guys, this is a sarcastic anti-israel twitter account.
Did you think that I wasn't aware of that already? If you follow his account you'll notice that he actually makes some very sharp, accurate observations.
So if Israel relinquished air, sea, and land crossing control over Gaza, it'd be a start. I agree.
Lol. So you'd like to see a 180 degree flip of the situation.
Lol. Yeah, Israel has no legal right to continue occupying Gaza in this way. Lol. The Palestinians have the right to self-determination under international law. Lol.
Agreed. Posting spoof twitter accounts is definitely not congruent with how Byrnzie tell us how he makes only good points.
Are the points that Twitter account makes not good points? I think they're very good points. Sometimes satire is the only way to deal with a campaign of cynical lying and shameless propaganda.
Many who have watched the conflict over the past few weeks have made the fundamental error of viewing it as a national struggle between Israelis versus Palestinians. In reality, an extremist segment of the Palestinian leadership – Hamas along with other terror groups – has effectively hijacked the Palestinian national movement in the name of Islamism.
The agenda isn’t about securing Palestinian rights or opposing Israeli policies; it’s about securing an Islamic state and opposing Israel’s existence. The vision offered by Hamas, and paid for by Iran, cannot be detached from what has happened in Iraq and Syria, and the ongoing battle between Sunni jihadis and Shia jihadis across the region.
Having lived under the sort of regime Hamas intends to create in Gaza, I know firsthand that Hamas is foremost a threat to the Palestinians themselves. And I know that, while Israelis may be Tehran’s sworn enemy, the Palestinian people are nothing more than pawns in the radical scheme of Iran’s ayatollahs.
I agree with your thinking here.Ive said the same thing.
You may agree with it, but it has no relation to reality.
I hardly think that the exclusion of all of North America still constitutes the "whole world".
It does when my original comment was that the whole World is on one side and the U.S and Israel are on the other.
Also, because I'm nitpicky, the U.S. and Canada do not comprise "all of North America." There are 21 more countries in the continent, eight of which have UN Associations.
Many who have watched the conflict over the past few weeks have made the fundamental error of viewing it as a national struggle between Israelis versus Palestinians. In reality, an extremist segment of the Palestinian leadership – Hamas along with other terror groups – has effectively hijacked the Palestinian national movement in the name of Islamism.
The agenda isn’t about securing Palestinian rights or opposing Israeli policies; it’s about securing an Islamic state and opposing Israel’s existence. The vision offered by Hamas, and paid for by Iran, cannot be detached from what has happened in Iraq and Syria, and the ongoing battle between Sunni jihadis and Shia jihadis across the region.
Having lived under the sort of regime Hamas intends to create in Gaza, I know firsthand that Hamas is foremost a threat to the Palestinians themselves. And I know that, while Israelis may be Tehran’s sworn enemy, the Palestinian people are nothing more than pawns in the radical scheme of Iran’s ayatollahs.
I agree with your thinking here.Ive said the same thing.
You may agree with it, but it has no relation to reality.
Many who have watched the conflict over the past few weeks have made the fundamental error of viewing it as a national struggle between Israelis versus Palestinians. In reality, an extremist segment of the Palestinian leadership – Hamas along with other terror groups – has effectively hijacked the Palestinian national movement in the name of Islamism.
The agenda isn’t about securing Palestinian rights or opposing Israeli policies; it’s about securing an Islamic state and opposing Israel’s existence. The vision offered by Hamas, and paid for by Iran, cannot be detached from what has happened in Iraq and Syria, and the ongoing battle between Sunni jihadis and Shia jihadis across the region.
Having lived under the sort of regime Hamas intends to create in Gaza, I know firsthand that Hamas is foremost a threat to the Palestinians themselves. And I know that, while Israelis may be Tehran’s sworn enemy, the Palestinian people are nothing more than pawns in the radical scheme of Iran’s ayatollahs.
I agree with your thinking here.Ive said the same thing.
