Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[Loren Pechtel]

There is nothing inevitable about ethnic cleansing. It's a choice bigoted assholes make and indifferent assholes allow, not the destiny of Semitic people to either give or receive.

You choose to ignore that the Palestinians have been calling for ethnic cleansing for decades. They'll suddenly give up that goal if they get in a position to actually do it??

Even if you could substantiate the claim that some Palestinians have been calling for ethnic cleansing (which I doubt since you rarely can substantiate anything you claim), you'd still be unable to show how they'd be able to carry out such a campaign.

Just look at the Hamas charter. Not your fantasy about how they believe, but what they actually say they want.

Hamas couldn't do it. They don't have enough fighters or enough international support. Fatah can't even get illegal settlers out of the West Bank. But somehow declaring borders and building sustainable communities can make ethnic cleansing happen?

If the people were mixed together how would the Jews avoid the genocide? Remember, they would outnumber the Jews.

Your argument here is nothing but racist fear mongering and fantasy.

I'm sure it's a lot easier for you to think that than to pay attention to what's really going on.

Your idea of peaceful coexistence isn't going to work. It didn't work in India, either--and that was bloodier and more displacement than anything around Israel.

It worked for centuries before the British took over and Europeans began flooding into the area. It worked so well that Palestinian Jews were willing to risk their lives by confronting Zionist terrorists carrying out Plan Dalet to make them stop murdering Palestinian Muslims and Christians. It worked so well that Palestinian Muslims and Christians fleeing murderous Zionists gave the keys to their houses to Palestinian Jews in the nearby towns because they trusted their friends and longtime neighbors to look after their property until they could return.

I was pointing out India. The India/Pakistan partition makes Israel/Palestine look benign.

Yes, I saw. I presume you want to talk about India because

I was comparing the situation. We have two places that were divided between Muslim and non-Muslim after the colonial powers left. It's the logical thing to compare to!

Apples and oranges are both fruits.

Did the Hindu and Muslim citizens of the various kingdoms that became vassal states of the British Raj have peaceful relations for centuries before armed Europeans showed up? Were their relations so friendly that Hindus sheltered Muslims and Muslims sheltered Hindus when violent bigoted assholes were murdering people?

Do you want to examine the history of the region or just make shit up?

Just because there was coexistence doesn't change what happened when they got independence. The Muslims were not willing to accept a non-Muslim government, the bloodshed was a far larger scale than in Israel and continues to this day.

1. you want to bash Muslims and you think you can portray Hindus as victims, and

It was bloody on both sides and continues to be a problem to this day.

2. you don't want to talk about the centuries of friendly, peaceful relations between Palestinian Jews and their Muslim and Christian neighbors.

The peace of blacks under Jim Crow.

Bullshit.

I know you want to use that line about a slave rebellion because it makes the Zionist invasion sound noble, but it's akin to Lost Cause mythology. Palestinian Jews weren't enslaved and didn't live under Jim Crow laws. And even if they had, it wasn't the Palestinians who made the laws or enforced them. It was the Ottoman Turks.

I never said they were enslaved. They were second class citizens. That's how it is as a non-Muslim in Muslim lands.

Palestinian Christians, Druze, Baha'i, and adherents of other non-Muslim religions all paid an extra tax. That was it. That was the only difference between them and the Shiite and Sunni Muslims under Ottoman rule.

That wasn't the only difference.

And I will remind you once again, the Palestinian Jews weren't the ones forcing their neighbors out. It was the European immigrants who did that. Yet another difference between the Levant and the Indian subcontinent.

The forcing was done by the Muslims--it's just they failed to accomplish it.

If you really want to talk about India before, during, and after the British Raj, go ahead and start a new thread. Don't forget to mention the burning people alive part, though. It's an important part of the story.

I was comparing the post-colonial events.

Then start a new thread and show your sources.

I believe it's relevant to this thread--I'm showing that the common element is Muslims aren't willing to not be above non-Muslims. In a moderate Muslim government this shows up as the tax you mentioned and that the legal system is tilted towards the Muslims. In a more radical Muslim government non-Muslims aren't remotely safe. Or even Muslims that are seen as second class citizens. (There are plenty of de-facto slaves in the Middle East these days.)

How about reigning in the Palestinians?

A Jew who goes down the wrong street very well might end up dead. A Palestinian won't.

How about equal treatment under the law?

How about addressing the issue?

Equal treatment under the law is the issue.

Human rights and not being shitty towards people who have different ideas about Biblegod is the issue.

Racism and religious bigotry enshrined as national policy is the issue.

There's also greed and cultural chauvinism at work, but first things first.

You act as if it's only Israel who does wrong. I'm pointing out that a Jew who takes a wrong turn very well might end up dead and you don't think that matters.

I do think it matters.

It always matters when people are attacked, harassed, bullied, and murdered, and I have always said so.

Yeah, you say so but you only care when a non-Jew is hurt. The killing of lost Jews is not considered newsworthy.

