I am simply pointing out OP's double standard: when it comes to Israel, everything is to be distrusted; when it comes to Israel's enemies, everything is to be believed. I am well-aware of the differences between Hamas and Hezbollah and have studied this conflict for well over two decades.
> when it comes to Israel, everything is to be distrusted
Correct, with a good reason for it. Israelis have been caught lying so many times that now when they make a claim, it is on them to prove that the claim is correct, rather than on others to prove that it is not. Just a few examples off the top of my head include:
- The killing of medical workers in a convoy of ambulances and burying them in shallow graves, then lying about doing it until someone dug the bodies up and found footage confirming that they lied on the phone of one of the buried aid workers. [1]
- The hunting down and killing of World Central Kitchen aid workers via multiple air strikes [2]. This was repeatedly denied by Israelis until too much evidence was stacked up and they settled for "it was a grave mistake".
- The high profile case of killing of Hind Rajab [3] who for a brief period of time was the sole survivor of a tank attack in a shelled vehicle filled with her dead family members. Aid workers were dispatched to rescue here, coordinated with Israelis. Neither the girl nor the aid workers were ever seen alive after that. Israelis repeatedly insisted that there were no troops in the area, until too much evidence was stacked again.
Hi there, I see you too trust Hamas sources (the origin of the Hind Rajab sotry) and not Israeli sources, so you too are in the camp of "believe hamas" and "doubt israel".
1. Hamas used World Central Kitchen vehicles, according even to the head of World Central Kitchen, who initially condemned the attack and then later admitted Hamas used WCK vehicles. You didn't know this, did you?
2. A few questions on the Hind Rajab incident:
Was the car stationary or moving? was it travelling north to a combat zone or south away from one? According to the original Arabic reports, did the family get out of the car or were they trapped inside? In the audio of this attack, was there any crossfire? When was Hind Rajab killed? Was it at 8:10am or at 2:30pm? What happened in those 6 hours? How can you be sure this was not a "fog of war" incident as opposed to a deliberate targeting of a civilian?
As per my previous assertion, it is now on Israel and their sympathizers to answer all those questions in a manner that leaves no doubt about their veracity. Watching what they are doing and what they are saying for two whole years, and the results of it all, leaves them with zero benefit of the doubt with the vast majority of people in the world.
Nothing's invented, what I listed are real events with extensive documentation and evidence behind them.
You are stating some questions which are supposedly going to lead to IDF's innocence in the matter if they are truthfully answered. The burden of that additional proof is now on you. Mere questions being enough to dispel a case against the IDF is a thing of the past. They worked very hard to earn such a reputation, and now there are consequences for it.
There's no burden of proof on me, it's all on you.
You're the one claiming Israel purposefully killed Hind Rajab and yet you refuse to answer the specific questions I asked you about the incident. You say this is because you answering is "going to lead to IDF's innocence." On this we agree. The facts of what actually happened matter.
In the case of Hind Rajab, I hope this does go to court so we can find out what happened in this tragic incident. If there were war crimes, I'd like to see the soldiers who committed them face legal justice. But I still believe in the concept of presumed innocence and the burden of proof.
You don't get to make up crimes and declare a party guilty of them, even if you're totally sure they're the baddies. That's what enlightenment thinking and four centuries of western jurisprudence teaches us. Innocent until proven guilty.
Everything you say here is false.
1. Israel's stated goal is to neuter Hamas and return the hostages, not kill civilians.
2. Arabs speak a semitic language; the "semites" in "anti-semite" has always referred to Jews.
3. Jews, including white Ashkenazi European Jews, are levantine in origin. Their lineage traces to Judea.
4. "Antisemitic" means anti-Jew. You are using it to mean anti-Arab, but arabs are not semites
5. You did make all that up!
>Israel's stated goal is to neuter Hamas and return the hostages, not kill civilians
Sure, yeah, just like it was in any number of previous operations, which at the time they declared successful, even though they did quite a bit more of the latter. Per Occam's razor, either they are prodigious bunglers, or you are overly credulous.
> 1. Israel's stated goal is to neuter Hamas and return the hostages, not kill civilians.
And yet so many dead civilians. It's almost like a genocial terrorist country like israel always lie. Also, I was referring to israel's genocide of the semites in palestine to found "israel" up to present day. You conveniently forgot about it.
> 2. Arabs speak a semitic language; the "semites" in "anti-semite" has always referred to Jews.
Arabs are ethnic semites who speak a semitic language. "Israelis" are non-semitic europeans pretending to be "jews". Ethnic europeans are not semites and can never be semites because they come from an entire separate branch of the human family tree.
> 3. Jews, including white Ashkenazi European Jews, are levantine in origin. Their lineage traces to Judea.
