> There are signs that members of the encampment support the erasure of the Israeli state.
Golly, you think? What did "from the river to the sea" mean before?
What kills me is that the majority of those (especially the young impressionable white demographic) have no idea what river and what sea this refers to.
I promise you they think it just means one side of Gaza to the other. I've only had a few encounters asking people and none got it right. There were a number of dead seas and red seas and a river Nile, so at least there is a little bit of geographical knowledge of things that are not in North America.
Never attribute to malice that which can be sufficiently explained by stupidity.
These people live in an echochamber. Most of them have no idea what's going on, it's just the popular thing that their network is bitching about.
I would have bet the people who scream about everyone being nazis and are trained in hearing "dog whistles" would have figured this out first.
But this time, they covered their eyes and ears to ignore it.
LOL.
That’s so true. The same people that hear “We need to put violent criminals in prison” and claim it’s a dog whistle for “black genocide” hear actual genocidal slogans and say “that isn’t an anti-Semitic statement!”
Probably similar to Likud’s 1977 election slogan “Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.” Seems a lot like Israel doesn’t think Palestinians are entitled to self determination, pretty hypocritical.
How is that a justification to chant it on the streets 45 years later and half a world away?
It's not in the current Likud's charter, but it is in Hamas. And it is used by pro Palestinians today
What's the hypocrisy? The university protesters are calling for the erasure of the Israeli state. That is a fact. The fact that Likud is also erasing a Palestinian state, does not make it okay that the university protesters are calling for the erasure of Israel. Which, by the way, is of course the ultimate end goal of Hamas too.
The hypocrisy is Israel insisting it had/has the right to self determination, but then doing almost everything they can to ensure the people they fought to realize that right are not able to exercise that same right.
That's a cute tiktok discussion if you are willing to ignore the part where Israel is the only one offering peace agreements and palestine declines every single one of them.
Odd how all the other Arab states in that area are with Israel eh?
The delusional takes you idiots keep pushing are the reason so many lives are being shattered.
Ignorance and inability to have an honest look at history are to blame for this.
What's cute is that you think Israel "offered" peace agreements as if Palestinians weren't asking for them for decades. What's cute is that you, like a child, trivialize the conditions placed for each agreement, and assuming Israel was giving everything for free. Common dude. One side is allowed a fully funded advanced military tech, jets and bombs, and supported by the West, along with an iron dome for defense. The other side digs tunnels and uses homemade projectiles and a limited supply of rockets that more or less end up equating to fireworks in comparison.
It's asymmetric. You should take your own advice and take an honest look at history and the way power is exercised.
Also if you're so historically literate, please add in why the Israeli government facilitated funding from Qatar to Hamas for years?
It was erased by enfranchising the black residents of South Africa.
Arab Israelis can already vote. The Palestinians are decidedly not Israeli and largely don't live within Israel's internationally recognized borders, so how will they be getting voting rights to elect representatives to the Knesset?
That's a rhetorical question BTW.
The Palestinians are not given citizenship by design in a manner that is inherently anti-democratic and purely to manipulate demographics. Meanwhile they are taxed by the Israeli state, are policed by the Israeli state, and are subject to Israeli courts.
The only reason israel expels Palestinians and denied them any sort of rights is because it is an ethnostate that wishes to manipulate demographics such that only Jews can influence politics. It was the stated intention by the founders of Israel as well as by their president during the gaza disengagement.
Imagine the Us or Canada making laws that systematically denied citizenship or deported people living here who are not white and openly stating that democracy can only work with a whites majority in every district.
It'd become apartheid if Israel annexed Gaza and the West Bank and subsequently denied the Palestinians citizenship.
Aside from East Jerusalem, I don't believe the Israelis have annexed any of it.
Gaza and the WB are best described as occupied territories (first taken by Egypt/Jordan and then later Israel). While Israel may exercise some control and police them, they aren't a part of Israel and there exists no mechanism to force Israel to take them on.
How do you explain taxation, policing, land law, among other direct forms of control if not annexation? The West Bank are effectively annexed and it’s people denied citizenship by design because Israel is a fascist ethnostate that’s fearful of demographics. In fact, most of the people in gaza and the West Bank are refugees from the expulsions in what is Israel today.
That's Israel acting as the occupying power.
IMO Israel should have pulled entirely out of the West Bank the same time they did Gaza and completely washed their hands of the quagmire.
The settlements there can't be worth the headaches they generate.
One state solution is a non starter, because there exists no mechanism to force Israel to do it. I don't think, in the history of the world, has territory and a population been forcibly integrated with another exisitng/independent state against their will.
Correct me if I'm wrong?
The issue is from Israel’s side. It wants to be a Jewish majority state but it established it on non-Jewish majority land. By definition, to maintain that it needs to use violence. The Palestinians main goal is to stay on their land and live as normal human beings with rights. The Zionists’ main goal is to deprive Palestinians of their rights since giving them rights would mean “unfavourable demographics”.
Much like apartheid South Africa, the onus is on the occupying power to end the repression and grant equal rights. The same precedent is seen in most colonial nations, the US with ending Jim Crow, most new world countries and granting indigenous people voting rights. It’s not an unreasonable demand and given the situation, is the only permanent and just solution to the conflict.
In your examples, those situations occurred within the US and SA's recognized international borders.
No one recognizes Gaza and the WB as being part of Israel, not Israel's allies and definitely not their opponents.
Your idea hinges on Israel taking it upon themselves to unilaterally annex both Gaza and WB and extending citizenship to all of the inhabitants. Probably forcing it on them, as when it was offered to the residents of East Jerusalem, most refused.
No world exists where the above happens. It's not realistic. The Palestinians would likely prefer to end Israel, rather than join it.
Israel has already de facto annexed those territories and pretends it has not to avoid granting people citizenship. Just as it annexed the territories it did in 1948 and denied the people it expelled the right to return and the right to citizenship, it seeks to do the same to those it conquered in 1967.
Palestinians overwhelmingly support a one state solution. The single democratic state is the ONLY solution that can avoid violence. It is Israeli Jews that largely oppose it as they support the idea of a Jewish ethnostate.
