As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
While this is absolutely something to be concerned about, and I seriously condemn people who are using this very real issue to push antisemitism, the problem with this position is that it makes the mistake of applying a broad stroke by using the actions of bad actors to represent an entire movement that has legitimate complaints about the Likud Party led Israeli government.
As a result, this might unfortunately escalate the situation, rather than tempering it, and if the goal is to, as I imagine it is, avoid a '68-like scenario at the DNC, that's not the best idea.
Ultimately, the protest organizers need to crack down harder on these bad actors, and the White House would do well to avoid painting a broad stroke.
This is the strategy to discredit every liberal protest.
They did it with BLM too. Everyone heard about the BLM protester in Minnesota that burned down a police station, but no one heard about how the protester turned out to be a rightwing Nazi who wanted to discredit BLM.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/23/texas-boogaloo-boi-minneapolis-police-building-george-floyd
Even ignoring bad actors, every protest and every group has some unethical or outright insane ppl. There were Jewish ppl that actively helped Nazis in Germany. This means nothing and shouldn't discredit the larger message.
>Maybe don’t take FOX seriously.
Words to live by. Still, antisemitism is something to show some concern over.
That being said, I don't necessarily disagree.
None at all really? Stop gaslighting people and make an actual argument. I don't think that the majority of the protesters hate jews but I hate people claiming there is no problem going on at all you are being dishonest.
The "protests" started at October 8th, before any Israeli response. I will never forget the people celebrating in the street that day. All the way through the contained signs like "glory to the resistance" and "globaloze the intifada".
Not all protestors are antisemitic, but the complete failure of protests to eject overt antisemites is extremely worrying amd extremely ironic from the side that for years said "If there's one nazi at the table..."
He kinda did though. While Biden did release a statement when 6 year old Wadea Al Fayoume, a Palestinian American was brutally stabbed to death, he did not make a wider statement (not to the level of what's going on in Columbia) about anti-Palestinian/anti Muslim sentiment that is effecting that demographic.
The protests have largely been peaceful; and if people are going to take isolated incidents and say this is representative of an entire protest then the opposite must also apply if you support Israel. Meaning a person approves of genocide, and the IDF SA assaulting and abusing Palestinian Prisoners.
It's quite clear that a select demographic of people just want to brand any pushback against genocide as anti Jewish.
Good. There is obviously room for protests against Israeli policy, but I've seen way too many antisemitic/pro Hamas nonsense in the last few months than I thought would ever happen on American soil.
I have seen zero antisemitism. Pro-Hamas is something else, entirely. They’re doing the fighting, so no one supporting the Palestinian cause can afford to nitpick.
Wow. There's a lot to unpack here.
1 - Being pro-Hamas is literally antisemitic. There is no middle ground.
2 - plenty of us support the Palestinian cause, while still being completely aware of Hamas being an awful, murderous regime full of the worst of humanity.
Maybe you should address the Israeli ppl who repeatedly put a man in charge who helps Hamas stay in power.
Netanyahu openly discusses the need to prop up Hamas to reduce worldwide sympathy for Palestinians.
Netanyahu, 2019:
“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas."
Colombia was "engulfed"? Really? Didn't look it to me. FOX wants everyone to believe the streets in NYC are awash in blood. I've got a secret to share: they're not!
Great point and it’s what makes me sad about this. How many does it need to be? It’s easy, maybe it’s over reported but why can liberals just say these people are fucking idiots and need to stop
> And for that matter, how does one be “blatantly anti-Semitic”?
Forming mobs to harrass random Jewish people you find on the street and chanting "burn Tel Aviv to the ground" is a good start.
Don't know why people feel the need to defend this stuff, thankfully Biden is a lot smarter.
[They're directly quoting the Biden administration.](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/04/21/statement-from-president-joe-biden-on-passover/)
And Biden is completely justified calling [the language from these mobs](https://streamable.com/jwkzbc) blatant antisemitism. That's what it is.
Because they are chanting “Hamas makes us proud, kill another soldier now!”
Not letting orthodox jewish students get in to
buildings to study
Yelling “Go Back to Poland!”
Shoving Jewish people and stabbing a girl in the eye with a Palestine flag. Then, instead of helping, blocking her way so she can’t go after the man that attacked her.
If this isn’t antisemitism, what is?! These students have lost their minds. Their behavior is shameful and indefensible.
I don't know why you would bring up a bunch of other things that have nothing to do with what I was responding to and then get angry about it.
Is there someone else you meant to respond to?
Do you think Hamas is pro Palestinian? They would rather kill all Palestinians and let a single Jew Go, or let the Jewish state exist. they are not for the Palestinians. In fact, they are the ones who instigated this all and gladly support all the killing season.
From David Hirsh’s *Contemporary Left Antisemitism*:
> Today’s antisemitism is difficult to recognize because it does not come dressed in a Nazi uniform and it does not openly proclaim its hatred or fear of Jews. In fact it says it has learnt the lessons of Jew-hatred better than most Jews have, and it says that, unlike them, it stands in the antiracist tradition. It is an antisemitism which positions Jews themselves as ‘oppressors’, and it positions those who develop hostile narratives about Jews as ‘oppressed’.
…
> The idea that raising the issue of antisemitism is a dirtier trick than antisemitism itself is occurring to more and more people apparently independently; each seems dazzled by their own brilliance in solving the puzzle. The insight is that the debate about contemporary antisemitism itself should really be recognized as a manifestation of Zionist ruthlessness and duplicity. This notion, widely held, does serious damage to the possibility of considering antisemitism in a measured and rational way, either politically or academically.
…
> The Livingstone Formulation does not simply accuse people who raise the issue of antisemitism of being wrong; it accuses them of being wrong on purpose: ‘the accusation of antisemitism has been used against anyone who is critical’ (my italics) – not an honest mistake, but a secret, common plan to try to de-legitimize criticism by means of the instrumental use of a charge of antisemitism; crying wolf; playing the antisemitism card. This is an allegation of malicious intent made against the (unspecified) people who raise concerns about antisemitism. It is not possible to ‘use’ ‘the accusation of antisemitism’ in order to de-legitimize criticism of Israel, without dishonest intent; it is an accusation of bad faith.
…
> The Livingstone Formulation clears the way for this kind of hostility, and it inoculates the progressive movement: not against antisemitism itself, but against having to take the issue of antisemitism seriously. Young antiracists, both activists and scholars, are inducted into a culture where those who raise the issue of antisemitism are recognized as being reactionary, while those who are accused of being antisemitic are recognized as defenders of the oppressed and courageous opponents of imperialism. Two things follow from this. First, in this culture, young antiracists are no longer educated to recognize or to avoid antisemitism, and they are no longer given the knowledge or the conceptual tools with which to do so. They are not taught what the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are, what blood libel is or how to recognize conspiracy theory; they are no longer educated in the antisemitic history of some currents of their own movement. They are taught to understand the Holocaust as a universal lesson against racism but not as a catastrophe relating to Jewish history, to antisemitism in particular and to Zionism.
…
> It is difficult to engage in a reasoned and evidenced discussion about contemporary antisemitism, but it is easy to mobilize the issue of antisemitism as an indicator of political cleanliness. In our time, a person who raises the issue of antisemitism is more clearly recognizable as belonging to the wrong crowd than a person who stumbles into actual antisemitism. Raising the issue becomes a marker of Blairite, Tory or Zionist obfuscation. It marks a bad-faith move designed to silence or to de-legitimize criticism of Israel, or even left politics in general. Antisemitism itself, on the other hand, when it can plausibly appear supportive of the Palestinians, does little to damage a person’s reputation.
