51–60 of 370 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a democracy of the first-class citizens only. Don't forget it's an apartheid state!
All Israelis have equal rights, why do you say Israel an apartheid state?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a democracy of the first-class citizens only. Don't forget it's an apartheid state!
This is not grounded in reality. Arab citizens can vote and participate, and there are Arab parties in Israeli government. If you want to see an apartheid, go look at any other country in the middle east. Let's see how Jewish representation looks there...?
https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/ndik83/south_afr...
"Israel is the nation state of Jews alone" Netanyahu responds to TV star saying Arabs are equal citizens (2019):
source: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-israel-is-the-n...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of people voice their concerns, including a lot of Israelis, but what can you do? Israel is a democracy and the majority votes for far right militaristic candidates and parties. Whether or not you hear about these concerns in public discourse in your country's media depends on your current foreign policy.
I fail to see how Bennett is far right in any sense of the word. Conservative yes, but the far right is inhabited by nut jobs like Smotrich and Ben Gvir. Whether you define support for an active military as militaristic versus actually taking aggressive military action is also another issue - they cannot be militaristic if you accept the second definition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a democracy of the first-class citizens only. Don't forget it's an apartheid state!
Yep, like that disgusting incident on 2005 where they gave up their land... and their control... they are the worst. Who else is at fault to what happened in Gaza? The apartheid of curse. Disgusting! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_Gaz...
https://www.reddit.com/r/list_palestine/comments/l43xgk/mega...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> dare criticize it anyhow, you are quickly marked either a) antisemitic I don't think this is a good representation of anti-anti-Israel debate. The opposite of antisemitism is equality, where there is no "special" treatment of either Jews or Israel. Anyone can criticize Israel for its policies, provided they also criticize other states that have similar policies and not "single out" Israel as such. If only Israel is…
But isn't that just a roundabout way of describing whataboutism?
Once the method exists. i'd just assume its everywhere We know about Pegasus/NSO and its a fun subject to follow, but in all honesty, every engineer privy to the 0-day bank that powers it could build one of their own, or sell it to another group, and no one would know
Imagine some group that duplicates Pegasus/NSO -- compromises it but sells it AS Pegasus/NSO to unsuspecting, less-savvy nation-states and effectively uses /IT/ to infiltrate/backdoor the intelligence/LEO ops of said customer state... Or is that what Pegasus/NSO basically already provide, as a feature?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its a bit easier for Israel - if you are an outsider (99.9% of mankind) and dare criticize it anyhow, you are quickly marked either a) antisemitic or b) supporting islamic terrorism, or some mix of those. Nobody wants to touch that with 10 foot pole in woke era.
It's a bad situation: we don't currently have a good litmus test for good-faith criticisms of Israel (of which there are an overwhelming number) versus treatments of Israel as coextensive with and the mouthpiece of the Jewish diaspora (which it certainly isn't). The former is righteous criticism; the latter is gussied up antisemitism. Edit: and, to be absolutely clear, it is in Israel's continued interest for us to n…
Motte: Israel's use of Palestinian "guest workers" who have no opportunity to participate in either a robust Palestinian economy or a neighboring Arab economy, even when those workers receive the Israeli minimum wage or higher, does fit into an analogy to the treatment of black South Africans under apartheid as captive cheap labor. If Israel wants to avoid being subjected to this analogy, it should simply stop exploiting Palestinian labor this way.
Bailey: Israel is an apartheid state, and not exploiting Palestinian labor would just be covering it up. The only way for Israel to stop being an apartheid state is to stop being Jewish-Israeli: dissolve itself into a single state of Palestine ruled by its natural Arab majority.
Super-bailey: Israel is so apartheid, white-supremacist, and settler-colonial that not exploiting Palestinian labor, were it possible or even implemented at some point in existing history, would only make it more racist (see: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/10/kibbutz-labor-zionism-ber...). Israel owes these jobs to the Palestinians, as a precursor to the genocide reparations it will pay when it dissolves itself into a single state of Palestine ruled by its natural Arab majority.
So yeah. The people who could just lay down the motte as a serious moral charge don't want to. They want the bailey, or preferably the super-bailey. Likewise, the people who could just admit to the motte and fix the problem are assured that, were they to actually do so, the goalposts would only be moved to the bailey. Then the bailey will be moved to the super-bailey.
This should surprise no one since the spyware was developed by Israeli intelligence agencies.
It was not, no matter how the company tries to market itself to foreign clients. Israeli intel has more important work to do than develop software to spy on journalists and others persons of interest for big ego dictators.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I fail to see how Bennett is far right in any sense of the word. Conservative yes, but the far right is inhabited by nut jobs like Smotrich and Ben Gvir. Whether you define support for an active military as militaristic versus actually taking aggressive military action is also another issue - they cannot be militaristic if you accept the second definition.
There are few countries on Earth that have (a) directly officially threatened military action against another state, or (b) routinely bomb another state they are not officially at war with, the way Israel has. How are they not "taking aggressive military action"?
In what sense are we not officially at war with Palestine? Nobody ever signed an armistice, ceasefire, or peace deal to end the War of 1948. Nobody even wants to. The official policies of both the PLO and Hamas remain "struggle until victory". There are internal political reasons for this that any knowledgeable person can describe, but as far as anyone who lacks inside influence is concerned, that's their policy and they're sticking to it.