🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@ned

Israel was the name of a kingdom, and this mythical kindgom was founded by a specific Jewish person (saul/samuel), and was intrinsicly a jewish first kingdom.

That is quite different from saying some other kingdom existed with a different ruler, with a different name, at a different time and in a different place, that was a mix of arabic and jewish population.

The first invasion of Rome in regard to Judae was the sacking of jeurselem in 63 BC and the conquering of the surrounding area. Before Judae became the province of judae of rome it was actually called both palestine and judae by the people int he region since it was a mix of both and there was **not** a clear jewish rule there at the time.

This period is called by historians "hellenistic palestine", however the jews, called the same redion Judae and thus jewish scholars refer to it by that name. It was **not** a jewish kingdom , it was a kingdom of mixed heritage.

@ned The word jew doesnt even show up in the quote you just made.. I said nothing about what race was in the area.

So feel free to try again. But you cant just quote something and make it sound like its saying something it isnt and think that will work with me.

@realcaseyrollins

"Hamas was born as a means of resistance"

Though in context she said (and i am paraphrasing)... that hamas was formed 20 years after israel started exterminating her people.. it was born as a direct result of unjust mass murder commited ont he palistinians...

She is right... look i dont justify the terrorism... but if someone is terroristic to you for 20 years straight, and you have no means to do anything about it other than to just watch your people get slaughtered... yea your going to rise up as a means of resistance. And while i still do not justify it, id o understand meeting terror with equal terror.. after 20 years fighting back int he same way you have been treated isnt right (two wrongs dont make a right) but it is **expected**. There is a big difference between whats right,a nd what is the natural consequence of an injustice.

If i try to kill someone their going to try to kill me. Doesnt make it right, but it does make it expected.

@realcaseyrollins

She answered that for us. let me find the quote so I can judge it.. one sense.

@d9dba0e072bdb353dfb0020de159126af47e69e133ea91bbd48e8bede37320e2

right.. its not about who had it first, nor even about the 3k years... its about people invading a land who havent lived there in any of their recorded history, or even written history.. and invading people who have lived on that land for generations going back before recorded history.

The land being in dispute changes nothing for me. The people who hav ea right to the land are the people born there.. .. beyond the last generation or two it doesnt matter all that much.

@realcaseyrollins

@realcaseyrollins

I agree they are very different things.

What I see is a member of the community who has been abused cheering the fact that her people have finally been able to blow the walls of their prison and escape.. that was a huge freedom moment for them as a tortured and abused people... I think her reaction, especially with her going out of her way not to support hamas but only supporting the rioting people themselves and their escape throught he wall.. i think that shows remarkable restraint for a person whose community and family have been the victim for so long

I saw the same for the isralis by the way... many of them make excuses for the genocide and war crime of their own government. I often say how their support of terrorism is because of the same effect, they have had so many people die due to this war they just arent thinking straight, so as long as they dont actively support the terrorism and instead turn a blind eye, while it isnt right, as a victim as well I can understand how that mentality occurs at the hands of brutality.

@realcaseyrollins I mean I gave you some links/citations of well known historians and the papers they have written explaining this fact.

In fact its worse than that.. not only is there no historical evidence. What little non-historical evidence we have can be directly debunked due to known inaccuracies in the text about the time period.

@realcaseyrollins

> I cannot speak to what I don’t know about. I’m not going to “downplay”, or condemn, #Israel using, for example, human shields, when I don’t know for sure that they have done that before.

This is kinda my point though... you seem to "know" all this (very valid) things about what the hamas did.. yet you selectively known nothing about the attorcities that israel has done... Both of these are quite visible and easy knowledge to have.

So my point is, having willful ignorance of one side and not the other still holds you accountable for your bias. You are in completer control of what you know, so you are entierly responsible for learning about one side in a debate and not the other... ignorance, when it is known and not resolves, is not an excuse IMO

Nothing person of course,, thats just the hard truth.

@realcaseyrollins

> Imagine if I had said, the hour the planes hit the twin towers on 9/11, “well, we provoked them, y’know” and said nothing about the attack, or American casualties and victims, or how bad the attack was. One could very reasonably infer that I’d be supporting the act of terror due to my downplaying of the situation and deflection of blame.

That isnt a remotely equal analogy.. it would be more like saying. Lets look at the original quote we are turnigninto an analogy again:

> No you dont understand. They flew into occupied territory on hang gliders

your quote does not at all line up with that one. It would be more like if the following was said about 911:

"No you don't understand they used planes in forign USA territory"

While that clearly doesnt paint the full picture of 911 no one would read that and go "thats a lie of omission"... no one would think it is acting like they didnt fly those planes into towers... its just, people know they were flown into towers, it wasnt needed to say that, its assumed, the narrative is known.

@realcaseyrollins By the way her videos is exactly correct... There is no histoical record of any country named israel before the 40's... hamas and terrorism largely arose as a direct result of Israel's invading prior to that there was plenty of confllict and war, but the vast majority of the modern day radicalization was the result of israel and its actions over 80 years.

@ned Please quote the part of what I said that you feel says that?

@d9dba0e072bdb353dfb0020de159126af47e69e133ea91bbd48e8bede37320e2

Huh, I said the exact opposite of what your saying I said... I was saying it makes no sense to go back 3k years...

