[Sherlock Holmes]

If you study cults like the Jonestown cult of a few decades ago... you notice that their isolation and socially-constructed sense of social rejection... can lead them to do very harmful things.

One of the reasons that cults can do great harm is that their ideology often short-circuits natural human empathy, along with other instinctive survival instincts.

By destroying natural instincts with powerful propaganda and in-group repression, the entire human race is negatively affected by the cult's actions.

Israelis would probably "wipe out the world" over October 7 if they could. This is a dangerous situation for the entire world. A race-based cult that is being exposed as what it is can get very homicidal (or suicidal, in the case of Jonestown).

IF only Jimmy Jones could distribute kool-aid to all violent cults... their nuclear and biological and propaganda weapons would never leave their silos.

I think that's a fitting analogy, Zionism being a cult, it sure seems to hit all the requirements for one.

[Sherlock Holmes]

I disapprove of them, but more importantly I disapprove of the settlements that cause those policies to begin with.

Why do you disapprove? how do you reason about them to reach the conclusion "I cannot approve of this policy"?

What do you mean you disapprove of "settlements that cause..."?

[wat0n]

Why do you disapprove? how do you reason about them to reach the conclusion "I cannot approve of this policy"?

What do you mean you disapprove of "settlements that cause..."?

The policies you mentioned are all to protect the Israeli settlements, aren't they?

If there were no settlements, there would be little friction between Israelis and Palestinians on a daily basis. There would be little need for checkpoints - although there would be an exception, like having checkpoints close to Israeli military bases - and also less violence in general. Wars like the one in 2014 wouldn't have happened at all.

This would not solve the conflict on its own, but would definitely make it easier to solve and manage.

[Sherlock Holmes]

The policies you mentioned are all to protect the Israeli settlements, aren't they?

If there were no settlements, there would be little friction between Israelis and Palestinians on a daily basis. There would be little need for checkpoints - although there would be an exception, like having checkpoints close to Israeli military bases - and also less violence in general. Wars like the one in 2014 wouldn't have happened at all.

This would not solve the conflict on its own, but would definitely make it easier to solve and manage.

I agree, this is embodied in UN resolution 2334 and a few others. Do you agree that settlers should be punished, settlements demolished, all stolen land returned and the occupation should cease, Israel forces should leave and return to within the uncontested Israeli border and ever person evicted from their homes and farms should be financially compensated for their losses ?

[Sherlock Holmes]

Israel (and it's western backers) have been so very very bad, made so so many enemies and lost much of the sympathy people all over the world showed them after the Holocaust. I really wonder just how much longer the pariah state can survive without charity from the United States.

A cataclysm can still be avoided but I doubt that the insane criminals who run the country have the wisdom, they are going to bring catastrophe to Jews and non-Jews alike as the entire project erupts into a ball of fire, the writing is on the wall...

[Unthinking Majority]

This is mere speculation.

Really? "From the river to the sea...."

It's what Gaza did when they got their land back...

[Sherlock Holmes]

Really? "From the river to the sea...."

It's what Gaza did when they got their land back...

Speaking of openly supporting Genocide (as you mention in your signature)

In the speech in support of the ceasefire resolution, the Democratic Florida state representative Angie Nixon said: “We are at 10,000 dead Palestinians. How many will be enough?”

“All of them,” Michelle Salzman called in reply.

Nixon acknowledged the interruption and said: “One of my colleagues just said, ‘All of them.’ Wow.”

Source: The Guardian.

[wat0n]

I agree, this is embodied in UN resolution 2334 and a few others. Do you agree that settlers should be punished, settlements demolished, all stolen land returned and the occupation should cease, Israel forces should leave and return to within the uncontested Israeli border and ever person evicted from their homes and farms should be financially compensated for their losses ?

Let me break it down piece by piece:

Do you agree that settlers should be punished,

Depends on behavior and future cooperation in case they are e.g. asked to relocate.

settlements demolished

Those ending under Palestinian control? I won't tell them what to do. It's up to the Palestinians to figure out what to do with the structures.

all stolen land returned

That's basically impossible, partly because some of the settlements were actually founded by people returning to what was their property before the 1948 war. You are aware some Jews were expelled during that war too, are you? If not, this may be something for you to consider. Israeli settlements are how a non-negotiated return looks like.

Instead, I think any population movements should be based above all on security considerations, and land swaps should accommodate the rest. Furthermore, anyone who lost property (or worse) should be financially compensated, be it Israeli or Palestinian, Jewish or Arab.

Israel forces should leave and return to within the uncontested Israeli border

As part of a final status agreement or at least being replaced by an international peacekeeping force in the interim, yes. I think the Gaza withdrawal illustrates the risks in unilateral withdrawals even though I still believe it was the right call.

ever person evicted from their homes and farms should be financially compensated for their losses ?

Absolutely, people should be compensated for losing property if they owned it as I mentioned above, their lease rights (most people did not own land under Ottoman/Mandatory law as it was owned by the state but instead owned a long-term and transferable lease on it, for which they also paid rent/tax) and also the very experience of being expelled/relocated. Again, this applies to everyone.

