#and supporting jews who choose to return to israel

[squidgirlautism]

i dont think goyim should have particularly strong feelings about what jews should think about living in the diaspora Tbh

[girlactionfigure]

Ya know, just in case the pro Israel group has any doubt for a split second that they’re on the right side of history, you don’t have to look too far.

A good place to start is the internet.

Sentences you’ll see in the feed of a pro Israel activist:

“Bring our women and children home.” “We want peace.” “Every innocent death is a tragedy.” “Rape is never ok.”

Sentences you’ll see in the feed of a pro-Palestinian activist:

“Hitler was right.” “Wipe Israel off the map.” “Gas the Jews.” “The Jews have big noses.” “Jews are Nazis.”

If the internet wasn’t enough to convince you, then go to a protest of both sides. 

A pro Palestinian protest:

Violence. Yelling. Calling for genocide. Tons of masks. Flags of terrorist organizations. Harassing innocent bystanders. 

A pro Israel protest:

Singing. Hugging. Crying. Calling for the return of innocent hostages. Calling for a terrorist org to surrender so the war can end. Flags of the only democracy in the Middle East. 

You really don’t have to be a rocket scientist to see it. 

Those who support Israel support freedom, human rights, and peace. They support a people that was persecuted for thousands of years. 

Those who support Hamas support terror, rape, and pedophilia by calling it resistance. They support the beheading of babies, the denial of the holocaust and the kidnapping of holocaust survivors. 

This isn’t a nuanced decision. 

This is good vs evil. This is radical fundamentalist jihadis against the free world. 

If you can’t see the distinction clearly, if you still think the two sides in this war are equal, if you compare October 7th to the retaliation of the IDF, if you can’t differentiate between one side that does everything to minimize civilian death and the other that does everything to maximize civilian death, I don’t know how to say this nicely so I’m just gonna say it. 

You are an immoral human being who has lost all sense of right and wrong. 

I am deeply sorry for you that this is your existence, and that you have sided with the side Hitler would have sided with. 

That should tell you all you need to know. 

Choose morality, choose Israel. 

Historically, it’s just the smart thing to do.

hilzfuld

[determinate-negation]

and why are israelis talking about going to china like its a threat

“Rosenfeld arrived in China with one of his brothers, but did not integrate into the Jewish community in the city. His political leanings led him to seek out the local Communists, as did a small group of other Jews. The latter included the reporter, Hans Shippe, who greatly influenced Rosenfeld’s views, and the Jewish-Austrian physician, Richard Frey, who had experiences similar to those of Rosenfeld. The Chinese Foreign Ministry website, which provides added proof of the country’s great respect for Rosenfeld, posted an article that quotes him as saying that he did not come to China to lead a comfortable life, but that he came to join the revolution. And he did in fact do that.

[…] The Chinese Communists considered Rosenfeld one of their own. He was close to the highest-ranking officials in the party, including Liu Shaoqi, who would later become the President of the People’s Republic of China after Mao Zedong’s death, and to Mao himself. He also forged a deep friendship with the Communist commander, Chen Yi, who would later go on to become the Mayor of Shanghai and Foreign Minister of China. The two shared a love of literature and poetry, took hikes together, and had long conversations in French. Chen Yi also wrote poetry, and an anthology of his writings includes a “Letter to Comrade Rosenfeld,” in which Chen Yi supports the decision made by his friend, the European doctor, to join the struggle of the People’s Army of China.

Rosenfeld believed that the Communist Party would free the Chinese people from both the Japanese invaders and the Kuomintang. In 1942, he became a member of the Chinese Communist Party, and he is still considered a national hero in China.

At the end of 1949, after the People’s Republic of China was founded, Rosenfeld decided to return to Vienna. His Chinese friends advised him to remain in China, claiming that Europe no longer had a place for him. But Rosenfeld wanted look for relatives who had survived the Holocaust. At a farewell dinner held for him before going back to Austria, Chen Yi spoke about his friend’s huge contribution to the revolution and awarded him a badge of merit.

After a short time in Austria, Rosenfeld tried unsuccessfully to return to China. He also tried to emigrate to the United States, but was denied a visa due to his ties with Communist China. In 1951, he moved to Israel, settled in Tel Aviv, and worked at Assuta Hospital. It appears that he was actually waiting for a visa to return to China, but within less than a year he died of a heart attack at the age of only 49.”

and he didnt even want to move to israel. zionism and its alliance with antisemitic movements (like american anticommunism) is the negation of the diaspora. slightly tangential to this post but the red scare disproportionately targeted jewish americans. post war us jewish institutional leaders choose to move to the right in their dedication to israel and support for the us government, betraying socialist and anti zionist american jews

[vergess]

Choosing you as the most likely to give a honest and detailed answer. Feel free to delete, however.

When people are calling Israel a colony, what do they mean? The way I understand that word, a colony is land, controlled by some other country that's elsewhere and run by citizens of that country. That doesn't seem to be the case here, since most Israel citizens are only citizens of Israel, not something else, and there's no "main" country they're representing and can return to. Or are people using "colony" metaphorically here?

Before Tumblr mobs me - I don't like Israel and don't support it.

Israel began as a British colony of Palestine in the post WW1 era, around 1920. The people responsible for the genocide are almost entirely of European origin who were moved to Palestine after WW2 (in the 1940s and 1950s) to avoid returning to the homelands where they'd been given up to the nazis by their neighbors.

Today, however, the bulk of the colonization effort is managed by the US military industrial complex.

Now, there are many other people living in Israel, of many faiths and many ethnicities. The Israeli people, be they Jews or otherwise, are also not fans of the genocide, in much the same way the American people are not fans of US genocides.

But the israeli government exists almost entirely as a puppet for US and European colonial goals, and has done since the assassination of Prime Minister Rabin in the 90s.

Prior to that, there was a brief period wherein the rightfully elected leaders of Israel sought peace in the region after throwing off the shackles of British colonialism, which again founded the country and only "ended" (on paper) in the 1950s.

Israel has been a colonial effort for about 2/3s of the century it has existed, including today.

Now, this is a simplified explanation, of course. For example, although it was was a colonial effort, the "return" of Jews to their "homeland" was also a refugee effort, and a repatriation effort.

Jews never really "stopped" being indigenous to the levant even in diaspora. This is extremely obvious if you've ever lived in a Jewish neighborhood, but may come as a shock to a lot of people used to thinking of the assimilated mask Jews wear in Christian societies as our "true" selves.

My family were nondiasporic Jews until me, which I gather is an... unusual perspective that many people don't see often. You'll have to take me at my word, I think, because it's difficult to explain. But Jews never actually "became white" the way people so desperately want to believe. Some jews learned to pass for white, yes, but that isn't the same thing.

Jews, even the Ashkenazim (the "white european" ones) have a right to return home the same as anyone. And not just because I'm a fan of open borders.

But here's the deal.

Mizrahim (Jews who remained in the middle east rather than living in diaspora) are literally treated as inferior, as "arabs" (a colonial term) regardless of religion or ethnicity. To be a Jew is not enough. You have to be the right kind. This is true of other Jews of Colour in Israel as well, often to an even greater extreme, as any Ethiopian Jew in Israel damned well knows.

