Netanyahu hoped Hamas would reject Israel's offer. When it didn't, he turned to sabotage
Netanyahu hoped Hamas would reject Israel's offer. When it didn't, he turned to sabotage
***
Israel's criminal defendant prime minister, more focused on saving his incompetent far-right government than saving the hostages who have spent seven months trapped in Gaza, is doing everything he can to torpedo Israel's last and best chance at bringing the hostages home
"Hysteria for political reasons," Minister Benny Gantz termed the statement issued over the weekend by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (also known as "the diplomatic official"), in which he reiterated that with or without a temporary pause in the fighting for the release of our hostages, "We will enter Rafah and eliminate the remaining Hamas battalions."
Later, before the end of Shabbat, Netanyahu sent another announcement, in which he denied reports saying Israel had agreed to a cease-fire as part of a deal.
Netanyahu had hoped that the Egyptian proposal, which was more far-reaching than anything he had been willing to accept in the past, would be rejected by Hamas. Over the weekend, when the negotiations took a positive turn, Netanyahu found himself in distress, as was expressed by his flurry of statements. Given our familiarity with his family environment, including his pampered son on the front in Miami, his fright is indeed understandable.
You're viewing a single thread.
Netanyahu never intended to stop the genocide/ war on Gaza, he made that clear:
- Netanyahu tells Blinken he will not end war on Hamas in Gaza as part of hostage deal.
- Netanyahu vows to invade Rafah ‘with or without a deal’ as cease-fire talks with Hamas continue.
Why would Hamas even accept the ''deal'' if Israel anyway will invade Rafah that has all the innocent Palestinian civillians?
They also shut down AlJezeera news and Israel claims they are the ''only democracy in the Middle East'': Israel orders Al Jazeera to shut down as Netanyahu rejects peace talks.
about the last part, the eu banned rt and sputnik news.
does that mean eu countries aren't democracies?Last part as in ''Israel claims they are the ‘‘only democracy in the Middle East''?
I refer to this not only because they shutdown Al Jazeera but also their entire regime. They call themselves an democratic country in the Middle East but we all know:
- They have an Apartheid regime (Two different laws. One for Israeli and one for Palestinian).
- They sent Palestinian people unfair to prison.
- Palestinian people have unfair judgement.
- They shutdown Al Jazeera (I'm not even sure if they gave an actual reason but if they did; can we trust it? They have been known for lying to the world).
- Netanyahu has been Prime Minister for so long while majority do not even want him as a Prime Minister.
- People who humiliate Palestinian often do not get punished by law.
How can you call such an state ''democratic''?
EDIT 1: If you want, I can get news-sources for each claim.
EDIT 2: Checking upon your comment history, you’ve been spamming that particular sentence. So I’m curious why you are defending an state that is on paper “democratic” but in reality is not.
Two different laws. One for Israeli and one for Palestinians
In Israel proper the laws are equal, plenty of Arabs live in Israel with the same rights as anyone else. In territories they occupy the laws are unfair, but I don't know of any democracy that gives people in occupied territories equal rights
They shutdown Al Jazeera
They shutdown a foreign media outlet specifically for the duration of a war. Undemocratic, but not beyond the scope of democracy.
People who humiliate Palestinian often do not get punished by law.
This is discrimination not by law but by the people that enforce it, unfortunately democracy can't effectively fix the biases of its citizens.
The reason they are a democracy is because they have elections that determine the ruling party in the legislature. In 2022 a right wing party got the most votes and successfully created a coalition government. If the government does unpopular things then they will lose votes in the next election and be removed, ideally this limits unpopular government policy.
In Israel proper the laws are equal, plenty of Arabs live in Israel with the same rights as anyone else. In territories they occupy the laws are unfair, but I don’t know of any democracy that gives people in occupied territories equal rights
Do you have any proof of your particular claim? Like give a link with an example of it. Sorry to say but I’m immensely skeptical. I could claim lots of things and it could not be true.
They shutdown a foreign media outlet specifically for the duration of a war. Undemocratic, but not beyond the scope of democracy.
You said it, yourself. Undemocratic. Plus the two separate laws does not really define ''democratic'', does it? A Apartheid regime cannot be democratic. Not only that if they are so democratic, why shut it down? Freedom of speech is a part of being democratic which means allowing real news and evidence to be spread into to the world, to let others know what is going on.
- Democracy or Apartheid: You Can't Have Both
- Freedom of expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society
- Israel prevents hundreds of worshippers from entering Al-Aqsa on first night of Ramadan
This is discrimination not by law but by the people that enforce it, unfortunately democracy can’t effectively fix the biases of its citizens.
Two different laws makes it by itself already discriminating against the Palestinian people. Makes it more worse when people do not even ‘obey the law’.
