Israel/Palestine post 10/7 - follow-on events/thoughts as relate to other countries

Canada is now not officially resuming its UNRWA funding: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-unrwa-funding-restore-1.7136924

what a pile of crap

meanwhile the media is trying out the Jeremy Corbyn playbook in BC: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/eby-robinson-resign-1.7136786

Robinson resigned as post-secondary education minister last month after saying modern Israel was founded on "a crappy piece of land" during a public panel, sparking outcry from pro-Palestinian groups that called the comments racist and Islamophobic.

She apologized and committed to taking anti-Islamophobia training.

On Thursday, Robinson said she plans to continue that work personally.

She said Wednesday her heart had been "shattered" by her treatment and that there were antisemitic voices within the NDP caucus.

To my knowledge she's the only politician in North America who faced any consequences for making anti-Palestinian statements

I think Zachary Foster and his email newsletter Palestine Nexus are essential reading, here's his latest on the Times' complicity in genocide.

https://palestine.beehiiv.com/p/new-york-times-complicit-plausible-genocide

The headlines conceal Israel’s war crimes, the word choice whitewashes Israeli violence while the focus of attention centers Israeli victims.

The Intercept study also found that for every two Palestinian deaths, Palestinians are mentioned once. For every Israeli death, Israelis are mentioned eight times.

Then there's the paper's peculiar commitment to documenting Hamas atrocities. What is worthy of 150 interviews? What story does the paper stand behind “200%”? What story does the paper provide as much time as needed for interviews and investigative research?

Not Israel’s plausible genocide; not Israel’s systematic torturing of prisoners; not Israel’s targeting of apartment buildings and civilian infrastructure (e.g. +972 reporting); not Israel’s killing of its own civilians on Oct. 7th (Electronic Intifada reporting); not Israel’s starving Palestinians to death; not even Hamas’s killing of 764 Israeli civilians on Oct. 7th. Nope. Nothing having to do with anyone killing anyone at all.

Instead, the New York Times decided it wanted to published a Hamas rape story and poured limitless resources into it. Anat Schwartz, a co-author of the now infamous Times piece, “Screams Without Words,” said as much in an interview with Israeli Army Radio on December 31. According to Schwartz, “The New York Times said, ‘Let’s do an investigation into sexual violence’.” Remarkably, the Times had to convince Schwartz, a former Israeli soldier with no journalism experience, to do the story. Schwartz was asked, “it was a proposal of The New York Times, the entire thing?” She responded: “Unequivocally. Unequivocally. Obviously. Of course.”

No surprise the sponsor of the piece, Executive Editor Joe Kahn, has strong pro-Israel sympathies. Also no surprise that Schwartz told interviewees the point of the article was to present Israel in a positive light. This fact was revealed by the lead author of the story as well, Jeffrey Gettleman, who said the point of the investigation was not to assess the veracity of testimonies collected, but rather the point was to present a story to move people.

And, indeed, the paper did not seem bothered by reporting fiction as fact. Raz Cohen, a key witness, had already changed his story at least 3 times before the Times cited it as fact. The family of the main character of the story, Gal Abdush, rejected the accusation that she was raped, claiming “the media invented” the entire thing. The spokesperson of Kibbutz Be’eri also rejected the claim in the article that the sisters, Yahel and Noiya Sharabi, were raped. The paper relied on Zaka testimonies, the organization responsible for intentionally spreading some of the most insidious lies that have circulated about Oct. 7th.
...

Study after study has documented the bias. During the second intifada (2000-2005), the Times over-reported Israeli deaths and and under-reported Palestinian deaths; it often called the Palestinian Occupied Territories "disputed” and referred to illegal Israeli settlements as "neighborhoods” and, whenever Palestinian civilians were killed, they were "caught in the crossfire." Moreover, the paper often described Israelis as dovish or peaceniks, but never Palestinians.

