Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[DrZoidberg]

Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, like Black folks in America, ain’t divided by nature, they’ve been split by pressure. Outside forces made it that way. Just like Europe got countries with shared roots, Germany and Austria, Spain and Portugal, split by war, politics, and colonizers. Same blood, same memory, same struggle. They ain’t really divided, just holding convictions from different angles, some more extreme, yeah, but all from the same bucket. But white supremacists won’t see that. They don’t want to. Especially not the ones carrying a white supremacist torch 'cause their love for a Jewish wife is being used as a crusade with no real skin in the game.

Edit: I take the word 'love' back, clearly it means different things to different people. Let’s just call it what it is: a wife who’s fine with her husband having Girl Scout rope partners.

But the blacks of America don't have a predominantly black supremacy ideology and are willing to go to any lengths to terrorise whites into submission.

America is not surrounded by black nations with the same black supremacy ideology. Luckily those surrounding countries leaders mostly pays lip service to the ideology. But they still share it.

Its funny that you bring in the "white supremacy" talk about the only democratic and liberal country in the Middle-East.

What you call "white supremacy" I call "fighting to be able to exist att all".

Considering that islamofascism is so prevalent in the middle east I think its in exceptionally bad taste to allude to any supremacist tendencys among Israelis or their supporters. Its victim blaming imho

You’re out of your depth, Zoidberg , both on Black history and Israel. First of all, Black Americans absolutely lived under a hostile environment dominated by a white supremacist system , one that didn’t just 'discriminate,' but systematically enslaved, segregated, murdered, and erased them for generations. They were surrounded by institutions, policies, and people who saw their very existence as a threat , and still, they endured, organized, and fought back. Not to terrorize, but to survive and demand basic dignity (This is what the State of Israel is doing now, not that white supremist shit you're peddling).

You misunderstood what I wrote, as much as you possibly could. Try reading it again... and pay attention to what I am actually saying. It seems like this is 100% your projection of what you think I must have meant. Not what I actually wrote.

So miss me with the idea that Black people can’t relate to Israel’s situation. In fact, it’s because we’ve been through it, surrounded by hostility, stripped of power, criminalized for resisting, that we see through the nonsense when someone like you pretends to be an expert on either struggle.

I don't know wtf your problem is? Get off your high horse... please.

Let’s be real: you’re not defending Israel out of understanding, you’re using it to cosplay moral superiority while throwing around buzzwords like 'Islamofascism' and playing the victim. You’re not some principled voice of reason, you’re just another privileged white guy trying to earn credibility by forcing proximity to both Jewish and Palestinian communities, like a knockoff version of the 'I have Black friends' trope. Sit yo white supremacists ass down.

Hitler... is it you?

So here’s the deal: if you’re that far off the mark about what Black folks have lived through in America, maybe you should sit the Israel conversation out too. Because clearly, you don’t understand what it means to fight for your existence, you just like using white supremacist arguments at any given opportunity.

Islamofascism is not a buzzword. You clearly have never heard of the Muslim brotherhood or Baathism. It's fascism... as imported from Hitler, Muselini, Ataturk and Napoleon III. Combined with Islam.

It's not the same thing as Islam. It's a distinct, and very popular, form of Islam.

I don't care how much emotionally charged angry bullshit you spew. You have clearly no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Gospel]

No it isn't. My stance is built on harm reduction. Whatever leads to the least amount of pain and misery for most people is what we should do.

You supported siege tactics for the release of the remaining Israeli hostages. That is not remotely compatible with your "whatever leads to the least amount of pain and misery for most people" claim.

If we have zero tolerance for hostage taking we remove the incentives for taking hostages.

Israel is now in the process of making Palestinians think that its not worth it. And supporting Hamas is not worth it

I agree. Lets hope it works. However not all Palestinians need to be made to think this. Some already do.

Edit: Just looking into the west bank tells you this.

Looking into what?

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Palestinians in the West Bank do recognize Israel as a state, and many acknowledge its right to self-defense. But let me guess: those Palestinians don’t fit in your narrative, do they? Because acknowledging them would disrupt your white supremacist orgy.

Lol. No. I was merely asking you what you specifically were referring to. Now I know.

