Thanks for sharing. Perfectly on-brand from them tbh.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
Oh totally, I'll deny it. it's genocide
The United States takes a "white" position in Ukraine. It is for Freedom and Democracy. It takes a Black position in the current (and past) Israeli-Palestinian conflict (it is not about gradual, empirically verified, apartheid, but instead it is about Israel's "right to Defend itself [code for Israel's right to practice apartheid and expansionist policies in the West Bank and Syria].
Brzezinski's Great Chessboard is interesting. I simplify it by simply stating that all nations, of a certain size/military expenditure, find themselves playing a death-cult game. Russia (to Russians) is White in Ukraine (Black to many other nations, because they invaded and support that seizure of land as per current events) and posits itself as White in Syria. By assuring the Assad regime, a check against the American-led and British/French/Israeli-supported movement to remove Assad. To a Western audience, America and its vassals contend that it is White in the Middle East.
White just means "Correct side/Good actor" and Black, as per chess, but within moral orderings, here, "Wrong side/Bad Actor".
Everyone knows that Russia is occupying Ukraine and that Israel is illegally occupying the vast majority of the West Bank and various parts to its north. It, Israel, cites terrorism (Hamas/Hezbollah) as its reason for war. That is where it draws its legitimacy from in the minds of people.
The problem, I think, is the obviously hypocritical nature of what various nations are doing in various parts of the world under the guise of national security (call it resource competition if you prefer).
America/Nato (easier that way) are White in Ukraine, as per their own propaganda, because Russia is Black and Russia has invaded without just cause (no just invasions). But, in the same insane Orwellian foreign policy, we are now receiving justification for the continuation of a multi-decade ethnic cleansing process in the Palestinian territories. One ethnic cleansing is terrible (Russia occupying Ukraine) and you cannot, genuinely, (they are right here), justify any of that war. That is, Russia cannot occupy Ukraine and should simply retreat with proper negotiations. However, the other ethnic cleansing, which has been forecast decades in advance, that such a moment as this (the Hamas terror act) would come, is justified by a slogan called "Freedom Fries [Israel has the right to do whatever it wants because they are our allies and we do not care if it causes cognitive dissonance amongst our own citizenry].
Then we have Russia, farcically, citing what is truthful but selectively in Israel and in Syria. Painting itself as "White" and in the "right".
It has all been laid bare. The news you read, the tweets you consume, the "sides" you take (which you are encouraged to take, as per divide and rule: "free palestine/four more years" was the dichotomy yesterday as Biden gave a speech) and so on. It is all Empire/War agenda serving gibberish. Anti-Orwellian because Orwell was making precisely the point I am paraphrasing here in many of his own works (read on the English Language as an example).
There is no excusing what Israel is doing in Palestine and no excusing what Russia is doing in Ukraine (nor any excusing the American-supported-Israeli regime if we want to be consistent and apply the same standards as are applied to the Iranian-backed-Hezbollah or whatever "bad guy/nation term [insert-Backed]" precedes a description in a news item, propaganda, obviously, which exist to steer people in an already selected direction.
It is genocide. The Hamas attack was a micro-genocide (I don't care about semantics with respect to scale) and the Israeli response is a large-scale-genocide. It is the larger genocide, Israeli (White in Western news sources), which we are encouraged to respect as per Israel's "right to defend itself". Apply that same standard to the Russian occupation/genocide (if we like) in Ukraine and you see how ridiculous it all is (whenever a talking head bothers to even pretend there is a moral issue behind their action).
Add to that, then, the positions America takes in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Yemen, and most of Africa. These are all "Black" positions and you hear about them precisely "never" because they are exactly that: without any capacity to justify. It is the Saudi demon we are supposed to blame, the American-backed-Saudi demon, when America is asked why it does what it does in that region.
It's one large war-game with morality entirely in existence only to rile support, blindly, for foreign actions which nations might justify as resource competition abroad but which is never explicated in-depth on any mainstream news outlet domestically. It is, entirely intentional, too, kept from the agenda.
