#Israeli palestinian peace treaties

[capricorn-0mnikorn]

While it's true that much of the current criticism of Israel is antisemitic...

it still feels like gaslighting when people insist that any criticism of the Israeli Government's current actions is antisemitic.

[All links are to Wikipedia articles]

Especially when I am old enough to remember watching coverage of The Camp David Accords, on the evening news ... and also sitting with a Jewish teacher* in my school cafeteria over lunch as he talked about how the Zionists don't speak for all Jewish people.

And then, watching on the evening news, a few years later, about the assassination of Anwar Sadat, by an extremist member of his own army, because, in part, he had signed those Camp David Accords.

I also remember the Oslo Accords, and how Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was also assassinated by an ultranationalist student specifically because he had signed that peace agreement.

This war has deep and long roots. But so does the struggle for peace. On all sides, we've gotten close to peace (however imperfect) only for those extremists in support of religious ethnostates (on both sides) to sabotage that peace struggle.

*(Not to be: "I can't be antisemitic, because I've had Jewish friends," but rather: "I've come upon some of my opinions through face-to-face conversations with people I care about, and not through just outrage-farming headlines."

[agentfascinateur]

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by LPC (@landpalestine)

Besides, Netanyahu's people killed her grandfather...

[soon-palestine]

Israeli cabinet just declared to remove the Palestinian Authority from any governance power in east Bethlehem and southeast Jerusalem.

This is the first official move its kind since the Olso agreements as these areas constitute “Area B”.

Israel is preparing to bring what it did in Gaza to the West Bank, except rather than the military murdering us it is likely the deranged settlers that were strategically armed with new weapons in the last six months.

It’s been years in the making. The last two years we witnessed unprecedented settlement expansion and illegal outposts across the West Banks area B locations.

Please google what Area A, B, C mean. Stretch your brain a bit, it’ll also give you perspective on the labyrinthine ways settlers work in annexation. It’s not just bombs and bullets, it’s also in negotiations and treaties designed not for peace but for future conquest.

They’re strategic, but still psychopaths.

[zvaigzdelasas]

Egypt has warned that it could suspend its peace treaty with Israel if the Israeli military enters Rafah in southern Gaza, or if Palestinian refugees are forced toward the Sinai Peninsula, The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.

Israeli ground troops are planning to storm Rafah, the Gaza Strip’s last major urban centre, which has not yet seen an Israeli incursion. Dozens have already been killed there in airstrikes.[...]

Egyptian officials have informed their Israeli counterparts through Western intermediaries that any attempt to push Palestinians into the Sinai "would effectively suspend" the 1979 peace treaty, The Wall Street Journal cited a senior Western diplomat as saying.

The developments come as reports emerge of Egypt working to increase the height of the concrete border wall with Gaza and install barbed wire in a bid to deter any Palestinians from attempting to cross into the Sinai.

Israeli officials have also been considering bolstering the wall by installing a 'smart border' between the Gaza Strip and Egypt, a plan which was quickly rebuffed by the Egyptians.

Egypt was the first Arab state to normalise ties with Israel, despite widespread opposition from the Egyptian public.

10 Feb 24

[lizardsfromspace]

I'm not actually sure what Very Online types think should happen in Palestine and I don't think they're sure either bc what is this

We shouldn't praise a teenager resisting the draft too hard bc. Bc...? I struggle to even parse what's being said here. It's guff about how "the bar is really this low" and then a reminder of how "we are seeing what is happening to Palestinians...and this is what people are uplifting?" but like. What does that mean though

They want Israeli oppression of Palestine to cease, but we can't be happy that a teenager refused to join in that oppression? So what should we do. Should we not encourage teens to resist the draft in a country with mandatory military service, heavy propaganda, and that has organized society to heavily stigmatize resisting military service? No, genuinely, what do they want people to do? We need the occupation to end, but also can't support anyone who's fighting for that to happen, since uhhh is the bar really this low??? Would it have been better if he joined the IDF

(do people not know Israel has mandatory military service? I've seen people agreeing with this by saying "refusing to join is the bare minimum, deciding to enlist is horrific". But they're not enlisting, it's conscription. Do they think this person enlisted then withdrew or something...? And why would that not be worth celebrating???)

The answer is ofc this person hasn't really thought about any of this. It's just raging id and an idea that engaging in online discourse is what's truly helpful. It's like the people who treated Hozier as if he was some pro-genocide goon for saying there needs to be "peace" in a statement far more condemnatory than most, since...I still don't know. "How can you talk about peace when one side's oppressing the other?" Well ending that is what peace is, definitionally speaking. How else will it end but with a treaty

The scenario here seems to be, we need the genocide and occupation to end. But also we can't support any Israelis trying to stop it, and should be sus of activism in general. Also we can't talk about "peace" in any way. We just need to post about how it should happen

Anyway when people pointed this out they instantly locked replies and said the "kumbaya libs found it 💔"

It reminds me of those people who swarm any story about Russian anti-war activists by saying it doesn't matter unless they personally assassinate Putin. Like cool. I guess people in the oppressor state should just do nothing to oppose it then if they can't fix anything. Screaming at someone who refuses to join the military that it's actually very problematic that they aren't joining in the oppression, when there's so much oppression to oppose instead of praising them for refusing to join the oppression

[capybaracorn]

Satellite photos show Egypt building Gaza buffer zone as Rafah push looms

Despite its opposition to displacement of Palestinians, Cairo appears to be preparing for a scenario forced by Israel.

