Anonymous wrote:Jeff is an Orientalist; he cannot be objective about this topic.

Atrocities are committed on both sides; both sides use people as pawns and shields in this conflict. Why is nobody mentioning how many rockets Hezbollah fired over Yom Kippur?

Why are we holding Israel to a higher expectation and are outraged when they do not act with some high moral ground, but it is ok for Hamas and Hezbollah to be savage?
On that note, why is it barely news that rockets were fired at Israel, but we are all judging Israelis with a different lens?

I wrote a long post about how people are used and abused by those in power on both sides. Why are so many outraged only on behalf of Israel's actions?

Wow, you're just so brilliant in your "both sides" argument.

Israel is not held to higher standard because RUSSIA has been sanctioned for far less. Israel is not held to a higher standard because CHINA did not get 37 US states to violate their own citizens' 1A on their behalf. Israel is not held to higher standard because the US has broken Int'l law to protect it from accountability.

Israel acts with impunity and has done so long before Oct 7. You can't "both sides" something when Hamas or Hezbollah didn't even exist when Israel was stealing, kidnapping, killing and raping people long before you had Oct 7 to bleat about. The very reason Israel is what it is today isn't because of Hamas or Hexbollah, it's becaus ethey know the US will impale itself to defend the indefensible.

You're not as intelligent as you think are on this topic specifically because when you pull the both sides nonsense it's always and without fail to absolve Israel's depravity.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, if Hamas and Hezbollah choose to secrete themselves into civilian neighborhoods, as they saying goes, "you get what you get".

The overwhelming Palestinian population has elected Hamas as the government of Gaza.

The bolded is not true. There was never an election for the government of Gaza. The Israelis also put their bases in civilian areas. I guess you won't complain if Israeli civilians are harmed during attacks on those installations.

Hamas won the Palestinian legislative elections in January 2006.

Right, legislative elections for the entire Palestinian territories. Not Gaza and not the presidency. It is the executive branch (president) that governs, not the legislature. As I said, there was never an election for the government of Gaza.

Well then, I guess every Palestinian should scheme, plot and plan to kill Hamas and anyone tied to the Gaza government, doncha think?

Right now Palestinians are doing all they can to escape Israel's attempt to exterminate them. You know, the Israelis elected Netanyahu. There is no dispute about that. Should every single Israeli be held responsible for Netanyahu?

If Israel wanted to exterminate Palestinians, they would all be dead and gone now.

They’re getting there with the help of the US. They cant be obvious about it and expect to survive. So they’ll continue killing families with the excuse that Hamas is hiding amongst them. No kidding, they aren’t the first enemy that hides in a hospital or school. They will also continue to destroy every housing unit in Gaza so that the survivors have nowhere to go.

“There was no Armenian Genocide because Armenians still exist!”

“There was no Rwandan Genocide because Rwandans still exist!”

Keep thinking calling yourself a “Zionist” in the future, will make people want to embrace you rather than be repulsed. Keep despicably trying to conflate Judaism with Zionism and hurting good Jewish people who can see the evil in what Israel is doing and discovering what it has always done to Palestinians.

Right now, there are hundreds of Jewish people protesting at the stock exchange to stop weapons going to Israel. You are their enemy, not Palestinians and not anyone who speaks out about what Israel is doing.

Jeff is an Orientalist; he cannot be objective about this topic.

Atrocities are committed on both sides; both sides use people as pawns and shields in this conflict. Why is nobody mentioning how many rockets Hezbollah fired over Yom Kippur?

Why are we holding Israel to a higher expectation and are outraged when they do not act with some high moral ground, but it is ok for Hamas and Hezbollah to be savage?
On that note, why is it barely news that rockets were fired at Israel, but we are all judging Israelis with a different lens?

I wrote a long post about how people are used and abused by those in power on both sides. Why are so many outraged only on behalf of Israel's actions?

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, if Hamas and Hezbollah choose to secrete themselves into civilian neighborhoods, as they saying goes, "you get what you get".

The overwhelming Palestinian population has elected Hamas as the government of Gaza.