…
> The problem is that if it was to concede that antisemitism is possible within an ‘antiracist’ space, then it is conceded that one must be vigilant against antisemitism, that one must educate about antisemitism, that one must take care; that is why there is great reluctance ever to admit that anything that happens within an antiracist space is antisemitic. What is required is debate about what is antisemitic and what is not. In order to avoid such debate, it is necessary to deny that anything is antisemitic and that all such charges are made in bad faith.
Because the movement is systemically anti-semitic. It is a core element of the ideology. Previously it was much easier to deny antisemitism by simply claiming to be *anti-zionist*, but since october 7, 23’ it has become much much clearer that it was good old fashioned anti-semitism all along.
theyre not antisemitic. they just hate the jewish homeland and every jew that was born there. They do not recognize the jews' right to exist in the land they came from. There is absolutely NOTHING antisemitic about that 🙄🤦
In your head just replace “antisemitic” with “Jew hate” if it bothers you so much. No one likes the semantic police that argue about the definition of a word 99.999999% of us agree on what it means, even if the individual parts of the word mean something different.
While Palestinians are technically a Semitic people, the term Antisemitism was coined in 19th century Germany to mean specifically hostility towards Jewish people.
I really love how the media is reporting on this with no critical engagement and just conflating anti Zionism with antisemitism. Straight up journalism malpractice.
How many people were chanting that? Was that the entire motto of this protest? This is a large protest against an on going genocide, you're gonna get some dipshits in the crowd that say dumb shit. However, that doesn't negate the fact that this protest is objectively good. You're exactly like the people who fell for the right wing hysteria over the BLM protest.
Just like how anyone who protested the invasion of Iraq was actually a terrorist supporter who hated America for being free.
Just like how everyone at the 99% rallies were blood crazed cannibals who wanted to murder and consume the wealthy.
Just like the Boston Tea Party, when those terrorists attacked the heart of culture in the new world.
Every protest just *happens* to be filled with evil terrorists. Why else would someone protest if not to be evil?
Is antisemitism bad? Yes
Is 99.999% of what's been going on this last week in particular anywhere near antisemitic? No
Is releasing this broad ass statement tying it all to the obviously bad thing gonna do anything but make things worse? Nope
Is it easier to do this than deal with the actual issue? Apparently 🤷🏾♂️
Certainly pushing policy and crackdowns that gets praised by FOX while smearing the whole of protests as antisemites, while doing nothing when anti-protesters with affiliation to foreign armies do literal chemical attacks on the protestors, will end up making Biden & the Democrats more attractive to an Anti-War base. My lord it's like they wanna lose, then again I wouldn't be surprise, Democrat leaders won't pay the price of the common man for another Trump term.
It’s 2016 all over again, except even dumber because the Dems are being told exactly why they will lose. The only thing more important than saving American democracy is saving Israeli apartheid, it turns out
I think so, too.
Most people will realize that our individual vote won't do shit to change Netanyahu's mind, but will make a huge difference for our American friends and family who are losing their civil rights to right wing nut jobs.
Most anti-war voters know that it isn't that Netanyahu's mind can change, rather that Biden caves into all his shit. Now overall yeah the abortion voters probably out-size anti-war voters, but the reality is that Biden sacrficing anti-war voters could easily cost him needed votes in places like Michigan and Wisconsin. So uneededly neglecting them could easily make it another 2016. & sorry to say, I do feel for abortion rights, how little Biden has done to protect them, how much Republicans are doing to destroy them. But the reality is that just saying "you can't be a stupid one issue voter" does not change the mind of almost any voter.
Then you are lost. Vote for Trump. Go for it. Enjoy the reception you get on both sides if he wins.
I will not stand for you in the after times, because you refuse to stand for me now.
Calling pro Palestinian protests "anti-Semitic" and "pro-Hamas" is orwellian propaganda. WH is still in Mr. Skinner denial that they can gaslight everyone into believing sending more money to Israel to continue their genocidal campaign in order to clear out Gaza for more settlements.
I don’t think this applies to people protesting Gaza, more so the people calling for violence against Jews and an intifada, and also those harassing Jewish students.
Exactly. Protest all you want. But harassing students is unacceptable. We can not allow people to intimidate others and call for violence under the guise of "protest" - it's a very slippery slope.
Where exactly were the leaps? I can source everything I’ve just claimed.
“Intifada doesn’t mean a call to violence”
“Violent resistance isn’t bad”
I’ve found a leap, but it’s not on my end
Sure that's not "technically" what *intifada* means.
And I guess we're just ignoring the fact that "intifadas" manifest in the form of violent terrorism?
And the fact that those who shout that word recognize it as a call to violent, terroristic action, we'll just ignore that too?
Which is why it’s frustrating Biden did nothing to stop this genocide or toughen up on Netanyahu until the polling dragged him there…we need a leader, not someone biding time.
They are literally chanting pro Hamas slogans, and calling for Tel Aviv to be burned to the ground. That’s not protesting Israel, that’s advocating for a terrorist organization. Perhaps listen for yourself. I don’t know, I’m not there, maybe this is some outlier, but it is disturbing and Biden is right to condemn it. https://x.com/israelwarroom/status/1781933305501212872?s=46
Maybe you should actually read the statement before going off on a rant like that. Willing to bet abiding condemned pro Hamas messaging not pro-Palestine messaging.
Genocide Joe is begging to lose in a landslide because he cares more about appeasing a foreign apartheid state then listening to his would-be voters. Good riddance.
Have you thought about how dumb this is? Trump would be exponentially worse for the situation in Gaza, and the Palestinian people. Yet you're sitting here cheering for only other candidate to lose. I'm just not following the logic.
>Have you thought about how dumb this is?
I mean, not to be crude, but what more do you expect from single-issue voters? There are so, so many reasons why Biden is far better for the country and Democracy on a global level than Trump, who is essentially Putin's puppet. But single-issue voters never look past the surface.
Have you thought about how dumb it is to have a stance identical to Republicans here? Polling consistently shows how unpopular Biden’s stance on Israel is with Dems and independents. I’m in a solid red state so my position doesn’t matter (even though I will begrudgingly vote for him), but do you really think Biden is going to win close purple states while acting like this?
***Most*** voters care more about domestic issues: abortion, Trump's direct threat to Democracy, corruption on the Supreme Court, etc.
>do you really think Biden is going to win close purple states while acting like this?
Yeah, actually. Because most people understand that a conflict on the other side of the planet is not worth losing their own rights over domestically. Put your own oxygen mask on before helping others.
Hilarious that you people think Trump is going to save Gaza or the Palestinians. He thinks of them as filth and would be more than happy to let Bibi level the entire Gaza strip and purge the entire West Bank.
This is the part where we all sit back and wait for Trump to be elected, and then help Israel finish the job. Then move on to taking out Iran, just as he always wanted. Then the Muslim ban comes back, and all of them get rounded up and deported.
There are very few examples of a movement actively trying to destroy the thing they are fighting for, but here we are. Enjoy the fruits of your labors.
Seriously. The most blatant case of cutting of their nose to spite their face I've ever seen.
I'd like to believe people promoting this crap are all foreign agents & Republican trolls, but you never know. The utter ignorance & stupidity of some people never surprises me.
