Pro-Palestinian does not equal anti-Semitism; your thoughts?

[DJChameleon]

I condemn Insane Clown Posse's actions but I understand their resistance to culture.

The last Faygo I tried, I hated. It was not a good flavor. It was Cotton Candy.

[Lexi of the Dawn]

I condemn Insane Clown Posse's actions but I understand their resistance to culture.

The last Faygo I tried, I hated. It was not a good flavor. It was Cotton Candy.

Each to their own of course. I'll be over here sipping on cotton candy Faygo from the monogrammed mug while blasting The Great Milenko.

[Lucem Ferre]

I condemn Insane Clown Posse's actions but I understand their resistance to culture.

The last Faygo I tried, I hated. It was not a good flavor. It was Cotton Candy.

Cotton Candy is overrated. I like Peach and Fireworks.

[jimmy jazz]

You are arguing semantics and being disingenuous as usual.

Disingenuous you say?

You also know that I didn't call you a Zionist.

he hinted yet again that I'm a Zionist.

[Trollheart]

I think the important question nobody is asking here is: do you condemn ham, as a vegetarian? Are you for pig power? Do you support the sausage slaughter and would you ban bacon? Come on: don't be a swine - go the whole hog.

[Lucem Ferre]

I think the important question nobody is asking here is: do you condemn ham, as a vegetarian? Are you for pig power? Do you support the sausage slaughter and would you ban bacon? Come on: don't be a swine - go the whole hog.

It's a very unhealthy animal to eat. The Muslims were on to something.

[Trollheart]

Certainly unhealthy for the pig!

[DJChameleon]

Disingenuous you say?

If protesters say they condemn their actions then they do whether you want to believe it or not. You are basically repeating Zionist talking points by making a big deal about condemning or not while grouping the two beliefs together. You can be pro Palestinian and condemn Hamas at the same time. Its not that wild of an idea.

I specifically said talking points. Why are you acting like you can't read?

[Lexi of the Dawn]

Cotton Candy is overrated. I like Peach and Fireworks.

Firework is a good one, yeah. I was stoked cause recently our local grocery store started stocking green apple which is one of my favorites.

Also, love the new avatar @DJChameleon !

[DJChameleon]

Firework is a good one, yeah. I was stoked cause recently our local grocery store started stocking green apple which is one of my favorites.

Also, love the new avatar @DJChameleon !

Thanks, I have one for Linkin Park and Evanescence too in the same style.

[Jwb]

No it isn't. The closest historical parallel I can think of is The Troubles in NI. The IRA aren't Arabs but I would expect the same thing from Irish Republicans, you can object and resist NI's status without condoning the IRA. My granddad was a Republican from Belfast and even he drew the line at murdering civilians, which is what the IRA did.

If you say you don't condemn the resistance when we are talking specifically about Hamas then you yourself are conflating being pro-Palestine with Hamas. You can't keep saying they're different things and then keep bringing resistance into it when we mention Hamas.

I guess one of the weird things about this approach is that while you can technically just say "I condemn both Israel and Hamas for their actions," the reality is what does condemning Israel actually translate to in terms of action? At most, it translates into not arming them anymore. Where as Hamas is both the government of Gaza and the only form of military force or means for self defense that they have, and yet the default assumption is they should be wiped out entirely. 

When people refer to Hamas and Hezbollah as 'resistance' they're referring specifically to violent resistance.  So it's not the conflation you are mistaking it for.  College protesters in the US isn't a form of resistance in this way.  It's referring to violently resisting occupation.  So there's a sense that actually claiming to condemn the occupation while simultaneously condemning any violent resistance to said occupation is just... well, confused.

Like ori pointed out, the  schtick of demanding people condemn Hamas as an unprovoked debate tactic is something we've seen countless times since Oct 7th. So I'm gonna be honest, you're always just going to piss off/raise the suspicions of anyone who is pro Palestine by trying to nail people on that line of questioning. I think that has as much to do with why people are so resistant to say the magic words.  But that's just me. Either way, you're free to do so,  but the same way you're cautioning pro Palestine protesters about how they're percieved, I'm trying to offer you similar insight  into how your statements would be percieved by people on the other side of the issue.

Personally, I think Hamas is overall a plague on Gaza that causes far more harm to their own population than they do good by providing a fighting force.  Realistically, I think that if the failure of a two state peace deal in the 90s leads to a blackpilled attitude towards negotiating and peaceful protest, then what is there to really be said about the fruits of the violent resistance thus far? If the leaders of the resistance were to actually try to give a sober accounting of how their strategy has fared better, I really doubt they could. Unfortunately, that's not the way it works.  Violence begets more violence.  Very unlikely that the next generation of Gazans will take a different attitude, but I guess you should never say never. 

[Jwb]

Ngl, Nick Fuentes is just right in this case. I don't think I've seen anyone put it more bluntly:

https://x.com/Natsecjeff/status/1840181276789104775

[Lucem Ferre]

I don't think the failure of the Oslo accords black pilled Palestinians.

I think it was Israel intentionally shooting at innocent civilians during the great march of return that did it.

No form of resistance has worked.

[Jwb]

Well I would disagree on Oslo. I'm not saying after that point there was never any more attempts at peaceful protest, but there has never been anything that provided as much hope and anticipation for the possibility of a Palestinian state since Oslo. Shooting at The Great March of Return was an atrocity but that protest can't be compared to Oslo in terms of creating an expectation that there was a plausible path to a negotiated settlement.  The break down of Oslo lead more or less directly to the 2nd antifada, which was markedly more violent and less centered around protest and boycott that the first antifada. In the aftermath, the PA was left discredited and their more extreme counter part in Hamas gained prominence. So I would say the trend toward a more radical approach  in the aftermath of the failed negotiations was fairly noticable in that generation.

I don't disagree that neither strategy has worked.  But it's not like they yield no results.  They do yield results, but it comes mostly in the form of Israeli bombs.  Are you actually neutral on which strategy has lead to worse outcomes?

[Lucem Ferre]

Well I would disagree on Oslo. I'm not saying after that point there was never any more attempts at peaceful protest, but there has never been anything that provided as much hope and anticipation for the possibility of a Palestinian state since Oslo. Shooting at The Great March of Return was an atrocity but that protest can't be compared to Oslo in terms of creating an expectation that there was a plausible path to a negotiated settlement.  The break down of Oslo lead more or less directly to the 2nd antifada, which was markedly more violent and less centered around protest and boycott that the first antifada. In the aftermath, the PA was left discredited and their more extreme counter part in Hamas gained prominence. So I would say the trend toward a more radical approach  in the aftermath of the failed negotiations was fairly noticable in that generation.

I don't disagree that neither strategy has worked.  But it's not like they yield no results.  They do yield results, but it comes mostly in the form of Israeli bombs.  Are you actually neutral on which strategy has lead to worse outcomes?

I don't think so. I think if they were black pilled they wouldn't have tried peaceful protests to begin with and the only reason they weren't as hopeful as the Oslo accords was because Israel responded by shooting at them.

Palestine didn't turn towards Hamas. Hamas won a slim majority in the elections and after refusing to share the government with Fatah they broke a peace deal and started massacring members of Fatah.

Israel supported Hamas over Fatah more than Palestine did.

I think the peaceful negotiations of the PLO would have been more productive if they didn't fall through. But you can't look at each method in a vacuum. And I wouldn't blame Israel's mass murder campaign on Hamas's kidnappings like that. They were just looking for a reason to speed up the process of annihilating Gaza.

All of this just makes me wonder what exactly do you think they should do?