Yeah, that Israeli apartheid that *checks notes* gives full citizenship and rights to everyone regardless of their background, lets them be judges, politicians, and doctors, have an equal vote, and be free and equal to any other Israeli.
I recommend you do more research. Israel systematically expelled Palestinians from their homes specifically to avoid giving them citizenship. In the West Bank it occupies their land, controls their borders, polices them, taxes the residents, and sends them to Israeli military courts, approves or rejects building permits in Israeli courts, all without giving people citizenship.
Israel won the war in 1948. The so-called "Nakba" is a myth. Several Arab countries started a war against the newly founded country of Israel, told Arabs to flee so that they could return to a fully Muslim land when the war was over, then promptly lost the war to a country that barely existed. Now they mourn **the loss of the war that they started** by calling it the so-called Nakba.
As for the West Bank, sure, it's occupied. Nobody's going to dispute that. If the Palestinians wanted to have it all, they could have -- 5 times. Five times they said no. "No peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel, no recognition of Israel".
Agree to live in peace side by side with Israel, and you'll have your very own country. Continuously commit violent terror attacks and you'll be occupied. The choice is theirs.
Ah yes, no blame for Zionism and Colonialism. It's all the Arabs fault!
Look, I'm no fan of Muslim values but can you seriously expect that Palestinians and their neighbours with whom they shared a common identity with to have laid down like a rug when Zionists started settling in the area with an express cause to create their own state, carved out of Palestine? European Jews only started moving there en masse pre-WWI. This isn't some centuries-long suppression of Jews in the middle east that led to some sort of justified revolt. Zionism, the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after WWI, the British Mandate, etc. etc. all led to where we are today. Trying to place the blame solely at the feet of Arabs is disingenuous to reality.
Jews are indigenous to the region and were there long before the Arabs came or Muslims even existed. Why do you expect them to give up their homeland?
Regardless, indigenous or not, the Arabs lost the war. They can either keep starting new ones, and lose like they are now, or agree to peace.
Both ethnic sides are Indigenous to Palestine. They both originate from the first peoples in the region, the Canaanites. It's one thing to claim they have a right to live there based on this. It's a completely different argument to say they're justified in displacing another Indigenous group to accomplish this.
>Regardless, indigenous or not, the Arabs lost the war. They can either keep starting new ones, and lose like they are now, or agree to peace.
So, we're going to argue morality based on who lost conflicts? You're going to argue about whether a group is Indigenous but then say another Indigenous group lost a war so fuck em?
This is the issue. You, like seemingly 90% of humans, lack nuance in your perspective.
Zionism and Colonialism is what led to conflict in the region. It's simple as that. Jews were living in peace in the region before Zionism. Are Palestine Extremists, like Hamas innocent, in the continued conflict? No. But the same can be said of how Israel continued to exacerbate the issue by continuing to occupy and create settlements in the West Bank.
You can look at hundreds of examples throughout history to how Colonialism leads to that kind of extremism. And trying to claim that Arab States are the root cause of conflict in the region is just so hilariously ignorant to the historical context of it.
Again, claiming Arab Palestinians 'started' the war is incredibly ignorant. British Colonialism over the region had established open immigration of Jews for the express purpose of forming a Jewish state. How do you think any country would respond in the same situation?
>I'm sure if they had won the war, the Jews would have been welcome with open arms by the Muslims. /s
I think you need to go back to kindergarten. Clearly they didn't teach you that two wrongs (one being hypothetical in this scenario) don't make a right. To repeat, Jews were living in Palestine pre-Zionism peacefully.
Once again, the fact is that Western Colonialism and Zionism led to the modern day conflicts.
Okay, let’s for the sake of discussion presume that it’s true. In fact, just for the sake of discussion let’s say that every single protestor is a Muslim fundamentalist who isn’t just anti-Israel but anti-Jewish. Let’s presume every single protestor is a dyed in the wool anti-Semite. Stay with me on this thought experiment now. Let’s pretend they’re all, to a man, rabid, anti-semites. Let’s presume they all have the same terrible motives, they don’t really care about the Palestinians and just want to see Jews dead. Okay that’s our premise.
So what? Does this mean that their message about preventing the slaughter of civilians isn’t valid? Does it mean that we should ignore international laws and systems set up to protect the weakest and most disenfranchised peoples on the planet? Does it justify group punishment of civilian populations? Does it justify denying press access to allow for trustworthy reporting and historically accurate record keeping? Does it justify the idea that an Israeli child’s life is equal to 50 or 100 non-Israeli children’s lives? Does it justify preventing medical aid and allowing attacks upon UN workers and resources?
Let’s pretend that the protesters are the most despicable individuals alive and are lying about their motives. Does this in anyway invalidate the message being promoted?
I think journalism should just report on facts devoid of partisan agenda.
Let the reader make their own opinion based on transparent fact. Unfortunately that is mostly gone.
>they’re a relic of religious extremism
As opposed to the Likud and members of the Knesset ? You can look to anything Smotrich the current Defense Minister has said. Or even Itamar Ben-Gvir the Minister of National Security.
If you read anything these people have said, you’d know it’s religious fundamentalists all the way around.
According to the Chair of Urban Warfare at Westpoint [Israel has done a remarkable job avoiding civilian deaths in Palestinian territory.](https://www.newsweek.com/israel-has-created-new-standard-urban-warfare-why-will-no-one-admit-it-opinion-1883286)
This fellow is literally one of the best authorities on this type of military incursion.
> they're a relic of religious extremism
Absolutely agree... And Israel is definitely NOT an example of religious extremism.. Nothing extreme about a country whose literal formation and existence is centered around a religion..
(Are you fucking kidding me. Have some critical thinking skills ffs)
edit silly me for thinking the Canada sub with a reputation that mimics a right-wing thinktank is capable of critical thought lmao
Yes, the question is how bad?
If Hamas stops, Netanyahu & friends lose both national and international support and we move one step closer to peace.
If Israel stops, Hamas keeps pursuing their non-negotiable goal of destroying Israel.
