I got tired of the Zionist media and I'm preparing this. Out now!
I got tired of the Zionist media and I'm preparing this. Out now!
cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/4534160
Article is now out here: https://open.substack.com/pub/criticalresist/p/just-how-many-of-israels-civilians?r=2hqzpa&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
It's exactly as I keep saying: there is no such thing as a settler civilian; the very act and habitus of colonial settlerdom is marking oneself as an illegal occupant, an invader; and as all invaders are, this makes the settler a legal combatant. Sucks to be their kids, but Israel don't give the first fuck about no Palestinian kids.
Fire article as always, Crit; I pray it gets under Dershowitz's skin somehow.
I reject framing either side as "innocent" except in regards to small children. Settlers are not. Many Palestinians could be. Each way you break down the groups the number of truly "innocent" dwindles. It's just a loaded term.
In regards to Palestinians I accept the Israeli claims that they are all supportive of armed resistance, for instance. For them this is damning of the Palestinians but in my eyes this elevates them. Good, I say. Let them resist their oppression, it shows good moral character. They have a right to resist and should support resistance. This does not make them innocent but there is a genocide being orchestrated against them. They must be firm and decisive in action. If they are not, they are dead. As Mao said, "It is right to rebel."
Well put. Not to romanticize it or anything but the innocence of all involved is the first casualty of war.
There is only one thing war does consistently and effectively and that is create victims. Even in the most just of wars, the most righteous, there are always victims on both sides.
The pedophile Dershowitz also believes this, but he extends it to all Palestinians. He wouldn't extend the same definition to 'Israelis', however.
As he is on the side that has the power, he can get away with weasel words. He can legitimately say "of course I don't want children to be killed" while internally cackling every time a video of dead Palestinian children pops up on his feed.
He can do this because the child-killing will continue no matter his opinion of it. He knows it will, even if he was somehow influential within 'Israeli' politics (he probably is with all the pedos they harbor). He could publicly tell Nethanyahu "Stop killing children", and they would look at each other with a smile on their face, knowing that the public eats it up.
As the oppressed side and being on the side of the oppressed, we have to be much more direct with our arguments. I don't believe any settler is innocent, and saying this instantly puts me at odds with the child rapist Dershowitz who said "sure some people in Gaza are innocent, why not". However in this case, I was directly rewriting his article to make a point, and thus the line that some settlers might be innocent was included as it was part of the original article (although, from the further arguments in the article, I was actually arguing they can not be innocent, much like Dershowitz was subtly saying the same about Gazans).
I plan on expanding this argument if I end up writing my own article based on the title of this one, which is looking increasingly more likely.
I feel that and I think there are many ways to frame the issues. This is how I frame it; how I view it.
Isn't Dershowitz's rationale the same as Bin Ladens?
Yay another media post! You do a very good job with these.
I looked at the original NYP article and holy shit that is disgusting. Straight up naziposting.
the actual guilty are the ones who kicked them out of europe in the first place
it always comes back to them