A satellite image shows the construction of a wall along the Egypt-Gaza border near Rafah on February 15, 2024 [Maxar Technologies/Handout via Reuters]

Egypt is building a fortified buffer zone near its border with the Gaza Strip as fears mount of an imminent Israeli ground invasion of the southern city of Rafah, which could displace hundreds of thousands of Palestinians across the frontier, according to satellite images and media reports.

Footage from the site in the Sinai desert and satellite photos show that an area that could offer basic shelter to tens of thousands of Palestinians is being constructed with concrete walls being set up on the Egyptian side of the Rafah crossing, the only non-Israeli-controlled crossing to and from Gaza.

The new compound is part of contingency plans if large numbers of Palestinians manage to cross into Egypt and could accommodate more than 100,000 people, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday, citing Egyptian officials.

It is surrounded by concrete walls and far from any Egyptian settlements. Large numbers of tents have been delivered to the site, the report said.

Videos taken by the United Kingdom-based Sinai Foundation for Human Rights show trucks and bulldozers clearing debris from a plot of land of about 8sq miles (21sq km), according to The Washington Post, which obtained satellite images that show 2sq miles (5sq km) was cleared between February 6 and Wednesday.

Mohamed Abdelfadil Shousha, the governor of North Sinai, the Egyptian governorate that borders Gaza and Israel, has reportedly denied that Egypt is building a refugee camp along the border in case of an exodus by Palestinians forced by the Israeli military.

The Sinai Foundation, an activist organisation that has a monitoring team in northern Sinai, said in a report this week that the gated area will be surrounded by 7-metre-high (23ft-high) cement walls.

Israel has said it wants to take over the Philadelphi Corridor, the fortified border area between Gaza and Egypt, to secure it. Egypt has threatened that this would jeopardise the peace treaty the two countries signed four decades ago.

Cairo has emphasised that it does not want Palestinians to be displaced from their land by Israel, comparing such a scenario to the 1948 Nakba, the forced displacement of about 750,000 Palestinians from their homes in the war that led to Israel’s creation.

Tel Aviv’s insistence on going ahead with its planned attack on Rafah despite international pressure has been unshaken even though the area is where 1.4 million Palestinians are living, the vast majority of whom have been forcibly displaced – some multiple times – by Israeli bombardments and ground operations.

Palestinians displaced to Rafah are suffering from a lack of sufficient shelter, food, water and medicine, and the United Nations and human rights groups have warned that the humanitarian disaster in the besieged enclave is rapidly worsening.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ordered the army to work on a plan of evacuation for more than half of the 2.3 million people of the Gaza Strip who are now crammed into Rafah, but has provided no detailed steps.

He has suggested Palestinians could be sent to areas north of Rafah that the Israeli military has already cleared through a ground invasion backed by bombings.

Avi Dichter, Israel’s minister of agriculture and rural development, has suggested areas west of Rafah and the bombed al-Mawasi refugee camp near the Mediterranean coast, where many are already sheltering.

A satellite image shows new construction and earth grading along the Egypt-Gaza border near Rafah on February 10, 2024 [Maxar Technologies/Handout via Reuters]

The United States and a number of other key allies of Israel have said they oppose a ground assault on Rafah, some warning it would be “catastrophic”.

US President Joe Biden “has been clear that we do not support the forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza”, the Reuters news agency quoted a US Department of State spokesperson as saying on Friday. “The US is not funding camps in Egypt for displaced Palestinians.”

Israel on Wednesday pulled out of US- and Arab-mediated talks with Hamas because it said the Palestinian armed group has had “ludicrous demands” that have included Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza.

Netanyahu and the Israeli war cabinet have continued to push for “total victory” with the prime minister calling Rafah the “last bastion” of Hamas.

For weeks, the fiercest fighting in the Gaza Strip has been taking place in Khan Younis, also located in southern Gaza, with the Israeli military claiming its attacks are aimed at destroying Hamas battalions in the area.

Using shelling, sniper fire and drones, the Israeli army has also for weeks been laying siege to Nasser Hospital, the largest medical facility in the area, which has hundreds of patients and staff and has been a shelter for thousands of displaced Palestinians.

Dr Nahed Abu Taima, the hospital’s director, told Al Jazeera on Friday that Israeli forces were rounding up patients and civilians and had cut off electricity to the medical complex.

“We stand helpless, unable to provide any form of medical assistance to the patients inside the hospital or the victims flooding into the hospital every single minute,” he said.

Israel’s attacks on Gaza have killed at least 28,775 Palestinians and wounded 68,552 since October 7, according to the Ministry of Health in Gaza. Several thousand more are missing, presumably buried under rubble.