@realcaseyrollins

@ech

> Ok, but "if she supported Hamas" ... she almost kinda sorta did? And you didn't quote everything.

Agreed, a few more posts have come up since I posted that I didnt know about... After looking them up in context none of them change my opinion. She was supporting the palestinians and the freedom fighters, but she didnt at any point support the war crimes or the hamas (remember not everything that took place was the hamas, this all started with a civilian riot).

> The snarky "I can’t believe the Zionist apartheid regime is being brought down by guerrilla fighters in fake Gucci shirts" feels like grave dancing.

That also wasnt the whole quote and the rest of it is quite important.

The full quote is this:

> “I can’t believe the Zionist apartheid regime is being brought down by guerrilla fighters in fake Gucci shirts — the biopics of these moments better reflect that.”

To me this came across more as saying "The big bad rich bully who has been bombing and killing off my people for 80 years are going to be taken down by a punch of people with no resources, just a bunch of crazy people with sticks... the documentaries better show that"...

To me this is her mocking the very thing her people has been tortured with her whole life. They have murdered and killed her people with a vastly overpowered asymetry (as the result of foreign intervention) and she finds it poetic justice that a bunch of random people with little to no resources are able to topple that.

There is also a point she made that is interesting... 100% of isralis must join the military. While not all are currently active military that means 100% of citizens (not people) were actively military at one point. In their eyes that makes them valid targets... not saying i agree. and i still wont justify these actions... but there is a nugget of logic there. the overwhelming majority of isralis are people who choose to migrate to a land that belond to someone else, choose to pick up a gun, and choose to take the land away from those people.. Even if now they are civilians and out of service, that makes them a valid target in their minds... again.. I dont agree , but I see their logic.

Palestinians on the other hand arent there by choice, they were already there for a very very long time, and when israel invaded by all coming from around th world and gathering, the palestinians, who werent coming from anywhere but already there couldnt leave. So there is a logic there where **most** (not all( israeli citizens are guilty for supporting genocide by their very presence there. Palestnians not so much.

Anyway im ranting.. none of that JUSTIFIES it. I still see what hamas did as war crimes... but all I can say is when you take a population shove them into an open-air prison for 80 years and continually turn off their water and electricity and commit genocide... the natural consequence of that is the people will become increasing desperate and racicalized.. it odesnt maike it right, but it does make it understandable.

@realcaseyrollins

> I’m pretty sure that I’ve condemned what #Israel has done before, as I have never been a fan of their government. I’m not familiar with how they’ve treated the people of #Palestine in general, but I do know that they’re heavy-handed and decreasing democracy within the country, are authoritarian and to my knowledge oppress #LGBT people to some extent as well.

This sounds like far more of a "downplay" than the post you said.. when the Israelis are using small children as human shields during attacks, and this and countless war crimes were official filed with the internation court, which they have refused to show for... then yea thats as much of a downplay as the description you just gave..

I get that its because, as you said, you havent read up on it.. but willful ignorance is as much of a bias as anything else. And Mia may just be as willfully ignorant as you as the other side.

Both of you, as people with bias, seem to be demonstrating that bias against the sides in equal yet opposite ways.

> While I haven’t condemned much of what they’ve done following #Hamas’ attack against them, as I can understand why they’d do it

Sure but then one can argue why were you condeming them right up until the hamas attack? Like they were commiting war crimes right uo until the hamas cranked it up to 11, and no one was saying anything... While it doesnt excuse the hamas the fact is when you commit war crimes and genocide on a people for 80 years you should expect them to become increasingly radicalized.

The hamas in all their brutality are the result of Israel in all its brutality, and vice versa, israel's brutality is the result of the hamas.. The only difference is that the palestinians lived there for 3000 years ... so ther eis that.

And note you cant say "it leaves out the details of the massacre"... cause while this is true, it also wasnt her post, AND since i dont know what the post is in reply to I cant say if that omission was out of bias or out of irrelavance to whatever point might have been made there.

The post reads "No you dont understand... The flew into occupied territory on hang gliders"... What about that statement is inaccurate... Every word of that is entierly factually true, none of that actually supports Hamas, it is simply a statement of fact, that is, exactly what they did. What part of that statement do you even disagree with?

@realcaseyrollins I've never heard you say a single word to condemn anything Israel has done, despite them being an active part in genocide and war crimes every day for the last 80 years.

Should that server as a red flag to me? By your logic it should (it doesnt other than to indicate bias, your still cool thouhg :) )

@realcaseyrollins

Im getting my info largely from israeli news and videos as my israeli friends are sending it to me... Thats what they described and showed me. What part do you disagree with?

@realcaseyrollins

> …she was literally cheering on #Hamas and asking them to release higher quality footage of their attacks on civilians.

No this was during the riot from palestinians, not the hamas attacks itself.

Remember first the citizens rose up and rioted. During the riot hamas placed bombs along the wall. The bombs went off and hamas and palestianians flooded into israel

The act of bombing the walls to their prison and escaping is perfectly ok to cheer on.. It would only be if sheered on the attacks of the hamas (which as far as I can tell she did not) that it wold be an issue.