Really?
Is it not true that Hana’s was last elected nearly 20 years ago, when the majority of Palestinians were either unborn or else ineligible to vote? And didn’t Hamas fail to gain a plurality of the vote at that time, but instead assume power with the assistance of the Israeli government?

Boy, your command of the actual facts is really bad, even for a Zionist.

20 years ago? Why are you judging their electoral system by U.S. standards? it is what it is.

Better question: why are you insinuating that the innocents being slaughtered by Israel have themselves to blame?

Yes. This. We can go back and forth about he 2006 election but honestly does it matter? Clearly more than militants are being killed (and maimed and displaced don’t forget). I understand it’s hard to accept that Israel is this cruel, but it is. I find it sickening that a country whose people know suffering can inflict such harm on others. (Ps. I’m not an anti semite. I’m of Jewish descent and think my people must do better).

The Hamas militants are hiding among civilians and literally used hospitals and other civilian facilities to launch attacks on the IDF. They are thus equally culpable in the killings of civilians. It's extremely misleading to try and claim that EVERY civilian death is SOLELY the fault of the IDF and we are far past due an admission from pro-Palestinians of that.

Let's agree that Israel and Hamas have equal responsibility for the ongoing genocide. The leaders of both sides should be indicted on war crimes (has already happened) and the U.S. should follow U.S. law and stop supplying weapons to both sides. Of course, the U.S. does not supply weapons to Hamas so we can only stop providing weapons to Israel. But, this will meet your objection of not placing fault only on one side.

Does what is happening in Gaza fall under this definition? Isreal could have mowed the land there by now. Did it?
Definition of genocide by the U.N.
Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Yes, Israel has killed members of the group, upwards of 40,000 of them. Yes, Israel has caused serious bodily and mental harm to members of the group. Yes, Israel is deliberately inflicting conditions on the group calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or part — namely, it is striving Palestinians in northern Gaza at the moment. So, Israel is clearly 3 for 5 and only one is needed. Moreover, there are arguments that Israel has done the last two as well.

It's not only me saying this, but the International Court of Justice as well.

Sure, ok. Could the same not be said of Hamas?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, if Hamas and Hezbollah choose to secrete themselves into civilian neighborhoods, as they saying goes, "you get what you get".

The overwhelming Palestinian population has elected Hamas as the government of Gaza.

Really?
Is it not true that Hana’s was last elected nearly 20 years ago, when the majority of Palestinians were either unborn or else ineligible to vote? And didn’t Hamas fail to gain a plurality of the vote at that time, but instead assume power with the assistance of the Israeli government?

Boy, your command of the actual facts is really bad, even for a Zionist.

20 years ago? Why are you judging their electoral system by U.S. standards? it is what it is.

Better question: why are you insinuating that the innocents being slaughtered by Israel have themselves to blame?

Yes. This. We can go back and forth about he 2006 election but honestly does it matter? Clearly more than militants are being killed (and maimed and displaced don’t forget). I understand it’s hard to accept that Israel is this cruel, but it is. I find it sickening that a country whose people know suffering can inflict such harm on others. (Ps. I’m not an anti semite. I’m of Jewish descent and think my people must do better).

The Hamas militants are hiding among civilians and literally used hospitals and other civilian facilities to launch attacks on the IDF. They are thus equally culpable in the killings of civilians. It's extremely misleading to try and claim that EVERY civilian death is SOLELY the fault of the IDF and we are far past due an admission from pro-Palestinians of that.

Let's agree that Israel and Hamas have equal responsibility for the ongoing genocide. The leaders of both sides should be indicted on war crimes (has already happened) and the U.S. should follow U.S. law and stop supplying weapons to both sides. Of course, the U.S. does not supply weapons to Hamas so we can only stop providing weapons to Israel. But, this will meet your objection of not placing fault only on one side.

Does what is happening in Gaza fall under this definition? Isreal could have mowed the land there by now. Did it?
Definition of genocide by the U.N.
Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Yes, Israel has killed members of the group, upwards of 40,000 of them. Yes, Israel has caused serious bodily and mental harm to members of the group. Yes, Israel is deliberately inflicting conditions on the group calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or part — namely, it is striving Palestinians in northern Gaza at the moment. So, Israel is clearly 3 for 5 and only one is needed. Moreover, there are arguments that Israel has done the last two as well.

