Please or to access all these features

Conflict in the Middle East

Israel committing genocide in Gaza, world’s top scholars on the crime say

681 replies

Everexpanding · 01/09/2025 17:15

An overwhelming majority of members of the world’s leading genocide scholars’ association have backed a resolution stating that Israel’s actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of the crime.
Eighty-six per cent of those who voted in the 500-member International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) supported the motion. The resolution states that “Israel’s policies and actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of genocide in article II of the United Nations convention for the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide (1948).”

www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/01/israel-committing-genocide-in-gaza-worlds-top-scholars-on-the-say

Gaza | The Guardian

Latest news, sport, business, comment, analysis and reviews from the Guardian, the world's leading liberal voice

https://www.theguardian.com/world/gaza

OP posts:
Thread gallery
23
Everexpanding · 03/09/2025 22:58

A non paywalled source

www.middleeastmonitor.com/20230627-israel-poisoned-palestinian-land-reveal-newly-released-state-documents/?amp

OP posts:
OP posts:
Everexpanding · 03/09/2025 22:47

Yes it is very interesting how we got here

The pioneerss of today's Jewish settlers, who currently terrorize the Palestinians in the occupied Gaza, West Bank and Jerusalem, committed horrific terrorist acts in the 1930s and 1940s. Founders of Zionist Israeli regime used terrorism as a political weapon in the Middle East. After the creation of Israel, their actions became official Israeli state policy of terror as evidenced in the numerous massacres committed by the Israeli army and the violence perpetrated against the Palestinian people. Long before Palestinian resistance groups like Hamas picked up arms against the Israeli occupation, a plethora of Jewish militias were bombing and shooting dead British officials and Palestinian Arabs.
According to US Department of Justice, “JEWISH TERRORISM AGAINST BRITISH AND ARABS did contribute heavily to the removal of the british from palestine, the abandonment of the league of nations mandate and the creation of a Jewish state of Israel”. It cites three groups - THE HAGANAH, THE IRGUN, AND THE LOHAMEI HERUT(LEHI), THEIR MILITARY AND PARAMILITARY GROUPS. John Lois Peeke, an American military expert, also writes that Zionist terrorism was at the core of the idea of Israel. “Jewish terrorism against British and Arabs did contribute heavily to the removal of the British from Palestine, the abandonment of the League of Nations mandate and the creation of a Jewish state of Israel,” he wrote in his book Jewish-Zionist Terrorism and the Establishment of Israel.
The British historical researcher and author, Thomas Suarez, in his book “State of Terror: How Terrorism Created Modern Israel” says “they engaged in an unrelenting litany of infrastructure bombings, mass
killings, and massacres of Palestinian villagers. Equally, they committed systematic acts of terrorism directed against British Mandate officials, oil refinery facilities, colonial railways, police vessels and infrastructure. Fighting the British served the Zionist claim that they were fighting a “war of liberation” against a colonial power, which suited their public relations in the West, especially in the USA.”
The Jewish Agency in Palestine, an offshoot of the World Zionist Organization, and founded in 1929orchestrated these efforts during the Mandate period. David Ben-Gurion, later to become Israel’s first
Prime Minister, served as the chairman of the Agency’s Executive Committee. It was chargedwith resettling Jews in Palestine. It had a “defense” force, the MILITARY wing
Haganah, and a strike force, the Palmach. The Haganah engaged in anti-British and anti-Palestinian terrorism together with other terrorist organizations, the Irgun and Lehi.
David Ben-Gurion founded Hagana which raised the slogan “Judaea was lost by blood and fire and will rise again by blood and fire. During World War II, hundreds of Haganah members enlisted in the British army to help Britain in its war against Nazi Germany and her allies. This gave them valuable military experience and enabled them to amass large hoards of weapons. At war's end, and in order to hasten the creation of a Jewish state, members of the Haganah and their elite units, called the Palmach, numbering over 60,000 male and female fighters began to carry out terrorist operations against British military and civilian outposts throughout Palestine. They launched a regular offensive to clear the Arab settlements.
In 1943, Menachem Begin, a Polish Jew, arrived in Palestine, having defected from the Polish Army. Begin immediately joined the Irgun, and advanced to command Irgun in a very short period of time. There were three basic tenets of Irgun ideology: (1) All Jews had a right to enter Palestine; (2) Only active retaliation would deter the Arabs; (3) Only Jewish armed force would ensure the Jewish State. For instance, in July 1946, Irgun blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, where the British administration headquarters were located, killing 92 people. to destroy the secret documents which would have linked the Jewish Agency and Ben- Gurion to Haganah terrorism.” On April 1, 1948 an Irgun unit totally destroyed the Arab village of DIR YASSEN outside Jerusalem killing two-hundred and fifty people. The organization was was named as a terror group by the UN, the US and the UK. But despite such a strong censure, Begin later formed Herut, a right-wing Israeli political party. Begin went on to became the sixth prime minister of Israel in 1977. Herut, alongside other prominent leaders of Lehi terror group, later merged into the Likud Party of incumbent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Another underground Jewish terrorist group, Lohamey Heruth Israel (fighters for the freedom of Israel) or Lehi, was formed under the leadership of Avraham Stern and came to be perceived by conventional eyes as the most violent and unrestrained terrorist organization of the modern era. Whereas the Haganah acted as an undergroupnd militia and the Irgun as an underground army, Lehi focused on the assassinations of significant British officials, the most notable being the murder of the British ambassador in Egypt. The Jewish Agency protected these terrorist groups whenever the British asked for the Agency’s help in controlling their violence. Most Israelis viewed these groups and their members as the most dedicated, sacrificial, and effective contributors to the Zionist cause.

