• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Palestinian Lives Don't Matter*

And Israel proved they are not bluffing by bombing Gaza. I wish they would really take the kid gloves off and resume the policy of targeting terrorist leaders like Haniyeh and Sinwar.



Why these riddles? Who are the people you have in mind?

The thing about Gandhi is that he was successful in forcing the British out of India. Palestinian Gandhis are working to force the Zionists out of Palestine,
By which these "Gandhis" mean abolishing Israel and replacing it with an Islamic "Palestine". Gandhi did not seek to destroy Britain.

or at least out of the parts they were promised would become a Palestinian State when the Oslo Accords were negotiated, and to force the opening of the containment wall around Gaza. That's not an activity the current Israeli government tolerates. So all those potential Gandhis are labeled criminals and the threat they pose to Zionism is neutralized.

No riddles, just the suggestion to use Google to do your own research: Palestinian Gandhi

There have been several people who fit the description, and I have no doubt there will be more before a peaceful resolution is achieved.

You forgot demanding that millions of descendants of 1948 refugees be allowed to settle in Israel. That is an absolute non-starter. And these "Gandhis" are labelled criminals when they commit crimes. Again, a bit difficult to comment more specifically if you shroud the identity of these supposed "Gandhis" in riddles.

It's a non-starter because racists and religious bigots have the upper hand. That won't always be the case.

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" --- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., quoting Rabbi Jacob Kohn paraphrasing the words of Unitarian minister Theodore Parker.
 
Last edited:
No riddles, just the suggestion to use Google to do your own research: Palestinian Gandhi

Since calling somebody a "Palestinian Gandhi" is not an official designation but a matter of opinion, googling the phrase would merely uncover different writers' opinions on it, but would not explain what your opinion on the matter is.
Take this ridiculous Haaretz piece as an example.
Still Waiting for a Palestinian Gandhi? S/he's Already Here

The author, Zaha Hassan, believes all Gazans, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists and their supporters, are "Gandhis". She also thinks terrorists imprisoned by Israel are "Mandelas".

People can write all sorts of nonsense and it will show up on google. So I am asking you again, who do you think these Palestinian Gandhis are?

There have been several people who fit the description, and I have no doubt there will be more before a peaceful resolution is achieved.
Again, several Gandhis or several seditious scribes from Caesarea, or several whatevers is useless as a descriptors unless you actually tell me who you have in mind.

It's a non-starter because racists and religious bigots have the upper hand. That won't always be the case.

No, it's a non-starter because Palestinian racists and Islamist religious bigots use the issue to prevent peace. Everybody knows Israel cannot allow millions of Palestinians to settle in Israel, and so the stubborn adherence to this futile demand is used to make a peace deal impossible to achieve.

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" --- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., quoting Rabbi Jacob Kohn paraphrasing the words of Unitarian minister Theodore Parker.

I am afraid our understandings of what "justice" would mean in this case are diametrically opposite.
 
Since calling somebody a "Palestinian Gandhi" is not an official designation but a matter of opinion, googling the phrase would merely uncover different writers' opinions on it, but would not explain what your opinion on the matter is.
Take this ridiculous Haaretz piece as an example.
Still Waiting for a Palestinian Gandhi? S/he's Already Here

The author, Zaha Hassan, believes all Gazans, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists and their supporters, are "Gandhis". She also thinks terrorists imprisoned by Israel are "Mandelas".

People can write all sorts of nonsense and it will show up on google. So I am asking you again, who do you think these Palestinian Gandhis are?


Again, several Gandhis or several seditious scribes from Caesarea, or several whatevers is useless as a descriptors unless you actually tell me who you have in mind.

I already told you:

If you use Google to search for a Palestinian Gandhi you'll find there have been several. One was forced into exile in the US by Israel. One has spent years in Israeli prisons, much like Gandhi himself was imprisoned by the British. Another one is currently living in Gaza but his situation is precarious.

But if it's too hard to figure out how to use Google, here's one of the results that mentions one of the Palestinian Gandhis I mentioned, here's another result about the one in Gaza, and here's another result about another one. There are more Palestinian Gandhis than just those three, which was actually the point of having you look through the links.


It's a non-starter because racists and religious bigots have the upper hand. That won't always be the case.

No, it's a non-starter because Palestinian racists and Islamist religious bigots use the issue to prevent peace. Everybody knows Israel cannot allow millions of Palestinians to settle in Israel, and so the stubborn adherence to this futile demand is used to make a peace deal impossible to achieve.

I highlighted the racist bigot part.