The reason they are a democracy is because they have elections that determine the ruling party in the legislature. In 2022 a right wing party got the most votes and successfully created a coalition government. If the government does unpopular things then they will lose votes in the next election and be removed, ideally this limits unpopular government policy.
Not sure if I said it in this thread or somewhere else but Israel is on paper ‘’democratic’’ but in reality they are not. In January there was a poll done whether the Israeli want their Prime Minister to stay or be gone and the majority of the Israeli do not want their current prime minister and he keeps being in power.
Do you have any proof of your particular claim? Like give a link with an example of it. Sorry to say but I’m immensely skeptical. I could claim lots of things and it could not be true.
Thanks for the response and I understand your skepticism, I will do my best to provide sources. I found an article describing the type of discrimination Arab Israelis face, there are problems but legal rights are equal, "They have the same legal rights as Jewish citizens, but many continue to face discrimination and socioeconomic disadvantages." Your link is about the occupied West Bank. Those are military courts applied during a military occupation, people living under a military occupation do not have the same legal rights as the citizens of the state occupying them.
You said it, yourself. Undemocratic. Plus the two separate laws does not really define ''democratic'', does it? A Apartheid regime cannot be democratic.
Israel has not annexed the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, they occupy them. Apartheid is two different laws for citizens of the same country, the effect of an occupation is similar but the cause and solution are completely different. The solution is to end the occupation, in apartheid the solution is to change laws to grant equal rights to all people of a country. I could see apartheid being used to describe how the Israeli military treats the West Bank, but it does not apply to Israel itself.
Not only that if they are so democratic, why shut it down? Freedom of speech is a part of being democratic which means allowing real news and evidence to be spread into to the world, to let others know what is going on.
- Democracy or Apartheid: You Can't Have Both
- Freedom of expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society
- Israel prevents hundreds of worshippers from entering Al-Aqsa on first night of Ramadan
The stated reason the Israeli cabinet banned them was because they were "Harming Israel’s security and inciting violence against its soldiers" this article also mentions "Under a law passed last month, the government can temporarily shutter foreign media outlets that have been found to undermine national security." I disagree with the decision but it only applies to foreign media and is temporary. Freedom of speech in Israel isn't perfect but the judicial system has protected it and generally it has gotten better over time. The history of the right to free speech in Israel is interesting, here's an article about it. Israel hosts one of its harshest critics Haaretz. If Israel was undemocratic why would they allow such a news source to exist? Other countries in the Middle East certainly wouldn't tolerate this. Israel used to have the best score on the press freedom index for the Middle East region. As a result of the war they are now second in the region but still 30-70 ranks higher than their neighbors.
In response to some of your sources, Israel's actions at Al Aqsa mosque and in Jerusalem in general are issues I'll read more on, specifically permanent residents status vs citizens living there. I don't think it would change my overall view of Israel being a democracy though. Democracies can do a lot of bad things and still be democracies.
Not sure if I said it in this thread or somewhere else but Israel is on paper ‘’democratic’’ but in reality they are not. In January there was a poll done whether the Israeli want their Prime Minister to stay or be gone and the majority of the Israeli do not want their current prime minister and he keeps being in power.
In practice Israel is a democracy. People want Netanyahu out but that's not how a democracy works. There is not an election being held right now so the only way Netanyahu can be removed is by a vote of no confidence from the legislature. People can ask the legislature to remove him and hold new elections, in fact a vote was held in January but the motion only got 18 of the 61 needed votes. As a result of Netanyahu's war the Likud party (he is the chairperson) has lost a lot of popularity and the National Unity party has gained in popularity. Current polls indicate Likud will lose the next election which is how democracy works. It is a slow process but in the end the people decide their government by voting.
last part as in 'They also shut down AlJezeera news and Israel claims they are the ''only democracy in the Middle East'''
they have the same laws for all citizens. jews, muslims, druze, etc.
palestinians living in the west bank are citizens of the pa (or jordan), not of israel.
the situation in area c of the west bank is a result of the failed oslo accords and bibi's policy of "status quo".
article by prof mohammed wattad, who is an israeli-arab (his own words)
israel's declaration of independence
basic laws of israelshutting down a state backed media group that has ties to the muslim brotherhood (hamas is a branch of theirs), from a hostile state that hosts the billionaire leaders of hamas, is similar to the shutting down of rt in europe - which is a state backed media group of a hostile state.
in israel you don't vote for the prime minister, you vote for a party. as part of the coalition creating process, the pm is chosen as part of the agreements between parties.
one of the pm's parties in 2022, naftali bennet, had much less votes than the likud ever had.
basic law: the government
knessetposting something twice and then replying to someone with a similar link isn't "spamming".
pointing out the reality of this specific action / situation isn't "defending" anything. that's a very black and white view of things.
same as when i criticize a state it doesn't instantly mean i'm against it or hate it.they have the same laws for all citizens. jews, muslims, druze, etc. palestinians living in the west bank are citizens of the pa (or jordan), not of israel. the situation in area c of the west bank is a result of the failed oslo accords and bibi’s policy of “status quo”.
