Israel/Palestine Thread

I can't help that. I'm posting as I see it. If it breaks the rules, report.

It's true I've stopped bothering to reply to a lot of posts - but that's generally precisely because I don't see the point in repeating something yet again.

The latest example of bad faith posting being your suggestion that I might be quite ok with a Palestinian prisoner being raped with a crowbar. I'm sure you can see the irony in you posting that and then telling me you're fed up with my posts??

It is irrelevant whether they are war crimes or legitimate military objectives, I gave you an answer. They took them as leverage. Maybe, they might have demanded the removing of settlements in the West Bank. Who knows? What you have not done is give an alternative reason for taking hostages, if not for leverage? Isn't that the basic of principle of hostages in any situation?

As for Israel never rejecting peaceful coexistence. They did just that the minute Zionism decided to try and create a state in the Middle East for Jewish settlers without any input from the people who actually lived there.

That's a consent issue - they took them from Palestinians and Israelis who died in hospital. They were far from the only country to have issues with consent back then: a whole generation of boys with haemophilia were infected with HIV in the UK, and instead of being told, in some cases it was considered that as they were already infected, they might as well be given MORE of the infected product because they were already condemned. But that would not be a good basis for accusing the British of doing that now.

Note that this is not a justification for either practice, simply pointing out that this sort of malpractice decades ago* is unrelated to the conspiracy theory claims about organs being taken from dead bodies picked up on the battlefield. That's just unscientific nonsense, and raises questions about the sources such posters are using to inform themselves.

It's also significant that so many posters can't bring themselves to disagree even with such arrant nonsense, preferring to hide behind "I'm not a specialist". No need to be much of a specialist to know that organ donation requires multiple checks and can't just be done on random bodies picked up in a battle zone.

Your example of the man with diabetes for example, is of someone who died in controlled conditions. The claim that it was done on prisoners - dubious, I'd say, and you have provided no proof, just a claim that it would be investigated. And still not the same as prisoners captured in a battle, often injured and with possible infections picked up either during or after the original injury.

• From the 1990s, with one alleged case in 2009 which doesn't appear to have been proven.

Oh Volchitsa. If you had only googled before doubling and tripling down on your mistake you could have saved yourself a huge amount of embarrassment.

You are still peddling debunked nonsense about a murder victim being decapitated.
You do acknowledge that 40 babies were not beheaded, no baby was ripped from a womb and stabbed while the umbilical cord was attached to its mother, no baby was cooked in an oven.
You do accept they were all Israeli lies designed to justify their genocide? Right?

Keep digging and lying Volchista. Making things up to hide your own embarrassment at your own ignorance.
Go on, show us all where I claimed Israel is harvesting organs from dead bodies found on battlefields. You built a strawman out of lies because you doubled down on your mistake.

From my question

“. Do you acknowledge that Israel has stolen the organs of dead Palestinians?

You build a strawman about battlefield deaths, medical impossibility and other nonsense.

What “allegations” are those Blanch? Is the fact that Israel illegally harvested the organs of dead Palestinians a “blood libel” like claiming they attack hospitals?

Give me a break.

I mean exactlby what i said. When the Zionists initially decided that Palestine was going to be where their Jewish state would be located back in the early 20th Century, the locals were not asked about such a possibility. Think of Trump saying of Canada becoming the 51st state or the US taking over Greenland. Bonkers.

When the Balfour Agreement was signed, the Arabs had zero input. When Sykes-Picot was signed, the Arab's had zero input. Palestine was initially under the French remit, but the British traded for it precisely so it could be given over for settlement by Zionists as they had agreed under the Balfour Agreement. Zero input from the locals. Prince Faisal(leader of the Arabs)who was at the Paris peace talks was receptive to the idea of giving land for a Jewish state if the Arabs got their state, he was ignored as Sykes-Picot had already been agreed dividing up the region for French/British(Zionist)interests, Arabs ignored.

All that took place when the Jewish population of Palestine was under 10%. The horse had long bolted before the Arabs were offered any kind of input into their region, and they knew they would be screwed.

I said it before, there is not a single pro Israeli poster on here who wants to understand the history and context of Mandatory Palestine.

The Ottoman Empire lost their empire during WW1, the boarders were redrawn just like Germany after WW2. Was that German land stolen as well?

Suddenly concerned about Palestinians… but not the ones in the West Bank. At least once a day, there’s a news report dropped here of settler violence in the West Bank, the ongoing flagrant breach of law there by settlers, facilitated by the Israeli government and IDF and radio silence from these posters.

Strange for people that have been very vocal about Israel’s right to defend itself, but every time someone brings up what’s happening in the West Bank, the settler violence, you just get radio silence from those posters

Is it because that side of the story doesn’t fit the narrative they stick with? I suppose it’s hard to talk about ‘self-defence’ when it involves attacking people with no justification.

They will condemn Hezbollah killing Irish peacekeepers but not Israelis killing Irish peacekeepers. They will condemn Palestinians killing Palestinians but not Israelis killing Palestinians. Pathetic.

I will refer back to my comment about pro-Israeli posters and lack of history knowledge The Arabs who were a sub-group within the Ottoman Empire fought alongside the Allies in WW1 against the Ottomans on the promise of an Arab state afterward. The Arab wish was for a singular Arab based around Greater Syria(which included Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine)and that is what they fought for. The British/French instead divided up the region into various states which suited their own interests, not Arab interests. Now if you think that is comparable with Germany Post WW2, good luck with that. The Germans were clearly being punished. What were the Arabs being punished for?

Also, Balfour and Sykes-Picot were both agreed long before the war was over, the German borders were not decided until WW2 had finished. There were no promises of a country to people who didn't even live on the continent.

Id like to update the list with China, but I'll need the experts on here to decide what goes on it. The Blanches, Sheepys, Cordell's, Bogman etc those in the know.

No offense @tayto lover, you just aren't "expert" enough