|
Triple Elation posted:How can this be? What caused this divergence? It's not the genetics, obviously. Must be the environmental factors, then, which makes this a right up miracle, since the Palestinians are in a much worse predicament, and you would expect them to be more driven to extremism, not less. Is it the Palestinian educational system? Is Judaism vastly more radical than Islam? What gives? I think the main factor is that Palestinians actually desire an end to the conflict. Their narrative doesn't demand a categoric hatred of Israelis or Jews, just opposition to the acts of the Israeli government. Even direct action against settlers and the IDF is met with disproportionate retribution, so hatred and aggression is pretty much counterproductive to their end goal. The Israelis government, on the other hand, is actively engaged in ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Israel is in a clear position of power, and its government is accepted to represent its people, so Israelis who desire peaceful coexistence are counterproductive to the goals of Likud and the further right. Hatred and aggression strengthens the position of the Israeli leadership. Since open support for genocide is pretty untenable, Likud maintains a narrative of self-defense, which is thankfully how they get most of their voters and international support, and is the reason you get a lot of bullshit arguments like this: -Troika- posted:It's not. The unstated bit behind the "Israel should be destroyed" opinions generally is "and all the non-Palestinians in it should be killed to make room". You know those Al Aqsa brigade gangtags that some older posters have? Some of those arn't ironic, in any way, shape, or form. "The people who oppose ethnic supremacy and genocide? They actually secretly support ethnic supremacy and genocide! So really, both sides are equally at fault here."
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 23:12 |
|
|
I was kind of hoping for "you know what, yes, that can't make any sense, it must be the case that Israelis are generally sane normal people too". Ok, then 
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
I'm sorry for ignoring your strange begged question. No, Israelis are not inherently hateful and inhuman. Neither are Palestinians, Germans, the Chinese or any other group of people whose only shared trait is nationality/ethnicity. It helps discussion a lot if you take that as a given.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:What's with the sudden change in the Israeli attitude? Are they worried about an Intifada that badly? I'm not really sure, myself. There's a lot of tensions and divisions in Jewish Israeli society, but racism was the one thing most people could agree on. I think that Israeli society was tolerant of terrorism toward Arabs because of a perception of self-defense and moral superiority, but a lot of the big terrorist events recently weren't against Arabs, and the big one that was managed to challenge the perception of moral superiority. The general center-right Israeli reaction to violence against Arabs, especially by the IDF, is that it's justified because Arabs are inhuman monsters and love violence against Jews, while Jews only regretfully do what they have to and sometimes accidents happen which are then investigated. It's a moral superiority argument - "violence and abuse is okay as long as we're better than those monstrous, genocidal Arabs". Sometimes there's an element of "we were just defending ourselves against a dangerous Arab", "we were getting revenge for the bad things Arabs do", or " the Arabs hate us all and want to destroy us, so they are an enemy we must fight and destroy by any means" too - and all three of those are some flavor of retribution for perceived crimes. That's why the arson attack resonated so deeply: it disrupted the perceived moral superiority so critical to Israeli justification of abuse against Arabs, while also being very clearly not a revenge attack at all. The "good guys" can do whatever they want as long as they're better than the "bad guys". An unprovoked sneak attack at night by masked civilians that kills an infant? That disrupts the whole justification. It's not an anti-terror operation or an accident or collateral damage or revenge for a similarly heinous attack. The general sense I get, reading the reactions on the right is "murdering a baby is something the Arab terrorist dogs do, we Jews are supposed to be better than that". In other words, it's shaken the moral superiority so badly that only the farthest right is still able to defend it, with most of the rest of the country, even much of the right, decrying it as an inhuman crime that should be punished severely regardless of who committed it. Even the extreme far-right is mostly unwilling to publicly praise the arson, instead choosing to deflect the blame by spinning wild conspiracy theories about how the Palestinians actually set the fire and killed the baby themselves as a false-flag attack to blame on settlers and the godless liberal-secular Nazis in the government are just using it as an excuse to suppress the real Jews because ~insert nonsense reason here~. On top of that, there's the gay pride parade stabbings. That one's pretty obvious: an extremist Haredi stabbing