473

Israel’s Brutality Is Increasing—and So Is Its Denialism (www.thenation.com)

submitted 8 months ago by juicy@lemmy.today to c/world@lemmy.world

173 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A human rights monitor documented the sniping of at least 13 children in and around Shifa Hospital, all between the ages of 4 and 16.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The concept of Transfer in Zionist thought and the displacement of Palestinians since the 1920s culminated into a full fledged ethnic cleansing campaign in 1948

The Concept of Transfer 1882-1948

Transfer Committee and the JNF led to Forced Displacement of 100,000 Palestinians throughout the mandate.

Plan Dalet and Plan C Details

Before 1948, Palestinian Leadership repeatedly advocated for a Unitary Binational State for decades.

Palestinian Arab Congress advocating for Unified State 1928, Arab Higher Committee advocating for Unified State 1937 , Arab League advocating for Unified Binational State 1948

History of peace process

If Israel disappeared, a State where Palestinians have equal rights to Israelis would take its place.

How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution

‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe

[+] JustZ@lemmy.world -8 points 8 months ago

Now do the concept of genociding every Jew and Christian in the middle east and the concept of blowing yourself up inside a coffee shop or doing a mass shooting at a kids concert.

If Israel disappeared, a State where Palestinians have equal rights to Israelis would take its place.

Bro, Hamas's motto, same as the motto of every other pan-Islamist violent religious extremists in the middle east, "Death to Israel and death to America."

They literally think God has ordained them to be the true rules of the entire world. They call it "restoring Islam to its rightful place" or they call it a "new world order free from infidels" or "the caliphate."

Like where do you even get this fictitious nonsense?

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Oslo Accords MEE, NYT, Haaretz, AJ

History of peace process

Hamas began twenty years into the occupation during the first Intifada, with the goal of ending the occupation. Collective punishment has been a deliberate Israeli tactic for decades with the Dahiya doctrine. Violence such as suicide bombings and rockets escalated in response to Israeli enforcement of the occupation and apartheid.

What Is Hamas? - Council on Foreign Relations

What Does Hamas Actually Want? - NY Mag

Hamas Election - Snopes

Hamas 1988 Charter and Revised 2017 Charter

The 1988 Charter, which is certainly unreasonable in its fundamentalism with Sharia Law and is antisemitic, does not call for the extermination of all Jewish People. The 2017 Revised charter accepts a Two-State Solution of the 1967 Borders. Check Article 7 and 13 of the 1988 Charter to see yourself, compare it to Article 20 and 24-26 in the revised charter

The slogan From the River to the Sea is about Palestinian liberation that started in the 60s by the PLO for a democratic secular state, not Genocide. Maybe you're thinking of the Syrian leader Hafez al-Assad in 1966.

Like where do you even get this fictitious nonsense?

I don't hide my sources. I don't know where you get your fictitious nonsense besides the IDF.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world -5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

More nonsense, irrelevant spam. You don't hide your sources. You just post an overwhelming amount of irrelevant, biased shit that would take too long to correct.

Anyway, sorry the war still making you so sad that you reject reality to make yoursel feel better. Is denial working?

Like the Snopes article that tries desperately to gloss over the fact that Hamas was popularly elected with innuendo and lies.

It was true that Hamas won the latest election among Palestinians in Gaza — it happened in 2006 — though that victory was not by a majority of votes.

It was a majority of je votes cast, not a majority of the voters. And the reason for that is because Hamas encouraged loyal their many supporters not to participate in the process, and they still won!

I agree that doesn't necessarily reflect what Gaza might do in an election today but we cannot know that because Hamas cancelled all future elections. Another key details omitted by you and Snopes. That's who you support: people who will literally kill you for saying nice things about democracy.

And all your bullshit has never once been about criticizing specific policies about Israel, it's about proving to everyone watching that Israel is evil, not because you want Israel to get better, but because you want to justify Hamas's actually indiscriminate killing of Jews.

