Like father like son? A roadmap to genocide:

Gilad in 2012: ‘We need to flatten entire neighbourhoods in Gaza. Flatten all of Gaza. The Americans didn’t stop with Hiroshima – the Japanese weren’t surrendering fast enough, so they hit Nagasaki, too. There should be no electricity in Gaza, no gasoline or moving vehicles, nothing.’

And certainly nobody else is into dehumanization:

Yoav Gallant: ‘We are fighting human animals, and we will act accordingly’

Or guilt by association:

President Isaac Herzog: ‘It is an entire nation out there that is responsible’

As Adam Shatz put it:

the belief that the best way of honouring the memory of those who died in Auschwitz is to condone the mass killing of Palestinians so that Israeli Jews can feel safe again is one of the great moral perversions of our time.

European Commission President accused of complicity in Israel's war crimes at ICC

The Geneva International Peace Research Institute (GIPRI) filed a complaint against EU leader Ursula von der Leyen in which it stated:

Reasonable grounds exist to believe that the unconditional support of the President of the European Commission to Israel – military, economic, diplomatic and political – has enabled war crimes and the ongoing genocide in Gaza, [...] — GIPRI

Even though I think it's highly unlikely this case will lead to anything substantial, it's good to see the European hypocrites are being called out for their complicity and tacit approval.

Biden should get the same treatment, by the way.

Just your daily reminder that Israel is fighting a humane war against a genocidal enemy that kidnapped hundreds of its citizens.

Just your daily reminder that Israel is fighting a humane war against a genocidal enemy — BitconnectCarlos

Strapped down, blindfolded, held in diapers: Israeli whistleblowers detail abuse of Palestinians in shadowy detention center

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/10/middleeast/israel-sde-teiman-detention-whistleblowers-intl-cmd/index.html

Within a week of bombing two schools and killing hundreds of innocent people— yet again.

So very humane. “Just your daily IDF propaganda.”

It’s like bad satire…

Strapped down, blindfolded, held in diapers

Oh no and they restrain their prisoners? Oh the humanity! :cry:

Do they also commit war crimes by using guns against Hamas? Is shooting a war crime? Or rescuing hostages? How did that make you feel?

Do they also commit war crimes by using guns against Hamas? — BitconnectCarlos

10,000 dead babies and genocide apologists call them “Hamas.”

And they wonder why they’re internationally condemned and bleeding support. Oh wait, no…it’s because of antisemitism. :yawn:

10,000 dead — Mikie

Can't be that low. I've heard the figure is 6 million. 6 million dead innocent palestinian babies killed by the zionists because they hate palestinians -- especially the babies. in fact, only babies. a holocaust of babies. :death:

That's just a variation on the tu quoque fallacy. Even if other people were worse, it doesn't make this acceptable. However, the figures are also false, entirely based on one article from John Spencer, who apparently can't count.

For starters, the 80%-90% casualty rate in modern warfare is bullshit. Not even the sieges of Leningrad and Stalingrad had such figures, which are clear examples of urban warfare at a time with much lower accuracy. Leningrad was closer to 1:1 and even qualified as a war crime due to the intentional targetting of infrastructure, restrictions in fuel leading to cold and, finally, famine. The conflicts that reached the 80-90% were established genocides, to wit: Cambodia, Rwanda, Second Congo War, Darfur and Northern Uganda (still disputed I suppose).

The figures on the ongoing war crime in Gaza reported by the UN, due to uncertainty of data, range from 2:1 to 9:1. So from a badly fought urban war to a clear corrolary to other genocidal conflicts.

Oh no and they restrain their prisoners? — BitconnectCarlos

They paint a picture of a facility where doctors sometimes amputated prisoners’ limbs due to injuries sustained from constant handcuffing; of medical procedures sometimes performed by underqualified medics earning it a reputation for being “a paradise for interns”; and where the air is filled with the smell of neglected wounds left to rot.

Yes, it reeks of “humane.”

range from 2:1 to 9:1. — Benkei

Does it even matter much to you? You don't hate Israel bc the casualty count, you hate it bc it is institutionally racist and oppressive and even dead Israeli citizens receive zero sympathy from you. But do you not realize the West is also institutionally racist and oppressive? Oppression and institutional racism are everywhere. They are charges that can be applied anywhere and every country is guilty of it.

Also those murdered on 10/7 were not in the WB; they were in Israel proper (are they still occupiers?). Why do you consider intentional violence against civilians "resistance?" It is just murder.

