Gaza War, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Move on and get over it! ” - when it’s about Palestinian expulsion and death

“Never forget !!” -about Jewish expulsion and death.

I don’t think any Jews or the Israeli state have said “move on and get over it.”

I think weaponizing the Holocaust as you do is a form of antisemitism. It’s offensive. You might think it’s a witty statement, but it’s not true and it shows that you’re holding a chip on your shoulder about Jews and the Holocaust.

DP. I didn't see it as an attack on Jews or the Holocaust at all. It's an attitude that describes militant Zionists rather accurately and, unfortunately, reflects the attitudes of many leading officials in Israel. This is why there is currently a genocide underway. There's nothing antisemitic about pointing out this out.

Actually, it is antisemitic. The most basic DEI training will teach you that discrimination and harassment and hostile work environment caused by racist conduct is not based on what the allegedly racist person intended; whether it is racist from a legal perspective is whether a reasonable person on the receiving end of the comment would be offended. Comparing the Holocaust to Palestinian suffering is a party trick that weaponizes a 6 million person genocide, steals and misuses the term “genocide” and then applies it to an unfortunate and tragic situation in which innocents are killed because they are used as human shields by the terrorist organization that rules their government. Throwing the phrase “never again” in the face of Jewish people is offensive and antisemitic in this context. And no, just because YOU don’t agree that you’re antisemitic doesn’t mean that you aren’t. The legal standard is whether an average person, and particularly an average Jewish person, would find what you say to be offensive and antisemitic. And what you are saying is antisemitic, and we all see through you when you fixate and foam at the mouth over Jews killing Palestinians when you ignore all the other Palestinian deaths in other countries such as Syria or all the other mass killings that have taken place in the world over the past couple of decades. We see you, we know exactly what you are, and we’re too classy to scream in your face about it.

Most of the people that complain about Israel's treatment of the Palestinians complain about all those other places as well. That's why they complain about Israel's treatment of the Palestinians.

Blatantly absurd and false. They certainly do not. I don’t see threads like this on any other conflict.

It's one of the longest running shows on TV. There's been a lot of seasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Move on and get over it! ” - when it’s about Palestinian expulsion and death

“Never forget !!” -about Jewish expulsion and death.

I don’t think any Jews or the Israeli state have said “move on and get over it.”

I think weaponizing the Holocaust as you do is a form of antisemitism. It’s offensive. You might think it’s a witty statement, but it’s not true and it shows that you’re holding a chip on your shoulder about Jews and the Holocaust.

DP. I didn't see it as an attack on Jews or the Holocaust at all. It's an attitude that describes militant Zionists rather accurately and, unfortunately, reflects the attitudes of many leading officials in Israel. This is why there is currently a genocide underway. There's nothing antisemitic about pointing out this out.

Actually, it is antisemitic. The most basic DEI training will teach you that discrimination and harassment and hostile work environment caused by racist conduct is not based on what the allegedly racist person intended; whether it is racist from a legal perspective is whether a reasonable person on the receiving end of the comment would be offended. Comparing the Holocaust to Palestinian suffering is a party trick that weaponizes a 6 million person genocide, steals and misuses the term “genocide” and then applies it to an unfortunate and tragic situation in which innocents are killed because they are used as human shields by the terrorist organization that rules their government. Throwing the phrase “never again” in the face of Jewish people is offensive and antisemitic in this context. And no, just because YOU don’t agree that you’re antisemitic doesn’t mean that you aren’t. The legal standard is whether an average person, and particularly an average Jewish person, would find what you say to be offensive and antisemitic. And what you are saying is antisemitic, and we all see through you when you fixate and foam at the mouth over Jews killing Palestinians when you ignore all the other Palestinian deaths in other countries such as Syria or all the other mass killings that have taken place in the world over the past couple of decades. We see you, we know exactly what you are, and we’re too classy to scream in your face about it.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines genocide. Many experts on the topic believe that what is happening in Gaza is objectively genocide under this definition. Your argument appears to be that because of the Holocaust, identifying other genocides is "stealing and misusing" the term. That's like arguing you can't accuse anyone of murder, even when all the evidence is there, because someone previously committed an unrelated mass homicide. This obviously makes no sense, and it proves the point the PP made. And if antisemitism is in the eye of the beholder, what does DEI training make of anti-Palestinian sentiment? Is an "average Palestinian person" justified in feeling offended and victimized by having all their children killed by dumb bombs and dumber AI algorithms? By Smotrich's "Decisive Plan"? By deliberate starvation? By the execution of pro-Palestinian journalists? By vicious settler attacks in the West Bank? Antisemitism is real and ugly (as is anti-Palestinianism), but here you are weaponizing the term to try to shut down concerns about an ongoing genocide, which is really quite ironic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And if you're really all about ancestral lands, then guess what, Armenians lived in Artsakh for centuries, but that didn't keep Israel from supplying Azeris with top notch weapons to help them expel the natives.