I have also said that I believe working toward a just and fair society where the equal rights of all persons are respected regardless of race, religion, sex, gender, religion, or creed is the best way to proceed, whereas supporting a society in which racism and bigotry are enshrined is the worst.

But you pay no attention to whether your plans would actually accomplish your objective.

Also, that stealing from other people makes them angry, and beating and imprisoning them because they're angry makes them angrier.

I've already provided the quote from the Hamas spokesman that says they are fighting because Israel exists. Not because of anything Israel has done.

How about taking race, religion, and ethnic origin out of the equation when considering what should be done when crimes are committed?

And how does it make a difference? Yes, settler crimes against Palestinians are effectively ignored because they're impossible to prosecute, not because they're above the law. With no cooperation from the Palestinians the police can't even determine if a crime was committed, let alone who did it. (Many of the allegations are clearly false.)

^This is bullshit.^

I'm making two claims here, which are you calling bullshit?

All of it is bullshit.

The reason you give for why crimes committed by settlers are effectively ignored is bullshit, your claim that the Palestinians don't cooperate with the police is bullshit, and your claim that many of the allegations are "clearly false" is clearly bullshit.

To cooperate with the police the police would first have to dare go there. And people would have to feel free to tell them the truth (hint: if you were a Palestinian who showed up in court and said the Jews didn't do X you would be signing your own death warrant.)

Off the top of my head: Many of the pictures of ripping out "olive" trees aren't olive trees at all and not a tree anyone would cultivate.

How about working towards a fair and just society and away from a society where bigotry is enshrined and racist assholes protected?

And you think you can reform the Palestinians? Because they are far more guilty of this than Israel.

^This is bullshit plus racism.^

In other words, you have no actual rebuttal.

That's the nature of bullshit. There's nothing of substance to rebut. It's just words.

Because you can't comprehend blasphemy. No surprise, most people can't.

What I said applies equally to Jews, Christians, Muslims, Druze, and any and all religious and ethnic groups.

What don't you like about working towards a fair and just society and away from a society where bigotry is enshrined and racist assholes are protected? Be specific.

The thing is your approach is not going to produce remotely the result you imagine it will.

Fatah never tried diplomacy. Sham talks to see what they could get but no willingness to agree to a partition of the territory. Oslo was a case of can-kicking, not a true partition.

^This is an unsupported assertion that appears to be a perfect blend of bullshit, racism, ignorance, and handwaving.^

The Palestinians want their State. They jumped through enough hoops to demonstrate their willingness to jump through hoops to get it. Now it's the Israelis turn to prove their willingness. They can start by letting everyone know where Israel ends and Not-Israel begins.

Nope, they never demonstrated their willingness. At no point have they presented a viable two-state solution.

Goal post shifting noted.

Prove your claims. You can start with the claim that Fatah never tried diplomacy. Show us the history of Fatah political strategy and policies.

When have they ever proposed a viable two-state solution? What you conveniently can't remember is that Arafat offered 67 borders + right of return. You pretend that would be a token but that's not how they see it--all the "Palestinian" (by now many are as little as 1/8th Palestinian) "refugees" (they've lived their whole lives elsewhere) would be forced into Israel whether they want to go or not.

You and the Israelis should want Fatah to succeed in their diplomacy. I think on some level you do. It's just that Israel wants all of the land it calls Eretz Israel under Israeli control more than it wants Fatah to succeed in defending the Palestinians.

I'd like it if they succeeded but they inherently can't.

They "inherently" can't?

How very anti-Semitic of you to think so.

Has nothing to do with who they are. It has to do with their own laws.

Which laws are those?

Support your claims. Show us the links.

There's no point to it because you're not going to trust any source I provide. A prime source is not an option because it won't be in English.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Extremism comes from the money being paid for terror.

The extremism is there without the money. The ability to act on terrorism with weaponry comes from money.

Paying for terrorism is relatively easym Convincing young people to die for it is the harder part.

That's why they have to keep their people in poverty. Hamas is the majority of the GDP of Gaza.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

No one has been posting much about the hospitals and siege of hospitals very recently but there's been tons of news. My own reason for not doing so is that as an atheist, I base my informed opinions on information. Information coming out is very controlled by one side and as far as demonstrating one conclusion or the opposite, the one-sided evidence and arguments have been very sketchy. I suspect that a number of other posters have felt the same way, like thinking I am not quite sure what to say about this yet.

So, first, here is The Times of Israel:

IDF reveals entrance to Hamas tunnel, weapons cache found in Shifa Hospital complex

Troops also locate a Hamas pickup truck with weapons in it, similar to those used in October 7 attacks; Gallant says military has moved on to 'next phase' of operation

www.timesofisrael.com

I searched Counterpunch to get a different perspective. It's not one that I endorse in full, but I'm sharing it so that other posters can see more broadly what positions on the hospital news may be:

The IDF is Coming Up Almost Empty in Search for Underground Hamas ‘Pentagon’

The US is backpedaling its support for Israel’s brutal invasion of Gaza; destruction of the entire northern half (or third) of the walled-off and

www.counterpunch.org

Meanwhile, Hamas so trusts the media to tell their lies that they tell utterly stupid lies:

Under bombardment, Gaza medics fight to save patients with no power, water or food

Just one hospital in the territory is still able to take patients as doctors and nurses try to keep those in their care alive

www.theguardian.com

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This guy gets it:
The only rational choice left for Israel in the wake of October 7 is to finally choose to deal seriously and constructively with the Palestinians who are committed to talking to Israelis, as opposed to bolstering those who want to kill Israelis.

