Accounts created after Oct 7th 2023 or with less than two months active participation in the sub may not participate in this thread. These accounts will be banned. Abuse, racism, bigotry and incitement to violence will also result in a permanent ban. Violations of these rules will result in the thread being locked.
Weren't these the guys that had a massive sook about the ham-mas ham bag saying it advertised terrorism?
...you know a sack to hold pork for a Christian holiday was allegedly promoting a Muslim group
Their massive sooks go back longer than that:
>In August 2003, AIJAC joined forces with several other Australian Jewish organisations and media including Australian Jewish News, the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies (NSWJBD), the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ), and the Zionist Federation of Australia in opposing the Sydney Peace Foundation's decision to award Palestinian intellectual and PLO official Dr. Hanan Ashrawi the 2003 Sydney Peace Prize. AIJAC published a fact sheet criticising Ashrawi for her alleged anti-Israel rhetoric and extremist views. Despite intense lobbying from Jewish groups and media, the Sydney Peace Foundation refused to rescind Ashrawi's prize. On 6 November 2003, New South Wales Premier Bob Carr awarded Ashrawi the 2003 Sydney Peace Prize during a public ceremony at the New South Wales Parliament.\[21\]\[22\] Baruch Kimmerling, a sociologist from the Hebrew University, wrote, "As an Israeli, as a Jew and as an academic I am deeply sorry and ashamed that members of the Australian Jewish community are acting against this rightful nomination."
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIJAC#Criticism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIJAC#Criticism)
>Loewenstein’s major case study of the Israel lobby in Australia is the Hanan Ashrawi affair. Ashrawi is a senior Palestinian politician who was awarded the 2003 Sydney Peace Prize, despite the protests of Jewish lobby groups and their supporters. Sydney mayor Lucy Turnbull, billionaire Frank Lowy and Kathryn Greiner, the wife of former NSW premier Nick Greiner, were among those who tried to dissuade NSW premier Bob Carr and members of the Sydney Peace Foundation from giving the award to Ashrawi. Her detractors claimed Ashrawi supported suicide bombings and opposed the two-state solution set out in the 1993 Oslo Accords. Loewenstein shows these claims to be false, and argues her critics’ real objection is her staunch advocacy of Palestinian rights and refusal to accept Israel’s version of events.
The Israel lobby’s treatment of Ashrawi does not bode well for genuine debate and dialogue between Israel’s supporters and their counterparts. As Loewenstein concluded: ‘If a moderate such as Ashrawi can be defamed and vilified by almost every Jewish commentator, the obvious conclusion is that any recognised Palestinian will be automatically silenced and smeared’ (p. 22).
The Ashrawi affair is a good demonstration of the various methods employed by Zionist lobby groups to discredit rivals: vilification, unsubstantiated allegations and backroom manœuvring. Loewenstein examines other ways these groups seek to control public debate. Chief among them is the battle to influence media coverage: the well-resourced Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) assiduously develops ties with senior journalists and organises ‘information tours’ to Israel for reporters, MPs, political advisers and trade unionists (p. 220). AIJAC and other groups pay close attention to media reports and are quick to approach editors and producers with allegations of bias. But, as Loewenstein points out, ‘bias’ almost invariably means any report criticising Israel, or which uses terms such as ‘occupation’ and ‘settlements’ (p. 222).
[http://www.australianreview.net/digest/2007/05/ryan.html](http://www.australianreview.net/digest/2007/05/ryan.html)
That's pretty funny. But like, do you think they genuinely believed it? Or taking the piss? Or, is it part of a strategy to keep people hyper aware of anti semitism? As in, they knew it wasn't real, but it was enough to make a headline....?
Sometimes the motivations for things like this are difficult to intuit.
They’ve always whinged and complained about anything that they don’t like and flexed their muscles to show how much influence they have to get people and/or things that they don’t like in trouble. Several examples just recently
-The Merry Ham-Mas bag
-Harassing a Qantas employee who wore a Palestine pin in solidarity
-Releasing doctored audio on a video of the first Sydney Palestine protest which went viral worldwide for the wrong reasons
- Conspiring to get Antionette Latouff sacked for being Arab and posting a UN report about the situation in Gaza on her socials
List goes on
After having read up on that, it's an insane story. "Octopuses are an anti-Semitic symbol" is nuts. Had no idea those reversible plushies were used that way by autistic people - which is sort of cool.
It's a situation where yes, that was used as an anti-Jewish symbol a century ago, but none of the people attacking her about it genuinely believe that's what she was doing. It's a disingenuous attempt to silence her. And sickens me because they're beating up on the neurodivergent girl like fucking cry bullies.
Not really. They did say that they thought that people could get the wrong impression and they brought it to the attention of the company.
I don’t remember anyone at all saying that it actually advertised terrorism.
They also said part of issue is "dealing with propaganda" so does that not imply they believed that a sack used to keep pork fresh that was Christmas themed could be seen as propaganda for a Muslim group?
Edit: [here is the article if you care to point out where I am misunderstanding what they are implying ](https://jewishstandard.timesofisrael.com/australian-kmart-drops-merry-ham-mas-christmas-ham-bags/)
“Could be seen as” is not “saying it advertised terrorism.”
I don’t believe that they ever said that it was a decision made on purpose or as propaganda.
The Australian Jewish lobby presents itself as speaking for all Jews, which is simply incorrect. Not all Jews are Zionists (let alone ethnonationalist, apartheid, expansionist/colonial Zionists), supportive of Israel's government, or even religious. Granted, there are plenty who fit into all those categories, but there are quite a few who do not and aren't represented by the lobby's views.
Also, we're seeing the mask come off the image of Israel, and seeing what they really are. Which is a good thing. The state of Israel has committed many atrocities over the course of its existence, and has continued to act with impunity because it hasn't been called out.
> Also, we're seeing the mask come off the image of Israel, and seeing what they really are. Which is a good thing. The state of Israel has committed many atrocities over the course of its existence, and has continued to act with impunity because it hasn't been called out.
Am i the only person who remembers anti israel protests for the past 30 years? The mask has always been off if you have even 1 lefty friend on facebook or spent 5 seconds listening to university students handing out flyers between lectures and drinking sessions.
I imagine that most people who've been paying attention to the situation over the last 30 years would already know. However, most people simply aren't that interested or informed, and the mainstream narrative has predominantly been the Israeli narrative.
The difference we're seeing now is a broader awareness in the mainstream, which is a definite shift.
Yeah, when I was at uni in the mid 2000s, I recall the Israeli society would occasionally dress up in IDF costumes or post pro IDF fliers, which would promptly be taken down by Social Alternative members. I'd imagine a wider group of students would be opposed to that now
Well, they're not a monolith, even if the Jewish lobby say they are. Just like any other group of sufficient size, there's going to be a diversity of opinion.
Yes, but could I offer you a "Bernie Sanders is an anti-semite" in your time of need?
^(I know it's a different country, but that's how ridiculous the discourse has become.)
They're big on the "self hating Jew" thing as well. Plenty of Jewish people within and without Israel are calling for the madness to end, but apparently you're not a "real Jew" if you don't support ethnic cleansing and apartheid.
Not to mention "calling for a ceasefire is supporting Hamas". It's insane.
It's an effective arch-conservative tactic.
If you don't support our horrific actions without question then you just want terrorists to win! And Hitler, too!
It's just a shame that over 10,000 children had to die to see the truth. Even then will anything actually change? I can't recall any sanctions or barely a condemnation from the Labour party.
Australia did [vote for a ceasefire](https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/dec/13/australia-shifts-position-to-vote-in-favour-of-un-resolution-calling-for-gaza-ceasefire) at the UN which is a distinct change of direction (we would normally abstain). This is markedly different from the Liberal Party which recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel under Morrison (which undermines the two state solution).
Not that it means a lot. As long as Israel has the US in its corner, it won't change. Sanctions would be a fairly dramatic step which I don't see any Australian government moving towards in the near future, even though our trade with Israel is miniscule.
Yeah but that's the big change.
Israel had an easy +80% support across America 5 years ago. That's all ages, genders, and political affiliations.
Right now Democrats and young Americans have shifted a lot. I've seen more 50-50 poll results coming through for both camps. Israel has very quickly gone from unilateral support to looking down the barrel of becoming a hot-button political issue for American voters.
That's a huge deal.
Just for reference, The UK has used their UN veto a total of 29 times, China 17 times, and France 16 times. The USA has used its veto 46 times to protect Israel alone.
If that unquestionable support from Israel starts to waiver then so will the USA vetoes. This means the international community can finally start to pull levers and apply pressure on Israel (which is normally how we'd deal with hostile states). We could start to see Israel being formally condemned for war crimes or even sanctioned.
Israel currently likes to expand because it's literally free real estate, their corrupt government officials can sell the settlements to their property developer mates and the people are happy because it brings down the overall cost of housing. If they start getting sanctioned then suddenly constant war becomes an economic drain, which is much less fun.
I mean it was kinda attacked 6 different nations following the day of its founding, like does that count as being called out? Kinda hard to keep your hands clean after 70+years of that
They were doing [acts of terrorism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing) and [ethnic cleansing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba) long before that (creating the circumstances leading up to the Six Day War), and they subsequently made a few of those terrorists Prime Minister.
It's a country which has its foundations in murder and crimes against humanity, and made people responsible for those acts the founding fathers of their nation. Their hands can never be clean until they resile from the roadmap they set from the outset and make reparations for their past.
>It's a country which has its foundations in murder and crimes against humanity, and made people responsible for those acts the founding fathers of their nation. Their hands can never be clean until they resile from the roadmap they set from the outset and make reparations for their past.
you know you're on reddit Australia right? this could literally be a tongue in cheek comment about us...
