

From Lemmy to Piefed I believe so. I don’t know any other details tho
Say no to authoritarianism, say yes to socialism. Free Palestine 🇵🇸 Everyone deserves Human Rights


From Lemmy to Piefed I believe so. I don’t know any other details tho


I think you’re a Zionist


Physical and sexual abuse of children inside Israeli prisons:
Children are jailed and abused in Israeli prisons (Save The Children) ing threatened with harm (70%), and hit with sticks or guns (60%).
Some children reported violence and abuse of a sexual nature, including being hit or touched on the genitals and 69% reported being strip searched.
60% of children experienced solitary confinement with the length of time varying from one 1 day to as long as 48 days.
Children were denied access to basic services, 70% said they suffered from hunger and 68% said they didn’t receive any healthcare.
Stripped, beaten and blindfolded: new research reveals ongoing violence and abuse of Palestinian children detained by Israeli military - (Save The Children)
In general:
Torture and Abuse in Interrogations (B’TSelem)
Palestinians denied civil rights (HRW) including Military Court (B’TSelem)
Palestinian Prisoners in Israel (wiki)
Thousands of Palestinians are held without charge under Israeli detention policy (NPR)
Shocking testimony: Torture in Israeli prisons, “sexual assaults even using dogs"
Why raping Palestinians is legitimate Israeli military practice
'Everything is legitimate’: Israeli leaders defend soldiers accused of rape
Extent of systematic torture, atrocities endured by Palestinians in Israeli prisons is shocking
UN Report Details Vast, Systemic Torture of Palestinians in Israeli Detention
“Welcome to Hell” is a report on the abuse and inhuman treatment of Palestinians held in Israeli custody since 7 October 2023. B’Tselem collected testimonies from 55 Palestinians held during that time and released, almost all with no charges. Their testimonies reveal the outcomes of the rushed transformation of more than a dozen Israeli prison facilities, military and civilian, into a network of camps dedicated to the abuse of inmates as a matter of policy. Facilities in which every inmate is deliberately subjected to harsh, relentless pain and suffering operate as de-facto torture camps.


Yeah, and the Nazi’s said they were socialist. That doesn’t carry any weight when you look at what they actually stand for.
You’re right that there is a split, but both sides are still antisemitic. It’s between anti-Semites that support Israel and those that don’t.


Yeah the Nazi who’s famously done Holocaust revisionism is actually not anti-Semitic and opposes israel on the basis of human rights instead of cynically using it as a talking point to garner support…
Both are fascist and antisemitic.


Palestinian deaths treated as less newsworthy: Despite Gaza suffering 34x more casualties than Israel, BBC gave Israeli deaths 33 times more coverage per fatality and ran almost equal numbers of humanising victim profiles (279 Palestinians vs 201 Israelis).
Systematic language bias favouring Israelis: BBC used emotive terms 4 times more for Israeli victims, applied ‘massacre’ 18x more to Israeli casualties, and used ‘murder’ 220 times for Israelis vs once for Palestinians.
Suppression of genocide allegations: BBC presenters shut down genocide claims in over 100 documented instances whilst making zero mention of Israeli leaders’ genocidal statements, including Netanyahu’s biblical Amalek reference.
Muffling Palestinian voices: The BBC interviewed significantly fewer Palestinians than Israelis (1,085 v 2,350) on TV and radio, while BBC presenters shared the Israeli perspective 11 times more frequently than the Palestinian perspective (2,340 v 217).
https://cfmm.org.uk/bbc-on-gaza-israel-one-story-double-standards/
Over 400 media figures, including 111 BBC staffers, have signed a letter demanding the BBC remove board member Robbie Gibb over conflict of interest on Gaza and the Middle East and his “consistent efforts to stifle legitimate coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza”
https://institute.aljazeera.net/en/ajr/article/3250
Today Drop Site News is publishing a landmark investigation about the BBC’s coverage of Israel’s unrelenting assault on Gaza by British journalist Owen Jones. His report is based on interviews with 13 journalists and other BBC staffers who offer remarkable insights into how senior figures within the BBC’s news operation skewed stories in favor of Israel’s narratives and repeatedly dismissed objections registered by scores of staffers who, throughout the past 14 months, demanded that the network uphold its commitment to impartiality and fairness. Jones’s investigation of the BBC has three main components: a deeply reported look into the internal complaints from BBC journalists, a quantitative assessment of how the BBC characterizes the year-long siege on Gaza, and a review of the histories of the people behind the coverage—and, in particular, one editor, Raffi Berg.
https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/bbc-civil-war-gaza-israel-biased-coverage