What's the point in making peace with someone not remotely able to deliver peace?

 

[Arctish]

Even if you could substantiate the claim that some Palestinians have been calling for ethnic cleansing (which I doubt since you rarely can substantiate anything you claim), you'd still be unable to show how they'd be able to carry out such a campaign.

Just look at the Hamas charter. Not your fantasy about how they believe, but what they actually say they want.

Please quote the part of Hamas's charter that calls for ethnic cleansing. Then we'll talk about whether Hamas has developed their own version of Plan Dalet, and whether they're capable of carrying it out. Also, please explain how Israel declaring its borders and treating Muslim, Christian, and Druze Palestinians as well as it treats Jews will make ethnic cleansing happen. That looks like a non sequitur to me.

Hamas couldn't do it. They don't have enough fighters or enough international support. Fatah can't even get illegal settlers out of the West Bank. But somehow declaring borders and building sustainable communities can make ethnic cleansing happen?

If the people were mixed together how would the Jews avoid the genocide? Remember, they would outnumber the Jews.

Why do you never make this argument when we're talking about the settlements? You should be howling about idiot parents putting their kids in deadly peril every time a family of Jews moves to the West Bank, but you say nothing, which leads me to believe this is just more fear mongering bullshit.

Your argument here is nothing but racist fear mongering and fantasy.

I'm sure it's a lot easier for you to think that than to pay attention to what's really going on.

Your idea of peaceful coexistence isn't going to work. It didn't work in India, either--and that was bloodier and more displacement than anything around Israel.

It worked for centuries before the British took over and Europeans began flooding into the area. It worked so well that Palestinian Jews were willing to risk their lives by confronting Zionist terrorists carrying out Plan Dalet to make them stop murdering Palestinian Muslims and Christians. It worked so well that Palestinian Muslims and Christians fleeing murderous Zionists gave the keys to their houses to Palestinian Jews in the nearby towns because they trusted their friends and longtime neighbors to look after their property until they could return.

I was pointing out India. The India/Pakistan partition makes Israel/Palestine look benign.

Yes, I saw. I presume you want to talk about India because

I was comparing the situation. We have two places that were divided between Muslim and non-Muslim after the colonial powers left. It's the logical thing to compare to!

Apples and oranges are both fruits.

Did the Hindu and Muslim citizens of the various kingdoms that became vassal states of the British Raj have peaceful relations for centuries before armed Europeans showed up? Were their relations so friendly that Hindus sheltered Muslims and Muslims sheltered Hindus when violent bigoted assholes were murdering people?

Do you want to examine the history of the region or just make shit up?

Just because there was coexistence doesn't change what happened when they got independence. The Muslims were not willing to accept a non-Muslim government, the bloodshed was a far larger scale than in Israel and continues to this day.

1. you want to bash Muslims and you think you can portray Hindus as victims, and

It was bloody on both sides and continues to be a problem to this day.

2. you don't want to talk about the centuries of friendly, peaceful relations between Palestinian Jews and their Muslim and Christian neighbors.

The peace of blacks under Jim Crow.

Bullshit.

I know you want to use that line about a slave rebellion because it makes the Zionist invasion sound noble, but it's akin to Lost Cause mythology. Palestinian Jews weren't enslaved and didn't live under Jim Crow laws. And even if they had, it wasn't the Palestinians who made the laws or enforced them. It was the Ottoman Turks.

I never said they were enslaved. They were second class citizens. That's how it is as a non-Muslim in Muslim lands.

They, along with the Christians, Druze, Zoroastrians, and other non-Muslims, were Dhimmi, persons whose life, property, and freedom of religion was protected in exchange for loyalty to the state and payment of the jizya tax.

I once invited you to a discussion of life in Palestine during the 19th and early 20th century. What to restart it and explore the history?

Show

Palestinian Christians, Druze, Baha'i, and adherents of other non-Muslim religions all paid an extra tax. That was it. That was the only difference between them and the Shiite and Sunni Muslims under Ottoman rule.

That wasn't the only difference.

And I will remind you once again, the Palestinian Jews weren't the ones forcing their neighbors out. It was the European immigrants who did that. Yet another difference between the Levant and the Indian subcontinent.

The forcing was done by the Muslims--it's just they failed to accomplish it.

If you really want to talk about India before, during, and after the British Raj, go ahead and start a new thread. Don't forget to mention the burning people alive part, though. It's an important part of the story.

I was comparing the post-colonial events.

Then start a new thread and show your sources.