You may agree with it, but it has no relation to reality.
</blockquote I guess we perceive reality thru different lenses.I can assure you,it won't end well for Hamas,when all is said and done.Another will take its place but they will be exposed.
Palestinian resistance in Gaza is “fighting for all of us,” says Dr. Mads Gilbert 08/08/2014
“The heart of the Earth beats in Gaza now. It bleeds, but it beats,” says Dr. Mads Gilbert.
The Norwegian emergency surgeon returned to his home city of Tromsø on 31 July, after spending several weeks treating the wounded from Israel’s assault at Gaza City’s al-Shifa Hospital.
He went straight from the airport to give a spontaneous speech at a large solidarity demonstration for Gaza held at the same time.
Tromsø is twinned with Gaza City.
The newspaper Nordlys made this video, above, of his speech. It is subtitled in English.
“The Palestinian people’s resistance in Gaza today is admirable, it is fair and it is a struggle for all of us. We do not want a world where raw power can be abused, to kill those who struggle for justice.”
Gilbert asks why after all the massacres, all of Israel’s violations of the laws protecting civilians, there are no sanctions on Israel.
He demands to know why the government of Norway is so “quiet” as Palestinians face “one of the most brutal occupation forces of modern history.”
“Solidarity is a powerful weapon,” Gilbert says, ending his address with a call for everyone to get involved in the movement for Palestinian rights.
“Israel is more isolated than ever and they deserve to be,” Gilbert says, endorsing the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement.
It is a powerful 25-minute speech.
We have transcribed the first few minutes, in which Gilbert asks his fellow Norwegians to imagine what their country would be like today if they had not struggled for its liberation from German occupation:
I know you applaud for Gaza. I know you applaud for those who are there, the heroes of Gaza.
This will be no easy appeal to make, because I am now overcome by the mildness, the warmth, the safety, the absence of bombs, jets, blood and death. And then all that we’ve had to keep inside comes to the surface – so forgive me if sometimes I break.
I thought when I got home and met my daughters Siri and Torbjørn, my son-in-law and my grandkids Jenny and Torje, that it is such a mild country we live in.
It so good, with a kind of humanity in all relationships, because we actually built this country on respect for diversity, respect for the individual, respect for human dignity.
And imagine being back in 1945. And I beg to be understood when I say that I am not comparing the German Nazi regime with Israel. I do not.
But I compare occupation with occupation. Imagine that we in 1945 did not win the liberation struggle, did not throw out the occupier, could not see a bright future or believe our kids had a future. Imagine the occupier remaining in our country, taking it piece by piece, for decades upon decades. And banished us to the leanest areas. Took the fish in the sea, took the land, took the water, and we became more and more confined.
And here in Tromsø we were actually imprisoned, because here there was so much resistance to the occupation. So we are imprisoned for seven years, because in an election we had chosen the most resilient, those who would not accept the occupation.
Then after seven years of confinement in our city, Tromsø, the occupier began to bomb us. And they began to bomb us the day we made a political alliance with those in the other confined parts of occupied Norway, to say that we Norwegians would stand together against the occupier. Then they began to bomb us.
They bombed our university hospital, then the medical center, then killed our ambulance workers, they bombed schools where those who had lost their homes were trying to seek shelter. Then they cut the power and bombed our power plant. Then they shut off the water supply. What would we have done?
Would we have given up, waved the white flag? No. No, we would not. And this is the situation in Gaza.
This is not a battle between terrorism and democracy. Hamas is not the enemy Israel is fighting. Israel is waging a war against the Palestinian people’s will to resist. The unbending determination not to submit to the occupation!
It is the Palestinian people’s dignity and humanity that will not accept that they are treated as third, fourth, fifth-ranking people.
In 1938, the Nazis called the Jews “Untermenschen,” subhuman. Today, Palestinians in the West Bank, in Gaza, in the Diaspora are treated as Untermensch, as subhumans who can be bombed, killed, slaughtered by their thousands, without any of those in power reacting.
