advertisement


War declared, Israel v Palestine...

doctorf said:
I thought you were better than that.
Click to expand...
Well, it seems to me from what I've seen reported, that this was a militant, zionist Jew who chose to pick an argument against Palestinians, pro-Palestinian people, and external intermediating parties, to suit his own agenda. This feels like a familiar MO: First, escalate disproportionately, then play the victim card. I'm not sure what you took from my point that makes you uncomfortable?
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Well, it seems to me from what I've seen reported, that this was a militant, zionist Jew who chose to pick an argument against Palestinians, pro-Palestinian people, and external intermediating parties, to suit his own agenda. This feels like a familiar MO: First, escalate disproportionately, then play the victim card. I'm not sure what you took from my point that makes you uncomfortable?
Click to expand...
Don’t forget the lies, and the lies…
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Well, it seems to me from what I've seen reported, that this was a militant, zionist Jew who chose to pick an argument against Palestinians, pro-Palestinian people, and external intermediating parties, to suit his own agenda. This feels like a familiar MO: First, escalate disproportionately, then play the victim card. I'm not sure what you took from my point that makes you uncomfortable?
Click to expand...
You said “Zionist thinks it's OK to demand access to area currently occupied by Palestinians and their supporters.”
Firstly, he was Jewish, not necessarily a Zionist.
Secondly, area “occupied by Palestinians and their supporters” implies no one else is allowed to have access to that area. That is nonsense.
I have no problem with your basic premise that he was looking for trouble, nor do I believe the police said much wrong under the circumstances of trying to keep the peace.
 
Gideon Falter is a far-right racist IMHO. A man desperately trying to brand all Jews as genocidal Zionists and everyone who stands against genocide or apartheid as an antisemite.

Here is a vastly more intelligent perspective from David Rothkopf. A different context, but entirely relevant and the best post I’ve read anywhere today:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782406544287482221

”I'm a Jew-loving Jew. Anti-Semitism is never ok. Here's what is not anti-Semitism: Peaceful protest, criticism of the Israeli government, calling for an independent Palestine, demanding a ceasefire in Gaza, using the term apartheid to describe Israel, questioning Zionism.

Also not anti-Semitism: Condemnation of the serial war crimes and human rights violations in Gaza and the West Bank, demands for organizations to divest from states that commit war crimes and violate human rights, demands that the US stop providing weapons used in war crimes...

...and human rights violations. As offensive as phrases like "the river to the sea" may seem, they are no more offensive than the reality of an Israel seeking to exert their political control from "the river to the sea" and negate the legitimate claims of Palestinians.

Hamas is a vile terrorist organization that should be negated as a factor in the Middle East. But saying things while peacefully protesting that have also been said by Hamas does not make one a supporter of Hamas. Those who are supporters of Hamas should be condemned.

Terrorism is reprehensible. Any efforts to intimidate Jews should be denied on college campuses and violators should be punished. But "intimidation" does not include peacefully arguing any of the above points.Indeed, as I have said before...

...any educational institution that does not have a vigorous debate around the points cited above and counter-arguments to them is failing to create in its educational mission. These are critical questions of political science, international affairs, morality, and philosophy.

Universities or other institutions that succumb to donor or other outside pressure tactics to censor viewpoints are not only devaluing their role as academic institutions, they are seeking to intimidate those who hold those views into silence.

So too is bringing in the New York City police an intimidation tactic. So too is denying a valedictorian the right to speak because of her political views a tactic that says "those views will not be tolerated here." The challenge for university administrators is great.

But they must never lose site of the purpose of universities to serve as a place to foster diverse perspectives founded in fact and sound reasoning and to use the same kind of reasoning to question conventional wisdom and entrenched power.

For journalists and their audiences, the obligation is to take the time to present the complexity of these issues and to always base reporting on facts and not simply repeating the press statements of those in power or to whom they have easy access.

The goal of academic institutions should be to promote the search for truth & to combat intolerance in all its forms & to create a safe space in which to do so. We're clearly not there yet in many leading academic institutions and we need to continue the struggle to get there.“

David Rothkopf.
 
doctorf said:
You said “Zionist thinks it's OK to demand access to area currently occupied by Palestinians and their supporters.”
Firstly, he was Jewish, not necessarily a Zionist.
Secondly, area “occupied by Palestinians and their supporters” implies no one else is allowed to have access to that area. That is nonsense.
I have no problem with your basic premise that he was looking for trouble, nor do I believe the police said much wrong under the circumstances of trying to keep the peace.
Click to expand...