I believe it's relevant to this thread--I'm showing that the common element is Muslims aren't willing to not be above non-Muslims. In a moderate Muslim government this shows up as the tax you mentioned and that the legal system is tilted towards the Muslims. In a more radical Muslim government non-Muslims aren't remotely safe. Or even Muslims that are seen as second class citizens. (There are plenty of de-facto slaves in the Middle East these days.)

How about reigning in the Palestinians?

A Jew who goes down the wrong street very well might end up dead. A Palestinian won't.

How about equal treatment under the law?

How about addressing the issue?

Equal treatment under the law is the issue.

Human rights and not being shitty towards people who have different ideas about Biblegod is the issue.

Racism and religious bigotry enshrined as national policy is the issue.

There's also greed and cultural chauvinism at work, but first things first.

You act as if it's only Israel who does wrong. I'm pointing out that a Jew who takes a wrong turn very well might end up dead and you don't think that matters.

I do think it matters.

It always matters when people are attacked, harassed, bullied, and murdered, and I have always said so.

Yeah, you say so but you only care when a non-Jew is hurt. The killing of lost Jews is not considered newsworthy.

I have also said that I believe working toward a just and fair society where the equal rights of all persons are respected regardless of race, religion, sex, gender, religion, or creed is the best way to proceed, whereas supporting a society in which racism and bigotry are enshrined is the worst.

But you pay no attention to whether your plans would actually accomplish your objective.

Also, that stealing from other people makes them angry, and beating and imprisoning them because they're angry makes them angrier.

I've already provided the quote from the Hamas spokesman that says they are fighting because Israel exists. Not because of anything Israel has done.

How about taking race, religion, and ethnic origin out of the equation when considering what should be done when crimes are committed?

And how does it make a difference? Yes, settler crimes against Palestinians are effectively ignored because they're impossible to prosecute, not because they're above the law. With no cooperation from the Palestinians the police can't even determine if a crime was committed, let alone who did it. (Many of the allegations are clearly false.)

^This is bullshit.^

I'm making two claims here, which are you calling bullshit?

All of it is bullshit.

The reason you give for why crimes committed by settlers are effectively ignored is bullshit, your claim that the Palestinians don't cooperate with the police is bullshit, and your claim that many of the allegations are "clearly false" is clearly bullshit.

To cooperate with the police the police would first have to dare go there. And people would have to feel free to tell them the truth (hint: if you were a Palestinian who showed up in court and said the Jews didn't do X you would be signing your own death warrant.)

Off the top of my head: Many of the pictures of ripping out "olive" trees aren't olive trees at all and not a tree anyone would cultivate.

How about working towards a fair and just society and away from a society where bigotry is enshrined and racist assholes protected?

And you think you can reform the Palestinians? Because they are far more guilty of this than Israel.

^This is bullshit plus racism.^

In other words, you have no actual rebuttal.

That's the nature of bullshit. There's nothing of substance to rebut. It's just words.

Because you can't comprehend blasphemy. No surprise, most people can't.

What I said applies equally to Jews, Christians, Muslims, Druze, and any and all religious and ethnic groups.

What don't you like about working towards a fair and just society and away from a society where bigotry is enshrined and racist assholes are protected? Be specific.

The thing is your approach is not going to produce remotely the result you imagine it will.

Fatah never tried diplomacy. Sham talks to see what they could get but no willingness to agree to a partition of the territory. Oslo was a case of can-kicking, not a true partition.

^This is an unsupported assertion that appears to be a perfect blend of bullshit, racism, ignorance, and handwaving.^

The Palestinians want their State. They jumped through enough hoops to demonstrate their willingness to jump through hoops to get it. Now it's the Israelis turn to prove their willingness. They can start by letting everyone know where Israel ends and Not-Israel begins.

Nope, they never demonstrated their willingness. At no point have they presented a viable two-state solution.

Goal post shifting noted.

Prove your claims. You can start with the claim that Fatah never tried diplomacy. Show us the history of Fatah political strategy and policies.

When have they ever proposed a viable two-state solution? What you conveniently can't remember is that Arafat offered 67 borders + right of return. You pretend that would be a token but that's not how they see it--all the "Palestinian" (by now many are as little as 1/8th Palestinian) "refugees" (they've lived their whole lives elsewhere) would be forced into Israel whether they want to go or not.

You and the Israelis should want Fatah to succeed in their diplomacy. I think on some level you do. It's just that Israel wants all of the land it calls Eretz Israel under Israeli control more than it wants Fatah to succeed in defending the Palestinians.

I'd like it if they succeeded but they inherently can't.

They "inherently" can't?

How very anti-Semitic of you to think so.

Has nothing to do with who they are. It has to do with their own laws.

Which laws are those?

I'm putting the bulk of your quibbling and bullshit behind HIDE tags because of this:

Support your claims. Show us the links.

There's no point to it because you're not going to trust any source I provide. A prime source is not an option because it won't be in English.

There is no point in discussing claims you refuse to support.

 

[Arctish]

It looks like the link in my previous post isn't working.

I'll try again:

Dhimmi

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

For those who think the reporting is honest:

...here's some more reporting that purports to be honest

FFS, Loren, literally nobody with half a brain expects ANY honest reporting from any war zone.