So I returned home to my free country – and this country is free because we had a resistance movement, because we said that occupied nations have the right to resist, even with weapons. It’s stated in international law.
You are permitted to fight the occupier even with weapons. One should of course respect international law …
Keep fighting. It just keeps you spinning your wheels, going absolutely nowhere. No one is really interested in peace for the people when they insist on choosing sides. People would rather spin their wheels than to work for actual progress, solutions and ultimately peace. Because that means actually working together and eating our stupid pride.
You're just making excuses for doing nothing. And all that your lazy apathetic selfishness achieves is that it benefits the aggressor in this conflict, and allows a prolongation of the suffering of those under occupation.
But what's actually incredibly offensive and disrespectful is that not only do you profess to not give a fuck about the people being occupied, and oppressed, but that you feel you should try to convince others to adopt that same attitude.
Please do not take any offense my friend, I really do not mean to offend and do not want it to come across that way, but I am actually curious...
Are you doing anything to help in regards to this conflict? And do you have any advice to people that may want to help, in anyway?
Does anyone find it the least bit interesting that we've spent the last 6 years removing ourselves from world affairs and now the world is on fire? I know we can't and shouldn't be involved in everything. But, perhaps SOME vigilance might be in order to "maintain the peace." (And no I'm not so stupid I think that nothing goes on when we are more involved. I am talking about degrees).
A little preventive measure goes a long way. - Speak softly and carry a big stick. (which does not mean you have to use the stick. Just that folks know you're willing to use it instead of jibber jabbing).
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Started by Hamas because they want an open border (which Egypt won't provide either), but won't disarm. Why don't they attack Egypt for keeping a closed border?
They have no hope of defeating Israel militarily, yet they choose a militaristic solution that puts their citizens at peril while only addressing a single border. How does that make any sense?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Does anyone find it the least bit interesting that we've spent the last 6 years removing ourselves from world affairs and now the world is on fire? I know we can't and shouldn't be involved in everything. But, perhaps SOME vigilance might be in order to "maintain the peace." (And no I'm not so stupid I think that nothing goes on when we are more involved. I am talking about degrees).
A little preventive measure goes a long way. - Speak softly and carry a big stick. (which does not mean you have to use the stick. Just that folks know you're willing to use it instead of jibber jabbing).
I think it is a good point, but I disagree that the world was not also on fire six years ago.
Started by Hamas because they want an open border (which Egypt won't provide either), but won't disarm. Why don't they attack Egypt for keeping a closed border?
They have no hope of defeating Israel militarily, yet they choose a militaristic solution that puts their citizens at peril while only addressing a single border. How does that make any sense?
Many who have watched the conflict over the past few weeks have made the fundamental error of viewing it as a national struggle between Israelis versus Palestinians. In reality, an extremist segment of the Palestinian leadership – Hamas along with other terror groups – has effectively hijacked the Palestinian national movement in the name of Islamism.
The agenda isn’t about securing Palestinian rights or opposing Israeli policies; it’s about securing an Islamic state and opposing Israel’s existence. The vision offered by Hamas, and paid for by Iran, cannot be detached from what has happened in Iraq and Syria, and the ongoing battle between Sunni jihadis and Shia jihadis across the region.
Having lived under the sort of regime Hamas intends to create in Gaza, I know firsthand that Hamas is foremost a threat to the Palestinians themselves. And I know that, while Israelis may be Tehran’s sworn enemy, the Palestinian people are nothing more than pawns in the radical scheme of Iran’s ayatollahs.
I agree with your thinking here.Ive said the same thing.
As Byrnzie said, this is not actually reflective of reality. One Zionist tactic to win support for Israel's assault on Gaza is to talk about the threat of "Islamism", almost as though to make this another front for the "War on Terror". This has been the case for years now.