This also... well, I've talked about it a bit before, but this summary is also casting a very cruel light on the concept of Jewish citizenship being automatically granted in the case of Jewish descent. Which isn't fair of me at all.

In a world without all the goddamned genocide, having a reduced immigration process for the children of emigrants is perfectly fucking common and normal and many countries do it, including the US.

And this also doesn't touch upon the critical political reality that Israel exists as a place for bigots to throw their jews away instead of straight up killing us.

So, okay, this got away from me.

Basically, Israel as a state is a colony of the US (today) and UK (historic), which is armed almost entirely by the US, and which attacks targets the US deems "of interest." The fact that the colony is populated by repatriated indigenous peoples doesn't really change that.

If anything, it deepens the horror, because many of the Jews involved in the genocide against Palestine genuinely (and fairly) believe that this is the last place on earth where a Jewish person can reasonably expect religious safety. Genuinely, and fairly, believe that it's a choice between "the genocide of all Jews globally or the elimination of a single '''Arab''' city."

They're wrong, but not irrational.

In a way, the existence of global antisemitism is the justification that fuels the ongoing palestinian genocide.

Though in practical terms, it is "fueled" by US weapons. The US wants to own Israel and use it as a launching off point for US violence in the region, without the US having to take the blame.

"See? It's all just poor, innocent Israel defending itself*!"

*(entirely with US weapons and often on US orders, often with weapons given to Israel rather than purchased, solely to further destabilize a religiously and financially significant region and furthermore to instill a sense of fear of Israel's neighbors and gratitude to the US)

For another example of a colony-of-the-repatriated, you can check out the history of civil war in Liberia, after the US just dumped a bunch of freed slaves there instead of killing them. Unsurprisingly, it went fucking Badly. However, because Liberia was not considered a "valuable" colony, less study tends to be done into the complexities of that.

Or, I mean, there's always "the life history of Osama Bin Laden" which is kind of like a one man speedrun of what the US is doing with all of Israel.

Support: Patreon - Paypal - Venmo - Ko-Fi - CashApp

[theconstitutionisgayculture]

Any time someone condemns the actions of Israel killing children you accuse them of hating Jews. That only makes sense if you think killing children is inherently a part of Judaism.

Hoo boy, you are very dumb, for real.

Okay, I'm going to explain this to you even though you either, already know it and you're just pretending not to because that's the only way you can avoid having to admit how wrong you are, or you're too stupid to grasp basic English conversation. So I know it's pointless and I know you're still not going to get it. But here we go anyway.

Israel is a majority Jewish country. Anti-semitism, or hatred of Jews if that's too big a word for you, is often dressed up in "criticism" of Israel. Since October 7th, a lot of people who claimed to not be anti-semites because they were only "criticizing" Israel have been loudly celebrating an attack where Hamas terrorists raped, murdered, and kidnapped people who were mostly Israeli Jews. They have taken up chants of "Globalize the Intifada" (The Intifada is a Palestinian movement to eliminate Israel and all the Jews in it, so this is a call for the global elimination of all Jews) and "From the river to the sea" (which is a call for the destruction of Israel and all the Jews in it so "Palestinians", which are not a real cultural or ethnic group by the by, can occupy all the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea). Since these people are cheering a brutal attack on Jews, and supporting the destruction of the only majority Jewish state in the world along with the murder of every Jew who lives there, and calling for the global extermination of the Jewish race, they are anti-semites. (Remember that means they hate Jews).

Following along so far?

Probably not, but let's continue anyway.

Hamas is a terrorist organization. In 2007 it was elected into power. Shortly after, it won a civil war to stay in power. That makes it the ruling power in what's called the self-governing territory of Gaza. That ruling power sent soldiers into Israel, a legitimate nation recognized as such by most of the world, and attacked its citizens as well as the citizens of other countries. Israel responded by declaring war. Now, if this had happened with any other nation in the world, there would be very little debate about Israel's justification in defending itself and the abhorrent nature of Gaza's attack. But since Israel is a mostly Jewish state, that's not what's going on. Western leftists are gleefully showing their hatred of Jews by demanding Israel not strike back and not defend itself and instead just sit there and let themselves be destroyed.

Now, by any sane standard, Israel would be justified in turning the entirety of Gaza into molten slag. Remember, the 10/7 attacks were carried out by the ruling power that was originally voted into that position of power. When the terrorists returned from their attack, where they raped and/or murdered some 1,200 people, many of them children, the citizens of Gaza celebrated. They cheered as Hamas terrorists led naked hostages who were bleeding from their vaginas from being brutally gang raped through the streets. They cheered as their children surrounded Jewish children who had been kidnapped and taunted them and threw rocks at them. Ever since Israel freed Gaza and allowed them to govern themselves, Gaza has supported terrorists who want to kill every Jew in Israel. But Israel has no interest in destroying Gaza completely. They just want to wipe out Hamas and let the Gazans go back to governing themselves. They even went so far as to let the enemy know where they were going to attack so civilians could evacuate.

And what did Hamas do in response?

They refused to allow anyone to leave.

Because Hamas has a long history of hiding behind Gazan civilians. They build their terrorist bases under schools, hospitals, and mosques specifically so Israel would have to choose between attacking those locations or allowing Hamas to attack them with impunity. They make sure civilians are in the path of every Israeli bomb because they believe that Gaza is a "nation of martyrs" and they know that every dead Gazan civilian is a prop they can show to the largely Jew hating western media as "proof" that Israel is some kind of evil, genocidal country. They want that perception to flourish worldwide so, when they do finally manage to kill every Jew in Israel, they can say it was justified. They were just fighting back against their oppressors. They were decolonizing. (Ignoring the fact that the Arabs were the ones who colonized the Jewish land and then began exterminating all the Jews that still lived there, or who fled to live in other lands, to the point where there are almost no Jews left anywhere in the Middle East except in Israel)

So when people ignore the mountains and mountains of proof that Hamas are the ones responsible for the civilian deaths in Gaza, because their strategy relies on dead children and dead civilians, because they do everything in their power to make sure children are between them and Israeli bombs and bullets, they are doing so knowing that they're giving support to a terrorist group that wants to murder all the Jews in Israel. They are showing their hatred of the Jewish people by promoting lies and joining the cries for "global Intifada". So yes, when people blame Israel for the dead children that Hamas killed by forcing them into the line of fire during a war, they are doing it because they hate Jews.

And if you think calling out that hatred means anyone thinks killing children is a part of Judaism, then you're either stupid, or you hate Jews too.

