Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, leader of the far-right Jewish Power party, landed meetings with four Republican members of Congress on Monday during a visit to Capitol Hill.
Ben Gvir, an outspoken proponent of the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, told The Times of Israel that the lawmakers he met with included Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), the head of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who previously volunteered with the Israeli military and once wore his IDF uniform on Capitol Hill.
Mast is a strong backer of the Israeli settlements and recently directed his staff to refer to the Israeli-occupied West Bank as “Judea and Samaria,” a biblical name the state of Israel uses to refer to the Palestinian territory. Ben Gvir is a West Bank settler himself and wants Israel to annex the territory.
Ben Gvir also met with Reps. Jim Jordan (R-OH), Claudia Tenney (R-NY), and Mike Lawler (R-NY). The Israeli minister said he didn’t come to discuss a particular issue but wanted the US lawmakers to get to know him.
“I didn’t ask them afterward whether they’ll vote for Ben Gvir, but they wanted to get to know me and I think they really liked what they heard,” he said.
Ben Gvir said the lawmakers expressed their full-throated support for Israel and didn’t put any pressure on him to change policies. The meetings come as Israel is slaughtering dozens of Palestinians in Gaza every day and has been imposing a total blockade on the territory for nearly two months, as children are starving.
Ben Gvir has called for Israel to bomb food and aid stocks inside Gaza and claimed he received support for the idea from senior Republican officials that he met at President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida last week.
The Israeli minister has faced protests as he has traveled around the US and was confronted by antiwar activists when he was on Capitol Hill. “Israeli war criminal Itamar Ben Gvir can’t handle confrontation from protestors at the US Capitol,” Medea Benjamin, co-founder of CODEPINK, said in a post on X that included a video of a confrontation with Ben Gvir.
“As minister of ‘National Security,’ Ben-Gvir has openly endorsed the ethnic cleansing of Gaza and intentionally bombs civilians, aid, and civilian infrastructure,” Benjamin added.
The Israeli-Palestinian War is a tribal war, and that means there are no civilians – on either side. The only way for your side to win is to completely eradicate the other side. The Palestinians understand this, and so does Ben Gvir. But there are too many liberal Israelis who try to pretend this isn't so.
If one frames it as "tribal", perhaps – but I don't know that many-if-any groups in modernity use "tribal" in the archaic sense you suggest. Apart from anthropologists, clinical sociologists, and possibly A Tribe Called Quest if they still puttin' out records.
It's a term fascists use to dehumanize people so they can be exterminated.
It’s an ethnic cleansing by zionist supremacy.
In real time. Exposed.
^^^ Channeling the Nazi genocide command to justify his very own genocide.
yea in this version you don't just admit it's genocide, you incite it – 'exterminate the tutsis! butcher them all! it's them or us!'
this is about more than what israel is doing – it's about what israel is being exposed as:
as the depravities of israel become more blatant- and the murder and suffering of gazans becomes more horrific – the justifications become more shrill.
but that's just in the brains of fanatical jewish supremacists like "andrew" – the Jewish Power Party type epitomized by the openly raving Ben Gvir.
as with the hutu butchers convicted of genocide, it won't stand up in court – or in the judgment of most of the world.
If it was both sides armed with swords and shields. However, this is a conventional army against an unarmed population. A segment of that population manufactures its own primitive weapons as a defense. And the notion there are no civilians on either side certainly doesn't apply to the Palestinians, especially the Islamic movements. By law, faith and practice they are prohibited from purposefully targeting civilians. This genocidal intent is inherent to the bible and to western colonial practices.
@disqus_qhuce9v5DO:disqus@bergoffbirns:disqus@warsrus:disqus@deganawida:disqus@existentialdread:disqus@disqus_cWEo452Cca:disqus@unclesapien:disqus @
“the notion there are no civilians on either side certainly doesn’t apply to the Palestinians, especially the Islamic movements. By law, faith and practice they are prohibited from purposefully targeting civilians.”
Hamas disagreed with you, at least as of 1994 when they announced a principle of “treating like with like” and began carrying out suicide bombings specifically against civilian targets.