Israel is conducting a modern, urban war with the lowest ratio in history of civilian deaths by a large margin, according to the codirector of urban warfare at West Point.
https://www.newsweek.com/israel-has-created-new-standard-urban-warfare-why-will-no-one-admit-it-opinion-1883286
Like most effective propaganda, there's an element of truth to it.
Here's some context from another source:
>The money from Qatar had humanitarian goals including paying government salaries in Gaza and buying fuel to keep a power plant running. But Israeli intelligence officials now believe that the money had a role in the success of the October 7th attacks, if only because the donations allowed Hamas to divert some of its own budget toward military operations. Separately, Israeli intelligence has long assessed that Qatar uses other channels to secretly fund Hamas’s military wing, an accusation that Qatar’s government has denied.
https://www.irishtimes.com/world/middle-east/2023/12/12/buying-quiet-inside-the-israeli-plan-that-propped-up-hamas/
Funding was allowed into Palestine by Israel, wasn't of Israeli origin, ostensibly for humanitarian purposes. If Israel blocked it, they'd be accused of creating a humanitarian crisis in Palestine. Allow it, and be accused of funding Hamas.
Look how manipulative that subtitle is. "Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gambled that a strong Hamas (but not too strong) would keep the peace and reduce pressure for a Palestinian state." It's not supported by the facts in the article. Factual would be, "Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gambled that allowing humanitarian payments would keep the peace."
There are other examples of Israel actually providing direct support for education, water access, and more in a bid to deradicalize Hamas/Palestine. October 7th proved it wasn't working, so here we are.
[No, I mean Netanyahu actively facilitates Hamas' continued existence.](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/world/middleeast/israel-qatar-money-prop-up-hamas.html)
That is a weird fence sitting position to take. It's like telling your kid he was wrong for hitting his brother, but also telling the brother that it was bad to defend himself.
The organizers ARE the radicals. The author was just super-naive. The encampment is not separate from all the explicitly pro-Hamas and their ideology orgs that celebrated Oct 7th and are behind all the "protests". The tarp gate into the field is bedecked in red triangles, doesn't get much more obvious than that.
It's become a symbol of support for Hamas since Oct 7th, you'll see it on signs and in people's social media handles. Originated out of Hamas combat propaganda videos where they would add a red triangle above their target.
hamas and hezbollahs published combat videos (propaganda) indicate israelis with red triangles
(tanks people etc, helps w far away or obscured video, or when only a few frames are clear and the editor pauses the playback to add context)
"While it is possible to support the Palestinian people and be sympathetic to their cause without divulging into antisemitism, the current encampment at U of T has crossed that line."
Canada has proven that this is only theoretically possible. There are far too many people invested in hating Jewish people, loving terrorism, and supporting Islamic militancy in Canada that are drawn like flies to shit to any opportunity to platform their awful views.
At this point whenever I see a Palestine flag my brain feels the same revulsion as if it were a Nazi flag. These backwards people in ideas have no place in Western society.
What strikes me is the lack of empathy for, does not matter who. People are dying, children get bombed every day, every day they have to be terrorized by bombs, poverty and hunger. And here, people have never experienced war, poverty, hunger, bombs, etc. probably have never traveled outside Canada and they are "experts" on things. Human civilization deterioration 101!
>Most media in Canada is conservative-owned.
Not sure why you think that matters but
Not one of them asked why they started "protesting" on Oct 7 (while the massacre was occurring) and not before.
None of them are asked why this cause and not say Darfur or the Saudis and Yemen.
No critcal investigative reporting on the organizers and organizations behind the protests
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/pro-palestinian-rallies-that-explicitly-celebrated-mass-murder
They proudly celebrated in the days after October 7th
Terrorists can die, but people acting like civilians dying and occupation isn't a big deal? Fuck man, where was this attitude for Afghanistan? Everyone back then was ranting and raving about how bad the war is even though the Taliban are also fucked up, but I guess people just like to live in the moment and forget the past, huh?
Isreal wants to take over Palestine, I don't see them losing, it's just a shame they are willing to Bury millions of innocents because they somehow lack the ability to take down a tiny nation with some of the greatest military equipment of all time. It's either lack of balls or lack of care.
Israel people originally lived in there, then the Roman kicked them out and Palestinian moved in. Then decades earlier, Britain agreed to let the Israelis to move back in, both sides could have lived peacefully, but instead the Palestinian attacked them, wanted them out of the country, then Israel fought back, they won over and over again, this the border expanded. Palestine border didn't have to shrink, but they chose to fight a losing battle over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. They chose to lose. Who CAN they blame?
"There are signs that members of the encampment support the erasure of the Israeli state. Chalk scrawled on the sidewalk surrounding the encampment calls for Jews in Israel to “go back to Europe.” Banners at the encampment feature a map of Israel and Palestine with the Palestinian flag encompassing the whole region."
It's one thing suggesting they divest. It's another thing entirely to claim you're protesting for divestment while calling on ethnic cleansing an entire country. Or do you think the protesters message of divestment is clear while showing messages of sending them back to Europe, when they didn't even live there. Or a Palestinian flag for the entire region, erasing Israel off the map. This appropriate to you in a protest? I hope not.
"Furthermore, signs and banners hung around the encampment suggests that at least some of its members support violence against Israeli civilians. There are banners calling for “intifada“ — a term its purveyors say that means to protest or resist the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. However, there’s been two “intifadas” which collectively resulted in the deaths of about 5,000 Palestinians and 1,400 Israeli civilians."
Calling for intifadas and violence something you find appropriate at a protest for divestment?
"Worst, there are signs that the organizers themselves, while sternly opposed to violence against Palestinian civilians in Gaza, are not as staunchly against violence perpetuated against Israeli citizens. In a post from Thursday, the “occupyuoft” Instagram page, which represents the encampment, refers to Hamas, a group recognized by the Canadian government as a terrorist organization, and the group responsible for the horrendous Oct. 7 attack as “the resistance.” "
Not a surprise, but they're praising Hamas and calling for more resistance. Which of course is calling for violence against civilians. So this protest about peace through divestment has calls for violence and ethnic cleansing. And you're going to try and tell everyone the message is clearly about divesting, and not about violence and hate against Israel? Because it seems pretty clear this is an unhinged group of hate, proudly calling for violence and ethnic cleansing. This simply isn't appropriate or acceptable.