The author of the article that dancinacrossthewater posted has a very superficial understanding of the Middle East. Just look at how the author can't even get his conspiracy straight: Hamas is a pawn of the Iranians, while a Sunni-Shia "jihadist" war rages across the Middle East. But what the author conveniently forgets is that Iran is Shia and Hamas is Sunni, so where does this confusion fit within the neat little paradigm the author constructed of the Middle East? Or the fact that Hamas chose not to support Assad in the Syrian Civil War, forcing the leadership to relocate elsewhere, such as Qatar -- the same Qatar that is supporting rebels against Assad in Syria, while Iran is supporting Assad. Unfortunately for people like the author, or dancinacrossthewater for that matter, the Middle East is actually a more complicated place than people give it credit for, as opposed to one large warzone where madmen are running around massacring each other.
Just like anywhere else in the world, there are politics that govern the relationships between different groups and governments here. Hamas is a Palestinian national movement - it is guided by Islamic principles, but its goal is not to create an Islamic empire, or even an Islamic "state" within historic Palestine. This isn't me saying this, this is the Hamas leadership themselves. Why not allow them to have their own voice? Why is it that whenever we want to know what Hamas thinks, we don't go see what they say, we ask their critics and Zionists what Hamas thinks? Such poor researching skills.
They have said they don't participate in any regional conflicts, they are simply focused on liberating Palestine from Israeli occupation -- something many in this thread claim to be in support of as well. They have said they don't have anything against Jews, they just oppose the occupation. They have said they'd accept a longterm ceasefire and peace along the 67 borders - something that Byrnzie astutely pointed out the overwhelming majority of the world, save the US and Israel, has also accepted. They have said that afterwards they will not negotiate the future of Palestine singlehandedly, but that they want the Palestinians themselves to decide what their future would be. They have accepted democratic principles in the past, which Western countries at the behest of Israel actually rejected because the right puppet didn't win.
But let's not deal with what's actually on the ground. It's much more convenient to believe in worldwide "Islamist" conspiracies. Let's not listen to what Palestinians themselves have to say. Let's just demonize Hamas without using facts, and say that they hold the Palestinians "hostage" without asking the Palestinians themselves. How else can we continue to justify Israeli war crimes? The first step to justifying these crimes is by creating a moral equivalency between both sides, despite the fact that one is an occupier and the other is being occupied; in spite of the fact that international law is very explicitly anti-occupation, while granting the occupied the right to resist. No, let's ignore reality and just focus on what conveniently fits our worldview, because those crazy Muslims are just so easy to hate.
I agree that the Elie Wiesel add is over the top. But so is Hamas's charter. It's up to others to try and work towards a solution, which doesn't mean just yelling "Fuck the oppressors" in a self-righteous way all the time. I don't think the majority of the folks in this thread are doing that - just a few.
Why is "fuck the oppressors" in quotes, as if you are quoting someone? Who in this thread said that? Can you please find the quote? What a fucking pathetic attempt to reduce the actual substantive arguments made in this thread to counter your false narratives. People have presented investigative articles, human rights reports, and historical context to explain why you are wrong. People have explained what potential solutions would look like. If all you think has been going on in this thread is people yelling "fuck the oppressors" then perhaps you have not been reading closely enough.
no i didn't say we can't [have a dialogue]...i said it would be difficult. i'm up for trying.
No, what you did was set preconditions for us even having a fucking discussion. You said:
"I'm happy to try and engage with your criticisms of the original article if you can phrase them in a more balanced manner and at least acknowledge that the guy who wrote it - and adopted a position most reasonable people would view as centrist - isn't totally full of shit. I don't accept your main argument that because Israel is currently the stronger power any attempt to look at the situation in a measured way means you're siding with Israel. So in that sense it's difficult for us to engage with each other because we're starting from fundamentally different assumptions."
