Listen to this article: 1 You don't get to drop an entire colony on top of an inhabited country, grind those inhabitants into the dirt for generations, and then claim self defense every time they retaliate. That's not a thing. The US-centralized power alliance in general is a gargantuan globe-spanning juggernaut that feeds on rivers of human blood and every time its victims try to escape from its fangs it shows up on the news sobbing that it is merely defending itself.
excellent points made except the ludicrous: 'Once you accept that religious texts are made up nonsense from ancient historical contexts that have no relevance to the present'.
That's all well and good but you fail to make a distinction between Hamas and the Palestinians. The Palestinians aren't responding to Zionist aggression, Hamas are. Targeting civilians is forbidden in Islam. Supporting the Palestinians and supporting Hamas are two, entirely different things. Hamas have hijacked this issue to further their own agenda. They knew exactly what they were doing when they started firing rockets and they knew Palestinians would die and suffer as a result. Hamas are terrorists. They are an obstacle to peace, and if you don't think they're terrorists then look back at what happened in 2002, when the Arab League had secured a withdrawal by the Zionists from all territories, and secured East Jerusalem as their capital, what did Hamas go and do? Blow up a hotel. The deal was off. The same deal they now want.
The peace plan dominated the summit that year and it was unanimously endorsed by the Arab League.
Essentially, it offered Israel full normalisation with the entire Arab world in exchange for a withdrawal from all occupied territories, including the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and Lebanon, as well as giving the Palestinians East Jerusalem as their capital and reaching a "just solution" for Palestinian refugees who, in the Arab-Israel war of 1948-49, had fled or been expelled from their homes in what became Israel.
The plan received international support and it briefly put Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on the spot. Here, at last, seemed a chance to end once and for all the historic Arab-Israeli conflict.
But just before the plan was published, Hamas bombed an Israeli hotel in Netanya, killing 30 people and wounding more than 100. All talk of peace was off the table.
Four years ago I posted an impassioned blog about Israel and the Palestinians on an Irish site called The Wild Geese. Here is the piece I wrote. Please let me know if you think there has been any substantive political change in those four years. https://thewildgeese.irish/profiles/blogs/the-israeli-occupation-different-voices
When a person or people are wrongly oppressed, they can respond in one of two ways: they can rise above petty revenge in order to spare others from suffering a similar fate, uplifting all of us with their example. Think Nelson Mandela.
Or they can mimic their abusers, internalize their abuse, and inflict it on others. Think Israel.
Articles like yours dare give me hope that the passive acceptance of Zionism's festering narrative is about to be replaced with something much brighter.
I was with Caitlin 100% until her statement, "Zionism is a white supremacist ideology." No. Zionism arrogates to itself the protection of all Jews everywhere, but it does not benefit most Jews, even most Jews in Israel. It benefits mainly elite Ashkenazi Jews who form the leadership of Israel. It would be wrong to call it "Jewish supremacist," because it is not endorsed by nor does it benefit all Jews. Such a term would simply be scapegoating *ALL* Jews for the beliefs and actions of a few. As such, it would be anti-Semitic. Similarly, the use of race and other ideologies by a minority of Western and American elites to benefit themselves is not endorsed by nor does it benefit all white people, so use of "white supremacist" to describe the actions of such elites is simply scapegoating *ALL* white people for the beliefs and actions of a few. It would be anti-White racism, and particularly egregious since a majority of those elites don't even believe such an ideology and many of them, like Barack Obama and Kamala Harris, are in fact non-white. They serve elite interests, and they will use any convenient tool to advance elite goals. In the past racism was used to gain support. Today, it is more often a claim to anti-racism that's a more effective tool.
excellent points made except the ludicrous: 'Once you accept that religious texts are made up nonsense from ancient historical contexts that have no relevance to the present'.
Great piece that lays it all out. Thanks
That's all well and good but you fail to make a distinction between Hamas and the Palestinians. The Palestinians aren't responding to Zionist aggression, Hamas are. Targeting civilians is forbidden in Islam. Supporting the Palestinians and supporting Hamas are two, entirely different things. Hamas have hijacked this issue to further their own agenda. They knew exactly what they were doing when they started firing rockets and they knew Palestinians would die and suffer as a result. Hamas are terrorists. They are an obstacle to peace, and if you don't think they're terrorists then look back at what happened in 2002, when the Arab League had secured a withdrawal by the Zionists from all territories, and secured East Jerusalem as their capital, what did Hamas go and do? Blow up a hotel. The deal was off. The same deal they now want.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-54437222
The peace plan dominated the summit that year and it was unanimously endorsed by the Arab League.
Essentially, it offered Israel full normalisation with the entire Arab world in exchange for a withdrawal from all occupied territories, including the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and Lebanon, as well as giving the Palestinians East Jerusalem as their capital and reaching a "just solution" for Palestinian refugees who, in the Arab-Israel war of 1948-49, had fled or been expelled from their homes in what became Israel.
The plan received international support and it briefly put Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on the spot. Here, at last, seemed a chance to end once and for all the historic Arab-Israeli conflict.
But just before the plan was published, Hamas bombed an Israeli hotel in Netanya, killing 30 people and wounding more than 100. All talk of peace was off the table.
Systemic transformation remains our great task and hope...
Four years ago I posted an impassioned blog about Israel and the Palestinians on an Irish site called The Wild Geese. Here is the piece I wrote. Please let me know if you think there has been any substantive political change in those four years. https://thewildgeese.irish/profiles/blogs/the-israeli-occupation-different-voices
When a person or people are wrongly oppressed, they can respond in one of two ways: they can rise above petty revenge in order to spare others from suffering a similar fate, uplifting all of us with their example. Think Nelson Mandela.
Or they can mimic their abusers, internalize their abuse, and inflict it on others. Think Israel.
Articles like yours dare give me hope that the passive acceptance of Zionism's festering narrative is about to be replaced with something much brighter.
16 - Israel is the only country where the far right defends the immigrants.
I was with Caitlin 100% until her statement, "Zionism is a white supremacist ideology." No. Zionism arrogates to itself the protection of all Jews everywhere, but it does not benefit most Jews, even most Jews in Israel. It benefits mainly elite Ashkenazi Jews who form the leadership of Israel. It would be wrong to call it "Jewish supremacist," because it is not endorsed by nor does it benefit all Jews. Such a term would simply be scapegoating *ALL* Jews for the beliefs and actions of a few. As such, it would be anti-Semitic. Similarly, the use of race and other ideologies by a minority of Western and American elites to benefit themselves is not endorsed by nor does it benefit all white people, so use of "white supremacist" to describe the actions of such elites is simply scapegoating *ALL* white people for the beliefs and actions of a few. It would be anti-White racism, and particularly egregious since a majority of those elites don't even believe such an ideology and many of them, like Barack Obama and Kamala Harris, are in fact non-white. They serve elite interests, and they will use any convenient tool to advance elite goals. In the past racism was used to gain support. Today, it is more often a claim to anti-racism that's a more effective tool.
Collective punishment is a war crime, but apparently it's only "self defense." Comparing "rockets" to jet bombing raids is a false equivalency.
Thank you for spreading the trust. This is horrifying.