I think I am going to start calling you a Neo Nazi. No reason. But you have no reason to call me white supremacist.. so I might as well. Mr Hienrich Gospel

And just like the disinformation tactics you use when accusing me of being a Hamas supporter, you won’t be able to back up your claim with anything concrete. If you can’t articulate it, it’s not a fact, it’s just an insult. Meanwhile, I’ve laid out repeatedly why your rhetoric aligns with white supremacist ideology. That’s not name-calling. I’m not trying to offend you, I genuinely mean it.

 

[Gospel]

You misunderstood what I wrote, as much as you possibly could. Try reading it again... and pay attention to what I am actually saying. It seems like this is 100% your projection of what you think I must have meant. Not what I actually wrote.

Oh, I know exactly what you wrote. It’s just another attempt to control the narrative, textbook behavior for white supremacists, rather than trying to understand where 'other folks' are coming from. Predictable, as always.

 

[Gospel]

Islamofascism is not a buzzword. You clearly have never heard of the Muslim brotherhood or Baathism. It's fascism... as imported from Hitler, Muselini, Ataturk and Napoleon III. Combined with Islam.

It's not the same thing as Islam. It's a distinct, and very popular, form of Islam.

I don't care how much emotionally charged angry bullshit you spew. You have clearly no idea what you are talking about.

What you just did is textbook ideological laundering: throw out historical names like Hitler, Mussolini, and Ataturk to sound informed, then duct-tape Islam to fascism like it’s some universal mashup. 'Islamofascism' is a god damned buzzword cooked up to justify foreign policy decisions post-9/11. You’re not describing a school of thought, you’re selling fear dressed up as scholarship.

Yes, there are authoritarian movements in Muslim-majority countries, just as there are in Christian ones. But no one’s out here calling Catholic regimes 'Christofascist' every time a priest blesses a tank. So spare us the “it’s a distinct form of Islam” line unless you’re willing to apply the same logic to settlers invoking the Torah to justify land grabs. But something tells me that kind of consistency isn’t your strong suit.

 

[Gospel]

If you squint hard enough, Kim Jong-un is basically what white supremacists see in the mirror, strongman rule, no dissent, and control over who gets to speak. Fitting avatar for someone trying to gaslight an entire forum.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Islamofascism is not a buzzword. You clearly have never heard of the Muslim brotherhood or Baathism. It's fascism... as imported from Hitler, Muselini, Ataturk and Napoleon III. Combined with Islam.

It's not the same thing as Islam. It's a distinct, and very popular, form of Islam.

I don't care how much emotionally charged angry bullshit you spew. You have clearly no idea what you are talking about.

What you just did is textbook ideological laundering: throw out historical names like Hitler, Mussolini, and Ataturk to sound informed, then duct-tape Islam to fascism like it’s some universal mashup. 'Islamofascism' is a god damned buzzword cooked up to justify foreign policy decisions post-9/11. You’re not describing a school of thought, you’re selling fear dressed up as scholarship.

Yes, there are authoritarian movements in Muslim-majority countries, just as there are in Christian ones. But no one’s out here calling Catholic regimes 'Christofascist' every time a priest blesses a tank. So spare us the “it’s a distinct form of Islam” line unless you’re willing to apply the same logic to settlers invoking the Torah to justify land grabs. But something tells me that kind of consistency isn’t your strong suit.

Wtf are you on about? The contention was whether Islamofascism actually means something.

Islamofascism - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Luckily Wikipedia has an article. Saves me the work

You learned something today

 

[DrZoidberg]

You misunderstood what I wrote, as much as you possibly could. Try reading it again... and pay attention to what I am actually saying. It seems like this is 100% your projection of what you think I must have meant. Not what I actually wrote.

Oh, I know exactly what you wrote. It’s just another attempt to control the narrative, textbook behavior for white supremacists, rather than trying to understand where 'other folks' are coming from. Predictable, as always.

Wtf. On the topic of "not trying to understand where other other people are coming from".

 

[Gospel]

Islamofascism is not a buzzword. You clearly have never heard of the Muslim brotherhood or Baathism. It's fascism... as imported from Hitler, Muselini, Ataturk and Napoleon III. Combined with Islam.

It's not the same thing as Islam. It's a distinct, and very popular, form of Islam.