DP.

I agree that claims to ancestral lands are unworkable.

Which is why Palestinians have no claim to Israel, since they last inhabited it > 80 years ago.

Actually, under UN Resolution 194, they do. They can either return to their homes or receive compensation. And in the case of Palestinians, we're not talking only about "ancestral lands," as in the lands of their ancestors. We're talking about their OWN lands, where they lived as young children and from which their parents and grandparents were evicted (or murdered) by Zionist terrorists (like the Irgun and Alexandroni Brigade) and the IDF. Also, it's under 80 years for many of those evicted during the Nakba. 80 years is very different from 2,000 years.

Excellent.

So Pakistanis also have the right to reclaim their family lands in India.

And we'll unwind the map of Africa to reapportion land ownership to reflect the end of the colonial period?

Splendid idea.

Anybody violently evicted from their homes and forced out of their homelands in the recent past should absolutely have the same options offered by UN Resolution 194. That is, they should either have the right of return or receive compensation. In my opinion, Native Americans should receive far more reparations than the occasional scant handouts they've been granted so far. If you want to talk about justice since the end of the colonial period, we agree.

Things get absurd when you try to go back 2,000 years to reclaim the land where a percentage of your ancestors may have once lived, and they really get ugly when you feel entitled to evict or butcher the people you used to share the land with, but who remained there from that time onward. It's worth considering where all of our ancestors lived 2,000 years ago. If you assume 25 years per generation, that's 80 generations and means we all have a LOT of ancestors who lived back then. The world population was much smaller at that time (perhaps 150 to 300 million). It's easy to see how closely related people living in what is now Israel must have been. My own ancestors probably lived in the Middle East and Europe, and I have distant cousins today who are Jewish, Muslim, Christian, a few other religions, and (mostly) secular. Trying to establish land ownership after 80 generations is virtually impossible. However, there are people alive today who were violently forced out of Palestine by the IDF and had all but the clothes on their backs stolen from them, and they cannot even visit the homes where they used to live. That is clearly an injustice that needs to be addressed.

So you favor a policy that would lead to civil wars across Africa, the ME, parts of Europe, and much of Asia?

Doesn't seem like the most humane approach to me.

Your idealism is...painful.

Land-grabbing by ethnosupremacist colonialists, often accompanied by the exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population, hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history. In fact, this process has led to horrific violence, as we see in Palestine/Israel.

Totally inapposite.

Umm (rolls eyes) ... yeah. Brilliant refutation. LOL

[Anonymous]

If not for WW2, there’s be no Israel and suddenly the issue of ancestral ties would just magically go away or seem utterly unimportant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And if you're really all about ancestral lands, then guess what, Armenians lived in Artsakh for centuries, but that didn't keep Israel from supplying Azeris with top notch weapons to help them expel the natives.

DP.

I agree that claims to ancestral lands are unworkable.

Which is why Palestinians have no claim to Israel, since they last inhabited it > 80 years ago.

Which is why Israel has no claim to reparations since the Holocaust happened 80 years ago.

I don’t think Israel is seeking reparations for the Holocaust. Some Holocaust survivors received meager reparations over 50 years ago. There have been some lawsuits over personal property disposition where Holocaust survivors and their detained seek compensation for art, for example, stolen by Nazis. But Israel as a nation isn’t seeking reparations for the Holocaust, nor are any Jewish people that I know of claiming some sort of entitlement to the homes and/or land they inhabited before the Holocaust.