It's not only me saying this, but the International Court of Justice as well.

No, that's a common misconception. The IJC did not say that.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3g9g63jl17o

“a plausible risk of genocide”. Seems like it.

For the folks who keep using the word "genocide," have you actually stopped to compare the civilian casualty stats from the Gaza war to other urban combat scenarios?

Current death toll estimates from Gaza Health Ministry is around 42,000. This number has been disputed but for the sake of argument let's accept it, as pro-Palestine activists don't have any reason to dispute it. It's known that in those numbers, the Gaza Health Ministry lumps together civilians and militants, so we need to separate the numbers out. IDF claims 17,000 militants killed in Gaza, of which 8,500 are confirmed and identified in detailed reports. If we go by that smaller number, that gives us 42,000-8,500 = 33,500 civilians as a worst-case number. Given a population of approximately 2 million for Gaza, that gives a per-capita civilian death rate of 1.67%

In comparison, the civilian death rate in WWII was 2.17% to 2.39%. Korean war was 6.67% to 10%. Battle of Mosul may have been as high as 2.67%. Battle of Manila 10% - yet with higher civilian casualty rates than Gaza, none of these have ever been regarded as being "genocide" apart from the 6 million who died in Nazi concentration camps out of an estimated 50-55 million who died overall as a result of WWII.

Yes, war is brutal and awful and yes, the Gaza war needs to end, and yes, there are documented examples of IDF abuses and war crimes, and yes, tens of thousands of civilian Palestinian casualties is horrible but going by the numbers, it still does not bear out the term "genocide" and the numbers for Gaza are generally consistent with the numbers seen in combat elsewhere. Using that term is inflammatory rhetoric.

Your commitment to defending Israel would be commendable were it not for such a terrible cause. The Health Ministry figures you cite are out of date. While the Health Ministry gets a lot of criticism for its numbers, the ministry is really quite conservative and only counts those victims that it can identify. Those who are still buried under rubble and can't be identified are not counted. According to a recent letter in "The Lancet" that is discussed in this article, the actual number of deaths, both direct and indirect, from the conflict may be as high as 186,000:

https://www.france24.com/en/middle-east/20240711-more-than-186-000-dead-in-gaza-how-credible-are-the-estimates-published-on-the-lancet

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, if Hamas and Hezbollah choose to secrete themselves into civilian neighborhoods, as they saying goes, "you get what you get".

The overwhelming Palestinian population has elected Hamas as the government of Gaza.

Really?
Is it not true that Hana’s was last elected nearly 20 years ago, when the majority of Palestinians were either unborn or else ineligible to vote? And didn’t Hamas fail to gain a plurality of the vote at that time, but instead assume power with the assistance of the Israeli government?

Boy, your command of the actual facts is really bad, even for a Zionist.

20 years ago? Why are you judging their electoral system by U.S. standards? it is what it is.

Better question: why are you insinuating that the innocents being slaughtered by Israel have themselves to blame?

Yes. This. We can go back and forth about he 2006 election but honestly does it matter? Clearly more than militants are being killed (and maimed and displaced don’t forget). I understand it’s hard to accept that Israel is this cruel, but it is. I find it sickening that a country whose people know suffering can inflict such harm on others. (Ps. I’m not an anti semite. I’m of Jewish descent and think my people must do better).

The Hamas militants are hiding among civilians and literally used hospitals and other civilian facilities to launch attacks on the IDF. They are thus equally culpable in the killings of civilians. It's extremely misleading to try and claim that EVERY civilian death is SOLELY the fault of the IDF and we are far past due an admission from pro-Palestinians of that.

Let's agree that Israel and Hamas have equal responsibility for the ongoing genocide. The leaders of both sides should be indicted on war crimes (has already happened) and the U.S. should follow U.S. law and stop supplying weapons to both sides. Of course, the U.S. does not supply weapons to Hamas so we can only stop providing weapons to Israel. But, this will meet your objection of not placing fault only on one side.

