zazen

You can’t even accept the occupier/occupied dynamic between Israel and Palestine. Saying Gaza isn’t occupied because Israel withdrew is like saying a prisoner is free because the warden isn’t technically inside his jail cell. How can anyone move on to discuss solutions if the facts of reality can’t be agreed. Is the UK government and US state department who are both Israel’s allies good enough sources to confirm firstly that Palestinians are occupied? https://www.state.gov/reports/2016-report-on-international-religious-freedom/israel-and-the-occupied-territories/israel-and-the-occupied-territories-the-occupied-territories/ https://www.gov.uk/world/the-occupied-palestinian-territories/news Isreal apologists will claim any critique coming from a non jew as anti Semitic and claim Jews like Norman Finkelstein, Gabor Mate or Gideon Levy are traitors and self hating Jews if they give any critique.

“One thing the empire is about to realize is that the western public has lost all its appetite for war. All the careful sanitising, video-gamifying and propagandizing that has been put in place since Vietnam in order to build a platform of consent for “humanitarian” wars has cratered into nothing over the course of mere weeks. You can’t have an up close and personal relationship with the reality of bombs and all the things they do to human flesh and then go back to the way you were ever again. Millions of western eyes have been changed forever. “War” is not abstract any more.“

@jaylimix Maybe your heart and empathy aren’t real as you wrote this on another thread: ‘Israel is NOT evil, they do care about civilians, asking them to mouth south, calling off airstrikes if there are too many civilians around. The same cannot be said about me, I don't care about dead Palestinian children.’

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/israel-and-the-occupied-palestinian-territories-opts-country-of-concern/israel-and-the-occupied-palestinian-territories-opts-country-of-concern#torture From the UK governments website on Israels use of torture: There are continued allegations by NGOs of mistreatment of Palestinian detainees by the Israeli authorities. Palestinian prisoner Arafat Jaradat died in Israeli custody in February 2013; Israeli authorities denied allegations that his death was a result of torture. The UK has made clear to the Israeli authorities the importance we attach to a full investigation into the circumstances of his death, including the allegations of mistreatment. Whilst noting that acts of torture are criminal under Israeli law, we called at Israel’s UPR for “necessity” to be removed as a possible justification for torture, and for all allegations of torture and ill-treatment to be promptly and effectively investigated, with perpetrators prosecuted. In December, the NGO Public Committee Against Torture in Israel reported that, following arrest, Palestinian child detainees were being held outside in iron cages for hours overnight. Justice Minister Tzipi Livni has publicly confirmed that, on hearing the reports, she immediately instructed the Israeli Prison Service to stop this practice. Further: https://www.omct.org/en/resources/blog/its-now-even-more-official-torture-is-legal-in-israel https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/11/israel-opt-horrifying-cases-of-torture-and-degrading-treatment-of-palestinian-detainees-amid-spike-in-arbitrary-arrests/

@DocWatts Well put. Its's important to agree on definitions as everyone stretches the definition of words to fit more of what they wish to associate it with. Even if it isn't genocide which some people claim it isn't, it sure is ethnic cleansing as that by definition includes the expulsion of a people. From what I can infer by actions and statements of prominent members from the Israeli side the target is not only Hamas but Gaza itself to be unlivable. No wonder they've been going at it to destroy even Hospitals that are sacrosanct.

It starts as metaphorical but often becomes literal and less often radical interpretations are drawn from religious texts. People die more for fiction than facts. The fiction of flags and nationalities, religion and ideologies. Islam's concept of martydom and jihad for example have been perverted for sick causes. Likewise being proud of ones heritage, nationality or ethnicity can and has been perverted for sick causes. Religions often believe in paradise after death, and they go about sick ways in order to achieve it and get there, often creating hell on earth. But so can atheists and the non religious create hell on earth in trying to bring about paradise on earth such as the communist regimes which a estimated 100 million people have died because of. Radical religion creates hell on earth for paradise in the here after, radical communism creates hell on earth for a utopian paradise on earth.