Just last week Germany announced they were giving Holocaust survivors in Israel $27 million to help them manage disruptions after 10/7.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/04/12/europe/israeli-holocaust-germany-payout-october-7-intl

I wonder why Germany has to pay so much. Historically they weren’t even the most racist one in Europe. Italy was far more vicious to the Jewish people for millennia not just one Holocaust but plenty of Holocausts and mass killings . One can say they’re the source of the current conflict and the Jews being dispersed to Europe. Germany and Russia -not so much. The Protestants and Orthodox were cooler with the Jewish people since they were minorities as well compared to the Catholics

Hitler was also born in Austria not Germany and funded and supported by the Vatican/Catholics .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And if you're really all about ancestral lands, then guess what, Armenians lived in Artsakh for centuries, but that didn't keep Israel from supplying Azeris with top notch weapons to help them expel the natives.

DP.

I agree that claims to ancestral lands are unworkable.

Which is why Palestinians have no claim to Israel, since they last inhabited it > 80 years ago.

Actually, under UN Resolution 194, they do. They can either return to their homes or receive compensation. And in the case of Palestinians, we're not talking only about "ancestral lands," as in the lands of their ancestors. We're talking about their OWN lands, where they lived as young children and from which their parents and grandparents were evicted (or murdered) by Zionist terrorists (like the Irgun and Alexandroni Brigade) and the IDF. Also, it's under 80 years for many of those evicted during the Nakba. 80 years is very different from 2,000 years.

Excellent.

So Pakistanis also have the right to reclaim their family lands in India.

And we'll unwind the map of Africa to reapportion land ownership to reflect the end of the colonial period?

Splendid idea.

Anybody violently evicted from their homes and forced out of their homelands in the recent past should absolutely have the same options offered by UN Resolution 194. That is, they should either have the right of return or receive compensation. In my opinion, Native Americans should receive far more reparations than the occasional scant handouts they've been granted so far. If you want to talk about justice since the end of the colonial period, we agree.

Things get absurd when you try to go back 2,000 years to reclaim the land where a percentage of your ancestors may have once lived, and they really get ugly when you feel entitled to evict or butcher the people you used to share the land with, but who remained there from that time onward. It's worth considering where all of our ancestors lived 2,000 years ago. If you assume 25 years per generation, that's 80 generations and means we all have a LOT of ancestors who lived back then. The world population was much smaller at that time (perhaps 150 to 300 million). It's easy to see how closely related people living in what is now Israel must have been. My own ancestors probably lived in the Middle East and Europe, and I have distant cousins today who are Jewish, Muslim, Christian, a few other religions, and (mostly) secular. Trying to establish land ownership after 80 generations is virtually impossible. However, there are people alive today who were violently forced out of Palestine by the IDF and had all but the clothes on their backs stolen from them, and they cannot even visit the homes where they used to live. That is clearly an injustice that needs to be addressed.

So you favor a policy that would lead to civil wars across Africa, the ME, parts of Europe, and much of Asia?

Doesn't seem like the most humane approach to me.

Your idealism is...painful.

Land-grabbing by ethnosupremacist colonialists, often accompanied by the exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population, hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history. In fact, this process has led to horrific violence, as we see in Palestine/Israel.

Totally inapposite.

Umm (rolls eyes) ... yeah. Brilliant refutation. LOL

Refutation?

No interest in refuting—you’re quite correct.

Problem is that your argument is at best tangentially related to the prior discussion.

Am I to conclude that you’ve abandoned the argument that we should redraw borders across the globe to right the wrongs of the colonial era?

[Anonymous]

A poster in the Iran thread made an excellent point. Israel says Palestinians are unable to live with but on the other hand, Israelis proudly note that 20% of their pop. is Arab.

Hypothetically speaking, What exactly makes these Arabs less terroristic than the Arabs in West Bank and Gaza? Their parents accepted Israel’s existence? They didn’t do so happily. They needed a job and maybe they weren’t able to get a visa to emigrate annywhere else. Most of the Palestinians who live in Gaza annd WB have family in the States of elsewhere who send money back . No reparations to help them for their displacement

[Anonymous]

A detailed investigation in the Washington Post today about the killing of 6 year old Hind Rajab.

