George W Bush, after the 9/11 attacks, had a line where he would try to cowl people into supporting his attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan by saying you were either with him or against him and the same sort of thing is going on now with the idea that if you are not supporting Israel then you are supporting Hamas.
Obviously nonsense and there was an American student on a campus just after the American polices unnecessarily overhanded brutality on protesters who said something which i thought hit the nail on the head for most of us wanting to see an end to the bloodshed in the Middle East, saying she wanted: ‘peace for everyone between every river and every sea'.
The media doesn't help by labeling protests as 'pro-Palestinian' or 'anti-Israel', during the Iraq War there were 'anti-war' and 'peace protesters', not 'pro-Iraq' or 'anti-UK' protesters and Britain and America supply Israel with weapons with which the Israeli's have killed tens of thousands of people, decimating homes, hospitals and schools but these actions are not portrayed as 'anti-Palestinian', although that is who they are firmly dropped and fired onto on what the highest court in the World, the ICJ, has ruled in all likelihood falls under the banner of genocide.
So support for the Palestinians is not support for Hamas who must be removed entirely and nor is it anti-Israel or antisemitic which is another trope which gets thrown around to try and stop any criticism of Israel but what is unmistakable is that the safety and security of Israeli's and Palestinians are dependent on both states being safe, secure and run by people who want to see peace.
Hamas and this Israeli Government both have the same agenda of prolonging a conflict which has been going on for decades, namely they are killing and punishing the 'other side' to keep themselves relevant and in power, the ones who can stop the atrocities coming across the Gaza–Israel barrier wall.
The only solution to a hopelessly one sided battle which has been going on since the 1940's is for Palestine and Israel to realise that for both to live in peace, both have to be safe with leaders interested in ensuring a peaceful co-existence with their neighbour and that isn't Hamas killing as many Jews as possible or Netanyahu inflicting a murderous genocide on the Palestinians.
Saturday 27 April 2024
Peace For Everyone Between Every River And Every Sea
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
all sounds good, but then leftists never have let reality play a role in their machinations.
the people in gaza elected hamas in 2006.
by so doing, they chose to support a group guilty of atrocities. if they could, they would commit genocide against Jews. nothing Jews or Israel can do, except committing mass suicide, will satisfy the elected representatives of gaza.
the same can be said of many nations in africa, russia, china, and north korea. they are all willing to use force to have their way, and being nice to them will not change their ways.
i'm do not what you learned in history courses taught in the uk, but in the rest of the world history books recount the continuous use of violence. i cannot think of one example where being nice changed the ways any empire or would be empire. can you?
The people in Israel elected Netanyahu in 1996, 2009 and 2022
by so doing, they chose to support a leader guilty of atrocities. He IS committing genocide against Palestinians. Nothing Palestinians can do, except committing mass suicide, will satisfy the elected representative of Israel.
See, works either way if your eyes are not closed to what's been going on for decades.
you do not know what genocide is. it is obvious by the way you use it
if the people of gaza (won't call them palestinians as that is not a people) captured and turn in all the members of hamas, and released the hostages Israel would stop attacking.
no, once again you show an absolute la la land like misunderstanding of reality...
Well one of us doesn’t so let’s check with the ICC and ICJ. Oh what a shocker, it’s you.
the icc uses the un "definition". so a corrupt court using the corrupt definition from a corrupt entity. carries no weight with anyone except idiot leftists (sorry for the redundancy).
the un is so inane, that if the un defined "obesity" it would be something brilliant like this:
Article 1:
Obesity is a hate word used to cause emotional, economic, and social harm to people that are already emotionally damaged and eat their frustrations and angers. As such "detrimentally fat" people are a un protected group. Being "detrimentally fat" is a right as listed in the un's International Human Rights Declaration Article 1[1].
Article 2 defines obesity:
...any of the following acts committed with intent to, in whole or in part, on an individual, nation, ethnicity, race or religious group, as such:
(a) Force members of the group to admit their physical condition, including showing them full body photos of themselves, or full body photos of thin people;
(b) Cause intentional or unintentional serious bodily or emotional harm to members of the group by using obese, fat, lard asses, whales, pigs, hogs, hippos or other similarly hateful words to describe them;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its weight loss in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent weight gain within the group;
(e) Forcibly exchanging fried foods eaten by the group to another group;
— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Obese People, Article 2[7]
(f) Providing clothing or other cover that hides their bodily proportions.
Article 3 including thoughts about:
(a) Dieting;
(b) Conspiracy to commit dieting;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit dieting;
(d) Attempt to commit dieting;
(e) Complicity in dieting;
(f) Thinking about dieting.
(g) Writing about dieting in your private journal.
(h) Whispering one of more words with "diet" as its root or base in any language.
(i) Reading about dieting.
(j) The consideration of producing, selling, bartering, transporting, or consuming fresh veggies or fruits.
— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Dieting, Article 13[1]
ha ha, rereading my last comment it just dawned on me that the united nations, abbreviated as the un, is a core feature of newspeak in the book "1984". instead of bad, big brother used "ungood"... perfect!! just like modern day journalists in the US and the uk, abuse language to substantiate the narrative.
the un is another tool used by the left to undermine reality, just like the newspeak of "1984". glorious observation!
Post a Comment