[slyandthefamilybook]

they're not dismissed because they live in "the bad country" they're dismissed because any solution they might pose, for the vast majority of them at least, will fundamentally involve preserving the state apparatus of israel, which is an inherently oppressive force. the two state solution is not justice. don't twist this into a call for the murder of the israeli population. that is explicitly not the goal. it is a demand to dismantle the fucking government system of a settler state that has spent 75 years committing genocide. if your leftism was worth anything you would believe that israel should be abolished. if you don't, your allyship is shallow and will only lead to electing people who will still do genocide, but with better pr so you can go back to ignoring it. if you really give a shit, genuinely ask yourself if the solution you have in mind would actually stop the genocide of Palestinian people, or if it would just slow it down a little, and answer the question honestly. if you can't do that, fuck off

HA

I predicted this. I saved this to my drafts 3 days ago

here's that response

there are a lot of people who seem to think that peace would be bad because it would involve Palestinians cooperating with the Israeli government. They believe the government should be spurned at every moment. Any action taken by the Israeli government is inherently one-sided and therefore it's categorically impossible to reach an agreement that's mutually beneficial and respects the dignity and autonomy of Palestinians

I hear this a lot in discussion of the UN Partition Plans. "Oh, so you want victims of violence to just roll over for their oppressors? You can't just steal someone's land and then offer it back to them!" To which my response is always "this is better?". Can you honestly look me in the eye and say that whatever lopsided colonial apartheid agreement you're imagining would've been made in 1948 would've been worse than the situation we have now?

It displays a really limited understanding of how geopolitics works. Countries aren't just a government and a set of borders. A country is also a people and a mechanism through which that people can interact with other peoples. You can't just point at a country and say "they're doing bad things, we should get rid of them". That's how America has functioned for the past 150 years and I thought we all decided that was bad. Dismantling a country doesn't solve your problems, it just creates new ones. "Burn it all down and start over" won't bring back the dead. It won't honor their deaths or make them any more worthwhile

Every time Hamas attacks Israel, Israel gets stronger. The right thrives off of conflict. It's why they don't want to give people free healthcare. When people suffer, it strengthens their positions. Every time Israel is attacked it generates more support for the military, in the people and in the Knesset. The IDF gets more soldiers, more rifles, more tanks. It drives the Overton Window further to the right. The Israeli government starts borrowing more money from the US, starts getting sent more foreign aid, further entrenching their economic dependency. The only reason Netanyahu has stayed in power for so long is because Israel keeps getting attacked. Israel gets hundreds of millions in military aid from the US, a country that has made killing people a science. You're not going to defeat them in open battle. People have been trying for 75 years with no success

I dislike the Israeli state as much as I dislike every state (which is a not-insignificant amount). But I also understand that states are massive webs of economy, policy, international trade, and agreements and treaties. If every member of the Israeli government stepped down tomorrow with no plan, the country would be thrown into chaos and millions would die. You can't say you want to destroy the apparatus of a country that is currently at war, while also claiming you want its citizens to be safe. That's not how that works. You claim that the majority of Israeli leftists want a two-state solution (something I don't believe I've ever said I support), but if that the case you don't have to throw your weight behind those people! There are also leftists who want anarchism, and a no-state solution. There's a vast diversity of thought and pretending that there isn't doesn't help anyone

I notice that in your decrial of people who are actually trying to help, you don't offer an alternative solution. You say you want to dismantle the Israeli state, but how do you plan to do that? I assume from your tone that you're not yourself Israeli, so how do you plan to affect change? You can pressure whoever is the leader of your country to stop sending aid to Israel, but Israel has a domestic economy as well. The worst you'll do is send them into a depression. And if you are somehow successful in cutting of Israel at the windpipe, what will you do when people begin to starve? When people are kicked to the curb because they lost their job? Will you be proud of yourself for sending 9.5 million people into a humanitarian crisis? Does your plan to end suffering involve making other people suffer instead?

We live in a statist world. As much as you or I dislike it, that's the reality we have. You can aspire to a better system, you can set your sights on a world in which there are no states, no governments, no militaries, and no borders. But you can't work within that framework before it's applicable. You can't eat raw cookie dough because you want it to eventually become a cookie. Liberalism won't save us, but it might stop the bleeding

[matan4il]

Daily update post:

Today, the IDF is beginning its internal investigation into the failure to prevent the Hamas massacre on Oct 7. The investigation will check the way the army handled all relevant aspects, covering the period of 2018 until Oct 10, 2023. The investigation is operative in nature, it's not meant to single out and punish the guilty (there will likely be a separate investigation for that later, after the war), it'll be more focused on understanding mistakes that were made, in order to prevent them from occurring again.

It's kind of ironic, how quick westerners are to accuse Israel of genociding Arabs, meanwhile Arab countries (even ones that say similar things) are still looking to collaborate with Israel. In its peace treaty with Jordan, Israel agreed to supply its eastern Arab neighbor with an annual amount of water, but has in reality implemented a deal, where it supplies Jordan with twice the amount it's obligated to. Now, Jordan is asking Israel to extend this water deal by at least another year. Jordan has been one of the more hostile Arab countries when it comes to Israel since the start of the war in Gaza (which is no surprise, since it's the Arab country with the most substantial Palestinian population). Jordan has even gone so far as to back up South Africa in its ICJ case blaming Israel of committing genocide. If Jordan really believed that Israel seeks to genocide Arabs, would this Arab kingdom really be asking the Jewish state to supply it with water? Would it allow itself to depend on Israel for its water supply? Would it be able to say, "please extend this water deal," showing it has in the past trusted Israel with its water supply, and has gotten exactly what it was asking for? Israel is asking Jordan in return to tone down its anti-Israel rhetoric.