The area she was in came under an evacuation order by IDF and the family loaded up the car and left the same day. They had traveled only 1/4 mile when they came under fire, leaving Hind the only survivor.

After several hours, the Red Crescent received permission from COGAT with a map marked with a route that the paramedics then took to reach Hind.

12 days later, the ambulance was found destroyed, and little remaining from the bodies of the two paramedics. Seven decomposing bodies, including Hind and four other children, were found in the car.

Satellite images show 3 Israeli armored vehicles directly up the road from Hind that afternoon while she was on the phone, with a dozen more withing 1/4 mile. Experts consulted by the Washington Post who analyzed the audio of the multiple calls as well as visual evidence from the scene taken days later conclude that the munitions are consistent with Israeli tank weaponry.

From the Israeli authorities:

Israel Defense Forces said they conducted a preliminary investigation and that its forces were “not present near the vehicle or within the firing range” of the Hamada family car.

In mid-March, Elad Goren, head of Coordination and Liaison Administration at COGAT, told The Post that the agency “coordinated everything … including the ambulance that wanted to go and find Hind,” but said he was “not aware” of the specifics. COGAT did not respond to repeated requests to clarify.

The IDF denied that any coordination had taken place, repeating its assertion that its forces were not in the area. It did not comment on two detailed timelines of the incident, or on the expert findings, provided by The Washington Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/interactive/2024/hind-rajab-israel-gaza-killing-timeline/

[Anonymous]

The case of poor Hind is tragic. She must have been so scared. With 13k+ kids killed the suffering is horrible.

The suffering during / after the Holocaust is beyond words as well.

It shouldn’t be about a competition of who is hurt more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A detailed investigation in the Washington Post today about the killing of 6 year old Hind Rajab.

The area she was in came under an evacuation order by IDF and the family loaded up the car and left the same day. They had traveled only 1/4 mile when they came under fire, leaving Hind the only survivor.

After several hours, the Red Crescent received permission from COGAT with a map marked with a route that the paramedics then took to reach Hind.

12 days later, the ambulance was found destroyed, and little remaining from the bodies of the two paramedics. Seven decomposing bodies, including Hind and four other children, were found in the car.

Satellite images show 3 Israeli armored vehicles directly up the road from Hind that afternoon while she was on the phone, with a dozen more withing 1/4 mile. Experts consulted by the Washington Post who analyzed the audio of the multiple calls as well as visual evidence from the scene taken days later conclude that the munitions are consistent with Israeli tank weaponry.

From the Israeli authorities:

Israel Defense Forces said they conducted a preliminary investigation and that its forces were “not present near the vehicle or within the firing range” of the Hamada family car.

In mid-March, Elad Goren, head of Coordination and Liaison Administration at COGAT, told The Post that the agency “coordinated everything … including the ambulance that wanted to go and find Hind,” but said he was “not aware” of the specifics. COGAT did not respond to repeated requests to clarify.

The IDF denied that any coordination had taken place, repeating its assertion that its forces were not in the area. It did not comment on two detailed timelines of the incident, or on the expert findings, provided by The Washington Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/interactive/2024/hind-rajab-israel-gaza-killing-timeline/

After the World Central Kitchen attack COGAT revealed that IDF on the ground routinely ignores it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A detailed investigation in the Washington Post today about the killing of 6 year old Hind Rajab.

The area she was in came under an evacuation order by IDF and the family loaded up the car and left the same day. They had traveled only 1/4 mile when they came under fire, leaving Hind the only survivor.

After several hours, the Red Crescent received permission from COGAT with a map marked with a route that the paramedics then took to reach Hind.

12 days later, the ambulance was found destroyed, and little remaining from the bodies of the two paramedics. Seven decomposing bodies, including Hind and four other children, were found in the car.

Satellite images show 3 Israeli armored vehicles directly up the road from Hind that afternoon while she was on the phone, with a dozen more withing 1/4 mile. Experts consulted by the Washington Post who analyzed the audio of the multiple calls as well as visual evidence from the scene taken days later conclude that the munitions are consistent with Israeli tank weaponry.