Tom, I respect your principled stance against power, but it’s ironic to reject decent human attempts at dignity when it stands as a radical challenge to tyranny, falsehood, and injustice.
That statement, while factually referencing Hamas' post-1994 rhetoric, flattens a complex reality and misunderstands the context, motivation, and evolution of Palestinian resistance — especially in the brutal aftermath of the 1994 Ibrahimi Mosque massacre, where 29 Palestinians were gunned down in prayer by an Israeli settler in a holy site, with the tacit protection of Israeli forces. The massacre was a turning point — not only in Hamas’ operational logic but in Palestinian public sentiment, disillusioned by the Oslo process and enraged by impunity for settler violence.
When Hamas invoked the principle of “treating like with like”, it was not issuing a religious fatwa or universal doctrine. It was a political and moral reaction to an unbearable reality: Palestinians were being killed en masse, and not a single Israeli perpetrator — not even Baruch Goldstein’s supporters — faced accountability. The Israeli state’s response was to impose restrictions on Palestinians, not settlers.
To be clear: Islam prohibits the targeting of civilians. And Hamas’ own scholars and religious figures have debated and at times condemned certain forms of violence. But in the 1990s and early 2000s, Palestinians were not operating in a vacuum of international law — they were operating in a vacuum of international conscience.
So yes, Hamas adopted suicide bombings as a tactic. But why? Not because Palestinians are inherently violent. Not because Islam commands it. But because:
Lawful resistance was criminalized.
Peaceful protest was ignored.
Negotiations were used as cover for land theft.
And massacres of Palestinians were met with silence.
Hamas’ strategy was reactive, not inherent. And as researchers like Tareq Baconi, Jeroen Gunning, and Azzam Tamimi have shown, the suicide attacks were a tragic language of last resort, expressing not just resistance but a raw demand for recognition, for dignity — even if only in death.
This isn’t to excuse attacks on civilians. It’s to understand them, morally and historically.
Your claim omits the fact that most Israelis — including off-duty soldiers and reservists — have military training and are often buried in military cemeteries. When suicide bombings targeted buses or public areas, the victims frequently included conscripts, off-duty personnel, or settlers armed and embedded in occupied territory — a distinction that international law struggles to fully capture in asymmetric warfare.
But crucially, Hamas has since moved away from this tactic. Suicide bombings have almost entirely stopped since the mid-2000s. Why? Not because Israel changed. But because Hamas evolved politically and strategically. It saw that these tactics, while symbolically powerful, did not yield sustainable results — and exacted too great a moral and human toll.
In the end, framing Hamas’ response in 1994 as proof of ideological bloodlust ignores the deeper truth: people under occupation do not explode because of ideology — they explode because they are buried alive.
The only problem is that Islamists get to decide who is guilty or innocent. No one suffers more from Islamism than everyday good Muslims.
The only problem with your argument is that Israel is guilty of genocidal war crimes, in violation of international law.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d7f762303a6a3bda05328f9ca002f5790d0cddff22dffba14df12fba1f10288e.jpg
Statement of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor Karim A.A. Khan KC:
On the basis of evidence collected and examined by my Office, I have reasonable grounds to believe that Yahya SINWAR (Head of the Islamic Resistance Movement (“Hamas”) in the Gaza Strip), Mohammed Diab Ibrahim AL-MASRI, more commonly known as DEIF (Commander-in-Chief of the military wing of Hamas, known as the Al-Qassam Brigades), and Ismail HANIYEH (Head of Hamas Political Bureau) bear criminal responsibility for the following war crimes and crimes against humanity committed on the territory of Israel and the State of Palestine (in the Gaza strip) from at least 7 October 2023:
Extermination as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(b) of the Rome Statute;
Murder as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(a), and as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
Taking hostages as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(iii);
Rape and other acts of sexual violence as crimes against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(g), and also as war crimes pursuant to article 8(2)(e)(vi) in the context of captivity;
Torture as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(f), and also as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i), in the context of captivity;
Other inhumane acts as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(l)(k), in the context of captivity;
Cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i), in the context of captivity; and
Outrages upon personal dignity as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(ii), in the context of captivity.