H

I get it if people are just too busy or don't feel knowledgeable enough to make a judgment and take a stand on issues. Rationality allows for relativity - to understand the other. But it also allows for discernment of what values/actions are more legit than others. We can understand others values but don't have to value their values in the same way or to the same degree. Mature rationality is not just understanding but discerning - one could further say a even higher level of rationality is not to even play the game itself and be lost in moral discussions all together. The enlightened types like to be detached from the disputes and dichotomies of the common man, looking down at it all from a lofty place of transcendence. As Ram Dass said, part of awakening can be playing the role of form we are in - that is human. To be human, we've got to get down in the muck where the humanness is happening. Moral relativity is about understanding both sides but moral legitimacy is about determining and discerning the rightness of each side. Pluralism doesn't always mean neutralism. It's possible to see both sides of every contentious issue - that's a sign of intellectual maturity. But just because we can see both sides doesn’t mean we should live our life as though they both have equal merit. If we don’t further grapple with the rightness of each side we neglect a whole dimension of understanding by simply leaving it at “well I can see both sides which means both are equally right”. It’s good to understand that all concepts are relative and that none contain absolute truth, but this necessarily means that some concepts are more relatively truthful than others and by extension some actions are more relatively right than others. None of us live our lives as though all things are the same and all concepts are equally true - men can't have babies and I can't identify as something I'm not. We don’t drink bleach to wake us up, we order a coffee. When we want to go to somewhere we take a specific route, we don’t walk in a random direction and hope for manifestation to do its magic. Our daily choices reflect our reliance on relative truths as a fundamental aspect of our everyday life. I can understand why a robber had to rob to feed his family but I can still claim it not to be right. I can understand why Hamas did what they did and still claim it not to be right. I can understand why Israel feels entitled to the land of Palestine and still claim it not to be right. Where a rational society malfunctions compared to a irrational one is that it doesn't mature past the stage of understanding towards discernment. It gets stuck at the subjective level playing the game of moral relativity which is like a windmill able to go in all directions and see all perspectives but which keeps us going round and round, dazed, dizzy and chaotic. As opposed to graduating to also having discernment which implies a hierarchy of values and thus a compass to guide us towards betterment. Deciding our direction with the windmill of moral relativity and not a compass is what keeps us lost and disillusioned. I feel this is one of the reasons a lot of people in the West are returning to religion or tradition as a way to feel anchored in something with direction. But, religion and tradition can be a shortcut to thinking as can be the liberalism of moral subjectivity - that all perspectives are fine so we don't have to wrestle with the tougher beast that is discerning which perspectives are better or worse.

@lina That's what's frustrating, the hypocrisy of the Western elite. It causes cognitive dissonance among Westerners and distrust from non Western allies. Not to say hypocrisy doesn't exist in other parts of the world, but in the West it's magnified at a state level making it visible for those who can see through the propoganda. The West are supporting Ukraine that's full of neo-Nazis who hate Jews and then go on to support Israel in the name of supporting the Jewish people. Western imperialists don't actually stand for what they claim to stand for, and their framing of where they stand in these conflicts is a cloaked lie. The empire just supports who it supports because that's where its interests happen to be at the time. Peak hypocrisy is inflicting violence and destruction throughout the world in order to pursue planetary hegemony while lying about your reasons for doing so. The global south knew this from past experience (they paied the blood price for the lesson), but its only become more and more clearer today since the war on terror from 2001 and the advent of social media which debunks main stream narratives. The global south have developed some economic strength are more in a position to speak against and oppose the West now collectively with China in their corner. Concepts like democracy and human rights are not values they wish to promote as much as they are political sticks used against adversarial nations - these nations are aggressively criticized for human rights violations and lack of democracy. Paying lip service to democracy and human rights is just one tactic in their playbook to create the façade of moral authority, all the while tactfully undermining governments that go against them.

I agree it definitely isn’t that simple. There are toxic elements on both sides. The protests for the most part are positive. I was at the London protest with almost a million people and majority were fair and little to no arrests or violence. There are a few bad apples for sure but that shouldn’t stop people from supporting a just cause to end a conflict that see’s civilians dying. The same way in more right wing protests which are anti-immigration you get completely racist people among them that de-legitimise the whole thing due to their extremism. Marginalisation leads to radicalisation and racism is extreme otherising and marginalisation. Here’s a good talk between Sam Harris and Yuval Noah Harari. He mentions how a two state solution and peace are undermined from the Israeli side by Bibis government. Listen to time stamps ( 13-15 min ) and ( 16:30 - 18:30 ). In fact by supporting and having a more extremist party like Hamas in power it de-legitimises the Palestinian cause the same way extremist racists de-legitimise the right wing and their valid concerns for unchecked immigration. Hamas gives a reason to not establish peace or offer a state - and if a state is offered it’s done so with concessions favouring the Isreali side. Hamas is not the target but the excuse. A good video on why and how Israel offer of a two state solution and any peace hasn’t worked:

