Egyptian authorities have refused the passage of foreign residents of Gaza through the Rafah crossing, except as part of a foreign aid delivery agreement, Al-Qahera News TV reported, citing informed sources.
With the exception of an amazing 3-day event that took place in my school (we had some history professors/researchers come in over 3 days and present us arguments from both sides, then moderate a debate…) I received no education about this, and even if I had it would have been about 20 years ago or more.
I suspect we have all seen a version of this map before. I can read the Wikipedia, and watch the documentaries, but where should I look to be able to come to a decision on my own regarding these maps? Meaning, is one of them more factual than the other?
All those maps seem to show the same things, in slightly different ways. Basically, “statistics massaging” done with maps.
The “Fact” one seems to have the most information, as in:
Since 1917, the British had control ver the “Mandate of Palestine”, which was neither Israel nor Palestine.
Both Jews and Arabs started buying land and settling there, hoping to become the majority population in case a referendum was held when the British retired.
Since 1941, the Jewish ideated a plan on how to win a possible referendum by getting One Million of their own in there, presenting it in 1944 as a solution for Holocause refugees, but then realizing that it wouldn’t be enough, that they’d still be missing people and they’d need “Arab refugees”, as in Jews fleeing persecution from Arab countries.
In 1947, after WWII, the UN proposed a plan to split the land, which the Arab countries rejected.
In 1948 the British planned to GTFO… and just the day before, Israel was formed and declared that the whole land would be theirs.
The moment the British left, all the Arab countries attacked Israel which they saw as illegitimate… and with the idea of genociding everyone.
However, Israel won that war, and let any Arabs choose whether to stay or GTFO. About 150,000 decided to accept Israeli citizenship, about 700,000 got pushed into Jordan/Palestine.
As predicted, a lot of Jews fled Arab countries fearing persecution, which propped up the numbers of Israeli citizens, and further increased the hatred in Arab countries.
In 1967, Israel got attacked again, and won again, letting it lay claim to the area previously known as Jordan/Palestine.
But people in that area, were mostly Arabs, which didn’t sit well with Israel, who started a colonization process, mainly to cut off the “Palestine enclave” from Jordan… and to intersperse some Jewish population inside, lest the area decoded to hold a referendum and the Arab side win.
People in the Gaza area were Arab/Palestinian, and it has open access to the sea, so instead Israel tried to contain those people by walling them off, and telling Egypt to take them… which Egypt doesn’t really want to (we’re in the middle of a worldwide migration crysis, nobody wants millions of immigrants).
In 1995, after a lot dirty tactics from bother sides, a Palestinian governance was established… but by then the ex-Jordan area was already decimated by Israeli colonists.
Misinformation:
The “disappearing Palestine” map, starts by claiming all the territory was Palestine, which is false, it was a “Mandatory Palestine” under British control. If you compare it with the first “Fact” map, you’ll notice it claims all the white area as Arab owned, which is false.
The UN plan seems to be correct on all the maps, little to manipulate there since it failed anyway.
The 1948/1949 maps match what Israel claimed after preemptively declaring itself as a state, getting attacked, and winning.
The 1967 maps also show how Israel got control over the whole area, and progressively has been eating away at any possible Arab/Palestinian claim.
The 1995 and “NOW” maps show why Israel conceded a Palestinian governance: mainly over territories where people identifying as Palestinians are no longer a majority.
Personally, I’d say the “Fact” one along the AlJazeera one, paint the most complete picture.
As more details emerge about the shocking Hamas attack on Saturday, we speak with Rabbi David Basior of Kadima Reconstructionist Community, a progressive Jewish group in Seattle focused on social justice. Basior’s former congregant Hayim Katsman was among those killed in Israel by Hamas militants who stormed Kibbutz Holit. The 32-year-old was a gardener, mechanic and peace activist who worked with anti-occupation groups. During the attack, he shielded a woman from bullets with his own body, saving her life at the cost of his own. Katsman’s family have said that he would not have wanted his death to fuel retribution against Palestinians. “Life is the utmost. It is the most core teaching that I have received from my tradition, from my ancestors,” says Basior, who evokes the phrase “never again,” used in remembrance of the Holocaust and other genocides, and says that precept means the violence against Palestinians “must be spoken out against.”
The unfolding crisis in Gaza, where relentless Israeli bombardment has killed more than 1,500 people since Saturday, is “a humanitarian catastrophe,” says Palestinian American human rights attorney Noura Erakat. She says Western leaders and the mainstream media have relied on racist, Islamophobic tropes to build a false consensus “that war is inevitable and that whatever consequences come out is the fault of Hamas, thereby further blaming the victims for their own killing and massacres.” Erakat also decries the Israeli order that 1.1 million residents in Gaza relocate under threat of a ground invasion. “What we are seeing is a genocidal campaign. You cannot forcibly transfer 1.1 million Palestinians in a 225-square-mile enclosed area. There is nowhere for them to go,” says Erakat, an associate professor at Rutgers University and author of Justice for Some: Law and the Question of Palestine.
Assange hasn’t been playing anything for years as he is imprisoned in the UK fighting his extradition to the U.S. while in other parts of the world he is being awarded -once again- for his journalistic work. He may or may not have an agenda, but the issue here is something else.
As Israel expands its military offensive in Gaza, some Democrats in the US are expressing growing criticism of Israeli actions. Younger progressive Democrats have been more vocal in calling for civilian protections and a ceasefire. However, support for Israel remains strong among both Democratic and Republican leadership as well as the general public. While progressive critics want to see Palestinian lives prioritized, Israel sees no viable negotiating partner with Hamas controlling Gaza. The article discusses the long history of US support for Israel since its founding and changing views over time. Some analysts believe criticism from the left lacks real political power but could influence younger voters. Ultimately both sides express pessimism about prospects for peace given the deep tensions and lack of trust between Israelis and Palestinians.
It’s evidenced in the vote in the last U.S. Congress to top up American funding for Israel’s missile-defence system: a lopsided result of 420 to 9.
I checked who voted which way, and the following were Nay votes:
This video is such garbage. Like, the left is not celebrating this attack? Like what?
What a ridiculous position to group together an entire half of the political discourse on the internet and claim that everyone in that half has the same position.
But I guess you wanted me to explicitly say that “some left” are doing that. That’s fine. It is indeed a fringe portion of the left, and also not everybody on the right are hateful nazis.
The linked site is a blog, not sure how that constitutes fact. Pointing out bullshit isn’t being against facts, it’s being against bullshit. And conflating the two shows both bias and bullshit.
This article already seems disingenuous. DSA Salt Lake City Utah’s Statement on Palestine slcdsa.org/…/salt-lake-dsa-statement-in-support-o… does not mention Hamas killing civilians let alone justify it. It vaguely uses the quote they cite to say that Palestine has a right to self defense, and even offense, which it does. I do not believe that this right includes the right to commit war crimes like killing civilians. We vote on statements in DSA, and such a statement certainly would not get my vote, but this statement is not that.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.