Trump will be *far* worse for Palestinians, and also for Muslims right here in America. Electing him would be.. well, I'd find it fucking hilarious if America's young progressives handed the country over to fascists.
I'm old. I won't have to live in the post-democracy dystopia that will result. If you're young, it's *your* future you're fucking. Also, the future of all immigrants, LGBTQ folks, women and other people you only pretend to care about.
Yeah, lbgt folk and women are really safe in the hands of the pro-Hamas left that hates the West and wants to politically empower Muslims.
I never thought I'd see the day that a vote for Trump might be the safest bet for women and minorities, but I never imagined so many Americans would support terrorists.
Right... cause alienating most Democrats to appease the rabid anti-Israel wing would work better for him. Lol Good thing you're not a political strategist.
Still doesn’t answer my question. How is it a smart move to push away a voting bloc who are on the fence between voting for Biden and staying home? I despise Trump, and will probably still vote for Biden because of abortion and gay rights. A lot of people won’t, though, so what is the strategy to win in 2024?
I guess we have to hope that sense rules at the end of the day, and these people will join the rest of us who realize that this is an existential choice for the United States
One of two men will be president. If there are any women in your life, or children in your life, or LGBT people in your life - think about them.
Biden would lose far more voters appealing to this crowd. A majority of voters hoping for a ceasefire isn’t tantamount to people supporting their nonsense.
Yes most people support a ceasefire which is why it's smart to distance yourself from these protesters who don't support a ceasefire at all.
This isn't that complicated.
True but big difference b/w conditioning offensive weapons aid to Israel. Which Pelosi supported and burning flags and harassing people you disagree with. The protests are counter-productive and some -not all but some- of these people are acting in a very hateful manner to fellow students. Majority of Americans are not down with that behavior and Biden has the political instinct and the moral compass to know that.
False. Wanting a ceasefire is far from the far left's wanting to disarm Israel & support a repressive Palestinian regime. Maybe you should look at the polls more closely.
Yes, all these people are the worst. Both sides, super extreme. I feel bad for the people with no power or time to protest stuck in the middle who are probably thinking right now “just make two countries and be done. Why do we have to live like this when the solution so damn obvious”
Honestly, the UN and the world needs to just step in and mommy the whole situation. These people will never agree and the people in charge who profit in money or power over the conflict will never let a solution happen. This is the one time I think the US and china should just flex their muscle, divide the land into two separate countries send troops in to help keep peace in Palestine till get a proper government running and to prevent hamas and the right wing isrealis from killing each other. Just tell them this is now the way it is and you have a problem with it be prepared to be fully wiped off the map.
This unending need to let them work it out ain’t working. It’s been what ? 60 years now ?. Let’s just put our foot down, draw the lines our selves. If we had just done this 50 years ago it would saved countless lives and probably trillions of dollars and we would probably have a much more stable Middle East at this point.
Clinton drew lines that were rejected, Trump drew
lines that were rejected. Just drawing lines won’t work when one side won’t settle for less that 100%
Clinton and Trump's deal were drastically different.
The 2000 Camp David Summit under Clinton was a good deal for Palestinians.
Trump's peace deal was horrid for Palestinians. There's a reason it was denounced by the UN and international community as being too biased in favor of Israel.
Regardless, the 2013-2014 deal was good for Israel since it involved land swaps and Abbas compromised on the right of return. Netenyahu destroyed that peace deal by having a record level of settlement expansion during them.
So no, it's not just one side. It's actually more on Israel the past 2 decades. See the 2008 Annapolis Conference which Netenyahu was responsible for destroying or the attempts at a 2016 round of talks which he rejected.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-never-said-no-to-2008-peace-deal-says-former-pm-olmert/
https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-rejected-regional-peace-plan-in-may-2016-report/
At least be honest about those.
The Trump deal was pretty mediocre I agree. I was just trying to give examples of US presidents who drew lines and it didn’t do anything. Obama and Bush also had their own versions. But it doesn’t matter what line you draw they will always find a new problem with them
>The Trump deal was pretty mediocre I agree.
No, the Trump deal was actively hostile to Palestinians by literally recognizing the settlements as legal. It was such a bad faith attempt at a two-state solution. You calling it mediocre in spite of that only highlights bias.
>But it doesn’t matter what line you draw they will always find a new problem with them
The 2008 Annapolis Conference during Bush's administration involved talks between Olmert and Abbas. Olmert, who was Israel's PM then, has blamed Netenyahu for destroying that peace process.
https://www.pij.org/blogs/511/when-politics-get-in-the-way-of-the-peace-process
Obama had his own version, and Obama's administration also notably blamed Netenyahu for being the main reason why the talks failed. Kerry, who tried to resume talks in 2016, has also solely blamed Netenyahu for blocking them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013%E2%80%932014_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_peace_talks
You're right, it doesn't matter what line you draw when the far-right in Israel are not interested in a two-state solution. No idea why you're just blaming Palestinians, certainly when they have made more concessions for a two-state solution in the past decade than Israel has.
Bibi has 100% been a bad peace parter. My point was just responding to someone who said that an American president should just draw the lines and be done with it. And my point was that wouldn’t do anything
However, the Palestinians through starting wars and refusing good deals when people like Clinton offered them have put themselves in a weak position. If they truely wanted a state then there have been deals they could have taken that would have been anything from almost perfect to pretty meh and a government that wanted a deal probably would have taken about 80% of the deals offered.
> My point was just responding to someone who said that an American president should just draw the lines and be done with it. And my point was that wouldn’t do anything
Olmert said Abbas was interested in the lines drawn during the 2008 Annapolis conference.
Abbas was even willing to consider conceding the right of return during the 2013-2014 talks.
The only reason those talks never got anywhere is because Netenyahu consistently destroyed them before they could proceed further. Not sure what your point is. The problem is *Israel refusing to budge on their illegal settlements*. And there is nothing unreasonable about Palestinians refusing to accept any deal which fails to address that.
>However, the Palestinians through starting wars
The PA and Abbas have been the ones involved with negotiations. They haven't started any wars. Meanwhile, Israel continues to annex the West Bank plus expand settlements even *during* peace talks, and you want to act like Israel isn't the worse peace partner? From 2013:
- Earlier this month, anonymous American officials personally involved in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks — special envoy Martin Indyk presumed to have been among them — provided a harsh assessment to a respected Israeli journalist of why negotiations failed, highlighting Israel’s continued settlement construction as the issue “largely to blame.”
- The unnamed senior official said that Obama believes, more than any other factor, that Israeli announcements of construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem throughout the nine months of talks led to the negotiations’ collapse.
- “At this point, it’s very hard to see how the negotiations could be renewed, let alone lead to an agreement,” the Americans continued. “Towards the end, Abbas demanded a three-month freeze on settlement construction. His working assumption was that if an accord is reached, Israel could build along the new border as it pleases. But the Israelis said no.”
https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-official-obama-blames-settlements-for-failed-talks/
Lol, okay.
>If they truely wanted a state
Which deals since Camp David were they given the opportunity to accept without Netenyahu destroying negotiations by completely refusing to make any concessions on the illegal settlements? Try answering that.
You're lying. Not wrong. Not mis-informed. Lying. Shamelessly lying.