Particularly not when it comes to counter-propaganda about how the other side are all lying liars who lie.

EVERYONE IS LYING.

EVERYONE.

In other news, everyone is being vicious, cruel, and heartless; Everyone is flouting the established rules of international law; And everyone needs to stop doing that.

Not "as soon as they do"; Now.

But they won't. Because they're all a bunch of vicious, cruel, and deeply committed enthusiasts for their "side".

Of course reporters don't see the whole picture. The point of that bit was the reporter was clearly not interested in hearing the truth.

More evidence of reporters cooperating on hiding things:

Foreign journalists reveal Hamas' false front

The world didn't believe Israel, but it might believe foreign reporters who were afraid to offer real-time reports but now tell all: A Hamas HQ at Al-Shifa Hospital, launchers near UN facilities, and staged bomb scenes.

www.ynetnews.com

So, they are 12,000 crisis actors?

 

[laughing dog]

This guy gets it:
The only rational choice left for Israel in the wake of October 7 is to finally choose to deal seriously and constructively with the Palestinians who are committed to talking to Israelis, as opposed to bolstering those who want to kill Israelis.

What's the point in making peace with someone not remotely able to deliver peace?

True, Netanhyu is pretty much a proven shifty character out to de-Arab Palestine.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Even if you could substantiate the claim that some Palestinians have been calling for ethnic cleansing (which I doubt since you rarely can substantiate anything you claim), you'd still be unable to show how they'd be able to carry out such a campaign.

Just look at the Hamas charter. Not your fantasy about how they believe, but what they actually say they want.

Please quote the part of Hamas's charter that calls for ethnic cleansing. Then we'll talk about whether Hamas has developed their own version of Plan Dalet, and whether they're capable of carrying it out. Also, please explain how Israel declaring its borders and treating Muslim, Christian, and Druze Palestinians as well as it treats Jews will make ethnic cleansing happen. That looks like a non sequitur to me.

Once again: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/hamas-2017-document-full

Please explain for the audience what #27 means, considering the definition in #2.

Hamas couldn't do it. They don't have enough fighters or enough international support. Fatah can't even get illegal settlers out of the West Bank. But somehow declaring borders and building sustainable communities can make ethnic cleansing happen?

If the people were mixed together how would the Jews avoid the genocide? Remember, they would outnumber the Jews.

Why do you never make this argument when we're talking about the settlements? You should be howling about idiot parents putting their kids in deadly peril every time a family of Jews moves to the West Bank, but you say nothing, which leads me to believe this is just more fear mongering bullshit.

Arabs in Jewish-controlled areas: basically safe. Jews in Arab-controlled areas: Often dead. Why are you blaming Israel?

Your argument here is nothing but racist fear mongering and fantasy.

I'm sure it's a lot easier for you to think that than to pay attention to what's really going on.

They, along with the Christians, Druze, Zoroastrians, and other non-Muslims, were Dhimmi, persons whose life, property, and freedom of religion was protected in exchange for loyalty to the state and payment of the jizya tax.

So long as they put up with the Jim Crow that came along with it.

Support your claims. Show us the links.

There's no point to it because you're not going to trust any source I provide. A prime source is not an option because it won't be in English.

There is no point in discussing claims you refuse to support.

The problem is that neither of us can read the original even if it's online. Thus we have to rely on translations and only the Jews would have any interest in translating this. Thus any source that tells the truth will be Jewish.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

For those who think the reporting is honest:

...here's some more reporting that purports to be honest

FFS, Loren, literally nobody with half a brain expects ANY honest reporting from any war zone.

Particularly not when it comes to counter-propaganda about how the other side are all lying liars who lie.

EVERYONE IS LYING.

EVERYONE.

In other news, everyone is being vicious, cruel, and heartless; Everyone is flouting the established rules of international law; And everyone needs to stop doing that.

Not "as soon as they do"; Now.

But they won't. Because they're all a bunch of vicious, cruel, and deeply committed enthusiasts for their "side".

Of course reporters don't see the whole picture. The point of that bit was the reporter was clearly not interested in hearing the truth.

More evidence of reporters cooperating on hiding things:

Foreign journalists reveal Hamas' false front

The world didn't believe Israel, but it might believe foreign reporters who were afraid to offer real-time reports but now tell all: A Hamas HQ at Al-Shifa Hospital, launchers near UN facilities, and staged bomb scenes.

www.ynetnews.com

So, they are 12,000 crisis actors?

From a practical standpoint there are millions, it's just most never are on stage. In a state like that you say what those in power tell you to say. Same thing we see with a certain poster and Russia.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This guy gets it:
The only rational choice left for Israel in the wake of October 7 is to finally choose to deal seriously and constructively with the Palestinians who are committed to talking to Israelis, as opposed to bolstering those who want to kill Israelis.

What's the point in making peace with someone not remotely able to deliver peace?

True, Netanhyu is pretty much a proven shifty character out to de-Arab Palestine.

Once again, you utterly ignore the point.

