[skinster]

no country in the world would ignore such a thing

[Suntzu]

More videos!

[skinster]

[Suntzu]

I bet they are devastated!

[skinster]

zionists are.

[colliric]

Why do we even call them Zionists?

Why don't we just call them what they actually historically were called.

The Zealotes and the Sicarii....

I mean they are Jewish Terrorists who believe in "the kingdom of Israel at all costs" right? including killing and opressing Jews which are sympathetic with the Palestinians or other anti-zionist international communities. Why call them something different? They're basically the same. Nothing changes. Except instead of Romans, it's Islamics they hate now.

Sometimes I wonder if they called it Israel instead of Judea and Zionist instead of Zealotes just to propaganda against uncomfortable Jewish Terrorism history and do the usual "Nothing to see here in the First Century... Certainly no Messiah to be seen here at all" thing.

[Zamuel]

Why do we even call them Zionists? Why don't we just call them what they actually historically were called. The Zealotes and the Sicarii.....

Call them what you want, they have returned to the land their god gave them "for ever and ever."
Better get used to it, they have.

-And- as promised, "those who set themselves against them" have suffered.

(book of Zamuel 1.1)

Zam

[Cookie Monster]

The best way for the Middle Eastern States to reprimand Israel for its actions against the people in Gaza and WB is to deny all air flights from and to Israel over their sovereign air spaces. If all the Arab States, Iran and Turkey would do this, it would impose sever constraints on Israel to trade and connect with Asia and Africa. They would become more dependent on Europe and North America, which in turn would mean that the latter would have more leverage on stopping Israel's atrocities.

But of course Israel is busy with tribalising the region to prevent any collective effort.

[Suntzu]

Since the Muslim Middle East seems to be prone to violence the U.S. could answer any action against Israel with a reciprocal ban on any travel to the U.S.

[Cookie Monster]

Since the Muslim Middle East seems to be prone to violence the U.S. could answer any action against Israel with a reciprocal ban on any travel to the U.S.

The US already imposed a ban on Muslims.

Point is not that the ME states should ban Israelis from travelling over their airspace, but banning aircraft to use their sovereign airspace for destinations to and from Israel and Jerusalem. Of course the US could take "reciprocal" measures, but the effect would not be the same. Middle Easterners can switch flights in London, Paris, Amsterdam, Madrid, Rome, etc. on their way to the US.

[Zamuel]

Point is not that the ME states should ban Israelis from travelling over their airspace, but banning aircraft to use their sovereign airspace for destinations to and from Israel and Jerusalem. Of course the US could take "reciprocal" measures, but the effect would not be the same. Middle Easterners can switch flights in London, Paris, Amsterdam, Madrid, Rome, etc. on their way to the US.

If flights into Israel were banned, ME countries would be cutting their own throats. It wouldn't just be the US taking "reciprocal" measures. ME airlines wouldn't be able to land anywhere. It's a stupid idea.

Zam

[skinster]

Why do we even call them Zionists?

That's what they call themselves.

[Zamuel]

That's what they call themselves.

Yes it is … Jews are a people with hundreds of years of oppression (similar to that of Palestinians) behind them. Israel is their salvation. Many of them have naturally sympathized with Palestinians, only to find themselves replied to with an "US or THEM" ultimatum. Of course they choose themselves, anything else is suicidal. Gradually they have been backed into the corner of extremist "Zionism."

If you actually have any of the "Humanity" you claim to feel. You cannot condemn them. Yet you do. Your humanity is false. Most likely a strong guilt reaction that really centers upon YOU, not Israel or Palestine.

Zam

[skinster]

It is Israel that claims Jews as its own, pretending Jews everywhere support zionism, but how could that be so when more Jews live outside of Israel than inside it? There are tons of Jews who do not support zionism, including whole Jewish sects. The largest growing Jewish organization in America (JVP) is against the occupation of the West Bank and the siege of Gaza and support the BDS movement. Israel is not their salvation because Jews can and do live outside of Israel very easily.

I don't condemn Jews because I'm not a racist piece of shit, but I do condemn zionists because zionism is racism and a particular racism that costs the lives and homes of another people and this is ongoing since the Palestinians are still living under a brutal military occupation and in concentration-camp-like conditions. Spare me your trash about "humanity" while you're cheerleading for the side that massacred over 120+ Palestinians and injured 13,000+ more just a few weeks ago.