I don't care how much emotionally charged angry bullshit you spew. You have clearly no idea what you are talking about.

What you just did is textbook ideological laundering: throw out historical names like Hitler, Mussolini, and Ataturk to sound informed, then duct-tape Islam to fascism like it’s some universal mashup. 'Islamofascism' is a god damned buzzword cooked up to justify foreign policy decisions post-9/11. You’re not describing a school of thought, you’re selling fear dressed up as scholarship.

Yes, there are authoritarian movements in Muslim-majority countries, just as there are in Christian ones. But no one’s out here calling Catholic regimes 'Christofascist' every time a priest blesses a tank. So spare us the “it’s a distinct form of Islam” line unless you’re willing to apply the same logic to settlers invoking the Torah to justify land grabs. But something tells me that kind of consistency isn’t your strong suit.

Wtf are you on about? The contention was whether Islamofascism actually means something.

Islamofascism - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Luckily Wikipedia has an article. Saves me the work

You learned something today

Just because it’s on Wikipedia doesn’t mean it’s universally accepted or intellectually rigorous. There are Wikipedia articles on phrenology, flat earth theory, and lizard people, none of which lend credibility to those ideas by mere existence.

“Islamofascism” is a highly controversial, politically charged term. It’s not a neutral descriptor but a rhetorical weapon, used to conflate disparate Islamic political movements with European fascism, usually to justify aggressive foreign policy or demonize Muslim populations.

The term’s vagueness and ideological baggage make it deeply problematic in academic and diplomatic contexts. Scholars have repeatedly criticized it for being imprecise, inflammatory, and Islamophobic. As scholar Homa Hoodfar puts it, terms like “Islamofascism” simplify complex socio-political dynamics into propaganda-friendly slogans. But let me guess, because she's a Canadian Iranian I'm showing bias right?

Anyway, If you’re going to throw around a term like “Islamofascism” and expect to be taken seriously, you should back it up with actual scholarly sources, not just a Wikipedia article that openly discusses how controversial and heavily criticized the term is. But of course, that’s not what white supremacists do. Engaging with opposing viewpoints in good faith? Yeah, that’s your stumbling block, not mine.

 

[ZiprHead]

Under normal conditions the actions of the soldier who fired would be in the insane category. But everyone on the Israeli side seems to regard it as an understandable mistake--which only makes sense if this was a rare real one amongst a sea of fakes. In other situations Israel has definitely condemned misdeeds, so it's not a coverup.

Translation:

"It's not a coverup; We know this from the fact that the people who might be covering it up, and their allies and supporters, all seem to think it's fine and dandy".

The point is they have a history of admitting when their people fuck up. Your argument would be valid if they had a history of covering things up, but they don't.

How would anyone know about successful coverups? They have a history of unsuccessful coverups because they only admit fuckups when they are caught.

Coverups don't last forever.

Of course some do.

 

[ZiprHead]

Pretty simple really. You and your ilk keep complaining Hamas et al use Gazans as human shields. What do you expect to happen when you support them all being locked up together in a tiny area with one of the highest population densities in the world? Let the innocent Gazans go free to Israel proper. Then no more human shields.

And when the war is over what happens? They would be executed if they were to return to Gaza.

Why would they need to be returned to Gaza?

So what becomes of them? Give them citizenship and Hamas gets it's genocide after all?

So you are assuming guilt therefore they belong in Gaza. You must be clairvoyant.

No, simply not utterly blind.

You have this fantasy of coexistence that none of the people there think is going to happen.

Dr. Z thinks the Palestinians that live in Israel proper and the West Bank are treated just peachy keen and love Israel for it.

 

[Gospel]

You misunderstood what I wrote, as much as you possibly could. Try reading it again... and pay attention to what I am actually saying. It seems like this is 100% your projection of what you think I must have meant. Not what I actually wrote.

Oh, I know exactly what you wrote. It’s just another attempt to control the narrative, textbook behavior for white supremacists, rather than trying to understand where 'other folks' are coming from. Predictable, as always.

Wtf. On the topic of "not trying to understand where other other people are coming from".

What you said was a lazy attempt to create an analogy based on where you think I’m coming from. My response was a direct explanation of where I’m actually coming from. Are you really that slow?