To fascists, yes


First documented in the late Bronze Age, about 3200 years ago, the name Palestine (Greek: Παλαιστίνη; Arabic: , Filastin), is the conventional name used between 450 BC and 1948 AD to describe a geographic region between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River and various adjoining lands. This work explores the evolution of the concept, histories, identity, languages and cultures of Palestine from the Late Bronze Age to the modern era. Moreover, Palestine history is often taught in the West as a history of a land, not as Palestinian history or a history of a people. This book challenges colonial approach to Palestine and the pernicious myth of a land without a people (Masalha 1992, 1997) and argues for reading the history of Palestine with the eyes of the indigenous people of Palestine. The Palestinians are the indigenous people of Palestine; their local roots are deeply embedded in the soil of Palestine and their autochthonous identity and historical heritage long preceded the emergence of a local Palestinian nascent national movement in the late Ottoman period and the advent of Zionist settler-colonialism before the First World War.


Yemen is peak anti-colonialism. Which unfortunately comes with religious conservatism as a reaction against colonial forces. Fanon discusses this at length in the context of Algeria.


Yes, Susan Collins and Janet Mills


If I’m being very generous, this dude was in straight up denial about all his buds being Neo-Nazis for a looong time. I guess it’s possible all those crayons blocked a lot of his critical thinking lol. Working for Blackwater is still by far the most damning, I’d need to hear an authentic condemnation of all the merc shit He’s done to really believe that he’s not a fascist or that he’s at least reflected and reformed.
It’ll be interesting to see how many ppl in Maine will choose this guy over the incumbent, and whether this kind of background matters at all to the electorate as long as the policies being advocated for actually address affordability


The White House and Pentagon boast that the targeted killing program is precise and that civilian deaths are minimal. However, documents detailing a special operations campaign in northeastern Afghanistan, Operation Haymaker, show that between January 2012 and February 2013, U.S. special operations airstrikes killed more than 200 people. Of those, only 35 were the intended targets. During one five-month period of the operation, according to the documents, nearly 90 percent of the people killed in airstrikes were not the intended targets. In Yemen and Somalia, where the U.S. has far more limited intelligence capabilities to confirm the people killed are the intended targets, the equivalent ratios may well be much worse.
The documents show that the military designated people it killed in targeted strikes as EKIA — “enemy killed in action” — even if they were not the intended targets of the strike. Unless evidence posthumously emerged to prove the males killed were not terrorists or “unlawful enemy combatants,” EKIA remained their designation, according to the source. That process, he said, “is insane. But we’ve made ourselves comfortable with that. The intelligence community, JSOC, the CIA, and everybody that helps support and prop up these programs, they’re comfortable with that idea.”
The source described official U.S. government statements minimizing the number of civilian casualties inflicted by drone strikes as “exaggerating at best, if not outright lies.”


Leahy Law
Multiple provisions in U.S. law restrict the sale or provision of weapons to other countries, including the federal Arms Export Control Act, the Foreign Assistance Act, and the Leahy Law. The open letter draws on evidence from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and other watchdogs to argue that continuing to provide weapons to Israel blatantly violates these laws, in addition to international treaties.