Does what is happening in Gaza fall under this definition? Isreal could have mowed the land there by now. Did it?
Definition of genocide by the U.N.
Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Yes, Israel has killed members of the group, upwards of 40,000 of them. Yes, Israel has caused serious bodily and mental harm to members of the group. Yes, Israel is deliberately inflicting conditions on the group calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or part — namely, it is striving Palestinians in northern Gaza at the moment. So, Israel is clearly 3 for 5 and only one is needed. Moreover, there are arguments that Israel has done the last two as well.

It's not only me saying this, but the International Court of Justice as well.

No, that's a common misconception. The IJC did not say that.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3g9g63jl17o

“a plausible risk of genocide”. Seems like it.

For the folks who keep using the word "genocide," have you actually stopped to compare the civilian casualty stats from the Gaza war to other urban combat scenarios?

Current death toll estimates from Gaza Health Ministry is around 42,000. This number has been disputed but for the sake of argument let's accept it, as pro-Palestine activists don't have any reason to dispute it. It's known that in those numbers, the Gaza Health Ministry lumps together civilians and militants, so we need to separate the numbers out. IDF claims 17,000 militants killed in Gaza, of which 8,500 are confirmed and identified in detailed reports. If we go by that smaller number, that gives us 42,000-8,500 = 33,500 civilians as a worst-case number. Given a population of approximately 2 million for Gaza, that gives a per-capita civilian death rate of 1.67%

In comparison, the civilian death rate in WWII was 2.17% to 2.39%. Korean war was 6.67% to 10%. Battle of Mosul may have been as high as 2.67%. Battle of Manila 10% - yet with higher civilian casualty rates than Gaza, none of these have ever been regarded as being "genocide" apart from the 6 million who died in Nazi concentration camps out of an estimated 50-55 million who died overall as a result of WWII.

Yes, war is brutal and awful and yes, the Gaza war needs to end, and yes, there are documented examples of IDF abuses and war crimes, and yes, tens of thousands of civilian Palestinian casualties is horrible but going by the numbers, it still does not bear out the term "genocide" and the numbers for Gaza are generally consistent with the numbers seen in combat elsewhere. Using that term is inflammatory rhetoric.

Because Israel is trying to wipe out Palestine. That's the difference.

As someone stated, was the genocide of Jews not really genocide since so many millions of Jews still existed after WWII? What's the threshold for "genocide"? 50%? 80%? At what point should the world wait until they stop a genocide?

What is Israel's ultimate goal for Palestine other than wiping out Hamas?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, if Hamas and Hezbollah choose to secrete themselves into civilian neighborhoods, as they saying goes, "you get what you get".

The overwhelming Palestinian population has elected Hamas as the government of Gaza.

Really?
Is it not true that Hana’s was last elected nearly 20 years ago, when the majority of Palestinians were either unborn or else ineligible to vote? And didn’t Hamas fail to gain a plurality of the vote at that time, but instead assume power with the assistance of the Israeli government?

Boy, your command of the actual facts is really bad, even for a Zionist.

20 years ago? Why are you judging their electoral system by U.S. standards? it is what it is.

Better question: why are you insinuating that the innocents being slaughtered by Israel have themselves to blame?

Yes. This. We can go back and forth about he 2006 election but honestly does it matter? Clearly more than militants are being killed (and maimed and displaced don’t forget). I understand it’s hard to accept that Israel is this cruel, but it is. I find it sickening that a country whose people know suffering can inflict such harm on others. (Ps. I’m not an anti semite. I’m of Jewish descent and think my people must do better).

The Hamas militants are hiding among civilians and literally used hospitals and other civilian facilities to launch attacks on the IDF. They are thus equally culpable in the killings of civilians. It's extremely misleading to try and claim that EVERY civilian death is SOLELY the fault of the IDF and we are far past due an admission from pro-Palestinians of that.

Let's agree that Israel and Hamas have equal responsibility for the ongoing genocide. The leaders of both sides should be indicted on war crimes (has already happened) and the U.S. should follow U.S. law and stop supplying weapons to both sides. Of course, the U.S. does not supply weapons to Hamas so we can only stop providing weapons to Israel. But, this will meet your objection of not placing fault only on one side.