You didn't like that my argument wasn't "balanced" enough for you, i.e., it doesn't fit your worldview. In fact, you explicitly say that at the end when you say that we have "different assumptions", therefore it's "difficult" for us to engage. You actually sound like an Israeli setting preconditions for negotiations with the Palestinians.
"First, you must recognize me." "Ok." "No, you must recognize my right to exist!" "Um...ok?" "No, now you must recognize that I have the right to exist as a Jewish state" "Fuck off"
What I am wondering about is, so if people decide on a two-state solution - how will this work out. Will they draw back the borders to what they have been in 1947? The people who had to flee from their land can go back and reclaim it? What will the people do who have lived there since back then? Can something like this happen peacefully? It somehow did in Germany after the country came back together. There were personal tragedies, but they were of course not comparable to what is going on in the Middle East right now. Would there be a peaceful solution that is not going to start another battleground?
Yeah, I'm wondering the same thing. That's why I keep repeating, what does a real resolution look like? Forcing Israel to back down is using a violent act, and violence only begets violence. It certainly doesn't cause peace. So far, Leeze, you are one of the few really attempting to think what peace would look like. I'm merely attempting to get people to actually start thinking in that direction rather than spinning the wheels of anger and finger pointing. Because, that gets us no where. You'd think more this concept would get into more people's heads.
What are you talking about? We've explained time and time again that there are peaceful ways to force Israel to back down. Why do you keep thinking these are calls for war? To demand that your representatives in the US stop sending military aid to Israel -- that's a call for violence? To boycott products from Israel -- that's a call for violence? To demand companies begin divesting from Israel until they adhere to international law is a call for violence? What exactly do you disagree with here? To demand that Israel ends the occupation is a call for violence? To demand that Palestinian refugees who have been living in refugee camps for over 60 years be allowed the right to return to their homes is a call for war?
I think there's been a lot of good debate in this thread in addition to some crap. I don't think the articles I've posted are crap, and I don't think all of what you've said is crap either. I do think think the idea that Hamas as an organization would accept peace along the 67 borders is untrue...one or two party officials may have said it at one point, but the vast majority of those who wield power in Hamas's power structure continue to call very openly for the destruction of Israel and annihilation of Jews.
Do you support Hamas over Fatah to lead Palestine, fuck? Serious question - I'm not trying to trick you.
So if Israel relinquished air, sea, and land crossing control over Gaza, it'd be a start. I agree.
Lol. So you'd like to see a 180 degree flip of the situation.
Why is this a laughing matter? Do you think the blockade should continue?
As for your comment, a 180 degree flip of the situation would be the following: Palestinians take 1.8 million Israelis and lock them in a 30 mile by 10 mile strip of land. They do not allow anyone to get out or to get in. They restrict all the goods that go in to the extent that just enough food passes in so that they don't completely starve to death. Over 95% of the water in this strip of land becomes contaminated. They can receive no goods to sort out water filtration or sewage. Electricity cuts out 50% of the day because we are blocking their access. If fishermen get a little too far out, we shoot them dead. If an Israeli gets just a little too close to the "no man's land" area of the border, we shoot them dead. We have drones flying up at night routinely assassinating people we deem "terrorists" because they dare resist this blockade we've imposed on them. Sometimes, oftentimes, their family members or other people are killed in these attacks. And every couple of years we launch a full operation to kill ~1500 people.
Is this what dancinacrossthewater called for? Or did dancinacrossthewater simply agree that the lifting of the inhumane blockade which UN officials have deemed a "collective punishment" on the people of Gaza and a "crime against humanity" might be a good start to reaching some sort of settlement?
Then again, maybe you just skipped Geometry class in middle school.
I think there's been a lot of good debate in this thread in addition to some crap. I don't think the articles I've posted are crap, and I don't think all of what you've said is crap either. I do think think the idea that Hamas as an organization would accept peace along the 67 borders is untrue...one or two party officials may have said it at one point, but the vast majority of those who wield power in Hamas's power structure continue to call very openly for the destruction of Israel and annihilation of Jews.