The Jewish Agency developed Jewish settler “hiking parties” to guide Zionist forces in their ethniccleansing of Palestinians and land seizure. Moreover, in their effort to increase Jewish settlers in Palestine, the Zionists developed campaigns to encourage American Jews to make Aliyah (immigration to Israel). Today, there are nearly 600,000 US citizens living in the West Bankalone. The Zionists also sought to populate Palestine with surviving European Jewish orphans. These children could be easily socialized into the Zionist narrative and provide a ready-made second generation to sustain the transformation of Palestine. Thousands of Jewish children were forcibly removed from the adoptive families that had saved them when their parents perished years earlier, the kidnappings sometimes assisted by these Jewish groups. Suarez writes that Zionists blocked American and European resettlement efforts of Jewish victims of Nazi Germany to places other thanPalestine. Terrorism would be used to force European Jews to move to Palestine after the war and to prevent Jews in Palestine from leaving.

OP posts:
PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 22:28

YourBrightSnake · 03/09/2025 22:16

It's absolutely true that the right to self-determination does not depend on a state having existed for hundreds of years and obviously the 'nation state' is a relatively modern concept. But it's also clear that the narrative of 'Jews came in and stole the Palestinians' land and that's why the Palestinians are terrorists' is not supported by a clear-sighted reading of history. That's why I don't buy the idea that Palestinian anger is all Israel's fault.

To clarify, I agree that Jewish people didn’t come in and just steal the land. That isn’t what I was suggesting and I apologise if that’s what my post inferred. To clarify, the arrival of huge numbers of Jewish immigrants and the promise by the Brits of autonomous Jewish state had an impact on the people who already lived there. I’m simplifying a lot of history here but my point is that the perspective of people living on the land at that time matters when working out why violence and hatred followed. It doesn’t condone or justify the violence. It doesn’t mean Jewish people then or Israeli citizens today are to blame for the violence they have suffered. People committing atrocities in the past and present are wholly responsible for their actions. But looking at both perspectives helps us understand it and how we got to where we are today. If we understand how we got here, we can the try to change course.

YourBrightSnake · 03/09/2025 22:16

TulipLavender · 03/09/2025 21:49

You do realise that over 100 current nation states were not sovereign nation states prior to 1947 - does that mean that none of them have a right to self determination on the land that they have lived in for centuries?
You are just trotting out these hasbara talking points that are not appropriately contextualised.

Jordan was separated earlier.