Similarly, during Israel’s 2014 War on Gaza, another study found that the New York Times often justified Israeli violence while condemning and exaggerating Palestinian violence.

All of these findings are a direct consequence of the newspaper’s curious choices for Jerusalem Bureau chiefs. The paper has a knack for finding journalists deeply embedded in Jewish Israeli society: Ethan Bronner’s child served in the Israeli military; Isabel Kershner has family ties to an Israeli think tank that promotes a positive media image of Israel; Thomas Friedman has said on numerous occasions he is deeply committed to the idea of the Jewish State.

How many more studies of the paper’s selection of editors and writers, headlines, word choice, focus of attention and carelessness with facts are necessary before its editors ask themselves, are we complicit in Israel’s genocidal war on the Palestinians?

All of this is backed up by sources in the newsletter, and at the link above.

Super Furry Animals' singer Gruff Rhys has pulled out of a major US festival in protest over "the hyper violence inflicted on civilians in Gaza".

Rhys is the latest in a line of artists boycotting the South by Southwest (SXSW) festival in Texas, which is sponsored by the US Army.

On Instagram, the Welsh musician said he was "in dismay at the utter collapse of coherent diplomacy in the West".

Organisers said they respected artists' right to free speech.

Rhys has performed at the festival many times before. But he said the best way to use his platform to protest was to "withdraw my music" this weekend.

All my friends (and others of their community) have pulled out of sx

Yeah, the double whammy of the DoD and CIA sponsoring various events but also when you get something you might find cool that has no publicized MIC connection(like the Fallout party), you’re at risk of Elon and his dipshit ketamine coterie showing up.

And who(aside from the usual freaks) would want that

How else can the Army attract skinny indie fans?

Eurovision basically done.

London's biggest @Eurovision screening party has cancelled its 2024 edition over the participation of genocidal Israel.

We salute the Rio for courageously standing on the right side of history.

We urge all #Eurovision2024 party venues to cancel!#BoycottEurovision2024 https://t.co/ObB2dJQ8yz

— PACBI - BDS movement (@PACBI) March 17, 2024

Got round to reading this interview on the German left in Berlin and the weird Antideustche faction.

https://www.leftvoice.org/antideutsche-the-aberration-of-germanys-pro-zionist-left/

it's a real shame what these clowns have done to postone's legacy and reputation - the german left could really have learnt a lot from his work instead of using it as a kind of intellectual fig leaf for their weird offbrand version of german nativism

I didn't realise how specifically maoist their tendency's origins were (since one of the strangest things about them these days is how hard they are to distinguish from the mainstream) which is an awkward fit with the postonean stuff (his anti-stalinism was strong enough to occasionally take him to borderline reactionary places) (then again maybe he was their way out) but if that's their background their predilection for physically assaulting ("other") leftists makes a lot more sense

I need to stop with the brackets

Are they the only group that has Maoist tendencies that is pro-Israel? Most of the ones I encounter are borderline Soros=New Rothschild major anti-semitism vibes

I doubt they have maoist tendencies now (other than violence and the whole chauvinism in the name of its opposite thing) but you can mao yourself into basically any position by changing what the primary contradiction in society is and enforcing the new line on your cadre and then the world. most actual maoists I'm aware of are more "anti-zionist" than anti-capitalist right now but I wouldn't put it past them to switch those priorities at some point either

I would guess the antideutsche also have some interesting views on soros and probably think he's more of a nazi than their grandparents were