My Office submits that the war crimes alleged in these applications were committed in the context of an international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine, and a non-international armed conflict between Israel and Hamas running in parallel. We submit that the crimes against humanity charged were part of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Israel by Hamas and other armed groups pursuant to organisational policies. Some of these crimes, in our assessment, continue to this day.
Blah, blah, Sinwar…
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/644b67b81112c1912ac35cda0f53044aa162d647386a02aa7afe470ac0c2e5a8.png
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention%20on%20the%20Prevention%20and%20Punishment%20of%20the%20Crime%20of%20Genocide.pdf
LOL. That's a joke. Hamas has been accused of war crimes from the day it was born. What's a humongous blow is Israel being dragged through the dirt and condemned in the eyes of the world for its obvious crimes. Why don't you quote the arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant?
"I have reasonable grounds to believe that Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, and Yoav Gallant, the Minister of Defence of Israel, bear criminal responsibility for the following war crimes and crimes against humanity committed on the territory of the State of Palestine (in the Gaza Strip) from at least 8 October 2023:
– Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare as a war crime;
– Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health;
– Wilful killing or murder as a war crime and crime against humanity;
– Intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population as a war crime;
– Extermination and/or murder as a crime against humanity;
– Persecution as a crime against humanity;
– Other inhumane acts as crimes against humanity."
Khan emphasized that these charges were based on "independent investigation" and "objective, verifiable evidence vetted through a forensic process."
International Criminal Court
I can't believe your ignorance as Hamas started out in the guise of a charity until they came out with the Hamas Covenant, calling for the "obliteration" of Israel and to replace it with an Islamic State.
1988 Hamas Covenant came out, calling for the "obliteration" of Israel, it kind of changed the relationship.
The Preamble: "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."
"The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine." (Article 6)
Let’s start with the deeper problem in your framing: the suggestion that Islam itself is the threat. This is both lazy and offensive. Islam is not the issue—it is the identity, faith, and will of many Palestinians. To cast Islamic belief as inherently violent or illegitimate is to deny millions their humanity and right to self-determination. The problem is not Islam—it’s occupation, apartheid, and ethnic cleansing.
Now, quoting the 1988 Hamas Charter without historical context is equally dishonest. That document was not written by Hamas’s top leadership—most of them were in Israeli prisons at the time—but by lower-level members during a moment of revolutionary upheaval following 20 years of systematic Israeli repression and the eruption of the First Intifada. It reflects rage and desperation, not official long-term policy.
Yes, it contains language about “obliterating Israel,” but only if you remove it from context. That "obliteration" refers to the dismantling of an unjust, violent settler-colonial regime—not the elimination of Jews or Judaism. Hamas has clarified this repeatedly, and in its 2017 revised charter, it explicitly distinguishes between Zionism and Judaism, and states its conflict is with occupiers, not people of any faith.
Meanwhile, you ignore the Likud Party platform, which openly rejects any Palestinian state and claims exclusive Israeli sovereignty “from the river to the sea.” That's not theoretical language from a resistance group—that’s the governing policy of a nuclear-armed state.
And finally, let’s be honest about violence. The occupier defines the terms of conflict. When a people live under siege, dispossession, and military rule, violence becomes a response to violence. If you’re disturbed by that, then be disturbed by what created it.
@knappster:disqus@andrewp111:disqus@disqus_qhuce9v5DO:disqus@zivkovasiljev:disqus@bergoffbirns:disqus@warsrus:disqus@deganawida:disqus@disqus_ky8vtfPjLn:disqus@existentialdread:disqus@disqus_cWEo452Cca:disqus@unclesapien:disqus
Islamism denies millions of Muslims the right to self determination. And it is very political as the 57 member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation is the largest voting bloc at the UN General Assembly.
Why is it that a Christian Arab cannot gain citizenship in Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of Muhammad. This is the 21st century! Jews lived in Mecca before the invention of Islam, now no non-Muslim can enter or be arrested, and this is the 21st century.
In Saudi Arabia, women's ability to choose their husband is restricted by the male guardianship system, which mandates that a woman obtain permission from a male guardian to marry. The guardian, who is typically the father or a male relative, must consent to the marriage contract, even if the woman herself desires to marry someone else. But this is the 21st century.