The assertion was Israel should try to make peace with Palestinians that want peace--but this amounts to looking for your keys under the streetlight. A peace treaty with someone not in power is worthless.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Film set clip falsely claimed to show staged scenarios in Gaza

A video of a young girl having makeup and fake blood applied, accompanied by scenes of people waving Palestinian flags, is being shared on social media alongside claims it shows Gazans are staging injuries during the war between Israel and Hamas. This is false, and the latest in a series of...

factcheck.afp.com

 

[Arctish]

Even if you could substantiate the claim that some Palestinians have been calling for ethnic cleansing (which I doubt since you rarely can substantiate anything you claim), you'd still be unable to show how they'd be able to carry out such a campaign.

Just look at the Hamas charter. Not your fantasy about how they believe, but what they actually say they want.

Please quote the part of Hamas's charter that calls for ethnic cleansing. Then we'll talk about whether Hamas has developed their own version of Plan Dalet, and whether they're capable of carrying it out. Also, please explain how Israel declaring its borders and treating Muslim, Christian, and Druze Palestinians as well as it treats Jews will make ethnic cleansing happen. That looks like a non sequitur to me.

Once again: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/hamas-2017-document-full

Please explain for the audience what #27 means, considering the definition in #2.

Thank you for providing a link to the 2017 charter.

Section 27 describes a single sovereign state with Jerusalem as its capital. Section 2 described the geographic location of Palestine and says that "The expulsion and banishment of the Palestinian people from their land and the establishment of the Zionist entity therein do not annul the right of the Palestinian people to their entire land and do not entrench any rights therein for the usurping Zionist entity".

IOW, Palestinians have a Right to live in Palestine, and the "Zionist entity" that is the State of Israel does not have any right to replace or remove them.

What is your interpretation of #6, #16, and #17?

Hamas couldn't do it. They don't have enough fighters or enough international support. Fatah can't even get illegal settlers out of the West Bank. But somehow declaring borders and building sustainable communities can make ethnic cleansing happen?

If the people were mixed together how would the Jews avoid the genocide? Remember, they would outnumber the Jews.

Why do you never make this argument when we're talking about the settlements? You should be howling about idiot parents putting their kids in deadly peril every time a family of Jews moves to the West Bank, but you say nothing, which leads me to believe this is just more fear mongering bullshit.

Arabs in Jewish-controlled areas: basically safe. Jews in Arab-controlled areas: Often dead. Why are you blaming Israel?

You are dodging the question.

All your hysterical fear mongering about the dangers of allowing Palestinians to return to their former homes inside Israel are based on the notion that if Jews don't have a supermajority where they live, then they will be the victims of ethnic cleansing and genocide.

There are approximately 2.75 million Palestinians and approximately 670,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank. Why aren't you concerned about that? If you truly believe your own claims you should be arguing for the IDF to evacuate settlers, by force if necessary, like it did in Gaza.

I think the reason you don't is because your claims are bullshit. You approve of racism, religious bigotry, and the theft of land and resources, but want to make it sound noble so you call it creating safe spaces for Jews.

Your argument here is nothing but racist fear mongering and fantasy.

I'm sure it's a lot easier for you to think that than to pay attention to what's really going on.

They, along with the Christians, Druze, Zoroastrians, and other non-Muslims, were Dhimmi, persons whose life, property, and freedom of religion was protected in exchange for loyalty to the state and payment of the jizya tax.

So long as they put up with the Jim Crow that came along with it.

Support your claims. Show us the links.

There's no point to it because you're not going to trust any source I provide. A prime source is not an option because it won't be in English.

There is no point in discussing claims you refuse to support.

The problem is that neither of us can read the original even if it's online. Thus we have to rely on translations and only the Jews would have any interest in translating this. Thus any source that tells the truth will be Jewish.

Are you admitting you never use sources? Is that why you refuse to support your claims?

*** Just to reiterate, I believe Hamas must be defeated on the ground and at the ballots. The Charter has some good passages and concepts but IMO there are way too many terrorists in the organization for it to live up to its own ideals.

 

[laughing dog]

This guy gets it:
The only rational choice left for Israel in the wake of October 7 is to finally choose to deal seriously and constructively with the Palestinians who are committed to talking to Israelis, as opposed to bolstering those who want to kill Israelis.

What's the point in making peace with someone not remotely able to deliver peace?

True, Netanhyu is pretty much a proven shifty character out to de-Arab Palestine.

Once again, you utterly ignore the point.

No, I did not miss your biased point - I improved it to reflect reality.

The assertion was Israel should try to make peace with Palestinians that want peace--but this amounts to looking for your keys under the streetlight. A peace treaty with someone not in power is worthless.

That is your opinion. And it ignores the fact that "Palestinians" live in the West Bank and in Gaza.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Film set clip falsely claimed to show staged scenarios in Gaza

A video of a young girl having makeup and fake blood applied, accompanied by scenes of people waving Palestinian flags, is being shared on social media alongside claims it shows Gazans are staging injuries during the war between Israel and Hamas. This is false, and the latest in a series of...

factcheck.afp.com

How about the article I linked in post #1483? Think about the image and the scenario it is supposedly part of. What's wrong with it?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Even if you could substantiate the claim that some Palestinians have been calling for ethnic cleansing (which I doubt since you rarely can substantiate anything you claim), you'd still be unable to show how they'd be able to carry out such a campaign.