their fellow Jews for not adhering to his views. That cuts right to the heart of the considerable tensions between the secular and religious in Israel, and casts a lot of suspicion on the Haredi, who largely oppose the secular state and pay little heed to laws and standards of common decency that aren't written in the Torah. On top of that, he'd just finished serving a prison sentence for doing the exact same thing. The right loves to criticize the government for releasing Palestinian prisoners who have been involved in crimes against Jews, saying that they'll just reoffend and hurt even more Jews, so having a right-wing extremist jailed for attacking Jews do it again right after release is incredibly embarrassing. And although Schlissel's first sentence was appropriately heavy, his acts still drew attention to the general trend of treating Jewish offenders with kid gloves compared to Arabs. The arson at the Church of Multiplication wasn't popular from the beginning. The general Israeli population isn't anti-Christian, that's almost entirely a haredi thing. There wasn't anyone jumping out of the woodwork to defend that from the beginning, so it's looked down upon from the beginning. I don't know as much about the demolition of the two illegal buildings in a settlement, but it had a boatload of political support despite its divisiveness among the population. And then of course, there's Ettinger. His manifesto wasn't against Arabs, it was against the state of Israel. He wanted to smash the state and provoke a civil war. Moreover, he wanted to do it by using terrorism to provoke the underlying tensions between groups in Israeli society. Not just between Jews and Arabs, but also between Jews and Christians, the secular and the religious, the settlers and the non-settlers, the Jewish and the democratic, the haredi and civil rights activists...many of the same tensions that were aggravated by the recent attacks! I'm not saying that he had anything to do with Schlissel (though some Kahanists consider him a hero) or the Beit El demolitions, it's almost certainly a coincidence that those happened around now, but it must be making the government nervous to realize that Jewish terrorism has no intention of stopping just at Arabs and left-wingers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
Triple Elation posted:Something about that narrative has always bothered me. This divergence is just one of perception, originating mostly from your insistence on attributing a single communal viewpoint to each of two vast, diverse populations. There are plenty of Palestinians who attack defenseless civilians, just as there are plenty of Israelis who attack defenseless civilians. There are plenty of Israelis who just want to live in peace, just as there are plenty of Palestinians who want to live in peace. There are plenty of Palestinians who won't rest until all of Jerusalem is undisputed Palestinian territory, just as there are plenty of Jews who won't rest until all of Jerusalem is undisputed Israeli territory. The difference you see is simply a matter of governmental differences, demographic differences, power differentials, and biases in your media consumption habits, not some kind of fundamental difference between Israelis and Palestinians. For example, the PA is a secular dictatorship with no right of free speech and zero tolerance for religious extremists (because of the political threat they pose), so saying that the judicial branch should be bulldozed and advocating violence against Jews is a good way to end up in jail, whereas Israel is tolerant of political dissent and has enough of a religious component in the state that it has to grapple with the fact that independent rabbis often support such incitement.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
I did not literally mean what I posted. I thought that since people in this thread seem to simultaneously, unironically believe everything I wrote there, and that it all adds up to a rather extraordinary claim of the sort that requires extraordinary evidence, that it was worth highlighting to see the response. The response was "well ok, it must be that Israelis have lost all semblance of human morality because of the draft and their leisure first-world lifestyle and the fact that they're winning the conflict and it got to their head". Now I know one more thing that I didn't before about what advocates involved with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict believe. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
Triple Elation posted:I did not literally mean what I posted. I thought that since people in this thread seem to simultaneously, unironically believe everything I wrote there, and that it all adds up to a rather extraordinary claim of the sort that requires extraordinary evidence, that it was worth highlighting to see the response. The response was "well ok, it must be that Israelis have lost all semblance of human morality because of the draft and their leisure first-world lifestyle and the fact that they're winning the conflict and it got to their head". Now I know one more thing that I didn't before about what advocates involved with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict believe. To be fair when I go hang out I hear 'drive them to the sea' more often than 'those bastards in the government need to stop the occupation'. And Israeli culture doesn't have that thing where we say 'death to whatever' and actually just mean 'drat whatever'.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