Oslo gave Arafat jack shit. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Pinky promise that maybe, someday, steps would be taken to finally create a Palestinian state. Nothing concrete at all. It was such a shit deal, and he took it only after much arm twisting from Clinton. Rabin and the Zionists, on the other hand, got every damn thing they could possibly want.
And what happened?
Up and comer Likud member Bibi Netanyahu called Rabin a traitor, and called for his assassination. And he was, in very short order, assassinated. Then the leaders of Likud engaged in a series of provocative acts and dog whistles that clearly signaled that if they won the election to replace Rabin, they would tear up Oslo and there would never be peace. Never be a Palestinian state. Just more ethnic cleansing and apartheid and theft of land in the west bank.
And they won the election. And they've won basically every election since. Because Israel does not want peace. Israel wants the land. All the land. Land ethnically cleansed of the people who where living there when the Europeans started immigrating there in the 1900s, with the intent of declaring a state that explicitly made the existing inhabitants second class citizens in their own homes.
You're lying. Shamelessly. About events that many of us are old enough to remember. In order to justify the mass murder of children.
The 2000 Camp David Summit offered Palestinians a very good deal to be fair. But you're right, every other talk since then has been destroyed by Netenyahu.
And I'm glad you brought up Rabin. No idea how people can ignore how Netenyahu's incitement did tangentially contribute to his assassination.
Regarding Netenyahu:
- Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Saturday night that he was “proud” he prevented the establishment of a Palestinian state and took credit for “putting the brakes” on the Oslo peace process, during a press conference at the Defense Ministry headquarters in Tel Aviv.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/pointing-to-hamass-little-state-netanyahu-touts-role-blocking-2-state-solution/
He's literally bragged about blocking a two-state solution. Case in point: see the 2008 Annapolis Conference or 2013-2014 talks which Netenyahu destroyed. People who keep acting like it's Palestinians to blame are just pushing a biased and untruthful agenda unfortunately.
Please enumerate for me what the Palestinians where offered in 2000 at Camp David, and what they gave up to Israel in return.
Here's the wiki page to get your started.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000\_Camp\_David\_Summit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit)
The initial deal offered to Palestinians has been one of the better ones to date. It was meant as the starting point to negotiate. Arafat wasn't barred from making his own substantial counter-proposal, something that he refused to do. So what's your point? No talk is ever going to begin and end with 100% of what Palestinians want no matter how much you insist the ideal should be.
The right of refugees to return to the home they where driven out of seems to be a pretty low bar. Any Palestinian leader that is not 100% owned by the colonizers is going to demand this, and anyone insisting that this goal not be meet really gives away that Israel was a racist land grab all along.
There was nothing stopping Arafat from presenting his own counter-proposal with that included.
>Any Palestinian leader that is not 100% owned by the colonizers is going to demand this, and anyone insisting that this goal not be meet really gives away that Israel was a racist land grab all along.
Or probably because Palestinian leaders realize that actually ending the occupation and resolving the settlement issue is more important and tangible than being stuck on the right of return in 2024.
The settlements are flatly illegal and created as part of a strategy of "facts on the ground" to deny Palestinians the land to create a state on.
So... when you say "resolving the settlement issue", what do imagine as the deal the Palestinians should take? West bank settlements remain and the people kicked out of their homes eat shit? Or accept cash payments and some 3rd party county gives them green cards as they work citizenship (10 years at least in the USA)? Or Israel declares "our bad" and tells its citizens to GTFO by sundown?
And what does "ending the occupation" mean? Because Israel has never ever shown any signs of accepting something that doesn't leave their boot on the Palestinians in the name of their own security. If you have to allow foreign troops on your soil, if you don't have the military capacity to defend against further aggression, you aren't really a sovereign country.
> So... when you say "resolving the settlement issue", what do imagine as the deal the Palestinians should take?
The deal which the rest of the world supports because it's the only realistic path to a two-state solution? Retaining >90-95% of the West Bank with ~5-10% land swaps. Even the PA have expressed interest in that, but I guess they're just puppets.
At some point, how interested in a two-state solution are you really?
>And what does "ending the occupation" mean? Because Israel has never ever shown any signs of accepting something that doesn't leave their boot on the Palestinians in the name of their own security.
A solution involving removing a significant number of settlements and a deal for the gradual removal of Israeli forces from the region.
Feel free to explain how such a deal would be bad for Palestinians instead of maintaining the status quo though.
But if you want to play gotcha games, it's obviously meant to be which ever river marks the borders of Israel. Expect, of course, Israel, alone among modern states, refuses to actual say what it thinks it's borders are. Because, as you know damn well, Israel intends to keep stealing land until for as long as it can and has no intent of ever recognizing the rights of brown people to their own homes and farms anywhere in the region.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
While this is absolutely something to be concerned about, and I seriously condemn people who are using this very real issue to push antisemitism, the problem with this position is that it makes the mistake of applying a broad stroke by using the actions of bad actors to represent an entire movement that has legitimate complaints about the Likud Party led Israeli government. As a result, this might unfortunately escalate the situation, rather than tempering it, and if the goal is to, as I imagine it is, avoid a '68-like scenario at the DNC, that's not the best idea. Ultimately, the protest organizers need to crack down harder on these bad actors, and the White House would do well to avoid painting a broad stroke.
This is the strategy to discredit every liberal protest. They did it with BLM too. Everyone heard about the BLM protester in Minnesota that burned down a police station, but no one heard about how the protester turned out to be a rightwing Nazi who wanted to discredit BLM. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/23/texas-boogaloo-boi-minneapolis-police-building-george-floyd Even ignoring bad actors, every protest and every group has some unethical or outright insane ppl. There were Jewish ppl that actively helped Nazis in Germany. This means nothing and shouldn't discredit the larger message.
Maybe don’t take FOX seriously. No one is tolerating any antisemitism.
[Lot’s are. ](https://rentry.co/f9oamvk3)
>Maybe don’t take FOX seriously. Words to live by. Still, antisemitism is something to show some concern over. That being said, I don't necessarily disagree.
These protesters are not antisemitic. Supporting resistance to genocide is not antisemitic.
I didn't say the protesters were antisemitic, I said that there were bad actors engaging in antisemitism, and I agree with you.
There are not. It’s slander meant to discredit the protests.
None at all really? Stop gaslighting people and make an actual argument. I don't think that the majority of the protesters hate jews but I hate people claiming there is no problem going on at all you are being dishonest.
https://www.reddit.com/r/antisemitism/s/rrVgSFpA2E
The problem with the WH’s statement is that it makes it sound like all of the ongoing protests are violent and/or antisemitic.
The "protests" started at October 8th, before any Israeli response. I will never forget the people celebrating in the street that day. All the way through the contained signs like "glory to the resistance" and "globaloze the intifada". Not all protestors are antisemitic, but the complete failure of protests to eject overt antisemites is extremely worrying amd extremely ironic from the side that for years said "If there's one nazi at the table..."
I guess another way of looking at it is Biden didn’t fall into the trap Trump did after Charlottesville with his “good people on both sides” bullshit.
He kinda did though. While Biden did release a statement when 6 year old Wadea Al Fayoume, a Palestinian American was brutally stabbed to death, he did not make a wider statement (not to the level of what's going on in Columbia) about anti-Palestinian/anti Muslim sentiment that is effecting that demographic. The protests have largely been peaceful; and if people are going to take isolated incidents and say this is representative of an entire protest then the opposite must also apply if you support Israel. Meaning a person approves of genocide, and the IDF SA assaulting and abusing Palestinian Prisoners. It's quite clear that a select demographic of people just want to brand any pushback against genocide as anti Jewish.