Great interview. Here are two very good videos also:

@kenway Social media has played a big part in it. The support for Palestinians has a generational gap. From an article Head of ADL: “But I also wanna point out that we have a major, major, major generational problem,” Greenblatt complains to his cohorts. “All the polling that I’ve seen — ADL’s polling, ICC’s polling, independent polling — suggests this is not a left or right gap, folks. The issue in the United States’ support for Israel is not left and right, it is young and old.” “We really have a Tik-Tok problem, a Gen-Z problem,” In reality, what Greenblatt and his associates have is a morality problem. They have a large group of people who have not been indoctrinated into accepting madness and amputating parts of their own conscience over the years, and so are able to look at the mass murder of civilians in Gaza with clear eyes. Israel’s problem is not that people are being propagandized into hating it, it’s that people are not being successfully propagandized into supporting it. There’s only so many ways you can spin the murder of thousands of children and the existence of an oppressive ‘security’ apparatus over people. All the media obfuscation in the world is not enough to pull the wool over fresh eyes that are ready to see.

.@Vrubel I didn't mean you are dehumanizing Palestinians, just generally those that do. I wasn't equivocating toddlers being taken hostage to thuggish teens but rounding up teens or children even if they have 'misbehaved' without charge, trial or access to their parents or lawyers is bad enough in my books to be called out. You mentioned the silent majority are turned off at Pro-Palestinian protests and talking points. I don't like to see it as Pro one side or the other but I do clearly see that if the root cause of suffering that is the occupation ends that will be pro both sides. Palestinian liberation will liberate the Israeli's of having to play prison guard on watch and dedicate resources to immense amounts of propaganda to hide the truth and continuously wash the stain that is occupation in a post-occupation, post colonial world - and that they get a bad image for. I'd say to that any individuals expressing anger towards pro-Palestinians are, at best, comical and at worst, pitiful. Criticizing those who advocate for freedom from a long-standing oppressive regime is absurd. The atrocity of October 7 reflects the accumulated violence imposed by Israel on Palestinians for decades. It's similar to foolishly resenting an echo for responding, or a man being angered by his own shadow darkening the floor.

Blatant hypocrisy? The West are supporting Ukraine that's full of neo-Nazis who hate Jews and then go on to support Israel in the name of supporting the Jewish people and their homeland. Remember when the Canadian parliament applauded a man who fought for the Nazi's just last month then backtracked once it got media attention and backlash. Western imperialists don't actually stand for what they claim to stand for, and their framing of where they stand in these conflicts is a cloaked lie. The empire just supports who it supports because that's where its interests happen to be at the time. What is hypocritical is inflicting violence and destruction throughout the world in order to pursue planetary hegemony while lying about your reasons for doing so. Concepts like democracy and human rights are not values they wish to promote as much as they are political sticks used against adversarial nations - these nations are aggressively criticized for human rights violations and lack of democracy. It also appeases domestic Westerners as it gives us a sense of righteousness - that our states are going to instill great values and democracy to those nations. It allows us in the West who are comfortable and not used to harsher realities to stomach our empire going around the world dick swinging its power and causing carnage. Paying lip service to democracy and human rights is just one tactic in their playbook to create the façade of moral authority, all the while tactfully undermining governments that go against them.

I'd struggle to imagine being at the mercy of terrorist captors, maybe we can ask Gazans though. Not sure how the hostages have been treated but just to point out that some view them as completely barbaric and wanting to kill Jews (and some of them are and did on October 7th) and they haven't gone and killed the hostages all the while being bombarded to an absurd degree. Can you imagine having 25'000 tonnes of bombs dropped on where you are in Gaza - equivalent to 2 nuclear bombs. Hiroshima's bomb was 15'000 tonnes for comparison, and Hiroshima is about 3 times bigger than Gaza. And you have to try keep hostages safe in this situation with your life on the line doing so - apparently people you utterly hate. Whats vile is the attitude towards Palestinians and the dehumanization of them. Whilst this whole hostage swap is going on people are wondering 'hey, how come Israel have women and children prisoners.' to begin with. Even the liberal leftist opposition party in Israel claims that most of the deaths in Gaza are just terrorists hamas fighters.