Triple Elation posted:I did not literally mean what I posted. I thought that since people in this thread seem to simultaneously, unironically believe everything I wrote there, and that it all adds up to a rather extraordinary claim of the sort that requires extraordinary evidence, that it was worth highlighting to see the response. The response was "well ok, it must be that Israelis have lost all semblance of human morality because of the draft and their leisure first-world lifestyle and the fact that they're winning the conflict and it got to their head". Now I know one more thing that I didn't before about what advocates involved with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict believe. "golly, why does everyone here think israelis are bad people?" *israeli army blow up literally scores of buildings packed with palestinians civilians*
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:That's another question I have not been able to figure out. Things have been way worse for younger Palestinians the last 15 years or so than for young Israelis, but the level of violence is flip-flopped. Meanwhile you have the massive bombing campaigns on Gaza. The Second Intifada radicalized Israelis, and the lack of successful violence on the Palestinian side is not due to lack of trying. SyHopeful posted:So why does the Arab Peace Initiative get so little discussion in general? I mean, it blows holes in the pro-Israel trope about being surrounded by enemies but otherwise I rarely see it get brought up. Peace if you agree to every single PA demand isn't exactly grounds for a stable agreement.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
uninterrupted posted:"golly, why does everyone here think israelis are bad people?" Do you think Palestinians are bad people because Palestinian terrorists have murdered "literally" score of innocent Israeli civilians? Do you consider it morally acceptable if others hold that belief?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:Do you think Palestinians are bad people because Palestinian terrorists have murdered "literally" score of innocent Israeli civilians? Do you consider it morally acceptable if others hold that belief? Boo hoo, let's all make way for the Israeli hurt feelings brigade acting like their feelings matter when they elected and fund an army that does nothing but starve and murder Palestinians. Palestinian terrorist are terrorists. The Israeli army is the will of the Israeli people, and the Israeli people should be held to the decisions they make. Don't like it, maybe stop mindlessly killing people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
uninterrupted posted:Boo hoo, let's all make way for the Israeli hurt feelings brigade acting like their feelings matter As a practical matter, I don't see what purpose dehumanizing the Israeli people is meant to serve, either it bringing about an equitable settlement or arriving at a more complete and nuanced understanding of the conflict. quote:when they elected and fund an army that does nothing but starve and murder Palestinians. I am fairly certain that the Israeli Defense Force does things other than "starve and murder Palestinians". To take one example more or less at random: https://news.vice.com/video/the-war-next-door-part-1 quote:Palestinian terrorist are terrorists. The Israeli army is the will of the Israeli people, and the Israeli people should be held to the decisions they make. I find it reprehensible when some right-winger insists that the people of the Gaza Strip supported and elected Hamas, and so they must bear a collective punishment for the acts of Hamas. I don't see how the argument is much better when it's applied to Israelis.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:I find it reprehensible when some right-winger insists that the people of the Gaza Strip supported and elected Hamas, and so they must bear a collective punishment for the acts of Hamas. I don't see how the argument is much better when it's applied to Israelis. Hamas is not an internationally-recognized state institution; Hamas are a private organization. Israel is a state institution engaged in policy implementation at the state level. The actions of state institutions and non-state institutions are not equal; the acts of state institutions, when engaged in an appropriate manner which is in full accord with the evidence-based best practices for policy implementation and in accord with the judeo-christian values of America, default to greater legitimacy than the actions of non-state institutions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 05:59
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:The Second Intifada radicalized Israelis, and the lack of successful violence on the Palestinian side is not due to lack of trying. If by 'every single PA demand' you mean 'in accordance with what the international consensus has decided to be the fairest resolution, a return to the 67 borders with some mutually agreed land swaps' then I guess that yes, you have accurately represented the Arab Peace Initiative.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 07:27
