No, where did you get that? I’m not even saying he is right wing.
My sole point was that this is an opinion piece that was trying to lead the reader to a particular point of view, rather than purely a Ken Burns style documentary of the history of Israel, so it shouldn’t be used as the sole source for understanding the issues involved.
I don’t know what to tell you - this is definitely an issue of the left (again, in the west) and not the right (who have their own problems, such as the whole “you and him fight” mentality I’ve repeatedly called out).
It’s not trying to be the sole source for understanding the entire situation. It’s a refutation of one specific argument.
I agree and said so repeatedly. It is a fine article for what it is which is an informed opinion piece trying to argue a specific point of view.
The only thing that sent me down the rabbit hole, which I am deeply regretting ever entering, was this comment
And I just wanted to make sure that Ferris knew that it was written from a pro-Israel perspective, and that another author may have an equally factually accurate account that shaded things differently.
No, I didn’t say that he did; hence my remark about “selective omission” rather than “explicit denial”.
No, I didn’t say that he did, just that those four classic right-wing boogeyman figures were the only types of people that he mentioned in this context.
I’m not making any claims whatsoever about what Sebag Montefiore “really means”, just about the impressions conveyed by what he chose to say.
And I think that the the well of American political discourse is so deeply poisoned that as a nation, you are no longer capable of rational thought. You’re so obsessed with subtext that the actual text might as well not exist.
Those are two arguments - one can agree with one (that Israel is a colonialist regime) and yet disagree with the other (that decolonization requires Jews be removed from Israel).
Well, Zimbabwe… and South Africa sometime in the future, probably.
I do not know how much of it was official policy, but, while there were a lot of efforts to help Jews to move to Israel in the early 1950s, if anything there were no analogous efforts to encourage Palestinians to move (or move back) to Israel, quite the contrary. That would have been a good time to put a pin in the looming situation, but, as is eternally the case everywhere, the politicians did not want to deal with it.
It definitely would have been a good time to permanently resettle them in other countries, yes.
Oof, fair. It’s just barely possible that we Americans don’t know enough about the rest of the world’s history sometimes.
The sentence was “since October 7, Western academics, students, artists, and activists have denied, excused, or even celebrated the murders by a terrorist sect”.
This is poisoning the well in multiple ways.
Firstly, since there are no constraints here, the implication is that we’re talking about many people; that probably a majority of people belonging to those groups and speaking on this issue are taking this position.
I honestly haven’t heard anyone deny the Hamas atrocities so far and as far as I could read the article, it provides no such cites (the archive version didn’t work for me, I could only read up to the paywall).
Secondly, why are we even talking about these groups? It’s clearly trying to paint a picture of people without real jobs taking these heinous views.
Zimbabwe land reforms were rife with corruption, and a total failure. Before there were economies of scale, and that nation exported massive amounts of food. Now, people are starving. And now, They are allowing White folks who the land was seized from the reclaim it. In other words- a total failure. Same thing happened in quite a few nations, where land reform, ie splitting up the plantations and giving each farmer a smallish plot - failed utterly.
Where did LHoD say anything about the handing back having to be successful? What does any of this have to do with what we were talking about?
An amazing non-response!
Moderating
End the Zimbabwe hijack now. Start a new thread if you want to discuss this.
So, the cease fire, eh?
JERUSALEM, Nov 30 (Reuters) - Two Hamas gunmen killed three people at a Jerusalem bus stop during morning rush hour on Thursday, and Israel reiterated its commitment to wiping out the Palestinian Islamist faction, whose Oct. 7 killing spree triggered the Gaza war.
The attackers, Palestinians from East Jerusalem, were shot dead by off-duty soldiers and an armed civilian, police said. At least eight people were also wounded in the shooting.
Why do Muslim American support Hamas?
Makes no sense to me?
Dec 2 (Reuters) - Muslim American leaders from six battleground states on Saturday vowed to mobilize their communities against President Joe Biden’s reelection over his support of Israel’s war in Gaza, but they have yet to settle on an alternative 2024 candidate.
And Biden has pushed for a cease fire- what do they want that Biden can deliver?
…can you quote the specific parts of the article that states “Muslim American support Hamas?” The article requires me to sign in to read it and I couldn’t see it in the preview.
Heres another cite-
They demand that Biden demand a permanent cease fire. Which supports Hamas.
… but he hasn’t pushed for a cease fire. It’s one of the things people have been asking him to do for the last 58 days. They want Biden to actually call for a ceasefire. They want him to “turn off the tap.” They want the bombing and death and destruction in Gaza to stop. They consider what is happening in Gaza to be genocidal, and that Biden is complicit in that genocide.
This is a different claim.
Can you provide a cite to support the claim that “Muslim American support Hamas?”
Because I too demand a ceasefire (permanent being a word used to characterize the calls, but not actually used in the calls that you cited) .
But I don’t support Hamas.
Guess I’m a Hamas supporter now.