From the Israeli authorities:

Israel Defense Forces said they conducted a preliminary investigation and that its forces were “not present near the vehicle or within the firing range” of the Hamada family car.

In mid-March, Elad Goren, head of Coordination and Liaison Administration at COGAT, told The Post that the agency “coordinated everything … including the ambulance that wanted to go and find Hind,” but said he was “not aware” of the specifics. COGAT did not respond to repeated requests to clarify.

The IDF denied that any coordination had taken place, repeating its assertion that its forces were not in the area. It did not comment on two detailed timelines of the incident, or on the expert findings, provided by The Washington Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/interactive/2024/hind-rajab-israel-gaza-killing-timeline/

Don't worry, nobody will ever be held to account and US arms will continue to flow

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Move on and get over it! ” - when it’s about Palestinian expulsion and death

“Never forget !!” -about Jewish expulsion and death.

I don’t think any Jews or the Israeli state have said “move on and get over it.”

I think weaponizing the Holocaust as you do is a form of antisemitism. It’s offensive. You might think it’s a witty statement, but it’s not true and it shows that you’re holding a chip on your shoulder about Jews and the Holocaust.

DP. I didn't see it as an attack on Jews or the Holocaust at all. It's an attitude that describes militant Zionists rather accurately and, unfortunately, reflects the attitudes of many leading officials in Israel. This is why there is currently a genocide underway. There's nothing antisemitic about pointing out this out.

Actually, it is antisemitic. The most basic DEI training will teach you that discrimination and harassment and hostile work environment caused by racist conduct is not based on what the allegedly racist person intended; whether it is racist from a legal perspective is whether a reasonable person on the receiving end of the comment would be offended. Comparing the Holocaust to Palestinian suffering is a party trick that weaponizes a 6 million person genocide, steals and misuses the term “genocide” and then applies it to an unfortunate and tragic situation in which innocents are killed because they are used as human shields by the terrorist organization that rules their government. Throwing the phrase “never again” in the face of Jewish people is offensive and antisemitic in this context. And no, just because YOU don’t agree that you’re antisemitic doesn’t mean that you aren’t. The legal standard is whether an average person, and particularly an average Jewish person, would find what you say to be offensive and antisemitic. And what you are saying is antisemitic, and we all see through you when you fixate and foam at the mouth over Jews killing Palestinians when you ignore all the other Palestinian deaths in other countries such as Syria or all the other mass killings that have taken place in the world over the past couple of decades. We see you, we know exactly what you are, and we’re too classy to scream in your face about it.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines genocide. Many experts on the topic believe that what is happening in Gaza is objectively genocide under this definition. Your argument appears to be that because of the Holocaust, identifying other genocides is "stealing and misusing" the term. That's like arguing you can't accuse anyone of murder, even when all the evidence is there, because someone previously committed an unrelated mass homicide. This obviously makes no sense, and it proves the point the PP made. And if antisemitism is in the eye of the beholder, what does DEI training make of anti-Palestinian sentiment? Is an "average Palestinian person" justified in feeling offended and victimized by having all their children killed by dumb bombs and dumber AI algorithms? By Smotrich's "Decisive Plan"? By deliberate starvation? By the execution of pro-Palestinian journalists? By vicious settler attacks in the West Bank? Antisemitism is real and ugly (as is anti-Palestinianism), but here you are weaponizing the term to try to shut down concerns about an ongoing genocide, which is really quite ironic.

Neither you or I decide whether what is happening in Gaza is a genocide. The International Court of Justice in The Hague will determine whether what is happening in Gaza is a genocide. The ICJ has already denied the preliminary injunction sought by South Africa on the basis of an ongoing genocide, but we will see how the longer trial goes.