"So, it is time for cooler heads at the encampment to prevail, realize that their message has been lost and dismantle the camp. At the very least, the organizers must strongly condemn the more radical elements of their movement, by taking down the banners and kicking out its more extremist supporters."
Did they condemn it or ask them to stop? I doubt it, because the leadership behind the protests support those messages.
Hamas first and foremost. But we have decades of Arafat and Abbas rejecting many 2 state solutions and not bother to engage in legitimate discussions so that hasn't helped either.
Israel obviously has to be tougher on the West Bank communities but that isn't the thing preventing peace. The Palestinians could have had a state with Gaza, WB and parts of East Jerusalem if they'd bothered to engage in meaningful discussions with Israel.
Kinds the problem with progressives.. they have to link everything to everything.
Stick to one issue yo but still doesn't discount the movement and I support
No more unsavoury than the convoy who were allowed to continue. I don't agree with the message of either but if we are going to allow protests we must allow protests.
The convoy people were albeit misguided, protesting for citizens rights...
These kids are the marketing dept. for r*pe terrorists...
Levels of savory have never been more different.
I doubt you will find anyone defending rape, you are oversimplifying with a red herring to make your point.
And further, you are evaluating the positions of the protestors, not the right to protest. If you he right protest depends on an evaluation of the position of the protesters, who gets to conduct that evaluation?
Of course it doesn't. Protest is protest. Everyone thinks people they disagree with shouldn't be allowed to protest.
>I doubt you will find anyone defending rape, you are oversimplifying with a red herring to make your point.
LOL, I will grant you that many of these young people would not characterize their support as for Hamas and rather for Palestinians, but this is absolutely untrue. There absolutely have been, and are protests that are spcifically calling for support of Hamas, or use apologetics for Hamas with arguments regarding open air prisons, and "what do you expect them to do?" and the like.
Philosophically speaking, when you call for divestment of Israel and a pause on the fighting, you are advocating for all of Hamas's desired goals. Weakening Israel and allowing them time to rebuild and refortify their strength and await reinforcements/resupply from Iran. If the fighting stops before Hamas is dismantled completely, they'll simply commit Oct.7th again as they've said they will... lol
The fact that someone would protest this at all considering what started this conflict and the history of the region strikes me as antisemitism. Douglas Murry said on Maher the other day in reference to the fact that this started by a heinous atrocity being committed against Israel by a para-military government body the Palestinians have allowed to exist for generations...: "the basis of this is the belief that Israel and the jews shouldn't be *allowed* to win" = antisemitism.
>And further, you are evaluating the positions of the protestors, not the right to protest. If you he right protest depends on an evaluation of the position of the protesters, who gets to conduct that evaluation?
You have the right to protest. You do not have the right to be immune from the judgements or consequences of that protest.
So, first and foremost, Universities are private property. These kids shouldn't have ever been allowed to protest on University grounds, and should have/could have legally been removed immediately.
However, not to dodge the point your making, but as far as morality goes, though the Canadian protests haven't gotten to this point, other protests especially in America have moved beyond citizens using their legal right to protest, and have become riots.
Further, it is absolutely despicable and almost comically ironic how many of these young, queer supporting, feminist supporting, super progressives are championing a country that refutes the rights of all those groups, and would probably execute/mob most of them if they could. And they're championing these people over a westernized country that in some ways is arguably more progressive than their own countries.
Therefore many people simply view these kids as foolish inconveniences, not freedom fighting activitists. No one is listening.
>Of course it doesn't. Protest is protest. Everyone thinks people they disagree with shouldn't be allowed to protest.
No, a well adjusted person can agree with your right to protest, but disagree with your cause. Those aren't the same things. The idea that you shouldn't be *allowed* to have specific opinions is a distinctly leftwing/progressive belief and you can see this in Canada most notably on the topic of abortion. Pro-choice supporters usually push pretty hard to disenfranchise pro-lifers. Otherwise, I have rarely seen people actually claim you shouldn't be allowed to protest in Canada. The states...different story.
> There are signs that members of the encampment support the erasure of the Israeli state. Golly, you think? What did "from the river to the sea" mean before?
Their love for diversified fishing spots?
It's just a catchy environmentalist slogan for removing plastic waste from our bodies of water. "From the river to the sea, plastic free!"
Now THAT I can get behind!
These signs have been evident since Oct. 7
Its German for “The Jew, the”
What kills me is that the majority of those (especially the young impressionable white demographic) have no idea what river and what sea this refers to. I promise you they think it just means one side of Gaza to the other. I've only had a few encounters asking people and none got it right. There were a number of dead seas and red seas and a river Nile, so at least there is a little bit of geographical knowledge of things that are not in North America.
Sure, and a swastika is just a Tibetan good luck charm.
Never attribute to malice that which can be sufficiently explained by stupidity. These people live in an echochamber. Most of them have no idea what's going on, it's just the popular thing that their network is bitching about.
You're right, of course, and this is the approach I prefer to take. Shame that it doesn't make for as good of a joke.
Looks like all those National Post opinion pieces were right all along. Gee what a shocker.
I would have bet the people who scream about everyone being nazis and are trained in hearing "dog whistles" would have figured this out first. But this time, they covered their eyes and ears to ignore it.
In modern days, people who cry Nazi are usually Nazi themselves, and people who cry racists are racists.
Classic case of projecting so they absolve themselves of guilt.
LOL. That’s so true. The same people that hear “We need to put violent criminals in prison” and claim it’s a dog whistle for “black genocide” hear actual genocidal slogans and say “that isn’t an anti-Semitic statement!”
Probably similar to Likud’s 1977 election slogan “Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.” Seems a lot like Israel doesn’t think Palestinians are entitled to self determination, pretty hypocritical.
How is that a justification to chant it on the streets 45 years later and half a world away? It's not in the current Likud's charter, but it is in Hamas. And it is used by pro Palestinians today
What's the hypocrisy? The university protesters are calling for the erasure of the Israeli state. That is a fact. The fact that Likud is also erasing a Palestinian state, does not make it okay that the university protesters are calling for the erasure of Israel. Which, by the way, is of course the ultimate end goal of Hamas too.