Hamas's genocidal intent is not up for debate. It's their sole unifying purpose over decades and their literal motto and it's what they say to Qatar and Iran when they have their hands out for more rockets and tunnel money. God forbid they buy some food and try to improve anyone's life.

Here's the substance of the Snopes claim:

former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett stated that when Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005, Palestinians supposedly had the opportunity to turn it into "an amazing and beautiful state." Instead, he wrote, "A majority of Palestinians voted Hamas whose explicit goal is to destroy Israel," and Hamas' subsequent rocket firing, according to Bennett, forced the Israeli military to form a blockade on the Gaza Strip.

And nothing thereafter in the article proves otherwise. This statement has been and remains 100% true. Gaza is responsible for Gaza and Gaza out Hamas in charge. Hamas shut down the airports and seaports. Hamas refused to follow any international law. They would still be doing suicide bombings if it didn't undermine their lawfare steategy. More facts that you completely ignore.

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The amount of projection and denial from you is unreal lol

Most Palestinians Believe Hamas Should Change its Position on Eliminating Israel - WPO March 2, 2006

Most Palestinians agree that Hamas should recognize Israel’s right to exist. Two-thirds (63 percent) of those polled Jan. 27-29 by Near East Consulting said Hamas should change its position calling for the elimination of Israel. Even among those who voted for Hamas, only 37 percent support Hamas’ position that Israel does not have the right to exist.

Apparently the vast majority of Palestinians did not vote for Hamas because of its political goals but because of their desire to rid the Palestinian Authority of corruption, a theme Hamas campaigned on. Among those polled by JMCC who said they voted for Hamas, only 12 percent said they did so because of Hamas’ political agenda. A plurality of 43 percent said they voted for Hamas because they hoped it would end corruption.

Furthermore it should be noted that Hamas did not receive the majority of the popular vote. With the Palestinians’ mixed system of proportional representation according to party support for half the seats and district seats based on population for the other half, Hamas was able to take 58 percent of all seats with only 45 percent of the overall popular vote (the 58 percent includes three independents who campaigned with Hamas).

The Israeli imposed closure on Gaza began in 1991, temporarily, becoming permanent in 1993. The barrier began around Gaza around 1972.

Between July 1971 and February 1972, Sharon enjoyed considerable success. During this time, the entire Strip (apart from the Rafah area) was sealed off by a ring of security fences 53 miles in length, with few entrypoints. Today, their effects live on: there are only three points of entry to Gaza—Erez, Nahal Oz, and Rafah.

Perhaps the most dramatic and painful aspect of Sharon’s campaign was the widening of roads in the refugee camps to facilitate military access. Israel built nearly 200 miles of security roads and destroyed thousands of refugee dwellings as part of the widening process.'* In August 1971, for example, the Israeli army destroyed 7,729 rooms (approximately 2,000 houses) in three vola- tile camps, displacing 15,855 refugees: 7,217 from Jabalya, 4,836 from Shati, and 3,802 from Rafah.

Page 105

Through 1993 Israel imposed a one-way system of tariffs and duties on the importation of goods through its borders; leaving Israel for Gaza, however, no tariffs or other regulations applied. Thus, for Israeli exports to Gaza, the Strip was treated as part of Israel; but for Gazan exports to Israel, the Strip was treated as a foreign entity subject to various “non-tariff barriers.”'°° This placed Israel at a distinct advantage for trading and limited Gaza’s access to Israeli and foreign markets. Gazans had no recourse against such policies, being totally unable to protect themselves with tariffs or exchange rate controls. Thus, they had to pay more for highly protected Israeli products than they would if they had some control over their own economy. Such policies deprived the occupied territories of significant customs revenue, estimated at $118-$176 million in 1986.!°! (Arguably, the economic terms of the Gaza—Jericho Agreement modify the situation only slightly.'°)

page 240

The Gaza Strip: The Political Economy of De-Development - Third Edition by Sara M. Roy

this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2024

473 points (94.9% liked)

World News

39371 readers

2519 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.