[bilbobagginsomebabez]

the arguments about palestine that changed a zionist's mind in real life:

THIS IS RHETORIC. IT WAS DESIGNED TO CHANGE SOMEONE ELSE'S MIND, NOT TO PORTRAY MY FUNDAMENTAL BELIEFS AND UNDERSTANDINGS OF THE CONFLICT.

stressing equal rights as the solution to political violence. i usually start w "the single most influential factor to joining a terrorist group or a gang is hopelessness, the idea that there is no other way for them to create a livable future in which their family can eat." in this, the progression from the peaceful and unarmed 2018 Day of Return (emphasize injuries and casualties; opening fire at protestors attempting to just walk out of an "open air prison," half of whom were under 18. if they had been allowed to leave and seek political rights, october 7 never would have happened. every escalation is a result of lack of human rights. "everyone deserves human rights without qualifier, and everyone deserves equal legal rights under the law. most problems are actually side effects of this initial problem. who lacks legal rights in Israel?"

sidestep Hamas completely. refuse to engage. "there is a geographic region in the middle east whose border touches the mediterranean. Jewish people and Palestinian people live here. the government of this geographic region must then care equally for Jewish lives and Palestinian lives because that's who lives there, and just democracies give equal rights to everyone, right?" americans will be HARD PRESSED to say no. "you're pro-palestinian"

"Ethnostates are bad. We know that ethnostates are oppressive goverments that choose permanently harming a portion of second-class citizens. The whole world already has people in it, and there is nowhere to establish an ethnostate that does not require the violent removal of people who already live there. You Also Don't Need An Ethnostate to Be Safe. You need equal rights." Excerpts from Ch. 3 A Theory of Genocide from Scott Straus' Making and Unmaking Nations explaining the inherent genocidal risk of founding narratives that serve one group to the exclusion of others was very effective coupled with current death tolls.

Israel puts Jews in more danger by associating them with real human rights abuses and telling the world they're doing it in the name of Jewishness. "My neighbors have nothing to do with the violent actions of a nation-state. Additionally, you are my community member and this is already your home. The base requirement of your community members here is to make your home safe for you, not chase you halfway around the globe where we won't have to "deal with you" anymore. Your fight is here by my side making our real current community safe for everyone, not millions of miles away using bombs on civilians."

The story of the Golem, in which something created to protect Jewish communities from antisemitism grew too powerful and too violent and had to be destroyed before it destroyed the community itself in its uncontrollable rage. this actually should have been number 1 because this is used to structure the entire thing. the Golem is the last argument I brought up, but I knew I was going to bring it up the whole time and every single argument was structured to reinforce it. Continuously through the conversation, I stressed trauma responses, fear, and conservatism. they've done studies where they asked people for their political opinions, waited weeks, brought them back, shared recent headlines (divided between positive/hopeful and negative/fearmongering), and found that after being shown fearmongering headlines, the second round of responses were more conservative no matter where the subject started. there's a reason zionism was invented well before the holocaust but didn't gain widespread support in Jewish communities until after. I approached from a fundamental position of empathy. I used rising antisemitism as my lead-in to the topic, I talked extensively about how Jewish people always have Israel in the back of their head as a refuge and escape-- "if it ever gets too bad here, i have somewhere safe to run to"-- and as a result feel an intense sense of existential fear when asked to criticize or challenge it. I talked about how there are no moral dimensions to feeling (you just get to have them) but by the same metric, it means your feelings are not indicative of political truth. Being scared doesn't mean you're really in danger. All of it specifically chosen to reinforce this idea of Israel as a Golem whose violent rage must be addressed by Jewish people for the sake of preserving their own community.

that's what worked. coming at it from a fundamental position of empathy for my Jewish community members and asking them to give Palestinians the same unbending demand for human rights and safety that I am giving to everyone in this moment. showing them that their safety is not mutually exclusive to each other. part of it is capacity creation. massaging their perspective of the conflict and balming some of their most immediate and disruptive fears for themselves so that the space created by relief can turn to empathy. which is easier to do when someone is modeling it right in front of you.

[amit-rider]

Just watched philosophy tube's video on antisemitism. Abigail is known for doing her due diligence and really giving her all to do proper research, at the beginning of the video she even mentions how grateful she is for the jewish script consultants who helped her with the episode. I was thinking this is what I need rn, an ally putting effort.

In minute 21 she mentions the only reason jews came to Palestine in the early 1900 was because of the "British mandate which started in 1917" (as far as I'm aware it started in 1920), which "supported the zionist project at least in part bc they wanted to get rid of the people in Britain". She then makes it seem like the only reason the mandate ended in 1948 was because of the Arab revolt (its the only reason mentioned). She continues to say at this point in time the Palestinian people basically asked the UN for their land back to which they responded "that's Israel now". This section doesn't have any sources appearing on the screen while she speaks. Her following quote is "its a wonder I'm not invited to teach more history classes" which. Sorry but its not a wonder to me....

I don't blame Abigail, I still like her as a creator and I will continue to watch her videos and support her. I also understand that not all Jewish people will view this as poorly as I have, and the proof is that none of the Jewish script consultants she hired seemed to have said anything (I assume) bc she kept it in.

But I actually mind a lot to see she choose to present a narrative in which the Jewish people are once again passive in the events which came to. My great grandparents in Germany (in early 1900s) did no go to a Jewish youth program which encouraged their participants to support the Jewish yishuv and believed in the right to return to their land (way before the mandate btw) for gentiles to think the only reason we came back is cause it was in Britain's interest. These specific people believed that land is and will always be their holy land.

Also according to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine:

Competing interests of the two populations led to the 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine and the 1944–1948 Jewish insurgency in Mandatory Palestine.

Why omit one?

Additionally, from the same source, one sentence after:

The United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine to divide the territory into two states, one Arab and one Jewish, was passed in November 1947.

So I would say it's inaccurate, to say the least, to present it as the Palestinian people asking the UN for their land back to which the UN said no? That is just. Not what happened at all. And the first and very basic most research (Wikipedia) presents why this is false.

I'm really bothered by how this whole sectioned just went up with no sources. Did no one mind? Sigh.

It's just a very specific part of the video. But you know what? I'm just a little tired...

[decolonize-the-left]

I have a question. Are you supportive of Jewish self-determination/decolonization/Zionist movements question mark (idk it's not letting me type that)

I am, because our oral tradition, written tradition, archaological evidence, outsider writings, and genealogical evidence links us to Israel. Our religion constantly mentions Israel, we have specific practices that only occur in Israel (ie certain farming traditions). We've been colonized for millenia by Romans, Abbasids, Ottomans, the British, etc. and treated horribly under each of those rules. Most of us were exiled from our homeland, although we always wish to return. In my opinion, Zionism has been one of the most successful Indigenous Land-back movements to date, and the State of Israel has saved countless Jews. It's not perfect, but we're improving it every day.

There are a lot of misconceptions and hatred against Zionism/Zionists/Jews, and I'm curious if you're antizionist. Worth noting that the VAST majority of Zionists don't want to kick out Arabs/non-Jews, we just want to make sure that we're safe and allowed to be in our home (we've been expelled from a lot of places in our history, including many in the Middle East where we had been living for centuries post-1948). A lot of people hate us, though, and they usually choose to take out their hatred on American Jews that have no connection to the Israeli government.

No

"it's not perfect."

Genocide is being committed in the name of Zionism, get all the fucking way out of here, dummy.