How the media denies Palestinians their humanity
In coverage of Israel’s recent massacres, columnists have defended abject brutality and implied that Palestinians have no rights

Since the Great Return March demonstrations began on 30 March, Israel has killed at least 116 Palestinians in Gaza and injured thousands more while shooting at unarmed protesters.

Israel has used bullets that leave "unusually severe wounds to the lower extremities... [and] an extreme level of destruction to bones and soft tissue", according to Doctors Without Borders. Israel's most egregious attacks on unarmed protesters came on 14 May, when its forces killed 62 Palestinians.

In coverage of the 14 May massacre and of the marches more generally, however, the media have thoroughly dehumanised Palestinians and rendered their rights invisible.

Declining to criticise Israel
If columnists saw Palestinians as human, they would unambiguously condemn the recent mass murder. Instead, Shmuel Rosner in the New York Times outright endorsed the slaughter, writing: "It is customary to adopt an apologetic tone when scores of people have been killed, as they were this week in Gaza. But I will avoid this sanctimonious instinct and declare coldly: Israel had a clear objective when it was shooting, sometimes to kill... That objective was achieved."

In the same paper, Thomas Friedman declined to criticise Israel, blaming Hamas for supposedly "facilitat[ing] the tragic and wasted deaths of roughly 60 Gazans by encouraging their march".

We can conclude that this type of support for Israel's death squads extends even to their killing of children and disabled people, given that the aforementioned authors say nothing to the contrary.

The harshest criticism of Israel from the Times's David Brooks came when he said that he "doesn’t absolve the Palestinians from responsibility for their choices" but also "doesn't let the Israelis off the hook for their failure to properly confront extremism". With a stroke his magic pen, the killing of dozens of unarmed demonstrators is transformed into a "failure to properly confront extremism".

What has happened during the Great Return March, he claims, is that Palestinians have sought "to create a martyrdom performance that will show the world how oppressed [Palestinians] are". Similarly, Max Boot of the Washington Post describes Israel's massacre as a "possible tactical misjudgment" that "in no way obviate[s] Hamas’s ultimate responsibility for this horror".

A 'grotesque spectacle'
Meanwhile, Bret Stephens of the Times complains: "The world now demands that Jerusalem account for every bullet fired at the demonstrators, without offering a single practical alternative for dealing with the crisis." He suggests that Palestinians place an undue burden on Israel by getting shot by live Israeli ammunition roughly 3,500 times. The idea that Palestinians are fully human so confounds Stephens that he misses the absurdly obvious: The alternative to shooting unarmed Palestinian demonstrators is not shooting them.

For these authors, Palestinians are not humans, but rather demonic spirits in a death cult capable of possessing Israelis and making them shoot Palestinians. Humans have rights, but to these writers, Palestinians are not human - so their rights are transformed into threats to Israel.

Rosner declares that "guarding the border was more important than avoiding killing, and guarding the border is what Israel did successfully". Boot dehumanises Palestinians by portraying them as menacing hordes: "Israel is caught in a no-win situation: It can't allow its border to be overrun - no state can - but if it tries to protect its territory, it runs a high risk of a human tragedy and a public-relations nightmare."

Brooks describes the Great Return March as "a massive border invasion" of Israel. Stephens writes of what he calls "the grotesque spectacle along Gaza's border over the past several weeks, in which thousands of Palestinians have tried to breach the fence and force their way into Israel, often at the cost of their lives".

The protests, according to Stephens's racist drivel, symbolise a "culture of victimhood, violence and fatalism" from which "no decent Palestinian society can emerge".

The right of return
What they call the "grotesque spectacle" and "overrun" of a "border" is actually Palestinians courageously drawing attention to the extraordinary wrongs done to them and attempting to exercise - perhaps only symbolically - their long-denied, legally mandated right to return to their homeland by crossing a colonial armistice line that no institution with any standing recognises as an international “border” that Israel has a right to “protect”.

For the writers I’ve been discussing, Israelis are humans, so they have rights - but the same does not apply to Palestinians. The title of Rosner’s article is "Israel Needs to Protect Its Borders. By Whatever Means Necessary". Friedman writes: "I get why Israel has no choice but to defend its border with Gaza with brute force."

Boot says of Israel's merciless siege of Gaza: "To protect itself, Israel established tight security controls around Gaza, but Hamas used tunnels to smuggle in missiles and other weapons from Egypt." Stephens argues that there is a pattern wherein Palestinians harm themselves and blame Israel, and that this alleged trend "deserves to be highlighted amid the torrent of morally blind, historically illiterate criticism to which Israelis are subjected every time they defend themselves against violent Palestinian attack".