Just look at the Hamas charter. Not your fantasy about how they believe, but what they actually say they want.

Please quote the part of Hamas's charter that calls for ethnic cleansing. Then we'll talk about whether Hamas has developed their own version of Plan Dalet, and whether they're capable of carrying it out. Also, please explain how Israel declaring its borders and treating Muslim, Christian, and Druze Palestinians as well as it treats Jews will make ethnic cleansing happen. That looks like a non sequitur to me.

Once again: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/hamas-2017-document-full

Please explain for the audience what #27 means, considering the definition in #2.

Thank you for providing a link to the 2017 charter.

Section 27 describes a single sovereign state with Jerusalem as its capital. Section 2 described the geographic location of Palestine and says that "The expulsion and banishment of the Palestinian people from their land and the establishment of the Zionist entity therein do not annul the right of the Palestinian people to their entire land and do not entrench any rights therein for the usurping Zionist entity".

In other words, ethnic cleansing. The same thing you keep denying.

IOW, Palestinians have a Right to live in Palestine, and the "Zionist entity" that is the State of Israel does not have any right to replace or remove them.

What is your interpretation of #6, #16, and #17?

Hamas couldn't do it. They don't have enough fighters or enough international support. Fatah can't even get illegal settlers out of the West Bank. But somehow declaring borders and building sustainable communities can make ethnic cleansing happen?

If the people were mixed together how would the Jews avoid the genocide? Remember, they would outnumber the Jews.

Why do you never make this argument when we're talking about the settlements? You should be howling about idiot parents putting their kids in deadly peril every time a family of Jews moves to the West Bank, but you say nothing, which leads me to believe this is just more fear mongering bullshit.

Arabs in Jewish-controlled areas: basically safe. Jews in Arab-controlled areas: Often dead. Why are you blaming Israel?

You are dodging the question.

All your hysterical fear mongering about the dangers of allowing Palestinians to return to their former homes inside Israel are based on the notion that if Jews don't have a supermajority where they live, then they will be the victims of ethnic cleansing and genocide.

There are approximately 2.75 million Palestinians and approximately 670,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank. Why aren't you concerned about that? If you truly believe your own claims you should be arguing for the IDF to evacuate settlers, by force if necessary, like it did in Gaza.

You've fallen for their deceptions hook, line and sinker. The "Occupied Territory" and the right of return aren't about the West Bank as they have deceived you into thinking, but about Israel itself.

As for evacuating the settlers by force if needed--they tried that in Gaza. It just made the situation worse.

I think the reason you don't is because your claims are bullshit. You approve of racism, religious bigotry, and the theft of land and resources, but want to make it sound noble so you call it creating safe spaces for Jews.

Your argument here is nothing but racist fear mongering and fantasy.

I'm sure it's a lot easier for you to think that than to pay attention to what's really going on.

They, along with the Christians, Druze, Zoroastrians, and other non-Muslims, were Dhimmi, persons whose life, property, and freedom of religion was protected in exchange for loyalty to the state and payment of the jizya tax.

So long as they put up with the Jim Crow that came along with it.

Support your claims. Show us the links.

There's no point to it because you're not going to trust any source I provide. A prime source is not an option because it won't be in English.

There is no point in discussing claims you refuse to support.

The problem is that neither of us can read the original even if it's online. Thus we have to rely on translations and only the Jews would have any interest in translating this. Thus any source that tells the truth will be Jewish.

Are you admitting you never use sources? Is that why you refuse to support your claims?

I'm saying you wouldn't accept anything I provided because it would be Jewish.

 

[Arctish]

Even if you could substantiate the claim that some Palestinians have been calling for ethnic cleansing (which I doubt since you rarely can substantiate anything you claim), you'd still be unable to show how they'd be able to carry out such a campaign.

Just look at the Hamas charter. Not your fantasy about how they believe, but what they actually say they want.

Please quote the part of Hamas's charter that calls for ethnic cleansing. Then we'll talk about whether Hamas has developed their own version of Plan Dalet, and whether they're capable of carrying it out. Also, please explain how Israel declaring its borders and treating Muslim, Christian, and Druze Palestinians as well as it treats Jews will make ethnic cleansing happen. That looks like a non sequitur to me.

Once again: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/hamas-2017-document-full

Please explain for the audience what #27 means, considering the definition in #2.

Thank you for providing a link to the 2017 charter.

Section 27 describes a single sovereign state with Jerusalem as its capital. Section 2 described the geographic location of Palestine and says that "The expulsion and banishment of the Palestinian people from their land and the establishment of the Zionist entity therein do not annul the right of the Palestinian people to their entire land and do not entrench any rights therein for the usurping Zionist entity".

In other words, ethnic cleansing. The same thing you keep denying.