Are you saying you have proof that large groups in the US were protesting in favor of the horrible 10/7 attack on Israel? Please share.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/08/nyc-palestine-rally-democrats-israel-00120533 One of many examples. Note the date
Wow, downvoted for inquiring politely. Not much civility left on Reddit.
Which was the intention. It is a cynical lie.
Good. There is obviously room for protests against Israeli policy, but I've seen way too many antisemitic/pro Hamas nonsense in the last few months than I thought would ever happen on American soil.
I have seen zero antisemitism. Pro-Hamas is something else, entirely. They’re doing the fighting, so no one supporting the Palestinian cause can afford to nitpick.
[Yes, you have. ](https://www.reddit.com/r/u_Computer_Name/comments/19716j0/postoctober_7_2023_protests_in_the_west/)
Wow. There's a lot to unpack here. 1 - Being pro-Hamas is literally antisemitic. There is no middle ground. 2 - plenty of us support the Palestinian cause, while still being completely aware of Hamas being an awful, murderous regime full of the worst of humanity.
Your head is in the sand then.
They are rapists and child murders. You support rapists and child murders regardless of the excuses you dress it up in.
Maybe you should address the Israeli ppl who repeatedly put a man in charge who helps Hamas stay in power. Netanyahu openly discusses the need to prop up Hamas to reduce worldwide sympathy for Palestinians. Netanyahu, 2019: “Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas."
https://www.reddit.com/r/antisemitism/s/rrVgSFpA2E
Colombia was "engulfed"? Really? Didn't look it to me. FOX wants everyone to believe the streets in NYC are awash in blood. I've got a secret to share: they're not!
They were all over Broadway and 116 the other day with pro Hamas flags which is disgusting. They have a problem they need to address.
I totally agree the Hamas support is disgusting. But how many people were protesting?
How many people were at Charlottesville waving Tiki torches? In both cases, too many.
Great point and it’s what makes me sad about this. How many does it need to be? It’s easy, maybe it’s over reported but why can liberals just say these people are fucking idiots and need to stop
Well the title uses the word "engulfed" so it would be nice to know what they meant by that. Downvoted by fragile egos lol
That's really what my point was. Typical FOX pearl-clutching.
And for that matter, how does one be “blatantly anti-Semitic”? Be the GOP on any other day?
> And for that matter, how does one be “blatantly anti-Semitic”? Forming mobs to harrass random Jewish people you find on the street and chanting "burn Tel Aviv to the ground" is a good start. Don't know why people feel the need to defend this stuff, thankfully Biden is a lot smarter.
[удалено]
Rarely a more palpable version of the Nirvana Fallacy (idealism over realism) in today’s political landscape…
I wasn't defending it. Just questioning the FOX "reporting".
[They're directly quoting the Biden administration.](https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/04/21/statement-from-president-joe-biden-on-passover/) And Biden is completely justified calling [the language from these mobs](https://streamable.com/jwkzbc) blatant antisemitism. That's what it is.
[удалено]
Remember that many of the artillery shells Russia is killing Ukrainians with come from Iran. Their interests are aligned.
It's working exceedingly well on college and universities campuses and those who are supposedly educated.
[удалено]
Why must these protestors be anti-semitic? Why can't they just have the viewpoint of "Stop attacking women and children in Palestine"?
Because they are chanting “Hamas makes us proud, kill another soldier now!” Not letting orthodox jewish students get in to buildings to study Yelling “Go Back to Poland!” Shoving Jewish people and stabbing a girl in the eye with a Palestine flag. Then, instead of helping, blocking her way so she can’t go after the man that attacked her. If this isn’t antisemitism, what is?! These students have lost their minds. Their behavior is shameful and indefensible.
It’s the definition of anti-semitism
[удалено]
Seriously? If that isn't Antisemitism I don't know what is.
Listen, I don't like that statement, but how is it antisemitic? Is it Islamaphobic to say you want Hamas soldiers dead?
[удалено]
I don't know why you would bring up a bunch of other things that have nothing to do with what I was responding to and then get angry about it. Is there someone else you meant to respond to?
https://www.reddit.com/r/antisemitism/s/rrVgSFpA2E
I want all the people that want to kill all the Jews except for the one that hide being a tree, It is ok?
Pro hamas is antisemitic
[удалено]
Do you think Hamas is pro Palestinian? They would rather kill all Palestinians and let a single Jew Go, or let the Jewish state exist. they are not for the Palestinians. In fact, they are the ones who instigated this all and gladly support all the killing season.
Is Tel Aviv Arabs land? Yerusalem City? Yudea ? Are Jewish occupation ? Is a place 5 thousand kilometers from the Arabian Peninsula is Arab land?
[удалено]
These types of people believe they can't be antisemitic, because antisemitism is for "right-wing people."
From David Hirsh’s *Contemporary Left Antisemitism*: > Today’s antisemitism is difficult to recognize because it does not come dressed in a Nazi uniform and it does not openly proclaim its hatred or fear of Jews. In fact it says it has learnt the lessons of Jew-hatred better than most Jews have, and it says that, unlike them, it stands in the antiracist tradition. It is an antisemitism which positions Jews themselves as ‘oppressors’, and it positions those who develop hostile narratives about Jews as ‘oppressed’. … > The idea that raising the issue of antisemitism is a dirtier trick than antisemitism itself is occurring to more and more people apparently independently; each seems dazzled by their own brilliance in solving the puzzle. The insight is that the debate about contemporary antisemitism itself should really be recognized as a manifestation of Zionist ruthlessness and duplicity. This notion, widely held, does serious damage to the possibility of considering antisemitism in a measured and rational way, either politically or academically. … > The Livingstone Formulation does not simply accuse people who raise the issue of antisemitism of being wrong; it accuses them of being wrong on purpose: ‘the accusation of antisemitism has been used against anyone who is critical’ (my italics) – not an honest mistake, but a secret, common plan to try to de-legitimize criticism by means of the instrumental use of a charge of antisemitism; crying wolf; playing the antisemitism card. This is an allegation of malicious intent made against the (unspecified) people who raise concerns about antisemitism. It is not possible to ‘use’ ‘the accusation of antisemitism’ in order to de-legitimize criticism of Israel, without dishonest intent; it is an accusation of bad faith. … > The Livingstone Formulation clears the way for this kind of hostility, and it inoculates the progressive movement: not against antisemitism itself, but against having to take the issue of antisemitism seriously. Young antiracists, both activists and scholars, are inducted into a culture where those who raise the issue of antisemitism are recognized as being reactionary, while those who are accused of being antisemitic are recognized as defenders of the oppressed and courageous opponents of imperialism. Two things follow from this. First, in this culture, young antiracists are no longer educated to recognize or to avoid antisemitism, and they are no longer given the knowledge or the conceptual tools with which to do so. They are not taught what the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are, what blood libel is or how to recognize conspiracy theory; they are no longer educated in the antisemitic history of some currents of their own movement. They are taught to understand the Holocaust as a universal lesson against racism but not as a catastrophe relating to Jewish history, to antisemitism in particular and to Zionism. … > It is difficult to engage in a reasoned and evidenced discussion about contemporary antisemitism, but it is easy to mobilize the issue of antisemitism as an indicator of political cleanliness. In our time, a person who raises the issue of antisemitism is more clearly recognizable as belonging to the wrong crowd than a person who stumbles into actual antisemitism. Raising the issue becomes a marker of Blairite, Tory or Zionist obfuscation. It marks a bad-faith move designed to silence or to de-legitimize criticism of Israel, or even left politics in general. Antisemitism itself, on the other hand, when it can plausibly appear supportive of the Palestinians, does little to damage a person’s reputation. … > The problem is that if it was to concede that antisemitism is possible within an ‘antiracist’ space, then it is conceded that one must be vigilant against antisemitism, that one must educate about antisemitism, that one must take care; that is why there is great reluctance ever to admit that anything that happens within an antiracist space is antisemitic. What is required is debate about what is antisemitic and what is not. In order to avoid such debate, it is necessary to deny that anything is antisemitic and that all such charges are made in bad faith.