You're not arguing for self-determination — you're arguing that Muslims should submit to Western-approved politics. "Islamism" doesn’t “deny” Muslims self-determination — it is the form many Muslims choose when freed from dictators propped up by the West. That’s what scares you.
The OIC? Mostly symbolic. If you think it wields real power, explain why it hasn’t stopped a single occupation, war, or coup against Muslim-majority nations? It’s hardly the UN puppet master you imagine.
As for Saudi Arabia — it's a monarchy, not a model of Islamic governance. Using it to bash Islam is lazy. Christian Arabs can’t get citizenship there? Sure — but try being a Hindu, African migrant, or Muslim trying to get citizenship in Israel. You think that’s a beacon of pluralism?
And the "oppressed Muslim woman" trope? Old and tired. The West has no monopoly on women’s rights — ask the rape victims in Israel, U.S. military academies or Indigenous women in Canada. Selective outrage doesn’t make you principled. It makes you biased.
@knappster:disqus@andrewp111:disqus@peepsqueek:disqus@disqus_qhuce9v5DO:disqus@zivkovasiljev:disqus@bergoffbirns:disqus@warsrus:disqus@deganawida:disqus@disqus_ky8vtfPjLn:disqus@existentialdread:disqus@disqus_cWEo452Cca:disqus@unclesapien:disqus
Let’s start with the deeper problem in your framing: the suggestion that Islam itself is the threat. This is both lazy and offensive. Islam is not the issue—it is the identity, faith, and will of the Palestinian people. To cast Islamic belief as inherently violent or illegitimate is to deny millions their humanity and right to self-determination. The problem is not Islam—it’s occupation, apartheid, and ethnic cleansing.
Now, quoting the 1988 Hamas Charter without historical context is equally dishonest. That document was not written by Hamas’s top leadership—most of them were in Israeli prisons at the time—but by lower-level members during a moment of revolutionary upheaval following 20 years of systematic Israeli repression and the eruption of the First Intifada. It reflects rage and desperation, not official long-term policy.
Yes, it contains language about “obliterating Israel,” but only if you remove it from context. That "obliteration" refers to the dismantling of an unjust, violent settler-colonial regime—not the elimination of Jews or Judaism. Hamas has clarified this repeatedly, and in its 2017 revised charter, it explicitly distinguishes between Zionism and Judaism, and states its conflict is with occupiers, not people of any faith.
Meanwhile, you ignore the Likud Party platform, which openly rejects any Palestinian state and claims exclusive Israeli sovereignty “from the river to the sea.” That's not theoretical language from a resistance group—that’s the governing policy of a nuclear-armed state.
And finally, let’s be honest about violence. The occupier defines the terms of conflict. When a people live under siege, dispossession, and military rule, violence becomes a response to violence. If you’re disturbed by that, then be disturbed by what created it.
“To cast Islamic belief as inherently violent or illegitimate is to deny millions their humanity and right to self-determination.”
Um, no. It is entirely possible to cast ANY belief as inherently violent or illegitimate while acknowledging that those who believe it have the right to believe it.
You're splitting hairs to dodge the deeper issue. It was a response to an Islamophobic comment. You can’t claim to respect someone’s rights while branding the core of their identity as dangerous. Saying “you’re free to believe in something I deem violent and illegitimate” isn’t tolerance—it’s veiled contempt.
Contempt doesn’t violate your rights.
You are well within your rights to believe that there is no god but Allah and Muhammed is his prophet, and to say so.
Someone else believing, and saying, that Muhammed was a schizophrenic pedophile with an imaginary friend whose commands encourage violent conduct is also well within his or her rights and in no way violates your rights by believing or saying those things.
Violation of rights only occurs when one of you decides to use force to impose your belief on the other, to forbid the other to state said belief, etc.
Of course contempt alone doesn't violate legal rights—but hiding behind “rights” to justify bigotry doesn’t make the bigotry any less despicable. Free speech protects your right to mock; it doesn’t protect you from being called out for dehumanizing rhetoric.