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Hamas is not an internationally-recognized state institution; Hamas are a private organization. Israel is a state institution engaged in policy implementation at the state level.  Also, you're wrong, but even if you weren't by your logic Israelis should be held even more accountable than Palestinians for their votes. Especially since Israelis voted in genocidal racists whereas Hamas is just a private organization trying to supply food, water and education while having more success stopping rocket attacks than Israel (during case fires). And they do all this despite Israeli resistance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 08:05
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:The Second Intifada radicalized Israelis, and the lack of successful violence on the Palestinian side is not due to lack of trying. When you got the PLO willingly policing their own side it makes things pretty easy for Israel.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 08:09
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:If by 'every single PA demand' you mean 'in accordance with what the international consensus has decided to be the fairest resolution, a return to the 67 borders with some mutually agreed land swaps' then I guess that yes, you have accurately represented the Arab Peace Initiative. The international consensus doesn't support the right of return, so no, it does not meet the international consensus. Crowsbeak posted:When you got the PLO willingly policing their own side it makes things pretty easy for Israel. It's pretty easy and fair to argue that Israel's strategy is not a good long term one in their own self interest, but if we're talking solely about the objective of skewing casualty ratios as far as possible, it's been successful.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 08:29
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:The international consensus doesn't support the right of return, so no, it does not meet the international consensus. Yeah if the murder of the family hadn't happened I would say the have until Abbas dies. Now I don't know. Really the whole reason the Israli right has even been able to be ascendent isn't just the second intifada but because the've been able to claim bieng so harsh and exclusivist keeps the peace. I have my doubts they'll be able to keep up such a facade while the west bank goes up in flames.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 08:34
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Yeah if the murder of the family hadn't happened I would say the have until Abbas dies. Now I don't know. Really the whole reason the Israli right has even been able to be ascendent isn't just the second intifada but because the've been able to claim bieng so harsh and exclusivist keeps the peace. I have my doubts they'll be able to keep up such a facade while the west bank goes up in flames. Given Arafat's decision to launch the Second Intifada and the resulting terrorist violence led very directly to the collapse of the Israeli political left and a decline in support for a negotiated settlement, the suggestion that a Third Intifada would bring closer the end of the occupation is a risible one. Scholarly studies have found that terrorist violence leads to a rightward shift in political opinion. Kajeesus posted:I'm sorry for ignoring your strange begged question. No, Israelis are not inherently hateful and inhuman. Neither are Palestinians, Germans, the Chinese or any other group of people whose only shared trait is nationality/ethnicity. It helps discussion a lot if you take that as a given. There is a difference between saying "all members of ethnopolitical group X are intrinsically hateful and inherently inhuman" and making the generalization that "group X are hateful and inhuman". Your answer seems to be in response to the former, but the question to you seemed to be more along the lines of the latter. Without presupposing your views are the same or contrary on them, I'll just point out they're two different questions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 09:28
|
|
|
uninterrupted posted:Boo hoo, let's all make way for the Israeli hurt feelings brigade acting like their feelings matter when they elected and fund an army that does nothing but starve and murder Palestinians. Lol, excuse me. But are you perchance an american?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 09:32
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Peace if you agree to every single PA demand isn't exactly grounds for a stable agreement. Now what is the Israeli peace proposal exactly? The Insect Court posted:Do you think Palestinians are bad people because Palestinian terrorists have murdered "literally" score of innocent Israeli civilians? Do you consider it morally acceptable if others hold that belief? I think this shows admirable restraint on the Palestinian terrorists' parts, because only twenty innocent victims in total? That's peanuts. Yes, this is what "literally score" means: exactly twenty. The Insect Court posted:I find it reprehensible when some right-winger insists that the people of the Gaza Strip supported and elected Hamas, and so they must bear a collective punishment for the acts of Hamas. I don't see how the argument is much better when it's applied to Israelis. lol hamas. Some Al Qaeda blokes in Gaza throw a rocket above the wall and a statement saying "we're doing this to attack Hamas!", and then Israel obligingly obeys to Al Qaeda's demands by attacking Hamas. (Which is codeword for "blowing up some school or hospital or refugee camp or water processing plant", by the way.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 09:34