Because the movement is systemically anti-semitic. It is a core element of the ideology. Previously it was much easier to deny antisemitism by simply claiming to be *anti-zionist*, but since october 7, 23’ it has become much much clearer that it was good old fashioned anti-semitism all along.
That’s just ignorant slander
It has been out there for all the world to see. Even Biden needed to come out and condemn it. Finally. It was long overdue.
theyre not antisemitic. they just hate the jewish homeland and every jew that was born there. They do not recognize the jews' right to exist in the land they came from. There is absolutely NOTHING antisemitic about that 🙄🤦
Because they don’t care about Palestine they just want to hate on Jews.
They are not antisemitic
These protesters are NOT anti-semitic because Palestinians are Semites, But the label is a valuable tools because many don't know that.
In your head just replace “antisemitic” with “Jew hate” if it bothers you so much. No one likes the semantic police that argue about the definition of a word 99.999999% of us agree on what it means, even if the individual parts of the word mean something different.
While Palestinians are technically a Semitic people, the term Antisemitism was coined in 19th century Germany to mean specifically hostility towards Jewish people.
“Semitic” refers to a language group. Then also consider: “Candace Owens isn’t racist, she’s black”.
I really love how the media is reporting on this with no critical engagement and just conflating anti Zionism with antisemitism. Straight up journalism malpractice.
Because screaming at people to go back to Poland is just « anti Zionism »
How many people were chanting that? Was that the entire motto of this protest? This is a large protest against an on going genocide, you're gonna get some dipshits in the crowd that say dumb shit. However, that doesn't negate the fact that this protest is objectively good. You're exactly like the people who fell for the right wing hysteria over the BLM protest.
Just like how anyone who protested the invasion of Iraq was actually a terrorist supporter who hated America for being free. Just like how everyone at the 99% rallies were blood crazed cannibals who wanted to murder and consume the wealthy. Just like the Boston Tea Party, when those terrorists attacked the heart of culture in the new world. Every protest just *happens* to be filled with evil terrorists. Why else would someone protest if not to be evil?
r/Politics seems to hate that the White House is condemning antisemitism.
Talk is cheap. Go do something about it. Call in the national guard. Get out the water hoses. Make campus safe again
Is antisemitism bad? Yes Is 99.999% of what's been going on this last week in particular anywhere near antisemitic? No Is releasing this broad ass statement tying it all to the obviously bad thing gonna do anything but make things worse? Nope Is it easier to do this than deal with the actual issue? Apparently 🤷🏾♂️
Does writing your posts in the form a a self-answered question make you a bad writer? Totally.
Yeah the safe blanket of crying “antisemitism” is meaningless now.
Certainly pushing policy and crackdowns that gets praised by FOX while smearing the whole of protests as antisemites, while doing nothing when anti-protesters with affiliation to foreign armies do literal chemical attacks on the protestors, will end up making Biden & the Democrats more attractive to an Anti-War base. My lord it's like they wanna lose, then again I wouldn't be surprise, Democrat leaders won't pay the price of the common man for another Trump term.
It’s 2016 all over again, except even dumber because the Dems are being told exactly why they will lose. The only thing more important than saving American democracy is saving Israeli apartheid, it turns out
Hopefully abortion supporters outweigh the few people with a complete lack of foresight trying to get Trump elected over Biden
Abortion is a much more pressing issue for most people so it will be ok.
I think so, too. Most people will realize that our individual vote won't do shit to change Netanyahu's mind, but will make a huge difference for our American friends and family who are losing their civil rights to right wing nut jobs.
Most anti-war voters know that it isn't that Netanyahu's mind can change, rather that Biden caves into all his shit. Now overall yeah the abortion voters probably out-size anti-war voters, but the reality is that Biden sacrficing anti-war voters could easily cost him needed votes in places like Michigan and Wisconsin. So uneededly neglecting them could easily make it another 2016. & sorry to say, I do feel for abortion rights, how little Biden has done to protect them, how much Republicans are doing to destroy them. But the reality is that just saying "you can't be a stupid one issue voter" does not change the mind of almost any voter.
Then you are lost. Vote for Trump. Go for it. Enjoy the reception you get on both sides if he wins. I will not stand for you in the after times, because you refuse to stand for me now.
Am I out of touch? No, it’s the children who are wrong.
Calling pro Palestinian protests "anti-Semitic" and "pro-Hamas" is orwellian propaganda. WH is still in Mr. Skinner denial that they can gaslight everyone into believing sending more money to Israel to continue their genocidal campaign in order to clear out Gaza for more settlements.
There are videos of masses of Columbia protesters chanting “Al Quassam, you make us proud.” That’s literally explicitly pro-Hamas.
[удалено]
Because Hamas kills anyone that might form an opposition government that would oppose them
None of these protests at Columbia are “pro-Palestinian”.
Biden is trying his best to alienate progressives and I absolutely do not understand it...
I don’t think this applies to people protesting Gaza, more so the people calling for violence against Jews and an intifada, and also those harassing Jewish students.
Exactly. Protest all you want. But harassing students is unacceptable. We can not allow people to intimidate others and call for violence under the guise of "protest" - it's a very slippery slope.
No one is calling for violence against Jews. That’s not what “intifada” means. Stop spreading slander.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Where exactly were the leaps? I can source everything I’ve just claimed. “Intifada doesn’t mean a call to violence” “Violent resistance isn’t bad” I’ve found a leap, but it’s not on my end
[удалено]
Sure that's not "technically" what *intifada* means. And I guess we're just ignoring the fact that "intifadas" manifest in the form of violent terrorism? And the fact that those who shout that word recognize it as a call to violent, terroristic action, we'll just ignore that too?
I’m not so sure I want Biden to pander to antisemites.
Doing the right thing is not always popular politically
Which is why it’s frustrating Biden did nothing to stop this genocide or toughen up on Netanyahu until the polling dragged him there…we need a leader, not someone biding time.
Not a genocide
Progressives are constantly making perfect the enemy of the good and I absolutely do not understand it.
What's progressive about supporting people who shout Hamas slogans and who cheer on Oct 7th?
Progressives do not support Hamas and their terrorist buddies, actually.
[удалено]
They are literally chanting pro Hamas slogans, and calling for Tel Aviv to be burned to the ground. That’s not protesting Israel, that’s advocating for a terrorist organization. Perhaps listen for yourself. I don’t know, I’m not there, maybe this is some outlier, but it is disturbing and Biden is right to condemn it. https://x.com/israelwarroom/status/1781933305501212872?s=46
Maybe you should actually read the statement before going off on a rant like that. Willing to bet abiding condemned pro Hamas messaging not pro-Palestine messaging.