So first of all, Wikipedia is not a trustable source at all and therefore dismissed. This is because everyone can edit the Wikipedia page. For example, I can edit a page and then claim it is true. There's no one really who keeps tabs on how trustable it is. Not only that, Wikipedia even says that one of the pages you gave is not really trustable ''This page does not provide license information'' and the page can be deleted. Thus not trustable.
Wikipedia is a good starting point but not a (trustable) source to back up claims.
My point stays the same; Israel is on paper ''democratic'' but in reality they are not. You cannot be democratice while having:
- Apartheid system.
- Unfair judgement to Palestinian people.
- Unfair sending Palestinians to prison (many whom are children).
And everything else they do to the Palestinian people.
There are whistleblowers on how Israel litteraly tortures Palestinian people, article of this is the 3rd one. Do you consider this an actual ''democratic'' state?
- Wikipedia is a wiki, meaning anyone can edit nearly any page and improve articles immediately. You do not need to register to do this, and anyone who has edited is known as a Wikipedian or editor.
- Declaration of Independence (Israel) & This page does not provide license information.
- Strapped down, blindfolded, held in diapers: Israeli whistleblowers detail abuse of Palestinians in shadowy detention center
shutting down a state backed media group that has ties to the muslim brotherhood (hamas is a branch of theirs), from a hostile state that hosts the billionaire leaders of hamas, is similar to the shutting down of rt in europe - which is a state backed media group of a hostile state.
Huge claim but no link to a trustable source. I'm honestly not sure whether this is true however then here's my question: Why shutting it down now and not decades ago? If it is true, it means they knew it already and never done anything about it until Israel decided to commit another ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people and worse, genocide.
posting something twice and then replying to someone with a similar link isn’t “spamming”. pointing out the reality of this specific action / situation isn’t “defending” anything. that’s a very black and white view of things. same as when i criticize a state it doesn’t instantly mean i’m against it or hate it.
I do not understand what you mean here nor to what you are referring to.
I don’t have time to give a complete argument back (yet) but where are your sources for your claims?
I’ll respond in a day or two entirely.
fair enough.
added some, will add more later.
does that mean eu countries aren’t democracies?
Try to criticise israel or your government publicly to have a taste of "democracy".
plenty of israelis criticize israel all the time.
the existance of media groups like haaretz and 972 in israel, which criticize israel all the time are a good example.
the massive protests are another.
As I understand it, the English and Arabic channels are very different editorially, with the latter being rather controversial and biased to the Muslim Brotherhood1. The English channel even wrote about the division themselves2.
This is something, in addition to that censorship exists in the west/everywhere (and arguably is favourable in certain forms), that should be kept in mind regarding Aljazeera. I must honestly say, I did not read more upon this, so feel free to correct or specify.
- Al Arabiya English (2017), https://english.alarabiya.net/News/gulf/2017/10/01/Al-Jazeera-English-vs-Al-Jazeera-Arabic-One-channel-two-messages.
- Aljazeera English (2011), https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2011/5/6/al-jazeera-one-organisation-two-messages
Yes the EU isn't a Democracy either.
UK surgeon who described Gaza ‘massacre’ denied entry to France
ah ok, some of the most democratic countries in the world aren't democratic.
which countries are then? qatar? north korea?Whataboutism doesn't disprove my argument. Reality is inconvenient indeed.
a case of an anti-semitic doctor who praises terrorists and flouts a visa ban, isn't enough to declare some of the most democratic countries in the world "not democratic".
here's one of the articles by him in arabic praising a terrorist who murdered a rabbi.He was named by the BBC as a “key” source of verification for Hamas’s controversial death count in Gaza and has used his extensive media platforms to claim that Israel has used white phosphorous and targeted hospitals. He also alleged that amputations in Gaza were being carried out without anaesthetic and with washing-up liquid to clean wounds.
All things that have now been fully proven to be true showing this is not a man that makes up false stories.
Zionist newspapers with the quotation marks lmao.
Also your article does not provide any evidence of antisemitism aside from claiming he praised a resistance fighter in the West Bank for shooting what appears to be a violent israeli colonist in the West Bank, while not mentioning the full story whatsoever. Palestinians defending themselves is super anti-Semitic.
Only the IDF may be praised in Germany for Nazi'ing all over the West Bank and Gaza to expand their Lebensraum right?