These authors insist upon what they see as Israel exercising its rights to "security" and to "defend" itself, but since they see Palestinians as non-human, it's possible to ignore Palestinians' right to defend themselves from decades of wanton Israeli violence and to pretend that Palestinians don't have a right to liberate themselves - a right that is protected under international law and extends to armed struggle.

For the commentariat, Israel and its US patron have the right to use infinite levels of violence to maintain occupation and apartheid, but Palestinians have no rights - only an obligation to submit to their own slaughter, dispossession and oppression.
http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/ho ... 1875505188

[Zionist Nationalist]

Spinster stop bullshitting

Vast majority of Jews support Israel

and the American Jews that dont can fuck off we only need their money. they are the ones who elected Obama in 2008 and most of them supported killary

[Zamuel]

Spinster stop bullshitting

Oh come on, is this a new Disney movie? You don't appreciate that without skinster and her fanatical Palestinian campaign, people might start taking a serious look at Israeli atrocities.

Zam

[Zionist Nationalist]

Oh come on, is this a new Disney movie? You don't appreciate that without skinster and her fanatical Palestinian campaign, people might start taking a serious look at Israeli atrocities.

Zam

What atrocities?

Israel is dealing with them very softly

they haven't experienced any atrocities yet

just look at Syria as an example of atrocities where skinsters buddies were slaughtering hundred thousands of civilian population and it didnt seem to concern them too much but 100 dead rioters seem to be the end of the world for them

[Zamuel]

What atrocities?

The ones skinster features in those tweet storms that everybody just scroll past because they're sick of them. They are real and, regardless of the justification, they're atrocious.

Israel is dealing with them very softly

We agree on that … But a "soft atrocity" is still an atrocity. Yes it could, and probably will, be much worse.

There are some striking similarities between Gaza and the old US Indian policies / actions. Also the British / Indian confrontation. What the Palestinians really need is a "non-violent" leader like King or Ghandi who can unite them and forsake violence against Israel. If that happens? You're in trouble. - but - it's about as likely as skinster stopping the BS.

Zam

[Rich]

But of course Israel is busy with tribalising the region to prevent any collective effort.

Of course its the Jews fault that Sunni Muslims are trying to genocide the Shia, no blame on the Sunnis. Its obviously the Jews fault that Turks and Arabs are trying to wipe Kurdistan off the map, no blame to the Arab or Turkish Muslims. Of course its the Jews fault that Saudi Arabia and Iran are locked in regional client war, no blame on the Saudi or Iranian regimes or their radical Muslim base's.

Point of distinction. I have most certainly extremist blamed Zionist influence on American foreign policy for prolonging Syria's civil war, prolong the Iran-Iraq war and delaying the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, but the genocide, murder, rape, torture and terror that Muslims inflict on each is the responsibility of Islam, of Muslims, not Jewish supremacists or their gentile cuck running dogs.

[Atlantis]

Of course its the Jews fault that Sunni Muslims are trying to genocide the Shia, no blame on the Sunnis. Its obviously the Jews fault that Turks and Arabs are trying to wipe Kurdistan off the map, no blame to the Arab or Turkish Muslims. Of course its the Jews fault that Saudi Arabia and Iran are locked in regional client war, no blame on the Saudi or Iranian regimes or their radical Muslim base's.

Point of distinction. I have most certainly extremist blamed Zionist influence on American foreign policy for prolonging Syria's civil war, prolong the Iran-Iraq war and delaying the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, but the genocide, murder, rape, torture and terror that Muslims inflict on each is the responsibility of Islam, of Muslims, not Jewish supremacists or their gentile cuck running dogs.

I don't know about the Zionists, but it is quite obviously the fault of the Anglo-American imperialists who destroyed the Ottoman empire and who have used divide and rule tactics to control the region for over a century. The Saudi pariahs wouldn't be able to sponsor terrorism worldwide without US and UK support. And Iran would be a prosperous and modern country with a flourishing culture and vibrant economy.

In fact, the Saudi crown prince recently said in a NYT interview that the US and UK encouraged the Saudis to support terror and Wahhabi ideology abroad. That statement was approved by the Saudi embassy. Now that the shit show in Syria draws to its close, those responsible for spreading terror will blame each other. The West will blame the Saudis and the Saudis will blame the West. The Brits will blame the Yanks and the Yanks will blame the Brits.

Whatever the role of the Zionists, the tail doesn't wag the dog. Israel is the Imperialist's tool for maintain the region in a constant state of war.