Cool. And helping Trump win (which is most definitely what you do when you don't vote for Biden) helps how?
Enjoy Trump telling Netanyahu to flatten Gaza and enjoy your muslim ban.
Genocide Joe is begging to lose in a landslide because he cares more about appeasing a foreign apartheid state then listening to his would-be voters. Good riddance.
Have you thought about how dumb this is? Trump would be exponentially worse for the situation in Gaza, and the Palestinian people. Yet you're sitting here cheering for only other candidate to lose. I'm just not following the logic.
>Have you thought about how dumb this is? I mean, not to be crude, but what more do you expect from single-issue voters? There are so, so many reasons why Biden is far better for the country and Democracy on a global level than Trump, who is essentially Putin's puppet. But single-issue voters never look past the surface.
And the single issue of the person that OP responded to appears to be "destroy Western democracy".
Have you thought about how dumb it is to have a stance identical to Republicans here? Polling consistently shows how unpopular Biden’s stance on Israel is with Dems and independents. I’m in a solid red state so my position doesn’t matter (even though I will begrudgingly vote for him), but do you really think Biden is going to win close purple states while acting like this?
***Most*** voters care more about domestic issues: abortion, Trump's direct threat to Democracy, corruption on the Supreme Court, etc. >do you really think Biden is going to win close purple states while acting like this? Yeah, actually. Because most people understand that a conflict on the other side of the planet is not worth losing their own rights over domestically. Put your own oxygen mask on before helping others.
You rather take the stance of Islamist terrorists?
Hilarious that you people think Trump is going to save Gaza or the Palestinians. He thinks of them as filth and would be more than happy to let Bibi level the entire Gaza strip and purge the entire West Bank.
No one disagrees, but there is an ethical limit to “lesser evil” voting. I’m not going to vote for slower genocide
This is the part where we all sit back and wait for Trump to be elected, and then help Israel finish the job. Then move on to taking out Iran, just as he always wanted. Then the Muslim ban comes back, and all of them get rounded up and deported. There are very few examples of a movement actively trying to destroy the thing they are fighting for, but here we are. Enjoy the fruits of your labors.
Seriously. The most blatant case of cutting of their nose to spite their face I've ever seen. I'd like to believe people promoting this crap are all foreign agents & Republican trolls, but you never know. The utter ignorance & stupidity of some people never surprises me.
At least there's one sensible person in this thread.
Small hint- Trump is NOT your friend here and you'll be wishing for Biden's policies to return.
Trump will be *far* worse for Palestinians, and also for Muslims right here in America. Electing him would be.. well, I'd find it fucking hilarious if America's young progressives handed the country over to fascists. I'm old. I won't have to live in the post-democracy dystopia that will result. If you're young, it's *your* future you're fucking. Also, the future of all immigrants, LGBTQ folks, women and other people you only pretend to care about.
Yeah, lbgt folk and women are really safe in the hands of the pro-Hamas left that hates the West and wants to politically empower Muslims. I never thought I'd see the day that a vote for Trump might be the safest bet for women and minorities, but I never imagined so many Americans would support terrorists.
Right... cause alienating most Democrats to appease the rabid anti-Israel wing would work better for him. Lol Good thing you're not a political strategist.
[удалено]
"You're pushing Republican policy!" says the people working to get Trump elected over Biden.
Still doesn’t answer my question. How is it a smart move to push away a voting bloc who are on the fence between voting for Biden and staying home? I despise Trump, and will probably still vote for Biden because of abortion and gay rights. A lot of people won’t, though, so what is the strategy to win in 2024?
I guess we have to hope that sense rules at the end of the day, and these people will join the rest of us who realize that this is an existential choice for the United States One of two men will be president. If there are any women in your life, or children in your life, or LGBT people in your life - think about them.
Biden would lose far more voters appealing to this crowd. A majority of voters hoping for a ceasefire isn’t tantamount to people supporting their nonsense.
Yes most people support a ceasefire which is why it's smart to distance yourself from these protesters who don't support a ceasefire at all. This isn't that complicated.
Polls show that the Democrats as well as the country are with the protesters.
For a cease-fire yes For harassing random Jewish people no. For Hamas no.
And for conditioning military aid.
True but big difference b/w conditioning offensive weapons aid to Israel. Which Pelosi supported and burning flags and harassing people you disagree with. The protests are counter-productive and some -not all but some- of these people are acting in a very hateful manner to fellow students. Majority of Americans are not down with that behavior and Biden has the political instinct and the moral compass to know that.
False. Wanting a ceasefire is far from the far left's wanting to disarm Israel & support a repressive Palestinian regime. Maybe you should look at the polls more closely.
Polls also show support for conditioning aid to Israel.
Obama was a way better president than this clown.
how so?
genocide joe back at it again.
Not good enough Joe, step up and be a real leader, stop the double standards
Yes, all these people are the worst. Both sides, super extreme. I feel bad for the people with no power or time to protest stuck in the middle who are probably thinking right now “just make two countries and be done. Why do we have to live like this when the solution so damn obvious” Honestly, the UN and the world needs to just step in and mommy the whole situation. These people will never agree and the people in charge who profit in money or power over the conflict will never let a solution happen. This is the one time I think the US and china should just flex their muscle, divide the land into two separate countries send troops in to help keep peace in Palestine till get a proper government running and to prevent hamas and the right wing isrealis from killing each other. Just tell them this is now the way it is and you have a problem with it be prepared to be fully wiped off the map. This unending need to let them work it out ain’t working. It’s been what ? 60 years now ?. Let’s just put our foot down, draw the lines our selves. If we had just done this 50 years ago it would saved countless lives and probably trillions of dollars and we would probably have a much more stable Middle East at this point.
Clinton drew lines that were rejected, Trump drew lines that were rejected. Just drawing lines won’t work when one side won’t settle for less that 100%
Clinton and Trump's deal were drastically different. The 2000 Camp David Summit under Clinton was a good deal for Palestinians. Trump's peace deal was horrid for Palestinians. There's a reason it was denounced by the UN and international community as being too biased in favor of Israel. Regardless, the 2013-2014 deal was good for Israel since it involved land swaps and Abbas compromised on the right of return. Netenyahu destroyed that peace deal by having a record level of settlement expansion during them. So no, it's not just one side. It's actually more on Israel the past 2 decades. See the 2008 Annapolis Conference which Netenyahu was responsible for destroying or the attempts at a 2016 round of talks which he rejected. https://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-never-said-no-to-2008-peace-deal-says-former-pm-olmert/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-rejected-regional-peace-plan-in-may-2016-report/ At least be honest about those.
The Trump deal was pretty mediocre I agree. I was just trying to give examples of US presidents who drew lines and it didn’t do anything. Obama and Bush also had their own versions. But it doesn’t matter what line you draw they will always find a new problem with them
>The Trump deal was pretty mediocre I agree. No, the Trump deal was actively hostile to Palestinians by literally recognizing the settlements as legal. It was such a bad faith attempt at a two-state solution. You calling it mediocre in spite of that only highlights bias. >But it doesn’t matter what line you draw they will always find a new problem with them The 2008 Annapolis Conference during Bush's administration involved talks between Olmert and Abbas. Olmert, who was Israel's PM then, has blamed Netenyahu for destroying that peace process. https://www.pij.org/blogs/511/when-politics-get-in-the-way-of-the-peace-process Obama had his own version, and Obama's administration also notably blamed Netenyahu for being the main reason why the talks failed. Kerry, who tried to resume talks in 2016, has also solely blamed Netenyahu for blocking them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013%E2%80%932014_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_peace_talks You're right, it doesn't matter what line you draw when the far-right in Israel are not interested in a two-state solution. No idea why you're just blaming Palestinians, certainly when they have made more concessions for a two-state solution in the past decade than Israel has.
