dude, Jews ARE the Indigenous people in Israel. The main reason arabs hate Jews is religious. Their prophet and undeniably the role model for each muslim, fought and killed Jews most of his life.
CNN's Pro-Palestinian Contributer Has Pro-Hitler Past
- Thread starter Cantaro
- Start date
There is no state backed "terrorism" in Israel, there is only survival of the Jewish state. Smaller amount of attacks achieved byState backed 'terrorism' is just one more level worse, basketcase.
Again, there were 450 cases of state backed acts you have labelled as 'terrorism' over the last 2 years.
Why do you excuse these acts and focus only on the much smaller amount of attacks by Palestinians?
Why do you support this settler colonialism?
Why do you refuse to support investigations into both sides if you are so sure of Israeli innocence?
UN moves forward with unprecedented open-ended probe against Israel
United Nations General Assembly approves budget for investigation set up after Gaza conflict in May; envoy Gilad Erdan calls commission 'despicable and biased'www.timesofisrael.com
constant work on improving security measures...when that was not that great (15-20 years ago) they had public places, buses,
coffee shops, malls blown by suicide bombers. When you see body parts hanging from the trees you see it differently.
As of "colonialism" - nonsense. These are Jewish lands, you open Bible and you can see names of the places that still
exist there and Jews live in them. Majority of the Arab population in Israel are those who illegally immigrated from the
Arab countries in 20th century, there never been a Palestinian state, language or literature.
I guess it is like syphilis, you can't really fully get rid of it if you once got it
Are you suggesting that state backed terrorism is justified or that it doesn't exist?
State-backed Settler Violence
Yet for some reason, Hamas, PFLP, PIJ, etc. are on Canada's designated terrorist list while Israel is a trading partner.
And it's funny you don't see how ridiculous you are when you say Jews throwing rocks at civilians is terrorism while Palestinians throwing rocks at civilians is self defense.
Do people living under an occupation have a right to fight that occupation?
And your 'terrorism' argument fell apart when Defence For Children International were listed by Israel as 'terrorists'.
Its just a political designation.
One that Israel now fits as well, with Kahanists now part of the democratically elected government of Israel.
That same government that commits acts you have labelled as 'terrorism', by backing settler attacks with the IDF.
So now its about settler colonialism, racism and apartheid.
Do you stand with BLM/Palestinians or do you stand with apartheid?
That's going really well, isn't it?
Hollywood stars back Emma Watson after Palestinian solidarity post
Susan Sarandon and Mark Ruffalo among signatories to letter supporting Harry Potter actor accused of antisemitism
www.theguardian.com
Targeting random Jews is not fighting occupation. It's the definition of terrorism according to the rights groups you pretend to follow.
The reason Hamas, PIJ, PFLP and the rest are on Canada's terrorism list is because they commits acts of terror.
What has that to do with the question?
Do people living under an occupation have a right to fight that occupation?
Or do you mean that you think settlers backed by the IDF are really just 'random Jews'?
Because that sounds a touch antisemitic, basketcase, implying that settlers represent the entire people.
I would argue that most Jews are actually peaceful, support human rights and definitely don't march on villages in angry mobs shouting 'death to arabs'.
But hey, I'm not a right winger like you and I tend to hang with the more left wing crowd here.
Just another example of your rejection of the rights groups you pretend to support.
here's Amnesty directly contradicting your arguments.
Nice, 2002!Just another example of your rejection of the rights groups you pretend to support.
here's Amnesty directly contradicting your arguments.
View attachment 115449
You had to go back 20 years to find that one.
Now that you're here backing the reports of Amnesty lets have a look to see what they are saying now:
Here's a few lines from this year's report:
First line, how do you define 'apartheid'? Like this:
Israel continued to impose institutionalized discrimination against Palestinians living under its rule in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT).
How about addressing the root causes?
Unless the world presses Israel to address root causes like the illegal blockade of Gaza, impunity & longstanding dispossession and oppression of Palestinians, it is likely there will be another round of civilian deaths & destruction.
Palestinians’ experience of systemic discrimination, dispossession and displacement is at the root of the ongoing violations we see today.
Israel/OPT: Designation of Palestinian civil society groups as terrorists a brazen attack on human rights
Israeli authorities have launched a shocking assault on human rights by designating six Palestinian civil society groups terror organizations
www.amnesty.org
Pattern of discriminatory Israeli police violations against Palestinians
Police targeted Palestinians with mass arrests, used unlawful force against peaceful protesters, and subjected detainees to torture
www.amnesty.org
I assume, since you are quoting Amnesty that you must agree with them.