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/19/canada-halt-arms-sales-to-israel

can someone explain to me "Reality Israel"? asking because someone i know posted on Instagram how they were "given the opportunity to visit Israel" through this service and they shared photos, videos, etc of the experience. as someone who has great sympathy for those who died, injured, or otherwise traumatized on Oct 7, and who is sensitive to some of the more dog-whistley criticisms of Israel (though NOT the actually relevant, cold hard facts of the ongoing atrocity criticisms), i found it a bit distasteful and tone-deaf. one video showed a group of what amounted to tourists walking through and filming a bullet-hole filled kibbutz where i'm sure people died, followed by a cheerful group photo, followed by a long dining table where i guess everyone ate and chatted. the accompanying text was full of detail about how supposedly both sides were heard, but it felt one-sided, underscored by its conclusion to "release the hostages, eliminate Hamas, ceasefire" (apparently a suggestion of what order things should be done in.) lots of replies in the comments such as, "love you brother" and "so much this" and heart emojis and "good of you to bear witness". and while i am COMPLETELY on board with getting those hostages back, on board with seeing Hamas gone (and Netanyahu just as gone, since both sides deserve so much better), i was just taken aback by the post for some reason. and then one voice crying out in the comments, "we won't even talk about how you're going there for a nice meal while children in Gaza are starving and dying?" it did feel a bit like "i want to live like common traumatized people" on one hand, and atrocity tourism on the other, and so self-centered in the manner in which it was communicated. and disappointing. i didn't engage with the post, i know it's a very sensitive topic in general and it's a can of worms i choose not to open via social media.

i write all that as someone who again is vv sensitive to and sometimes disappointed in a bit of the ol ILX rhetoric surrounding these terrible events, which i won't get into now but just placing myself where i belong in the discourse.

It isn't a can of worms. The person you know doesn't care that 30,000+ Palestinians have been killed, and advertised it for their friend group to see. What else is there to know except that the person you know is not a good person?

yeah i've never thought this was a particularly good person. it was more interesting to see it as an example of grassroots propaganda of the type i've seen a lot of on social media and wondered if that group was part of a larger effort to engage in it, i don't know anything about it.

It sounds like a Birthright tour, but for adults.

https://www.schusterman.org/reality

The Schusterman family were among the founders of Birthright Israel, and made their fortune investing in petroleum products. Basically, and ultra-Zionist Koch Brothers

When she is not working, she can be found cooking Israeli recipes (and destroying a few kitchens in the process)

the Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Philantropies is behind the REALITY trips, which actually have just been cut going forward (https://www.yahoo.com/news/schusterman-cuts-reality-trips-leadership-124752133.html). they are also co-founders of Birthright Israel.

The trips themselves are geared at people with platforms and influence, mostly, to help use their experience to enact social change. One trip indicates "Through this journey, you will go beyond the headlines and sound bites to explore the richness and complexity of Israel firsthand while strengthening your abilities to engage in challenging conversations across lines of difference."

the program seems geared at countering some of the conversations and what they feel are misconceptions about Israel - I don't think their specific goal is to influence discourse regarding past and current conflicts, but I would guess the type of people they approve to go on these REALITY tours are probably people with viewpoints similar to the person you know. particularly since the Israel Institute, which they founded, has been accused of influencing institutions to minimize criticism of Israel.

so perhaps not their overall goal, but "hey, people are shitting on Bibi/Israel, would you like to see the real Israel instead of the lies the mainstream media shares" is probably a unstated secondary goal

xxxposts lol....looks like we all posted fragments of the same

They infect people with hasbara talking points and then send them back to manufacture consent through their platforms and networks

Sorry not sorry to be harsh, not in the mood to entertain niceties about what the real goals of these organizations are.

don't think the goals I stated are very nice goals! i'm essentially in agreement with you

btw the can of worms comment was simply me stating i didn't comment on that post on IG, i didn't want to open a can of worms in terms of getting into it.

understandable, sorry to misinterpret

one of the biggest anti-Trump "take back our country from fascism" guys I knew, I had to eventually delete because his response to the Palestinian deaths, unsolicited, was "don't lots of people always die in war?"

in war, both sides have usually consented to fight and have arms to fight with, but idk ymmv rando asshole

no prob table, it's a pretty volatile topic and you ain't gotta worry about what you say to me, you've got exceptionally valuable insight

otm

in war, both sides have usually consented to fight and have arms to fight with, but idk ymmv rando asshole

I don't know if thats generally true, I think in many wars have an asymmetry about them, where one sides decides they'll have some or all of what the other side has. The other side usually has to consent to fight because the alternative is often even worse

I was meaning to contrast that with describing 'war' as people who are fleeing bombs when they were just trying to go to work or shelter

Yeah I was gonna say - I don't think most wars start because two countries sit down together and decide to have a war. Also, Hamas sought to provoke war, hoping that Hezbollah (and possibly others) would join in.