 

[DrZoidberg]

You misunderstood what I wrote, as much as you possibly could. Try reading it again... and pay attention to what I am actually saying. It seems like this is 100% your projection of what you think I must have meant. Not what I actually wrote.

Oh, I know exactly what you wrote. It’s just another attempt to control the narrative, textbook behavior for white supremacists, rather than trying to understand where 'other folks' are coming from. Predictable, as always.

Wtf. On the topic of "not trying to understand where other other people are coming from".

What you said was a lazy attempt to create an analogy based on where you think I’m coming from. My response was a direct explanation of where I’m actually coming from. Are you really that slow?

My analogy was accurate. What happened was that you got triggered, which set you off down some crazy road

I'm not your therapist

 

[Gospel]

My analogy was accurate. What happened was that you got triggered, which set you off down some crazy road

I'm not your therapist

More empty words from an empty individual. let’s humor your "analogy" and break it down properly:

Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, like Black folks in America, ain’t divided by nature, they’ve been split by pressure. Outside forces made it that way. Just like Europe got countries with shared roots, Germany and Austria, Spain and Portugal, split by war, politics, and colonizers. Same blood, same memory, same struggle. They ain’t really divided, just holding convictions from different angles, some more extreme, yeah, but all from the same bucket. But white supremacists won’t see that. They don’t want to. Especially not the ones carrying a white supremacist torch 'cause their love for a Jewish wife is being used as a crusade with no real skin in the game.

Edit: I take the word 'love' back, clearly it means different things to different people. Let’s just call it what it is: a wife who’s fine with her husband having Girl Scout rope partners.

But the blacks of America don't have a predominantly black supremacy ideology and are willing to go to any lengths to terrorise whites into submission.

America is not surrounded by black nations with the same black supremacy ideology. Luckily those surrounding countries leaders mostly pays lip service to the ideology. But they still share it.

Its funny that you bring in the "white supremacy" talk about the only democratic and liberal country in the Middle-East.

What you call "white supremacy" I call "fighting to be able to exist att all".

Considering that islamofascism is so prevalent in the middle east I think its in exceptionally bad taste to allude to any supremacist tendencys among Israelis or their supporters. Its victim blaming imho

DrZoidberg, your analogy is trying so hard it might pull a muscle.


Let’s walk through this:

“Blacks of America don’t have a predominantly black supremacy ideology and are willing to go to any lengths to terrorize whites into submission.”

Right, because you just made up a strawman of what Palestinian resistance looks like and then tried to make Black Americans the “better” version of it. No serious scholar of civil rights, conflict, or Middle Eastern politics would accept that framing. What you’re doing is mixing two completely different struggles, one rooted in systemic racial oppression, the other in occupation and geopolitical conflict, and slapping a convenient “supremacy” label on one to justify the actions of the other.

“America is not surrounded by black nations with the same black supremacy ideology.”

True, and irrelevant. The point of comparison was shared ethnic, cultural, and familial ties across an arbitrarily divided group (e.g., Gaza and West Bank), not proximity to ideological enemies. And frankly, that part of your argument leans dangerously close to racial paranoia: assuming collective guilt by geography or association.

“It’s funny that you bring up ‘white supremacy’ when talking about the only democratic and liberal country in the Middle East.”

No one’s denying Israel has democratic institutions, but “democratic” doesn’t mean exempt from critique, and certainly doesn’t mean everyone under its rule is treated equally under the law. You wouldn't say Jim Crow-era America wasn't white supremacist just because it had elections, would you?

“What you call ‘white supremacy’ I call ‘fighting to exist at all.’”

That’s the same logic white nationalists use when they claim they're "defending Western civilization" against immigrants, or that colonial powers used to justify massacres. "Survival" doesn't give blanket permission to oppress, displace, or collectively punish. If that logic was accepted universally, any group could rationalize any atrocity.

“It’s in bad taste to allude to any supremacist tendencies among Israelis or their supporters.”

You're not being accused of being supremacist because you support Israel. You're being criticized because you keep echoing rhetoric that strips Palestinians of agency, dignity, and legitimacy, while dismissing any reference to power imbalance or historical context as “victim-blaming.” That’s not “bad taste”, that’s calling out harmful narratives.


