Since October 7th, there has been a lot of effort across media - major, minor, and social - to put the attacks committed by Hamas against Israeli civilians in context. To explain why so many Palestinian men would eagerly participate in acts of savagery, and why so many Palestinians would
With all due respect, John, this really doesn't seem very fair or balanced. You're acting as if the murder of thousands of civilians is more justifiable when the slaughter is conducted by a state. Could you expand upon this point please?
You know that I have a ton of respect for your work, but when you're calling for Hamas to surrender, you're calling for an oppressed group to submit to their oppression. You're tacitly making the argument that Might Makes Right.
My perspective is that two wrongs don't make a right. To put all the blame on Hamas is to ignore historical context, including the recent past. Do you know about the Great March of Return? How about the Dahiya Doctrine?
“Those now championing the Israeli onslaught will reply that the critical difference between Palestinian “terror” and Israeli “self-defence” is, whereas the horrific massacre of Israeli civilians by Hamas a week ago was targeted and deliberate, Israel’s killing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza is incidental and unintended. “Civilians … are very deliberately the target of Hamas operations,” US Secretary of State Antony Blinken argued. “They are not the target of Israeli operations.”
However, to propagate the latter claim is to exploit an audience bereft of historical memory.
Lest it be forgotten, five years ago, the people of Gaza launched an unarmed, popular, and grassroots protest movement near the Gaza security fence. Dubbed the Great March of Return, these mass Palestinian demonstrations aimed inter alia at lifting the illegal and inhuman Israeli blockade, which after almost two decades of economic strangulation rendered the Gaza Strip—in the words of a few reputable observers—a “sinking ship” (International Committee of the Red Cross), “unlivable” (UN Country Team), a “ghetto” (Ha’aretz Editorial Board), and a “toxic slum”, in which Palestinians “are caged … from birth to death” (UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Ziad Rifai).
And how did Israel greet Gaza’s non-violent, ghettoized, demonstrators? With a “murderous assault” (Amnesty International), involving “individual snipers safely ensconced hundreds of feet, even farther, away, targeting individual protestors and executing them one at a time.” (Human Rights Watch Near East Director Sarah Leah Whitson). An exhaustive investigation by a Commission of the UN Human Rights Council subsequently determined that, in brutally suppressing the demonstrations, Israeli snipers “deliberately targeted” Palestinian health workers, journalists, disabled people, and children for death.”
And to answer your question as to where to start the story, I would suggest that the roots of the present conflict go back to the Balfour Declaration. It is a result of British imperialists basically giving land that wasn't theirs to an ultra-rich Jewish banking dynasty. Yeah, yeah, I know you're not supposed to put it in so few words, but the Balfour Declaration literally begins with the words DEAR LORD ROTHSCHILD.
We need to not being afraid of telling it how it is. This is WWIII, John. It's everyone against Israel. Are you going to instinctively side with a genocidal regime actively involved in a campaign of terror against a civilian population which obviously has the goal of ethnic cleansing?
Let me say again that I greatly respect your work, and I was considering reaching out to you to write something about your position. Clearly, we see things quite differently.
If you would like to write something directly addressing our audience, I would be happy to publish it. Though far from ideologically homogenous, we are very much for the cause of Palestinian liberation. I imagine that you support Palestinian freedom as well... but you don't seem to offer in the way of ideas about they might fight for their rights in a way that won't be completely ignored.
Perhaps we've been pro-Palestinian to the point of being imbalanced, and the fact is that we don't want to take sides in what is basically a race war. On the other hand, my instinctive sympathies are with the oppressed against the oppressor, and it's undeniable that Israel is an apartheid state, to put it mildly.
You also don't address the fact that Israel has supported Hamas in the past and there are major questions about the "intelligence failure" of October 7th. A lot of people are calling this a false flag, and it's worth looking into. Israel wanted an excuse to drive the Palestinians out, and now they've got one. I hope to see you address this in a future piece.