Does what is happening in Gaza fall under this definition? Isreal could have mowed the land there by now. Did it?
Definition of genocide by the U.N.
Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Yes, Israel has killed members of the group, upwards of 40,000 of them. Yes, Israel has caused serious bodily and mental harm to members of the group. Yes, Israel is deliberately inflicting conditions on the group calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or part — namely, it is striving Palestinians in northern Gaza at the moment. So, Israel is clearly 3 for 5 and only one is needed. Moreover, there are arguments that Israel has done the last two as well.

It's not only me saying this, but the International Court of Justice as well.

No, that's a common misconception. The IJC did not say that.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3g9g63jl17o

“a plausible risk of genocide”. Seems like it.

For the folks who keep using the word "genocide," have you actually stopped to compare the civilian casualty stats from the Gaza war to other urban combat scenarios?

Current death toll estimates from Gaza Health Ministry is around 42,000. This number has been disputed but for the sake of argument let's accept it, as pro-Palestine activists don't have any reason to dispute it. It's known that in those numbers, the Gaza Health Ministry lumps together civilians and militants, so we need to separate the numbers out. IDF claims 17,000 militants killed in Gaza, of which 8,500 are confirmed and identified in detailed reports. If we go by that smaller number, that gives us 42,000-8,500 = 33,500 civilians as a worst-case number. Given a population of approximately 2 million for Gaza, that gives a per-capita civilian death rate of 1.67%

In comparison, the civilian death rate in WWII was 2.17% to 2.39%. Korean war was 6.67% to 10%. Battle of Mosul may have been as high as 2.67%. Battle of Manila 10% - yet with higher civilian casualty rates than Gaza, none of these have ever been regarded as being "genocide" apart from the 6 million who died in Nazi concentration camps out of an estimated 50-55 million who died overall as a result of WWII.

Yes, war is brutal and awful and yes, the Gaza war needs to end, and yes, there are documented examples of IDF abuses and war crimes, and yes, tens of thousands of civilian Palestinian casualties is horrible but going by the numbers, it still does not bear out the term "genocide" and the numbers for Gaza are generally consistent with the numbers seen in combat elsewhere. Using that term is inflammatory rhetoric.

Throw in that Congress tried to punish South Africa for trying to get justice for Palestinians. A bill sponsored by both parties. Don’t ever tell Muslims, especially Palestinians like myself, the Democrats are the better alternative. The difference between the parties is Democrats are more polite in their hate and think they’re doing me a favor by not outright treating me like a “terrorist.” You’re not that clever, you’re just far more deceitful and despicable, which is why I respect Republicans more. Because at least they don’t try to deny (at least the smart ones) their hate. You think I care what happens to me after what I’m seeing? You think I can live a normal life among Dems seeing the depravity they defend and fund?

As I watch my people being burned alive and watching so-called “liberals“ who think people outraged by it are “the far left” while you’re the sane, moderate Democrats who justify such evil and with your evil instinctive bleats of “Hamas” with every goddamn thing you witness Israel doing and of course, ignoring that it didn’t start on October 7, you are far more evil because you think you’re normal.

Israel has literally intentionally attacked UN Peacekeepers in Lebanon this week but hey no biggie.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, if Hamas and Hezbollah choose to secrete themselves into civilian neighborhoods, as they saying goes, "you get what you get".

The overwhelming Palestinian population has elected Hamas as the government of Gaza.

Really?
Is it not true that Hana’s was last elected nearly 20 years ago, when the majority of Palestinians were either unborn or else ineligible to vote? And didn’t Hamas fail to gain a plurality of the vote at that time, but instead assume power with the assistance of the Israeli government?

Boy, your command of the actual facts is really bad, even for a Zionist.

20 years ago? Why are you judging their electoral system by U.S. standards? it is what it is.

Better question: why are you insinuating that the innocents being slaughtered by Israel have themselves to blame?

Yes. This. We can go back and forth about he 2006 election but honestly does it matter? Clearly more than militants are being killed (and maimed and displaced don’t forget). I understand it’s hard to accept that Israel is this cruel, but it is. I find it sickening that a country whose people know suffering can inflict such harm on others. (Ps. I’m not an anti semite. I’m of Jewish descent and think my people must do better).