NARRATIVES THAT HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THE STATE OF ISRAEL STANDS FOR. But you, much like Hamas, use people as a human shield to protect your white supremacist arguments. Because the moment I call you out on it, you deflect and say, “You mean Israel?” No, coward. I mean YOU.

 

[Gospel]

Now wipe that white nationalist boot polish off your lips and sit this one out.

 

[DrZoidberg]

My analogy was accurate. What happened was that you got triggered, which set you off down some crazy road

I'm not your therapist

More empty words from an empty individual. let’s humor your "analogy" and break it down properly:

Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, like Black folks in America, ain’t divided by nature, they’ve been split by pressure. Outside forces made it that way. Just like Europe got countries with shared roots, Germany and Austria, Spain and Portugal, split by war, politics, and colonizers. Same blood, same memory, same struggle. They ain’t really divided, just holding convictions from different angles, some more extreme, yeah, but all from the same bucket. But white supremacists won’t see that. They don’t want to. Especially not the ones carrying a white supremacist torch 'cause their love for a Jewish wife is being used as a crusade with no real skin in the game.

Edit: I take the word 'love' back, clearly it means different things to different people. Let’s just call it what it is: a wife who’s fine with her husband having Girl Scout rope partners.

But the blacks of America don't have a predominantly black supremacy ideology and are willing to go to any lengths to terrorise whites into submission.

America is not surrounded by black nations with the same black supremacy ideology. Luckily those surrounding countries leaders mostly pays lip service to the ideology. But they still share it.

Its funny that you bring in the "white supremacy" talk about the only democratic and liberal country in the Middle-East.

What you call "white supremacy" I call "fighting to be able to exist att all".

Considering that islamofascism is so prevalent in the middle east I think its in exceptionally bad taste to allude to any supremacist tendencys among Israelis or their supporters. Its victim blaming imho

DrZoidberg, your analogy is trying so hard it might pull a muscle.


Let’s walk through this:

“Blacks of America don’t have a predominantly black supremacy ideology and are willing to go to any lengths to terrorize whites into submission.”

Right, because you just made up a strawman of what Palestinian resistance looks like and then tried to make Black Americans the “better” version of it. No serious scholar of civil rights, conflict, or Middle Eastern politics would accept that framing. What you’re doing is mixing two completely different struggles, one rooted in systemic racial oppression, the other in occupation and geopolitical conflict, and slapping a convenient “supremacy” label on one to justify the actions of the other.

No analogy is perfect. I think you are straining very hard to be able to dismiss it.

It's the Islamic supremacy narrative that has been the problem for the Palestinians all along. When Israel was founded they were afraid the Jews would treat them as they had treated Jews under Ottoman rule.

When Israel was founded every country around Israel expelled their Jews, seized their property and forced them to Israel.

Did you forget about that? Which created predictable problems.

It was the Muslims fear of Jewish power that triggered the Nakhba. While atrocities were committed. It wasn't ethnic cleansing.

When Israel treated the Palestinians who didn't run with respect, the Muslims didn't really know what to do about it. The assumption is all the time that Palestinians in Israel are opressed somehow. They're really not. And never were. They live normal lives in Israel, just like the Jews

“America is not surrounded by black nations with the same black supremacy ideology.”

True, and irrelevant. The point of comparison was shared ethnic, cultural, and familial ties across an arbitrarily divided group (e.g., Gaza and West Bank), not proximity to ideological enemies. And frankly, that part of your argument leans dangerously close to racial paranoia: assuming collective guilt by geography or association.

Islam is not a race. FYI, Arabs are racist against Palestinians. And Palestinians are racist toward black Muslim. To an extreme degree. This is not the west. The Middle East is different. They talk so casualy about races. Racial essentialism is generally assumed to true. Among Muslims. Not among Ashkenazi Jews. I'm sure there's racist Jews. But Ashkenazi Jews in Israel culturally western.

Power and loyalty dynamics in the Middle-East are mind bendingly complicated. I think its probably more ethnically fractured than anywhere else on earth. And they're all, pretty much, racist towards eachother. Its completely normalised

“It’s funny that you bring up ‘white supremacy’ when talking about the only democratic and liberal country in the Middle East.”