But do you not realize the West is also institutionally racist and oppressive? Oppression and institutional racism are everywhere. They are charges that can be applied anywhere and every country is guilty of it. — BitconnectCarlos

I don't hate Israel. I'm anti- zionist. As to comparing Israel to other western countries. How many of those countries are currently committing genocide? And there's a difference, a rather large one in fact, between Apartheid where the discrimination is enshrined in law and reinforced by the Israeli supreme Court and racism that's an emergent property of societies but at least pursues the ideal of non-discrimination.

Why do you consider intentional violence against civilians "resistance?" — BitconnectCarlos

Never said that. I said that Palestinians have a right to violently resist their occupation but not all violence is permitted.

I don't hate Israel. I'm anti- zionist. — Benkei

Do you believe in the preservation or destruction of the Jewish state? If you're an anti-zionist then you ultimately aim at it's destruction. I thought I remembered you saying that you were in support of 1967 borders, but perhaps that was just step one of dismantling Israel.

but at least pursues the ideal of non-discrimination. — Benkei

I would say Israel does pursue the ideal of non-discrimination. Israel has numerous laws that combat discrimination like any western nation. Israel's basic laws include a provision on equalityfor all citizens not just Jews.

Here's some of the anti-discrimination legislation:

Equal Employment Opportunities Law (1988): Prohibits discrimination in employment on various grounds, including gender, age, race, religion, nationality, country of origin, sexual orientation, and more.
Prohibition of Discrimination in Products, Services, and Entry into Places of Entertainment and Public Places Law (2000): Ensures that individuals are not discriminated against in access to goods, services, and public places.
Education Law (1953): Mandates equal educational opportunities for all children in Israel.

Never said that. I said that Palestinians have a right to violently resist their occupation but not all violence is permitted.

So according to you then violence against legitimate targets, e.g. government forces, is sanctioned until 1967 borders are returned to? Or until Israel is dismantled? A commitment to 1967 borders would still make you a zionist as it would leave the Jewish state intact.

Do you believe in the preservation or destruction of the Jewish state? If you're an anti-zionist then you ultimately aim at it's destruction. I thought I remembered you saying that you were in support of 1967 borders, but perhaps that was just step one of dismantling Israel. — BitconnectCarlos

I believe that a state favouring one religion above others is inherently discriminatory and should progress into an actual democracy instead of the Apartheid state it is now. The idea of a "jewish" state that favours Jews as Jews is obviously wrong to anyone with a modicum of knowledge about human and civil rights. It presupposes discrimination and the result is it is enshrined in its laws.

I would say Israel does pursue the ideal of non-discrimination. Israel has numerous laws that combat discrimination like any western nation. Israel's basic laws include a provision on equalityfor all citizens not just Jews. — BitconnectCarlos

And yet a host of discriminatory laws were passed because the basic laws do not operate as an actual constitution. It's the only "western" state that enshrines discrimination on the basis of faith and confers or rejects rights based on the distintion. The supreme court confirmed in 1989 that converting to another religion means you lose those priviliges. I've shared those laws repeatedly (at least 3 times in this thread). Here's a few of them:

• The Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law. The law denies the right to acquire Israeli residency or citizenship status to Palestinians from the occupied territories, even if they are married to citizens of Israel.
• The Absentees’ Property Law (APL) was enacted in 1950, ostensibly to address the management of property left by the roughly 750,000 Palestinian refugees driven out of Israel during the 1948 war. In reality, the law provided not for management of these properties, but for their permanent expropriation.
• Admissions Committees Law. Admission committees operate in approximately 700 agricultural and community towns inside Israel. Their purpose is to filter out Palestinian citizens of Israel who apply for residency in these towns on the basis of their “social unsuitability”.
• The Land Acquisition for Public Purposes Ordinance – Amendment No. 10 (2010) allows Israel’s Finance Minister to confiscate land for “public purposes”. The state has used this law extensively, in conjunction with other laws like the Land Acquisition Law (1953) and the Absentees’ Property Law (1950), to confiscate Palestinian-owned land in Israel.
• The Jewish National Fund Law of 1953 bestows powers on governmental authorities designed to empower the Jewish National Fund and endows it with financial advantages including tax relief, and in the purchasing of land. Over time, the JNF has come to own 13% of all land in Israel. JNF is a Zionist organization established in 1901 to collect funds for the purpose of purchasing land for the exclusive benefit of the Jewish people.
• Israel’s Jewish Nation State Law (2018). a) It declares the exercise of national self-determination to be a right enjoyed by Jewish citizens only. b) It makes Hebrew the only official state language (prior to the Nation State Law, both Hebrew and Arabic were official state languages). c) It commits to expanding Jewish settlement as “a national value”. In practice, it prioritizes settlements for Jews at the expense of others within Israel and the occupied territories.