There are reports coming out of Russia, that today, an ISIS cell was stopped before committing a terrorist attack against a local synagogue in Moscow.

In the Netherlands, anti-Israel activists have demanded the arrest of the Israeli president when he arrives in the country for a state visit. I have to point out two things. First, the president's role in Israel is mainly a ceremonial one, he has almost no executive power (the most meaningful action he can take, is in pardoning, or refusing to pardon, prisoners). Second, there are Hamas seniors living in and traveling to Europe freely. People who are leading the genocidal, antisemitic Islamist terrorist organization which committed the Oct 7 atrocities are free to come and go as they please, while Israeli officials, even ceremonial ones, have to be worried about their freedoms. This is a twisted reality we are living in.

This:

vs this:

Remember how many countries froze their UNRWA funding, after info started coming out that its employees had participated in the Hamas massacre, and how many of them have ties to Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist organizations? Turns out that this only froze about half of UNRWA's annual budget, that quietly some of these countries have begun trickling money back to UNRWA, and that Canada is about to unfreeze its funding for this UN agency. Ask Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau where is the body of Yonatan Samerano, kidnapped by an UNRWA member. Ask him where are our hostages, and how many of them are still held captive because of UNRWA's complicity. Ask him how many Canadian citizens murdered or otherwise harmed on Oct 7 or since, were targeted by an UNRWA member, or because of the pro-terrorist education UNRWA supplies. Ask him how will he say "Never again" on the next Holocaust Remembrance Day with a straight face.

This is 19 years old Naama Levi.

On Oct 7, the second vid that Twitter pushed at me, was the one in which she was seen, being dragged by her hair out of the back of a Jeep, her hands cuffed, and her sweatpants soaked with blood. Not the last pair of bloodied pants or skirt or dress I've seen from that day, but the first, and the biggest shock. Naama is still in Hamas captivity. This is her mother, speaking about this ordeal:

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[boreal-sea]

The conflict isn’t really between Israel and Palestine. It’s not even really between Israel and Hamas. The conflict is between Israel and the surrounding Arab states who were against Israel’s formation for multiple reasons.

Firstly, these states are antisemitic. Places like Iran have not been welcoming to Jews. Ignoring the incredible level of hate for Jews in the region means you’re not going to understand what’s going on.

But secondly, they opposed Israel because it is a foothold of Western power in the Middle East. I think if you’re not aware of this larger political friction you’re going to misinterpret a lot of what has happened over the past 70 years. There is a reason the USA is such a staunch ally of Israel. It’s political.

And that’s where Hamas comes in. Hamas does not fund itself. Where do you think they are getting the thousands of rockets they’ve fired into Israel? Where do their leaders hang out? Hint: it’s not Palestine. Hamas is funded and armed by countries like Iran, Qatar and Turkey. Iran also funds Hezbollah. Countries like Iran know it’s a bad idea to declare outright war on Israel, even though that’s what they want. So they use Hamas instead.

And that’s what makes this conflict look one-sided, makes it look like it’s the overwhelming military power of Israel against a small rebel group.

But that’s not the actual situation.

Hamas was founded by Palestinians, but it is being used by Iran and others as a political tool. These other countries do not actually care about Palestinians: they care about torturing Israelis, ands keeping the region unstable. These countries don’t allow Palestinian refugees. They don’t particularly like Palestinians. They do not care about the fate of Palestine except to use it as a political tool. A treaty between Palestine and Israel would be a terrible blow against these other countries, so they are invested in preventing that peace.

Now. I don’t like how Israel was founded. I don’t think the Nakba was justified. I fully support the Palestinian right to form. I don’t like Israel’s current actions in Gaza. I want them to stop. I want them to find real peace with Palestine. I want the illegal settlements to stop. I want Netanyahu out of power. I want everyone there to be free and safe.

And if you also want peace, you need to stop treating Hamas like they’re freedom fighters. They’re not. They are funded and armed by people who do not want peace, who have political reasons to keep Palestine and Israel at war. Hamas brutally oppresses the people of Gaza - their own people - and they are violently antisemitic. Nothing they have done is justified.

[probablyasocialecologist]