The irony is that Hamas are portrayed as barbaric Jew haters but have done their best to protect their hostages despite being bombarded by the hostages host country who is their adversary. Lets see if these hostages will be allowed to speak on their experience as the two ladies did and the media had a melt down at them speaking of their positive experience - with the one lady shaking hands and saying bye to the Hamas guy even lol.

Though not pragmatic this may help stomach what happened on a psychological level. In the twisted dance of relationships, women are consistently warned about the potential dangers posed by men throughout their lives. They're advised to navigate cautiously, to be mindful of manipulation, to test and approach with caution. Their defenses, even in moments of naivety, remain steadfast. But who extends a warning to men about the intricacies of women? The answer is nobody. Most men stumble upon this wisdom through the harsh teacher of experience, paying the steep price in the currency of pain. As these men unearth the less-than-flattering truths, often paying with the currency of their soul through human suffering, the response is to dismiss them as embittered and having chosen the wrong partner. They're gas lighted and brushed aside. Pain, while an essential checkpoint on the journey to enlightenment, is also the birthplace of hatred. Hate, in essence, is the residue of love disappointed by unmet expectations, leading to suffering. It's the natural reaction to the demise of a cherished falsehood. Men, once blinded by unconditional love for women, perceiving them as universally benevolent and the embodiment of positive femininty, now view the feminine as the exclusive source of their anguish and the destroyer of their innocence. This births misogynists. This skewed perception, painting women as purer and kind, eventually drives men to extremes—either becoming simps or evolving into outright misogynists, just as women who have been hurt typically become misandrists and fan the flames of radical feminism. Yet, this is a transient phase, a coping mechanism to grapple with pain by rejecting and vilifying those who caused it. The journey begins as a fool, blindly trusting and loving, only to transform into a different kind of fool—one who blindly distrusts and hates. The error lies in perceiving them as entirely good or entirely bad. True evolution occurs when you recognize that they, like you, embody both good and evil. People are not categorically good or evil; they are a blend of both. The power to be a predator or a protector lies in your hands, and your destiny is a choice you make on your path. Ignorance makes you love blindly and resentment makes you hate blindly which only prolongs the suffering longer than needed.

Good list. This is a awesome site, thanks for sharing. The main archetype that comes to mind for red is that of the Warrior. Red is the warrior, Blue is the King (order, logos, religious), Orange is the magician (intellect, creativity, capitalism), Green is the lover (inclusive, equality, gaia). So how can we use the warrior in a developed way and what is the value of the warrior? Some thoughts: In the dance of masculine and feminine energies, men are assigned the task of bringing order to feminine chaos. Paradoxically, to maintain their masculinity, men require a dose of chaos, and it's the destructive element within man's chaos that makes man masculine. The arena of domestic and work life defined by stability and order doesn't provide the chaos that fuels a man's masculine essence or his warrior aspect. Here, he's the builder of order, domesticated by the constructive tasks of bringing stability and fostering the development of those that depend on him at home and at work via his work duties. Yet, to achieve a integrative wholeness, the constructive domestic and commercial plane must find its counterpoint in the destructive realm. Instead of merely bringing order on external chaos, a man must actively engage in the chaos and destruction of his own endeavors, embracing competition and taking risks, flirting with adventure and life in the arena as a warrior would. A man who shies away from competition, avoids risks, and refuses to dance with chaos and destruction becomes a tamed soul, subdued by duty but robbed of his warrior spirit. In doing the right thing by avoiding the wrong, he inadvertently loses a part of himself and is no longer virile enough to do the right. This is why a man needs a parallel existence beyond the confines of his domestic and commercial domain—a space where he can freely immerse himself in the chaos and destruction that preserves the vitality of his youthful audacity, all without jeopardizing the domestic and commercial domain which requires stability and order. What value does the warrior spirit bring? I'd say the main one of courage. If we have developed our rationality and intellects at a expense of courage, they will be misused. Courage means the courage to face truth. Now if we have rationality and intellect but don't want to face raw truths we will instead use rationality emotionally. We create a great many theories and get lost in a subjective echo chamber of them. We rationalize around truth rather than be rational about the truth. We twist narratives to fit our sentiments and feelings. Which is what we have currently in the West. We can call it a ignorant intellect - one which fears truth and use the intellect and cognitive horsepower to avoid it. A rational society (stage orange and above) is more developed than a less rational one (stage red, blue) but where the rational society malfunctions and starts to appear less developed or more clown worldish is when they use rationality in this way. Rationality helps us understand different perspectives - moral relativity. The West has indulged this and experimented but hasn't progressed to a mature rationality which not only understands but can then discern which perspectives are more valuable than others - and isn't afraid to face this. It gets stuck at moral relativity and subjective games of being able to identify however we wish. Moral relativity is like a windmill going in all directions rather than a compass in a single one. If we get stuck going round and round on the moral relativity windmill we will become dizzy, dazed and dissilussioned unable to make sense of the world without direction. This is where courage and the warrior aspect is needed to face the truth of a hierarchy existing, that there can be good and bad, better and worse (but not in such a black and white way) and to have the warrior act of hunting for its prey with eyes on the prize - a destination with a compass to progress on rather than be lost. Basically, the balls are needed as much as the head. The heart balances the two.