No one’s denying Israel has democratic institutions, but “democratic” doesn’t mean exempt from critique, and certainly doesn’t mean everyone under its rule is treated equally under the law. You wouldn't say Jim Crow-era America wasn't white supremacist just because it had elections, would you?

That is very true. Could not agree more. I also don't think Israel is perfect.

What I find impressive about Israel is how well they've handled themselves, considering the extreme pressure they have been under. They've had every opportunity to fuck it up.

They're continually in impossible situations where any choice are versions of bad ones. Its not an enviable position to be in.

“What you call ‘white supremacy’ I call ‘fighting to exist at all.’”

That’s the same logic white nationalists use when they claim they're "defending Western civilization" against immigrants, or that colonial powers used to justify massacres. "Survival" doesn't give blanket permission to oppress, displace, or collectively punish. If that logic was accepted universally, any group could rationalize any atrocity.

The difference is that white supremacists are just talking shit. White supremacists are paranoid. Their fears are based on fantasies.

Do you seriously think the dangers facing Israel are imaginary?

“It’s in bad taste to allude to any supremacist tendencies among Israelis or their supporters.”

You're not being accused of being supremacist because you support Israel. You're being criticized because you keep echoing rhetoric that strips Palestinians of agency, dignity, and legitimacy, while dismissing any reference to power imbalance or historical context as “victim-blaming.” That’s not “bad taste”, that’s calling out harmful narratives.

They should have thought about that before doing the 7/10 attack. Hamas is the government of Gaza. The fact that the Gazans didn't vote about it is neither here nor there.

Good luck digging yourself out of that hole.

NARRATIVES THAT HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THE STATE OF ISRAEL STANDS FOR. But you, much like Hamas, use people as a human shield to protect your white supremacist arguments. Because the moment I call you out on it, you deflect and say, “You mean Israel?” No, coward. I mean YOU.

So what do you think the state of Israel stands for? This will be interesting. I'm preparing for more racist drivel out of your mouth. I hope you disappoint my preconceptions.

Om Friday I will host a Palestinian and a Jew in my home. I hope they don't start a war. I joke. They travelled together all the way from Israel. I assume they get along

 

[Gospel]

No analogy is perfect. I think you are straining very hard to be able to dismiss it.

It's the Islamic supremacy narrative that has been the problem for the Palestinians all along. When Israel was founded they were afraid the Jews would treat them as they had treated Jews under Ottoman rule.

When Israel was founded every country around Israel expelled their Jews, seized their property and forced them to Israel.

Did you forget about that? Which created predictable problems.

It was the Muslims fear of Jewish power that triggered the Nakhba. While atrocities were committed. It wasn't ethnic cleansing.

When Israel treated the Palestinians who didn't run with respect, the Muslims didn't really know what to do about it. The assumption is all the time that Palestinians in Israel are opressed somehow. They're really not. And never were. They live normal lives in Israel, just like the Jews

You keep trying to frame this entire conflict around "Islamic supremacy", as if Palestinian resistance to occupation and apartheid is just a cover for religious dominance. That’s not historical nuance, that’s a talking point ripped straight from the playbook of nationalist propaganda.

You claim “fear of Jewish power” is what caused the Nakba? No. The Nakba wasn’t driven by some irrational Muslim paranoia, it was driven by the systematic displacement of over 700,000 Palestinians, often through forced expulsions, village demolitions, and massacres like Deir Yassin. That's documented by both Israeli historians and international scholars. You can gaslight the word “ethnic cleansing” all you want, but facts don’t become fiction because you’re uncomfortable with the terminology.

Then you say Palestinians who “didn’t run” were treated with respect, completely ignoring decades of military law, land confiscation, discriminatory zoning, and unequal rights faced by Palestinian citizens of Israel. If that’s your bar for “respect,” it’s telling.

And no, I didn’t “forget” that Jews were expelled from Arab countries. But unlike you, I don’t weaponize one trauma to justify another. That’s like saying Jim Crow laws were okay because slavery existed somewhere else.

You keep painting Palestinians as the aggressors driven by supremacy, while stripping every one of their grievances down to irrational hate. That’s not analysis, it’s projection. And ironically, it's the exact same logic white supremacists use to explain Black resistance in America: “They hate us because of who we are.” You don’t see that? I do.

