Israel - A Rant

[Numero Veinticinco]

11 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

I think the very worst aspect of the reporting isn't that they don't report atrocities from Israel, it's that they frame the situation as a "conflict". This gives people who only skim read stories about Israel/Palestine the impression that it's some sort of 50/50 battle. Rather than an apartheid with oppressors and the oppressed.

Yes, I think this is generally quite evident. Especially in some of the popular publications it's clearly true. Hamas fired rockets, Israel fired back, the cycle goes on. That type of stuff. It's not a particularly accurate version of events.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Red Phoenix said:

The tweet can be seen as right or wrong depending how you look at it. 

Yes, I guess that's true. If you look at it factually then it's wrong. If you look at it based off of what you want to believe, then it's definitely open to interpretation. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure you've seen enough my posts on the Israel/Palestine situation over the last decade to know where I stand on this, but I just don't ever this the cause is particularly helped with things like that. It gives supporters of Israel's more egregious measures something to point at. 

[Red Phoenix]

4 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Yes, I guess that's true. If you look at it factually then it's wrong. If you look at it based off of what you want to believe, then it's definitely open to interpretation.

 

Well she starts the tweet with : "The narrative in mainstream media always begins arbitrarily with a rocket fired from Gaza", which I still look at as the media focusing on the rocket attack as the event that started the assault off without giving more context. Some reports give no context or little to none in their entire reports. The next part : "They don't tell you that Israeli snipers have been lined up at the Israel-Gaza boundary fence gunning down unarmed protesters all year", is reported in several outlets, but I've only ever seen it mentioned way further onwards in the initial reports on the rocket attacks.

 

I don't think she's trying to make out that none of the media mention sniper fire at all. It's usually placed way further down in the rocket attack reports though if they include it.

[SammyAftershave]

They seldom mention if the targets of these rockets are illegal 'settlements' either.

[Strontium]

1 hour ago, SammyAftershave said:

They seldom mention if the targets of these rockets are illegal 'settlements' either.

 

What relevance would that have?

[Numero Veinticinco]

5 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

 

Well she starts the tweet with : "The narrative in mainstream media always begins arbitrarily with a rocket fired from Gaza", which I still look at as the media focusing on the rocket attack as the event that started the assault off without giving more context. Some reports give no context or little to none in their entire reports. The next part : "They don't tell you that Israeli snipers have been lined up at the Israel-Gaza boundary fence gunning down unarmed protesters all year", is reported in several outlets, but I've only ever seen it mentioned way further onwards in the initial reports on the rocket attacks.

 

I don't think she's trying to make out that none of the media mention sniper fire at all. It's usually placed way further down in the rocket attack reports though if they include it.

I know that's how the tweet starts, mate. She's not making a complex argument here. I'm just saying it's not right. They might well report the rocket attacks with information about rockets, but then it's not arbitrary it's specific; as news is not a one off event, it's rational that it's going to start off on the topic that it's reporting. Outside of that, the narrative in the Mainstream media is not 'always' anything. Reporting on a single event is legitimate. Starting the article about that event is legitimate. 

 

It sounds quite conspiratorial, to me. 'The MSM always...'. Well, they must be colluding then. Okay, fair shout. Let's prove it. The issue comes when it's easy to google and find many examples of it not being the case in just a few seconds. Some media is biased towards Israel. There's no doubt about that. But the tweet is broadstroked twaddled, in my view. I'm not attacking you, I'm just saying her tweet is off and, at best, poorly worded.

[Numero Veinticinco]

20 minutes ago, Strontium Dog said:

What relevance would that have?

Well, it wouldn't be relevant - in my opinion - to the attempted killing of human beings, because that's rarely a legit thing to do. However, I think a sound moral argument could be made that illegally occupied land is the land of the people firing the rockets and the targets of the rocket attackers are illegally occupying land. Ergo, firing rockets at your own land and at criminals could, in some people's eyes, be relevant to the discussion. It is, to some, different to firing at a hospital or school in the middle of legally obtained land. 

[Strontium]

Well, needless to say, I don't think people should be murdered for squatting. And this applies equally to the millions of Arabs occupying stolen Jewish land.

[Numero Veinticinco]

2 minutes ago, Strontium Dog said:

Well, needless to say, I don't think people should be murdered for squatting. And this applies equally to the millions of Arabs occupying stolen Jewish land.

Jewish land, you say. Let's talk about how they're illegally occupying Jewish land that is in any way comparable to Israel's international law breaches. 

 

You start. If you can, with a description of what the fuck you're talking about when you say 'Jewish land'. 

[Bjornebye]

Deplorable 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

Sheesh. 

[Strontium]

31 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Jewish land, you say. Let's talk about how they're illegally occupying Jewish land that is in any way comparable to Israel's international law breaches. 

 

You start. If you can, with a description of what the fuck you're talking about when you say 'Jewish land'. 