Hamas appears to have three goals corresponding to the short, medium and long term. In the short term, Hamas appears to have taken over 150 Israelis captive, and reports suggest around three quarters of those are military or security personnel. These hostages, Hamas hopes, will act as a shield against Israeli counterattacks and a bargaining chip to be traded for some of the thousands of Palestinian political prisoners in Israeli jails and in the ongoing neverending negotiations over the blockade on Gaza. In the medium term Hamas hopes to intervene politically in Israel, both domestically and within its surrounding network of relations with Arab states. Netanyahu’s bluster has correctly been judged to be lying on shaky foundations – his civil power grab has deeply polarised Zionist opinion both within Israel and internationally, and his alliance with far right provocateurs has not been universally welcomed. In fact that alliance may well become untenable now that Israel has suffered serious military losses while its troops were off chaperoning a bunch of fascist goons. There are echoes here of the 2006 attack on Lebanon when Israel found to its cost that soldiers accustomed to brutalising teenagers in the West Bank were less impressive when up against a rooted, disciplined and equipped resistance militia. Moreover, part of Netanyahu’s domestic political appeal within Israel is the promise of the so-called Abraham Accords, treaties normalising diplomatic and trade relations with the Israeli state signed so far by UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan – but not, as yet, Saudi Arabia. This process had already been overshadowed by China’s surprise intervention earlier this year in brokering a treaty between Saudi and Iran to end the war in Yemen. And the reactions of the Gulf states have been noticeably cooler towards Israel than one might have expected. These peace treaties, for what they are worth, now seem dead in the water. But it’s the third long-term goal of Hamas’s intervention that is the most important. The ongoing and seemingly neverending humiliation of the Palestinians at the hands of Israel has been responded to. Hamas statements at the outset of the conflict, relayed on Al-Jazeera English (which has been invaluable – no wonder Israeli snipers murdered Al-Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh last year), emphasised that this was a general call for Palestinian resistance, and invited other groups and factions to join. This echoes Hamas’s earlier, much smaller, rocket attack on Israel in May 2021, which came in response to Israeli police outrages at the Al-Aqsa Mosque. As with this time, Israel was caught off guard when Hamas retaliated: its assumption had been that al-Aqsa was not in Gaza, therefore Hamas would not strike back. What we saw that year, flickering briefly, was a three-pronged Palestinian resistance movement comprising Hamas in Gaza (which has an overwhelmingly Sunni Muslim population), assorted militant groups in the West Bank, as well as Palestinians within Israel’s borders itself, who organised and delivered a one-day general strike. These glimmers of a new Palestinian resistance movement come as the old order, represented by Fatah and Mahmoud Abbas are despised, discredited and in their senescence. They have at best proved impotent at protecting Palestinians in the West Bank and at worst actively collaborated with the Israeli occupation. A new Palestinian resistance movement will need a new leadership, and Hamas are positioning themselves at the head of that.

[edenfenixblogs]

Heads up that the following post discusses the poster photographed at this link. The link shows an antisemitic poster (this post will discuss why and how it is antisemitic as well as why everything about it is done in bad faith from a shady organization that should not be trusted).

You do not need to click the link to understand the content of this post, but you can choose to do so for context.

TRIGGER WARNINGS FOR THE POSTER:

Child death, child endangerment, starvation, war zones, body horror, graphic imagery

Link: https://www.tumblr.com/edenfenixblogs/750494095702704128/trigger-warnings-child-death-starvation-war

Ok, let’s get into it.

Part 1: Why Is It Antisemitic?

1. It starts by putting Jews on the defensive

This poster instantly puts any Jew who takes issue with the phrasing or rhetoric on this poster as a lying villain falsely accusing good people of bigotry in order to support a genocide. What about people who disagree with Israel’s bombardment of Palestine, but who also think this poster is antisemitic? Where will they be heard? How will their concerns be addressed?

2. It only addresses the needs of non-Jews

The goal to disarm people in a conflict is a good one! Why is it only Israel that must be disarmed when Israel is also receiving incoming bombs on a daily basis? Is that peace? Or is that a call for one side to be murdered? How does this address the stochastic threat that Jews outside of Israel are facing?

3. It offers no solutions for peace

After Israel is disarmed, what is the goal for the Israeli people and state? How will Israelis be protected? Should they have any protection? How will the defend against bombs from Hamas and Lebanon? What treaties will be negotiated to enable peace? How will antisemitic extremists be deradicalized? What policy-based or judicial systems or safeguards will be put in place to guarantee safety for both Palestinians and Israelis? Taking weapons away from one side of an armed conflict doesn’t create peace. It creates an unarmed target. I am a pacifist and against all war. But I am also against taking weapons away solely from the side that popular OR unpopular opinion deems “wrong.” Stopping destruction in Palestine—especially on the scale in which it is occurring—is vital. But that alone does not ensure peace or even encourage peace. All it does is disarm people. Peace is a negotiated state of existence not a lack of weaponry.

4. It mispells antisemitism

I am not inclined to believe that a person or organization who cannot spell antisemitism has a clear or complete understanding of what antisemitism entails or how it expresses itself in society.

Part 2: Source Evaluation (TL;DR: Abject failure across the board)

1. Not on charity navigator

Taxpayers for peace does not appear on charity navigator at all. I must question whether or not it is in fact a charity or simply a lobby. I also have no way of assessing the companies funding, spending, or transparency—because they do not provide information on the website.

2. No funding information on the website itself

I touched on this in the above bullet point. But it is really important in this conflict to know exactly where the money you give is going and where an organization is getting most of its money from. Hamas got its start from the charities associated with the terrorist organization, The Muslim Brotherhood. (^^I will be Reblogging this post with more info on this but don’t have time to address this all with photos and links in this post. For now, here are the linked Wikipedia sources and a screenshot of the info in question. As always with Wikipedia, consider it a starting point and read the sources the page cites, not just the wiki article)

3. Several source links are dead.

Not many sources are available on the taxpayersforpeace website, and they certainly do not have a tab specifically devoted to sources.

Here is the list of sources.

The two Badil links are dead:

4. Available sources are sparse

Of the few sources there are, there are only three actual organizations responsible for them: B’Tselem, Badil, and Architect and Academic Malkit Shoshan’s seminal work, Atlas of a Conflict.

The sources from Badil lead to dead links, leaving only Shoshan and B’Tselem. Two sources are not enough to support an entire website. Two sources are not even enough to support an academic paper.