The Hamas militants are hiding among civilians and literally used hospitals and other civilian facilities to launch attacks on the IDF. They are thus equally culpable in the killings of civilians. It's extremely misleading to try and claim that EVERY civilian death is SOLELY the fault of the IDF and we are far past due an admission from pro-Palestinians of that.

Let's agree that Israel and Hamas have equal responsibility for the ongoing genocide. The leaders of both sides should be indicted on war crimes (has already happened) and the U.S. should follow U.S. law and stop supplying weapons to both sides. Of course, the U.S. does not supply weapons to Hamas so we can only stop providing weapons to Israel. But, this will meet your objection of not placing fault only on one side.

Does what is happening in Gaza fall under this definition? Isreal could have mowed the land there by now. Did it?
Definition of genocide by the U.N.
Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Yes, Israel has killed members of the group, upwards of 40,000 of them. Yes, Israel has caused serious bodily and mental harm to members of the group. Yes, Israel is deliberately inflicting conditions on the group calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or part — namely, it is striving Palestinians in northern Gaza at the moment. So, Israel is clearly 3 for 5 and only one is needed. Moreover, there are arguments that Israel has done the last two as well.

It's not only me saying this, but the International Court of Justice as well.

No, that's a common misconception. The IJC did not say that.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3g9g63jl17o

“a plausible risk of genocide”. Seems like it.

Yes Biden and the Republicans worked hard to intimidate the court. Proud to be an American!

Don’t forget our Secretary of State literally threatening the panel of judges.

What’s his deal? Ah, that’s right. Raging conflict of interest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, if Hamas and Hezbollah choose to secrete themselves into civilian neighborhoods, as they saying goes, "you get what you get".

The overwhelming Palestinian population has elected Hamas as the government of Gaza.

Really?
Is it not true that Hana’s was last elected nearly 20 years ago, when the majority of Palestinians were either unborn or else ineligible to vote? And didn’t Hamas fail to gain a plurality of the vote at that time, but instead assume power with the assistance of the Israeli government?

Boy, your command of the actual facts is really bad, even for a Zionist.

20 years ago? Why are you judging their electoral system by U.S. standards? it is what it is.

Better question: why are you insinuating that the innocents being slaughtered by Israel have themselves to blame?

Yes. This. We can go back and forth about he 2006 election but honestly does it matter? Clearly more than militants are being killed (and maimed and displaced don’t forget). I understand it’s hard to accept that Israel is this cruel, but it is. I find it sickening that a country whose people know suffering can inflict such harm on others. (Ps. I’m not an anti semite. I’m of Jewish descent and think my people must do better).

The Hamas militants are hiding among civilians and literally used hospitals and other civilian facilities to launch attacks on the IDF. They are thus equally culpable in the killings of civilians. It's extremely misleading to try and claim that EVERY civilian death is SOLELY the fault of the IDF and we are far past due an admission from pro-Palestinians of that.

Let's agree that Israel and Hamas have equal responsibility for the ongoing genocide. The leaders of both sides should be indicted on war crimes (has already happened) and the U.S. should follow U.S. law and stop supplying weapons to both sides. Of course, the U.S. does not supply weapons to Hamas so we can only stop providing weapons to Israel. But, this will meet your objection of not placing fault only on one side.

Does what is happening in Gaza fall under this definition? Isreal could have mowed the land there by now. Did it?
Definition of genocide by the U.N.
Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Yes, Israel has killed members of the group, upwards of 40,000 of them. Yes, Israel has caused serious bodily and mental harm to members of the group. Yes, Israel is deliberately inflicting conditions on the group calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or part — namely, it is striving Palestinians in northern Gaza at the moment. So, Israel is clearly 3 for 5 and only one is needed. Moreover, there are arguments that Israel has done the last two as well.

It's not only me saying this, but the International Court of Justice as well.

No, that's a common misconception. The IJC did not say that.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3g9g63jl17o

“a plausible risk of genocide”. Seems like it.

Yes Biden and the Republicans worked hard to intimidate the court. Proud to be an American!

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
First, please share with me the Arab countries with large, thriving Jewish populations that were not already in precipitous decline as a result of Arab Islamist aggression, violence, and oppression in the that started to spread in the 1800s. The only country that saw an uptick was Palestine. And that’s where many MENA Jews went. Post WWII.

