Has anyone changed their mind from what they have read on here?

[mollyfolk]

we’ve argued a lot. We’ve backed up our arguments with lots of proof. Has anyone changed their mind or viewpoint - I’m just interested?

it would be lovely if we didn’t argue here and just let everyone state their views.

I’ve spent most of my life in Ireland, where you’d be hard pressed, in the present day, to meet someone who doesn’t agree that the Israeli authorities treat Palestinian’s terribly. It wouldn’t be controversial here to say - isn’t it awful what’s happening in Gaza - in any situation whether when I lived in the UK it was a lot more controversial and wouldn’t be a suitable thing to mention in work for example.

I haven’t changed my mind but I’m a lot more educated about anti semitism and have more understanding of the viewpoint of people who support the Israeli government.

@Analien49451 I think it would help if you kept your criticism to the Israeli government. Not all Israeli's support what their government is doing so it's not a good idea to generalise.

I would rather use the term Zionists , and please do not jump on the antisemitic bandwagon, the Zionists can do no wrong ?

What % of the population are conscripts in the Zionist occupying force - they should be classed as illegal combatants

Goading a Jewish poster and accusing a Jewish poster of supporting the bombing of innocent men, women and children, apropos of nothing, is well said? Is speaking out against Israelis? In what way?

@Analien49451 Oh trust me I'm not jumping on the band wagon.

Thank you @braticus.

@Analien49451 I'm a "Zionist". And I'm pro-ceasefire. I wonder if your narrow little mind is able to compute that.

“Zionist” is just a code word for “Jew” for antisemites, so you’re gleefully leaping onto the antisemitic bandwagon there anyway.

And this from the person who recently said “ If Israel doesn’t pay for its crimes then there is no justice in the world”. Maybe you could take your own advice.

There are news reports of dozens of people buried alive by IDF bulldozers outside of a hospital in Northern Gaza. I watched a report where a stray cat was eating someone’s remains.

So, to the answer your question OP, No nothing I have read on here has changed my mind. Despite all the rationalizing, the handwringing, the analysis, the debate and discussion, the insults and the education, in the end it comes down to the numbers.

20,000+ civilians killed,
10,000+ children killed,
63 journalists killed,
364 attacks on healthcare services
Millions at risk of starvation,
Millions at risk of dehydration,
Millions at risk of disease,
Millions displaced.

What Israel is doing is disgusting.

If the Israeli government doesn’t pay for it’s crimes then there is no justice in the world.

This is simply not true. Israel is an ethnoc racy - you are deemed rights according to your ethnicity. Jewish people are awarded rights that others aren't, see for example Law of Return and Absentee Land Law. It is very apparent in land permits, non Jews are very rarely granted permission to build houses within the green line, with the verdict stating "the need to retain the Jewishness of the area" is cited.
I know some might not like the site name, but it was the first that came up that contains these partial laws.

Are all Israelis equal?

No, what you are saying is not true. All countries put limits on immigration, mainly based on a person's claim to that nationality. The law of return is no different (incidentally, descendants of German Jews are entitled to German citizenship, no language test required - do you disagree with that too? How about Brits with an Irish grandparent having the right to be Irish?)

As for the website you've linked to, well yes, the name is a pretty hefty clue as to the views and biases of whoever put that together!

(Double post, apologies)

Re immigration, it's very normal to put restrictions on people according to nationality. Israel does not recognize nationality, it awards rights according to ethnicity. So a German, Polish, Australian Jewish person can have the right to live in Israel and be awarded citizenship. An Israeli Jew and Israeli Arab (Muslim, Christian, Druze) do not have the same rights. I'm pointing this out as some posters keep saying all citizens in Israel are equal. It's simply not true, the law differentiates between ethnicities. Whether you agree with the site or not, the laws are biased.

Israel does not treat its non-Jewish citizens equally with its Jewish ones. Since you are questioning the impartiality of @feralunderclass references, here is a link to an Israeli human rights organization that documents and works against such discriminatory practices.

https://www.english.acri.org.il/arab-minority-rights

Israel is literally a Jewish homeland. The reasons for this have been discussed at length on here and elsewhere. I'm not sure why it's surprising that it allows Jewish people to move there. Do you also object to Germany allowing the descendants of German Jews to claim German citizenship?

As for discrimination against minorities - I don't doubt that this happens in Israel, because it happens everywhere else. Let's not get started on the UK's own record here. Does it make it OK? No. Does it make it unique to Israel? Also no. What other countries' treatment of minorities do you also have a problem with?

It's not even a stand alone post there are several referring to the settlements in Gaza including soldiers who work for the company holding up the banner of the company in Gaza

Sounds more like posturing than trolling to me. Starting to think that Hasbara or no Hasbara Israel just aren’t that good as PR.

I don't have a "problem" with it as such. I'm just pointing out that not all citizens of Israel are equal, which was in response to a poster saying they were.
I understand it's a Jewish homeland and wants to give preferential treatment to Jews. That however becomes very problematic for the people who have always lived there. It's not a case of someone immigrating and not getting full rights until they meet the required duration. What is incredibly unfair is that Daniel, 38 from Australia, who arrived 10 days ago has the right to build a home, when Samer, who's family have lived there for hundreds of years doesn't.
ETA: and it's quite probable that Samer family home will be demolished to make way for Daniel's.

'A worrying trend in Western democracies' you say.

Whereas in the middle East, east Europe eg Russia, parts of Africa, various dictatorships, southern america, etc they sit down and discuss all angles rationally... 😉 🤣🤣 Nope not at all.

I think you are completely missing the point. Israel has preferential treatment for Jews living in Israel and this is unjust and a form of apartheid. You can be a Jewish state and allow Jews moving to Israel for the first time be afforded all the rights of any existing Israeli citizen that's fine, but why deny some of those rights to non Jewish citizens who've been living in Israel all their lives? That's the bit people object to and it is a form of apartheid. This is not the same as immigration laws where, depending on what country you come from will depend on your right to work etc, so if you are moving from one EU country to another you will have more rights than if you are moving from a non EU country. In Northern Ireland in the 60s and 70s catholics were being discriminated against in comparison to protestants it led to the civil rights marches and then subsequently the troubles.
Yes discrimination against minorities exists in all countries but for western democracies it is not state sponsored discrimination and there are anti discrimination laws to protect people when they feel they've been discriminated against. I personally feel any modern democracy that allows some of its citizens to be treated differently because of race, colour or creed is not a progressive modern society and has a lot of work to do to address this

Yair Lapid, Israel’s former prime minister, has called for Netanyahu to stand down (about bloody time)

David Cameron says that too many civilians have died and calls for a ceasefire.

Ben Wallace says that Israel has gone on a “killing rage” that will fuel the conflict for another 50 years and radicalise young Muslims across the world. He says that proportionate force is legal but collective punishment and forced movement of civilians is not, and Israel “risks” losing its moral authority alongside its legal one.

Only “risks”?

Oliver Dowden says he does not think Israel has gone too far at all, and high civilian casualties is unavoidable (presumably he means it’s ok to kill one type of person in order to ensure the safety of another type).

What kind of laws are we talking about exactly, that no one seems to agree on whether they’re being broken or not? Who made a law that says it’s ok to go on a “killing rage” and kill “too many” civilians?

It’s not only on Mumsnet that these debates go around in circles.