I could go on but you get the idea. And this is just in Israel. Obviously, the discrimination is worse in the occupied territories under the guise of "security". Including arbitrary detentions, demolitions, evictions etc. See (for the 4th time!): https://www.adalah.org/en/content/view/7771

So according to you then violence against legitimate targets, e.g. government forces, is sanctioned until 1967 borders are returned to? Or until Israel is dismantled? A commitment to 1967 borders would still make you a zionist as it would leave the Jewish state intact. — BitconnectCarlos

From a purely legal point of view, only the 1948 borders would be legally justified although I think a land partition imposed on people without them having a say in the negotiations was morally unjust itself. The 1967 borders have been signalled by both the PLO as well as Hamas as being a starting point for negotiations for peace. If that represents Palestinian majority thinking that it is acceptable then that's what Israel should aim at. Instead, the zionists want it all. The end result this way is that it will have nothing. Empires come and go and so will the support of the USA and Europe. At some point Israel will be forced to negotiate from a position of weakness if it continues along this path and what it will be left with will be a matter of how magnanimous the other side will be. In the long run, the zionist path Israel is on is self-destructive and it's entirely within its power to avoid it.

US says Hamas seeks changes to ceasefire plan; Hamas denies proposing new ideas


Notice the dirty game this administration is involved in:

It pretends to broker a peace deal in order to placate US progressives, only to subsequently come up with excuses, to placate Israel and the US-Israel lobby.

Is anyone still fooled by this bullshit?

This is toddler-level diplomacy. Maybe it's time for adults to take the wheel again?

It pretends to broker a peace deal in order to placate US progressives, only to subsequently come up with excuses, to placate Israel and the US-Israel lobby. — Tzeentch

Why would the US pretend here? Out of all the parties involved it seems like the US is the only one that seriously wants a deal done, with Israel and Hamas holding up any deal for their own interests. If Hamas didn't propose anything new or problematic in their response and simply said yes then the US would for sure announce it immediately.

The US doesn't care about peace. The only thing it cares about is whether unconditional support for Israel blows back on Biden and ruins his chances at re-election.

Of course, pissing off the US-Israel lobby by pushing Israel into an undesirable peace would be another, even more effective way of ruining Biden's chances.

So all of these peace talks are just windowdressing. I'll believe it when they put a neutral country in charge of the peace process.

The US doesn't care about peace. The only thing it cares about is whether unconditional support for Israel blows back on Biden and ruins his chances at re-election. — Tzeentch

I'd say fears about a blowback are the reason why they're so eager for a deal. That and the possibility of this war escalating to a wider conflict as well like when Israel almost dragged everyone into a war with Iran.

I'd say fears about a blowback are the reason why they're so eager for a deal. — Mr Bee

The US isn't eager for a deal.

A deal right now would mean "Hamas won", Netanyahu would be chased out of office and probably jailed. Israel will have to live with its stained reputation for the foreseeable future and it will have nothing to show for it.

Israel will not let that happen, and if the US pressures Israel into accepting such a deal Biden would be gutted in the press and his re-election chances would vanish.

The US is eager to keep up appearances, nothing more. This is what US-Israel relations have always looked like.

Can be generalized some while remaining relevant:

I believe that a state favouring one religion above others is inherently discriminatory and should progress into an actual democracy instead of the (Apartheid) ________ state it is now. The idea of a ("jewish") ________ state that favours (Jews as Jews) ________ is obviously wrong to anyone with a modicum of knowledge about human and civil rights. — Benkei

There are some in the region (including an old foe of theirs). :/


Albanese is apparently a controversial figure. According to UN Watch ...

Exposed: Francesca Albanese’s Global Influence Network Targeting Israel (— UN Watch · Jun 11, 2024)

A deal right now would mean "Hamas won", Netanyahu would be chased out of office and probably jailed. Israel will have to live with its stained reputation for the foreseeable future and it will have nothing to show for it. — Tzeentch

That's more Israel's problem, more specifically Netanyahu's. That being said it's reputation is already largely stained since they can't keep themselves from conducting this war inhumanely. I mean they probably could've learned from the lessons of the US after 9/11 but why be rational?

Can be generalized some while remaining relevant: — jorndoe

Sure.