Yes, the decline of Jews in the MENA went down to near zero in many countries after 1948, but that trend started centuries earlier, and with speed in the 1800s and 1900s.

I would question your knowledge of Middle East history if you’re not familiar with these historical events. Or would suggest you dig in a bit more deeply into the history of Jews in the region.

Lastly, you asked for info. I provided a simple, clearly labeled list. You want a filter function. It’s hard to take your interest in this information seriously.
Have a nice evening.

You provided a copy and paste that you didn't even vet and you don't know anything about any of the events listed. How many Jews fled because they weren't allowed to where western clothes in Algeria? What was the name of that massacre? The night of the long cravats?

As you know, many Jews arrived in Israel after its independence from Arab countries. What do you think those Jews were doing in those countries if they had all fed the region in the 1800s? There was a large Jewish population in Egypt, in Yemen, in Iraq, in Algeria, and Tunisia, and in several other Arab countries. They had mostly gotten along fine until the rise of Zionism. There is evidence that in many cases Israel was behind some of the violence that encouraged them to flee the Arab countries. Just Google the Lavon Affair, or the bombings in Iraq.

I'm the person who posted earlier. The Palestinian who said I was done with this topic. I wish I hadn't said that only because I missed out on what you've been saying and I thank you.

This is what I've told people over and over again regarding Jews in Arab countries. They simply don't want to believe it because I do think many Zionist Jews who are Ashkenazi and American in particular, refuse to let go of projecting what European Christianity did to them over a thousand years, onto Arabs/Muslims. Attempting to lie and claim Jews experienced in the ME what they did in Europe or worse, is a despicable lie.

When I see how Zionist Ashkenazi Jews speaks, I see their racism and bigotry being the reason they essentially absolve Europe and lie about how Jews were treated in the Mideast. The very reason Arab Jews now call themselves "Mizrahi" is because Europeans Zionist Jews made them shed their actual *culture* which is MIDDLE EASTERN/ARAB and that's why they preposterously claim ARAB food is "Israeli." The literal words are ARABIC and the food existed long before 75 years ago.

Zionism is a racist and bigoted ideology that invaded the ME and its purpose is solely the erasure of Palestinians. That's why they feel no shame in destroying thousand year old olive trees and claiming "Palestine never existed." That's why Gold Meir claims we never existed while she lived in the stolen home of a Palestinian family. There is nothing more preposterous than a western-born Zionist whether Jewish or Christian, talking about the Middle East and clearly knowing NOTHING when they do. The western media and govts chose to poison minds by claiming every damned thing was about "antisemitism." Stop getting angry at people pointing out you've been lied to and ask why in the first days of Oct 7, MSNBC for example, chose to bring on people with NO Middle East expertise and no Arabs, Palestinians or Muslims, and instead chose to bring on American-born Zionists with no ME expertise, to tell viewers everything is about "antisemitism"? To go along with the lies about beheaded babies and mass rape? It was always a concerted effort by media to silence people who actually understood the occupation and why what happened, didn't happen because the occupier is *Jewish*

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, if Hamas and Hezbollah choose to secrete themselves into civilian neighborhoods, as they saying goes, "you get what you get".

The overwhelming Palestinian population has elected Hamas as the government of Gaza.

Really?
Is it not true that Hana’s was last elected nearly 20 years ago, when the majority of Palestinians were either unborn or else ineligible to vote? And didn’t Hamas fail to gain a plurality of the vote at that time, but instead assume power with the assistance of the Israeli government?

Boy, your command of the actual facts is really bad, even for a Zionist.

20 years ago? Why are you judging their electoral system by U.S. standards? it is what it is.

Better question: why are you insinuating that the innocents being slaughtered by Israel have themselves to blame?

Yes. This. We can go back and forth about he 2006 election but honestly does it matter? Clearly more than militants are being killed (and maimed and displaced don’t forget). I understand it’s hard to accept that Israel is this cruel, but it is. I find it sickening that a country whose people know suffering can inflict such harm on others. (Ps. I’m not an anti semite. I’m of Jewish descent and think my people must do better).