The guy is a Zionist, it takes all of 10 seconds to google his name and find out exactly who he is and how he operates
 
doctorf said:
You said “Zionist thinks it's OK to demand access to area currently occupied by Palestinians and their supporters.”
Firstly, he was Jewish, not necessarily a Zionist.
Secondly, area “occupied by Palestinians and their supporters” implies no one else is allowed to have access to that area. That is nonsense.
I have no problem with your basic premise that he was looking for trouble, nor do I believe the police said much wrong under the circumstances of trying to keep the peace.
Click to expand...
Even knowing nothing about him before this incident, his attitude makes it clear he supports Zionist views. There is always a strong Jewish cohort on these 'support Palestine' marches, but he clearly was having no part in that and his objective was to disrupt the march. Why, as a Jew, would he wish to do that? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, etc.

Secondly, the area was 'currently occupied' by Palestinians at that very moment, but he would be able to have access after a short delay. In much the same way that I can't occupy a parking space that another car is already in, but if I'm patient, I may well be able to later. The fact that a car occupies a space doesn't imply it won't be available for others to use at an appropriate time. Your argument is a logical extrapolation which feels a bit slender.

But I'm glad we agree that he was looking for trouble. So we presumably agree on the similarities in MO I was commenting on.
 
doctorf said:
You said “Zionist thinks it's OK to demand access to area currently occupied by Palestinians and their supporters.”
Firstly, he was Jewish, not necessarily a Zionist.
Secondly, area “occupied by Palestinians and their supporters” implies no one else is allowed to have access to that area. That is nonsense.
I have no problem with your basic premise that he was looking for trouble, nor do I believe the police said much wrong under the circumstances of trying to keep the peace.
Click to expand...

He's a Zionist, mate. He sits on the board of an organisation that raises money to fund illegal settlements in the West Bank.

Also segregation of potentially antagonistic groups is standard procedure, when maintaining public order.

Gideon Falter went looking for aggro and the moment a police officer called him out on it, he went crying to the media like baby. Pathetic.
 
Tony L said:
Gideon Falter is a far-right racist IMHO. A man desperately trying to brand all Jews as genocidal Zionists and everyone who stands against genocide or apartheid as an antisemite.

Here is a vastly more intelligent perspective from David Rothkopf. A different context, but entirely relevant and the best post I’ve read anywhere today:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782406544287482221

”I'm a Jew-loving Jew. Anti-Semitism is never ok. Here's what is not anti-Semitism: Peaceful protest, criticism of the Israeli government, calling for an independent Palestine, demanding a ceasefire in Gaza, using the term apartheid to describe Israel, questioning Zionism.

Also not anti-Semitism: Condemnation of the serial war crimes and human rights violations in Gaza and the West Bank, demands for organizations to divest from states that commit war crimes and violate human rights, demands that the US stop providing weapons used in war crimes...

...and human rights violations. As offensive as phrases like "the river to the sea" may seem, they are no more offensive than the reality of an Israel seeking to exert their political control from "the river to the sea" and negate the legitimate claims of Palestinians.

Hamas is a vile terrorist organization that should be negated as a factor in the Middle East. But saying things while peacefully protesting that have also been said by Hamas does not make one a supporter of Hamas. Those who are supporters of Hamas should be condemned.

Terrorism is reprehensible. Any efforts to intimidate Jews should be denied on college campuses and violators should be punished. But "intimidation" does not include peacefully arguing any of the above points.Indeed, as I have said before...

...any educational institution that does not have a vigorous debate around the points cited above and counter-arguments to them is failing to create in its educational mission. These are critical questions of political science, international affairs, morality, and philosophy.

Universities or other institutions that succumb to donor or other outside pressure tactics to censor viewpoints are not only devaluing their role as academic institutions, they are seeking to intimidate those who hold those views into silence.

So too is bringing in the New York City police an intimidation tactic. So too is denying a valedictorian the right to speak because of her political views a tactic that says "those views will not be tolerated here." The challenge for university administrators is great.

But they must never lose site of the purpose of universities to serve as a place to foster diverse perspectives founded in fact and sound reasoning and to use the same kind of reasoning to question conventional wisdom and entrenched power.

For journalists and their audiences, the obligation is to take the time to present the complexity of these issues and to always base reporting on facts and not simply repeating the press statements of those in power or to whom they have easy access.

The goal of academic institutions should be to promote the search for truth & to combat intolerance in all its forms & to create a safe space in which to do so. We're clearly not there yet in many leading academic institutions and we need to continue the struggle to get there.“

David Rothkopf.
Click to expand...

This is a good piece. Lessons for all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top