Reducing a revered figure like the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ to slurs isn't a “critique of belief”—it's an attempt to delegitimize the people who hold that belief. It crosses from disagreement into cultural warfare. And while one has the right to say it, don’t pretend it’s neutral or principled—it’s designed to provoke and humiliate.
One can criticize ideas without stripping away the dignity of those who live by them. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from responsibility. These pro Zionist types lack basic morality and courtesy.
I’m not pretending that it’s “neutral” or “principled.”
I happen to agree that it’s “despicable,” if for no other reason than that I know many Muslims who do NOT derive a mandate for violent conduct from the Quran or the hadith.
But it violates no one’s rights to say X, whatever X might happen to be.
You want historical context?–Since the invention of Islam, Arabs have a historical track record. Egyptians were not Arabs, nor did they speak Arabic. Syrians (Assyrians) were not Arabs, nor did they speak Arabic, Moroccans, Libyans, and Tunisia (Berbers) were not Arabs, nor did they speak Arabic, Iraqis (Kurds, Assyrians, Armenians, Azides, etc) were not Arabs nor did they speak Arabic, Libya was not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic, the Sudan (tribal Africa) was not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic, Tunisia was not Arab, nor did they speak Arabic. Why are they all called "Arab" Countries, “Arab” States, belong to the League of “Arab” Nations, and have to live under some form of Islamic Sharia?
Do you really think they all voluntarily gave up their languages, beliefs, their laws, their ancient traditions and systems of government. It was the Babylonians, Persians, Assyrians, Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, Turks that brought civilization to the tribal desert dwelling Arabs, to include modern Europeans.
The countries where “Romance” languages are spoken and where the old Roman sun cult religion (now disguised as “Christianity”) is practiced didn’t speak those languages or practice that religion before they were conquered by the Roman empire, either. So?
There has not been an independent nation on the geographical area of Palestine since the Romans sacked Jerusalem 2000 years ago, until the Israelis built one.
We must all give thanks to the Romans who did the most to civilize the world.
There's plenty wrong with this. Think before you post.
Oh! I finally get your point. It's all about jealousy. The "masters of the universe" as Norm Coleman just called them in a video gone viral, are jealous because the simple Arab Beduins built a lasting civilization that reverberates until today, while puny Spartan-state Israel struggles to survive and can't convince its own tribe of its legitimacy.
Oh yes this is serious. You and the Israelis you represent need therapy. Tell the therapist you want to be cured of envy, projection, inferiority complex, proclivity to commit genocide and a host of other psychological disorders too numerous to list.
No, we should leave the implementation of morality to the immoral leaders of Israel and the US to decide.
The Islamic movements actually win elections. The violence you talk about comes from Israel, the US and corrupt Arab regimes who collude against the will of the people in having Muslims rule over themselves.
You are just another Islamist that is not allowed to criticize your own for fear of reprisals.
What reprisals and from whom? I say what I believe and I believe what I say. Even if its against me, the truth does me no harm
What kind of reprisals make you so fearful of admitting the crimes of the ethno-nationalist terror state you support?
"The Israeli-Palestinian War is a tribal war, and that means there are no civilians – on eit-"
See, "Andrew" and his Jewish Power party fanatics go for 'the Rwandan model' – the frenzied Hutu butcher version of genocide.
But in Israel, in US, the world – people aren't buying that anymore. Or the other justifications for the Israeli depravity. Goodbye Israeli impunity – welcome to the German hall of shame.
pol pot meets with the kkk, what a meeting of hearts and minds for the good of mankind……….. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6fc697acee278adadcf4e23b5f8fc0a8d87117913f736b65b7b9f9e63e3e6bf7.jpg
Made me cry.
injustice makes one sad
then mad
brain starts working
what can i do
to right this wrong
find another
just like you…
“I didn’t ask them afterward whether they’ll vote for Ben Gvir, but they wanted to get to know me and I think they really liked what they heard,” he said.
He didn't have to ask them since they voted for his clone, Trump. And yes, they did like what they heard since he talks just like their cult leader.