[Pants-of-dog]

Really? "From the river to the sea...."

It's what Gaza did when they got their land back...

Can you rewrite.this in such a way that your point is clear?

[Sherlock Holmes]

Can you rewrite.this in such a way that your point is clear?

[Unthinking Majority]

Speaking of openly supporting Genocide (as you mention in your signature)

Source: The Guardian.

Sounds like that Republican piece of crap is pro-genocide. This should be condemned. In Canada this is illegal, and rightly so. Numerous people praising Oct 7 are under police investigation for violent hate speech.

[Unthinking Majority]

Can you rewrite.this in such a way that your point is clear?

"From the river to the sea..." is a call by Palestinians to take all Israeli land from them. They made this clear during the UN Partition Plan negotiations. They want ALL the land for Arab Muslims. Hamas makes this clear. Arafat made this clear. Therefore If Israel were to give 90% of their current land to Palestinians, they Palestinians would still fight to get back the remaining 10%. There is no compromise, they aren't interested in ANY permanent 2-state solution and never have been.

Their goal is destroy Zionism in full.

[Pants-of-dog]

"From the river to the sea..." is a call by Palestinians to take all Israeli land from them. They made this clear during the UN Partition Plan negotiations. They want ALL the land for Arab Muslims. Hamas makes this clear. Arafat made this clear. Therefore If Israel were to give 90% of their current land to Palestinians, they Palestinians would still fight to get back the remaining 10%. There is no compromise, they aren't interested in ANY permanent 2-state solution and never have been.

Their goal is destroy Zionism in full.

This is an inference.

But even if we make the racist assumption that all Palestinians share a bloodthirsty hatred for Jews, it is beyond ridiculous to also assume that every protester also shares the same deep and unreasonable antipathy.

This seems like an ad hominem and unverifiable speculation all rolled up in one.

[Sherlock Holmes]

"From the river to the sea..." is a call by Palestinians to take all Israeli land from them. They made this clear during the UN Partition Plan negotiations. They want ALL the land for Arab Muslims. Hamas makes this clear. Arafat made this clear. Therefore If Israel were to give 90% of their current land to Palestinians, they Palestinians would still fight to get back the remaining 10%. There is no compromise, they aren't interested in ANY permanent 2-state solution and never have been.

Their goal is destroy Zionism in full.

Two points, first the purported "meaning" of the phrase is ridiculous, different people interpret it differently. I interpret it as a declaration that the people in (former) Palestine will live with same freedoms we take for granted here in the West. Freedom to walk around neighborhoods without solders stopping them and scrutinizing ID cards, freedom to buy a home and live in it without fear of armed extremists - sorry "settlers" - rampaging and evicting them with the police standing and watching. The reason this phrase is making news is because the Zionist lobby will stop at nothing in order to play the antisemitism card, from the outset of Zionism proper, shortly after WW1 the neo-Zionists have exploited antisemitism, its been an essential part of their strategy for years.

If the French in WW2 shouted "From the river to the sea France will be free" who'd seriously argue that that was calling for the genocide of all Germans? ridiculous, utterly stupid non-issue.

The second point is that it's no more wrong to want to destroy neo-Zionism than it was wrong to destroy the Third Reich, which was another ideology based in racial supremacy and a divine right to seize territory and build an Aryan based greater Germany.

[Sherlock Holmes]

Sounds like that Republican piece of crap is pro-genocide. This should be condemned. In Canada this is illegal, and rightly so. Numerous people praising Oct 7 are under police investigation for violent hate speech.

Do tell me more about these people under investigation, what EXACTLY did they say? who interpreted their words as "praising"? what is hateful about resisting a brutal and illegal foreign military occupation?

[Sherlock Holmes]

Sounds like that Republican piece of crap is pro-genocide. This should be condemned. In Canada this is illegal, and rightly so. Numerous people praising Oct 7 are under police investigation for violent hate speech.

Half of the Knesset speak this way publicly all the time, examples are easy to find, if you'd like me to provide some I'd be happy to.

[wat0n]

Is "from the river to the sea" irredentist if the Likud says it?

I would say so, but that's me.

[Pants-of-dog]

If other groups were to say it, it would mean different things according to the context.

The Likud would never say “From the river to the sea, Palestine must be free”.

Obviously, it would necessarily mean something else.

[wat0n]

Yet we are somehow supposed to believe those who chant that October 7 should be repeated 10,000 times over don't mean that "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" means that it will be free of Jews.

It's about "who", not "what".

[Pants-of-dog]

I have no idea if anyone has made the exact chant that October 7 should be repeated.

The vast majority of protesters have not made any such chant, so if we are going to try and figure out what the protesters mean, it is illogical to focus on a small minority of them.

Most protesters say it means (to copy and paste from @Sherlock Holmes) “a declaration that the people in (former) Palestine will live with same freedoms we take for granted here in the West”.

@Unthinking Majority thinks the protesters are lying.

If the protesters are lying, it would mean they do not really care about the dozens of children dying each day in Gaza or the occupation or the human rights abuses and instead simply hate Jewish people.

Why is this more plausible than assuming protesters have some basic empathy for people living in a situation comparable to Apartheid?