Where does it say that? Where does it allude to, suggest, or nudge-nudge-wink-wink that?

Be specific.

And what is your interpretation of #6, #16, and #17?

IOW, Palestinians have a Right to live in Palestine, and the "Zionist entity" that is the State of Israel does not have any right to replace or remove them.

What is your interpretation of #6, #16, and #17?

Hamas couldn't do it. They don't have enough fighters or enough international support. Fatah can't even get illegal settlers out of the West Bank. But somehow declaring borders and building sustainable communities can make ethnic cleansing happen?

If the people were mixed together how would the Jews avoid the genocide? Remember, they would outnumber the Jews.

Why do you never make this argument when we're talking about the settlements? You should be howling about idiot parents putting their kids in deadly peril every time a family of Jews moves to the West Bank, but you say nothing, which leads me to believe this is just more fear mongering bullshit.

Arabs in Jewish-controlled areas: basically safe. Jews in Arab-controlled areas: Often dead. Why are you blaming Israel?

You are dodging the question.

All your hysterical fear mongering about the dangers of allowing Palestinians to return to their former homes inside Israel are based on the notion that if Jews don't have a supermajority where they live, then they will be the victims of ethnic cleansing and genocide.

There are approximately 2.75 million Palestinians and approximately 670,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank. Why aren't you concerned about that? If you truly believe your own claims you should be arguing for the IDF to evacuate settlers, by force if necessary, like it did in Gaza.

You've fallen for their deceptions hook, line and sinker. The "Occupied Territory" and the right of return aren't about the West Bank as they have deceived you into thinking, but about Israel itself.

As for evacuating the settlers by force if needed--they tried that in Gaza. It just made the situation worse.

You are dodging the question.

You said in an earlier post "If the people were mixed together how would the Jews avoid the genocide? Remember, they would outnumber the Jews." In the past you have equated Jews living among Palestinians with them being surrounded by hungry lions. If that is what you truly believe then why aren't you the most strident anti-settlement poster on this board?

I think the reason is you don't truly believe it. It's just another bullshit argument you deploy to support the theft of land and resources and the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

I think the reason you don't is because your claims are bullshit. You approve of racism, religious bigotry, and the theft of land and resources, but want to make it sound noble so you call it creating safe spaces for Jews.

Your argument here is nothing but racist fear mongering and fantasy.

I'm sure it's a lot easier for you to think that than to pay attention to what's really going on.

They, along with the Christians, Druze, Zoroastrians, and other non-Muslims, were Dhimmi, persons whose life, property, and freedom of religion was protected in exchange for loyalty to the state and payment of the jizya tax.

So long as they put up with the Jim Crow that came along with it.

Support your claims. Show us the links.

There's no point to it because you're not going to trust any source I provide. A prime source is not an option because it won't be in English.

There is no point in discussing claims you refuse to support.

The problem is that neither of us can read the original even if it's online. Thus we have to rely on translations and only the Jews would have any interest in translating this. Thus any source that tells the truth will be Jewish.

Are you admitting you never use sources? Is that why you refuse to support your claims?

I'm saying you wouldn't accept anything I provided because it would be Jewish.

Ad hominem noted. Also, weird, because I use the Jewish Virtual Library a lot in our discussions. Did you never notice, or are you saying you don't consider it a Jewish source?

Anyway it doesn't matter whether or not I'd accept a source. What matters is whether or not you have one.

I'm calling you on your bullshit. Support your claims.

 

[ZiprHead]

Film set clip falsely claimed to show staged scenarios in Gaza

A video of a young girl having makeup and fake blood applied, accompanied by scenes of people waving Palestinian flags, is being shared on social media alongside claims it shows Gazans are staging injuries during the war between Israel and Hamas. This is false, and the latest in a series of...

factcheck.afp.com

That's like a music video. It's not an attempt to deceive.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Film set clip falsely claimed to show staged scenarios in Gaza

A video of a young girl having makeup and fake blood applied, accompanied by scenes of people waving Palestinian flags, is being shared on social media alongside claims it shows Gazans are staging injuries during the war between Israel and Hamas. This is false, and the latest in a series of...

factcheck.afp.com

That's like a music video. It's not an attempt to deceive.

Right.

False accusations of staging scenes of suffering with so-called "crisis actors" was a trend seen before with mass shootings in the US and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but experts have seen these types of claims skyrocket during the Israel-Hamas war.

Gendelman is not the first Israeli government account to share claims of faked wartime hardships in Gaza, as the trend continues to spread. Claims that Israeli survivors of the October 7 attacks seen in interviews were crisis actors have also been debunked.

 

[repoman]

Popping in for a few quick questions.

Looking back at the harrowing professional drone footage of totally demolished areas of Syria from a few years ago....

Is there similar comprehensive, survey-like drone video of the Gaza Strip from only a couple days ago? What about satellite images?

How much of Gaza infrastructure of buildings, roads, electrical substations, etc... have been destroyed in the past few weeks?

Have a substantial amount of houses and apartment buildings been bulldozed or wrecking-balled?