 

Er, the land that was expropriated from Jews when they were ethnically cleansed from the Arab nations.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_exodus_from_Arab_and_Muslim_countries#Property_losses_and_compensation

 

Quote

In Libya, Iraq and Egypt many Jews lost vast portions of their wealth and property as part of the exodus because of severe restrictions on moving their wealth out of the country.

 

In other countries in North Africa, the situation was more complex. For example, in Morocco emigrants were not allowed to take more than $60 worth of Moroccan currency with them, although generally they were able to sell their property prior to leaving, and some were able to work around the currency restrictions by exchanging cash into jewelry or other portable valuables. This led some scholars to speculate the North African Jewish population, comprising two thirds of the exodus, on the whole did not suffer large property losses. However, opinions on this differ.

Yemeni Jews were usually able to sell what property they possessed prior to departure, although not always at market rates.

Various estimates of the value of property abandoned by the Jewish exodus have been published, with wide variety in the quoted figures from a few billion dollars to hundreds of billions.

The World Organization of Jews from Arab Countries (WOJAC) estimated in 2006, that Jewish property abandoned in Arab countries would be valued at more than $100 billion, later revising their estimate in 2007 to $300 billion. They also estimated Jewish-owned real-estate left behind in Arab lands at 100,000 square kilometers (four times the size of the state of Israel).

 

 

You surely know all this already, though.

[Numero Veinticinco]

I knew what you were referring to, yes. I debate that it's 'Jewish land', or in any way comparable. There's quite a difference, after all, between 'property abandoned in Arab countries', 'real-estate left behind in Arab lands' and 'Jewish land' and countries, in whole or part, being illegally occupied. But I'd imagine that you already knew this.

[Strontium]

I think stolen land is stolen land, whether it's stolen from Jews who were forced out of Arab countries, or whether it's stolen from Arabs who have been forced out of occupied territories.

[Numero Veinticinco]

13 minutes ago, Strontium Dog said:

I think stolen land is stolen land, whether it's stolen from Jews who were forced out of Arab countries, or whether it's stolen from Arabs who have been forced out of occupied territories.

Yes, that's something entirely different to what we were just talking about though. 

[Anubis]

1 hour ago, Bjornebye said:

Deplorable 

 

 

 

 

Come on, Stig, have you never seen a controlled demolition before....

 

(c)BenjiNetProductions Ltd.

[Red Phoenix]

2 hours ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I know that's how the tweet starts, mate. She's not making a complex argument here. I'm just saying it's not right. They might well report the rocket attacks with information about rockets, but then it's not arbitrary it's specific; as news is not a one off event, it's rational that it's going to start off on the topic that it's reporting. Outside of that, the narrative in the Mainstream media is not 'always' anything. Reporting on a single event is legitimate. Starting the article about that event is legitimate. 

 

It sounds quite conspiratorial, to me. 'The MSM always...'. Well, they must be colluding then. Okay, fair shout. Let's prove it. The issue comes when it's easy to google and find many examples of it not being the case in just a few seconds. Some media is biased towards Israel. There's no doubt about that. But the tweet is broadstroked twaddled, in my view. I'm not attacking you, I'm just saying her tweet is off and, at best, poorly worded.

 

Well we disagree on thinking it has a point, that's fine. Even if it's not 100% correct in all cases it's generally right, and plenty of others understand the point she was getting at. There's an inbuilt bias in the mainstream media against Palestine and Muslims and this is pointing that out. We don't have to go down the route of saying it's some type of conspiracy theory, it's obvious that there's a bunch of racist and Islamophobic fucks twisting the media and this is just another part of that.

 

Here's another that's often right :

 

 

 

He says "always", I don't care to check if it's "always", but maybe you do. I get what he's saying. It's pointing out an Islamophobic and racist bias in the media, because the media is often Islamophobic and racist, and pro-Israel and anti-Palestinian.

[Red Phoenix]

Yeah, fuck AIPAC.

 

 

[cloggypop]

2 hours ago, Strontium Dog said:

I think stolen land is stolen land, whether it's stolen from Jews who were forced out of Arab countries, or whether it's stolen from Arabs who have been forced out of occupied territories.

When presenting the history, those who view the Jewish exodus as analogous to the 1948 Palestinian exodus generally emphasize the push factors and consider those who left as refugees, while those who do not, emphasize the pull factors and consider them willing immigrants.^[17]

 

^{https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_exodus_from_Arab_and_Muslim_countries#Property_losses_and_compensation}

 

 

[cloggypop]

That's your own source by the way but you know that. 

[Strontium]

Just now, cloggypop said:

That's your own source by the way but you know that. 

 

Yes. Needless to say, I treat the view that people were voluntarily forced out of their homes without compensation to be one that is hard to sustain.

[ZonkoVille77]

Why can't we all just kill each other?

[Bjornebye]

3 hours ago, ZonkoVille77 said:

Why can't we all just kill each other?

Some are trying 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

Scumbags. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/27/israeli-soldiers-kill-teenage-palestinian-medic-near-bethlehem

[SammyAftershave]

They should be very proud of themselves. Shithouse Dog is late with his statutory defence.