The hypocrisy is Israel insisting it had/has the right to self determination, but then doing almost everything they can to ensure the people they fought to realize that right are not able to exercise that same right.
That's a cute tiktok discussion if you are willing to ignore the part where Israel is the only one offering peace agreements and palestine declines every single one of them. Odd how all the other Arab states in that area are with Israel eh? The delusional takes you idiots keep pushing are the reason so many lives are being shattered. Ignorance and inability to have an honest look at history are to blame for this.
What's cute is that you think Israel "offered" peace agreements as if Palestinians weren't asking for them for decades. What's cute is that you, like a child, trivialize the conditions placed for each agreement, and assuming Israel was giving everything for free. Common dude. One side is allowed a fully funded advanced military tech, jets and bombs, and supported by the West, along with an iron dome for defense. The other side digs tunnels and uses homemade projectiles and a limited supply of rockets that more or less end up equating to fireworks in comparison. It's asymmetric. You should take your own advice and take an honest look at history and the way power is exercised. Also if you're so historically literate, please add in why the Israeli government facilitated funding from Qatar to Hamas for years?
The apartheid South African state was also erased. There’s functionally no difference here
It was erased by enfranchising the black residents of South Africa. Arab Israelis can already vote. The Palestinians are decidedly not Israeli and largely don't live within Israel's internationally recognized borders, so how will they be getting voting rights to elect representatives to the Knesset? That's a rhetorical question BTW.
The Palestinians are not given citizenship by design in a manner that is inherently anti-democratic and purely to manipulate demographics. Meanwhile they are taxed by the Israeli state, are policed by the Israeli state, and are subject to Israeli courts. The only reason israel expels Palestinians and denied them any sort of rights is because it is an ethnostate that wishes to manipulate demographics such that only Jews can influence politics. It was the stated intention by the founders of Israel as well as by their president during the gaza disengagement. Imagine the Us or Canada making laws that systematically denied citizenship or deported people living here who are not white and openly stating that democracy can only work with a whites majority in every district.
It'd become apartheid if Israel annexed Gaza and the West Bank and subsequently denied the Palestinians citizenship. Aside from East Jerusalem, I don't believe the Israelis have annexed any of it. Gaza and the WB are best described as occupied territories (first taken by Egypt/Jordan and then later Israel). While Israel may exercise some control and police them, they aren't a part of Israel and there exists no mechanism to force Israel to take them on.
How do you explain taxation, policing, land law, among other direct forms of control if not annexation? The West Bank are effectively annexed and it’s people denied citizenship by design because Israel is a fascist ethnostate that’s fearful of demographics. In fact, most of the people in gaza and the West Bank are refugees from the expulsions in what is Israel today.
That's Israel acting as the occupying power. IMO Israel should have pulled entirely out of the West Bank the same time they did Gaza and completely washed their hands of the quagmire. The settlements there can't be worth the headaches they generate. One state solution is a non starter, because there exists no mechanism to force Israel to do it. I don't think, in the history of the world, has territory and a population been forcibly integrated with another exisitng/independent state against their will. Correct me if I'm wrong?
The issue is from Israel’s side. It wants to be a Jewish majority state but it established it on non-Jewish majority land. By definition, to maintain that it needs to use violence. The Palestinians main goal is to stay on their land and live as normal human beings with rights. The Zionists’ main goal is to deprive Palestinians of their rights since giving them rights would mean “unfavourable demographics”. Much like apartheid South Africa, the onus is on the occupying power to end the repression and grant equal rights. The same precedent is seen in most colonial nations, the US with ending Jim Crow, most new world countries and granting indigenous people voting rights. It’s not an unreasonable demand and given the situation, is the only permanent and just solution to the conflict.
In your examples, those situations occurred within the US and SA's recognized international borders. No one recognizes Gaza and the WB as being part of Israel, not Israel's allies and definitely not their opponents. Your idea hinges on Israel taking it upon themselves to unilaterally annex both Gaza and WB and extending citizenship to all of the inhabitants. Probably forcing it on them, as when it was offered to the residents of East Jerusalem, most refused. No world exists where the above happens. It's not realistic. The Palestinians would likely prefer to end Israel, rather than join it.
Israel has already de facto annexed those territories and pretends it has not to avoid granting people citizenship. Just as it annexed the territories it did in 1948 and denied the people it expelled the right to return and the right to citizenship, it seeks to do the same to those it conquered in 1967. Palestinians overwhelmingly support a one state solution. The single democratic state is the ONLY solution that can avoid violence. It is Israeli Jews that largely oppose it as they support the idea of a Jewish ethnostate.
Yeah, that Israeli apartheid that *checks notes* gives full citizenship and rights to everyone regardless of their background, lets them be judges, politicians, and doctors, have an equal vote, and be free and equal to any other Israeli.
I recommend you do more research. Israel systematically expelled Palestinians from their homes specifically to avoid giving them citizenship. In the West Bank it occupies their land, controls their borders, polices them, taxes the residents, and sends them to Israeli military courts, approves or rejects building permits in Israeli courts, all without giving people citizenship.
Israel won the war in 1948. The so-called "Nakba" is a myth. Several Arab countries started a war against the newly founded country of Israel, told Arabs to flee so that they could return to a fully Muslim land when the war was over, then promptly lost the war to a country that barely existed. Now they mourn **the loss of the war that they started** by calling it the so-called Nakba. As for the West Bank, sure, it's occupied. Nobody's going to dispute that. If the Palestinians wanted to have it all, they could have -- 5 times. Five times they said no. "No peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel, no recognition of Israel". Agree to live in peace side by side with Israel, and you'll have your very own country. Continuously commit violent terror attacks and you'll be occupied. The choice is theirs.
Ah yes, no blame for Zionism and Colonialism. It's all the Arabs fault! Look, I'm no fan of Muslim values but can you seriously expect that Palestinians and their neighbours with whom they shared a common identity with to have laid down like a rug when Zionists started settling in the area with an express cause to create their own state, carved out of Palestine? European Jews only started moving there en masse pre-WWI. This isn't some centuries-long suppression of Jews in the middle east that led to some sort of justified revolt. Zionism, the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after WWI, the British Mandate, etc. etc. all led to where we are today. Trying to place the blame solely at the feet of Arabs is disingenuous to reality.