5. Available sources are outdated

None of the sources of this constantly evolving and ongoing conflict were written within the last decade. Even if these sources are considered legitimate, it is odd that more recent ones were not included.

6. The available sources are used manipulatively

So, we have two sources. Let’s look at them.

Source 1: Malkit Shoshan

By all accounts, she is a highly respected and credible source on architecture, spacial design and planning, and the way that the small space shared between Israel and Palestine has shifted to be dominated by Israel over the past several decades. She has been continually critical of Israeli settlements in the West Bank (as have I) and has been extremely consistent in including Palestinian voices and struggles in her advocacy for peace (as have I).

She also supports BDS (which I do not).

Her work has explores the relationship between architecture, urban planning, and human rights.

She is respected but also controversial source on the conflict. She has signed her name to a Harvard faculty letter (as a member of the faculty) endorsing BDS and Palestinian Solidarity. Her work is sure to ruffle some feathers. (The letters to which this one responded are also linked within the above link, providing several perspectives on the matter during a previous flare of the ongoing conflict—from before 10/7)

However, while she very well might be anti-Zionist, I have not been able to find any statements by her to the affirmative in this case. If anyone has such statements I welcome them in order to provide a more thorough analysis of her as a source. But from what I could gather, she views herself as a progressive seeking peace between Israel and Palestine.

And while she would characterize many aspects of Israeli treatment of Palestine as colonial in nature (a statement which I do not agree with as a blanket statement about Israel as a whole, but for which she provides compelling evidence in certain instances, especially in the West Bank), I have yet to see her call the whole of Israel as a colonial project. In fact, she views Israel as a whole as post-colonial, according to her most recent interview with Haaretz. In fact, she seems to reject the idea that violence from either side is appropriate or necessary in order to attain peace—and on this matter, I occur wholeheartedly:

She states that she prefers to engage in discourse rather than violence. She discusses European colonialism as a decades-bygone problem because of which we are still dealing with tremendous fallout internationally. Additionally, she goes on to say that other nations are using the conflict in Israel and Palestine to suit their own geopolitical ends. And she does not isolate American, European, or Middle Eastern nations as uniquely manipulative in this matter. She acknowledges that every side has an agenda.

Her work seeks to humanize Palestinians. Not dehumanize Israelis. I have found no evidence that she would sign her name to a statement condemning Israel and the US of collaborating to commit genocide—let alone a billboard with graphic, triggering imagery. Her work focuses on building a better future—helping internally displaced Palestinians speak with their governments and organizations on their own behalf to obtain equal access to civic resources—in a shared homeland that prioritizes humanity, cohabitation, mutual acknowledgment and respect, and a peace. As controversial as her work is, she makes sure to participate in what she calls “productive disagreement,” including bringing together frequently opposing Israeli and Palestinian voices.

She has written award winning books and been involved with thought-provoking art installations, yet all of her work focuses on improving Palestinian welfare and recognition, not tearing Israel or Israelis down or telling the US to unilaterally disarm Israel entirely. She focuses primarily on how life within the Levant can be improved, not on international military relations.

Her own personal Twitter account acknowledges the pain of all involved, including Israelis’. And she seeks an end to the conflict, not a victor.

One thing is clear: She does not want her name associated with poorly sourced information, inflammatory rhetoric, or “counterproductive rage” that dehumanizes anyone.

(SOURCE EVAL TL;DR: AN INTERESTING AND COMPELLING SOURCE PROVIDED WITHOUT ADEQUATE CONTEXT AND MANIPULATED FURTHER A ONE-SIDED AGENDA)

Source 2: B’Tselem

This is certainly a more interesting source than I have seen cited by anti-Israel folks than most others. First of all, the source seems to originate from within Israel.

Encouragingly, they do actually appear on charity navigator with a 94% rating.

Despite this, I have a few problems related to this rating.

This rating is based on data from no later than 2021

The charity has not posted tax documents on its site

They have not provided access to board meeting minutes.

Its entire score is calculated based only on financial data that is three years out of date. There is not data on its impact as an organization, measurement of data, internal culture and community, or analysis of its leadership. It’s essentially a stamp of approval that the financial documentation sent to charity navigator 3 years ago was in order.

It is harshly critical of Israel’s allowing settlements in the West Bank as well as of many of its policies toward Palestine and treatment of Palestinians. In large letters near the bottom of its page, it states:

“Israel’s regime of apartheid and occupation is inextricably bound up in human rights violations. B’Tselem strives to end this regime, as that is the only way forward to a future in which human rights, democracy, liberty and equality are ensured to all people, both Palestinian and Israeli, living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.”

Given that the organization claims to want equality for Palestinians and Israelis, I doubt they would support a unilateral disarmament. Even though the site itself is tremendously biased against Israel in general (having an article on Israeli use of human shields, but not an extant or equally visible source on Hamas’ use of human shields, which is also well documented). Even this organization acknowledges that crimes against Israeli civilians are indefensible and violate international law and the goal of peace.

(Link to full article found in the text above the image)

Additionally, the organization admits that 50% of its funding comes specifically from outside of Israel. This is intriguing on its own, but I am also suspect of the accusatory manner in which they declare that the law requiring that they disclose this information is meant to “equate their funding with disloyalty.”