Also it's not being taken out on innocent American Jewish ppl, ppl are rightfully telling the American Jewish ppl who are sympathizing with the ppl commiting genocide to shut the fuck up. Which is correct of them to do.

You should in fact, shut the fuck up.

There are a lot of ways to build and create a landback movement that don't involve setting fire to family homes and murdering kids.

The bit behind American Jewish ppl doing it is that y'all are literally settlers on native fucking land LMAO and y'all don't do SHIT for allyship while the US imperialist machine bulldozes our land and treaty rights.

Go cry me river then drown in it.

[david-goldrock]

You are my age. I haven't had the horror of seeing a wall erected as a border, but my country has one too. There are so many people suffering. The people's front for the liberation of palestine is one of the widely supported resistance movements that existed long before hamas. The british mandate of palestine was cruel, and immigration laws from britain are what prevented jewish immigration. A hundred hamas members in one huge city does not make every child in that city not innocent. It is Israel's government that is choosing to drop bombs. Self defense is not the same as aggressive destruction.

The nabka is not trivial. how as a victim of violence do you dare trivialize pain? haven't you seen an old woman with the key to a house that was razed? haven't you felt that powerlessness knowing a US funded destruction is waged against an entire region?

aren't you angry that anything anyone is trying to justify this?

Look friend, I just frankly disagree on a lot

I haven't seen the wall being built, I am too young, but I know the difference it made. My mother was next to several terrorist attacks in a few years. Had she been early or late a few minutes, neither her not I would be alive today. The wall erected stopped nearly every infiltration, and radically decreased terror from Judea and sameria.

What do you think the Arabs there are "resisting" dear? Over 80% of them, when asked on a poll, answered that the only solution they'd accept is a 1 state for their people "solution". They aren't resisting neither occupation not hardship, only the presence of Jews.

And with all due respect, I'd prefer a hundred innocent Palestinians will die for this war before I will send 1 solider to sacrifice himself for them. Even today, 70% of Palestinians support hamas and their actions on Oct. 7th. Many of the people who die aren't much different from the terrorists in their intentions nor in what they'd do were I to be strapped to a chair next to them, the only difference between them is that one chose to be a salesman and the other, a terrorist. Not ideology, only a career choice. And please, seriously, if we don't bomb their facilities, we send a clear message to them, and every other terrorists, that human shielding works and is good. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't take precautions, and make sure we give every chance possible to civilians to evacuate and save their souls. No intentional killing of civilians either. But I don't have any hard feeling when a building with 10 terrorists and a family of 5 is taken down.

The "nakba" is a virtual event. You start a war, start to lose, go away from your homes to return when the Arab forces kill all of the Jews, and you cry when you aren't allowed back? Not to mention that the ammount of evacuations and deportations in that time was insane. This is after WW2. Millions of Germans and poles and Russians and many more displaced from their lands to others, they all integrated and were fine. "Palestinians" (they weren't called that back then) got citizenships in Jordan, and Lebanon, and america, and many other lands. By any definition except for UNRWA, there are almost no more "Palestinian refugees" alive that were considered so even a year after the war. That is not to say some innocent villages weren't rekt, but this is a wildly exaggerated event, especially when it serves as the "Palestinian people" story of origin, as before the war, these people were all different flavours of arabs from different tribes. The same ammount as that of people who got out of Israeli land in the war is that the ammount of Jews that fled the middle east at that time because of pogroms all over this land. Billions of dollars worth of land and property was lost, do you see Israelis complain for 75 years? We built what we could with what we had, like Jews do.

And please, if I have a criticism of the US's actions in the middle east is that it does not agree to wage war in here. It does everything it can to avoid a war here, even sacrificing every value we had in our relationship, only so that Biden can get reelected in November. If the US was what you claim it to be, it'd have given Israel a green light to do whatever it wants, and the war would already have been over.

[sweaterkittensahoy]

Hey, so I can say I said it very, very bluntly:

I stand with the civilians in both Israel and Palestine.

I stand with the Israeli government responding with force towards Hamas because the other option is that Hamas literally just wants to slaughter every Jewish person they ever meet.

I stand with every person in both countries calling for peace, return of hostages, and a long-term solution where everyone gets to live in some goddamn peace.

I won't sit here and have any deep dive opinions on the Israeli government as a whole. I absolutely will not pretend to have any sort of deep-level knowledge. The experts for that are the people who live there. And I don't.

I WILL sit here and tell you Hamas is a terrorist organization. Because it fucking is. Palestine and Hamas are NOT the same thing, and if you say you support Palestine while saying you agree with Hamas, you don't actually support Palestine. You support harm towards Jews.

I have LOTS of opinions about US tactics in general. And in Yemen in particular. And my current opinion is: Stop the spread of the fucking Nazis who re-introduced slavery and engage in constant sex-trafficking and let the people of Yemen choose their own leaders.

And, no, no one in Yemen chose the Houthis. Except the Houthis. Who are fucking nazis.

Anyway, there. I've said it. I've made it very clear. This is not the start of a conversation. This is a series of declarative statements. I'm not here to argue with you; I'm telling you who I am so you can fuck off if it bothers you.

[jewishbarbies]

I truly cannot comprehend how the uncommitted crowd does not understand how much worse Donald Trump is going to be for Palestinians. If Trump gets a second term it’s going to be awful for everyone including LGBTQ people, people with uteruses, immigrants, basically everyone not a conservative, straight white male. Everyone should know that at this point. You only have to listen to what he’s saying at his rallies to know that if elected a second time, he fully intends to try and become a dictator. But theoretically, if someone doesn’t care about marginalized groups in the US and only cares about the war in Gaza, fine, but they should understand that Donald Trump being elected is a disaster for Palestinians too.

Trump was the most pro-Israel president in recent decades. He and Netanyahu have a long history together and were genuinely friends. Bibi LOVED Trump, whereas he had previously had a more tense relationship with Obama (and Biden as VP). It was under Trump that the US moved its embassy to Jerusalem. Jared Kushner spearheaded the Abraham accords which was one of Trump’s proudest foreign policy accomplishments and got several Arab countries to formalize ties with Israel. Apparently, Trump is currently annoyed with Bibi for recognizing Biden as president, however, he also recently told one of his rally audiences that the IDF should “finish off” Gazans. It’s highly likely, that Trump would actively support any action that the Israeli government chooses to take in Gaza or the West Bank if he were re-elected. Believe it or not, Joe Biden does push back quite a bit against Bibi and Trump would not.

The question of whether to support Israel is only really happening within left wing of the Democratic Party. It’s not even a conversion among Republicans. Leftists generally fail to understand or take the right seriously (in my opinion it’s why we lost to the pro life movement) and conservatives support Israel in the war. The only time that Speaker Mike Johnson clapped during Biden’s SoU was when Biden showed support for Israeli hostages. Republican women were wearing blue during the SoU to show support for the hostages too. I’m bringing this up because even if Trump might be mad at Bibi for recognizing Biden, a good portion of his base supports Israel so we are likely to hear more anti-Palestinian rhetoric from him as the general election ramps up. I’m waiting for Trump to start using the American hostages to start criticizing Biden for not getting them back fast enough and I’m surprised he hasn’t yet.