There are distinct ethnic identities and Palestinians are not just Arabs to be push out in Jordan or Egypt or Lebanon no matter how much you would like that.

It's absolutely true that the right to self-determination does not depend on a state having existed for hundreds of years and obviously the 'nation state' is a relatively modern concept. But it's also clear that the narrative of 'Jews came in and stole the Palestinians' land and that's why the Palestinians are terrorists' is not supported by a clear-sighted reading of history. That's why I don't buy the idea that Palestinian anger is all Israel's fault.

TulipLavender · 03/09/2025 21:49

CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 21:07

You do realise their was no sovereign state of Palestine before Palestinians (referred to as Arabs then) were apparently forced to give over their land, and the Arabs in the region of Palestine never had their own State.

There was a Jewish population and by all accounts a large immigrant population of Arabs from surrounding countries after the British started administering it in 1919.

73% of the British Mandate had already been handed over to create an Arab State - Jordan

Of the 27% left over, to split further again for another Arab State and a Jewish State, the majority of land allocated to the Jewish people was the Negev desert!

Ask the 2 million Arabs in Israel, those who were, or descended from, the Arabs who decided to remain in Israel in 1948, if the Jewish people wanted to co exist with them?

Or the Jewish people of 1948 in what is now Jordan, if the Arabs there wanted to co exist with them or why the British Government restricted Jews from settling there.

The British Balfour Declaration endorsed the idea of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, though its borders were not defined. Boundaries for a British Mandate for Palestine were proposed by the World Zionist Organization to the Paris Peace Conferenceof 1919:
^^
"The fertile plains east of the Jordan, since the earliest Biblical times, have been linked economically and politically with the land west of the Jordan. The country which is now very sparsely populated, in Roman times supported a great population. It could now serve admirably for colonisation on a large scale. A just regard for the economic needs of Palestine and Arabia demands that free access to the Hedjaz Railway throughout its length be accorded both Governments."
^^
Notwithstanding the wishes of the WZO, the British administration from as early as 1917 treated territory east of the Jordan River, known as Transjordan, separately, and saw it as a separate future state. A formal restriction of the Jewish homeland to west of the Jordan was announced at the Cairo conference in March 1921, and a new article was added to the draft mandate text allowing the British government to administer Transjordan separately. The mandate was approved by the League of Nations in July 1922, and in September 1922 the League approved a memorandum spelling out in detail the exclusion of Transjordan from the Jewish homeland provisions.
^^
The only formally approved presence of Jews in Transjordan was in the late 1920s. In 1927, Pinchas Rutenberg, founder of the Palestine Electric Company, signed an agreement with the Emir of Transjordan Abdullah I to build a hydroelectric power station on Transjordan territory. Construction of the Naharayim hydroelectric power plant began in 1928. Tel Or was built near the power plant to house the permanent employees and their families. Tel Or was settled in 1930 and was the only Jewish village in Transjordan at the time. Residents also farmed thousands of dunams of land and sold some of the produce at a company workers’ supermarket in Haifa. The town lasted until its depopulation in 1948 during the Arab-Israeli War, when it was overrun by Iraqi and Transjordanian forces and destroyed.

You do realise that over 100 current nation states were not sovereign nation states prior to 1947 - does that mean that none of them have a right to self determination on the land that they have lived in for centuries?
You are just trotting out these hasbara talking points that are not appropriately contextualised.

Jordan was separated earlier.

There are distinct ethnic identities and Palestinians are not just Arabs to be push out in Jordan or Egypt or Lebanon no matter how much you would like that.

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 21:49

CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 21:46

Clutching
At
Straws

Agreed

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 21:48

CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 21:07

You do realise their was no sovereign state of Palestine before Palestinians (referred to as Arabs then) were apparently forced to give over their land, and the Arabs in the region of Palestine never had their own State.

There was a Jewish population and by all accounts a large immigrant population of Arabs from surrounding countries after the British started administering it in 1919.

73% of the British Mandate had already been handed over to create an Arab State - Jordan

Of the 27% left over, to split further again for another Arab State and a Jewish State, the majority of land allocated to the Jewish people was the Negev desert!