So no, the analogy isn’t “imperfect.” It’s wildly dishonest. And if we apply your own standard about how rhetoric implies allegiance, your words echo the very supremacist ideologies you claim to oppose.

Islam is not a race. FYI, Arabs are racist against Palestinians. And Palestinians are racist toward black Muslim. To an extreme degree. This is not the west. The Middle East is different. They talk so casualy about races. Racial essentialism is generally assumed to true. Among Muslims. Not among Ashkenazi Jews. I'm sure there's racist Jews. But Ashkenazi Jews in Israel culturally western.

Power and loyalty dynamics in the Middle-East are mind bendingly complicated. I think its probably more ethnically fractured than anywhere else on earth. And they're all, pretty much, racist towards eachother. Its completely normalised

You keep trying to deflect criticism of systemic oppression by saying, “Well, they’re all racist over there.” that’s a cop-out.

Yes, racism exists in Palestinian communities. Yes, the Middle East is deeply fractured. But pointing that out doesn’t justify state-level displacement, military occupation, or apartheid policies. That’s like saying, “Jim Crow wasn’t so bad because Black communities had internal issues too.”

And let’s talk about that “Ashkenazi Jews are culturally Western” trash. That’s your polite way of saying “the racism is more refined.” You’re drawing a line between “good racism” (quiet, institutional, Western) and “bad racism” (loud, blunt, Eastern). That’s typical white supremacist bias.

Your argument boils down to: Everyone’s racist, so no one’s responsible. But when Palestinians react violently to being occupied, suddenly intent matters, and you project onto the entire religion and ethnicity supremacism. That’s inconsistency.

If we used your logic and applied it equally, we’d be calling out Zionist supremacy too, but I suspect that’s where your “mind-bending nuance” ends.

he difference is that white supremacists are just talking shit. White supremacists are paranoid. Their fears are based on fantasies.

Do you seriously think the dangers facing Israel are imaginary?

Ah, I see, so when white supremacists make sweeping generalizations based on fear, it's “paranoia.” But when you do it about Palestinians or Muslims, it’s “realism.” Got it.

The difference, according to you, is that their imagined threat justifies nothing… but your perceived threat justifies checkpoints, blockades, mass arrests, home demolitions, civilian casualties, and indefinite military occupation?

Sounds like textbook supremacist logic to me: "Our fear is noble and proactive. Theirs is ignorant and dangerous."

You don’t get to claim moral high ground while validating one group’s dominance over another based on who you think is justified in being afraid. That’s not analysis, it’s just choosing a side and cloaking it in selective morality.

If intent doesn’t matter (your words), and parroting Hamas propaganda makes someone a Hamas apologist, then let’s be fair: repeating white nationalist rhetoric about demographic threats and racial fear, even if you think it’s based in reality, makes you sound exactly like the supremacists you claim to oppose.

You didn’t kill the argument, you just switched jerseys.

They should have thought about that before doing the 7/10 attack. Hamas is the government of Gaza. The fact that the Gazans didn't vote about it is neither here nor there.

Good luck digging yourself out of that hole.

Ah, so now we're back to collective punishment as moral high ground?

By your logic, if a non-elected government commits an atrocity, every civilian under their control deserves the fallout, regardless of whether they supported it, voted for it, or were even old enough to understand it. That’s the hole you're proudly standing in, not me.

Let’s flip it: If the U.S. government commits a war crime, should every American, regardless of age, political stance, or ability to vote, be fair game for retribution? Of course not. That would be absurd. That would be terrorism. But for Gaza? Suddenly the rules change.

And here’s the kicker: You claim Hamas is the legitimate government of Gaza and use that to justify the civilian suffering, but earlier you were tripping over yourself to separate Israeli settlers from the Israeli state, claiming the government can't control them.

So when Israelis commit violence: “It’s complicated, don’t generalize, they’re individuals!”
When Palestinians suffer under Hamas: “Too bad, that’s your government. You all had it coming.”

You’re not defending Israel. You’re defending a double standard. One that just so happens to align perfectly with every dehumanizing rationale supremacist regimes have used to justify collective punishment throughout history.