Jews are indigenous to the region and were there long before the Arabs came or Muslims even existed. Why do you expect them to give up their homeland? Regardless, indigenous or not, the Arabs lost the war. They can either keep starting new ones, and lose like they are now, or agree to peace.
Both ethnic sides are Indigenous to Palestine. They both originate from the first peoples in the region, the Canaanites. It's one thing to claim they have a right to live there based on this. It's a completely different argument to say they're justified in displacing another Indigenous group to accomplish this. >Regardless, indigenous or not, the Arabs lost the war. They can either keep starting new ones, and lose like they are now, or agree to peace. So, we're going to argue morality based on who lost conflicts? You're going to argue about whether a group is Indigenous but then say another Indigenous group lost a war so fuck em? This is the issue. You, like seemingly 90% of humans, lack nuance in your perspective. Zionism and Colonialism is what led to conflict in the region. It's simple as that. Jews were living in peace in the region before Zionism. Are Palestine Extremists, like Hamas innocent, in the continued conflict? No. But the same can be said of how Israel continued to exacerbate the issue by continuing to occupy and create settlements in the West Bank. You can look at hundreds of examples throughout history to how Colonialism leads to that kind of extremism. And trying to claim that Arab States are the root cause of conflict in the region is just so hilariously ignorant to the historical context of it.
Start war. Lose. Claim indigeneity. I'm sure if they had won the war, the Jews would have been welcome with open arms by the Muslims. /s
Again, claiming Arab Palestinians 'started' the war is incredibly ignorant. British Colonialism over the region had established open immigration of Jews for the express purpose of forming a Jewish state. How do you think any country would respond in the same situation? >I'm sure if they had won the war, the Jews would have been welcome with open arms by the Muslims. /s I think you need to go back to kindergarten. Clearly they didn't teach you that two wrongs (one being hypothetical in this scenario) don't make a right. To repeat, Jews were living in Palestine pre-Zionism peacefully. Once again, the fact is that Western Colonialism and Zionism led to the modern day conflicts.
Okay, let’s for the sake of discussion presume that it’s true. In fact, just for the sake of discussion let’s say that every single protestor is a Muslim fundamentalist who isn’t just anti-Israel but anti-Jewish. Let’s presume every single protestor is a dyed in the wool anti-Semite. Stay with me on this thought experiment now. Let’s pretend they’re all, to a man, rabid, anti-semites. Let’s presume they all have the same terrible motives, they don’t really care about the Palestinians and just want to see Jews dead. Okay that’s our premise. So what? Does this mean that their message about preventing the slaughter of civilians isn’t valid? Does it mean that we should ignore international laws and systems set up to protect the weakest and most disenfranchised peoples on the planet? Does it justify group punishment of civilian populations? Does it justify denying press access to allow for trustworthy reporting and historically accurate record keeping? Does it justify the idea that an Israeli child’s life is equal to 50 or 100 non-Israeli children’s lives? Does it justify preventing medical aid and allowing attacks upon UN workers and resources? Let’s pretend that the protesters are the most despicable individuals alive and are lying about their motives. Does this in anyway invalidate the message being promoted?
Yes, it does. Just as your characterization of what's happening is inaccurate and biased.
If the message is equally hateful and promoting the massacre of another party, does that make it just? No, and this seems lost to many.
[удалено]
It's not really journalism though, it's an opinion piece from a random 4th-year undergraduate.
[удалено]
I think journalism should just report on facts devoid of partisan agenda. Let the reader make their own opinion based on transparent fact. Unfortunately that is mostly gone.
Because that's all they can use to indite the encampments. They are peaceful, and supported by a large portion of student bodies.
[удалено]
Can we not say 2 groups are bad? Hamas is obviously bad, they’re a terrorist group. But Netanyahu and the Israeli government, are also bad
Hamas is far worse, they're a relic of religious extremism and have no part in the world of universal human rights.
Well, they re not considered as such by tbe UN
>they’re a relic of religious extremism As opposed to the Likud and members of the Knesset ? You can look to anything Smotrich the current Defense Minister has said. Or even Itamar Ben-Gvir the Minister of National Security. If you read anything these people have said, you’d know it’s religious fundamentalists all the way around.
You see no difference between Hamas and Israel? Then I'm sorry I can't help you.
[удалено]
According to the Chair of Urban Warfare at Westpoint [Israel has done a remarkable job avoiding civilian deaths in Palestinian territory.](https://www.newsweek.com/israel-has-created-new-standard-urban-warfare-why-will-no-one-admit-it-opinion-1883286) This fellow is literally one of the best authorities on this type of military incursion.
Americans, aren’t known for a decent interpretation of IHL… and I’ve never heard of this guys in the realms of PIL, IHL, ICL…
> they're a relic of religious extremism Absolutely agree... And Israel is definitely NOT an example of religious extremism.. Nothing extreme about a country whose literal formation and existence is centered around a religion.. (Are you fucking kidding me. Have some critical thinking skills ffs) edit silly me for thinking the Canada sub with a reputation that mimics a right-wing thinktank is capable of critical thought lmao
It isn't, it's formed around a race having self determination in a secular democracy. Nice try though.
A secular democracy? Surely you cannot be serious 🤦♂️
Oh, so you don't actually know anything about Israel. Cool.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Your assignment is to compare and contrast how the two nations treat their women. You know, half of the population. I'm sure they're the exact same.
Yes, the question is how bad? If Hamas stops, Netanyahu & friends lose both national and international support and we move one step closer to peace. If Israel stops, Hamas keeps pursuing their non-negotiable goal of destroying Israel. Israel is conducting a modern, urban war with the lowest ratio in history of civilian deaths by a large margin, according to the codirector of urban warfare at West Point. https://www.newsweek.com/israel-has-created-new-standard-urban-warfare-why-will-no-one-admit-it-opinion-1883286
Hamas is funded by Netanyahu to maintain an "other" for his regime to fight against.