I mean, you wouldn't selectively quote a 20 year old report from a human rights organization you don't support, would you?
And neither their opinion or the legal basis for it has changed.
Why are you so desperate to say being Jewish and in the West Bank makes someone a legitimate target?
Why do you refuse to criticize apartheid when you claim to be against racism.
Why would you never apply the same terms to Palestinians living in what should have and could have been Palestine under Jewish rule?
Why are you so against equal rights?
Genocide, apartheid? A poll Israel cannot allow itself to ignore
Nobody who knows the reality in Israel could possibly believe it is committing genocide against the Palestinians. Yet 22% of US Jews apparently do. Alarm bells should be ringing
www.timesofisrael.com
Because it's not. You may have made up a new definition for the word but in the real world, you can't have a legal system based on race that applies only to one part of that race but gives full legal rights to others of the same race. It's like claiming Canada is apartheid because we don't give permanent residents the right to vote. Speaking of equal rights, why do you ignore that it is the right of Palestinians to reject your one-state farce.
And still you push the idea that being Jewish in the West Bank makes you a legitimate target just because what some other Jews do. No different than the hostage taker in Texas who blamed American Jews for Israeli and US policy.
You really are a conspiracist, having decided that Israel is evil, you ignore reality and logic in favour of blatant double-standards and blindly accepting anything you think backs your obsessive view.
Denial won't work.
You've already today described multiple legal differences applied on race, from evictions in Jerusalem, the right to self determination and the right to self defence.
That's just today.
The charges of apartheid are on the desk at the ICC, you're going to have to do better.
A Threshold Crossed
The 213-page report, “A Threshold Crossed: Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution,” examines Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. It presents the present-day reality of a single authority, the Israeli government, ruling primarily over the area between the Jordan River and...
Obviously reality doesn't work on you.
But keep on pushing your "peace plan" that involves Israel unilaterally annexing the West Bank and forcing Palestinians to become Israeli, predominantly against their will.
Sorry but Israeli Arab self determination is they want to remain Israeli. East Jerusalem Palestinians self determination is they want Israel to continue ruling. Palestinian self determination is they don't want to be Israeli.
And it's disgusting that you continue to claim Hamas rockets and attacks on random Jews in the West Bank are somehow self defense.
The reality is that Israel has enacted the one state, apartheid solution.
They've done it through the 'facts on the ground' that you defended here as 'not the problem'.
There is no possible two state solution and has been no peace talks towards the two state solution for years now.
So the only path forward is for international sanctions to end apartheid and for equal rights to be put in place for all.
The same way it happened for South Africa.
What happens after apartheid is ended will be up to all peoples there.
Its a human rights issue.
Why do you keep demanding Israel unilaterally annex the West Bank and force Palestinians to accept a One State peace that most of them reject? Do you think a unilateral Israeli solution imposed without the consideration of Palestinians will suddenly create a lasting peace?
I'm only demanding the end of apartheid.
If it ends and Palestine is established on the 1948 or 1967 borders and the refugees are given the right of return than that would be fine.
Its just not likely to end that way.
Why, after all this time, are you totally unable to suggest another solution that has even a snowball's chance of happening?
A negotiated Two State Peace is the only possible solution. That involves compromise from both sides and will require someone stepping in and taking away the power of Hamas and other armed factions who refuse to accept a permanent peace that includes a Jewish presence.
Olmert's offer should have at least been a starting framework for a permanent peace because it contained every concession the UN and the Arab League felt reasonable.
p.s. The 'return' of refugees and their descendants is yet another area where you want to force Palestinians to do something they don't want. The most recent polling of UNRWA recipients I've seen had a single digits percentage of them wanting to move to Israel as part of a Two State peace.
Now that you've stated that settlers also act as 'terrorists', would you accept all settlers in the Occupied Territories being disarmed as well?
Or is this one of those compromises for only one side that you support, like giving up land that is internationally recognized as occupied?
If you think this is possible, can you even provide a map of what you would think is reasonable?
From the Palestinian side, it contained almost none from the Israeli side.
If the two state solution happened, I'd be all for it.
I just don't see it as possible, there are too many settlements, all of which are in Palestine.
At this point, the majority of Palestinians are still against the two state solution you think should be forced on them.
Which means BDS and sanctions to end apartheid is the best way forward.
