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

@rml Man firefox tab management needs a LOT of attention... Its the only thing stopping me from adopting, the only thing.

@ech

Yea sadly america is a disgrace when it comes to immigration... but thats another matter.

@Yetimon

@CdnCurmudgeon

I care more about his respect for other peoples views than his home.. and likewise respect his personal views so long as he behavers correctly and makes the rightdecisions (not saying they do)

@Yetimon

I mean if your going to give them land anywhere, and take it from someone else, then it should be the germans.

@ech

@admin @ech

> The thing is, it's been 75 years. Israel is now a State. They are there. This is a fact which will not change, if the Israeli government has anything to say about it. The fact is, Israel exists.

This is true, it exists, however illegitimate that existence may be. It should not, however, have the right to continue to exist. Simply because its existance is at the expense and theft from those that have been on that land for a very long time.

The proper result is for israel to apologize, dissolve itself, and put themselves at the mercy of Palestine, or they give 100% of the land back to.. invest whatever resources the country has to enable israelis to leave the country if they wish... liquidate the whole thing, people can take a chunk of the nations wealth and use it to relocate if they can (thankfully they are at most 80 years removed from a proper home).. those that cant or wont relocate will be handled as immigrants by palestine.

YEs I know it will be horrible and displace a lot of people.. but no more so than the Palestinians have already been displaced, and at least that will give them back their home and start righting wrongs.

> Israel's conflict with their neighbors in Palestine goes back much further than the British Occupancy and the League of Nations' decision to create a Jewish State.. and the creation of a Jewish State had less to do with "shoving white people" into the region and more to do with setting up a place for Jews to live which was historically correct, and where Jews could be in control of their own destiny.

Thats the narrative sure, and there is some truth to it.. They wanted to steal land from a group of people because they felt their ancestry from 3000 years ago which they might have 1/400th the genes for still somehow gave them some "right to it"... sorry but thats all nonsense to me. Many many people have left their ancestral homeland, it doesnt give you a right to make a 3000 year old claim against people who have been living there for a long long time.

> Now, the newly minted Israeli government decided that it needed to be strong and militant in order to defend its borders. This militantism rekindled older negative feelings between the Palestinians and other Arabs and the Israelis. As their population grew (due to Right to Return), they ended up needing more land for their people, so the invasions started, etc...

Thats where we are at now, and I do agree... but the invasion started in 1919... the moment a **forteign** power decided toi abuse the land and resources of people living there it was an invasion. a 3000 year old excuse doesnt change that for me.

> Now, the newly minted Israeli government decided that it needed to be strong and militant in order to defend its borders. This militantism rekindled older negative feelings between the Palestinians and other Arabs and the Israelis. As their population grew (due to Right to Return), they ended up needing more land for their people, so the invasions started, etc...

On this, and to some extent in general I agree... THe Isralis are wrong historically.. but as you say its a bit too late... but when the wrong that is israel is only 100 years old.. I'd argue that we cant just ignore the fact that Israel is the invading and occupying force. Which means everything they do is far worse ethically than if they had just always been there and rose up in a civil war or something.

@musictraveler

Speak for yourself, here is the quote of me saying the hamas are terrorists, it just so happens to be the post you are replying to...

> There is absolutely no doubt Hamas, like Israel, is a terrorist group.

Welcome to block now, your a moron and talking to you will only waste my time.

@ech

> h I see! In your earlier post you said “Once the invasion was announced (that is, the international community of jews, along with the UN,”, so pretty clearly 1947

Well im glad we clarified now that this is in refernce to 1917, the first announcement of invasion. Yes I could have been more clear, so not your fault. But now we are on the same page, so great.

> So I thought that’s what you meant by the numbers you gave.

Understandable miscommunication. Glad we resolved that.

> Aside: You know, I’m having a hard time following you. You obfuscate a lot – e.g. calling something “illegal immigration” when you really mean “The British shouldn’t have encouraged Jewish immigration or even been there at all”. I mean, I see your point, and I even agree with you (of course I agree with you) that the British shouldn’t have colonized 99% of the world generally and made this problem a lot worse – in more ways than just that! – specifically. But like it took an awful long time for me to nail down what it was you were talking about! I took you at your word and was thinking you’re saying the Ottomans weren’t enforcing their immigration laws or something.😂 It’s exhausting! in a conversation like this it sure would be easier to follow if we were speaking a bit more precisely.

Words are important, you tried to claim they were just immigrants at the get go... thats very confusing considering they were an invading force and not "just immigrants".. they came there to kill the other side and take their land.

Luckily I am happy to explain if any words confuse you, while I will continue to use, perhaps unusual, but more factually accurate terms you can always just ask if they confuse you. There is a lot of context so I do understand the need to elaborate on any of it, so no worries.

> OK so you really are all in on this “refugee immigration” == “invasion” rhetoric. Like, deliberately. Well, that is disappointing.

I mean they literally showed up with weapons and killed and shot the other side to take the land... it is a **Very** accurate description. In fact to become an Israel citizen you are **required** to pick up a weapon and shoot the other side by israel law. Not just immigrants but those born there.. this has been established since the early days... Like it is **literally** an invasion, those people had weapons and killed others as part of the condition of their immigration.

Calling them simple refugee immigrants is highly unfair considering.

> so you understand how awful that would have been at that point, in 1947, right? I mean, even if you think the initial immigration was a terrible thing, a huge chunk of those people were born in Palestine, even. It’s like the Soviet relocations – I guess you’re thinking of Jewish immigration to Palestine as if it was like that – this was absolutely horrible that they did that, but what are you going to do about the situation in Crimea and other places like that 100 years later?