So no, I’m not the one in a hole. I’m just not standing on a moral sinkhole and calling it high ground.

So what do you think the state of Israel stands for? This will be interesting. I'm preparing for more racist drivel out of your mouth. I hope you disappoint my preconceptions.

Om Friday I will host a Palestinian and a Jew in my home. I hope they don't start a war. I joke. They travelled together all the way from Israel. I assume they get along

What does the state of Israel stand for? That’s a question best answered by Israel’s own declarations, its founding documents, legal precedents, and the evolving policies of its democratically elected governments over the decades. I’m not here to project my own fantasy onto it, or to weaponize someone else's suffering to justify political stances.

But let’s be real: your question wasn’t sincere, it was bait. You pre-loaded it with accusations of racism before I even answered. That’s not debate, that’s deflection.

Also, bringing up that you're hosting a Palestinian and a Jew is classic rhetorical theater. It’s the “I have Black friends” of geopolitics. Hosting two individuals doesn’t absolve you from the biased, often dehumanizing narratives you’ve pushed in this thread.

The issue isn’t whether Jews and Palestinians can share a room in peace, it’s whether we hold governments accountable for their policies, whether we recognize civilian suffering no matter who’s inflicting it, and whether we’re capable of seeing injustice without needing it to fit neatly into our preferred ideological framework.

So no, you don't get to hide behind anecdotes and pre-emptive slurs to dodge critique. If you're truly interested in what I believe Israel stands for, ask without loading the question with assumptions. Otherwise, it’s not curiosity, it’s your typical bullshit, theatrics.

 

[TomC]

When Israel treated the Palestinians who didn't run with respect, the Muslims didn't really know what to do about it. The assumption is all the time that Palestinians in Israel are opressed somehow. They're really not. And never were. They live normal lives in Israel, just like the Jews

A bunch of Islamic supremacy apologists don't seem to realize this.

There are nearly as many Muslim citizens of Israel as there are Gazans. Muslims who enjoy as much peace and prosperity as the other Israeli civilians. According to Wikipedia, Israel has a population of over 10 million. Almost 20% are Muslims. That's about 1.9 million people, Gaza has population just over 2 million.
Tom

 

[Gospel]

When Israel treated the Palestinians who didn't run with respect, the Muslims didn't really know what to do about it. The assumption is all the time that Palestinians in Israel are opressed somehow. They're really not. And never were. They live normal lives in Israel, just like the Jews

A bunch of Islamic supremacy apologists don't seem to realize this.

There are nearly as many Muslim citizens of Israel as there are Gazans. Muslims who enjoy as much peace and prosperity as the other Israeli civilians. According to Wikipedia, Israel has a population of over 10 million. Almost 20% are Muslims. That's about 1.9 million people, Gaza has population just over 2 million.
Tom

Palestinians in Israel do have more legal protections than those in Gaza or the West Bank, but to say they’re not and never were oppressed is factually inaccurate and ignores decades of documentation from international and Israeli watchdogs. It's an argument often used to dismiss legitimate grievances under the guise of "they have it good enough. I see you like a touch of White supremist seasoning on your brain food too huh?

 

[Gospel]

Anyway What does the State of Israel stand for? At its core, Israel defines itself as a Jewish and democratic state. That’s laid out clearly in its 1948 Declaration of Independence, which speaks of equality for all its citizens, regardless of religion, race, or sex. It also pledges freedom of religion, conscience, language, education, and culture.

In practice, what Israel stands for has evolved with its elected governments, some emphasizing security, others human rights, some leaning more secular, others religious. But the foundational idea remains: a national homeland for the Jewish people that also upholds democratic principles and civil rights.

That’s not a fantasy or talking point, it’s a documented self-definition. Whether or not its actions always live up to that ideal is fair to debate. But if we’re going to criticize or support a state, it should be based on what it claims to be and how well it lives up to that claim, not on what any of us emotionally want it to represent. Just like the white supremacy you claim it's enforcing, something I don’t agree with, and you go and grab a Jew to wedge between my criticism and yourself like a certified pussy.

 

[Gospel]

Well, time for this uppity negro to get back to work. I won’t say what that work is, first, because it’s none of your damn business, and second, because I don’t use other people’s lives as political props like white supremacists do.