Yeah … though

_in war, both sides have usually consented to fight and have arms to fight with, but idk ymmv rando asshole_

I don't know if thats generally true, I think in many wars have an asymmetry about them, where one sides decides they'll have some or all of what the other side has. The other side usually has to consent to fight because the alternative is often even worse

I was meaning to contrast that with describing 'war' as people who are fleeing bombs when they were just trying to go to work or shelter

― CEO Greedwagon (Neanderthal), Thursday, March 21, 2024 2:20 PM (two minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

I still don't really understand what you mean tbh. Dude was still an asshat for what he said, but the civilians hurt in war are typically not the ones consenting to war.

Like I talked about it with my mom who remembers watching the death count and bodybags of the Vietnam war on tv every night and how that motivated her, my family, and many other people to be peace activists because war is horrible and the atrocities happening in Palestine are common to wars. I feel like there is a generational difference here, where many Americans born here under 50 haven’t really seen this before…

It makes me want to reread Baudrillard’s The Gulf War book

I think the truth of the matter here is that this is not really a war. Hamas had an offensive 6 months ago, but since then it's just been the occupying power getting revenge by killing as many civilians and destroying as many buildings as possible.

I listened through the Blowback series on Iraq recently, pretty horrifying even as someone who was generally paying attention to what the US was doing both between the two wars and during the second Iraq war. xp

I think the truth of the matter here is that this is not really a war. Hamas had an offensive 6 months ago, but since then it's just been the occupying power getting revenge by killing as many civilians and destroying as many buildings as possible.

― President Keyes, Thursday, March 21, 2024 2:32 PM (twenty-nine seconds ago) bookmarkflaglink

I mean, Hamas has an armed militia of tens of thousands in Gaza, it's not like there's no one fighting. It's certainly not an even fight, but there has been fighting.

It’s similar to Vietnam in that Hamas is somewhat a spectre where civilians can be portrayed as possible members or sympathizers, giving Israel the “excuse” to kill and destroy

No idea if there's fighting going on or not because Israel won't let any reporters in and they're incapable of telling the truth.

Hamas itself posts combat footage, although IDK what's going on currently

I think the truth of the matter here is that this is not really a war. Hamas had an offensive 6 months ago, but since then it's just been the occupying power getting revenge by killing as many civilians and destroying as many buildings as possible.

― President Keyes, Thursday, March 21, 2024 3:32 PM bookmarkflaglink

this is what I was admittedly clumsily getting at, my 'friend' wasn't saying "lots of civilians die in war", he was saying in war, soldiers die, it's expected, and he's treating civilians and Hamas fighters interchangably, when it's not a war, it's one country basically assaulting the Gaza strip with a litter of bombs and attacking unarmed civilians directly and have made the land unlivable already.

even if his point was "civilian casualties are an inevitability of war", the point wouldn't scan because they aren't even collateral damage, they're being targeted.

even the battle with Hamas and Israel I hardly consider a war.

or at least...not now.

According to Israel (lol) they've killed 12,000 Hamas fighters, so I'vw no idea how many that leaves.

“It’s war people die so what” is the ingrained response of an American who has lived with “collateral damage” their entire life as the phrase that differentiates between us killing innocent people and the bad guys who do it on purpose.

more tellingly, his opinion about the Iraq war and the number of innocent people killed was decidedly different