Ask the 2 million Arabs in Israel, those who were, or descended from, the Arabs who decided to remain in Israel in 1948, if the Jewish people wanted to co exist with them?

Or the Jewish people of 1948 in what is now Jordan, if the Arabs there wanted to co exist with them or why the British Government restricted Jews from settling there.

The British Balfour Declaration endorsed the idea of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, though its borders were not defined. Boundaries for a British Mandate for Palestine were proposed by the World Zionist Organization to the Paris Peace Conferenceof 1919:
^^
"The fertile plains east of the Jordan, since the earliest Biblical times, have been linked economically and politically with the land west of the Jordan. The country which is now very sparsely populated, in Roman times supported a great population. It could now serve admirably for colonisation on a large scale. A just regard for the economic needs of Palestine and Arabia demands that free access to the Hedjaz Railway throughout its length be accorded both Governments."
^^
Notwithstanding the wishes of the WZO, the British administration from as early as 1917 treated territory east of the Jordan River, known as Transjordan, separately, and saw it as a separate future state. A formal restriction of the Jewish homeland to west of the Jordan was announced at the Cairo conference in March 1921, and a new article was added to the draft mandate text allowing the British government to administer Transjordan separately. The mandate was approved by the League of Nations in July 1922, and in September 1922 the League approved a memorandum spelling out in detail the exclusion of Transjordan from the Jewish homeland provisions.
^^
The only formally approved presence of Jews in Transjordan was in the late 1920s. In 1927, Pinchas Rutenberg, founder of the Palestine Electric Company, signed an agreement with the Emir of Transjordan Abdullah I to build a hydroelectric power station on Transjordan territory. Construction of the Naharayim hydroelectric power plant began in 1928. Tel Or was built near the power plant to house the permanent employees and their families. Tel Or was settled in 1930 and was the only Jewish village in Transjordan at the time. Residents also farmed thousands of dunams of land and sold some of the produce at a company workers’ supermarket in Haifa. The town lasted until its depopulation in 1948 during the Arab-Israeli War, when it was overrun by Iraqi and Transjordanian forces and destroyed.

If we’re discussing why the revolts happened, it’s relevant to note that the people on that land did not carve it up themselves though (either though violence (not ideal) or diplomacy (ideal) as other borders were drawn throughout history). And there were people removed from their homes - not all landowners lived on the land they sold (absentee landlords). Again, I’m not saying that Israel shouldn’t exist or that any Jewish immigrants seeking safety were wrong to go there. But it is important to understand the Palestinian (or, as you note at that time, Arab) perspective at each point so that where we at today makes sense. We’re talking decades of anger and frustration and fear and violence. Both sides have contributed to that and both sides have been scarred by it.

SharonEllis · 03/09/2025 21:48

PrawnAgain · 03/09/2025 21:44

Isreal have gone way beyond retaliation at this stage.

Again, it's not a binary choice between do nothing and commit genocide.

The destruction of Gaza isn't going to be good anyone in the long run. Obviously it's not good for the Palestinians living there but it's bad for Israel and Jewish people asking the world too.

Isreal is becoming a pariah state.
The Isreali hostages are not free.
Jewish people around the world are facing increased anti-semitism
Any surviving Gazans will hate Israel because of the trauma inflicted upon them by Isreal,leading to further terrorism.

Who do you think Isreal's actions are benefiting?

Edited

Wby cant you spell Israel?

CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 21:46

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 21:36

To be honest, they lost credibility when they shared a story without any evidence. Whether it then is found to be true isn’t necessarily relevant. They were happy to spread information based on opinion/a pro narrative. If an NGO is founded on the notion that it’ll check media bias and ensure stories are factual and ‘fair’, they must act within the same boundaries.

So you saw that info and decided not to share it - did it not fit your narrative?