Would you like to provide some evidence? Did you not watch what Khaled Meshaal, Hamas' leader, said in his interview with Charlie Rose? Also, who is that actually "wields power" in Hamas' "power structure" -- would you care to enlighten us?
I think there's been a lot of good debate in this thread in addition to some crap. I don't think the articles I've posted are crap, and I don't think all of what you've said is crap either. I do think think the idea that Hamas as an organization would accept peace along the 67 borders is untrue...one or two party officials may have said it at one point, but the vast majority of those who wield power in Hamas's power structure continue to call very openly for the destruction of Israel and annihilation of Jews.
Do you support Hamas over Fatah to lead Palestine, fuck? Serious question - I'm not trying to trick you.
I think I understand the frustrations of many posters here when questions are answered time and time again, distractions are brought in, and the debate starts again - it's like a record player skipping, but in this morbid scenario, the longer the playback continues, the more blood is spilt. Israel is NOT in a legal position to wage war against Hamas if it creates a collective punishment to be carried over to the Palestinians, because Israel itself has ensured that the Palestinians have nowhere to go! Do tell: where do you tell 1.8 million people to go if they're afraid of rockets being dropped by Israel, and funded by the largest military superpower in the world? Should they... wade out into the ocean (which, if they go to far out into, they'll be shot)? How about... going towards Israel, the people who technically and politically control the region (who, if they go to close to, they'll be shot)?
If Palestine existed as an independent entity, Hamas would be forced to be accountable for any terrorism from that very instance onwards to its own people, to the ICC, to the UN, to Israel. Its own people, the UN, and Israel would ALL be perfectly within their rights to retaliate brutally to any terrorism. From the very SECOND that the Palestinian regions are under Hamas-Fatah rule, the world will know whether Hamas was indeed a peaceful entity, and if they are not, my only hope is that the Palestinian people can revolt quickly enough to remove them from power without too many further casualties.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Comments
T&T, represent.
This is exciting stuff
Video:
Palestinian resistance in Gaza is “fighting for all of us,” says Dr. Mads Gilbert
08/08/2014
“The heart of the Earth beats in Gaza now. It bleeds, but it beats,” says Dr. Mads Gilbert.
The Norwegian emergency surgeon returned to his home city of Tromsø on 31 July, after spending several weeks treating the wounded from Israel’s assault at Gaza City’s al-Shifa Hospital.
He went straight from the airport to give a spontaneous speech at a large solidarity demonstration for Gaza held at the same time.
Tromsø is twinned with Gaza City.
The newspaper Nordlys made this video, above, of his speech. It is subtitled in English.
“The Palestinian people’s resistance in Gaza today is admirable, it is fair and it is a struggle for all of us. We do not want a world where raw power can be abused, to kill those who struggle for justice.”
Gilbert asks why after all the massacres, all of Israel’s violations of the laws protecting civilians, there are no sanctions on Israel.
He demands to know why the government of Norway is so “quiet” as Palestinians face “one of the most brutal occupation forces of modern history.”
“Solidarity is a powerful weapon,” Gilbert says, ending his address with a call for everyone to get involved in the movement for Palestinian rights.
“Israel is more isolated than ever and they deserve to be,” Gilbert says, endorsing the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement.
It is a powerful 25-minute speech.
We have transcribed the first few minutes, in which Gilbert asks his fellow Norwegians to imagine what their country would be like today if they had not struggled for its liberation from German occupation:
I know you applaud for Gaza. I know you applaud for those who are there, the heroes of Gaza.
This will be no easy appeal to make, because I am now overcome by the mildness, the warmth, the safety, the absence of bombs, jets, blood and death. And then all that we’ve had to keep inside comes to the surface – so forgive me if sometimes I break.
I thought when I got home and met my daughters Siri and Torbjørn, my son-in-law and my grandkids Jenny and Torje, that it is such a mild country we live in.