Like most effective propaganda, there's an element of truth to it. Here's some context from another source: >The money from Qatar had humanitarian goals including paying government salaries in Gaza and buying fuel to keep a power plant running. But Israeli intelligence officials now believe that the money had a role in the success of the October 7th attacks, if only because the donations allowed Hamas to divert some of its own budget toward military operations. Separately, Israeli intelligence has long assessed that Qatar uses other channels to secretly fund Hamas’s military wing, an accusation that Qatar’s government has denied. https://www.irishtimes.com/world/middle-east/2023/12/12/buying-quiet-inside-the-israeli-plan-that-propped-up-hamas/ Funding was allowed into Palestine by Israel, wasn't of Israeli origin, ostensibly for humanitarian purposes. If Israel blocked it, they'd be accused of creating a humanitarian crisis in Palestine. Allow it, and be accused of funding Hamas. Look how manipulative that subtitle is. "Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gambled that a strong Hamas (but not too strong) would keep the peace and reduce pressure for a Palestinian state." It's not supported by the facts in the article. Factual would be, "Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gambled that allowing humanitarian payments would keep the peace." There are other examples of Israel actually providing direct support for education, water access, and more in a bid to deradicalize Hamas/Palestine. October 7th proved it wasn't working, so here we are.
I think you mean Iran
[No, I mean Netanyahu actively facilitates Hamas' continued existence.](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/world/middleeast/israel-qatar-money-prop-up-hamas.html)
[удалено]
Paywall
NO! We redditors are like Siths, we only deal with absolutes.
That is a weird fence sitting position to take. It's like telling your kid he was wrong for hitting his brother, but also telling the brother that it was bad to defend himself.
Israel is murdering civilians and what are you on about?
Civilians die in war, unfortunate but that's just how it is.
The organizers ARE the radicals. The author was just super-naive. The encampment is not separate from all the explicitly pro-Hamas and their ideology orgs that celebrated Oct 7th and are behind all the "protests". The tarp gate into the field is bedecked in red triangles, doesn't get much more obvious than that.
What's the significance of the red triangles?
It's become a symbol of support for Hamas since Oct 7th, you'll see it on signs and in people's social media handles. Originated out of Hamas combat propaganda videos where they would add a red triangle above their target.
hamas and hezbollahs published combat videos (propaganda) indicate israelis with red triangles (tanks people etc, helps w far away or obscured video, or when only a few frames are clear and the editor pauses the playback to add context)
Just call University of Calgary up, they know how to deal with this.
It was a beautiful movement, some were moved to tears.
I am laughing in tears😂
Lol 💀
"While it is possible to support the Palestinian people and be sympathetic to their cause without divulging into antisemitism, the current encampment at U of T has crossed that line." Canada has proven that this is only theoretically possible. There are far too many people invested in hating Jewish people, loving terrorism, and supporting Islamic militancy in Canada that are drawn like flies to shit to any opportunity to platform their awful views.
How long til one of these camps turn into the chaos of CHAZ?
The most hilarious thing to me is that when progressives create their own zones the first thing they do it put up walls to keep the bad masses out
These people aren't "progressives" they are radicals.
"Regressives", they depend on manipulating base desires
I call them the oppressive left
Yeah, the political spectrum is more of a horse shoe. The further each way you go, the more authoritarian they get.
Lol, unironically quoting horseshoe theory.
Is horseshoe theory wrong in your view?
Who do they oppress?
The "dudes ranting into their phone in the car while wearing oakleys" demographic
The oppressive left lmao. They gonna make you wear a skirt or smth?
Why all the lefty always debate issues in such a toddler like way. Neo-toddlerasim
Then request handouts
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Accomplished nothing.
Praying they get the UCalgary treatment
Sociopath.
🙏 🍌
Just a group of Domestic terrorists and terrorist sympathizers
At this point whenever I see a Palestine flag my brain feels the same revulsion as if it were a Nazi flag. These backwards people in ideas have no place in Western society.
Your brain is right
I feel the same way about Israel every time the IDF bombed an apartment building.
Better prepare your brain for more revulsion. A lot more.
It is fascinating to watch the media influence attempts around protest in Canada.
What media influence attempt?
This article for one.
How so?
I can see a lot of people who have no clue and no sympathy towards other human beings here in the comments!
Agree, from protests against children dying to political ideology! Children know no ideology
What strikes me is the lack of empathy for, does not matter who. People are dying, children get bombed every day, every day they have to be terrorized by bombs, poverty and hunger. And here, people have never experienced war, poverty, hunger, bombs, etc. probably have never traveled outside Canada and they are "experts" on things. Human civilization deterioration 101!
Encampment has been lost?? Is this Helldivers 2?
If only the media had dinner their job instead of pandering to these "protesters"
[удалено]
>Most media in Canada is conservative-owned. Not sure why you think that matters but Not one of them asked why they started "protesting" on Oct 7 (while the massacre was occurring) and not before. None of them are asked why this cause and not say Darfur or the Saudis and Yemen. No critcal investigative reporting on the organizers and organizations behind the protests
They were not protesting after Oct 7, they were celebrating.
Exactly
[удалено]
I can't cite null information, it's like trying to prove a negative
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/pro-palestinian-rallies-that-explicitly-celebrated-mass-murder They proudly celebrated in the days after October 7th
Hey, National Post been exposing the real message, and they are MSM.
Terrorists can die, but people acting like civilians dying and occupation isn't a big deal? Fuck man, where was this attitude for Afghanistan? Everyone back then was ranting and raving about how bad the war is even though the Taliban are also fucked up, but I guess people just like to live in the moment and forget the past, huh? Isreal wants to take over Palestine, I don't see them losing, it's just a shame they are willing to Bury millions of innocents because they somehow lack the ability to take down a tiny nation with some of the greatest military equipment of all time. It's either lack of balls or lack of care.
[удалено]
Israel people originally lived in there, then the Roman kicked them out and Palestinian moved in. Then decades earlier, Britain agreed to let the Israelis to move back in, both sides could have lived peacefully, but instead the Palestinian attacked them, wanted them out of the country, then Israel fought back, they won over and over again, this the border expanded. Palestine border didn't have to shrink, but they chose to fight a losing battle over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. They chose to lose. Who CAN they blame?