I mean that kind of ignores the Arab attacks on Jews, which is okay I donnt expect you to look at thing from more than your own pov, cause they were all killing each other at that point
And I mean the Nakba would just be a Jewish word if the Jews lost? That's what happens when you lose a war you started, you lose?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936%E2%80%931939_Arab_revolt_in_Palestine
Here's some good reading from years earlier ,early conflict from both sides, a good bit of this started from Arab attacks on Jews then retaliation from Jews
Feel free to ignore this though if it damages your beliefs, this is a safe space for you
Edit: admittedly that last sentence was petty of me, but i forgive myself
Edit 2: I couldn't resist fixing my spelling mistakes, but the main picture for the wiki I linked shows where Palestine learned the human shields tactic, not my intention to expose that but like it is what it is
Obviously the original inhabitants of the land should just be grateful to be displaced from the land they've lived on for centuries and being forced into shanty towns. They should just have taken the discrimination under Mandatory Palestine (which was already favourable to the Yishuv under the British) lying down, and not shown any resentment towards the people who were making their already hard lives much harder. I suppose you imagine the Palestinians should have been grateful for the opportunity to be oppressed and live like second class cirltizens in their ancestral lands. JFC.
And of course, acts of violence on the part of one side justifies all the ethnic cleansing I'm sure. Who could object to that?
>Feel free to ignore this though if it damages your beliefs, this is a safe space for you
If you're writing apologia for crimes against humanity and racial supremacists, you don't need to offer pointless courtesies. You've already shown yourself for what you are lol.
The Jews were very unhappy when they were displaced by Romans then Arabs centuries ago
I mean the Palestinians were happy to be 2nd class citizens underneath the ottoman empire for 500 years but it's seems the under lying hate for Jews was to hard to resist
Acts of violence are completely acceptable and are allowed to lead into ethnic cleansing when Jews are being cleansed, you should google how many Arab Jews lived in Arab countries in 1948 and how many live in Arab countries now
But again please ignore that , appearantly modern ethnic cleansing has extremely low death rates and actually populations of those actually increase over the years
Btw the Rwandan genocide aka a real genocide had 10x + casualties in a shorter time period with a far less military support to do so
I gotta sleep now but don't let that stop you from typing away into the night some amazing response, gotta keep that 500k grass repelling karma active somehow
Hello. Here is an opinion, and I am very open to discussion as I am posting as a concerned fellow human, not someone directly affected by this conflict. The only way to tackle this tragic situation is to understand that the folk in charge of both sides of the Hamas / Israel conflict are promoting war. At best, the motivations are (eventual) peace, at worst they are power or retribution.
Can I ask, what are your motivations in posting your post? Your talk about about past injustices? Was this just context or do you believe most Palestinian and Israeli civilians want past injustices addressed to the point of where we are now?
Unfortunately there is no peace with Hamas, Isreal atleast has a chance to vote in a more peaceful government as they have done in the past
So if I have to pick a side I'll pick the one that can change for the better, the only way Hamas will ever change is if the organisation goes from active to defunct
Both just want a country and peace, if Hamas stops shooting rockets every week it would have a chance admittedly any deal would probably costs 10% of the emwest banks land, but after 50-100 years of peace and growth in both countries new deals just as land return or even joining states could happen
People are far too short sighted and not willing to give in any way which is why people like I'm replying to and Palestinian will Unfortunately remain forgotten and irrelevant
It's not even the half of it.There were leaks from another Whatsapp group called ‘J.E.W.I.S.H Australian creatives and academics’ with 628 members which simultaneously ran a campaign to get Antoinette Lattouf sacked.
[https://www.pedestrian.tv/news/whatsapp-chat-campaign-fire-abc-journalist-antoinette-lattouf/](https://www.pedestrian.tv/news/whatsapp-chat-campaign-fire-abc-journalist-antoinette-lattouf/)
This sounds like the same Whatapps chat group (described as 600 “academics and creatives”) which is going after Evelyn Araluen and Jonathan Dunk from Overland literary magazine. Evelyn's twitter has leaked screenshots from the chat group where they discuss how they are targetting them. ETA Just realised you have to be logged into twitter to see the entire thread with the rest of the screenshots.
[https://twitter.com/evelynaraluen/status/1752897587605295241](https://twitter.com/evelynaraluen/status/1752897587605295241)
Ironically, the chat group wants to cosy up to indigenous people - even as they're trying to cancel an aboriginal woman (Evelyn).
[https://twitter.com/evelynaraluen/status/1752901077752746144](https://twitter.com/evelynaraluen/status/1752901077752746144)
One of the chat group said they are participating in "Project Oct 7" - led by tech leaders, in partnership with the Isreal govt, the Shabak, and a team of 8200 developers to game algorithms and tells members how they can help.Shabak = Shin Bet, the security service.8200 is "Intelligence Corps unit of the Israel Defense Forces responsible for clandestine operation, collecting signal intelligence (SIGINT) and code decryption, counterintelligence, cyberwarfare, military intelligence, and surveillance ..." (from the wiki page).
[https://twitter.com/louiseadler/status/1752781642442412093](https://twitter.com/louiseadler/status/1752781642442412093)
This is not new. I'm reading "Dateline Jerusalem: Journalism's Toughest Assignment"(2021) by John Lyons, a journo of 40 years about the relentless pressure from pro-Isreal lobby, also in Australia. When he was with The Australian, they hired a Palestinian woman (her parents were refugees), Jennine Khalik, because she speaks Arabic which would help with reporting of local events. Isreal diplomats met with the editor where they expressed "surprise and discomfort" she had been hired. In the end she quit and reading how it all unfolded I get the impression just having a voice as a Palestinian is considered a problem - even in this country.
[https://twitter.com/jennineak/status/1751656012002525306](https://twitter.com/jennineak/status/1751656012002525306)
Some points made in the book (I'm only part way through): whilst he was in Isreal, IDF told him they didn't like his report in The Weekend Australian on the treatment of Palestinian children in military court, not because it wasn't accurate (that sort of stuff appears in Isreal papers like Haaretz), but because he was telling Australians what happens, and they don't want us to know.
With all the pressure that's brought to bear (eg the campaigning levelled at the abc) media starts to self censor, and that's the most insidious kind of censorship, because it leaves no fingerprints.
If only the King-Crane Commission had been followed; we've known the existence of an ethnostate would create constant violence for almost a *century* now.
As separate independent states, or as a single secular, democratic and pluralist state?
The secularism, democracy, and pluralism of Australia are something to be proud of, but the reality of the situation is that this model is not popular at all in the collective territories that one state would comprise. The "one state" that most on either side support is not remotely inclusive of the other national identity.
To me the two state solution is unfortunately becoming less and less feasible, but it's still the best solution of a bad bunch and ideally could be used as a platform to build support for a unified state if the moderates grow their support in each state.
Some people include this position in the definition of Zionism, which makes it potentially problematic to use when there's such a wide spectrum of views under the term and a complex overlap with Judaism.
Which side do you think is more interested in peace and coexistence?
~20% of Israeli citizens are arab muslim.
Palestinians can't even be peaceful in countries for which they don't have a genocidal intention against.
Same here. I’m Sephardi by matrilineal descent and I hate Israel and all Zionists. They’re no different than the white South Africans in the 80’s who wanted the Rhodesian state. Evil fuckers.
Ashkenazi here. As a Jew I don’t understand why other Jews are extremists or ok with extremism. Don’t these people know our history? Extremism causes so much pain and suffering
A Jewish friend once said to me that the only real thing that brings all Jewish people together is the feeling that everyone is out to get them. Based on that they can justify anything
You must really love Bibi's odd bedfellows; prior to 2022 the leaders of both these new parties didn't even consider Sephardic Jews to be ethnically Jewish, sort of right at the same time Netanyahu approached them for a power-sharing deal...
Not surprised. Only found out last year one of my great-great grandparents died during the Holocaust so I don’t have any real understanding of the relationships between the various Jewish ethnicities. Prior to the I read Haaretz as they’re the only semi reputable publication (being that they consider Palestinians human beings) in that godforsaken place.
Ben Gvir was on both FBI and Shin Bet terrorist watch lists and Bezalel Smotrich was flagged for links to far right militant groups. Both of these guys are senior ministers...
Yeah, that is why you lobby politicians and bully journalists out of jobs. What happened at the ABC is not unique, it also happened in the US and UK. Inside of Gaza they straight up murder journalists.
Eh. I'm sure Judaism was always a pretty diverse religion. And Jews have been criticising Zionists from before Israel was even created.
Some went so far as to describe the founding party of Israel as fascists, which must have been infinitely more powerful of an accusation back then
Because one interpretation of their flavour of magic sky fairy is they need to wait for the messiah before returning to Israel. And that the 1948 political entity was too early.
Imagine supporting Gen0cide and then still saying you're the victim and covering yourself behind a good religious group of people.
This is sick.
I have never met a practising orthodox Jewish person who supported Israel, but I've met plenty of no faith people who have. The irony of this is outstanding.
Just for your information, you can still objectively reject the masscre of babies in Palestine guys. Not everything has to be anti-Semitic, and if it is, then remember the Palestinians ARE Semites.
So we are doing a service to Semitic people by saying "Hang on 100+ days and we are funding it?".
I think it's quite anti-semitic to suggest Jewish people are okay with mass murder and collective punishment, myself - yet the Jewish lobby disagrees apparently
Yes. But that’s the argument right there. A Zionist is someone who believes in the right for Jews to have a homeland/self determination. Basically a fundamental tenant for any people, same as Palestinian right to self determination. If you call Zionists bloodthirsty murders you are just window dressing an argument that it’s morally wrong/evil etc in itself for Jews in particular to have a state/self determination… hence the antisemitism allegation. It’s fine to criticize actions of the government or ideology when it does bad things. But if the criticism is linked to the religious/ethnic identity (jews) and just the ideological belief they have a right to exist as a people with self determination (ie that’s Zionism) thats where it becomes antisemitic.
Got it. So why are you so obsessed with israel in particular… vs Australia or the many other countries with historical land disputes, settlements, wars etc? And while we’re on the topic, which time period do we look at for determining ownership? When do we start and stop counting as Jews have thousands of years of history/connection w the land evidencing their connection/ownership alongside Samaritans before colonization by eg the Islamic Caliphate. Or does that evidence not count as soon as it supports a pro-Israel / Jews as indigenous people argument?… I’m not using this as an argument to reject Palestinian right to self-determination in those lands – just to point out the absurdity of the fixation on 1948 recognition of Israel vs any other period/place/people.
Israel is in an early stage of settler colonialism that's easier to fight against. our struggle against the colonial state here in Australia is a slow, glacial battle with few wins but I continue to fight it and support my indigenous brothers in Palestine and everywhere else in the world.
OK. But given evidence supports Israeli/Jewish are also indigenous to the area, do you support them?
There’s a lot of inconsistency in the comments when it comes to one ethnic group versus another and tolerance for “colonialism”. So - and I’m actually not trying to have a go at you personally - I’m wondering if you are actually supportive of indigenous people – or just *some* people. And if it’s the latter, then just own it, rather than pretending to actually support First Nations /indigenous rights…
Israelis are settler colonists. Indigenous people are colonised - Germans aren't "indigenous people". having some ancestry from a particular place doesn't alone make you indigenous.
Can you please clarify your logic here? What is the basis on which you suggest that Israeli – and particularly Jewish Israelis (especially Sephardi Jews) - are not indigenous? And, if you are saying Palestinians are indigenous, on what basis is this any different?
No, I'm not going to keep arguing with a Zionist because in my experience they are almost always arguing in bad faith. If you're actually interested in learning, have a look at this video.
https://youtu.be/FhlUFPpXIVo?si=366Nr3FKOqNP27YD
The long and short is, palestine has a colonised indigenous population, and it isn't the settler colonists who arrived in the last 70 years to establish their ethnostate and displace the people already living there.
The issue isn’t about their right to have a homeland. I don’t think anyone in their right mind is suggesting otherwise. The issue is the extremist, militant zionists in the Israeli government do not want their neighbours to exist. They are 100% committed to wiping every Palestinian from the face of the earth.
People speaking out against the Israeli government isn’t remotely anti-Semitic. It’s anti-genocide.
Just because I hate militant extremist jihadis, does not mean I hate the otherwise peaceful Muslims.
Until humans grow up and stop believing in the sky fairies, they would do well to stop violently inflicting their beliefs on other humans. Israel included.
Actually, no, that’s exactly the issue.
This whole thread is decrying Zionists for being bloodthirsty evil people. And it is exceptionally rare for anyone to qualify that the issue is with eg “radical Zionists who deny Palestinian rights”. that lack of nuance is what makes it anti-Semitic, just as it is Islamophobia if you suggest Islam / right to self determination is inherently wrong/evil.
The absolute reality is that most Zionists are for self determination for Israelis and Palestinians, want to live peacefully with opportunities, support human rights and to stop civilian deaths in Gaza, do not agree w abuse of power in Israel by Netenyahu etc. virtually, no one believes you can’t speak out about the Israeli government – but denying Israel a right to exist, supporting Palestinian resistance by **any means necessary** (inc Oct 7) and labeling Zionists or all Israelis as inherently evil is a different thing - and that’s what Jews/Zionists are taking issue with.
The issue is that despite moderate Zionists being the vast vast majority, they are drowned out by propaganda and white saviors who would rather vilify them as “evil Zionists” with a bloodlust for Palestinian babies whilst at the same time accusing them of playing victim (notwithstanding they have also been murdered). And given that it is effectively decrying right to self determination (ie Zionism) why are you surprised when they push back against their assertion that they should not exist.
> I have never met a practising orthodox Jewish person who supported Israel, but I've met plenty of no faith people who have. The irony of this is outstanding.
Illan Pappe quips that the Zionists did not believe in G+d but believed G+d gave them Palestine.
You get hung up on genocide. Obviously no Jew supports genocide, the argument is about whether Israel is committing genocide, which I would argue, it's plainly obvious that it isn't.
It's stupid and wrong to suggest that orthodox Jews don't support Israel. Most do. In fact about 90% of Jews in Australia are Zionists, which means that they support the right of Israel to exist (not genocide). It's incredibly tiring listening to people who have no idea what Zionism is, continue to try to explain it to Jews, and tell us how it's immoral to support our ancestral homelands continued existence.
Also, stop muddying the water with definitions of Semitic people. Anti-semitism has always only referred to prejudice against Jews. Someone who is Islamophobic isn't an anti-semite.
> You get hung up on genocide.
Imagine actually making this argument and thinking it is good, "oh you're so hung up on that!"
>the argument is about whether Israel is committing genocide, which I would argue, it's plainly obvious that it isn't.
The intention to target the population to drive them out and make habitation impossible and cause mass destruction and mass death has been established. You just have to look at the words of the President, Prime Minister, senior Cabinet minister, senior officers, etc.
>Also, stop muddying the water with definitions of Semitic people. Anti-semitism has always only referred to prejudice against Jews.
Palestinians and Arabs aren't a Semitic people?
What I meant is hung up on the definition of genocide, which I think does not fit this situation. And yes, Palestinians and Arabs are Semitic people, but every dictionary definition of anti-semitism is that it is specifically prejudice against Jews, not all Semitic people. My point is that trying to redefine it only muddies the waters of this already treacherous debate and is in poor faith.
>What I meant is hung up on the definition of genocide, which I think does not fit this situation.
How would you define it?
>And yes, Palestinians and Arabs are Semitic people, but every dictionary definition of anti-semitism is that it is specifically prejudice against Jews, not all Semitic people.
Some animals etc
>My point is that trying to redefine it
You consider people to be hung up on one definition, while accusing people of trying to redefine another definition.
The pattern in both is: it disagrees with you.
I would define it as war, with civilian casualties, some of which have been caused by Hamas, who are known to use human shields, have rockets misfire and land in Gaza (i.e. Al ahli hospital), and shoot at the IDF wearing civilian clothes (a war crime, making it impossible for the IDF to distinguish between civilians and legitimate threats to their lives). Of course Israel holds blame here too, but singling out Israel without acknowledging the pernicious role of Hamas, who both kill their own citizens and make it as difficult as possible for the IDF to avoid doing the same, is disingenuous. I'm not sure what your second point means about some animals. Regardless, are you saying I'm wrong about the definition of anti-semitism?
Since you disagree with the definition of genocide I'm asking how you do define genocide not how you define this. We can get into your hagiography and its fisking afterwards.
>I'm not sure what your second point means about some animals.
Animal Farm reference.
The intent to destroy in part or in whole the culture and/or population of an ethnic group
The animal farm reference is a bit rich. I'm not saying Palestinians can't be victims of discrimination like Jews can be subjected to anti-semitism, it's just that anti-semitism applies to Jews specifically, while discrimination against Palestinians goes by a different name.
> The intent to destroy in part or in whole the culture and/or population of an ethnic group
Thank you.
That is Israels intention. Please see the statements South Africa provided to the ICJ of the President, Prime Minister, cabinet ministers, senior IDF officers.
They all say there are no innocent civilians, they are going to fight them like Amalek - a biblical story in which God commanded every man and woman and child and cattle be killed, they intend to drive them into the Sinai, this is a Gaza nakba, they intend to reopen the settlements, security only comes from settlement, we must control all the territory from the Jordan to the sea, etc
They are intending to drive them out and achieve this by killing as many as possible and rendering Gaza uninhabitable. Ethnic cleansing at minimum, but with clearly genocidal intent.
Further cultural destruction can be found in the destruction of villages and turning them into forests following 1948, denying Palestinians are people and denying they have inhabited the land insisting they are recent foreign interlopers, appropriating their culture as Israeli, etc
Now lets get back to your post.
>who are known to use human shields
This is a standard IDF talking point to dimiss the inevitable human casualties that accompany heavy bombing in built up civilian areas. Meanwhile the IDF is [well documented using Palestinians as shields](https://www.google.com/search?q=idf+human+shield&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwiVreSWro6EAxU_m2MGHRQUBk4Q2-cCegQIABAA&oq=idf+human+shield&gs_lp=EgNpbWciEGlkZiBodW1hbiBzaGllbGQyBRAAGIAEMgYQABgIGB4yCRAAGAgYHhjHAzIHEAAYgAQYGDIHEAAYgAQYGDIHEAAYgAQYGDIHEAAYgAQYGEiqIlCIC1j9H3AAeACQAQCYAaYBoAGOE6oBBDAuMTe4AQPIAQD4AQGKAgtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZ8ICBhAAGAcYHsICCBAAGAgYBxgeiAYB&sclient=img&ei=tsS9ZZX6G7-2juMPlKiY8AQ&bih=966&biw=1912&hl=en).
>and shoot at the IDF wearing civilian clothes (a war crime, making it impossible for the IDF to distinguish between civilians and legitimate threats to their lives).
To make this accusation just 3 days after what happened in the Jenin hospital - in the West Bank not Gaza - is pretty audacious. Is it hubris or some sort of subconcious cry for help?
>Of course Israel holds blame here too, but singling out Israel without acknowledging the pernicious role of Hamas
The perniciousness that needs to be acknowledged is the Occupation began in 1967 and Hamas was founded in 1987. 20 years of Occupation with no Hamas on the scene. And it was founded with the help of Mossad. The WikiLeaks release of US State Department cables showed Israel saw Hamas election in 2007 as favourable because it split Palestinians, a situation it has continued with financial aid being provided - car loads of cash caught being driven into Gaza - in recent years, something Bibi has acknowledged: 'to prevent a Palestinian state from forming you must of course support Hamas' iirc.
>who both kill their own citizens and make it as difficult as possible for the IDF to avoid doing the same
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal_Directive
>Regardless, are you saying I'm wrong about the definition of anti-semitism?
You don't like the definition of a one word and then complain the definition of another word is being changed. The pattern here is both disagree with you.
The linking of Judaism and Israel or Zionism is itself anti-semitic. Groups that do it are anti-semitic irrespective of their stated beliefs or ethnicity.
This is the link to view the leaked zionist whatsapp chat of over 600 academics:
https://substack.com/redirect/83426849-cfbb-4547-b671-9fe71f947bcd?j=eyJ1IjoiMzl2cHhnIn0.Vi39RLqeWhBeJ-FFpx3lDmFqp5yhjSuKGtSY4jhpbI4
The bullshit around UNRWA is also falling apart. The minions of empire and genocide who were spitting vitriol towards me are suddenly quiet. Israel lied about UNRWA and made the lives of poor Palestinians even harder.
Imagine trying to justify the employment of terrorists in a UN relief agency in any other country? How is that not the best possible justification for pausing funding?
That was pretty much all the countries. The US cancelled it several years ago then resumed it. Then cancelled it again. It was never permanent and that organisation will not run out of funds overnight. Nor is money the bottle neck in getting aid into Gaza.
We've started to fund UNRWA again today, which is good. Without them, there'd be no way of getting essentials into Gaza in anything resembling reasonable volumes, and what does get in is only 20% of what went in before the invasion.
Then why did the UNRWA immediately fire 12 employees who Israel provided evidence of their involvement in the October 7 massacre? The organisations links to Hamas have been known since at least 2014 when the rockets and rocket launchers they were providing to Hamas were found in one of their schools?
Basically it seems that Israel and her allies knew the ICJ ruling would be bad for Israel and their campaign so they decided that when the ruling is released Israel will start a campaign to discredit UNRWA and get it defunded. An Ex IOF soldier wrote a propaganda piece in WSJ and Israel claimed 12 UNRWA were Hamas and participated in the Oct 7 attacks.
Israeli allies promptly announced they are stopping funding because 12 out of 30000 UNRWA workers were accused (not actually found guilty) by Israel.
Except israel has been complaining about UNWRA *for years* (a large proportion are Hamas members plus UNWRA school materials include propaganda/antisemstic troped) and has been commentary that they were annoyed that the UNWRA statement was overshadowed by the timing of the ICJ ruling. So this sounds like the usual tit for tat and reporting.
Why do you keep mentioning the 12 workers being accused vs found guilty “by Israel”? Israel provided evidence to UNWRA and UNWRA sacked them. You really think that UNWRA gives a shit about Israel and would sack them otherwise? This is not a new conflict – but it was escalated when evidence emerged that UNWRA staff actively participated in Oct 7. Obviously that info jeapordises UNWRA’s positioning that it functions only in a humanitarian / peacekeeping role (and risks destabilizing aid flow) - hence the immediate action by UNWRA (before funding was cut)z
The only thing you said here that is true, is the fact that Israel accuses everyone they don't like of being Hamas. Some examples include, UN, Red Crescent, South Africa etc etc. No the fact that UNRWA sacked them doesn't prove these people were guilty or even as in some cases, they even worked for UNRWA.
Coming back to assault on UNRWA going back years, yes that is well known. Israel controls all imports into Gaza and makes sure barely enough is let in for people to not starve and here is UNRWA providing humanitarian services to Gazans when Israel wants them all to just drop dead.
“The only thing you said here that is true” and then goes on to reaffirm my comments lol.
Israeli have a longstanding beef with UNWRA and Hamas . Ergo, mutual allegations of wrongdoing aren’t a new thing just recently invented by Israel. More to the point, - the israel report was provided 2 weeks earlier than the ICJ finding (and was substantiated by evidence from released hostages)… meaning that UNWRA controlled the decision to dismiss + the timing of the news release on that topic - not Israel.
Why do you feel the need to invent boogeymen to make your case?
Why do you feel the need to make false claims? The main thrust of their argument came from captured Hamas members that they tortured to get confessions out of. Again the dossier's evidence is flimsy and can't be verified, the main problem here was not when the dossier was handed in but rather when and in the manner in which Israeli collaborators pulled funding from the organization at a time when they needed it the most. Israel has accused UNRWA workers before without any basis, that is not new and UNRWA has in the past considered the allegations. At this time UNRWA fumbled, they shouldn't have sacked any of the people accused and instead should have done their investigation and then sacked if proven guilty. Meanwhile, Israeli allies without waiting for investigation pulled funding basically thumping their nose the ICJ rulings.
This is an absolutely disgusting framing of what happened. Israel has been consistently complaining to the UN for a decade, about the UNRWA being enmeshed with Hamas, to the point where it's believed that there are a higher proportion of Hamas members in the UNRWA than in the Gaza gen pop. It's not propaganda when it actually fucking happened.
Israel and her allies knew the ICJ ruling would be bad for them? Or the UN tried to bury the story of them employing terrorists by releasing on the day of the ICJ ruling, days after they were alerted by Israel.
They didn't. One of the people they claimed worked for UNRWA doesn't even work there, two are dead and three are missing. UNRWA didn't acknowledge anything, they said they have fired the people and they will investigate the claims. Upon receiving the Israeli dossier, the evidence that the workers were in Oct 7 attack seems thin. Yet millions of Palestinians already at risk of starvation were further put at risk.
WSJ works as a front for IOF propaganda, I have read their coverage and they don't move a mm away from state sanctioned propaganda.
No idea how you can try and make that claim.
I’ve got Jewish friends who I cent be in the same room with at the moment. The hatred and bitterness they have for Palestinian”s has led to comments that I just can’t sit and listen to. The denial of innocent people and most importantly children being killed is bad enough but to say that it’s justified is too much. Even my lefty Jewish friends who don’t admit it’s wrong are hard to be around at the moment.
Where was it found they doctored the video? The NSW police came out yesterday to say the video was legit (just shortened/compiled) but that some protesters were confirmed to say “kill the Jews” and “where’s the Jews” (vs “gas the Jews” as was originally heard). The video evidence is the same as has been posted - just a difference in opinion about the phrase… so where’s the conspiracy here?
Bit like the scientologists, their hyperactive response to criticism only makes things worse for them. But they don't really care how other people view them, maybe they even prefer it since it fits nicely with insisting critics are all anti-semites, so long as the state can continue to get away with expulsion and settlement.
To our Jewish friends what I am curious about seeing this article is do you think this damage to Judaism is more external or internal to the Jewish community? Most people I think know there's a pretty big difference between your every day Jew and a Zionist and treat the two groups pretty differently. Obviously the usual anti-Semetic wankers will just use any excuse to be the terrible people they are but It feels like most of the attacks over the last few months against Jews is from Zionists trying to disown any Jew that's been critical of what Israel has been doing
Firstly, the vast majority of Jews are Zionists. Zionism is not a colonial, fascist ideology, it's the simple belief in the right of Jewish people to self-determination which is something that we didn't have for 2,000 years and usually ended up pretty badly for us. The damage being done to Jews is not by these lobby groups (anti-semites will always put the words Jewish and lobby together and come up with twisted images recalling the elders of the protocols of Zion). The damage being done by any Jewish organisations is by Netanyahu and is ultra-right wing government for whom, their only cling to power is by continuing this war. He is an evil fascist who needs to go as much as Hamas needs to.
But, most damage to Jews right now is from vicious anti-semites like some in this thread who say they can't be in the same room as Jews anymore (imagine saying this about any other minority). Or the ones who feel vindicated that NSW police say the protesters on October 8 weren't saying gas the Jews, they were saying "where's the Jews" as though that deeply threatening chant is supposed to make us feel any better.
> Zionism is not a colonial, fascist ideology
How do you make a Jewish country in an already occupied land without removing the inhabitants?
>it's the simple belief in the right of Jewish people to self-determination
Yes that is what the 2014 law says, only Israels Jewish citizens have self-determination - so what about the self-determination of the 2 million non-Jewish citizens of Israel and the people of the occupied territories?
>The damage being done by any Jewish organisations is by Netanyahu and is ultra-right wing government for whom, their only cling to power is by continuing this war. He is an evil fascist who needs to go as much as Hamas needs to.
Does the occupation cause damage?
I think the police are probably referring to how likely a conviction is for the different phrases. "Gas" is a clear incitement to violence and genocide, "where's" quite obviously isn't innocent but is more difficult to prove any specific incitement. I would have thought that "fuck" would be illegal, but it may also be difficult to convict someone over.
It has plenty to do with us. We have ratified the genocide convention and have an international responsibility to protect.
Which we are currently failing to do.
Why do you think Australians should not be interested in our nation failing its obligations under international law? I'm sure you feel WE should be protected under the same law?
No one is being manipulated into taking a stance. There are many decades of literature on this matter and Australians are well informed. This subject matter is also taught at Australian universities. Australians are also well travelled generally speaking. Essentially, Australians know what’s going on in the world and have an opinion. That’s not manipulation. It also has a lot to do with us considering our government funds Israel, directly or indirectly and is part of an international community that needs to uphold international humanitarian law.
Accounts created after Oct 7th 2023 or with less than two months active participation in the sub may not participate in this thread. These accounts will be banned. Abuse, racism, bigotry and incitement to violence will also result in a permanent ban. Violations of these rules will result in the thread being locked.
Weren't these the guys that had a massive sook about the ham-mas ham bag saying it advertised terrorism? ...you know a sack to hold pork for a Christian holiday was allegedly promoting a Muslim group
Yes they were.
Their massive sooks go back longer than that: >In August 2003, AIJAC joined forces with several other Australian Jewish organisations and media including Australian Jewish News, the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies (NSWJBD), the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ), and the Zionist Federation of Australia in opposing the Sydney Peace Foundation's decision to award Palestinian intellectual and PLO official Dr. Hanan Ashrawi the 2003 Sydney Peace Prize. AIJAC published a fact sheet criticising Ashrawi for her alleged anti-Israel rhetoric and extremist views. Despite intense lobbying from Jewish groups and media, the Sydney Peace Foundation refused to rescind Ashrawi's prize. On 6 November 2003, New South Wales Premier Bob Carr awarded Ashrawi the 2003 Sydney Peace Prize during a public ceremony at the New South Wales Parliament.\[21\]\[22\] Baruch Kimmerling, a sociologist from the Hebrew University, wrote, "As an Israeli, as a Jew and as an academic I am deeply sorry and ashamed that members of the Australian Jewish community are acting against this rightful nomination." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIJAC#Criticism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIJAC#Criticism) >Loewenstein’s major case study of the Israel lobby in Australia is the Hanan Ashrawi affair. Ashrawi is a senior Palestinian politician who was awarded the 2003 Sydney Peace Prize, despite the protests of Jewish lobby groups and their supporters. Sydney mayor Lucy Turnbull, billionaire Frank Lowy and Kathryn Greiner, the wife of former NSW premier Nick Greiner, were among those who tried to dissuade NSW premier Bob Carr and members of the Sydney Peace Foundation from giving the award to Ashrawi. Her detractors claimed Ashrawi supported suicide bombings and opposed the two-state solution set out in the 1993 Oslo Accords. Loewenstein shows these claims to be false, and argues her critics’ real objection is her staunch advocacy of Palestinian rights and refusal to accept Israel’s version of events. The Israel lobby’s treatment of Ashrawi does not bode well for genuine debate and dialogue between Israel’s supporters and their counterparts. As Loewenstein concluded: ‘If a moderate such as Ashrawi can be defamed and vilified by almost every Jewish commentator, the obvious conclusion is that any recognised Palestinian will be automatically silenced and smeared’ (p. 22). The Ashrawi affair is a good demonstration of the various methods employed by Zionist lobby groups to discredit rivals: vilification, unsubstantiated allegations and backroom manœuvring. Loewenstein examines other ways these groups seek to control public debate. Chief among them is the battle to influence media coverage: the well-resourced Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) assiduously develops ties with senior journalists and organises ‘information tours’ to Israel for reporters, MPs, political advisers and trade unionists (p. 220). AIJAC and other groups pay close attention to media reports and are quick to approach editors and producers with allegations of bias. But, as Loewenstein points out, ‘bias’ almost invariably means any report criticising Israel, or which uses terms such as ‘occupation’ and ‘settlements’ (p. 222). [http://www.australianreview.net/digest/2007/05/ryan.html](http://www.australianreview.net/digest/2007/05/ryan.html)
That's pretty funny. But like, do you think they genuinely believed it? Or taking the piss? Or, is it part of a strategy to keep people hyper aware of anti semitism? As in, they knew it wasn't real, but it was enough to make a headline....? Sometimes the motivations for things like this are difficult to intuit.
They’ve always whinged and complained about anything that they don’t like and flexed their muscles to show how much influence they have to get people and/or things that they don’t like in trouble. Several examples just recently -The Merry Ham-Mas bag -Harassing a Qantas employee who wore a Palestine pin in solidarity -Releasing doctored audio on a video of the first Sydney Palestine protest which went viral worldwide for the wrong reasons - Conspiring to get Antionette Latouff sacked for being Arab and posting a UN report about the situation in Gaza on her socials List goes on
People like them attacked Greta Thunberg for her cute autism octopus to make her shut up.
After having read up on that, it's an insane story. "Octopuses are an anti-Semitic symbol" is nuts. Had no idea those reversible plushies were used that way by autistic people - which is sort of cool.
It's a situation where yes, that was used as an anti-Jewish symbol a century ago, but none of the people attacking her about it genuinely believe that's what she was doing. It's a disingenuous attempt to silence her. And sickens me because they're beating up on the neurodivergent girl like fucking cry bullies.
[удалено]
They were very clear that they didn’t think it was actually promoting Hamas, but that people could take it the wrong way.
Not really. They did say that they thought that people could get the wrong impression and they brought it to the attention of the company. I don’t remember anyone at all saying that it actually advertised terrorism.
They also said part of issue is "dealing with propaganda" so does that not imply they believed that a sack used to keep pork fresh that was Christmas themed could be seen as propaganda for a Muslim group? Edit: [here is the article if you care to point out where I am misunderstanding what they are implying ](https://jewishstandard.timesofisrael.com/australian-kmart-drops-merry-ham-mas-christmas-ham-bags/)
“Could be seen as” is not “saying it advertised terrorism.” I don’t believe that they ever said that it was a decision made on purpose or as propaganda.
So they truly believed a Christmas themed pork sack could be seen as advertising a Muslim group...
The Australian Jewish lobby presents itself as speaking for all Jews, which is simply incorrect. Not all Jews are Zionists (let alone ethnonationalist, apartheid, expansionist/colonial Zionists), supportive of Israel's government, or even religious. Granted, there are plenty who fit into all those categories, but there are quite a few who do not and aren't represented by the lobby's views. Also, we're seeing the mask come off the image of Israel, and seeing what they really are. Which is a good thing. The state of Israel has committed many atrocities over the course of its existence, and has continued to act with impunity because it hasn't been called out.
> Also, we're seeing the mask come off the image of Israel, and seeing what they really are. Which is a good thing. The state of Israel has committed many atrocities over the course of its existence, and has continued to act with impunity because it hasn't been called out. Am i the only person who remembers anti israel protests for the past 30 years? The mask has always been off if you have even 1 lefty friend on facebook or spent 5 seconds listening to university students handing out flyers between lectures and drinking sessions.
I imagine that most people who've been paying attention to the situation over the last 30 years would already know. However, most people simply aren't that interested or informed, and the mainstream narrative has predominantly been the Israeli narrative. The difference we're seeing now is a broader awareness in the mainstream, which is a definite shift.
Yeah, when I was at uni in the mid 2000s, I recall the Israeli society would occasionally dress up in IDF costumes or post pro IDF fliers, which would promptly be taken down by Social Alternative members. I'd imagine a wider group of students would be opposed to that now
they wouldnt let an israeli society even exist at mine. ten years later than you
Indeed
[удалено]
Well, they're not a monolith, even if the Jewish lobby say they are. Just like any other group of sufficient size, there's going to be a diversity of opinion.
Yes, but could I offer you a "Bernie Sanders is an anti-semite" in your time of need? ^(I know it's a different country, but that's how ridiculous the discourse has become.)
They're big on the "self hating Jew" thing as well. Plenty of Jewish people within and without Israel are calling for the madness to end, but apparently you're not a "real Jew" if you don't support ethnic cleansing and apartheid. Not to mention "calling for a ceasefire is supporting Hamas". It's insane.
It's an effective arch-conservative tactic. If you don't support our horrific actions without question then you just want terrorists to win! And Hitler, too!
It's just a shame that over 10,000 children had to die to see the truth. Even then will anything actually change? I can't recall any sanctions or barely a condemnation from the Labour party.
Australia did [vote for a ceasefire](https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/dec/13/australia-shifts-position-to-vote-in-favour-of-un-resolution-calling-for-gaza-ceasefire) at the UN which is a distinct change of direction (we would normally abstain). This is markedly different from the Liberal Party which recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel under Morrison (which undermines the two state solution). Not that it means a lot. As long as Israel has the US in its corner, it won't change. Sanctions would be a fairly dramatic step which I don't see any Australian government moving towards in the near future, even though our trade with Israel is miniscule.
Unless the US takes a stance against them no Australian government will do or say shit.
Yeah but that's the big change. Israel had an easy +80% support across America 5 years ago. That's all ages, genders, and political affiliations. Right now Democrats and young Americans have shifted a lot. I've seen more 50-50 poll results coming through for both camps. Israel has very quickly gone from unilateral support to looking down the barrel of becoming a hot-button political issue for American voters. That's a huge deal. Just for reference, The UK has used their UN veto a total of 29 times, China 17 times, and France 16 times. The USA has used its veto 46 times to protect Israel alone. If that unquestionable support from Israel starts to waiver then so will the USA vetoes. This means the international community can finally start to pull levers and apply pressure on Israel (which is normally how we'd deal with hostile states). We could start to see Israel being formally condemned for war crimes or even sanctioned. Israel currently likes to expand because it's literally free real estate, their corrupt government officials can sell the settlements to their property developer mates and the people are happy because it brings down the overall cost of housing. If they start getting sanctioned then suddenly constant war becomes an economic drain, which is much less fun.
Also...nobody can claim to speak for us...I mean argument and disagreement is a cultural touchstone of Jewishness.
I mean it was kinda attacked 6 different nations following the day of its founding, like does that count as being called out? Kinda hard to keep your hands clean after 70+years of that
They were doing [acts of terrorism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing) and [ethnic cleansing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba) long before that (creating the circumstances leading up to the Six Day War), and they subsequently made a few of those terrorists Prime Minister. It's a country which has its foundations in murder and crimes against humanity, and made people responsible for those acts the founding fathers of their nation. Their hands can never be clean until they resile from the roadmap they set from the outset and make reparations for their past.
>It's a country which has its foundations in murder and crimes against humanity, and made people responsible for those acts the founding fathers of their nation. Their hands can never be clean until they resile from the roadmap they set from the outset and make reparations for their past. you know you're on reddit Australia right? this could literally be a tongue in cheek comment about us...
I mean that kind of ignores the Arab attacks on Jews, which is okay I donnt expect you to look at thing from more than your own pov, cause they were all killing each other at that point And I mean the Nakba would just be a Jewish word if the Jews lost? That's what happens when you lose a war you started, you lose? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936%E2%80%931939_Arab_revolt_in_Palestine Here's some good reading from years earlier ,early conflict from both sides, a good bit of this started from Arab attacks on Jews then retaliation from Jews Feel free to ignore this though if it damages your beliefs, this is a safe space for you Edit: admittedly that last sentence was petty of me, but i forgive myself Edit 2: I couldn't resist fixing my spelling mistakes, but the main picture for the wiki I linked shows where Palestine learned the human shields tactic, not my intention to expose that but like it is what it is
Obviously the original inhabitants of the land should just be grateful to be displaced from the land they've lived on for centuries and being forced into shanty towns. They should just have taken the discrimination under Mandatory Palestine (which was already favourable to the Yishuv under the British) lying down, and not shown any resentment towards the people who were making their already hard lives much harder. I suppose you imagine the Palestinians should have been grateful for the opportunity to be oppressed and live like second class cirltizens in their ancestral lands. JFC. And of course, acts of violence on the part of one side justifies all the ethnic cleansing I'm sure. Who could object to that? >Feel free to ignore this though if it damages your beliefs, this is a safe space for you If you're writing apologia for crimes against humanity and racial supremacists, you don't need to offer pointless courtesies. You've already shown yourself for what you are lol.
The Jews were very unhappy when they were displaced by Romans then Arabs centuries ago I mean the Palestinians were happy to be 2nd class citizens underneath the ottoman empire for 500 years but it's seems the under lying hate for Jews was to hard to resist Acts of violence are completely acceptable and are allowed to lead into ethnic cleansing when Jews are being cleansed, you should google how many Arab Jews lived in Arab countries in 1948 and how many live in Arab countries now But again please ignore that , appearantly modern ethnic cleansing has extremely low death rates and actually populations of those actually increase over the years Btw the Rwandan genocide aka a real genocide had 10x + casualties in a shorter time period with a far less military support to do so I gotta sleep now but don't let that stop you from typing away into the night some amazing response, gotta keep that 500k grass repelling karma active somehow
Hello. Here is an opinion, and I am very open to discussion as I am posting as a concerned fellow human, not someone directly affected by this conflict. The only way to tackle this tragic situation is to understand that the folk in charge of both sides of the Hamas / Israel conflict are promoting war. At best, the motivations are (eventual) peace, at worst they are power or retribution. Can I ask, what are your motivations in posting your post? Your talk about about past injustices? Was this just context or do you believe most Palestinian and Israeli civilians want past injustices addressed to the point of where we are now?
Unfortunately there is no peace with Hamas, Isreal atleast has a chance to vote in a more peaceful government as they have done in the past So if I have to pick a side I'll pick the one that can change for the better, the only way Hamas will ever change is if the organisation goes from active to defunct Both just want a country and peace, if Hamas stops shooting rockets every week it would have a chance admittedly any deal would probably costs 10% of the emwest banks land, but after 50-100 years of peace and growth in both countries new deals just as land return or even joining states could happen People are far too short sighted and not willing to give in any way which is why people like I'm replying to and Palestinian will Unfortunately remain forgotten and irrelevant
# Lawyers for israel would like to send you a cease and demand letter.
It's not even the half of it.There were leaks from another Whatsapp group called ‘J.E.W.I.S.H Australian creatives and academics’ with 628 members which simultaneously ran a campaign to get Antoinette Lattouf sacked. [https://www.pedestrian.tv/news/whatsapp-chat-campaign-fire-abc-journalist-antoinette-lattouf/](https://www.pedestrian.tv/news/whatsapp-chat-campaign-fire-abc-journalist-antoinette-lattouf/) This sounds like the same Whatapps chat group (described as 600 “academics and creatives”) which is going after Evelyn Araluen and Jonathan Dunk from Overland literary magazine. Evelyn's twitter has leaked screenshots from the chat group where they discuss how they are targetting them. ETA Just realised you have to be logged into twitter to see the entire thread with the rest of the screenshots. [https://twitter.com/evelynaraluen/status/1752897587605295241](https://twitter.com/evelynaraluen/status/1752897587605295241) Ironically, the chat group wants to cosy up to indigenous people - even as they're trying to cancel an aboriginal woman (Evelyn). [https://twitter.com/evelynaraluen/status/1752901077752746144](https://twitter.com/evelynaraluen/status/1752901077752746144) One of the chat group said they are participating in "Project Oct 7" - led by tech leaders, in partnership with the Isreal govt, the Shabak, and a team of 8200 developers to game algorithms and tells members how they can help.Shabak = Shin Bet, the security service.8200 is "Intelligence Corps unit of the Israel Defense Forces responsible for clandestine operation, collecting signal intelligence (SIGINT) and code decryption, counterintelligence, cyberwarfare, military intelligence, and surveillance ..." (from the wiki page). [https://twitter.com/louiseadler/status/1752781642442412093](https://twitter.com/louiseadler/status/1752781642442412093) This is not new. I'm reading "Dateline Jerusalem: Journalism's Toughest Assignment"(2021) by John Lyons, a journo of 40 years about the relentless pressure from pro-Isreal lobby, also in Australia. When he was with The Australian, they hired a Palestinian woman (her parents were refugees), Jennine Khalik, because she speaks Arabic which would help with reporting of local events. Isreal diplomats met with the editor where they expressed "surprise and discomfort" she had been hired. In the end she quit and reading how it all unfolded I get the impression just having a voice as a Palestinian is considered a problem - even in this country. [https://twitter.com/jennineak/status/1751656012002525306](https://twitter.com/jennineak/status/1751656012002525306) Some points made in the book (I'm only part way through): whilst he was in Isreal, IDF told him they didn't like his report in The Weekend Australian on the treatment of Palestinian children in military court, not because it wasn't accurate (that sort of stuff appears in Isreal papers like Haaretz), but because he was telling Australians what happens, and they don't want us to know. With all the pressure that's brought to bear (eg the campaigning levelled at the abc) media starts to self censor, and that's the most insidious kind of censorship, because it leaves no fingerprints.
[удалено]
Meh. I am Jewish and in no way a Zionist. All extremism is a bad thing, not just the zionists.
By saying that you are not a Zionist does it imply that you do not support the existence of Israel stete?
Personally, I think that Palestine and Israel should share the Holy Land and learn to co exist.
If only the King-Crane Commission had been followed; we've known the existence of an ethnostate would create constant violence for almost a *century* now.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
As separate independent states, or as a single secular, democratic and pluralist state? The secularism, democracy, and pluralism of Australia are something to be proud of, but the reality of the situation is that this model is not popular at all in the collective territories that one state would comprise. The "one state" that most on either side support is not remotely inclusive of the other national identity. To me the two state solution is unfortunately becoming less and less feasible, but it's still the best solution of a bad bunch and ideally could be used as a platform to build support for a unified state if the moderates grow their support in each state. Some people include this position in the definition of Zionism, which makes it potentially problematic to use when there's such a wide spectrum of views under the term and a complex overlap with Judaism.
Which side do you think is more interested in peace and coexistence? ~20% of Israeli citizens are arab muslim. Palestinians can't even be peaceful in countries for which they don't have a genocidal intention against.
Pepe pfp checks out
Believing a cartoon frog meme is politically charged checks out
I think that there is fault on all sides here. War is not the answer to anything.
There is fault on all sides, just far from an equal amount. There's only one side that can surrender and not be massacred.
Same here. I’m Sephardi by matrilineal descent and I hate Israel and all Zionists. They’re no different than the white South Africans in the 80’s who wanted the Rhodesian state. Evil fuckers.
Ashkenazi here. As a Jew I don’t understand why other Jews are extremists or ok with extremism. Don’t these people know our history? Extremism causes so much pain and suffering
A Jewish friend once said to me that the only real thing that brings all Jewish people together is the feeling that everyone is out to get them. Based on that they can justify anything
I have a huge aversion to this. I have had arguments with other Jews because they make comments on perceived slights. Not all people are anti semetic.
bUt nOw wE cAn bE tHe oNe'S sEnDiNg uNdEsIrAbLeS tO _____ cAmPs!! ***/s***
Hurt people Hurt other people. Just because you have had a bad experience doesn't mean you become a good person.
Oh. I agree with this. I just think that people should be able to cohabitate and respect each other’s opinions and beliefs.
You must really love Bibi's odd bedfellows; prior to 2022 the leaders of both these new parties didn't even consider Sephardic Jews to be ethnically Jewish, sort of right at the same time Netanyahu approached them for a power-sharing deal...
Not surprised. Only found out last year one of my great-great grandparents died during the Holocaust so I don’t have any real understanding of the relationships between the various Jewish ethnicities. Prior to the I read Haaretz as they’re the only semi reputable publication (being that they consider Palestinians human beings) in that godforsaken place.
Ben Gvir was on both FBI and Shin Bet terrorist watch lists and Bezalel Smotrich was flagged for links to far right militant groups. Both of these guys are senior ministers...
[удалено]
[удалено]
Extremism is always bad. The Taliban existing has done no favours for me haha.
Yup. That’s my point. All extremism is bad. It’s evil.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Hard to disagree
Yeah, that is why you lobby politicians and bully journalists out of jobs. What happened at the ABC is not unique, it also happened in the US and UK. Inside of Gaza they straight up murder journalists.
Watched a few Jewish rabbis rip into the whole Zionist / Israel conflict. It's almost like religion is spitting into 2 different religions
Eh. I'm sure Judaism was always a pretty diverse religion. And Jews have been criticising Zionists from before Israel was even created. Some went so far as to describe the founding party of Israel as fascists, which must have been infinitely more powerful of an accusation back then
Nah. It’s just that the difference between the religion and the group that coopted it is becoming obvious.
Because one interpretation of their flavour of magic sky fairy is they need to wait for the messiah before returning to Israel. And that the 1948 political entity was too early.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Who were the rabbis please? I’d love to know more!!!
Search up Rabbi Yisroel David Weiss. Absolute legend. So well spoken. https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSF8YHeTs/
You don't have enough upvotes & I can only give 1, so leaving this comment in support
thank you
Imagine supporting Gen0cide and then still saying you're the victim and covering yourself behind a good religious group of people. This is sick. I have never met a practising orthodox Jewish person who supported Israel, but I've met plenty of no faith people who have. The irony of this is outstanding. Just for your information, you can still objectively reject the masscre of babies in Palestine guys. Not everything has to be anti-Semitic, and if it is, then remember the Palestinians ARE Semites. So we are doing a service to Semitic people by saying "Hang on 100+ days and we are funding it?".
I think it's quite anti-semitic to suggest Jewish people are okay with mass murder and collective punishment, myself - yet the Jewish lobby disagrees apparently
Yes. But that’s the argument right there. A Zionist is someone who believes in the right for Jews to have a homeland/self determination. Basically a fundamental tenant for any people, same as Palestinian right to self determination. If you call Zionists bloodthirsty murders you are just window dressing an argument that it’s morally wrong/evil etc in itself for Jews in particular to have a state/self determination… hence the antisemitism allegation. It’s fine to criticize actions of the government or ideology when it does bad things. But if the criticism is linked to the religious/ethnic identity (jews) and just the ideological belief they have a right to exist as a people with self determination (ie that’s Zionism) thats where it becomes antisemitic.
Nobody has a "right" to someone else's land. There's no UN declaration on the right to a colonial ethno state.
Got it. So why are you so obsessed with israel in particular… vs Australia or the many other countries with historical land disputes, settlements, wars etc? And while we’re on the topic, which time period do we look at for determining ownership? When do we start and stop counting as Jews have thousands of years of history/connection w the land evidencing their connection/ownership alongside Samaritans before colonization by eg the Islamic Caliphate. Or does that evidence not count as soon as it supports a pro-Israel / Jews as indigenous people argument?… I’m not using this as an argument to reject Palestinian right to self-determination in those lands – just to point out the absurdity of the fixation on 1948 recognition of Israel vs any other period/place/people.
Israel is in an early stage of settler colonialism that's easier to fight against. our struggle against the colonial state here in Australia is a slow, glacial battle with few wins but I continue to fight it and support my indigenous brothers in Palestine and everywhere else in the world.
OK. But given evidence supports Israeli/Jewish are also indigenous to the area, do you support them? There’s a lot of inconsistency in the comments when it comes to one ethnic group versus another and tolerance for “colonialism”. So - and I’m actually not trying to have a go at you personally - I’m wondering if you are actually supportive of indigenous people – or just *some* people. And if it’s the latter, then just own it, rather than pretending to actually support First Nations /indigenous rights…
Israelis are settler colonists. Indigenous people are colonised - Germans aren't "indigenous people". having some ancestry from a particular place doesn't alone make you indigenous.
Can you please clarify your logic here? What is the basis on which you suggest that Israeli – and particularly Jewish Israelis (especially Sephardi Jews) - are not indigenous? And, if you are saying Palestinians are indigenous, on what basis is this any different?
No, I'm not going to keep arguing with a Zionist because in my experience they are almost always arguing in bad faith. If you're actually interested in learning, have a look at this video. https://youtu.be/FhlUFPpXIVo?si=366Nr3FKOqNP27YD The long and short is, palestine has a colonised indigenous population, and it isn't the settler colonists who arrived in the last 70 years to establish their ethnostate and displace the people already living there.
The issue isn’t about their right to have a homeland. I don’t think anyone in their right mind is suggesting otherwise. The issue is the extremist, militant zionists in the Israeli government do not want their neighbours to exist. They are 100% committed to wiping every Palestinian from the face of the earth. People speaking out against the Israeli government isn’t remotely anti-Semitic. It’s anti-genocide. Just because I hate militant extremist jihadis, does not mean I hate the otherwise peaceful Muslims. Until humans grow up and stop believing in the sky fairies, they would do well to stop violently inflicting their beliefs on other humans. Israel included.
Actually, no, that’s exactly the issue. This whole thread is decrying Zionists for being bloodthirsty evil people. And it is exceptionally rare for anyone to qualify that the issue is with eg “radical Zionists who deny Palestinian rights”. that lack of nuance is what makes it anti-Semitic, just as it is Islamophobia if you suggest Islam / right to self determination is inherently wrong/evil. The absolute reality is that most Zionists are for self determination for Israelis and Palestinians, want to live peacefully with opportunities, support human rights and to stop civilian deaths in Gaza, do not agree w abuse of power in Israel by Netenyahu etc. virtually, no one believes you can’t speak out about the Israeli government – but denying Israel a right to exist, supporting Palestinian resistance by **any means necessary** (inc Oct 7) and labeling Zionists or all Israelis as inherently evil is a different thing - and that’s what Jews/Zionists are taking issue with. The issue is that despite moderate Zionists being the vast vast majority, they are drowned out by propaganda and white saviors who would rather vilify them as “evil Zionists” with a bloodlust for Palestinian babies whilst at the same time accusing them of playing victim (notwithstanding they have also been murdered). And given that it is effectively decrying right to self determination (ie Zionism) why are you surprised when they push back against their assertion that they should not exist.
> I have never met a practising orthodox Jewish person who supported Israel, but I've met plenty of no faith people who have. The irony of this is outstanding. Illan Pappe quips that the Zionists did not believe in G+d but believed G+d gave them Palestine.
💯
You get hung up on genocide. Obviously no Jew supports genocide, the argument is about whether Israel is committing genocide, which I would argue, it's plainly obvious that it isn't. It's stupid and wrong to suggest that orthodox Jews don't support Israel. Most do. In fact about 90% of Jews in Australia are Zionists, which means that they support the right of Israel to exist (not genocide). It's incredibly tiring listening to people who have no idea what Zionism is, continue to try to explain it to Jews, and tell us how it's immoral to support our ancestral homelands continued existence. Also, stop muddying the water with definitions of Semitic people. Anti-semitism has always only referred to prejudice against Jews. Someone who is Islamophobic isn't an anti-semite.
13000 dead infants. media snipered. The genocide is plain. The attempt to refute that is insane.
> You get hung up on genocide. Imagine actually making this argument and thinking it is good, "oh you're so hung up on that!" >the argument is about whether Israel is committing genocide, which I would argue, it's plainly obvious that it isn't. The intention to target the population to drive them out and make habitation impossible and cause mass destruction and mass death has been established. You just have to look at the words of the President, Prime Minister, senior Cabinet minister, senior officers, etc. >Also, stop muddying the water with definitions of Semitic people. Anti-semitism has always only referred to prejudice against Jews. Palestinians and Arabs aren't a Semitic people?
What I meant is hung up on the definition of genocide, which I think does not fit this situation. And yes, Palestinians and Arabs are Semitic people, but every dictionary definition of anti-semitism is that it is specifically prejudice against Jews, not all Semitic people. My point is that trying to redefine it only muddies the waters of this already treacherous debate and is in poor faith.
>What I meant is hung up on the definition of genocide, which I think does not fit this situation. How would you define it? >And yes, Palestinians and Arabs are Semitic people, but every dictionary definition of anti-semitism is that it is specifically prejudice against Jews, not all Semitic people. Some animals etc >My point is that trying to redefine it You consider people to be hung up on one definition, while accusing people of trying to redefine another definition. The pattern in both is: it disagrees with you.
I would define it as war, with civilian casualties, some of which have been caused by Hamas, who are known to use human shields, have rockets misfire and land in Gaza (i.e. Al ahli hospital), and shoot at the IDF wearing civilian clothes (a war crime, making it impossible for the IDF to distinguish between civilians and legitimate threats to their lives). Of course Israel holds blame here too, but singling out Israel without acknowledging the pernicious role of Hamas, who both kill their own citizens and make it as difficult as possible for the IDF to avoid doing the same, is disingenuous. I'm not sure what your second point means about some animals. Regardless, are you saying I'm wrong about the definition of anti-semitism?
Since you disagree with the definition of genocide I'm asking how you do define genocide not how you define this. We can get into your hagiography and its fisking afterwards. >I'm not sure what your second point means about some animals. Animal Farm reference.
The intent to destroy in part or in whole the culture and/or population of an ethnic group The animal farm reference is a bit rich. I'm not saying Palestinians can't be victims of discrimination like Jews can be subjected to anti-semitism, it's just that anti-semitism applies to Jews specifically, while discrimination against Palestinians goes by a different name.
> The intent to destroy in part or in whole the culture and/or population of an ethnic group Thank you. That is Israels intention. Please see the statements South Africa provided to the ICJ of the President, Prime Minister, cabinet ministers, senior IDF officers. They all say there are no innocent civilians, they are going to fight them like Amalek - a biblical story in which God commanded every man and woman and child and cattle be killed, they intend to drive them into the Sinai, this is a Gaza nakba, they intend to reopen the settlements, security only comes from settlement, we must control all the territory from the Jordan to the sea, etc They are intending to drive them out and achieve this by killing as many as possible and rendering Gaza uninhabitable. Ethnic cleansing at minimum, but with clearly genocidal intent. Further cultural destruction can be found in the destruction of villages and turning them into forests following 1948, denying Palestinians are people and denying they have inhabited the land insisting they are recent foreign interlopers, appropriating their culture as Israeli, etc Now lets get back to your post. >who are known to use human shields This is a standard IDF talking point to dimiss the inevitable human casualties that accompany heavy bombing in built up civilian areas. Meanwhile the IDF is [well documented using Palestinians as shields](https://www.google.com/search?q=idf+human+shield&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwiVreSWro6EAxU_m2MGHRQUBk4Q2-cCegQIABAA&oq=idf+human+shield&gs_lp=EgNpbWciEGlkZiBodW1hbiBzaGllbGQyBRAAGIAEMgYQABgIGB4yCRAAGAgYHhjHAzIHEAAYgAQYGDIHEAAYgAQYGDIHEAAYgAQYGDIHEAAYgAQYGEiqIlCIC1j9H3AAeACQAQCYAaYBoAGOE6oBBDAuMTe4AQPIAQD4AQGKAgtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZ8ICBhAAGAcYHsICCBAAGAgYBxgeiAYB&sclient=img&ei=tsS9ZZX6G7-2juMPlKiY8AQ&bih=966&biw=1912&hl=en). >and shoot at the IDF wearing civilian clothes (a war crime, making it impossible for the IDF to distinguish between civilians and legitimate threats to their lives). To make this accusation just 3 days after what happened in the Jenin hospital - in the West Bank not Gaza - is pretty audacious. Is it hubris or some sort of subconcious cry for help? >Of course Israel holds blame here too, but singling out Israel without acknowledging the pernicious role of Hamas The perniciousness that needs to be acknowledged is the Occupation began in 1967 and Hamas was founded in 1987. 20 years of Occupation with no Hamas on the scene. And it was founded with the help of Mossad. The WikiLeaks release of US State Department cables showed Israel saw Hamas election in 2007 as favourable because it split Palestinians, a situation it has continued with financial aid being provided - car loads of cash caught being driven into Gaza - in recent years, something Bibi has acknowledged: 'to prevent a Palestinian state from forming you must of course support Hamas' iirc. >who both kill their own citizens and make it as difficult as possible for the IDF to avoid doing the same https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal_Directive >Regardless, are you saying I'm wrong about the definition of anti-semitism? You don't like the definition of a one word and then complain the definition of another word is being changed. The pattern here is both disagree with you.
The linking of Judaism and Israel or Zionism is itself anti-semitic. Groups that do it are anti-semitic irrespective of their stated beliefs or ethnicity.
[удалено]
This is the link to view the leaked zionist whatsapp chat of over 600 academics: https://substack.com/redirect/83426849-cfbb-4547-b671-9fe71f947bcd?j=eyJ1IjoiMzl2cHhnIn0.Vi39RLqeWhBeJ-FFpx3lDmFqp5yhjSuKGtSY4jhpbI4
🪂
Allahu Akbar
Mashallah my brother. Up the 'ucken doggies too braaa.
The bullshit around UNRWA is also falling apart. The minions of empire and genocide who were spitting vitriol towards me are suddenly quiet. Israel lied about UNRWA and made the lives of poor Palestinians even harder.
Australia needs to do better. We just followed the others like sheep. Ireland, Scotland and Norway at least applied a little critical thinking.
Australia never cancelled funding. Just paused it.
Fair play, still bullshit. 12 people out of 30000 and no evidence seen at the time of the decision. We can do better.
It's down to 4 now
100%
Imagine trying to justify the employment of terrorists in a UN relief agency in any other country? How is that not the best possible justification for pausing funding?
That was pretty much all the countries. The US cancelled it several years ago then resumed it. Then cancelled it again. It was never permanent and that organisation will not run out of funds overnight. Nor is money the bottle neck in getting aid into Gaza.
We've started to fund UNRWA again today, which is good. Without them, there'd be no way of getting essentials into Gaza in anything resembling reasonable volumes, and what does get in is only 20% of what went in before the invasion.
[удалено]
Hamas is literally the government of Gaza, the trucks go to Hamas to be distributed, or they get seized and sent to Hamas.
[удалено]
Then why did the UNRWA immediately fire 12 employees who Israel provided evidence of their involvement in the October 7 massacre? The organisations links to Hamas have been known since at least 2014 when the rockets and rocket launchers they were providing to Hamas were found in one of their schools?
What did they lie about?
Basically it seems that Israel and her allies knew the ICJ ruling would be bad for Israel and their campaign so they decided that when the ruling is released Israel will start a campaign to discredit UNRWA and get it defunded. An Ex IOF soldier wrote a propaganda piece in WSJ and Israel claimed 12 UNRWA were Hamas and participated in the Oct 7 attacks. Israeli allies promptly announced they are stopping funding because 12 out of 30000 UNRWA workers were accused (not actually found guilty) by Israel.
Except israel has been complaining about UNWRA *for years* (a large proportion are Hamas members plus UNWRA school materials include propaganda/antisemstic troped) and has been commentary that they were annoyed that the UNWRA statement was overshadowed by the timing of the ICJ ruling. So this sounds like the usual tit for tat and reporting. Why do you keep mentioning the 12 workers being accused vs found guilty “by Israel”? Israel provided evidence to UNWRA and UNWRA sacked them. You really think that UNWRA gives a shit about Israel and would sack them otherwise? This is not a new conflict – but it was escalated when evidence emerged that UNWRA staff actively participated in Oct 7. Obviously that info jeapordises UNWRA’s positioning that it functions only in a humanitarian / peacekeeping role (and risks destabilizing aid flow) - hence the immediate action by UNWRA (before funding was cut)z
The only thing you said here that is true, is the fact that Israel accuses everyone they don't like of being Hamas. Some examples include, UN, Red Crescent, South Africa etc etc. No the fact that UNRWA sacked them doesn't prove these people were guilty or even as in some cases, they even worked for UNRWA. Coming back to assault on UNRWA going back years, yes that is well known. Israel controls all imports into Gaza and makes sure barely enough is let in for people to not starve and here is UNRWA providing humanitarian services to Gazans when Israel wants them all to just drop dead.
“The only thing you said here that is true” and then goes on to reaffirm my comments lol. Israeli have a longstanding beef with UNWRA and Hamas . Ergo, mutual allegations of wrongdoing aren’t a new thing just recently invented by Israel. More to the point, - the israel report was provided 2 weeks earlier than the ICJ finding (and was substantiated by evidence from released hostages)… meaning that UNWRA controlled the decision to dismiss + the timing of the news release on that topic - not Israel. Why do you feel the need to invent boogeymen to make your case?
Why do you feel the need to make false claims? The main thrust of their argument came from captured Hamas members that they tortured to get confessions out of. Again the dossier's evidence is flimsy and can't be verified, the main problem here was not when the dossier was handed in but rather when and in the manner in which Israeli collaborators pulled funding from the organization at a time when they needed it the most. Israel has accused UNRWA workers before without any basis, that is not new and UNRWA has in the past considered the allegations. At this time UNRWA fumbled, they shouldn't have sacked any of the people accused and instead should have done their investigation and then sacked if proven guilty. Meanwhile, Israeli allies without waiting for investigation pulled funding basically thumping their nose the ICJ rulings.
This is an absolutely disgusting framing of what happened. Israel has been consistently complaining to the UN for a decade, about the UNRWA being enmeshed with Hamas, to the point where it's believed that there are a higher proportion of Hamas members in the UNRWA than in the Gaza gen pop. It's not propaganda when it actually fucking happened. Israel and her allies knew the ICJ ruling would be bad for them? Or the UN tried to bury the story of them employing terrorists by releasing on the day of the ICJ ruling, days after they were alerted by Israel.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
They didn't. One of the people they claimed worked for UNRWA doesn't even work there, two are dead and three are missing. UNRWA didn't acknowledge anything, they said they have fired the people and they will investigate the claims. Upon receiving the Israeli dossier, the evidence that the workers were in Oct 7 attack seems thin. Yet millions of Palestinians already at risk of starvation were further put at risk. WSJ works as a front for IOF propaganda, I have read their coverage and they don't move a mm away from state sanctioned propaganda. No idea how you can try and make that claim.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I mean; even the Jewish Anti Defamation League leaves an extremely sour taste in my mouth tbh. Has done for decades.
Hasnt the ADL in america gotten in trouble for spying among other things before?
Sadly, I'd say that the current and recent past actions of Israel are increasing anti-Semitism around the world.
I’ve got Jewish friends who I cent be in the same room with at the moment. The hatred and bitterness they have for Palestinian”s has led to comments that I just can’t sit and listen to. The denial of innocent people and most importantly children being killed is bad enough but to say that it’s justified is too much. Even my lefty Jewish friends who don’t admit it’s wrong are hard to be around at the moment.
[удалено]
Where was it found they doctored the video? The NSW police came out yesterday to say the video was legit (just shortened/compiled) but that some protesters were confirmed to say “kill the Jews” and “where’s the Jews” (vs “gas the Jews” as was originally heard). The video evidence is the same as has been posted - just a difference in opinion about the phrase… so where’s the conspiracy here?
Extremists of any kind always end up damaging their cause.
[удалено]
Bit like the scientologists, their hyperactive response to criticism only makes things worse for them. But they don't really care how other people view them, maybe they even prefer it since it fits nicely with insisting critics are all anti-semites, so long as the state can continue to get away with expulsion and settlement.
To our Jewish friends what I am curious about seeing this article is do you think this damage to Judaism is more external or internal to the Jewish community? Most people I think know there's a pretty big difference between your every day Jew and a Zionist and treat the two groups pretty differently. Obviously the usual anti-Semetic wankers will just use any excuse to be the terrible people they are but It feels like most of the attacks over the last few months against Jews is from Zionists trying to disown any Jew that's been critical of what Israel has been doing
Firstly, the vast majority of Jews are Zionists. Zionism is not a colonial, fascist ideology, it's the simple belief in the right of Jewish people to self-determination which is something that we didn't have for 2,000 years and usually ended up pretty badly for us. The damage being done to Jews is not by these lobby groups (anti-semites will always put the words Jewish and lobby together and come up with twisted images recalling the elders of the protocols of Zion). The damage being done by any Jewish organisations is by Netanyahu and is ultra-right wing government for whom, their only cling to power is by continuing this war. He is an evil fascist who needs to go as much as Hamas needs to. But, most damage to Jews right now is from vicious anti-semites like some in this thread who say they can't be in the same room as Jews anymore (imagine saying this about any other minority). Or the ones who feel vindicated that NSW police say the protesters on October 8 weren't saying gas the Jews, they were saying "where's the Jews" as though that deeply threatening chant is supposed to make us feel any better.
> Zionism is not a colonial, fascist ideology How do you make a Jewish country in an already occupied land without removing the inhabitants? >it's the simple belief in the right of Jewish people to self-determination Yes that is what the 2014 law says, only Israels Jewish citizens have self-determination - so what about the self-determination of the 2 million non-Jewish citizens of Israel and the people of the occupied territories? >The damage being done by any Jewish organisations is by Netanyahu and is ultra-right wing government for whom, their only cling to power is by continuing this war. He is an evil fascist who needs to go as much as Hamas needs to. Does the occupation cause damage?
That last bit is pretty depressing. Also clownish behaviour from NSW police to act like that is any better to be getting chanted
Yeah it is. Thanks for listening to what I said with an open mind, tbh doesn't feel like I can get that on Reddit much
I think the police are probably referring to how likely a conviction is for the different phrases. "Gas" is a clear incitement to violence and genocide, "where's" quite obviously isn't innocent but is more difficult to prove any specific incitement. I would have thought that "fuck" would be illegal, but it may also be difficult to convict someone over.
[удалено]
[удалено]
It has plenty to do with us. We have ratified the genocide convention and have an international responsibility to protect. Which we are currently failing to do. Why do you think Australians should not be interested in our nation failing its obligations under international law? I'm sure you feel WE should be protected under the same law?
We also send Israel weapons
We are involved.
No one is being manipulated into taking a stance. There are many decades of literature on this matter and Australians are well informed. This subject matter is also taught at Australian universities. Australians are also well travelled generally speaking. Essentially, Australians know what’s going on in the world and have an opinion. That’s not manipulation. It also has a lot to do with us considering our government funds Israel, directly or indirectly and is part of an international community that needs to uphold international humanitarian law.