Biden was just as bad as Trump. They’re all Zionist servants because they can’t get elected otherwise
No doubt. Biden, up until Trump got elected, was the worst in my lifetime. Trump pulled into a dead heat with him when he allowed the resumption of Israel's slaughter and the fact that he won't do anything about Israel's 2-month-old total blockade on Gaza.
I don’t know how old you are, but the presidents in my lifetime include:
* LBJ
*Nixon
*Ford
*Carter
*Reagan
* Bush I
* Clinton
* Bush II
* Obama
* Trump
* Biden
I’d certainly rank Biden and Trump on the low end of that list, but it’s not a list of good people and I’m not sure Biden and Trump are the two lowest-ranking names on it except to the extent that every president gets a little more imperial than his predecessor; THAT is “inherent in the system,” not a particularly personal attribute.
Add Ike and Kennedy to your list. Gaza has swayed my opinion.
Why on earth are Republicans inviting genocide killers (first Netanyahu and now Gvir) to the Capitol and then salivate all over them?
Trump was left out in this piece like he had nothing to do with it. Of course not he is the "peace president". Don't be fooled he made it very plain to the Atlantic that he rules America and the world.
Or Netanyahu, who was part of the act of spiriting out of the U.S. technology to develop the bomb.
The there is Jonathan Pollard, pardoned by Trump during Trump's first time as POTUS.
Watch this pod of Judging Freedom with Phil Giraldi.
In this episode Glenn has a compilation of some of the most apalling quotes:
Gaza Starves, Pro-Israel Propagandists Escalate Extremist Rhetoric and Actions | System Update #444
https://rumble.com/v6sp05p-system-update-show-445.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp
Amid relentless bombardment and a nearly two-month long total siege, Palestinians in Gaza are struggling to survive under impossible conditions. When asked by a colleague what they could do for Gaza now, retired director of Al Shifa Hospital, Dr. Medhat Abbas, wrote back:
Food
Food
Food
Medicine
Shelter
Water
Electricity
Fuel
I have no comment..Two Million people are succumbing to their destiny..
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d12baadd86b055617532b68b5f717accbff3d86595afaf86cae148f9ebe98ee4.jpg
evil as evil can be. benny the bloated psycho boy
This comes in a long line of such visits by monsters to the U.S. while various American administrations babbled about "constructive engagement." Among the leading gangsters of apartheid South Africa who visited the US: Hendrik Verwoerd (Prime Minister, 1958–1966); John Vorster (Prime Minister, 1966–1978; President, 1978–1979); P.W. Botha (Prime Minister, 1978–1984; President, 1984–1989); Pik Botha (Foreign Minister, 1977–1994). Of course many many other miscreants visited the U.S. over the years, and some even received standing ovations in our puppet congress.
Ben-Gvir convicted of inciting to racism. https://www.jpost.com/israel/ben-gvir-convicted-of-inciting-to-racism
Just for balance, do I have to post every video of Islamist racism and incitement to violence. I could fill this site for a month.
Do you have a point?
Seizing the West Bank: Extremist Israeli settlers in control – BBC
Hamas official says group would lay down its arms if an independent Palestinian state is established. https://apnews.com/article/hamas-khalil-alhayya-qatar-ceasefire-1967-borders-4912532b11a9cec29464eab234045438
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8313250e4ba144191e5ce32026d95aa4dc115ebdb9d249b2258bb36807666245.jpg
Palestinian Arab leaders do not want a Palestinian State, they want all of Israel. Every honest Islamist will tell you that.
Palestinian Arabs had plenty of opportunity to build an independent nation, especially the first 20 years before their was a single Israeli settlement in the West Bank or Gaza.
Zionists do not want a Palestinian State.
State of Palestine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine
Likud party 1977 election manifesto clearly states:
"Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty."