To me it is not even the admission that the funding comes from outside of Israel that troubles me. Rather, it is the admission that the funding comes specifically from state sources outside of Israel. Given the relevance of the aforementioned historical precedence that Muslim Brotherhood affiliated “charities” gave rise to Hamas, I would consider the source of funding in charities related to the conflict to be uniquely relevant. The antagonistic tone of the declaration as well as the small text with which it is declared and its placement at the very bottom of the website makes me suspect of the funders in question.

Relatedly, I could not find any financial documents or materials providing transparency in their funding or organization.

Another suspicious bit of information I found is that their Fatalities Statistics database only includes fatalities in the West Bank up to October 31. But it does not include any fatalities in the Gaza Strip OR ISRAEL past 10/6/2023–a day that might alter their data about the Israeli death toll a little.

To be very clear: this does not and will never justify the bombing of Gaza and Rafah. But it fully erases the attack by Hamas against Israel on 10/7/2023. I find this omission highly suspect. And the lack of acknowledgment of Hamas’ attacks on 10/7 or the ongoing incoming missile attacks from Hamas and Lebanon by B’Tselem in its statistics section to be a glaring omission on an organization that supposedly wants peace for all.

I also don’t see a list of sources from which they collect their data or any attempt to differentiate Palestinian citizens from Hamas combatants.

Finally, as I typically champion interfaith and intercultural organizations devoted to peace and relief within Israel and Palestine, I looked for B’Tselem on the Alliance for Middle East Peace website. B’Tselem did not appear on their list of 160+ affiliated/member-charities.

However, you can find those 160+ charities here: https://www.allmep.org

SOURCE EVALUATION TL;DR: Even though the source is flawed and would not pass muster on a full source evaluation in general, even this source itself claims to want violence against Israel to stop, leading me to believe it too would stop short of calling the current situation a genocide—although it would definitely call what is happening to Palestinian civilians in Gaza and Rafah a war crime, indefensible, and untenable (with which I am inclined to generally agree). I was unable to find a search function on the website, so I can’t be 100% certain that they didn’t use the word genocide, but that word seems at odds with their general mission statement, despite their bias. The site also calls for a release of Israeli hostages as well as acknowledging the attack by Hamas on 10/7 as horrific. Based on this information, despite my many problems with this source, even it does not call for unilateral disarmament. It calls for the expulsion of Israeli presence in the West Bank (in accordance with the law), an end to violence, and a release of Israeli hostages.

7. The sources are not provided by Taxpayersforpeace.

The few sources I was able to find for this website originate from VisualizePalestine—a tremendously problematic organization that also fails to appear on charity navigator.

I will included links on my next post about all this cuz I’m beat right now, but: It cites sources that insist on calling the IDF the IOF (tremendously inappropriate in an official document), legitimizing the Muslim Brotherhood, and reframing the intifadas as justifiable acts of resistance—something not even B’Tselem condemned. In general, VP’s entire goal seems to be to “change the narrative” from anti-Palestine to anti-Israel. And that will never support a peaceful future.

Despite my issues with the two sources listed in the graphic pictured above from VP—I find myself in full agreement with the statements at the heart of both Shoshan’s and B’Tselem’s arguments: The future must be geared toward attaining peace for all. Not casting one side or the other as the bad guy or good guy. Tremendous violence has shaped the lives of Israelis and Palestinians for my entire life and since long before I was born. We don’t need to swap our ideal victors. We need to end conflict for everyone. And not by just letting one side or the other be slaughtered, but by negotiating peace.

As always, please click my media analysis tag for more analysis of sources across the political and bias spectrum as well as for insight into how and why I evaluate as I do.

[xclowniex]

Sending you a nice ask, do you have any hopes for the beginnings of the long path to peace between Israelis and Palestinians for after the war ends? I'd love to hear what you think.

I do have hopes!

What would need to happen realistically is for Netanyahu to be not re-elected and for Hamas to be removed as the government of Gaza. The reason I say Hamas needs to be removed is because they don't hold elections and haven't since the early 2000's so it's not like they can be removed through an election.

A new government to replace Hamas should 100% be democratically elected though by those in Gaza.

It would be good if we could get one government for both the West Bank and Gaza but that could take a few years.

A peace treaty would also need to be signed, and depending on what stage relations are at when it is signed, a few other countries might need to hop onto it as like enforcers. Eg, if it is not upheld, x y z countries will take action against the country which violated the treaty.

The treaty should have stuff such as obviously a permanent ceasefire, new laws to prevent anti Palestinian and anti jew/israeli discrimination and hate crimes.

After peace and normalization is achieved, I think having a border similar to those in EU countries or like NZ and Australia has would be a bonus. So you don't need a visa to travel between them or work in a country you aren't a citizen or resident of.

Thats just what I think should happen, obviously I don't live in Israel or in Palestine so I don't have the most 100% accurate grasp of what is achievable or should happen, but that's just my thoughts.

[good-old-gossip]

Israeli army spokesperson Daniel Hagari said on Wednesday that the army has gained “operational control” over the strategic Philadelphi corridor, a 14-kilometre buffer zone along the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt.

“Big news. The IDF has secured the “Philadelphi Corridor” which separates Egypt from the Gaza Strip. This means that we can block the influx of weapons and ammunition from the Sinai into Hamas’ hands,” former Prime Minister of Israel Naftali Bennett said on X in response to the announcement.