The PA is an arm of Israeli Apartheid, Occupation, and Suppression.
The PA creates the appearance of Palestinian autonomy, but in fact, much like the governments of the Bantustans of apartheid South Africa, it is simply an extension of the colonial state, a tool of counterinsurgency that is highly effective for the repression of local rebellions, because it makes the native population police itself. Fatah, which was a revolutionary movement in the early days of the armed struggle, is now mostly contained by the PA.
Israel’s stabilization strategy, inspired by modern counterinsurgency doctrine, has rested on two pillars: the employment of pacification measures to co-opt Palestinians and reliance on the Palestinian Authority (PA) to police its population on Israel’s behalf. However, many Palestinians are now fighting back against this approach, while the PA’s eroding legitimacy has only hardened the population’s refusal to accept its restrictive methods.
It is presented here as it has been perceived by the Israeli policymakers and bureaucrats down the years. For them the PA was an integral and crucial component in the open-air prison model suggested in the 1990s, and one which the pragmatic elite of Israel still hopes to instate in the West Bank, at least in the near future.
In appearance, the PA has all the trappings of a state, with ministries and a civil service, but Israel wields the real power, turning the tap on tax revenue, and controlling access to the shrinking territories – a status quo often compared with the Bantustans of apartheid-era South Africa.
The PA has actively helped Israel to keep tight control over the Palestinian population. Many perceive the body as a tool of the Israeli security apparatus, its US-trained forces not only targeting those suspected of planning attacks on Israelis, but also arresting union figures, journalists and critics on social media.
Israel relies on this division of the West Bank to foster the fiction that the Palestinian Authority is the entity primarily responsible for administering the life of the majority of Palestinians in the West Bank. In practice, however, Israel still retains control over the entire West Bank and all its residents.


There is the Saif al-Islam Gaddafi Isratin proposal:
The Gaddafi Isratin proposal intended to permanently resolve the Israeli–Palestinian conflict through a secular, federalist, republican one-state solution, which was first articulated by Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the son of Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, at the Chatham House in London and later adopted by Muammar Gaddafi himself.
Creation of a binational Jewish-Palestinian state called the “Federal Republic of the Holy Land”;
Partition of the state into five administrative regions, with Jerusalem as a city-state;
Return of all Palestinian refugees;
Supervision by the United Nations of free and fair elections on the first and second occasions;
Removal of weapons of mass destruction from the state;
Recognition of the state by the Arab League.
Similar to the Binational State Solution advocated by the Palestinian leadership and some others prior to the Nakba.
The Zionist position changed in 1928, when the pragmatic Palestinian leaders agreed to the principle of parity in a rare moment in which clannish and religious differences were overcome for the sake of consensus. The Palestinian leaders feared that without parity the Zionists would gain control of the political system. The unexpected Palestinian agreement threw the Zionist leaders into temporary confusion. When they recovered, they sent a refusal to the British, but at the same time offered an alternative solution: the partitioning of Palestine into two political units.
On 31 August 1947, UNSCOP presented its recommendations to the UN General Assembly. Three of its members were allowed to put forward an alternative recommendation. The majority report advocated the partition of Palestine into two states, with an economic union. The designated Jewish state was to have most of the coastal area, western Galilee, and the Negev, and the rest was to become the Palestinian state. The minority report proposed a unitary state in Palestine based on the principle of democracy. It took considerable American Jewish lobbying and American diplomatic pressure, as well as a powerful speech by the Russian ambassador to the UN, to gain the necessary two-thirds majority in the Assembly for partition. Even though hardly any Palestinian or Arab diplomat made an effort to promote the alternative scheme, it won an equal number of supporters and detractors, showing that a considerable number of member states realized that imposing partition amounted to supporting one side and opposing the other.
This ongoing Settler Colonialism annexing the West Bank continues to make a Two State Solution less possible, it has already divided the West Bank into hundreds of isolated enclaves. This Apartheid State needs to end as a binational state for all Palestinians and Israelis.

Here are resources by Historians about a One-State Solution. In many ways, it’s already a One-State, an Apartheid State, this change would be the emancipation of Palestinians to bring forth a One-State with equal rights.
The settlements represent land-grabbing, and land-grabbing and peace-making don’t go together, it is one or the other. By its actions, if not always in its rhetoric, Israel has opted for land-grabbing and as we speak Israel is expanding settlements. So, Israel has been systematically destroying the basis for a viable Palestinian state and this is the declared objective of the Likud and Netanyahu who used to pretend to accept a two-state solution. In the lead up to the last election, he said there will be no Palestinian state on his watch. The expansion of settlements and the wall mean that there cannot be a viable Palestinian state with territorial contiguity. The most that the Palestinians can hope for is Bantustans, a series of enclaves surrounded by Israeli settlements and Israeli military bases.
How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution
‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe


At the time the Balfour Declaration was issued, Jews constituted about 10 percent of the population of Palestine, and owned about 2 percent of the land. While Zionist land purchases remained relatively limited during the Mandate period (6 percent until 1948), Jewish immigration into Palestine began eroding the immense numerical superiority of the Palestinians.32 Growing Arab awareness of Zionist aims in Palestine, reinforced by Zionist calls for unrestricted Jewish immigration and unhindered transfer of Arab lands to exclusive Jewish control, triggered escalating protests and resistance that were eventually to culminate in the peasant- based great Arab Rebellion of 1936-39.
Already at the time of the Balfour Declaration, apprehen sions concerning the fate of the “non-Jewish communities’ had been voiced in British establishment circles. Edward Montagu, a Jewish cabinet minister at the India Office, had expressed in 1917 his belief that the Zionist drive to create a Jewish state in Palestine would end by “driving out the present inhabitants.”33 Even the enthusiastically pro-Zionist Winston Churchill had written in his review of Palestinian affairs dated 25 October 1919 that “there are the Jews, whom we are pledged to introduce into Palestine, and who take it for granted that the local population will be cleared out to suit their convenience."
By February 1947, Britain had had enough. It had more soldiers in Palestine than on the Indian subcontinent, and had been constantly involved in direct clashes with both political leaderships. The number of British casualties had also risen, mainly due to a terror campaign waged by Zionist extremists, the most notorious being the Stern Gang. This terror campaign peaked with the blowing up of British headquarters in the King David Hotel in Jerusalem in 1946. But it was not terror that forced the British out. A particularly bad winter in 1946–47, and a harsh American attitude towards Britain’s debt to the United States, created an economic crisis in Britain that served as an incentive for a limited process of decolonization, mainly in India and Palestine
Zionism has always been about the ethnic cleansing of the native populations. You are falling for antisemitic conspiracy theories if you are conflating Zionism and Judaism. Same with conflating Palestinians resistance with Islam as a whole, as if the resistance is born out of some bullshit ancient Antisemitism instead of the resistance to ethnic cleansing.
Zionism goes against the actual teachings of Judaism, it’s very revisionist. Jewish opposition to Israel is as old as Zionism itself. Hasidic Jewish people, while small in number, are still the largest Anti-zionist group in Israel. Jewish people have been at the forefront of Anti-zionist activism for a long time, including Jewish Voice for Peace. Palestinians too of course.
Zionism uses Judaism as a shield, deflecting criticism against it’s fascist actions as anti-semitic, which in-turn raises the amount of genuine anti-semitism experienced by Jewish people worldwide, due to that false conflation of Judaism and Zionism. That’s why it’s critical to detangle that false conflation.
Zionism comes from the same roots of other-izing Jewish people as seen in white supremacy, that’s exactly why it’s been supported by white supremacist since the beginning to present day. For white supremacists, Jewish people are inherently different and need to go back to ‘where they came from’ in the middle east. Christian Zionists, who far outnumber Jewish Zionists, want to trigger the end-times which will kill every ‘nonbeliever’ with the holy war.
Adi Callai, in his video Anti-Semitism, Weaponized, does a phenomenal analysis the history of antisemitism and how Zionism fits into that picture. He has another on the Gaza Ghetto Uprising and on Frantz Fanon which are also just as relevant to the current situation in Palestine as well.


No, supremacism is not a cornerstone of every country’s governance, only the fascist ones


this is what happens when you have an entire country based on religion and genetics supremacy
Why America Supports Israel - GDF
Analysis: America’s 51st state? US pressure comes to bear on Israel - Al Jazeera
Why blaming the Israel lobby for western Middle East policies is misguided -MEE
Why Does the United States Support Israel? - Jacobin
Chris Hedges Report: Shared Mythological History Of Israel And US
The US’ support of Israel comes from ideological grounds, Christian Zionism, and more significantly from Foreign Policy grounds, from MIC profits to weapons testing to destabilization of the region for dominance.
Despite the blackmail Israel has on US politicians, it is by far Israel that is the puppet of the US. Israel is entirely dependent on the US.