This slogan was repeated by Menachem Begin. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party
Israel blew their opportunity to build an independent nation without violating international law.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cccc1480df3f0200d4d3ac7f8cda8e668542983af40d73a0c4f21accff3fa1e4.jpg
2000 Camp David Summit – Barak offered to withdraw from 97 percent of the West Bank and 100 percent of the Gaza Strip. In addition, he agreed to dismantle 63 isolated settlements. In exchange for the 3 percent annexation of the West Bank, Israel would increase the size of the Gaza territory by roughly a third. Barak also made previously unthinkable concessions on Jerusalem, agreeing that Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem would become the capital of the new state. The Palestinians would maintain control over their holy places and have “religious sovereignty” over the Temple Mount. The proposal also guaranteed Palestinian refugees the right of return to the Palestinian state and reparations from a $30 billion international fund that would be collected to compensate them. —Arafat turned it down without a counter offer. He wanted the right of return for 4 to 5 million Palestinian so-called Arab refugees into Israel proper, which is not mathematically feasible and Arafat knew it. Camp David was the best offer Arafat was ever going to get. Obviously a very bad choice to keep the status quo and begin more attacks on Israel. Very bad choice!
2025 – Wanted war criminal Netanyahu plans for Israel to seize 100% of Gaza and the West Bank, in violation of international law.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c2824da423f46c5b2242cf6fcc2e8e2f6bc0f7f6fb6bdf4b89e108bc1549d666.jpg
I would love to see Netanyahu take the stand and explain why he responded in this manner to the mass murder of Israelis and the rounding up of hundreds of hostages of all ages, while having violated every known UN Rules of War and Geneva Conventions.
Another pissweak argument from the pipsqueek.
The world would love to see Netanyahu and Gallant take the stand at the ICJ and explain Israel’s mass murder of Palestinian civilians and the rounding up and torture of thousands of hostages, including women and children, while ignoring every known UN Rules of War and the Geneva Conventions.
Rule 96, Human Shields, Geneva Conventions
Article 19, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention I provides: The responsible authorities shall ensure that [fixed establishments and mobile medical units] are, as far as possible, situated in such a manner that attacks against military objectives cannot imperil their safety.
Geneva Convention III
Article 23, first paragraph, of the 1949 provides: No prisoner of war may at any time be sent to, or detained in areas where he may be exposed to the fire of the combat zone, nor may his presence be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations. Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 23, first para.l
Article 28 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “The presence of a protected persons may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.”
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 28.
Additional ProtocolI
Article 12(4) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: Underno circumstances shall medical units be used in an attempt to shield military objectives from attack. Whenever possible, the Parties to the conflict shall ensure that medical units are so sited that attacks against military objectives do not imperil their safety.
Good to cite the law. Fits Israel like a glove. The only ones documented and proved to use human shields are the Israelis.
@knappster:disqus@andrewp111:disqus@peepsqueek:disqus@disqus_qhuce9v5DO:disqus@bergoffbirns:disqus@warsrus:disqus@deganawida:disqus@disqus_ky8vtfPjLn:disqus@existentialdread:disqus@disqus_cWEo452Cca:disqus@unclesapien:disqus
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9b49d15c5a5f5dc9bb4f16a75666343911ecd218bd89dfe4443ca1ac04d5e4b1.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b76507854f7d0ffdccb830ed1f62a2932c030d0c475b8f486d89b20ea3db779a.png
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/92a2726fbd09be5224141bc502e25c727aeba9dc1da079d56fb45215e9474c31.jpg
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/68280983ffbfeaf2a1e3dc9795021a64271b6137fdf07ddc69dbc2aafdf06e24.png
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fefdc1e9d3da04410bc3f32e83d5c946e644ddc6ffa3333014b055aab471e14.jpg
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a1f51683ef3a48b30ce3b34970c84667855418f37299aae38b585cd8fdbc6100.jpg
The Geneva Conventions protect medical personnel in armed conflict, and intentionally attacking them is a war crime. This protection applies to both military and civilian medical personnel, who are considered non-combatants. Attacks on medical personnel or units are prohibited, and those who carry them out can be held accountable under international law.
This video, shot by one of the medics who was killed in Rafah on 23 March, shows clearly marked ambulances using flashing emergency lights as they searched the area for colleagues who had gone missing.
Israel says soldiers fired on ‘terrorists’ in ‘suspicious vehicles’ but footage shows clearly marked ambulances.
Thank you.
There are pictures of IDF soldiers using Palestinians as human shields.
Be careful what you say and post.
He is just a university student in Israel earning shekels typing his junk.
