Israel/Palestine thread

its a bad faith question due to the framing. ofc it was awful that Israel invoked the Hannibal Doctrine and killed their own people.

I havent seen any official Hamas quotes bragging about killing innocent people, which was your initial framing. you have tried to subtly shift this context.

The Ottomans fell in 1916 and the mandate started in 1920. So it seems like 1920 is the earliest point of demarcation where one might start considering the currently recognized "cultures" as being their path towards being distinct. During the hundreds of years of the Ottomans up to 1916 it seems there would be no basis (or internal interest) towards distinguishing Arabs who lived in Beirut, Damascus or Jerusalem as separate cultures/ethnicities.

It should also be pointed out that for most of this period what we now call Israel/Palestine was mostly uninhabited swamps and deserts, with very low populations living in a pre-industrial revolution economy. This is what Mark Twain wrote about the region after visiting in 1867.

“. . . a desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds—a silent mournful expanse. . . . A desolation is here that not even imagination can grace with the pomp of life and action. . . . We never saw a human being on the whole route. . . . There was hardly a tree or a shrub anywhere. Even the olive and the cactus, those fast friends of the worthless soil, had almost deserted the country."

And here is a souvenir Bible Twain bought in Jerusalem in 1867, that he had inscribed in Hebrew (Why do you think he chose Hebrew and not Arabic?)

And ironically, it was immigration of European Jews (who brought with them capital, technology and industriousness) into the region, that spurred the development of the region; facilitating a Arab Muslim population explosion (through immigration and by native population growth) that resulted in what we now call the Palestinian people.

An amusing anecdote that is tangentially related to Victor's current lying and gaslighting about 10/7; is that this year someone tried to submit a documentary to Cannes about 10/7 using Hamas Go Pro footage, and it wasn't permitted with the official reason being Hamas didn't give permission to use their Go Pro footage in the documentary.

Although I suspect there was some politics involved, and if it had been a pro Hamas documentary incorporating videos taken by IDF soldiers Cannes would have found a way to make it work.

So, do you believe that 10/7 was a 'false-flag?'

As much as the narrative is European Jews were "invaders" into Palestine, the truth is they were the major driving force in making it in the first place.

The current narrative is as ahistorical as if American history recognized New England, including all its cities, as existing before European colonists; who invaded and occupied an infrastructure that was already there.

Strictly 1921 at the start of the League of Nations Mandate.

Because Arabic is not a Biblical language. Though the New Testament of course originated in Greek, the lingua franca of the Roman Empire, and not in Hebrew, so Twain, coming from Christendom, should really have had an inscription in Greek.

Because never the Twain shall meet?

Grok about to be reprogrammed (again)

This is how this shitt has been reported for almost two years:

old maltese, as modern maltese is too "corrupted" by sicilian dialect.

Like "brother in law" is cognato in italian, cugnatu in sicilian, kunjat in maltese. Politician is "politiku". gvern is government (guvernu in sicilian). Colors is kuluri (culuri in sicilian).

Usually familistic terminology is one of the most essential element of a language, that's a "back of the envelope" linguistic approach to check common roots/vicinity in languages.

Mother in law though is omm il-liġi (mom "in the law"). Ligi is from sicilian again though (law / legge in italian/ liggi in sicilian). But the construct is the anglo one ("In law"), we don't have that.

We actually either use entirely specific words (mother in law is suocera in italian) , or the term "acquired" (zia acquisita -> aunt in law).

Anyway, tldr is don't check current maltese thinking that's close to ancient aramaic. Maybe Maltese pre 1700 was

Choosing Hebrew also highlights how Jews were always a part of the social fabric of Jerusalem (becoming the largest demographic starting around 1880s), all the way through the Ottoman Empire to present day.

And Jerusalem becoming Al Aqsa was mostly a vanity project by a specific Sultan. And Jerusalem had very little significance in Islam under the ottomans, and not really until 1967, where for political reasons it was retroactively manufactured into being an important captured and defiled religious site that it was imperative for the Ummah to conquer.

Of all the retroactive fabrications of Palestinian history, the most cynical and insidious one is the myth of Al Aqsa, and the insistence by Arabs that Jerusalem/Aqsa was taken from the Palestinians by the Jews and needs to be recaptured and be the capital of a new Palestinian state.

no. why would you think that? Ive posted many times that it was an amazing feat of resistance showing the resilience, ingenuity, and spirit of the oppressed.

Ooh boy.

most people just dont read. not sure if they are even capable of it.

Victor you’re one of the biggest offenders when it comes to inability to read. You’re also incredibly dishonest.

For those who want to read actual sources on the use of the Hannibal Directive instead of the ramblings of a lunatic.

https://www.un.org/unispal/wp-content/up...

https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/7/9/why-did-israel-deploy-hannibal-directive-allowing-killing-of-own-citizens

Al Jazeera

Why did Israel deploy Hannibal Directive, allowing killing of own citizens?

The UN estimate for people killed under the Hannibal Directive is around 14. Maybe Victor’s math is as bad as his reading.

For anyone just joining us, if Victor says something the likelihood is extremely high that the complete opposite is the truth.

Good one!

You really hit the mark on that one!

Thanks for clarifying.

I asked because you brought up the Hannibal Directive.

This is how this shitt has been reported for almost two years pt 2:

That headline encapsulates everything that is wrong with the bad faith propaganda masquerading as honest journalism by outlets such as AP, Reuters and BBC.

First off, the claim of gunfire killing 25 seeking aid is straight from the Health Ministry, with no evidence to corroborate it, and is assuredly lies like most of their announcements.

And second, Netanyahu has been (mostly unsuccessfully) trying to get the international community to relocate Gazans this entire time. He hasn’t been blocking their leaving as the headline suggests.

Just bad faith propaganda all the way down.

“Relocation of people” is newspeak for ethnic cleansing. You and the people who upticked your post should be ashamed of yourselves.

Note this argument is tremendously bad faith and Newspeak in itself, as this disingenuous framing is not used in any other refugee relocation program.

Was Britain engaged in ethnic cleansing when it recently relocated thousands of Afghanistan’s?

Under the framing you employ, Britain is engaged in ethnic cleansing of (conservatively) 100 different nations. Probably much more.

It’s weird how for the first time in history it is considered a war crime to move people out of the way of bombs.

It is actually pretty wild how leftists like Jalfrezi don’t even view Palestinians as human beings at all; just avatars for their ideological cause.

Jalfrezi would rather every man, woman’s and child in Gaza died in the resistance to conquer Israel than a single one leave for a better life, which would be the ultimate sin of “ethnic cleansing.”

Extremely insidious how leftists and Islamist’s have completely dehumanized Palestinians to serve their narcissism and ideology.

Although in fairness to Islamism; sacrificing one’s earthly life for the Ummah and guaranteeing passage to heaven is a key component of their ideology; so less dissonance than there is with leftism.