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:The international consensus doesn't support the right of return, so no, it does not meet the international consensus. The international consensus is that there must be a just settlement to the refugees of the conflict. The Arab peace Initiative copies this phrase exactly, stating that there must be a just settlement and bases it in GA resolution 194 which is much weaker on the right of return (Like not actually using the phrase 'right of return' at all) rather than 3236 which is much stronger and mentions the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return. Both of those resolutions were passed, by the way, indicating a majority consensus even if it isn't as solid as overwhelming as the consensus over the occupation. Arafat in the Camp David talks was willing to accept only a small symbolic return on the basis that a Palestine state could stand as an alternative and absorb the refugees I believe the Arab Peace Initiative is going for something very similar. They can't outright say "Oh yeah, gently caress the refugees" because that would go massively against public opinion, but it's in line with how they've presented the initiative, how they have not referenced a right of return and with how previous peace talks were left. The Insect Court posted:Given Arafat's decision to launch the Second Intifada and the resulting terrorist violence led very directly to the collapse of the Israeli political left and a decline in support for a negotiated settlement, the suggestion that a Third Intifada would bring closer the end of the occupation is a risible one. Scholarly studies have found that terrorist violence leads to a rightward shift in political opinion. You're a literal conspiracy theorist. People at the time on BOTH sides were saying "Holy poo poo, don't let the person who's considered the face of the occupation go up to Al-Aqsa, it will cause a shitstorm you can't control". Then Sharon went up there and a shitstorm was unleashed which the Israeli side fanned by using deadly force people against protesters or random civilians. To quote amnesty international: "The first killings of Palestinians during the intifada were of those involved in demonstrations or bystanders. Many of the demonstrations were violent. Demonstrators threw stones at Israeli forces, sometimes using slingshots and, in Gaza and the West Bank, in some demonstrations threw Molotov cocktails. The Israeli police, border police, special forces and the Israeli army responded using potentially lethal rubber-coated metal bullets and live ammunition. During some riots in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, firearms were used by Palestinians and, after the first days, there were gunfights between Israeli security forces and Palestinians armed with guns. However, in the first month approximately 80 per cent of the victims, according to Amnesty International, were killed in demonstrations in circumstances when the lives of members of the security services were not in danger" ... "The demonstrations and riots in the early days of the intifada were studied by Amnesty International delegates, including a policing expert. Confrontations took place at “symbolic areas” -- where land had been confiscated, near checkpoints and on the way to Israeli settlements. The Amnesty International delegation found that the Israeli security forces, in policing the violent demonstrations, had tended to use military methods, rather than policing methods involving the protection of human lives. The security forces had moved swiftly from using non-lethal to lethal methods of control. They had breached their own rules of engagement that allow the use of firearms only when lives are in imminent danger, and then only targeted to the source of fire, and had used potentially lethal force randomly over a wide area. The weapons used -- rubber-coated metal bullets and live ammunition -- were not suitable for policing demonstrations. On many occasions Palestinian ambulances and first aid workers were hindered from giving aid" "According to Amnesty International’s findings, those demonstrations where the police or army did not arrive, did not seek confrontations with the demonstrators, or used alternative, non-lethal methods of controlling demonstrators were defused without loss of life. For example, demonstrations in Nazareth and Umm al-Fahm on 3 October 2001 to mark the first anniversary of the killing of 13 Palestinian demonstrators in Israel became violent as demonstrators threw stones at a police station in Nazareth over a four-hour period. Police did not respond with fire and the demonstrations were defused without loss of life."