You then seem to go on to question the way Media Bias analyse their reliability. As you have shown, withholding information can also lead to misinformation being spread. To be honest though, you should either share media bias scores because you trust their judgement or decide not to rely on them as evidence for your source because you don’t think their scoring works. I don’t think you can or should pick the parts of their analysis that suit your narrative and disregard the rest. At least share all the available information with people on here so they can make their own informed opinion.

Clutching
At
Straws

PrawnAgain · 03/09/2025 21:44

Tryonemoretime · 03/09/2025 18:47

If Israel had not retaliated, do you think Hamas would have stopped at one attack? They promised they'd do it again. And again....

Isreal have gone way beyond retaliation at this stage.

Again, it's not a binary choice between do nothing and commit genocide.

The destruction of Gaza isn't going to be good anyone in the long run. Obviously it's not good for the Palestinians living there but it's bad for Israel and Jewish people asking the world too.

Isreal is becoming a pariah state.
The Isreali hostages are not free.
Jewish people around the world are facing increased anti-semitism
Any surviving Gazans will hate Israel because of the trauma inflicted upon them by Isreal,leading to further terrorism.

Who do you think Isreal's actions are benefiting?

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 21:36

CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 20:40

Yep thought you would reference that.

https://www.mediasupport.org/blogpost/how-an-israeli-media-watchdogs-unsubstantiated-allegations-has-put-a-price-on-palestinian-journalists-heads/

With regards to the CEO ‘admitting’ they shared information re 7/10 with no supporting evidence.

After publication of this article, a spokeswoman for the Associated Press quoted by the Daily Wire denied any advance knowledge of the attack, although HonestReporting did not make such accusation.

honestreporting.com/photographers-without-borders-ap-reuters-pictures-of-hamas-atrocities-raise-ethical-questions/

I think they were proved right in the above report though weren’t they?

I didn’t miss the bit under the what I copied and pasted.

How does it make sense that it’s stated as having no failed fact checks but rated as only Mostly Factual?

They don’t hide their bias, as I already said, which is more honest than most media organisations IMO.

What propaganda do they create when they are reporting facts?

Are facts propaganda when they don’t suit a narrative?

To be honest, they lost credibility when they shared a story without any evidence. Whether it then is found to be true isn’t necessarily relevant. They were happy to spread information based on opinion/a pro narrative. If an NGO is founded on the notion that it’ll check media bias and ensure stories are factual and ‘fair’, they must act within the same boundaries.

So you saw that info and decided not to share it - did it not fit your narrative?

You then seem to go on to question the way Media Bias analyse their reliability. As you have shown, withholding information can also lead to misinformation being spread. To be honest though, you should either share media bias scores because you trust their judgement or decide not to rely on them as evidence for your source because you don’t think their scoring works. I don’t think you can or should pick the parts of their analysis that suit your narrative and disregard the rest. At least share all the available information with people on here so they can make their own informed opinion.

CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 21:07

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 20:34

I think immigration is slightly different to what happened here though - again, I’m not saying Israel shouldn’t exist or believe it should be destroyed/moved/changed. I am pro-Israel in the sense of its existence and its people. But Palestinians were forced to give over their land to people who wanted their own state. Neither side wanted the other to be there. And it’s easy to say one side was violent and the other peaceful but from the Palestinians perspective, someone else gave their land to a group of people who didn’t want to coexist either and their arrival had an impact on Palestinians lives. They were there and someone else came along and suddenly that land was no longer theirs. It’s a different type of attack (from their perspective) that the original Jewish immigrants aren’t to blame for or need to apologise for - they rightfully wanted a place to feel safe. But, in hindsight, if that had maybe been managed more carefully, we could be dealing with a totally different political landscape. But we are not, so we have to keep questioning how the two sides need to change their trajectory.

You do realise their was no sovereign state of Palestine before Palestinians (referred to as Arabs then) were apparently forced to give over their land, and the Arabs in the region of Palestine never had their own State.

There was a Jewish population and by all accounts a large immigrant population of Arabs from surrounding countries after the British started administering it in 1919.

73% of the British Mandate had already been handed over to create an Arab State - Jordan

Of the 27% left over, to split further again for another Arab State and a Jewish State, the majority of land allocated to the Jewish people was the Negev desert!