Well maybe thats why you shouldnt invade another country and take their land by force that you havent had any right to in over 2000+ years... You sure as fuck dont tell them that they now annexed the land for themselves and you kick off the far more densly populated natives as if you somehow have a right.

Like even if they decided to stay, the only ethical way to stay is as a **palestinian** under their laws and following their rules.. Dont like it, well maybe you shouldnt have picked taht country to invade knowing you or your kids might have to be held accountable for your immoral acts.

@musictraveler

I have called hamas terrorists quite a few times....

Try rubbing those two brain cells of yours together and make an argument that might actually disagree with me, I'll wait

@musictraveler

I know youre struggling with a low intelligence here, so I can understand how you might really struggle to understand what I said... dont worry about it, everyone else knows what my comment was in reference to at least.

@admin

thank you

@ech

@musictraveler ditto

@ech

> 160k vs. 700k and “Jews made up something like 10%”: Wasn’t the Jewish population like 500k by 1940? Your 160k to 700k sounds more like 1930 numbers? I’m not sure where you got those from, are you talking about a specific region that is much smaller than ex-Mandatory Palestine?

Ok so you have to keep in mind, 1947 is only when the invasion was announced with official borders for the annex. The start of the invasion was the british takeover in 1920, which had started in 1917 witht he Balfour decleration where Britain proclaimed its intention to take over the region and roce the invasion of jewish people upon the population currently living there. That was the start of the invasion in one sense or another as the british used its power to **force** the palestinians to accept jewish-only immigrants on to their land while explicitly **denying** arab imigrants in an attempt to **intentionally** tip the balance in that region.

So over the course of time from 1920 when the occupation of the british began, until 1947 when the Jews carried on the invasion on their own (and officially announced borders they intended to annex) was largely when the influx began.

So here are the official numbers for those dates (Source cited at the end):

1922 before the start of the occupation/invasion by brits: 84K Jews, 589K Muslim thats over 7x more Muslim than jews.

1947 at the end of British occupation after intentionally trying to inflate the area with more jews: 630K jews, and 1.1 million Muslims. Still approximately twice the number of Muslims to jews.

> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Statistics,_1945 – is this a total fabrication by the British??)

Yes, and no. The numbers there line up with what I said above... But its important within context. The British took over and occupied the land giving the native people no say in their own democracy, and in fact were intentionally diminished. Over the course of their rain they declared **publicly** their intent was to force millions of immigrants, jews, on the Palestinians against their objections. The numbers only rose to that level due to the British invasion and intentional injection of **illegal** immigrants into Palestine. So yes the ratio when from 7:1 to 2:1 in favor of palestinians due to an occupying force intentionally manipulating the population.

> When the partition was made, Jews were about 600k, 1/3 of the population. If I understand you correctly, you seem to be saying that number went from 160k to 600k in 1947. From everything I can find, this is not true? Instead, 160k->600k was gradual over a generation. (Do you have better sources than I do?

I cited sources for this. Population of jews went from 84K to 630K over the course of 20 years. This was intentionally done by Britain to manipulate the population in favor of Jews as they announced before their takeover that they would do exactly that.

> …uh, ok… I’m not trying to justify British colonialism here, not sure what your point is.

My point is that since the british was an invalid occupying force, and they acted contrary to the wishes of the citizens, those citizens are not valid since they were not recognized by the people who already were living on that land and were the rightful democratic body to make such a decision.

The brits cant just come in, force a bunch of white people on everyone and then leave and go "nope they have a right to be there"... like hell they do, Britain never had the right in the first place.

> fully agree. Something had to happen, though: there were 1/2 million Jews there and tons of violence. Do you think you could have done better?

I mean the brits are the ones who put those people there and started the violence... So yea something had to happen, they had to get those people out of the land they had no right to be on. If britain wanted to give refugees a home they should have given them part of britain, not someone elses home.

Citation:

Pergola, Sergio della (2001). "Demography in Israel/Palestine: Trends, Prospects, Policy Implications" (PDF). Semantic Scholar. S2CID 45782452. Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 August 2018.

@realcaseyrollins

The water and electricity has been off for much of gaza for more than 2 years (it was off the whole time i was there) due to Israel military intervention...

The only thing that changed is they decided to cut it off for MORE of the country than before... people have already been starving and dieing of disease en masse (why do you think so many international agencies are condemning them for apartheid?)

Whenyou understand the level of poverty and disease inflicted on them for many many years it might make sense why they are radicalizing. As I've said it is never moral, but when your people have been treated as they have for as long as they have it is completely expected. They are desperate, desperate people whoa re being exterminated will do crazy radical shit.

@Miriamm @ech @kjetil_kilhavn

@ech And to further drive the point home... attached is the border of palestine in 1919 as recognized internationally **before** the invalid british take over. AS you can clearly see before the British not only was it 100% Palestine with no large swaths of Jewish land at all (the jews were there but largely intermixed)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Palestine_claimed_by_WZO_1919.png

So basically the brits invaded, took over, told jews they could come there, displaced the muslims by about 10%, and then the brits left and said the Jews now owned more than 50% of the land.

Sorry but thats an invasion by any measure.

@realcaseyrollins

So you dont understand how highly dense urban ghettos without water or electricity for many months on end leads to tons of deaths... I mean you wont hear about it because its indirect, they dont have running water so they shit in the stream, the same stream that is now their only source of unclean water so they drink from it or wash with it.

You dont understand how it would be damn near impossible for people not to die from that? It just is indirect enough youll have a hard time quantifying it.

@Miriamm @ech @kjetil_kilhavn