Albanese is apparently a controversial figure. According to UN Watch ... — jorndoe

Not sure how this relates to what I said. Reading the UN Watch she's used tactics to get what she wanted. I think they were stupid because intended to manipulate instead of convince.

That's more Israel's problem, more specifically Netanyahu's. — Mr Bee

The power of the US-Israel lobby makes it the United States' problem as well.

If the administration doesn't appease the lobby, it will get gutted in the press. Especially now, with Biden's position being extremely weak.

I don't hate Israel. I'm anti-zionist. — Benkei

Same here. :up:

Do you believe in the preservation or destruction of the Jewish state? — BitconnectCarlos

I'm too cosmopolitan and leftist to do anything but militantly oppose every ethnonationalist (and/or theocratic), war criminal state.

If you're an anti-zionist then you ultimately aim at it's destruction.

The patently false assumption here is that (post-1967 ethnonationalist) "zionism" is the only, or best, governing principle (i.e. ideology) for preserving and securing the State of Israel. Thus, your vapid and false dilemma, BC: support the elimination of either "all non-Jews" (Us) or "all Jews" (Them) from the river to the sea. No doubt I am all for the "destruction" of the right wing, AshkeNAZI-racist, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, colonizer-settler establishment in Israel beginning with the immediate and permanent cessation of ALL US-Nato military support for & economic aid to (including total economic boycott of) Bibi's mass murdering regime.

The power of the US-Israel lobby makes it the United States' problem as well. — Tzeentch

That's like saying that the power of the oil lobby makes the green energy transition a problem for the US. The fact that there are lobby groups pushing an agenda in US politics doesn't make it our problem. That's just corruption.

I believe that a state favouring one religion above others is inherently discriminatory and should progress into an actual democracy instead of the Apartheid state it is now. — Benkei

Is a state to promote a certain way of life at all? Or no -- should it stay completely neutral? If a state has a religious character that may be due to democracy; the people may have wanted it. I don't see democracy and a state promoting a certain way of life/ancestral traditions as inherently anti-democratic.

If Israel were to fall it would just become a Muslim state. To impose secularism on a religious population seems undemocratic.

That's like saying that the power of the oil lobby makes the green energy transition a problem for the US. The fact that there are lobby groups pushing an agenda in US politics doesn't make it our problem. That's just corruption. — Mr Bee

It is a problem for the US. You might call it corruption, but what the US-Israel lobby does is completely legal, and yes, many believe this state of affairs is not in the US' best interest.

If you are unaware of the workings and scope of the US-Israel lobby, I would recommend watching something like this:

Is a state to promote a certain way of life at all? Or no -- should it stay completely neutral? If a state has a religious character that may be due to democracy; the people may have wanted it. I don't see democracy and a state promoting a certain way of life/ancestral traditions as inherently anti-democratic.

If Israel were to fall it would just become a Muslim state. To impose secularism on a religious population seems undemocratic. — BitconnectCarlos

There's too much to fully unpack for me here considering my own time. Quite frankly I'm flabbergasted at the lack of knowledge what makes a democracy a democracy. It's not just majority rule; it's also respect of fundamental civil rights and the rule of law. I get that a religious person would love for the world to adjust to their version of fairy tales but it won't. The safest political arrangement for any religious person has proven to be a pluralistic, secular democracy. In fact, empirical evidence seems to point to religious diversity making democracies better and the closer a religious is fused to a State the less free it becomes.

And no, there's nothing wrong with a state religion, as long as it doesn't discriminate between its own citizens based on religion. And there are plenty of countries that manage this just fine; among them England, Denmark and Greece.

It's not just majority rule; it's also respect of fundamental civil rights and the rule of law. — Benkei

You don't seem to take notice of the inherent contradictions within this idea. What if the majority wants e.g. blaspheming Muhammad to carry a penalty?

If e.g. 90% of a population wants a state to promote and embody a certain religious tradition how "democratic" is to tell them no -- you must be secular.

Are states not within their rights to strive to maintain a certain demographic balance or would that be apartheid?

BTW Greece does favor those with Greek ancestry for citizenship.

BTW Greece does favor those with Greek ancestry for citizenship. — BitconnectCarlos

And subsequently doesn't discriminate between it's citizens unlike Israel.

You don't seem to take notice of the inherent contradictions within this idea. What if the majority wants e.g. blaspheming Muhammad to carry a penalty? — BitconnectCarlos

Freedom of speech trumps dumb fairy tales.