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 09:44
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:I think this shows admirable restraint on the Palestinian terrorists' parts, because only twenty innocent victims in total? That's peanuts. Thank you for the correction, C.M, if not for your musings on the value of innocent life. What I meant to type, of course, was "scores". A brief Google search finds that estimates of fatalities resulting from Palestinian terrorism, while depending somewhat on the parameters, numbers around one thousand dead. Does that correction change your evaluation of the number of Israeli victims as being "peanuts"? quote:lol hamas. Some Al Qaeda blokes in Gaza throw a rocket above the wall and a statement saying "we're doing this to attack Hamas!", and then Israel obligingly obeys to Al Qaeda's demands by attacking Hamas. (Which is codeword for "blowing up some school or hospital or refugee camp or water processing plant", by the way.) Hamas has been responsible for the launch of rockets into Israel. Your posts, which only mentions al Qaeda launching rockets from the Gaza Strip, remains silent on this despite it being what I would consider a fairly important fact. Are you claiming that Palestinians never voted for Hamas? If so, that claim is incorrect. Refer to the results of the 2006 Palestinian legislative election, in which Hamas won a majority of the seats in the Palestinian Legislative Council. team overhead smash posted:You're a literal conspiracy theorist. A doubly inappropriate retreat to name-calling, given that the Amnesty International report you quote does not assign responsibility for the start of the intifada to Ariel Sharon's visit. To be fair, it does not attempt to conclusively assign blame at all. However the Mitchell Report, which did thoroughly investigate the origins of the intifada, supported the conclusion that violence had been planned beforehand by the Palestinian leadership as a means to regain diplomatic initiative following the breakdown of negotiations. The Insect Court fucked around with this message at 10:30 on Aug 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 10:23
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:A doubly inappropriate retreat to name-calling, given that the Amnesty International report you quote does not assign responsibility for the start of the intifada to Ariel Sharon's visit. You are inventing a literal conspiracy. Calling you a conspiracy theorist is an accurate description of what you're doing. Also you've kind of shown yourself up here. I'm guessing you haven't actually read the report and instead just went to the wiki article where you proceeded to misread the first paragraph about the contents of the reports, where it is actually just listing Israel's acccusations rather than the report's findings (which are listed a little bit further down). In fact the report specifically doesn't support the idea the violence was planned beforehand. So yeah, congrats on using a source you haven't actually read to disprove your own point. Kind of saves me from having to do any work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 12:11
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:Given Arafat's decision to launch the Second Intifada and the resulting terrorist violence led very directly to the collapse of the Israeli political left and a decline in support for a negotiated settlement, the suggestion that a Third Intifada would bring closer the end of the occupation is a risible one. Scholarly studies have found that terrorist violence leads to a rightward shift in political opinion. Violence mixed with security brings a rightward shift in opinion. If your supposed enemy is seen to be violent and unable to be agreeable, but using an extreme amount of violence on them brings them to heel. Well then that must be whart brought them to heel and it must be the only thing they'll ever recognize. Look at how peaceful the westbank is, that must mean that escalating violence will keep it peaceful, because Palestinians are as you have implied numeous times violent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:Thank you for the correction, C.M, if not for your musings on the value of innocent life. How does it feel to support genocidal intentions? I'm legitimately curious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:What I meant to type, of course, was "scores". A brief Google search finds that estimates of fatalities resulting from Palestinian terrorism, while depending somewhat on the parameters, numbers around one thousand dead. Does that correction change your evaluation of the number of Israeli victims as being "peanuts"? By it's own admission Israel killed nearly 750 civilians during Protective Edge alone, none of which were fighting age males (since Israel categorizes them differently). Other monitors claim substantially higher. While I agree that Hamas does commit terrorist attacks against Israel, do Palestinians not have a valid argument that Israeli military action also amounts to terrorism?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:How does it feel to support genocidal intentions? I'm legitimately curious. I'm sure that it feels empowering for Palestinians to vote for Hamas; after all, Hamas promises the world, and has a reliable tendency to blame jews when Hamas is unable to deliver, while conveniently disappearing anyone in Gaza who would stand up to their antisemitic platform.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Stop taking TIC's bait guys