What I’m saying is that a lot of people shouting the word genocide is inflammatory and designed to elicit an emotional response. But going even a step further and likening what is happening in Gaza to the Holocaust is a gut punch to Jews and many feel it’s antisemitic. Considering that there are people on this threat who are literally calling for all Jews to be wiped off the face of the earth (I just reported to Jeff Steele a post that wished Germans had completed their job and wiped out all Jews), if you’re posting a lot on here in defense of Gazans and think you’re antisemitic, then I would check yourself because you’re keeping close company with antisemites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And if you're really all about ancestral lands, then guess what, Armenians lived in Artsakh for centuries, but that didn't keep Israel from supplying Azeris with top notch weapons to help them expel the natives.

DP.

I agree that claims to ancestral lands are unworkable.

Which is why Palestinians have no claim to Israel, since they last inhabited it > 80 years ago.

Actually, under UN Resolution 194, they do. They can either return to their homes or receive compensation. And in the case of Palestinians, we're not talking only about "ancestral lands," as in the lands of their ancestors. We're talking about their OWN lands, where they lived as young children and from which their parents and grandparents were evicted (or murdered) by Zionist terrorists (like the Irgun and Alexandroni Brigade) and the IDF. Also, it's under 80 years for many of those evicted during the Nakba. 80 years is very different from 2,000 years.

Excellent.

So Pakistanis also have the right to reclaim their family lands in India.

And we'll unwind the map of Africa to reapportion land ownership to reflect the end of the colonial period?

Splendid idea.

Anybody violently evicted from their homes and forced out of their homelands in the recent past should absolutely have the same options offered by UN Resolution 194. That is, they should either have the right of return or receive compensation. In my opinion, Native Americans should receive far more reparations than the occasional scant handouts they've been granted so far. If you want to talk about justice since the end of the colonial period, we agree.

Things get absurd when you try to go back 2,000 years to reclaim the land where a percentage of your ancestors may have once lived, and they really get ugly when you feel entitled to evict or butcher the people you used to share the land with, but who remained there from that time onward. It's worth considering where all of our ancestors lived 2,000 years ago. If you assume 25 years per generation, that's 80 generations and means we all have a LOT of ancestors who lived back then. The world population was much smaller at that time (perhaps 150 to 300 million). It's easy to see how closely related people living in what is now Israel must have been. My own ancestors probably lived in the Middle East and Europe, and I have distant cousins today who are Jewish, Muslim, Christian, a few other religions, and (mostly) secular. Trying to establish land ownership after 80 generations is virtually impossible. However, there are people alive today who were violently forced out of Palestine by the IDF and had all but the clothes on their backs stolen from them, and they cannot even visit the homes where they used to live. That is clearly an injustice that needs to be addressed.

So you favor a policy that would lead to civil wars across Africa, the ME, parts of Europe, and much of Asia?

Doesn't seem like the most humane approach to me.

Your idealism is...painful.

Land-grabbing by ethnosupremacist colonialists, often accompanied by the exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population, hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history. In fact, this process has led to horrific violence, as we see in Palestine/Israel.

Totally inapposite.

Umm (rolls eyes) ... yeah. Brilliant refutation. LOL

Refutation?

No interest in refuting—you’re quite correct.

Problem is that your argument is at best tangentially related to the prior discussion.

Am I to conclude that you’ve abandoned the argument that we should redraw borders across the globe to right the wrongs of the colonial era?

How is pointing out that "exploitation, eviction, and/or extermination of the indigenous population hasn't exactly been a path to peace over human history" not directly related to this discussion? The eviction and extermination parts (ongoing since the Nakba) are what have led to the current untenable and unstable situation in Palestine/Israel. It is a straw man to claim I've argued we should "redraw borders." I've argued instead for the right of return or compensation. As an example, I think Native American nations should receive reparations in instances where the U.S. government has violated land treaties, which seems more practical than, for example, carving out an independent Arapahoe/Cheyenne state 173 years after a treaty effectively granting them a specific area of land was signed. Of course, the Native Americans can live freely on that land today. There are also cases where redrawing borders has, in fact, been the just solution. For example, the borders of what were Bantustans in apartheid South Africa were dissolved, and now people who needed special passes to leave those areas can move freely about the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Move on and get over it! ” - when it’s about Palestinian expulsion and death

“Never forget !!” -about Jewish expulsion and death.

I don’t think any Jews or the Israeli state have said “move on and get over it.”