All of this is to say that Trump would be a disaster for Palestinians. By the way, nothing that I’ve just said is some classified secret. I would strongly urge anyone who cares about the Palestinian people to research the Trump administration’s foreign policies and how they impacted Palestinians living in the Levant. I don’t know how you can say you support the safety of Palestinians and their right to self-determination and then allow Donald Trump to get elected.

someone made a good analogy on this whole to vote or not to vote bullshit discourse, and the gist was: legally, if you're in a car accident and there's proof you had the chance to see the other car coming and slow down and you didn't, you're responsible for what happens next. so, if you see the fascists coming, and you refuse to vote against them because of whatever trumped up moral argument you have in your head, you will be responsible for the outcome. you have a responsibility to hit the brakes.

i firmly believe leftists fail when they get to zionism specifically because they cannot recognize christian zionism for what it is. which is everything they claim regular zionism is. christian zionists are only "zionists" because of their fetishized view of jews, racist views on the middle east as a whole, and their obsession with jesus returning. it has nothing to do with actually caring about jews or the modern state of israel. christians want a firm hand in the middle east to be able to control what happens in order to ensure jesus' return. they don't care who lives or who dies, because all that matters is the christian agenda, which ultimately ends in all "sinners" wiped off the earth and the filthy jews finally getting their punishment so the "real chosen people" can have the holy land. republicans don't care about israel because they actually care about israel. it's all a fucking show. but leftists see their support for israel and stop the investigation, and immediately label israel the problem. yes, bibi needs to be replaced (obviously), but christian conservatives will cheer when he gets smited by what they perceive as god all the same bc he's a jew. so while everyone is focusing on israel as a country, christians in the US are steadily taking over america as a whole and doing everything they can to make that return of jesus possible, no matter who has to die. it's all just a big fucking distraction, benefiting a lot of evil people.

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

How Anti-Semitic Rhetoric Became Mainstream

Using anti-Semitic rhetoric, society historically accused Jews of being rich oppressors as well as leeches. Jews were rulers as well as disloyal agitators. Jews, they opined, are members of an inferior race; now, they are members of a privileged one.

Contemporary Jew-haters have similarly evolved in their use of anti-Semitic rhetoric. They have transformed what were once the sentiments of the radical fringe into the accepted stance of our current woke moralists. 

“Doublespeak” – the deliberate use of language to conceal or distort the truth, a concept made popular in George Orwell’s 1984 – is the main tool in the arsenal of today’s anti-Semites. Spouting the correct language, they have seamlessly transformed their expressions of unbridled, raw hatred into commendable academic jargon. Unfortunately, it is also pure anti-Semitic rhetoric.

“What is really important in the world of doublespeak is the ability to lie, whether knowingly or unconsciously, and to get away with it; and the ability to use lies and choose and shape facts selectively, blocking out those that don’t fit an agenda or program,” explains writer Edward S. Herman in his book Beyond Hypocrisy.

Phase I: “Zionism is Racism”

Post World War II, the anti-Semitic rhetoric shifted away from overtly anti-Jewish to a new concept, “anti-Zionist.” The murder of six million Jews in the Holocaust was a fresh memory. This made attacking Jews on the international stage less politically attractive.

While this didn’t stop powerful countries from closing their doors to Jewish refugees from Europe, it did change the discourse. Now, Jews were attacked by the declaration that “Zionism is racism.”

Where and how did this ruse begin? Not surprisingly, with the Soviets, world-class masters of doublespeak.

The USSR’s Campaign Against Israel

The 1917 revolutionary forces in the former USSR officially abolished the Czarists’ discriminatory policies against Jews. Yet, the reality of life for Jews under the Bolsheviks was one of state-enforced antisemitism and demonization.

Jews lived with quotas as well as outright rejection from universities. Many professions simply shut them out. When they did find employment, they faced glass ceilings, never able to progress to the highest levels.

Yet, surprisingly, when the state of Israel was created in 1948, “All international communist parties supported partition and the creation of a Jewish State,” documents Philip Mendes in Jews and the Left: The Rise and Fall of a Political Alliance.  

This included as well the U.S. Communist Party which called Israel “an organic part of the world struggle for peace and democracy. The French communists viewed the Israelis in solidary with “resistance” fighters throughout the world.

Why Soviet Support Changed

Immediately after Israel’s 1948 victory in the War of Independence, “Zionism was … celebrated by the left as an organic movement of national return and a model for national liberation and decolonization movements throughout the world,” writes Alex Rychin in “Red Terror: How the Soviet Union Shaped the Modern Anti-Zionist Discourse.”

“Israel’s victory in its War of Independence and refusal to succumb to far mightier foes was positively awe-inspiring to adherents of political movements predicated on toppling structures of power,” explains Rychin.

Ironically, it was the communists who understood Zionism for what it actually is. Namely, the return of the Jewish people to their indigenous homeland (“Zion” being one of Israel’s biblical names). Historically, the Jewish people are the only people in existence who have had a continuous presence and a claim to the land in what is now the state of Israel.

However, communist support for the nascent state of Israel waned quickly, not due to ideology but to politics. By the time the modern state of Israel was created, the Cold War between Russia and the United States had already begun. The two superpowers pitted against each other, each vying for world dominance, including in the Middle East.

Israel's Support for Democracy

By the early 1950s, when it became apparent that Israel was espousing Western democratic values and supporting America, the Soviets realized they needed to significantly downgrade Israel, if not entirely ostracize it in the eyes of the world. That's where the anti-Semitic rhetoric came into play.

As a first step, the Soviets began spewing and exporting rabid anti-Semitic rhetoric. Specifically, they embarked on an intense and concentrated campaign against the “Zionists.” Part of this campaign was the infamous 1953 “Doctors Plot.” There, the Soviet government levied false charges against prominent Jewish doctors. They accused them of planning to murder leading government and communist party officials.

“The propaganda was highly compelling and steeped in long-established [anti-Semitic] themes of Jewish bloodthirstiness, greed, corruption, manipulation and cunning. It would contend that the very existence of a Jewish homeland was not only a plot of imperialism, but a mortal danger to the peace of the world,” writes Rychin.

While Russia was busy introducing the term “anti-Zionist” into the global lexicon, most Americans were focused on the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights Movement. Yet Soviet-supporting professors at top American universities were paying close attention. In truth, anti-Semitism had never been in short supply at these universities. Most of them had Jewish quotas of their own.

The UN Ruse

At the UN, the Soviets began employing an audacious strategy using anti-Semitic rhetoric against Israel learned. Although the Nazis were their arch enemies, the Soviets learned from none other than Adolf Hitler. In his 1925 book Mein Kampf, Hitler praises the efficacy of using the psychological technique known as the “Big Lie”-- essentially promoting a lie so big that no one would believe that anyone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously."