Everybody knows the only reason the refugees aren't allowed to return is because they aren't Jews. The bigotry and racism is so blatant that even the most ardent Zionist apologist can't pretend it's not there.

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice" --- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., quoting Rabbi Jacob Kohn paraphrasing the words of Unitarian minister Theodore Parker.

I am afraid our understandings of what "justice" would mean in this case are diametrically opposite.

My understanding of justice is based on the concepts of equal rights and fair dealings among people of all races, ethnicities, cultures, and creeds. What is yours based on, and why would this case be different from any other?
 
Last edited:
*Unless Israel is to blame

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/21/opinion/palestinian-protests-gaza-strip-hamas.html

Again, what I've been saying for ages. It's not about protecting the Palestinians, it's about bashing Israel. However, they got it a bit wrong after the asterisk--it should be "unless some way can be found to blame Israel". Whether Israel is actually to blame or not is irrelevant. (For example, shortfalling Hamas rockets.)

This has parallels to the torture and drone arguments in the US after 9/11. Does the bad behavior of your enemy justify your own bad behavior?

The world has come to the answer, a firm and broad "no" to that question. Only the US and Israel say yes.

A commenter to the article summed it up this way,

... As a Jew I am saddened. One day our people will have to explain why we collectively acted so horribly or did not spend our last breath stopping our people from such horrors.

When evaluating the racist, violent, deadly and inhuman treatment which befalls the Palestinians, at the hands of the Israelis, I don't care how Hamas treats Palestinians. Jews have no license to act in such a manner. Even if Hamas, al-Hassad, etc. are horrible. Most of the civilized world have come down on the right side of this argument. America and Israel are the holdouts.
 
artish, you are doing what our liberals do. Bash Israel and ignore the regional behavior un unrelated to Israel, USA, or Europe. The Arabs and Palestinians are considered blameless. I do not see the Palerstininas as complete victins.

If they are victims they are victims of the Arabs as well as anything else. In the 57 war the Arabs enlisted what we call the Palestinians. When the Arab coalition lost they left the Palestinians dangling. They were Arab pawns.

To the Arab elite5the Palestinians were 'trailer trash' as we might say.

I have to agree that attributing the plight of the Palestine solely to Israel is part of the collective anti Jewish feelings in culture.

I do think we should support Israel to a point. Geopolitics again. The 67 and 73 Arab Israeli wars were partly proxy Cold War conflicts. Russia dominated the Arabs. It was about oil and the global oil economy, that is no secret.

As to a parallel to Gandhi or MLK I mean someone who is drawing crowds and rallies denouncing the violent tactics of Hamas and others.

Anyone who gained the level of staure and influence of MLK or Gandhi would be killed.

Both MLK and Gandhi were assassinated. Gandhiin part for trying to bridge Hindu and Muslim who were at each other's throats after the Brits left.

If the Palestinians had not turned to terrorism it would have bee easy to make a global and legal case against Israel for land seizure and settlements.

As to weapons they were flying French Mirages before US Phantoms.
 
artish, you are doing what our liberals do. Bash Israel and ignore the regional behavior un unrelated to Israel, USA, or Europe. The Arabs and Palestinians are considered blameless. I do not see the Palerstininas as complete victins.

What do you mean by 'bash' Israel? Are you talking about unfair criticism? If so, what do you think is unfair about what I said? Or do you mean any criticism of Israel at all? If that's bashing, then what do you call bigoted racist smears?

I don't think all Palestinians are entirely blameless for the bloody conflict in Palestine. The ones who stabbed people and bombed city buses and killed Olympic athletes in Munich were murderers. But I absolutely reject the assertions that Palestinians are inherently violent, that their land and culture is garbage, that they don't deserve the same rights as Jews, or that's it's acceptable to discriminate against them.

We could start a thread about the limits of self defense in the nation-state sense. I get the feeling that some folks are employing double standards without realizing it. But I will stipulate right now that IMV attacks on civilians are never justified, no matter what you think of their ethnicity or religion, or how much you despise the actions of others in their communities.

If they are victims they are victims of the Arabs as well as anything else. In the 57 war the Arabs enlisted what we call the Palestinians. When the Arab coalition lost they left the Palestinians dangling. They were Arab pawns.

To the Arab elite5the Palestinians were 'trailer trash' as we might say.

That might be true but it's largely irrelevant. Neighboring nations are under no obligation to like refugees or make them citizens.

Palestinians were driven off their land and out of their communities because they weren't Jews. I think that's a crime against humanity, and I support their Right to Return, with their families, to their homeland. I call it an important first step toward peace and justice, Loren and Derec call it a non-starter.