The Hamas militants are hiding among civilians and literally used hospitals and other civilian facilities to launch attacks on the IDF. They are thus equally culpable in the killings of civilians. It's extremely misleading to try and claim that EVERY civilian death is SOLELY the fault of the IDF and we are far past due an admission from pro-Palestinians of that.

Let's agree that Israel and Hamas have equal responsibility for the ongoing genocide. The leaders of both sides should be indicted on war crimes (has already happened) and the U.S. should follow U.S. law and stop supplying weapons to both sides. Of course, the U.S. does not supply weapons to Hamas so we can only stop providing weapons to Israel. But, this will meet your objection of not placing fault only on one side.

Does what is happening in Gaza fall under this definition? Isreal could have mowed the land there by now. Did it?
Definition of genocide by the U.N.
Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Yes, Israel has killed members of the group, upwards of 40,000 of them. Yes, Israel has caused serious bodily and mental harm to members of the group. Yes, Israel is deliberately inflicting conditions on the group calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or part — namely, it is striving Palestinians in northern Gaza at the moment. So, Israel is clearly 3 for 5 and only one is needed. Moreover, there are arguments that Israel has done the last two as well.

It's not only me saying this, but the International Court of Justice as well.

No, that's a common misconception. The IJC did not say that.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3g9g63jl17o

“a plausible risk of genocide”. Seems like it.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, if Hamas and Hezbollah choose to secrete themselves into civilian neighborhoods, as they saying goes, "you get what you get".

The overwhelming Palestinian population has elected Hamas as the government of Gaza.

Really?
Is it not true that Hana’s was last elected nearly 20 years ago, when the majority of Palestinians were either unborn or else ineligible to vote? And didn’t Hamas fail to gain a plurality of the vote at that time, but instead assume power with the assistance of the Israeli government?

Boy, your command of the actual facts is really bad, even for a Zionist.

20 years ago? Why are you judging their electoral system by U.S. standards? it is what it is.

Better question: why are you insinuating that the innocents being slaughtered by Israel have themselves to blame?

Yes. This. We can go back and forth about he 2006 election but honestly does it matter? Clearly more than militants are being killed (and maimed and displaced don’t forget). I understand it’s hard to accept that Israel is this cruel, but it is. I find it sickening that a country whose people know suffering can inflict such harm on others. (Ps. I’m not an anti semite. I’m of Jewish descent and think my people must do better).

The Hamas militants are hiding among civilians and literally used hospitals and other civilian facilities to launch attacks on the IDF. They are thus equally culpable in the killings of civilians. It's extremely misleading to try and claim that EVERY civilian death is SOLELY the fault of the IDF and we are far past due an admission from pro-Palestinians of that.

Let's agree that Israel and Hamas have equal responsibility for the ongoing genocide. The leaders of both sides should be indicted on war crimes (has already happened) and the U.S. should follow U.S. law and stop supplying weapons to both sides. Of course, the U.S. does not supply weapons to Hamas so we can only stop providing weapons to Israel. But, this will meet your objection of not placing fault only on one side.

Does what is happening in Gaza fall under this definition? Isreal could have mowed the land there by now. Did it?
Definition of genocide by the U.N.
Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Yes, Israel has killed members of the group, upwards of 40,000 of them. Yes, Israel has caused serious bodily and mental harm to members of the group. Yes, Israel is deliberately inflicting conditions on the group calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or part — namely, it is striving Palestinians in northern Gaza at the moment. So, Israel is clearly 3 for 5 and only one is needed. Moreover, there are arguments that Israel has done the last two as well.

It's not only me saying this, but the International Court of Justice as well.

No, that's a common misconception. The IJC did not say that.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3g9g63jl17o

The IJC agreed that South Africa's case against Israel for genocide was plausible and that Palestinians' rights to protection from genocide are at risk. Those determinations would not have been made had not there been evidence that Israel's actions were meeting the definition of genocide.

Specifically, the court ruled that, "some of the acts and omissions alleged by South Africa to have been committed by Israel in Gaza appear to be capable of falling within the provisions of the Convention." and that Palestinians in Gaza have the right "to be protected from acts of genocide and related prohibited acts identified in Article III, and the right of South Africa to seek Israel's compliance with the latter's obligations under the Convention."