Rychin documents the fabrication of the “Big Lie” against Israel by the Soviets:

When a sub-commission of the United Nations was tasked with drafting a convention on the “elimination of all forms of racial discrimination,” the proceedings naturally focused on apartheid, neo-Nazism and antisemitism. But the Soviets viewed the reference to antisemitism as a direct rebuke to their anti-Jewish measures, and served up an amendment that “was almost a joke,” even to the Soviet delegation itself.

The amendment inserted Zionism into the listed forms of racism. According to sources close to the deliberations, the Soviets understood “full well that the idea that Zionism is racism is an indefensible position,” yet they floated it anyway, in part to turn the US-led initiative into farce, and in part perhaps, to see how far a “big lie,” could go.

Ultimately, the Convention was adopted with neither antisemitism nor Zionism referred to … But the seed had been planted.

On 10 November 1975, the General Assembly of the United Nations passed resolution 3379 on the “elimination of all forms of racial discrimination,” which determined that “Zionism is a form of racism and discrimination.”

The accusation stuck, and pro-Israel advocates are still fighting this absurd allegation.

Phase II: “Zionism is a settler-colonial white supremacist ideology”

Today, anti-Semites still use the “Zionism is racism” canard against Israel. But now, the anti-Semitic rhetoric comes with a litany of other “sins” – namely that Israel is a “settler-colonial white supremacist” state. In this context, its “racist” nature is simply a given.

What caused the switch in language? How does it benefit those who desire to bring down the only Jewish state in the world? 

“Coalition of the Oppressed”

Most Americans viewed the election of Barack Obama as president of the United States as a watershed moment. Finally, the country thought, the era of post-racism had arrived. The fight for racial equality began with the freeing of the slaves. It was codified into law through the 1968 Civil Rights. Yet, it saw its ultimate expression in Obama’s election.

Most Americans thought that the era of post-racialism in America had finally arrived. Yet, Obama’s reaction to a number of pivotal moments in his presidency – the 2012 shooting of Trayvon Martin in Florida, the 2014 police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri (an event that sparked the Black Lives Movement) and the 1915 death of Freddie Gray while in police custody in Baltimore – proved otherwise.

With racial tensions flaring, the Obama years constituted the perfect atmosphere for the divisive concept of critical race theory to break through the walls of academia and find its expression in the streets of America.

By the end of Obama’s second term as president, a Rasmussen poll found that 60 percent of American voters thought race relations in the United States had worsened since President Obama’s election. A similar New York Times/CBS poll taken at the same time found that nearly 70 percent of Americans thought race relations in America were bad. This represented a level unseen since the 1992 Rodney King riots.

Critical race theory’s charge that America is a “systemically racist” country was powerful. Yet, those in Obama’s camp who were forward thinking knew that this grievance alone would not be enough to sustain their power base over time. Obama also recognized the limitations of this charge.

Identity Politics and Anti-Semitic Rhetoric

It was thus during his second term that Obama embraced the concept of identity politics. He began to push the idea of a “coalition of the oppressed.” The coalition included blacks, women (feminists), Hispanics, Muslims, indigenous and other “brown” people as well as those identifying as gay, lesbian, trans and a myriad of other emerging sexual identities – essentially all those granted victim status due to their oppression by the “Establishment.”

Jews were noticeably and pointedly not included.

In the 1960s, the “Establishment” was loosely defined as the structures of societal authority. By the early 21st century, those reviving the concept had a much more specific definition of their oppressors. Namely, “white supremacist colonial powers.” Those powers specifically included Jews, Zionists and Israelis, all of whom were now identified as white, European interlopers on land indigenous to “Palestinians” (a term previously used in common English to identify anyone living in British Mandate Palestine, Jews and Arabs alike).

Despite Sharia law’s treatment of gays, women and minorities, the coalition welcomed Islamist organizations. It did the same for radical Palestinian organizations, rebranding their violent tactics and support for terror conveniently as “resistance.”

Many of these organizations, such as Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), had already enjoyed victim status on college campuses. This was due to the successful mainstreaming of the “Zionism is racism” mantra, classic anti-Semitic rhetoric.

"Points of Unity"

When Nerdeen Kiswani, co-founder and former chair of New York City SJP (NYC SJP), began the radical Palestinian group Within Our Lifetime (WOL), it was with this broader “coalition of the oppressed” in mind. On a page titled “Points of Unity, “ WOL’s website reads,  

“We are anti-Zionists. Zionism is a settler-colonial white supremacist ideology built on the genocide and dispossession of the Palestinian people.”

On the same page, WOL pledges its allegiance to

“all oppressed nationality people in the United States and around the world to engage in all forms of struggle in pursuit of freedom.” 

One of WOL’s goals is to “Globalize the Intifada,” a strategy they employ to tie all “liberation” of “colonized and oppressed people” to persecution by the Jews – in WOL’s words, to “break free from the genocidal grip of U.S. imperialism and Zionism.” 

Neveen Ayesh: A Case Study

Ayesh is a millennial Palestinian-American activist working as the government relations coordinator for the Missouri branch of American Muslims for Palestine, an extremist anti-Israel organization with links to terror groups and terror financiers. The Anti-Defamation League has accused AMP of “provid[ing] a platform for anti-Semitism.”

She was active on Twitter between 2011-2017 when she was between 18- to 24-years old. There, she openly and unabashedly expressed her vitriolic hatred of Jews and spewed anti-Semitic rhetoric. A sample of her rage from that period includes the following tweets:

“#crimesworthyoftherope being a Jew" ( August 4, 2011)

“I want to set Israel on fire with my own hands & watch it burn to ashes along with every Israeli in it. Call it what you want to call it idc" (February 17, 2014)

“I should join al-Qassam [Hamas’ terrorist wing]. Be the first female to join their group lololol #IdLoveToThough." (August 2, 2014)

Ayesh is now a political ally of Congresswoman Cori Bush (D-MO) and co-hosted a fundraiser for her. She also has political aspirations of her own and has toned down her anti-Semitic rhetoric.

Re-branding Anti-Semitic Rhetoric

Canary Mission recently called out Bush for her relationship with Ayesh (whose antisemitism was widely known). In an attempt at damage control, Ayesh responded with a long tweet thread, essentially excusing her antisemitism by re-branding it in the “language of the oppressed.”

After acknowledging that she had said “horrible things” about Jews and assuring us that she is really “not that person,” she blamed her hatred on the “chaos” she claims is part of the Palestinian experience.

“Chaos,” she says, “that no one seemed to - and still does not - care about because we’re brown. Muslims and Christian’s alike but we’re brown and Palestinian Arab.”

Ayesh says that after moving to the United States and going to college, she “learned how to assign academic terminology to what I had witnessed, experienced, & continue to experience at home & abroad. I became able to speak from an analytical and informative aspect rather than an emotional one of rage …”

Namely, what Ayesh learned was how to use anti-Semitic rhetoric effectively. Now, she labels Israel a “settler-colonialist white supremacy” entity. From this perspective, it then becomes legitimate to advocate for Israel’s total destruction.