I think weaponizing the Holocaust as you do is a form of antisemitism. It’s offensive. You might think it’s a witty statement, but it’s not true and it shows that you’re holding a chip on your shoulder about Jews and the Holocaust.

DP. I didn't see it as an attack on Jews or the Holocaust at all. It's an attitude that describes militant Zionists rather accurately and, unfortunately, reflects the attitudes of many leading officials in Israel. This is why there is currently a genocide underway. There's nothing antisemitic about pointing out this out.

Actually, it is antisemitic. The most basic DEI training will teach you that discrimination and harassment and hostile work environment caused by racist conduct is not based on what the allegedly racist person intended; whether it is racist from a legal perspective is whether a reasonable person on the receiving end of the comment would be offended. Comparing the Holocaust to Palestinian suffering is a party trick that weaponizes a 6 million person genocide, steals and misuses the term “genocide” and then applies it to an unfortunate and tragic situation in which innocents are killed because they are used as human shields by the terrorist organization that rules their government. Throwing the phrase “never again” in the face of Jewish people is offensive and antisemitic in this context. And no, just because YOU don’t agree that you’re antisemitic doesn’t mean that you aren’t. The legal standard is whether an average person, and particularly an average Jewish person, would find what you say to be offensive and antisemitic. And what you are saying is antisemitic, and we all see through you when you fixate and foam at the mouth over Jews killing Palestinians when you ignore all the other Palestinian deaths in other countries such as Syria or all the other mass killings that have taken place in the world over the past couple of decades. We see you, we know exactly what you are, and we’re too classy to scream in your face about it.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines genocide. Many experts on the topic believe that what is happening in Gaza is objectively genocide under this definition. Your argument appears to be that because of the Holocaust, identifying other genocides is "stealing and misusing" the term. That's like arguing you can't accuse anyone of murder, even when all the evidence is there, because someone previously committed an unrelated mass homicide. This obviously makes no sense, and it proves the point the PP made. And if antisemitism is in the eye of the beholder, what does DEI training make of anti-Palestinian sentiment? Is an "average Palestinian person" justified in feeling offended and victimized by having all their children killed by dumb bombs and dumber AI algorithms? By Smotrich's "Decisive Plan"? By deliberate starvation? By the execution of pro-Palestinian journalists? By vicious settler attacks in the West Bank? Antisemitism is real and ugly (as is anti-Palestinianism), but here you are weaponizing the term to try to shut down concerns about an ongoing genocide, which is really quite ironic.

Neither you or I decide whether what is happening in Gaza is a genocide. The International Court of Justice in The Hague will determine whether what is happening in Gaza is a genocide. The ICJ has already denied the preliminary injunction sought by South Africa on the basis of an ongoing genocide, but we will see how the longer trial goes.

What I’m saying is that a lot of people shouting the word genocide is inflammatory and designed to elicit an emotional response. But going even a step further and likening what is happening in Gaza to the Holocaust is a gut punch to Jews and many feel it’s antisemitic. Considering that there are people on this threat who are literally calling for all Jews to be wiped off the face of the earth (I just reported to Jeff Steele a post that wished Germans had completed their job and wiped out all Jews), if you’re posting a lot on here in defense of Gazans and think you’re antisemitic, then I would check yourself because you’re keeping close company with antisemites.

Thanks for reporting and glad I didn’t see that. I would also add that in my opinion many Europeans in particular love to use this inflammatory language, genocide, Nazis, ethnic cleansing, etc, with regard to Israel and Jews bc it makes them feel less guilty about what happened in Europe during the Holocaust. “See? Anyone is capable of it! Even the Jews! Let’s put our own “naughtiness” into context.” Never mind that there is absolutely no parallel and any informed person would know this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Move on and get over it! ” - when it’s about Palestinian expulsion and death

“Never forget !!” -about Jewish expulsion and death.

I don’t think any Jews or the Israeli state have said “move on and get over it.”

I think weaponizing the Holocaust as you do is a form of antisemitism. It’s offensive. You might think it’s a witty statement, but it’s not true and it shows that you’re holding a chip on your shoulder about Jews and the Holocaust.