With all due respect, John, this really doesn't seem very fair or balanced. You're acting as if the murder of thousands of civilians is more justifiable when the slaughter is conducted by a state. Could you expand upon this point please?
You know that I have a ton of respect for your work, but when you're calling for Hamas to surrender, you're calling for an oppressed group to submit to their oppression. You're tacitly making the argument that Might Makes Right.
My perspective is that two wrongs don't make a right. To put all the blame on Hamas is to ignore historical context, including the recent past. Do you know about the Great March of Return? How about the Dahiya Doctrine?
I refer you to this article, which briefly explains both: https://nevermoremedia.substack.com/p/the-dahiya-doctrine-proves-that-israel
Quoting from Colter Louwerse:
“Those now championing the Israeli onslaught will reply that the critical difference between Palestinian “terror” and Israeli “self-defence” is, whereas the horrific massacre of Israeli civilians by Hamas a week ago was targeted and deliberate, Israel’s killing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza is incidental and unintended. “Civilians … are very deliberately the target of Hamas operations,” US Secretary of State Antony Blinken argued. “They are not the target of Israeli operations.”
However, to propagate the latter claim is to exploit an audience bereft of historical memory.
Lest it be forgotten, five years ago, the people of Gaza launched an unarmed, popular, and grassroots protest movement near the Gaza security fence. Dubbed the Great March of Return, these mass Palestinian demonstrations aimed inter alia at lifting the illegal and inhuman Israeli blockade, which after almost two decades of economic strangulation rendered the Gaza Strip—in the words of a few reputable observers—a “sinking ship” (International Committee of the Red Cross), “unlivable” (UN Country Team), a “ghetto” (Ha’aretz Editorial Board), and a “toxic slum”, in which Palestinians “are caged … from birth to death” (UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Ziad Rifai).
And how did Israel greet Gaza’s non-violent, ghettoized, demonstrators? With a “murderous assault” (Amnesty International), involving “individual snipers safely ensconced hundreds of feet, even farther, away, targeting individual protestors and executing them one at a time.” (Human Rights Watch Near East Director Sarah Leah Whitson). An exhaustive investigation by a Commission of the UN Human Rights Council subsequently determined that, in brutally suppressing the demonstrations, Israeli snipers “deliberately targeted” Palestinian health workers, journalists, disabled people, and children for death.”
And to answer your question as to where to start the story, I would suggest that the roots of the present conflict go back to the Balfour Declaration. It is a result of British imperialists basically giving land that wasn't theirs to an ultra-rich Jewish banking dynasty. Yeah, yeah, I know you're not supposed to put it in so few words, but the Balfour Declaration literally begins with the words DEAR LORD ROTHSCHILD.
We need to not being afraid of telling it how it is. This is WWIII, John. It's everyone against Israel. Are you going to instinctively side with a genocidal regime actively involved in a campaign of terror against a civilian population which obviously has the goal of ethnic cleansing?
Let me say again that I greatly respect your work, and I was considering reaching out to you to write something about your position. Clearly, we see things quite differently.
If you would like to write something directly addressing our audience, I would be happy to publish it. Though far from ideologically homogenous, we are very much for the cause of Palestinian liberation. I imagine that you support Palestinian freedom as well... but you don't seem to offer in the way of ideas about they might fight for their rights in a way that won't be completely ignored.
Perhaps we've been pro-Palestinian to the point of being imbalanced, and the fact is that we don't want to take sides in what is basically a race war. On the other hand, my instinctive sympathies are with the oppressed against the oppressor, and it's undeniable that Israel is an apartheid state, to put it mildly.
You also don't address the fact that Israel has supported Hamas in the past and there are major questions about the "intelligence failure" of October 7th. A lot of people are calling this a false flag, and it's worth looking into. Israel wanted an excuse to drive the Palestinians out, and now they've got one. I hope to see you address this in a future piece.