I have to agree that attributing the plight of the Palestine solely to Israel is part of the collective anti Jewish feelings in culture.

You're right that attributing the plight of Palestinians solely to Israel plays into the anti-Jewish narrative that some folks tell. And that's ironic because bigotry is the cause of both the plight and the anti-Jewish feelings.

Talking about the plight of Palestinians and attributing it to Israel is also part of the collective pro-human rights feelings in our society, especially among liberals. And that's problematic because a lot of liberals are Jews or know Jews and support Jews in other matters.

It's complicated.


I do think we should support Israel to a point. Geopolitics again. The 67 and 73 Arab Israeli wars were partly proxy Cold War conflicts. Russia dominated the Arabs. It was about oil and the global oil economy, that is no secret.

I do too.

We're better off having influence in the Middle East, and being Israel's ally gives us options we wouldn't have if our only allies were Saudi Arabia and Jordan.


As to a parallel to Gandhi or MLK I mean someone who is drawing crowds and rallies denouncing the violent tactics of Hamas and others.

Only denouncing the violence done by Palestinians and not the violence done to them? That sounds remarkably pro-status quo. That's not what Gandhi is famous for.

Gandhi resisted the oppressor and the occupier while encouraging others to do the same in a non-violent way. Most importantly, he's famous because he succeeded. A successful Palestinian Gandhi would thwart the territorial ambitions of Zionists. That's not something the current government of Israel would allow.

Anyway, Israel doesn't like it when Palestinians have rallies with big crowds. The IDF tends to arrest the people who organize them.

Anyone who gained the level of staure and influence of MLK or Gandhi would be killed.

Both MLK and Gandhi were assassinated. Gandhiin part for trying to bridge Hindu and Muslim who were at each other's throats after the Brits left.

If the Palestinians had not turned to terrorism it would have bee easy to make a global and legal case against Israel for land seizure and settlements.

As to weapons they were flying French Mirages before US Phantoms.

Abbas has forsworn violence and is pursuing a peaceful, diplomatic resolution. He might someday be assassinated. If that happens, hopefully we'll find out who did it and why.
 
Did anyone actually read the article?

I did.

Then I went looking for independent verification. And guess what I found?


PLO President Abbas, Amnesty International, and the UN have all condemned the use of violence by Hamas' security forces against protesters. Abbas even said that Hamas' leaders belong in "the garbage bin of history". But for some reason the author of the article Loren posted never mentioned that, probably because it doesn't fit in with his belief that people only care when it's Israel being the ruthless oppressor.


That's not about the Palestinians, that's about an attack on someone from Fatah.
 
Agreed. It is a compex issue and I try to take a balnced view.

Yet today Hamas is launching missiles on Israel which serves no purpose, funded by Iran.

The purpose of having missiles to be able to strike deep into someone else's territory. The purpose of firing one off every now and then is to prove you aren't bluffing.

Except every such launch is a war crime. Hamas rockets are not accurate enough to have any real military use.

Israel retaliates and the cyle repeats. Iran taunts Israel periodically into responses keeping alive the hatred against Israel.

Terrorism in Gaza is now a paying profession. While Arafat liked to wear drab military fatigues and present himself a s a simple man, he died rich never holding a job.

I believe the Palestinians are suffering far more from the extremists who actually control Gaza. A stasis quo or a peace with Israel means they are out of a jib, They get money from both Iran and anti Israel Arabs.

A Palestinian Gandhi or Martin Luther King would not last long in Gaza or the West Bank.

While there are issues on both sides, I put most of it on Iran and the terrorist who are stoking conflict they know is not winnable. Israel gave up Gaza and instead of pursuing prosperity they radicalized. Before the Intifada and Israel tightening the border there was trade between Gaza and Israel.

If you use Google to search for a Palestinian Gandhi you'll find there have been several. One was forced into exile in the US by Israel. One has spent years in Israeli prisons, much like Gandhi himself was imprisoned by the British. Another one is currently living in Gaza but his situation is precarious.

The thing about Gandhi is that he was successful in forcing the British out of India. Palestinian Gandhis are working to force the Zionists out of Palestine, or at least out of the parts they were promised would become a Palestinian State when the Oslo Accords were negotiated, and to force the opening of the containment wall around Gaza. That's not an activity the current Israeli government tolerates. So all those potential Gandhis are labeled criminals and the threat they pose to Zionism is neutralized.

He didn't get much of a following. And note that he was not preaching from Hamas or Fatah territory--that would have been suicide.
 
Back
Top Bottom