The Israeli military had seized portions of the Palestinian side of the corridor earlier this month, sparking outrage from Egyptian officials, who said Israel was violating the terms of the two countries’ 1979 peace treaty.

[scarz-xo]

My blog is not for Israelis to come and complain, I'm Egyptian, I'm pro-palestinian, you don't like that that's your issue, don't come at me with our peace treaty, that's politics & I'm no politician but I speak with FACTS, so don't come at me with your made up history expecting from me to just sit & shut up cause buddy that's the only thing I've never known how to do especially when it comes at the expense of defending the poor & what I believe for.

From the river to the see Palestine will be free.

[zvaigzdelasas]

Jordan said on Monday it was leaving "all options" open in its response to what it called Israel's failure to discriminate between military and civilian targets in its intensifying bombardment and invasion of the Gaza Strip. Prime Minister Bisher al Khasawneh did not elaborate on what steps Jordan would take, days after it recalled its ambassador from Israel in protest at Israel's offensive in Gaza [...] Jordan also announced last week that Israel's ambassador, who left Amman shortly after Hamas' attack, would not be allowed to come back, effectively declaring him persona non grata.

"All options are on the table for Jordan in our dealing with the Israeli aggression on Gaza and its repercussions," Khasawneh, whose country signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1994, told state media. Khasawneh said Israel's siege of the densely populated Gaza was not self-defence as it maintains. "The brutal Israeli attack does not discriminate between civilian and military targets and is extending to safe areas and ambulances," he said.

In a statement, Israel's foreign ministry said the country's "relations with Jordan are of strategic importance to both countries and we regret the inflammatory statements from Jordan's leadership."

Jordan is reviewing its economic, security and political ties with Israel and may freeze or revoke parts of its peace treaty if the Gaza conflict worsens, diplomats familiar with Jordanian thinking said.[...]

Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi said any move to drive Palestinians across to Jordan, which shares a border with the West Bank, was a "red line" amounting to a declaration of war. "Any attempt to expel Palestinians in an attempt by Israel to change geography and demography we will confront," Safadi said last week. The Jordanian army has already fortified its positions along its borders, security sources said.

6 Nov 23

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Palestinians and others in the Middle East see the U.S. as an "enabler" of Israel in its war with Hamas, Queen Rania al Abdullah of Jordan said Sunday on "Face the Nation."

"People view the U.S. as being a party to this war," Rania said in an interview with "Face the Nation" moderator Margaret Brennan. "Because, you know, Israeli officials say that without U.S. support, they couldn't launch this war."

• TRANSCRIPT: Queen Rania al Abdullah of Jordan on "Face the Nation," May 5, 2024

Jordan, a U.S. ally, has had a peace treaty with Israel since 1994. The queen, who is of Palestinian descent, has criticized the reaction to the war by the U.S. and other countries, saying there's been a "selective application of humanitarian law" that's causing a "loss of credibility" in the U.S.

"The U.S. may be Israel's most-closest ally, but a good friend holds a friend accountable," she said.

Rania said the world is getting "mixed messages" from the U.S., which she says has both made expressions of concern over civilian deaths in Gaza and provided offensive weapons to Israel "that are used against Palestinians." She urged the international community to use leverage to compel Israel to let aid into Gaza and bring an end to the war, saying the U.S. can do so by saying it won't continue to provide offensive weapons to Israel.

The queen described the war's toll on the Arab world, which she said has watched as Gaza has become "unrecognizable" over the last seven months. As Israel's bombardment of Gaza has stretched on for nearly seven months since the Oct. 7 terrorist attack, the Hamas-run Health Ministry has said that at least 34,000 have died as the humanitarian crisis has escalated, although the Health Ministry does not designate between civilians and combatant casualties.

"It's been quite devastating. And the impact has been, obviously people are so traumatized by what they're seeing every day," she said. "We were traumatized by Oct. 7, but then this war, we feel is not, you know, Israel is saying that this was a defensive war. Obviously, it was instigated by Oct. 7, but the way it's being fought is not in a defensive way."

Queen Rania made clear that Hamas does not represent the majority of people in Gaza, and that Palestinians have been dehumanized in decades by Israel to "numb people to Palestinian suffering."

"When you reduce people to a violent people who are different to us — so they're not moral like us, so therefore it's okay to inflict pain and suffering on them because they don't feel it the same way we do — it allows people to do bad things," she said. "That's-that's the mental loophole of dehumanization, it allows you to justify the unjustifiable, to do bad things and still see yourself as a good person."

At the same time, the queen condemned antisemitism, calling it "the worst kind of bigotry" and "pure hatred." And she drew a line between antisemitism and speaking out against the war in Gaza and Israeli policy. Pointing to protests on American college campuses, Queen Raina said that law and order must be maintained and that it's wrong for students to feel unsafe on campus.

"Emotions are running high and I think people are losing sight of what these students are protesting," she said. "For them, the issue of Gaza and the Palestinian conflict is more about social justice. They are standing up for human rights, for international law, for the principles that underpin international law. They're standing up for the future that they're going to inherit."

Her interview comes as President Biden is set to meet with King Abdullah II of Jordan this week. The administration is also facing a deadline to provide Congress with a determination of whether Israel is using American weapons in accordance with international law in the coming days.