Every medium to large-sized nation is at it. It's not even an anti-American thing, nor an anti-Israeli thing. It's just what is actually happening. You need only switch the name/brand of the nation around and the farce is laid entirely bare.
Great post.
Each day it breaks my heart. I read somewhere Netanyahu said he will try and reduce civilian loss of life down to 200 from 250 per day. I mean what is this world that we live in. Where is the humanity? What a shameful world we live in today.
People are getting murdered in their droves and nothing is being done about it.
If you support the IDF and you support what is happening in Palestine right now all I have to say is one day, you're eyes will stare in horror.
People are getting murdered in their droves and nothing is being done about it.
If you support the IDF and you support what is happening in Palestine right now all I have to say is one day, you're eyes will stare in horror.
That was a parody account.
Tried to look this up but haven't found a source.
It's coming from Al Jazeera reporter there quoting sources from the government.
Perfect caricatures from the most simplistic fiction, villains from a YA novel. Hunger Games elites laughing at huts in the coal mining village.
...
Short documentary on a small aspect of Gaza, made before Oct 7:
Getting inspiration from Mengele, I thought that the forced starvation now could be a good natural experiment in terms of long-term effects of starvation on survivors and their children (an interesting and open epigenetics question, one first explored using survivors of starvation in WW2 Holland). But the documentary has some interesting stuff about increased pollution and cancer rates already, which will complicate the interpretation.
If its true, then it may be a reference to the US base in Djibouti being used against the Houthis. It obviously wouldn't apply to US carrier groups in the area. The latter have more than enough firepower by way of the planes if ever there was a conflict with the Houthis.
The Arab Peace Initiative, 2002 Official translation of the full text of a Saudi-inspired peace plan adopted by the Arab summit in Beirut, 2002.
The Council of Arab States at the Summit Level at its 14th Ordinary Session, Reaffirming the resolution taken in June 1996 at the Cairo Extra-Ordinary Arab Summit that a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East is the strategic option of the Arab countries, to be achieved in accordance with international legality, and which would require a comparable commitment on the part of the Israeli government,
Having listened to the statement made by his royal highness Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, crown prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, in which his highness presented his initiative calling for full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967, in implementation of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, reaffirmed by the Madrid Conference of 1991 and the land-for-peace principle, and Israel's acceptance of an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, in return for the establishment of normal relations in the context of a comprehensive peace with Israel,
Emanating from the conviction of the Arab countries that a military solution to the conflict will not achieve peace or provide security for the parties, the council:
1. Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well.
2. Further calls upon Israel to affirm: I- Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon. II- Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194. III- The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
3. Consequently, the Arab countries affirm the following:
I- Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region.
II- Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.
4. Assures the rejection of all forms of Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special circumstances of the Arab host countries.
5. Calls upon the government of Israel and all Israelis to accept this initiative in order to safeguard the prospects for peace and stop the further shedding of blood, enabling the Arab countries and Israel to live in peace and good neighbourliness and provide future generations with security, stability and prosperity.
6. Invites the international community and all countries and organisations to support this initiative.
7. Requests the chairman of the summit to form a special committee composed of some of its concerned member states and the secretary general of the League of Arab States to pursue the necessary contacts to gain support for this initiative at all levels, particularly from the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the Muslim states and the European Union.
This initiative were readopted in 2007 by all arab countries except Libya.
Both rejected by Israel despite some positive reactions with no counter proposal from the Israeli side.
The Council of Arab States at the Summit Level at its 14th Ordinary Session, Reaffirming the resolution taken in June 1996 at the Cairo Extra-Ordinary Arab Summit that a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East is the strategic option of the Arab countries, to be achieved in accordance with international legality, and which would require a comparable commitment on the part of the Israeli government,
Having listened to the statement made by his royal highness Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, crown prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, in which his highness presented his initiative calling for full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967, in implementation of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, reaffirmed by the Madrid Conference of 1991 and the land-for-peace principle, and Israel's acceptance of an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, in return for the establishment of normal relations in the context of a comprehensive peace with Israel,
Emanating from the conviction of the Arab countries that a military solution to the conflict will not achieve peace or provide security for the parties, the council:
1. Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well.