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:I'm sure that it feels empowering for Palestinians to vote for Hamas; after all, Hamas promises the world, and has a reliable tendency to blame jews when Hamas is unable to deliver, while conveniently disappearing anyone in Gaza who would stand up to their antisemitic platform. Who else would they blame? Buhhdists aren't bombing UN shelters and civilian homes in Palestine.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:I think this shows admirable restraint on the Palestinian terrorists' parts, because only twenty innocent victims in total? That's peanuts. Hey, gently caress you. Murdering civilians for political reasons is bad no matter which side does it. Cat Mattress posted:lol hamas. Some Al Qaeda blokes in Gaza throw a rocket above the wall and a statement saying "we're doing this to attack Hamas!", and then Israel obligingly obeys to Al Qaeda's demands by attacking Hamas. (Which is codeword for "blowing up some school or hospital or refugee camp or water processing plant", by the way.) Actually, I rather suspect Israeli retaliatory airstrikes have mostly been targeting empty fields over the last couple of months, especially when ISIS is thought to be responsible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
 "One small step for the country, one giant leap for Danny Danon" Danny Danon, who was a Likud Member of Knesset and Minister for Science, Technology, and Space, among other leading Likud machine positions, has quit them to be appointed the new Israeli Ambassador to the UN.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
So this is getting some traction already (by which I mean it's been emailed/linked to me by like three different people, very scientific standard) http://www.timesofisrael.com/spanish-fest-cancels-matisyahu-gig-over-refusal-to-endorse-palestinian-state/ To be honest yea that's a pretty hosed up thing to try to make some rando New York Jew sign a support pledge or whatever, but of course it's being taken as a big 'no see it's really that those Palestinians control everything!' by the right wing circles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
It's their right, just as it's the right of people to do the same to anyone as any belief - as long as this isn't governmental pressure. The question then becomes what happens with a potential backlash in this case, and did they properly gauge their audience.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:It's their right, just as it's the right of people to do the same to anyone as any belief - as long as this isn't governmental pressure. The question then becomes what happens with a potential backlash in this case, and did they properly gauge their audience. It's also antisemitism, just another example of BDS' true agends. To economically deprive a Jew gainful employ solely because of their religious beliefs is anti-semitism. I hope that festival is cancelled and the organizers brought up in European court for their human rights violations. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Aug 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:It's their right, just as it's the right of people to do the same to anyone as any belief - as long as this isn't governmental pressure. The question then becomes what happens with a potential backlash in this case, and did they properly gauge their audience. It's 100% their right and it's also my right to say this 100% legal action was super creepy and had some really weird undertones of 'prove you're a good Jew by signing this statement'. Like, I do support a Palestinian state but if my job, especially my job being a loving singer, told me 'if you don't sign agreement to this pledge that has nothing to do with the concert at all, you can't play' I'd probably bail on that. And to be honest if BDS was involved in that (I don't really trust the Times Israel as a source for that) I really feel they overstepped in a pretty terrible way to demand a New York born Jew make public statements to support their cause, because that's just playing into the really gross 'no all you Jews have to answer for Israel' thing and I'm super not behind that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
This one person was deprived from the right to perform in a concert because he refused to recognize the Palestinian state's right to exist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:It's also antisemitism, just another example of BDS' true agends. To economically deprive a Jew gainful employ solely because of their religious beliefs is anti-semitism. I hope that festival is cancelled and the organizers brought up in European court for their human rights violations. A stopped clock is right twice a day, and yeah, demanding loyalty oaths from a Jew sounds pretty darned antisemitic to me. It's like when they protested a performance by Achinoam Nini/Noa a few months ago.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:This one person was deprived from the right to perform in a concert because he refused to recognize the Palestinian state's right to exist. He wasn't deprived because he was one person, he was deprived of economic equality because he is Jewish. Absurd Alhazred posted:A stopped clock is right twice a day, and yeah, demanding loyalty oaths from a Jew sounds pretty darned antisemitic to me. It's like when they protested a performance by Achinoam Nini/Noa a few months ago. BDS is, at its core, an antisemitic movement that shrouds itself in anti-Israeli rhetoric. It is a movement that, like all things NSDAP in Germany, could use heightened judicial oversight from European courts. Alas, its becoming ever more fashionable to be openly racist in Europe these days. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Aug 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 23:12 |
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:This one person was deprived from the right to perform in a concert because he refused to recognize the Palestinian state's right to exist. Counterpoint: he's not Israeli and has no pull in Israel so why does any protest group care? Should I, a Jew who was born in America and never been near the middle east in my life have to sign what amounts to a loyalty oath to a political ideology for my job that has nothing to do with it? This poo poo brings back some very uncomfortable memories to a lot of Jewish people, and I think if this was a BDS inspired thing they should apologize.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 20:35
|
|