It so good, with a kind of humanity in all relationships, because we actually built this country on respect for diversity, respect for the individual, respect for human dignity.
And imagine being back in 1945. And I beg to be understood when I say that I am not comparing the German Nazi regime with Israel. I do not.
But I compare occupation with occupation. Imagine that we in 1945 did not win the liberation struggle, did not throw out the occupier, could not see a bright future or believe our kids had a future. Imagine the occupier remaining in our country, taking it piece by piece, for decades upon decades. And banished us to the leanest areas. Took the fish in the sea, took the land, took the water, and we became more and more confined.
And here in Tromsø we were actually imprisoned, because here there was so much resistance to the occupation. So we are imprisoned for seven years, because in an election we had chosen the most resilient, those who would not accept the occupation.
Then after seven years of confinement in our city, Tromsø, the occupier began to bomb us. And they began to bomb us the day we made a political alliance with those in the other confined parts of occupied Norway, to say that we Norwegians would stand together against the occupier. Then they began to bomb us.
They bombed our university hospital, then the medical center, then killed our ambulance workers, they bombed schools where those who had lost their homes were trying to seek shelter. Then they cut the power and bombed our power plant. Then they shut off the water supply. What would we have done?
Would we have given up, waved the white flag? No. No, we would not. And this is the situation in Gaza.
This is not a battle between terrorism and democracy. Hamas is not the enemy Israel is fighting. Israel is waging a war against the Palestinian people’s will to resist. The unbending determination not to submit to the occupation!
It is the Palestinian people’s dignity and humanity that will not accept that they are treated as third, fourth, fifth-ranking people.
In 1938, the Nazis called the Jews “Untermenschen,” subhuman. Today, Palestinians in the West Bank, in Gaza, in the Diaspora are treated as Untermensch, as subhumans who can be bombed, killed, slaughtered by their thousands, without any of those in power reacting.
So I returned home to my free country – and this country is free because we had a resistance movement, because we said that occupied nations have the right to resist, even with weapons. It’s stated in international law.
You are permitted to fight the occupier even with weapons. One should of course respect international law …
Nobody wants to be occupied!
Yippee!
Too much war, too many warlords, too many conflicts. Worldwide.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
SWEET!
Are you doing anything to help in regards to this conflict? And do you have any advice to people that may want to help, in anyway?
A little preventive measure goes a long way. - Speak softly and carry a big stick. (which does not mean you have to use the stick. Just that folks know you're willing to use it instead of jibber jabbing).
They have no hope of defeating Israel militarily, yet they choose a militaristic solution that puts their citizens at peril while only addressing a single border. How does that make any sense?
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
The author of the article that dancinacrossthewater posted has a very superficial understanding of the Middle East. Just look at how the author can't even get his conspiracy straight: Hamas is a pawn of the Iranians, while a Sunni-Shia "jihadist" war rages across the Middle East. But what the author conveniently forgets is that Iran is Shia and Hamas is Sunni, so where does this confusion fit within the neat little paradigm the author constructed of the Middle East? Or the fact that Hamas chose not to support Assad in the Syrian Civil War, forcing the leadership to relocate elsewhere, such as Qatar -- the same Qatar that is supporting rebels against Assad in Syria, while Iran is supporting Assad. Unfortunately for people like the author, or dancinacrossthewater for that matter, the Middle East is actually a more complicated place than people give it credit for, as opposed to one large warzone where madmen are running around massacring each other.
Just like anywhere else in the world, there are politics that govern the relationships between different groups and governments here. Hamas is a Palestinian national movement - it is guided by Islamic principles, but its goal is not to create an Islamic empire, or even an Islamic "state" within historic Palestine. This isn't me saying this, this is the Hamas leadership themselves. Why not allow them to have their own voice? Why is it that whenever we want to know what Hamas thinks, we don't go see what they say, we ask their critics and Zionists what Hamas thinks? Such poor researching skills.