Oh, he's been giving testimony every day about his crimes. I sense he may get a bullet in his head from one of his own tribe or better yet be arrested by a Gazan one day and dragged to the Hague.
Nonsense. It was not 97% because Israel wanted to control borders including the Jordan Valley, and their were Israeli settler encroachments throughout. In addition, Israel wanted "Sovereignty" below the holy sites. Arafat asked Saudi Arabia and Egypt whether they would support Arafat if he accepted and they said no. Israel never wanted peace. Insisting they did is just a lie and propaganda.
As usual. So it goes.
There would be no excuse except that Israel was a constant target for violence since the day of its inception. If you say anything different, you would not be telling the truth.
Violence begets violence.
Recently, Alan (I had my pants on) Dershowitz blurted out one reason that Israel does not want a one state solution. He intimated that Israel and Israel alone would need to control the nukes. If there would be a single state, the Arabs might have access.
What a lawyer, blurting out the unspeakable (in Israel) that Israel indeed does have nukes!
From the beginning the Zionists wanted all of Palestine. Why are you afraid of a democratic state for both people in historical Palestine? Let the Israelis continue to insist on their position and we will definitely get an Islamic State. No doubt about that.
There are 57 declared Muslim States at the United Nations, all members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the largest voting bloc at the UN General Assembly. And only tiny Jewish State. What are you afraid of?/
Israeli occupation of /militarily imposed squatting on land outside Israel’s borders doesn’t magically change those borders.
Arab Palestinians are not all Islamists any more than Jews are all Zionists.
Every Israeli and every Israeli settlement was removed from Gaza in 2005 and it appeased no one.– Lesson learned! Within weeks, Hamas rockets began to rain down on Israel's civilian populated areas. — It is time to end Hamas for the greater good of both Gazans and Israelis.
There were no Israeli settlements in the West Bank before 1968. The first Israeli settlement re-established in the West Bank after the 1967 Six-Day War was Kfar Etzion. It was one of several Jewish communities that had been destroyed in 1948 and was rebuilt after the Six Day War.
I didn't say that Israel staying within its borders would magically solve all conflicts.
I just pointed out that Israel hasn't stayed within its borders.
They stayed within their borders until five Arab Countries decided that they wanted it all again. Israel was a constant target before there was single Israeli settlement in the West Bank or Gaza.
Mixed in with the Palestinians are Christians.
It’s not that Christians are “mixed in with” the Palestinians, it’s that some of the Palestinians are Christians.
When were Jews ever forbidden to settle in the West Bank, the biblical birthplace of David, Solomon, Jesus, John the Baptist, and other Jewish prophets.
There’s a difference between Jews settling in the state of Palestine on one hand, and the occupying Israeli regime handing other people’s land over to squatters who happen to be Jewish on the other.
There is only one tiny Jewish State, and all Jews were welcomed to come and break their backs to turn it into the beautiful State that they have today, at the forefront of science and technology. Arabs have the very same opportunity but they chose war instead and they lost.
If Jews want to peacefully "settle" in areas outside Israel, including but not limited to Jerusalem and the West Bank, I certainly agree that they should be free to do so.
That doesn't justify the Israeli regime using Jews worldwide as human shields against criticism of its refusal to live within the borders it accepted.
The borders were accepted by Jews, they were not accepted by Arabs. They chose war instead, several times, and they lost.
The borders were accepted by Zionists (many Jews rejected, and some still reject, Zionists' use of them as an excuse for the state of Israel).
And the Zionists are still bound by that acceptance.
Lol. A month? That's not bad. Israeli atrocities have been filling this site for years.
@knappster:disqus@andrewp111:disqus@peepsqueek:disqus@disqus_qhuce9v5DO:disqus@bergoffbirns:disqus@warsrus:disqus@deganawida:disqus@disqus_ky8vtfPjLn:disqus@existentialdread:disqus@disqus_cWEo452Cca:disqus@unclesapien:disqus
Past your bedtime, isn't it?
Doing well at your studies at university? Plus making a little change typing your stuff to the internet, eh?
The zionist vulture in kippah meets the zionist vultures in ties in DC…!