Ask the 2 million Arabs in Israel, those who were, or descended from, the Arabs who decided to remain in Israel in 1948, if the Jewish people wanted to co exist with them?

Or the Jewish people of 1948 in what is now Jordan, if the Arabs there wanted to co exist with them or why the British Government restricted Jews from settling there.

The British Balfour Declaration endorsed the idea of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, though its borders were not defined. Boundaries for a British Mandate for Palestine were proposed by the World Zionist Organization to the Paris Peace Conferenceof 1919:
^^
"The fertile plains east of the Jordan, since the earliest Biblical times, have been linked economically and politically with the land west of the Jordan. The country which is now very sparsely populated, in Roman times supported a great population. It could now serve admirably for colonisation on a large scale. A just regard for the economic needs of Palestine and Arabia demands that free access to the Hedjaz Railway throughout its length be accorded both Governments."
^^
Notwithstanding the wishes of the WZO, the British administration from as early as 1917 treated territory east of the Jordan River, known as Transjordan, separately, and saw it as a separate future state. A formal restriction of the Jewish homeland to west of the Jordan was announced at the Cairo conference in March 1921, and a new article was added to the draft mandate text allowing the British government to administer Transjordan separately. The mandate was approved by the League of Nations in July 1922, and in September 1922 the League approved a memorandum spelling out in detail the exclusion of Transjordan from the Jewish homeland provisions.
^^
The only formally approved presence of Jews in Transjordan was in the late 1920s. In 1927, Pinchas Rutenberg, founder of the Palestine Electric Company, signed an agreement with the Emir of Transjordan Abdullah I to build a hydroelectric power station on Transjordan territory. Construction of the Naharayim hydroelectric power plant began in 1928. Tel Or was built near the power plant to house the permanent employees and their families. Tel Or was settled in 1930 and was the only Jewish village in Transjordan at the time. Residents also farmed thousands of dunams of land and sold some of the produce at a company workers’ supermarket in Haifa. The town lasted until its depopulation in 1948 during the Arab-Israeli War, when it was overrun by Iraqi and Transjordanian forces and destroyed.

CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 20:40

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 19:44

Under the bit you copied and pasted, you missed the following important information: We also rate them as Mostly Factual rather than High due to the promotion of nationalist propaganda.

Even the CEO has admitted that they’ve shared information re 7/10 with no supporting evidence.

They’re a biased, pro-Israel NGO that create propaganda. They’re part of the problem.

Yep thought you would reference that.

https://www.mediasupport.org/blogpost/how-an-israeli-media-watchdogs-unsubstantiated-allegations-has-put-a-price-on-palestinian-journalists-heads/

With regards to the CEO ‘admitting’ they shared information re 7/10 with no supporting evidence.

After publication of this article, a spokeswoman for the Associated Press quoted by the Daily Wire denied any advance knowledge of the attack, although HonestReporting did not make such accusation.

honestreporting.com/photographers-without-borders-ap-reuters-pictures-of-hamas-atrocities-raise-ethical-questions/

I think they were proved right in the above report though weren’t they?

I didn’t miss the bit under the what I copied and pasted.

How does it make sense that it’s stated as having no failed fact checks but rated as only Mostly Factual?

They don’t hide their bias, as I already said, which is more honest than most media organisations IMO.

What propaganda do they create when they are reporting facts?

Are facts propaganda when they don’t suit a narrative?

How an Israeli media watchdog’s unsubstantiated allegations has put a price on Palestinian journalists’ heads | IMS

On Wednesday 8 November the Israeli self-proclaimed and audaciously named media watchdog Honest Reporting suggested that several Gaza-based Palestinian freelance photojournalists, whose coverage of Hamas’ 7 October rampage was used by NYT, Reuters, and...

https://www.mediasupport.org/blogpost/how-an-israeli-media-watchdogs-unsubstantiated-allegations-has-put-a-price-on-palestinian-journalists-heads/

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 20:34

dairydebris · 03/09/2025 19:41

I understand high levels of immigration can cause resentment.

