Pro-Palestinian Peaceful Protests

[Revoltingest]

You basically just confessed to blatant lying. You began by saying Israel beheaded babies. Now you want to say instead they bombed them. I've had enough of you and your irrational hate.

Irrational.
Perhaps now you can understand why it's a bad
idea to criticize the opposition personally....since
your reaction to a candid criticism of your posts
was thus.

I will no longer be reading or replying to your nutty, irresponsible posts.

Posters say that.
But they always come back.
The best way to ignore someone is
to do it. Not to say one will do it.

 

[MayPeaceBeUpOnYou]

It is a terrorist organization. It is no different than when the world fought against al qaeda or ISIS

Wow what a delusion. Would you catogorise isreal also a terrorist organization then?

It’s a resistance against the one a apartheid regime

was extremely clear. Go back and read what I wrote again

Right so not all Jews are Zionist

Sure. Now the entire forum sees that you refuse to even attempt answer the question. You clearly have an idea in your head what proportion of Jews are Zionist, since you think that I, by comparison, am exaggerating.

What the forum sees is that you are all over the place

Irrelevant. Could Hitler have killed every last Jew in the world. Of course not. But he wanted to. THAT is what counts.

it is relevant. Hamas doesn’t say they want to kill every Jew, come out of the box and don’t look to the facts

You are living in la la land. Do you know what will happen if Israel is irradicated? Jews will once more be forced to live in countries not our own, victimized by repeated incidents of pogroms, just as it was before the state of Israel. But I know enough about you to know you don't give a damn.

Yeah maybe I do live in la la land but at least I am not justifying killing a large of amount of people.

In my mind, the only ethical solution is for the land to be split, with a Jewish state and a Palestinian state. I would accept the 1967 borders.

Well the Zionist regime doesn’t want that. They want every Palestinian gone.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Wow what a delusion. Would you catogorise isreal also a terrorist organization then?

The country? No. The settlers in the west bank? Yes.

 

[MayPeaceBeUpOnYou]

The country? No. The settlers in the west bank? Yes.

Isn’t the settlers being backed by the government?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Isn’t the settlers being backed by the government?

That's a very good question, and it doesn't have a simple yes/no answer. For example, earlier this week, settlers attacked a food convoy headed for Gaza. The Israeli government responded by putting down the riot and arresting the perpetrators. Other times, the settlers attack Palestinian orchards and the IDF just sits there and twiddles their thumbs. It appears the government of Israel doesn't have a set policy about the settlers.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

That's a very good question, and it doesn't have a simple yes/no answer. For example, earlier this week, settlers attacked a food convoy headed for Gaza. The Israeli government responded by putting down the riot and arresting the perpetrators. Other times, the settlers attack Palestinian orchards and the IDF just sits there and twiddles their thumbs. It appears the government of Israel doesn't have a set policy about the settlers.

Or that is the policy. Don't let them go all wild, but let them do small parts one at a time and over time it adds up. And de facto you have Greater Israel.

 

[MayPeaceBeUpOnYou]

That's a very good question, and it doesn't have a simple yes/no answer. For example, earlier this week, settlers attacked a food convoy headed for Gaza. The Israeli government responded by putting down the riot and arresting the perpetrators. Other times, the settlers attack Palestinian orchards and the IDF just sits there and twiddles their thumbs. It appears the government of Israel doesn't have a set policy about the settlers.

Didn’t the government also provided guns for the settlers after 7 October ?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Or that is the policy.

Which? I described two completely opposite reactions to the settlers.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Which? I described two completely opposite reactions to the settlers.

Yeah, this is. If the goverment has a policy of not always doing the same but in effect on the sly try to bring about Greater Israel then that there are different reactions make sense.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Yeah, this is. If the goverment has a policy of not always doing the same but in effect on the sly try to bring about Greater Israel then that there are different reactions make sense.

No, it really doesn't. It shows lack of leadership, and much confusion within the Israeli government. But nice try.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Excellent. Unfortunately, I suspect that your comment reflects a shallow and romanticized understanding of Hamas.

When have I ever once romanticized Hamas?

Perhaps I'm wrong. Permit me a couple of questions:

• What triggered that barbaric October 7th pogrom?