Israel does everything it can to exaggerate the reasons for its bombing campaign including bombing hospitals. For example, the tunnels at Al-Shifa were built by Israel themselves which Ehud Barak confirmed on CNN: They go take out Gaza's largest hospital with false claims of there being a command center and no proof to show for it. That's why the world is angry at Israel, because it's actions have been found to be based on many lies which continue to be caught out. A senior US official said that the death toll caused by Israel’s assault on Gaza is likely far higher than the over 10,000 number being reported by Gaza’s Health Ministry. Barbara Leaf, assistant secretary of State said: “In this period of conflict and conditions of war, it is very difficult for any of us to assess what the rate of casualties are. We think they’re very high, frankly, and it could be that they’re even higher than are being cited.” After Biden accused the Palestinians of lying about the death toll, the UN and aid groups that have experience in Gaza backed the numbers coming from Gaza’s Health Ministry, saying they’re reliable. An Israeli security source told the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot that Israel has killed around 20,000 Palestinians, but the number has not been backed up by another source. Lets say even if the numbers were doubled by Hamas where they currently are at 14'000, that's still 7'000 dead of which most are women and children.

Maybe another angle to view past vs present problems is that problems still persist and always will, but are the quality of the problems better. I'm simplifying but you could say that the past had more problems related to physical survival, the present has more problems related to psychological survival. Past problems were due to scarcity, present problems are due to abundance. What allowed us to buffer our suffering in the past which had much tougher conditions related to physical survival were things like religion, community, physical activity and connection to the earth. Those have eroded at the expense of urbanization, secularism and materialism - things which have provided us more material comforts (though even those are now in decline) but have cut our spiritual umbilical cords off from what sustains us psychologically. Even the systems such as capitalism which provided a lot more economic growth over the decades are now in their later stages with increasing inequality and decreasing purchasing power and standard of living. So now we not only don't have the deeper aspects of life to fulfill us or the institutions to sustain us but we also no longer have the material wealth and comfort either. Physical, psychological and spiritual downturn. Sure, the outliers can definitely live almost better than ever but isn't that the problem - that only for the few can win and not the most. This is whats given rise to the hustle culture biohacking alpha male culture, because if your less than that you almost put yourself at a severe disadvantage being average in todays world. We were raised in a world of comfort, into a time approaching discomfort - and a lot of younger generations just aren't ready for it.

Analyzing and understanding a act, doesn't mean justifying or approving it. The Western world, because it is developed and more rational naturally asks what is it that led to this attack, and they dig into its wider context which reveals the situation. Yes, Hamas's charter is extreme, thank you for sharing all that information. Within the same source you share you have left out the sections of 'Revised 2017 Charter' and 'Relevance of 1988 Charter in the early 21st century' which also states: ''Ahmed Yousef, an adviser to Ismail Haniyeh (the senior political leader of Hamas), claimed that Hamas has changed its views over time since the charter was issued in 1988. In 2010 Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal stated that the Charter is "a piece of history and no longer relevant, but cannot be changed for internal reasons". ''30 years after releasing its founding charter, Hamas unveiled a revised version of the document that appears to soften the group's stance toward Israel. The major takeaway is that Hamas is open, at least in principle, to accepting the 1967 borders of a Palestinian state—a major sticking point in previous failed negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. Its previous position had always been to call for the destruction of the state of Israel.'' - https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2017/05/hamas-strategic-rebranding.html It was wrong for Hamas to rise and form, but the reactionary current that gave rise to the wave of Hamas was that of the formation of Likud party. Hamas is the symptom, the wave on the sea - the cause and current within the sea that gave rise to it is the Likud party formed before it in 1973 with its founding stating it will not give the 'land from the river to the sea' any other sovereign authority ie Palestinians. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party This would rightly be seen as the denial of the possibility of a Palestinian state and so in reaction extremer types of leadership could easily gain popularity against this. Hamas came to be in 1987, 14 years later and here we are. If we take Hamas's charter seriously then we should also take the Likud parties seriously - and both state a one state is all there can be - with Hamas's inciting more violence of course. If we forget about documents from decades ago and just look at the actions taken in more recent time instead. If Israel wanted a 2 state solution, why would they fill up the land that would be the Palestinians (West Bank) with far right orthodox Jews which would make it almost impossible as they would be the most resistant to leaving compared to more secular Jews. And if Israel did want a one state solution and to show the Palestinians that they would live well under Israeli leadership then why have they shown the opposite in the West Bank for example.