Palestinian leadership has consistently chosen to express that resentment through violence and terrorism.

The land intended for Palestinian Arabs was far, far greater than they can ever dream of for a Palestinian state now. It was their leadership that chose war to eliminate Jews instead of attempting peaceful existence. A monumental error in hindsight.

Neither side is blameless as we both know. I really do object to the suggestion that Palestinian hatred was due to Israeli oppression. Palestinian hatred pre dates any Israeli oppression. They never wanted to share the land. Any of it.

I think immigration is slightly different to what happened here though - again, I’m not saying Israel shouldn’t exist or believe it should be destroyed/moved/changed. I am pro-Israel in the sense of its existence and its people. But Palestinians were forced to give over their land to people who wanted their own state. Neither side wanted the other to be there. And it’s easy to say one side was violent and the other peaceful but from the Palestinians perspective, someone else gave their land to a group of people who didn’t want to coexist either and their arrival had an impact on Palestinians lives. They were there and someone else came along and suddenly that land was no longer theirs. It’s a different type of attack (from their perspective) that the original Jewish immigrants aren’t to blame for or need to apologise for - they rightfully wanted a place to feel safe. But, in hindsight, if that had maybe been managed more carefully, we could be dealing with a totally different political landscape. But we are not, so we have to keep questioning how the two sides need to change their trajectory.

hkathy · 03/09/2025 20:27

Tryonemoretime · 03/09/2025 20:03

What did Hamas expect to happen? You don't start a war and then complain when you lose.

The children are not hamas.

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 20:25

Tryonemoretime · 03/09/2025 20:03

What did Hamas expect to happen? You don't start a war and then complain when you lose.

But we’re talking about civilians dying not Hamas. Removing Hamas from power is an essential part of creating some sort of peace in that area. But if you kill a load of civilians, destroy their homes, take away their right to medical facilities and food and then suggest they relocate abroad, you cannot be surprised when your new shiny mega tech city full of Israeli settlers is attacked by the next generation of terrorists. Just as you said ‘what did Hamas expect to happen’, I would say ‘what did the Israeli government expect to happen?’

Tryonemoretime · 03/09/2025 20:03

hkathy · 03/09/2025 19:52

And when the settlers go back in it will be rebuilt on the bones of tens of thousands of children who died in the rubble.

What did Hamas expect to happen? You don't start a war and then complain when you lose.

hkathy · 03/09/2025 20:01

dairydebris · 03/09/2025 19:41

I understand high levels of immigration can cause resentment.

Palestinian leadership has consistently chosen to express that resentment through violence and terrorism.

The land intended for Palestinian Arabs was far, far greater than they can ever dream of for a Palestinian state now. It was their leadership that chose war to eliminate Jews instead of attempting peaceful existence. A monumental error in hindsight.

Neither side is blameless as we both know. I really do object to the suggestion that Palestinian hatred was due to Israeli oppression. Palestinian hatred pre dates any Israeli oppression. They never wanted to share the land. Any of it.

Thats something everyone can agree on, Palestinians never wanted to share the land.

And the Jews didn’t want to live as Jews in Palestine. Jews (understandably) wanted a Jewish state.

So there we go.

hkathy · 03/09/2025 19:52

Tryonemoretime · 03/09/2025 19:50

Mmm. When Israel withdrew from Gaza, any Israelis there were dragged from their homes and businesses. Jewish bodies were dug out from their cemeteries because everyone knew their burial grounds would be desecrated.

And when the settlers go back in it will be rebuilt on the bones of tens of thousands of children who died in the rubble.

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 19:52

Tryonemoretime · 03/09/2025 19:50

Mmm. When Israel withdrew from Gaza, any Israelis there were dragged from their homes and businesses. Jewish bodies were dug out from their cemeteries because everyone knew their burial grounds would be desecrated.

And then Israel had no further interactions with Gaza?

Tryonemoretime · 03/09/2025 19:50

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 19:26

And, to clarify my point, I’m not saying this all Israel’s fault either. Hamas and/or any Palestinian violence towards Israeli citizens is unacceptable. I just think even going back to those early issues, the Palestinians were justified in their concerns.