2. Further calls upon Israel to affirm: I- Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon. II- Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194. III- The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
3. Consequently, the Arab countries affirm the following:
I- Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region.
II- Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.
4. Assures the rejection of all forms of Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special circumstances of the Arab host countries.
5. Calls upon the government of Israel and all Israelis to accept this initiative in order to safeguard the prospects for peace and stop the further shedding of blood, enabling the Arab countries and Israel to live in peace and good neighbourliness and provide future generations with security, stability and prosperity.
6. Invites the international community and all countries and organisations to support this initiative.
7. Requests the chairman of the summit to form a special committee composed of some of its concerned member states and the secretary general of the League of Arab States to pursue the necessary contacts to gain support for this initiative at all levels, particularly from the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the Muslim states and the European Union.
This initiative were readopted in 2007 by all arab countries except Libya.
Both rejected by Israel despite some positive reactions with no counter proposal from the Israeli side.
reminder
Watch it live in the link
The lawsuit is headed for a hearing in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California later this month.
I get that it's good that this is in a formal court and all, but:
1. Who is the court made of?
2. Has this court ever found a western power guilty before?
2. What power does it have to punish?
I'm a little surprised at the optimism here and on twitter about this, basically, and also by the U-turn in Israeli rhetoric (broadcasst in English at least) as it approaches.
1. Who is the court made of?
2. Has this court ever found a western power guilty before?
2. What power does it have to punish?
I'm a little surprised at the optimism here and on twitter about this, basically, and also by the U-turn in Israeli rhetoric (broadcasst in English at least) as it approaches.
If it leads nowhere, at least it will lead to a further erosion of belief in western values among ordinary people. Divide between west and east will be furthered. Which is not neccesarily a bad thing, because western world is selling itself as a society built on freedom and democracy, which it isn't.
I don't believe anything will happen but it is good that even if it's just for show that they will be asked some questions. I hope they restraint themselves a little after this.
SA are going out hard. Not holding back one bit.
Yep, freedom and democracy when it's convenient and suits their agenda/pockets. The world is so full of shite.
This is good. People keep arguing if it's genocide or not. The whole point of defining the word and looking at history is to stop it BEFORE it happens, not look into it after the fact
I think there's a real danger that there's a ruling it's not genocide and that gives Israel cover to continue it's barbaric acts.
They will never rule genocide but hopefully demand a cease fire, making the war illegal and therefore anything as a consequence of it a crime.
They don't have to determine that this constitutes a genocide, rather that there's a real risk of one occurring due to the genocide convention being breached by Israel. South Africa is more asking for provisional measures to prevent one.
Doesn't seem that any of the major TV channels in the US and the UK are broadcasting it, would be funny if they only do so tomorrow during Israel's defense.
And it will take some time for a ruling on whether it constitutes genocide. Their goal is basically to do what the UNSC can't do because of the US veto.
Kind of fascinating how the zionists always react towards the accusations thrown at them. They either lie while playing the victim or go for character assassination of the accuser. You could see it in almost any debate with them over the decades and it has been emphasized 100 times more in the last 3 months.
Character assassination of South Africa from the zionists so far include:
They're the legal arm of Hamas
They work with the PA and take money from Iran and other countries
They're tarnishing the legacy of combatting racism
Oh, and the Hague court is plagued with antisemitism.
Character assassination of South Africa from the zionists so far include:
They're the legal arm of Hamas
They work with the PA and take money from Iran and other countries
They're tarnishing the legacy of combatting racism
Oh, and the Hague court is plagued with antisemitism.
Last edited:
The West Bank.
Just shows you how deeply things are tainted. Judges, professionals - you'd expect to act on the merits/facts of each case because of the sheer repercussions their decisions have on/in society, should be as objective as possible - irrespective of their countries of association. Yet, here we are...