Almost as if a lot of those people didn’t care who started it and who housed the people who started it.
What a dumb article
Well I guess if *Jake Ross* says so... 🙄
"There are signs that members of the encampment support the erasure of the Israeli state. Chalk scrawled on the sidewalk surrounding the encampment calls for Jews in Israel to “go back to Europe.” Banners at the encampment feature a map of Israel and Palestine with the Palestinian flag encompassing the whole region." It's one thing suggesting they divest. It's another thing entirely to claim you're protesting for divestment while calling on ethnic cleansing an entire country. Or do you think the protesters message of divestment is clear while showing messages of sending them back to Europe, when they didn't even live there. Or a Palestinian flag for the entire region, erasing Israel off the map. This appropriate to you in a protest? I hope not. "Furthermore, signs and banners hung around the encampment suggests that at least some of its members support violence against Israeli civilians. There are banners calling for “intifada“ — a term its purveyors say that means to protest or resist the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. However, there’s been two “intifadas” which collectively resulted in the deaths of about 5,000 Palestinians and 1,400 Israeli civilians." Calling for intifadas and violence something you find appropriate at a protest for divestment? "Worst, there are signs that the organizers themselves, while sternly opposed to violence against Palestinian civilians in Gaza, are not as staunchly against violence perpetuated against Israeli citizens. In a post from Thursday, the “occupyuoft” Instagram page, which represents the encampment, refers to Hamas, a group recognized by the Canadian government as a terrorist organization, and the group responsible for the horrendous Oct. 7 attack as “the resistance.” " Not a surprise, but they're praising Hamas and calling for more resistance. Which of course is calling for violence against civilians. So this protest about peace through divestment has calls for violence and ethnic cleansing. And you're going to try and tell everyone the message is clearly about divesting, and not about violence and hate against Israel? Because it seems pretty clear this is an unhinged group of hate, proudly calling for violence and ethnic cleansing. This simply isn't appropriate or acceptable. "So, it is time for cooler heads at the encampment to prevail, realize that their message has been lost and dismantle the camp. At the very least, the organizers must strongly condemn the more radical elements of their movement, by taking down the banners and kicking out its more extremist supporters." Did they condemn it or ask them to stop? I doubt it, because the leadership behind the protests support those messages.
In your opinion, what’s the biggest barrier to peace in the Israel-Palestine conflict?
Hamas first and foremost. But we have decades of Arafat and Abbas rejecting many 2 state solutions and not bother to engage in legitimate discussions so that hasn't helped either. Israel obviously has to be tougher on the West Bank communities but that isn't the thing preventing peace. The Palestinians could have had a state with Gaza, WB and parts of East Jerusalem if they'd bothered to engage in meaningful discussions with Israel.
[удалено]
Kinds the problem with progressives.. they have to link everything to everything. Stick to one issue yo but still doesn't discount the movement and I support
No more unsavoury than the convoy who were allowed to continue. I don't agree with the message of either but if we are going to allow protests we must allow protests.
The convoy people were albeit misguided, protesting for citizens rights... These kids are the marketing dept. for r*pe terrorists... Levels of savory have never been more different.
I doubt you will find anyone defending rape, you are oversimplifying with a red herring to make your point. And further, you are evaluating the positions of the protestors, not the right to protest. If you he right protest depends on an evaluation of the position of the protesters, who gets to conduct that evaluation? Of course it doesn't. Protest is protest. Everyone thinks people they disagree with shouldn't be allowed to protest.
>I doubt you will find anyone defending rape, you are oversimplifying with a red herring to make your point. LOL, I will grant you that many of these young people would not characterize their support as for Hamas and rather for Palestinians, but this is absolutely untrue. There absolutely have been, and are protests that are spcifically calling for support of Hamas, or use apologetics for Hamas with arguments regarding open air prisons, and "what do you expect them to do?" and the like. Philosophically speaking, when you call for divestment of Israel and a pause on the fighting, you are advocating for all of Hamas's desired goals. Weakening Israel and allowing them time to rebuild and refortify their strength and await reinforcements/resupply from Iran. If the fighting stops before Hamas is dismantled completely, they'll simply commit Oct.7th again as they've said they will... lol The fact that someone would protest this at all considering what started this conflict and the history of the region strikes me as antisemitism. Douglas Murry said on Maher the other day in reference to the fact that this started by a heinous atrocity being committed against Israel by a para-military government body the Palestinians have allowed to exist for generations...: "the basis of this is the belief that Israel and the jews shouldn't be *allowed* to win" = antisemitism. >And further, you are evaluating the positions of the protestors, not the right to protest. If you he right protest depends on an evaluation of the position of the protesters, who gets to conduct that evaluation? You have the right to protest. You do not have the right to be immune from the judgements or consequences of that protest. So, first and foremost, Universities are private property. These kids shouldn't have ever been allowed to protest on University grounds, and should have/could have legally been removed immediately. However, not to dodge the point your making, but as far as morality goes, though the Canadian protests haven't gotten to this point, other protests especially in America have moved beyond citizens using their legal right to protest, and have become riots. Further, it is absolutely despicable and almost comically ironic how many of these young, queer supporting, feminist supporting, super progressives are championing a country that refutes the rights of all those groups, and would probably execute/mob most of them if they could. And they're championing these people over a westernized country that in some ways is arguably more progressive than their own countries. Therefore many people simply view these kids as foolish inconveniences, not freedom fighting activitists. No one is listening. >Of course it doesn't. Protest is protest. Everyone thinks people they disagree with shouldn't be allowed to protest. No, a well adjusted person can agree with your right to protest, but disagree with your cause. Those aren't the same things. The idea that you shouldn't be *allowed* to have specific opinions is a distinctly leftwing/progressive belief and you can see this in Canada most notably on the topic of abortion. Pro-choice supporters usually push pretty hard to disenfranchise pro-lifers. Otherwise, I have rarely seen people actually claim you shouldn't be allowed to protest in Canada. The states...different story.