The Jewish immigrants fleeing Europe were victims themselves but their appearance in that area with British backing, even if justifiable and understandable, still had an impact on Palestinian people and caused anger. It wasn’t just a case of landlords selling off land and making money, people lost their homes and livelihoods in those sales and that’s how anger can begin and grow. And that same issue continues today but with a heap of generational trauma/context to heighten anger and hatred and violence.

Mmm. When Israel withdrew from Gaza, any Israelis there were dragged from their homes and businesses. Jewish bodies were dug out from their cemeteries because everyone knew their burial grounds would be desecrated.

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 19:44

CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 19:32

I have investigated Honest Reporting. I also read the story of why it was started which was shocking misreporting as linked:

honestreporting.com/the-photo-that-started-it-all/

Maybe you can list what they inaccurately reported?

If reporting accurately, albeit with bias because they quite clearly state their mission is to challenge anti-Israel bias, means they are not credible, what is your opinion on MSM organisations reporting Hamas ‘facts’ remembering Hamas rules Gaza?

From Mediabiasfactcheck.com

Failed Fact Checks

  • None in the Last 5 years

Under the bit you copied and pasted, you missed the following important information: We also rate them as Mostly Factual rather than High due to the promotion of nationalist propaganda.

Even the CEO has admitted that they’ve shared information re 7/10 with no supporting evidence.

They’re a biased, pro-Israel NGO that create propaganda. They’re part of the problem.

dairydebris · 03/09/2025 19:41

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 19:26

And, to clarify my point, I’m not saying this all Israel’s fault either. Hamas and/or any Palestinian violence towards Israeli citizens is unacceptable. I just think even going back to those early issues, the Palestinians were justified in their concerns.

The Jewish immigrants fleeing Europe were victims themselves but their appearance in that area with British backing, even if justifiable and understandable, still had an impact on Palestinian people and caused anger. It wasn’t just a case of landlords selling off land and making money, people lost their homes and livelihoods in those sales and that’s how anger can begin and grow. And that same issue continues today but with a heap of generational trauma/context to heighten anger and hatred and violence.

I understand high levels of immigration can cause resentment.

Palestinian leadership has consistently chosen to express that resentment through violence and terrorism.

The land intended for Palestinian Arabs was far, far greater than they can ever dream of for a Palestinian state now. It was their leadership that chose war to eliminate Jews instead of attempting peaceful existence. A monumental error in hindsight.

Neither side is blameless as we both know. I really do object to the suggestion that Palestinian hatred was due to Israeli oppression. Palestinian hatred pre dates any Israeli oppression. They never wanted to share the land. Any of it.

CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 19:32

PinkBobby · 03/09/2025 16:25

I think you should investigate ‘Honest Reporting’ and decide for yourself if they are the right place to locate the truth (or something as close to the truth as possible). Likewise with commentators on X. You appear to have switched sources and be believing what ever they say instead. Apologies if that isn’t a fair conclusion but you do seem to have replaced a lot of reputable sources with biased sources and ones that are more likely to spread misinformation in your quest for the truth.

You say the shocking reactions to 7/10 and the unbelievable celebrations caught your attention. Did they make you wonder why people would be so full of hatred and anger? If you’re going to research this conflict, it’s pretty important to try to understand why such extreme views could take hold in an area and what the context is for so much anger and resentment in Gaza. Hamas is a vehicle for that anger and they massively exploit angry people but it doesn’t explain why there are so many angry people in a relatively small area.

I have investigated Honest Reporting. I also read the story of why it was started which was shocking misreporting as linked:

honestreporting.com/the-photo-that-started-it-all/

Maybe you can list what they inaccurately reported?

If reporting accurately, albeit with bias because they quite clearly state their mission is to challenge anti-Israel bias, means they are not credible, what is your opinion on MSM organisations reporting Hamas ‘facts’ remembering Hamas rules Gaza?

From Mediabiasfactcheck.com

Failed Fact Checks

  • None in the Last 5 years
Swipe left for the next trending thread