Agendas Over Facts

Increasingly, agendas are more important to our populace than facts. This makes language a powerful tool in the arsenal of anti-Semites. It is particularly dangerous when used by radical groups like the New York-based Within Our Lifetime (WOL). These groups have successfully used venomous rhetoric to inspire physical attacks on Jews.

Last year, WOL activists sent Jews in New York to hospitals through their violent attacks. The group’s aggressive campaigns have been linked to the dramatic increase of attacks on Jews in the wider New York population.

Through equally anti-Semitic and venomous rhetoric, campus groups like Students for Justice in Palestine have successfully created atmospheres at U.S. universities where Jews are not only pushed out of student leadership positions but where Jewish students at large no longer feel safe on campus.

Like their Soviet predecessors, today’s anti-Semites rely on the “Big Lie” to sell their wares. Unfortunately, they are being sold to increasingly uneducated and gullible consumers.   

[latkefan-applesaucehater]

so you're arguing with an israel sympathizer: how to recognise their tactics and counter effectively without being a raging antisemite*!

*not all israel sympathizers are jewish, but lots of anti-israel arguments tend to devolve into antisemitism. also, i'm choosing to use israel sympathizer instead of zionist because it's more accurate: you can support the israeli genocide for reasons other than believing jewish people deserve to return to the levant, and you can believe jewish people deserve to return to the levant without supporting the state of israel and its actions. that said most people i know who do not support the israeli govt but still believe in zionism as defined above have chosen to stop self-identifying with zionism as it becomes the face of a genocide, and now express their views in other terms.

PART ONE: that's true actually

the scenario is this: an israel sympathizer says '[true statement], and that's why genocide is okay (or something to that extent)'.

WHAT NOT TO DO: '[true statement] is false actually you terrible genocide apologist!'

i am seeing this one a lot. an example of some true statements: there is currently a global rise in antisemitism. some diaspora jews only feel safe knowing there is a jewish state. jewish people are native to the levant. hamas has killed innocent civilians.

WHY THIS IS BAD: when you argue with the true statement instead of the genocide-is-okay, what you are implying is that if the statement WERE true, genocide would be okay. the statement IS true, and genocide is still not okay.

the part you need to be arguing with is 'and that's why genocide is okay'. if the post didn't SAY 'and that's why genocide is okay (or something to that extent)', you're just. attacking someone for saying true statements. stop doing that. especially stop doing that to random diaspora jews. argue with the genocide the problem is the genocide cmon people

PART TWO: ok now they're lying

the scenario is this: they are saying straight up untrue statements. they are lying! they are telling falsehoods. sometimes these falsehoods are interspersed with true statements. FOCUS on the LIES. look at part one again. don't do that.

STEP ONE: are you sure. find at LEAST two reliable sources proving it. reliable sources are primary or secondary sources, in this case. that means firsthand accounts from people in occupied palestine, or accounts relating information directly from a source in occupied palestine. try to show a little discretion with this for the love of g-d. just because you agree with a source does not make it reliable.

STEP TWO: decide how generous you are feeling. if you think the blogger is just wrong and not lying maliciously, maybe send a heads-up. if you want to debunk the claim for your followers, reblog with your (vetted, please, reliable, please) sources and a short paragraph. otherwise, block their ass! if you feel the lie is both malicious and harmful, throw a report in there.

WHAT NOT TO DO: write a callout post. i remember when we all hated callout culture can we go back to that. come ON.

PART THREE: antisemitism

the scenario is this: any criticism of israel or israel apologism is being framed as antisemitism.

STEP ONE: check yourself. is this post literally just a jew vibing while not hiding their judaism? are you blaming all jews for the acts of the israeli government? are you parroting unsourced claims (part two, step one) that sound suspiciously similar to blood libel, or well poisoning, or implying jews have a global conspiracy to control the media/banks/etc? are you blaming the israeli government for the actions of governments that do not represent a jewish state in ways that perpetuate antisemitic conspiracies* (eg, saying israel is pressuring US media outlets to take their side when that is entirely to do with the US having a vested interest in an intact israel under its current leadership)? this is not a boy who cried wolf situation some of the shit i'm seeing is super antisemitic. do better.

STEP TWO: ok, you're positive. you have verified your sources, and israel is simply doing something similar to antisemitic conspiracies. you're sure? go back to part two step two. still don't write that callout post. make a post or reblog debunking with your sources first, if you want, then block and report. *the point here being that choosing to blame a jewish state for the actions of other governments that happen to align with antisemitic myths is antisemitism. israel is doing plenty of fucked shit already you don't need to add more. also when you say things that are just. untrue, the response will be 'well you're wrong about them doing that, so what they ARE doing is okay.'

PART FOUR: don't feed the trolls

you will notice nothing on here says 'debate'. you are not going to convince these people. there will be no 'oh i see i understand genocide is wrong now', and you are just giving them a persecution complex. if you want to make a debunk, address it first and foremost to your followers. point out the arguments they use, and debunk them. point out the fallacies. point out when they're going didn't-say-boil ('i never said genocide was okay, just that israel is allowed to defend itself however it needs to!' israel is defending itself by committing genocide. they are synonyms in this context and denying that is a deliberate attempt to obscure the truth.) point out when they are deflecting, and what they are deflecting from. don't debate it won't go anywhere i'm serious resist the urge. ANTISEMITISM IS EVERYWHERE AND IF YOU ARE NOT JEWISH YOU HAVE UNCONSCIOUS BIAS. WORK TO UNLEARN IT AND STOP GOING WITH YOUR GUT. YOUR GUT WAS RAISED IN AN ANTISEMITIC CULTURE BECAUSE ALL OF THEM ARE. CHILL OUT AND START CHECKING RANDOM CLAIMS YOU SEE ONLINE.

[halalchampagnesocialist]

You haven’t answered my question. Why. Not. Both.

I’ve talked before about why I find a two state solution less than ideal. I think both people deserve to live on the land and have self-determination, but I don’t think a Palestinian state is the way, and neither do Israel’s leaders although for different reasons lmao. I would rather a single binational state from the river to the sea and that way Jews can live in the WB and Gaza if they want and Palestinians can return to Palestine or live in ‘48 territories if they choose to do so.

Even if I supported two states, I don’t think the current Palestinian leadership with Abbas at the helm are fit to lead, and US/Israel will not accept anyone who puts Palestinian interests first. That aside, israel has said over and over it has done everything to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state and its actions prove so. It could’ve pulled out the settlers decades ago but it hasn’t. It could’ve ended the occupation but it hasn’t.

Are you happy now?

[gavisuntiedboot]

I'm the anon that u called Islamophobic. I think I didn't get my point across. Mena is notorious for having no democracy or electing fundamentalist gov. This isn't being Islamophobic this is a fact. I don't think Palestinians will want to live in peace after what israel put them through especially kids from Gaza.

Creation of Israel was to make it a Jewish state not a secular state. Makes no sense for them to change law of return. Especially with Netanyahu n abbas to find a middle ground

Its naive of u to think that it won't start a Civil War like in Lebanon. They don't like each other. Either way there will be genocide of Either group. Forcing a one state solution is not feasible,unless u want a blood bath. Ut will be 1947 all over.