They have said they don't participate in any regional conflicts, they are simply focused on liberating Palestine from Israeli occupation -- something many in this thread claim to be in support of as well. They have said they don't have anything against Jews, they just oppose the occupation. They have said they'd accept a longterm ceasefire and peace along the 67 borders - something that Byrnzie astutely pointed out the overwhelming majority of the world, save the US and Israel, has also accepted. They have said that afterwards they will not negotiate the future of Palestine singlehandedly, but that they want the Palestinians themselves to decide what their future would be. They have accepted democratic principles in the past, which Western countries at the behest of Israel actually rejected because the right puppet didn't win.
But let's not deal with what's actually on the ground. It's much more convenient to believe in worldwide "Islamist" conspiracies. Let's not listen to what Palestinians themselves have to say. Let's just demonize Hamas without using facts, and say that they hold the Palestinians "hostage" without asking the Palestinians themselves. How else can we continue to justify Israeli war crimes? The first step to justifying these crimes is by creating a moral equivalency between both sides, despite the fact that one is an occupier and the other is being occupied; in spite of the fact that international law is very explicitly anti-occupation, while granting the occupied the right to resist. No, let's ignore reality and just focus on what conveniently fits our worldview, because those crazy Muslims are just so easy to hate.
"I'm happy to try and engage with your criticisms of the original article if you can phrase them in a more balanced manner and at least acknowledge that the guy who wrote it - and adopted a position most reasonable people would view as centrist - isn't totally full of shit. I don't accept your main argument that because Israel is currently the stronger power any attempt to look at the situation in a measured way means you're siding with Israel. So in that sense it's difficult for us to engage with each other because we're starting from fundamentally different assumptions."
You didn't like that my argument wasn't "balanced" enough for you, i.e., it doesn't fit your worldview. In fact, you explicitly say that at the end when you say that we have "different assumptions", therefore it's "difficult" for us to engage. You actually sound like an Israeli setting preconditions for negotiations with the Palestinians.
"First, you must recognize me."
"Ok."
"No, you must recognize my right to exist!"
"Um...ok?"
"No, now you must recognize that I have the right to exist as a Jewish state"
"Fuck off"
Do you support Hamas over Fatah to lead Palestine, fuck? Serious question - I'm not trying to trick you.
As for your comment, a 180 degree flip of the situation would be the following: Palestinians take 1.8 million Israelis and lock them in a 30 mile by 10 mile strip of land. They do not allow anyone to get out or to get in. They restrict all the goods that go in to the extent that just enough food passes in so that they don't completely starve to death. Over 95% of the water in this strip of land becomes contaminated. They can receive no goods to sort out water filtration or sewage. Electricity cuts out 50% of the day because we are blocking their access. If fishermen get a little too far out, we shoot them dead. If an Israeli gets just a little too close to the "no man's land" area of the border, we shoot them dead. We have drones flying up at night routinely assassinating people we deem "terrorists" because they dare resist this blockade we've imposed on them. Sometimes, oftentimes, their family members or other people are killed in these attacks. And every couple of years we launch a full operation to kill ~1500 people.
Is this what dancinacrossthewater called for? Or did dancinacrossthewater simply agree that the lifting of the inhumane blockade which UN officials have deemed a "collective punishment" on the people of Gaza and a "crime against humanity" might be a good start to reaching some sort of settlement?
Then again, maybe you just skipped Geometry class in middle school.
If Palestine existed as an independent entity, Hamas would be forced to be accountable for any terrorism from that very instance onwards to its own people, to the ICC, to the UN, to Israel. Its own people, the UN, and Israel would ALL be perfectly within their rights to retaliate brutally to any terrorism. From the very SECOND that the Palestinian regions are under Hamas-Fatah rule, the world will know whether Hamas was indeed a peaceful entity, and if they are not, my only hope is that the Palestinian people can revolt quickly enough to remove them from power without too many further casualties.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1