that foreign policy does not influence national elections increasingly seems like it will not hold this time around. The death and destruction unfolding in Gaza is being witnessed by young Americans on their phones in real time. They are reacting in disgust both to what they are seeing and to the Biden administration’s continued unwillingness to stop arming Israel’s military campaign... As voters sour on President Biden’s continual support for Israel’s war in Gaza, he must change course now or risk a disastrous outcome in November.
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
    Charles Péguy

    Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
    Thomas Piketty

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •