Open for exploits and surveillance
This wouldn't have happened if Biden wasn't distracted with enabling Israel's genocide.
5
Reservist eulogized for desire to take revenge against Gazans, setting home on fire to ‘boost morale’
(www.timesofisrael.com)
Harris hasn't come out in disagreement with Biden's policy over the last year.
Who does Blinken work for?
Yes it is, and it is also enabling a genocide. Denying it won't change the reality of it.
This comment being remove I didn't expect... I guess the NYT is misinformation now, or people would rather not know "why is this race so close"?
Grey is for girls living in urban areas and red is for girls living in rural areas
English is confusing. Thanks.
Hamas’ actions cannot be moral for they killed civilians which Israel is now doing and rightfully getting pushback for.
Hamas' actions are moral. Indigenous people have the right to resist settler colonialism and ethnic cleansing. Settlers have no right to use their people as human shields. If Russia was sending people to settle the territories it occupied from Ukraine you would have supported the Ukrainians fighting them back with any means necessary. Russians wouldn't be able claim that the settlers are innocent civilians.
Hamas actions are not justified as they have not reacted to civilian deaths but only to the death of their commander/leader.
Hamas has been serious about ceasefire negotiations from the beginning of the conflict. Israel wants to use this conflict to justify the 2nd Nakba they wanted to do for years.
Hamas actions’ legality is moot as their morality is questionable at best.
It is not moot, it is very relevant. Per international law people living under a military occupation have the right to resist even violently. The vast majority of people Hamas killed were military, it was Israel's Hannibal Directive that lead to most of the civilian deaths.
If they did not kill civilians on oct 7 then most of the deaths in Gaza since Oct 7 would have never happened.
If Israel hasn't illegally occupied Palestinian territories since 1967 Hamas wouldn't have come to be. The root of all evil here is the colonialism and occupation of Palestine, not the resistance. Israel has used settlers as human shields since its founding. You are blaming the victim for resisting and blaming them for the genocidal response from the aggressors.
Hamas willing to drop their weapons and surrender is just a political move designed to trick people into thinking they care about Gaza or it’s civilians. Nobody would be willing to bet that Netanyahu would accept their surrender.
The Arab Peace Initiative was from 2002. In 2006 Ismail Haniyeh sent a message to George W Bush telling him of Hamas' willingness to negotiate and accept a 2-state solution on 1967 borders. Both were rejected. The Likud Party has a policy since the 1970s of not allowing or recognizing any Palestinian state. When your oppressor refuses peace and continues the blockade and ethnic cleansing, you are morally obligated to resist even if violently.
Addressing #1 & #2: The legality/morality of Israel’s action in Gaza since Oct 7 is not a complement of the actions of Hamas. There is no justification for killing Israeli civilians on oct 7.
There is justifications for resisting settler colonialism, military occupation and ethnic cleansing, which Israelis are all participants in.
Israelis forced themselves on Palestine through sheer brutality committing massacres, rape and ethnic cleansing since its founding. They will leave the way they came. I really don't care if you accept it or not. International law is clear and Zionist settler colonialism is the root of all evil in this conflict and what Palestinians do as a response is moral, legal and justified. Meanwhile what you may have been misled to believe is of no relevance. Colonized people don't need permission from their colonizers nor from the nations that enable their colonization on how to resist.
The following quote tells you everything about how Israel was founded and why Palestinians are justified to fight until the end:
[It is the] iron law of every colonizing movement, a law which knows of no exceptions, a law which existed in all times and under all circumstances. If you wish to colonize a land in which people are already living, you must provide a garrison on your behalf. Or else – or else, give up your colonization, for without an armed force which will render physically impossible any attempts to destroy or prevent this colonization, colonization is impossible, not “difficult”, not “dangerous” but IMPOSSIBLE! … Zionism is a colonizing adventure and therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force. It is important to build, it is important to speak Hebrew, but, unfortunately, it is even more important to be able to shoot – or else I am through with playing at colonialization.
-- As quoted by Lenni Brenner, in The Iron Wall: Zionist Revisionism from Jabotinsky to Shamir (1984), where the quotation is cited as being from "The Iron Law" copied from https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ze%27ev_Jabotinsky
The Iron Wall Essay here: https://en.jabotinsky.org/media/9747/the-iron-wall.pdf by the same Zionist monster quoted above makes it clear that at least since 1923, Zionist settlers did not want peace and only wanted to dominate Palestinians through force.
view more: next ›
They did manage to replace most of them with local analogues though. I wish it was the same in the Middle East, instead US and western brands are over represented. I don't necessarily want it to be imposed on us, Russia was forcefully cut off, but I would appreciate if Western brands were less dominant and I do encourage boycotting them.