• kaffiene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      5 months ago

      “kill the Jews” and “death to the Jews” are antisemitic not anti Zionists. JFC

        • kaffiene@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          5 months ago

          The point being that you’re ignoring the actual content you’re responding to?

          • kibiz0r@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            5 months ago

            If you really wanna play out that conversation, here’s how that goes:

            I say “The vicious Nazi graffiti doesn’t belong in the same category as the anti-zionist protest signs”

            And you say “Those protest signs aren’t just anti-zionist, they’re antisemitic. If you’re calling for the end of the state of Israel, you’re calling for the extermination of Jews everywhere.”

            And I say “So if you really just wanted to say that anti-zionism is antisemitism, why did you pretend to agree in your first reply?”

            But we don’t need to bother with that tedious BS, because I can use my super hacker skills to… view your comment history.

            You’re trying to replicate OP’s original sleight-of-hand.

            Placing unequivocal Nazi shit in the same category as people calling for international law to finally be applied against a decades-long genocidal regime, and then saying “You gotta tolerate or detest 100% of these things in one fell swoop. It’s a bundle deal. And remember, I put some Nazi shit in there!”

            If you’ve watched just 2-3 hours of news coverage in the past 8 months, you’ve seen this play before. It doesn’t – or it shouldn’t – fool anyone anymore, and you should be embarrassed to even try it.

      • Zenjal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        47
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        If you think anyone is so entitled to land that they can commit crimes against humanity without recompense, you’ve lost the plot. Is the land theirs? No idea and depends on who you talk to, cause quite frankly, the argument that they were there first means every American that isn’t indigenous needs to get out, and that’s not even a great 1:1 analogy. If they are indeed entitled to that land, there are waaaaaay better ways to goin about than bombing hospitals. Zionest are jus makin things worse for Jews in general, cause their religious fanatics that are sure in their crusade and the rest of us are either with them or against them.

        • original2@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          But why wouldn’t you therefore return the USA to native Americans who also experienced war crimes, or perhaps Canada to the inuits

          • Zenjal@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Well, if memory serves from what they told me on the heritage trip, the Israelis were kicked out pre Jesus, when they were defeated by… Someone ( me memory ain’t always the best) and said someone gave the land to a different set of enemies, bastardizing the name of enemies into Palestinians. So we’re talkin about a much longer chunk of time, like less than 500 vs 2400 years, and as far as I remember ( could be wrong) the Palestinians we’re the ones to kick them out, jus a different enemy. Also the indigenous people aren’t bombing hospitals and food aid in hopes of pushing whitey back into the ocean, but do I think we owe reparations to them, among others, including that of more land? Absolutely. Does this include if it were to displace me? Sure. It would suck but ya know, if it was done above board and peacefully, not much I can do. Anything involving war crimes though would instantly loose my sympathy.

        • sabin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          30
          ·
          5 months ago

          Back when the British mandate was established the Jews purchased the land they occupied from the Ottomans. There isn’t really much cause to suggest war crimes were committed until after said mandate ended and all the surrounding Arab states decided to declare war.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        5 months ago

        That’s not what zionists are fighting for, and you know it. Any argument you make for Israeli statehood applies to Palestinian statehood as well.

        Further? Then state of Israel exists, and you can’t say the same about a Palestinian state, nor can you say Palestinians under Israeli rule have anything remotely resembling representation; while they’re being massacred in a genocide.

        Of course oct 7th was fucking awful, and evil. But so is the campaign in Gaza, the west bank and Lebanon. It’s patently offensive to basic reason to try and justify what Israel is currently doing.

        • sabin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          22
          ·
          5 months ago

          Any argument I make stands for both sides? Then doesn’t that make you a hypocrite for disagreeing with the sentiment.

          I am saying jews should have some right to exist inside Israel. Palestinian leadership wants them all dead/gone. From the river to the sea doesn’t mean “lets share the land” in case you didn’t know.

          • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Uhm. Your last paragraph is wrong.

            That’s Hamas. Who wouldn’t have nearly as much power if Netanyahu didn’t ensure they have the funds necessary to pose a semi-credible political entity… over a decade ago… specifically to disrupt Palestinian statehood and independence.

            So, once again: Zionist’s are militantly opposed to Palestinian statehood, your argument is a bullshit red herring because Israel already has that and is currently the one committing fucking genocide to see that Palestinians never get it.

            • sabin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              15
              ·
              5 months ago

              The last paragraph is not at all wrong. Lots of people other than Hamas want Israel to completely cease existing as a state. If you disagree with the sentiment that Israel should be able to have SOME land (and by extension the fact that chants like “from the river to the sea” are antisemetic) then you yourself are one of them.

              Hamas was the official party recognized by Palestinian voters. If you have an issue with Israel acquiescing to their demands in order to maintain some sense of stability then you have no right to suggest they intentionally tried to sabotage relations.

              • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Hamas was recognized by plurality vote (and substantially less than a majority,) in 2006- over fifteen years ago.

                Of the people that would be eligible to have voted in ‘23, less than half of them were even able to votein ‘06.

                Nice try at painting Hamas as democratic.

                And once again you are fucking defending a sovereign state that is committing genocide for the sole purpose of- a state that already has that sovereignty you seem to believe they don’t.

                It’s patently obvious that you are full of bullshit. Are you really saying that some Palestinians being extremists justified the genocide Israel is currently committing?

                Are you really trying to say that Israel has the right to exist- and indeed are a sovereign state, but that Palestinians don’t? Because Israel is the one actively committing genocide, and has denied Palestinians representation for over 70 years, and whose current elected government is actively ensuring can never have representation.

          • kibiz0r@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            From the river to the sea doesn’t mean “lets share the land” in case you didn’t know.

            Likud Party knows!

    • TheControlled@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      108
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Yes it is, and its a smokescreen to say it is not.

      Your downvotes doesn’t make your racism not exist. Mobs always think they’re right. Fuck all of you.

      • WhatTrees@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Do you care to back up your claim at all or are you just going to go with “these two distinct words with distinct definitions actually mean the same thing because I said so” the same way TERFs and transphobes talk about sex and gender?

        Is it possible to support the black community in America without supporting black separatism?

      • original2@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        5 months ago

        It can be but it isn’t necessary. I am a Jew and not a Zionist. Obviously the example above is anti simetic, but there are peaceful (but depending on your views perhaps tenuous) arguments against the state of Israel