Israel has never murdered citizens of their neighbors. Palestinians, on the other hand, have massacred any people they ever had the chance to. From Lebanese to Kuwaiti.
This is just a blatant lie. Israel has murdered more children than any other country in a modern war. They've attacked most of their neighbors in the past 2 years. I'm not even sure how you could make this claim and expect anyone to believe it.
That was 5 minutes research. Every conflict in this list has more children killed than the total deathtoll in the Israel-Palestina conflict, even if you believe hamas' absurd figures.
Or to pull out a really dramatic figure showing just how prejudiced people are against Israel/Jews: Palestinians killed more children in the Syrian civil war than the entire deathtoll in the Israel-Palestina conflict going back to 1880.
The Palestinian-instigated Syrian civil war killed more people than ALL deaths not due to old age in Israel-Palestina, including everything from traffic accidents to those 5 idiot soldiers who managed to fire a rocket aimed at themselves on an empty training ground 3 years ago. Palestinians killed more people in Lebanon in the civil war than realistic figures of the Israel-Palestina conflict.
Which shows the usual muslim prejudices. A million victims, like in Sudan, the better part of a million victims, like in Syria, millions deported in Armenia just 2 years ago, all just doesn't matter, because whoever you blame in that conflict, they're muslim. And muslims don't care about brutally murdered victims. They only care about blaming Jews.
Israel faces a "threat" from the people it's been ethnically cleansing for 80 years. Also, this is in the West Bank, so has nothing to do with Hamas (not that it would be ok to do this in Gaza). That the U.S. and EU also violate human rights at scale, doesn't make it ok for Israel to do the same. Only they go one step further and actually murder people based on the information they've spied.
I think your confusion results from the fact that "Palestinians" was the name used to call the Jews basically for nearly two thousand years, until the early 20th century. And, yes, they have been ethnically cleansed by arabs basically since the arab invasion in the 7th century.
The arabs themselves never wanted to be called Palestinians - they used the name "Syrian Arabs". Yassir Arafat, former leader of the PLO, was one of the most prominent opponents of the word "Palestinians" with regard to the arab population - he only changed his mind as Jordan and Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel, because he wanted to distance himself from these "traitors".
One of the problems he (and also most arabs) had with the word "Palestina" - it has exactly ZERO relationship to arabs and to Arabic languages. It's a greek word with actually Hebrew roots. It means "land of the Philistines" - and the Philistines, according to many historians, are a mixed group of people, mostly from western Mediterranean (modern-day Italy, France, Spain, northern Africa), also called "the sea people", or, in other words - pirates. The Romans introduced this name to the region to wipe out the original names Judea and Samaria (which IS actually a sign of a genocide).
You definitely need to learn to read and to understand words. Otherwise you make an impression of a degenerated parrot with a really limited vocabulary.
And now to your points - the word "Aschkenaz" IS actually of middle-eastern origin. It describes people who lived in the area of modern day eastern Turkey, north-eastern Syria, and north-western Iran - similar to the area where Kurdish people live today. The meaning of the word changed over time, and yes - nowadays it does have some relationship with Europe - it describes Jewish people who were driven out of Judea and Samaria by Romans and later settled in the middle and eastern Europe. So - yes - they are by definition Palestinian refugees with a right to return to their native lands.
But, of course, they are only one group of the Jewish people and not even the only one who lived in Europe. There are also displaced Jews and their descendants in Irak, Iran, northern Africa, India, even in China and Japan. But in the end, every one of them, including the "European" Aschkenazim still have substantially better claims to the land of Israel than the Arabs who are by definition just invaders in that region.
Believing israel has a right to exist is the definition of Zionism. This woman is not anti-Semitic, she speaks up, correctly, against Israel's many crimes.
If that's your definition, then effectively the entire planet is zionist, including almost all Arab states, and even the PLO.
Are you asserting that Egypt is zionist? The Palatinian Liberation Organization? All of there states have said that Israel has a right to exist. Passed resolutions.
If so, then what value has the word?
Zionism has changed over time. Israel exists, is going no where, and only weirdos think Israel should vanish.
However many will espouse an end to zionism today, which typically and effectively means no more expansion into modern Palastine, and a 2 state solution.
That is the definition of Zionism. The majority of the world's population is not Zionist and does not support the state of Israel. The governments are a different story.
Modern Israel has existed for more than a century now. Longer than Palestine as a place, after the Ottomon empire fell.
Both peoples have existed in the Middle East, and in that area for thousands of years.
I find few people that think Israel shouldn't exist. Do you have any sort of surveys, indicating that most people on the planet think Israel should bot exist?
There are currently Israeli lawmakers calling for crippling sanctions against Israel, as well as Israeli citizens protesting in the streets of Tel Aviv. At this point it's not entirely clear if the Israelis want Israel to exist under Netanyahu's leadership.
A lot of VCs are Zionists and personally dedicated to making war and violently attacking Muslims. If you doubt, go read the twitter feeds from Sequoia MDs like Shaun Maguire. They're very open about their goals and very pro-Palantir, which has also been very open with their Islamophobia and explicit desire to ethnically cleanse Palestine.
I'm not in a filter bubble but I have seen many, completely opposing communities support this murder. On my town's FB tons of "regular" people are very enthusiastic about it. Same with both the left and the right on every platform I'm on. I would say there's a very small minority opposed to this and I haven't run across any of them in the real world.
Sure you are. Literally everybody is. That you believe you aren't is (I know this is a slippery bit of rhetoric, but give it a moment's thought) itself a strong indicator.
Bear in mind what you're saying here is that you haven't met a person who opposes the cold-blooded murder of a health insurance executive. That seems incredibly unlikely.
If you have some sort of proof that people are upset by this action you should post it. Using ad hominem against me isn't accomplishing anything. You can't just claim people's observations are invalid because we're all in a "filter bubble".
I haven’t met anyone my age who is disturbed by it. To me, anecdata seems to indicate that people who share my values, while not supporting murder, aren’t surprised about or aren’t opposed to instilling fear into the ruling class. Especially members of that class that participate in the killing of countless people through predatory business practices. Quel surprise
The only place I’ve heard people say they care about this is on threads like these where people need to be contradictory and pretend anyone cares about a C.E.O. getting offed.
I was in midtown the day of and days after, not a single mourner in sight. Not one person lamenting the loss. No one cares. And plenty are happy about it.
While anti-BDS laws are a violation of US citizens rights, they don't cover this case. It's not "illegal" for Google to not do business with Israel. These are state level laws targeting US business that say they can't get state contracts if they oppose Israel.