This is like asking "what triggered 9/11". It's pointless to try to point to one singular cause rather than a range of causes that occur over decades, or even centuries. The history of conflict in the region which lead to the oppression of the Palestinian people and the illegal settling of their land, which lead to a rise in anti-Semitic sentiment, which lead to the empowering of Hamas, which lead to Hamas controlling Gaza, which lead to further conflict which increased both military responses from Israel and further anti-Semitic sentiment. If we wanted to talk "recently", Hamas have claimed it was a direct response to increased settler colonialism and the blockade of Gaza.

• What is "the reasonable response to terrorism"?

Also an overly broad question. It depends entirely on the circumstances. In the case of 7/10, I would say a military response is appropriate within international law and human rights. I would say there is no circumstance under which committing war crimes can be considered a reasonable response to terrorism.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

According to the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, genocide is defined as any act that aims to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, in whole or in part. That is NOT what is happening in Gaza. It is not the intent of Israel to kill off Palestinians either in whole or part. Their objective is clearly to destroy Hamas. COLLATERAL DAMAGE is not genocide.

That's very much what's happening in Gaza.

The actions of the IDF meet the definitions of genocide and ethnic cleansing. Israel is committing war crimes. The IDF is targetting civilians.

BTW: have you read the list of charges against Netanyahu and Gallant from the ICC?

Statement of ICC Prosecutor Karim A.A. Khan KC: Applications for arrest warrants in the situation in the State of Palestine

Today I am filing applications for warrants of arrest before Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court in the Situation in the State of Palestine. Image ICC Prosecutor Khan on application for arrest warrants in the situation in the State of Palestine Watch Download Yahya Sinwar...

www.icc-cpi.int

 

[anotherneil]

This may shed some light on what's going on & this is what happens when you have crony capitalists along with their Democrat politicians in control of a city:

"EXPOSED: Billionaire Zionists CAUGHT Controlling NYC Mayor | The Kyle Kulinski Show":

 

[Revoltingest]

Pro-Israel billionaires urged New York crackdown on Gaza protests: Report

WhatsApp leaks reveal group of business leaders discussed ways to pressure officials to clear pro-Palestine protesters.

www.aljazeera.com

MSN

Excerpted....

Business titans privately urged NYC mayor to use police on Columbia protesters, chats show​

 

[IndigoChild5559]

That's very much what's happening in Gaza.

Erm, no, it's not. In fact, the International Court of Justice looked into this very deeply, and while they did warn Israel about the number of casualties, they found that there was insufficient evidence to determine genocide.

Enough siad.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Erm, no, it's not. In fact, the International Court of Justice looked into this very deeply, and while they did warn Israel about the number of casualties, they found that there was insufficient evidence to determine genocide.

Enough siad.

That's false.

Israel-Gaza: What did the ICJ ruling really say?

The ICJ ruling has come under intense scrutiny, centring on the word "plausible". What did the court mean?

www.bbc.co.uk

This wasn't an investigation, it was an ruling based on the claims being made and whether South Africa had a right to make their case of genocide and whether the people of Palestine had a right to be protected under international law. It was NOT an investigation into whether genocide was ACTUALLY occurring. It made no such ruling that there was "not enough evidence to determine genocide".

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

Peaceful protest does not include destruction and takeovers of property that they do not own.

Sometimes it does.

Nonviolent Direct Actions do sometimes have planned distruction of property.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

I'm pro neither side. Both Israelis and and Palistinians have been behaving badly.
At the present moment, it's the Israelis who are causing the greatest harm.

There are three sides here.

Hamas, the Israeli government, and the people.

I do have a side.

 

[MayPeaceBeUpOnYou]

There are 2 sides. The occupiers and the one that are being occupied. Hamas is an ideology that fight against injustice. I totally disagree with killing of the innocents but we should look at the cause of this conflict which is that Palestinians are seen as sub humans, not only by the Zionist but also by the supporters of the Zionist. Until people realize this, there will no peace.
Give the people back the right to live and make amends of the wrong doings in the past, this is the way to peace.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

There are 2 sides. The occupiers and the one that are being occupied. Hamas is an ideology that fight against injustice. I totally disagree with killing of the innocents but we should look at the cause of this conflict which is that Palestinians are seen as sub humans, not only by the Zionist but also by the supporters of the Zionist. Until people realize this, there will no peace.
Give the people back the right to live and make amends of the wrong doings in the past, this is the way to peace.

Isn’t that a little like saying that the AUC wasn’t a side, but an ideology?

They still used the men, women, and children huddled in the sanctuary of the church as human shields, didn’t they?

Why let Hamas and The AUC off the hook?

And why group the AUC together with the parishioners in the church?

On what basis do you do this?