DP. I didn't see it as an attack on Jews or the Holocaust at all. It's an attitude that describes militant Zionists rather accurately and, unfortunately, reflects the attitudes of many leading officials in Israel. This is why there is currently a genocide underway. There's nothing antisemitic about pointing out this out.

Actually, it is antisemitic. The most basic DEI training will teach you that discrimination and harassment and hostile work environment caused by racist conduct is not based on what the allegedly racist person intended; whether it is racist from a legal perspective is whether a reasonable person on the receiving end of the comment would be offended. Comparing the Holocaust to Palestinian suffering is a party trick that weaponizes a 6 million person genocide, steals and misuses the term “genocide” and then applies it to an unfortunate and tragic situation in which innocents are killed because they are used as human shields by the terrorist organization that rules their government. Throwing the phrase “never again” in the face of Jewish people is offensive and antisemitic in this context. And no, just because YOU don’t agree that you’re antisemitic doesn’t mean that you aren’t. The legal standard is whether an average person, and particularly an average Jewish person, would find what you say to be offensive and antisemitic. And what you are saying is antisemitic, and we all see through you when you fixate and foam at the mouth over Jews killing Palestinians when you ignore all the other Palestinian deaths in other countries such as Syria or all the other mass killings that have taken place in the world over the past couple of decades. We see you, we know exactly what you are, and we’re too classy to scream in your face about it.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines genocide. Many experts on the topic believe that what is happening in Gaza is objectively genocide under this definition. Your argument appears to be that because of the Holocaust, identifying other genocides is "stealing and misusing" the term. That's like arguing you can't accuse anyone of murder, even when all the evidence is there, because someone previously committed an unrelated mass homicide. This obviously makes no sense, and it proves the point the PP made. And if antisemitism is in the eye of the beholder, what does DEI training make of anti-Palestinian sentiment? Is an "average Palestinian person" justified in feeling offended and victimized by having all their children killed by dumb bombs and dumber AI algorithms? By Smotrich's "Decisive Plan"? By deliberate starvation? By the execution of pro-Palestinian journalists? By vicious settler attacks in the West Bank? Antisemitism is real and ugly (as is anti-Palestinianism), but here you are weaponizing the term to try to shut down concerns about an ongoing genocide, which is really quite ironic.

Neither you or I decide whether what is happening in Gaza is a genocide. The International Court of Justice in The Hague will determine whether what is happening in Gaza is a genocide. The ICJ has already denied the preliminary injunction sought by South Africa on the basis of an ongoing genocide, but we will see how the longer trial goes.

What I’m saying is that a lot of people shouting the word genocide is inflammatory and designed to elicit an emotional response. But going even a step further and likening what is happening in Gaza to the Holocaust is a gut punch to Jews and many feel it’s antisemitic. Considering that there are people on this threat who are literally calling for all Jews to be wiped off the face of the earth (I just reported to Jeff Steele a post that wished Germans had completed their job and wiped out all Jews), if you’re posting a lot on here in defense of Gazans and think you’re antisemitic, then I would check yourself because you’re keeping close company with antisemites.

Now you're asking us to switch off our brains and blindly submit to authority. Humans, at least theoretically, constitute intelligent life. We can and should look at evidence and draw our own conclusions. I don't need to see an ICJ ruling to conclude that Israel is perpetrating genocide, and I suspect your submission to the ICJ's divine will would end if the ICJ does indeed determine that Israel's Gaza campaign is genocidal (it's already found the genocide claim to be "plausible"). I would hope that the word genocide always "elicits an emotional response." We should be programmed to feel emotional about wanton slaughter. You appear to be asking people not to point out the obvious because it might upset Jews. Sorry, but confronting genocide trumps hurt feelings, and there is nothing antisemitic about that. Would you prefer to allow tens of thousands of Palestinians to be butchered and starved en masse than to call out Israel's war crimes for fear that any criticism of Israel might be seen as "antisemitic"? If so, your priorities are misplaced and you are too morally timid. I saw the obscene comment about killing Jews and responded by saying I found it disgusting and that it needed to be retracted (thankfully, it was removed, but I think a similar comment is still out there, and I will report it).