Cyclohexane @ cyclohexane @lemmy.ml

West Asia - Communist - international politics - anti-imperialism - softwar

---

Read more

Posts

71

Comments

773

Joined

4 yr. ago

Moderating

---

This makes it sound like Britain is the good guy breaking up a fight. They literally planned for the whole thing, this is public information now. They intentionally massacred Palestinians and founded Israel as a genocidal state.

Said Jews then set about building a thriving western-style industrialized democracy that was opposed at every turn by an Arab and Islamic population that opposed its very existence

I am pretty sure that they were concerned about being expelled from their homes and massacred, and not because they hated "thriving industrialized democracy".

What country are you in?

The US has a large Jewish population by number.

Didn't Arabs and Palestinians just flat out refuse to coexist with a Jewish state from the start?

"coexist with a Jewish state" is a bit of a contradictory statement. Arabs coexisted with Jews fine prior to the Zionist project. A Jewish state is by definition a state exclusive to Jews. That's the opposite of coexistnece by definition, and yes that is exactly why Arabs (Muslims and Christians alike) refused it.

Certainly if they chose to fight,

Resist*. they chose to resist occupation, expulsion from their homes, massacre and genocide.

fight, and lost, then they have to face the consequences which might include losing their land.

Ahh, so if someone fights you for your land, destroys your home and genocides your people, then they've earned it?? Well I should not be surprised that someone who lives in a nation founded on genocide thinks this is okay.

yes it's "wrong" to kick someone off their land, both parties have to at least be reasonable and willing to compromise

"hey man, I know I just took over your home and burned your family alive in front of your eyes. But you gotta be reasonable here and be willing to compromise!"

What more of a compromise do you need beyond coexistence? That's all Palestinians have asked for, and Israel continues to deny them basic rights, no matter how peaceful they are.

And I end with: Israel bad apartheid state. It is truly that simple.

You rn

Israel Minister

So... A representative of the Israeli state? The state founded on Zionism? That's not a correction. That is Israel.

Hamas also thinks jews are no humans

Source? Hamas has a history with anti Semitic conspiracy theories and generalizations, but not to the extent of saying Jews aren't human.

Not to mention, even said anti semitism was dropped long ago, when Hamas underwent a radical shift in membership when Israel killed off other PLO groups.

Please feel free to ask any questions! I am happy to answer them all

Can you please cite which part of Wikipedia is saying this?

"Palestine" and "Israel" are two names for the same region, so it doesn't make sense to be expelled from one into the other. I think there must be a misunderstanding here.

I bet this is referring to certain Arab States expelling Jews during the creation of Israel and the British occupation of Palestine, as a retaliation (which was horrible and stupid and I fully condemn it). But keep in mind this is well into the conflict, when Zionists and British occupation were already well into committing heinous acts and massacres, and that this is Arab States who sympathized with Palestine, not Palestine itself.

What I was referring to was treatment of Jews in Palestine before the Zionist project.

As for Hamas' anti-semitism, I think some background information is important here.

When it was founded, Hamas was not a popular group by any means. Popular Palestinian resistance groups at the time were socialist and progressive, such as the PFLP and other members of the PLO. Hamas was founded as a Muslim brotherhood affiliate, and its charter had many anti Semitic references.

Israel saw this as a huge opportunity, and it propped up Hamas while fighting off other groups. Fast forward to the 2000's, every Palestinian resistance group was left defeated, and Hamas was left as the only group left fighting. Palestinians had no choice but to support Hamas.

This was a major change for Hamas. It saw hoardes of Palestinians join its ranks, and most were not ideologically aligned with them. There are even Christians fighting among its ranks. This caused an ideological shift within Hamas. It was even reflected in its new charter in 2017, which dropped anti-semitic rhetoric and said it is fighting against Israel, not because of its religion, but because of the Zionist occupation. You can find this charter translated online easily.

Since then, many Hamas officials reiterated their position that they are not fighting to expel Jews, but against Zionist occupation.

Palestinians today see Hamas as a vehicle for their liberation, and not as an ideological alignment. But even then, most of the people in Hamas do not hold anti Semitic opinions anymore, and we should keep in mind this major shift throughout its history.

I'm pretty sure there was at least one publisher caught experimenting with this.

It means they wouldn't

No

What worries me is, what if they put in some obfudcated unique ID in the document that can be traced back to you? Is there a way to catch it with reasonable certainty?

So you wanna hold a dance party at the border of a concentration camp and active war zone, and be surprised to get caught in the crossfire?

Israel: we literally don't consider the people of Gaza to be humans

You: sheesh, I really I can't tell the difference between these two!

Israel: we literally don't think people in Gaza are human

Westerners: I can't tell the difference between the two sides!

He's also really blowing those "acts of a few" out of proportion, because even those acts are not a big concern, especially compared to the horrors Israel commits.

What definition of "terrorist organization" are we using here?

I mean Hamas was the best option available. It just so happens to be the only group left fighting and resisting. Israel admitted that it did this on purpose; fought off all the other progressive groups but propped up Hamas.

The code is not open source, so it's hard to verify how good the encryption is or if it has backdoors.

I'm not an expert in cryptography, but from my limited knowledge, the cryptographic keys used are very important. If Meta or the government can somehow know the decryption key to your messages or predict it, then they can see your messages.

But they most likely don't need to decrypt it in transit. One of the vulnerabilities in this system is Google firebase, which delivers notifications to your phone when WhatsApp messages arrive. Ever noticed how those notifications include the message content and the sender? Google has access to this information, despite the encryption.

That's just an example. Google has access to a lot on your phone.

Another thing to consider is message metadata. The content of your message is encrypted, but what about information like the destination of your message, its recipients, time sent and received, and frequency? I'd even argue this is more important than content in many situations. Sometimes, linking person A to person B tells me a lot about person A.

I've seen a multitude of other comments here proclaiming all those other genocides were okay because they were thousands of years ago.

Where did anyone say it was okay because it was longer ago? Please point me to it, because I read the entire thread and did not see this once.

The genocide of native new worlders is historically unprecedented and that is fact. I highly doubt that genocides on the same scale, magnitude and horror are commonplace throughout history. I would urge you to support your claim with evidence or examples if you are going to repeat it, otherwise it is entirely baseless.

How much of the tab am I supposed to pick up?

However much it takes to bring up the status of the natives to what it would have been had they not been massacred and expelled, and undo the propping up of Western civilization on their backs. If you'd like more specific examples, I'd be glad to give them to you. Just ask.

We're in a (relatively) peaceful era now

Source? That's a pretty big claim.

Then you'd be wrong, because voting is futile and a distraction, as I already said. Refer to the rest my comment for direct action methods that aren't futile:

unionizing, striking, protesting, blocking traffic to our stores, boycotting