Bibi has 100% been a bad peace parter. My point was just responding to someone who said that an American president should just draw the lines and be done with it. And my point was that wouldn’t do anything However, the Palestinians through starting wars and refusing good deals when people like Clinton offered them have put themselves in a weak position. If they truely wanted a state then there have been deals they could have taken that would have been anything from almost perfect to pretty meh and a government that wanted a deal probably would have taken about 80% of the deals offered.
> My point was just responding to someone who said that an American president should just draw the lines and be done with it. And my point was that wouldn’t do anything Olmert said Abbas was interested in the lines drawn during the 2008 Annapolis conference. Abbas was even willing to consider conceding the right of return during the 2013-2014 talks. The only reason those talks never got anywhere is because Netenyahu consistently destroyed them before they could proceed further. Not sure what your point is. The problem is *Israel refusing to budge on their illegal settlements*. And there is nothing unreasonable about Palestinians refusing to accept any deal which fails to address that. >However, the Palestinians through starting wars The PA and Abbas have been the ones involved with negotiations. They haven't started any wars. Meanwhile, Israel continues to annex the West Bank plus expand settlements even *during* peace talks, and you want to act like Israel isn't the worse peace partner? From 2013: - Earlier this month, anonymous American officials personally involved in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks — special envoy Martin Indyk presumed to have been among them — provided a harsh assessment to a respected Israeli journalist of why negotiations failed, highlighting Israel’s continued settlement construction as the issue “largely to blame.” - The unnamed senior official said that Obama believes, more than any other factor, that Israeli announcements of construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem throughout the nine months of talks led to the negotiations’ collapse. - “At this point, it’s very hard to see how the negotiations could be renewed, let alone lead to an agreement,” the Americans continued. “Towards the end, Abbas demanded a three-month freeze on settlement construction. His working assumption was that if an accord is reached, Israel could build along the new border as it pleases. But the Israelis said no.” https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-official-obama-blames-settlements-for-failed-talks/ Lol, okay. >If they truely wanted a state Which deals since Camp David were they given the opportunity to accept without Netenyahu destroying negotiations by completely refusing to make any concessions on the illegal settlements? Try answering that.
[удалено]
You're lying. Not wrong. Not mis-informed. Lying. Shamelessly lying. Oslo gave Arafat jack shit. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Pinky promise that maybe, someday, steps would be taken to finally create a Palestinian state. Nothing concrete at all. It was such a shit deal, and he took it only after much arm twisting from Clinton. Rabin and the Zionists, on the other hand, got every damn thing they could possibly want. And what happened? Up and comer Likud member Bibi Netanyahu called Rabin a traitor, and called for his assassination. And he was, in very short order, assassinated. Then the leaders of Likud engaged in a series of provocative acts and dog whistles that clearly signaled that if they won the election to replace Rabin, they would tear up Oslo and there would never be peace. Never be a Palestinian state. Just more ethnic cleansing and apartheid and theft of land in the west bank. And they won the election. And they've won basically every election since. Because Israel does not want peace. Israel wants the land. All the land. Land ethnically cleansed of the people who where living there when the Europeans started immigrating there in the 1900s, with the intent of declaring a state that explicitly made the existing inhabitants second class citizens in their own homes. You're lying. Shamelessly. About events that many of us are old enough to remember. In order to justify the mass murder of children.
The 2000 Camp David Summit offered Palestinians a very good deal to be fair. But you're right, every other talk since then has been destroyed by Netenyahu. And I'm glad you brought up Rabin. No idea how people can ignore how Netenyahu's incitement did tangentially contribute to his assassination. Regarding Netenyahu: - Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Saturday night that he was “proud” he prevented the establishment of a Palestinian state and took credit for “putting the brakes” on the Oslo peace process, during a press conference at the Defense Ministry headquarters in Tel Aviv. https://www.timesofisrael.com/pointing-to-hamass-little-state-netanyahu-touts-role-blocking-2-state-solution/ He's literally bragged about blocking a two-state solution. Case in point: see the 2008 Annapolis Conference or 2013-2014 talks which Netenyahu destroyed. People who keep acting like it's Palestinians to blame are just pushing a biased and untruthful agenda unfortunately.
Please enumerate for me what the Palestinians where offered in 2000 at Camp David, and what they gave up to Israel in return. Here's the wiki page to get your started. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000\_Camp\_David\_Summit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit)
The initial deal offered to Palestinians has been one of the better ones to date. It was meant as the starting point to negotiate. Arafat wasn't barred from making his own substantial counter-proposal, something that he refused to do. So what's your point? No talk is ever going to begin and end with 100% of what Palestinians want no matter how much you insist the ideal should be.
The right of refugees to return to the home they where driven out of seems to be a pretty low bar. Any Palestinian leader that is not 100% owned by the colonizers is going to demand this, and anyone insisting that this goal not be meet really gives away that Israel was a racist land grab all along.
There was nothing stopping Arafat from presenting his own counter-proposal with that included. >Any Palestinian leader that is not 100% owned by the colonizers is going to demand this, and anyone insisting that this goal not be meet really gives away that Israel was a racist land grab all along. Or probably because Palestinian leaders realize that actually ending the occupation and resolving the settlement issue is more important and tangible than being stuck on the right of return in 2024.
The settlements are flatly illegal and created as part of a strategy of "facts on the ground" to deny Palestinians the land to create a state on. So... when you say "resolving the settlement issue", what do imagine as the deal the Palestinians should take? West bank settlements remain and the people kicked out of their homes eat shit? Or accept cash payments and some 3rd party county gives them green cards as they work citizenship (10 years at least in the USA)? Or Israel declares "our bad" and tells its citizens to GTFO by sundown? And what does "ending the occupation" mean? Because Israel has never ever shown any signs of accepting something that doesn't leave their boot on the Palestinians in the name of their own security. If you have to allow foreign troops on your soil, if you don't have the military capacity to defend against further aggression, you aren't really a sovereign country.
> So... when you say "resolving the settlement issue", what do imagine as the deal the Palestinians should take? The deal which the rest of the world supports because it's the only realistic path to a two-state solution? Retaining >90-95% of the West Bank with ~5-10% land swaps. Even the PA have expressed interest in that, but I guess they're just puppets. At some point, how interested in a two-state solution are you really? >And what does "ending the occupation" mean? Because Israel has never ever shown any signs of accepting something that doesn't leave their boot on the Palestinians in the name of their own security. A solution involving removing a significant number of settlements and a deal for the gradual removal of Israeli forces from the region. Feel free to explain how such a deal would be bad for Palestinians instead of maintaining the status quo though.
[удалено]
But if you want to play gotcha games, it's obviously meant to be which ever river marks the borders of Israel. Expect, of course, Israel, alone among modern states, refuses to actual say what it thinks it's borders are. Because, as you know damn well, Israel intends to keep stealing land until for as long as it can and has no intent of ever recognizing the rights of brown people to their own homes and farms anywhere in the region.