No they do not. Maybe a handful.
> 4. "Antisemitic" means anti-Jew.
No it does not because semite doesn't mean "jew". A semite and a jew are two different things.
> You are using it to mean anti-Arab, but arabs are not semites
No. I'm using semite to mean semite. Arabs surely are semites. Europeans are not though.
> 5. You did make all that up!
If arabs are not semites, then what are they? You say arabs are not semites and I'm the liar? I'm making shit up?
1. There aren't a lot of dead civilians given that this was a 2 year war fought in a built-up urban environment fought against a plainclothes terrorist enemy that violated every law of war, including using hospitals and schools as military bases.
2. Semites is not an ethnicity, it's a language family, sorry. When used colloquially it has always referred to Jews.
3. “Semitic” is a language group, not a racial caste. Jews—including Ashkenazi—have documented Middle Eastern ancestry, and about half of Israelis are Jews from the Middle East and North Africa. The idea that Israelis are “non-Semitic Europeans pretending to be Jews” is just antisemitic nonsense, not a serious factual claim.
4. See above. Semitic is a language family, not a people. "Anti-semite" as a term has always meant "anti-Jew."
5. Correct, Arabs are Arabian. You're not "making shit up" you're repeating evidence-free nonsense you want to be true without examining its validity.
> 1. There aren't a lot of dead civilians given that...
It's amazing how similarly zionists/israelis and nazis rationalize.
> 2. Semites is not an ethnicity, it's a language family, sorry. When used colloquially it has always referred to Jews.
"Semitic people or Semites is a term for an ethnic, cultural or racial group[2][3][4][5] associated with people of the Middle East and the Horn of Africa, including Akkadians (Assyrians and Babylonians), Arabs, Arameans, Canaanites (Ammonites, Edomites, Israelites, Moabites, Phoenicians, and Philistines) and Habesha peoples." --wiki
> 3. “Semitic” is a language group, not a racial caste.
Germanic is a language group and an ethnic group. Using your logic, germans are not germanic peoples because germanic is a language group.
They have less documented middle eastern ancestry (none) than elizabeth warren has of native ancestry.
> The idea that Israelis are “non-Semitic Europeans pretending to be Jews” is just antisemitic nonsense, not a serious factual claim.
Considering that most "israelis" are ATHEISTS and most "israelis" are non-semitic and most "israelis" do not adhere to or respect the torah, it is a factual claim.
> 5. Correct, Arabs are Arabian. You're not "making shit up" you're repeating evidence-free nonsense you want to be true without examining its validity.
Why do you lie? People can literally google "semites" or "semitic peoples". If you lie about something like this, what are the odds you are lying about israel killing civilian semites in palestine?
> 1. What's the similarity in your view between "zionist rationalization" and "nazi rationalization"?
Penchant for rationalizing away acts of genocide and dehumanize peoples. The only difference is zionists dehumanize actual semites ( palestinians) while nazis dehumanized european "jews". Zionists/"Israelis" are actual anti-semites. While nazis were anti-european "jews". Heady stuff.
> To me this sounds like more antisemitic nonsense, you comparing zionists to Nazis.
I'm comparing apples to apples.
> So using “Semitic” to argue that Israelis are “fake” or “non-Semites” is simply incorrect.
"Israelis" are europeans. Europeans are not semites.
> 3. The germanic language group is a family of languages that includes dutch, english, yiddish, afrikkans, etc. The germanic people includes germany, not brits and americans.
But germanic people includes ENGLISH though. It's pathetic what you are trying to do here.
> 5. I'm not lying.
That's all you have done. "Arabs are not semites". Lie. "Israel wasn't trying to kill civilians". Lie.
You seem to think that asserting something makes it true. I particularly love that you call yiddish speakers, americans and dutch "germanic people" - a novel claim, haha.
You literally do not understand antisemitism or semitic people or genetics or ethnic and national identity.
Israel's goal since the beginning was to exist, to be able to live. Antisemitism has literally never meant hatred against various semitic people such as Ethiopian semites or Assyrians it has always been a term to describe Jew hatred, coined by a German Jew hater. Also semitic is not a genetic thing, its a language thing and various identities tied to various semitic languages largely do not see it as a useful grouping. I have never heard of pan-semitic movement similar to pan Germanic or pan Slavic ones(those were not universally popular when they existed but they did exist and had some popularity). About half of Israeli Jews ancestors didn't recently live in Europe (and most of those had ancestors who lived elsewhere in MENA). Finally when it comes to genetics both Jews and Palestinians have substantial overlapping ancestry to the ancient Levant region as well as ancestry from outside of it, but that doesn't really change people's minds on ethnic identity and nationalism