I'm not Islamophobic like u make me out to be. I live in a country that feeds the same kind of propaganda. What israel is doing in wrong. They shouldn't have been making a state there. Things happened has happened.

Both of the leadership in very corrupt. This is the reason I support 2 state solution so that they don't kill each other. Or otherwise jews just go back where they come from Europe or Mena wherever.

Also river to sea is a call for genocide. It was used by Israeli gov and also Palestinians. U want to mean it something but it isn't.

I hope there will be peace someday without a genocide

Anon, read these words carefully: you ARE being Islamophobic and racist when you say these things.

MENA is notorious for actually having their governments collapsed by the West and then benefiting from the chaos. That's what happened in Egypt and Kuwait and Lebanon. They never let elections stand as the people want them. You are saying that "MENA people don't know how to pick governments or they pick a Muslim one." Like dude. There is currently no fundamentally Islamic government anywhere in the world. It doesn't exist. Like who are you referring to when you make this statement? If I say "Ukrainian people don't know how to elect a good government, so Russia should have Ukraine" it would be an ASS BACKWARDS STATEMENT. YOU, non-MENA individual, think we don't know how to pick or elect a government. So what if it's an Islamic government? IF THAT'S WHAT THE PEOPLE CHOOSE FOR THEMSELVES WHAT IS THE ISSUE? You're Islamophobic and racist because you believe that people in the MENA region are not capable of making decisions for themselves or capable of being civilized.

"Well I don't think that Palestinians will want x..." Respectfully, what you think means ABSOLUTELY FUCK ALL IN THIS SITUATION. You are not Palestinian, you don't talk to Palestinian or even Middle Eastern people apparently, and your response is "Well they already took the land so let them keep it." No. Fuck you. It's our land and we want it back. Because by your logic "well Franc took Algeria so they should just be fine with it". Like you fundamentally do not believe brown people have the right to their own land and to self determination. If Russia took a portion of Ukraine, you would never say "oh just let Russia keep it what happened already happened" because they're white.

The West fucks up the MENA region and then tells brown people to deal with it. Lebanon was created to make an Arab state for Christians so they would leave Syria. Then the same Western countries put a Muslim government in place TO MAKE SURE THE MIDDLE EAST WASN'T AT REST. THE WHITE WORLD BENEFITS FROM THE DESTABILIZATION OF THE MIDDLE EAST. SO THEY CASUE IT THEMSELVES.

Israel shouldn't exist. And God willing within our lifetimes it will cease to exist. And I mean that in the same way the Soviet Union ceases to exist. Not as a call for killing, but the dismantlement of an oppressive political system of ruling. I want the state of Israel to disappear, not Jewish people.

And finally, from the river to the sea was a slogan made by Palestinians. Israelis stole it, like they stole everything else. Palestinians say it with one meaning, and your refusal to accept the meaning from the creators of the phrase speaks to the internalized bigotry within you. When people say "Black Lives Matter" do you feel threatened? Do you think it is a call to end white lives? Do you burn with the need to say "well ALL lives matter"?

Your argument is based in the fact that you see brown people as incapable of self governance, that because they were massacred in '48 they don't deserve their own land, that everyone is bad so Palestinians should shut up and be happy with a two state solution and that's the best we can do. You are a racist and you are Islamophobic, and I will not be responding to any of your further attempts at a rebuttal until you can sit with yourself and realize that. You think you're free from propaganda? The propaganda has worked extra hard on you, because you still believe that we are not civilized people.

I hope you have the day you deserve.

[grits-galraisedinthesouth]

Not satire🤦‍♂️ Salon Magazine: "MAGA Republicans & Christian Nationalism ‘Bigger Threat to America than Hamas’ "

When Hillary Clinton called for the deprogramming of Trump Supporters, it was evident that Big Brother plans to imprison any American who refuses to relinquish love for God & love of country.

Today’s Republicans, as well as Christian nationalism, are a greater threat to the United States than the Hamas terrorist organization, which is responsible for scores of terror attacks including the most recent massacre of over 1,000 civilians — according to a recent Salon piece that is drawing fierce backlash for the “gross” assertion.

Following the deadliest attack on Jewish people since the Nazi Holocaust, Salon magazine published an essay declaring MAGA Republicans and Christian supporters a “bigger threat” to America than the Hamas terrorist perpetrators. 

The Thursday essay, titled “MAGA and Christian nationalism: Bigger threat to America than Hamas could ever be,” was penned by columnist Brian Karem, the former senior White House correspondent for Playboy.

— while forcing the rest of us to worship the way they choose,” he asserts, accusing them of appearing “hellbent on returning to the Middle Ages, driven there by the first Christian nationalist House speaker.”

He also claims that modern Republicans are unconcerned about the possibility of theocratic threats to freedom.

“They revel in their own chicanery. They despise free thought and independence, and are happy to play games with a government shutdown — the modern equivalent of fiddling while it all burns,” he writes. 

The longtime White House correspondent concludes with a reflection on President Joe Biden’s dwindling popularity and the broader challenges facing the country, from climate change to the potential of widespread violence and political turmoil.

In response, many took to social media to express outrage over the essay.

“Good grief,” remarked Tesla CEO and X (formerly Twitter) owner Elon Musk.“Yep. Some editor at Salon actually signed off on this piece by Brian Karem, who somehow is a credentialed WH ‘reporter,’” wrote columnist Joe Concha.

“In a sane world they’d be out of a job in about 30 seconds. Instead, Salon is actually promoting it,” he added.The U.S.-designated Islamic terror group, whose charter calls openly for the murder of Jews and the elimination of the Jewish state through relentless jihad, perpetrated the worst terrorist attack in Israel’s history last month, in an operation stemming from its radical beliefs. 

Hamas’ attack last month, which drew parallels to scenes from the Nazi Holocaust, saw some 2,500 terrorists burst into Issrael by land, sea, and air and gun down participants at an outdoor music festival while others went door-to-door hunting for Jewish men, women, and children in local towns who were then subject to torture, rape, execution, immolation, and kidnapping.

The attack resulted in more than 1,400 dead inside the Jewish state, over 5,300 more wounded, and at least 242 hostages of all ages taken.

The vast majority of the victims are civilians and include dozens of American citizens.On Tuesday, FBI Director Christopher Wray warned of heightened threats in the U.S. due to the Israel-Hamas war.

“We assess that the actions of Hamas and its allies will serve as an inspiration the likes of which we haven’t seen since (the Islamic State group) launched its so-called caliphate several years ago,” Wray told the Senate Committee on Homeland Security.

Salon has a history of smearing Republicans and Christians.

In March, a Salon piece insisted that Republicans are in the midst of waging a “fascist war” against freedom and democracy.Last year, an article in the progressive publication described the GOP as being a “de facto terrorist organization” as well as the “world’s largest white supremacist” group.

Previously, Salon published an interview in which “the Republican fascist movement” was referred to as “objectively evil,” and “white Christians” were accused of embracing lies, terrorism, white supremacy and fascism.

Joshua Klein is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jklein@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter @JoshuaKlein.