You trolling? Most have. And any hesitation isn't because they don't think its terrible - its because they don't want them condemning the October 7 atrocity to be equated with them condemning the cause of the Palestinians. People in extreme situations employ extreme tactics to emancipate themselves from those situations. The flaw of extreme tactics is that it makes the cause come across as a extreme one and thus not valid. Extreme tactics when used rarely as a last resort to amplify attention to the cause in a world apathetic to it can be effective. It becomes ineffective when used regularly as a strategy, that makes it appear as if the status quo of the cause is itself extreme.

@BlueOak Well articulated. @lina Nicely written. Sam Harris is correct in saying Islamism is a virus, but he wrongly conflates a lot with it and misunderstands the Muslim world which is funny as he's written a book on extremism with Majid Nawaz who was a ex-Islamist radical. The difference between Palestine/Hamas and ISIS is that Hamas are a resistance movement that use terrorist tactics, with the goal being localised to their homeland. ISIS is a terrorist movement with the goal of Islamic globalism - all lands. Hamas are defending their homeland, ISIS aspire to dominate all lands. The former is a defensive movement at its core but with terrorist elements and tactics, the latter is a dominating expansionist movement with a radical interpretation of Islam at its core and terrorism as its main strategy rather than just a tool in the toolbox of tactics. Every idea can become a ideology which can ferment extremist strains of itself. Islamist's are violent because human nature can be violent. That can take expression through any culture, context or on any continent. Nature doesn't change, the lens through which it unfolds does - the lens, vessel and human through which nature is nurtured. Its easy to assume that once someone progresses through the stages of Spiral Dynamics, similar to a child maturing into an adult, they are immune to reverting to childlike behaviors or regressing physically like Benjamin Button. However, psychologically, such regression is still possible. People can be like children frozen in adult bodies, and behave animalistically whilst encased in human form. Humans are like Russian dolls that have a beast deep down within that can be visited.They can do the needful when needed to in order to survive. The developed world otherizes groups they see as undeveloped yet don't see how they are capable of behaving in extreme ways they consider only undeveloped people capable of behaving in. They omit the regressive elements of human nature that revisit them and come in through the back door in unassuming ways. A lot of the time they’re not as moral or developed as they think, they're just in a position where they're safe enough to pretend to be. Developed liberals can still have the capacity to terrorize and tribalize, they just terrorize and tribalize in the name of, for and around a different set of values. We can have stage green talking points and positions yet act those out through a stage red disposition and state of being. Likewise the US can have a white house and yet a black heart - the veneer doesn't always match the visceral. Labels often confine us to the actions associated with those labels more than they liberate us. Labels are like psychic chains, nationalities are like psychic cages and literal interpretations of religion act like psychic straitjackets. Each more confining, restricting and stubborn. Now we are in a chicken or the egg situation where extreme terrorist elements exist. But is it that they are extreme innately or that circumstances made them so. The truth lies somewhere in the middle.

@Raze The ceasefire will be portrayed as noble and benevolent when it is only due to domestic pressure from the Israeli side with regards to their hostages as you shared, and for the US side to bolster Bidens image and ratings. Interesting article: https://caityjohnstone.medium.com/white-house-fears-pause-in-fighting-will-let-journalists-see-whats-been-happening-in-gaza-d90cd85a3ce1 ''According to Politico’s sources there has been some resistance to the pause in fighting within the administration due to fears that it will allow journalists into Gaza to report on the devastation Israel has inflicted upon the enclave. ''And there was some concern in the administration about an unintended consequence of the pause: that it would allow journalists broader access to Gaza and the opportunity to further illuminate the devastation there and turn public opinion on Israel,” Politico reports. In other words, the White House is worried that a brief pause in the Israeli massacre of civilians in Gaza will allow journalists to report the truth about the Israeli massacre of civilians in Gaza, because it will hurt the information interests of the US and Israel. They are worried that the public will become more aware of facts and truth. Needless to say, if you’re standing on the right side of history you’re not typically worried about journalists reporting true facts about current events and thereby damaging public support for your agendas. But that is the side that the US and Israel have always stood on, which is why the US empire is currently imprisoning Julian Assange for doing good journalism on US war crimes and why Israel has a decades-long history of threatening and targeting journalists. During Israel’s bombing campaign in Gaza in 2021 the IDF reportedly targeted more than 20 Palestinian press institutions in the enclave, as well as the tower hosting the international outlets AP and Al Jazeera. During this current onslaught Israel has been killing dozens of Palestinian journalists, sometimes by actively bombing their homes where they live with their families. The IDF’s campaign to wipe out inconvenient news reporters has resulted in the Committee to Protect Journalists calling this the deadliest conflict on record for journalists anywhere, ever. Both the US and Israel have been attacking the press in this way because their governments understand that whoever controls the narrative controls the world. They understand that while power is in controlling what happens, ultimate power is controlling what people think about what happens. Human consciousness is dominated by mental narratives, so if you can control society’s dominant narratives, you can control the humans. This is why the powerful have been able to remain in power in our civilization — because they understand this, while we the public generally do not. That’s why they bombard us with nonstop mass media propaganda, that’s why they work to censor the internet, that’s why Julian Assange languishes in prison, that’s why Israel routinely murders journalists, and that’s why the White House is afraid of what will happen if worldwide news reporters are able to get their cameras into Gaza.''

@Danioover9000 Nicely written. Other peoples always resisted and fought for their lands whether the Vietnamese against the Americans, the Algerians against the French, or the South African and Kenyans against the British. The key difference with Israel / Palestine I see is that while the others fought for their heritage, the Palestinians are fighting not only for their heritage but also for what is holy to them and their religion. That divine holy dimension coming into the mix with the Muslim world rallying behind them fuels them further into resistance. Reminds me of a lovely and poetic book: MIRDAD: Did you not say you would have peace? Prince: Yes, I would have peace. MIRDAD: Then do not fight. Prince: But my neighbour insists on fighting me; and I must fight him that peace may reign between us. MIRDAD: You would kill your neighbour that you may live with him at peace! How strange the spectacle! There is no merit in living at peace with the dead. But a great virtue it is to live at peace with the living. If you must wage a war on any living man, or thing, whose tastes and interests may clash at times with yours, then wage a war on God who caused these things to be. And wage a war upon the Universe; for countless are the things therein that disconcert your mind, and trouble your heart, and willy-nilly force themselves upon your life. Prince: What should I do when I would be at peace with my neighbour, but he would fight? MIRDAD: Fight! Prince: Now you counsel me alright. MIRDAD: Aye, fight! But not your neighbour. Fight rather all the things that cause you and your neighbour to fight. Why does your neighbour wish to fight you? Is it because your eyes are blue, and his are hazel? Is it because you dream of angels, and he dreams of devils? Or is it because you love him as yourself and holds all yours as his? It is your robes, O prince, your throne, your wealth, your glory and the things to which you are a prisoner that your neighbour wants to fight you for. If you would defeat him without lifting a spear, then go forth and declare a war on all these things. When you have conquered them by ridding your soul of their clutches; when you have cast them out upon the rubbish heap, maybe then your neighbour will halt his march, and sheath his sword, and say to himself, ‘Were these things worth a fight, my neighbour would not have cast them away upon the rubbish heap.’ Should your neighbour preserve still be greedily enraged and carry away the rubbish heap, rejoice at your own freedom from such a load, but grieve over your neighbour’s lot. Prince: What of my honour which is worth far more than all my possessions? MIRDAD: Man’s only honour is being Man, God’s likeness and image. All other honours are dishonours. An honour bestowed by men is easily taken away by men. An honour written with the sword is easily effaced by the sword. No honour, O prince, is worth a rusted arrow; much less a burning tear; much less a drop of blood.