zazen

Almost like bingo. Will be interesting to hear Norman Finklesteins take on it. I found this comment on youtube interesting:

@Danioover9000 I'd only add that though dark humour exists but if the person dishing it out has stated such things like that they don't care for Palestinian life - that obviously indicates a clear lack of empathy and good faith in any discussion. Some of Jaylimix's reasoning and points have been interesting and made me think which I appreciate but then past posts like the one below leave a bad taste in wanting to respond to them. I've more often seen dehumanising language come from the pro-Israeli side than the pro-Palestinian side. Maybe certain rhetoric has become so normalised in Israel that referring to the other side in such ways as virus, rats, animals etc doesn't seem to come across bad to their own conscience until they start interacting with the outside world in which they get some negative feedback for their choice of words. It's language like this that can lead to genocides and normalising ethnic cleansing. Likewise in the case of the Rwandan genocide it starts with speaking of the other side in such ways on public radio stations (referring to them as rats, cockroaches etc) that immunizes them to committing future death and destruction.

Maybe you're mixing falling into unconsciousness with going beyond it towards consciousness. Instinct, unconsciousness and evolution aren't higher than intelligence, consciousness and enlightenment. Instinct, unconsciousness and evolution are the base - intelligence, consciousness and enlightenment are the height of human potential. Someone who is conscious would be aware of taking another life unjustly, especially at a mass scale and systematically. Like what I wrote earlier in this thread: Hitler took Nietzche's concept of the superman (ubermensch) and perverted it. It takes a level of wisdom and consciousness to understand the same level of wisdom and consciousness. Hitler became a false prophet of Nietzche's philosophy and not only misinterpreted it but acted upon that interpretation to create the atrocity he did. When Nietzsche talks of the will to power it doesn't mean will to dominate and win the survival of the fittest - to be absolutely darwinian. Yes, its intoxicating, grand and stroked the ego - but this is the same myth and archetype of the Hero which other cultures feel affinity to. It's just not done at the expense of others. Power isn't a problem, its the misuse of it that is. Power in the service of lower forces wreak inhumane atrocity.

A serious escalation. Some points: Today a ship was seized by Iran - which used to be theirs and had barrels of oil cargo. Could also be deflection from the ICJ hearing. Houthis have the capability of hitting oil fields in Saudi which will tailspin the world into inflation and financial instability like we’ve never seen. Instead of intervening in stopping innocents dying in Gaza and strong arming a peaceful solution the US/UK are doing Israel’s bidding and escalating things / saving face as Western hegemons. Henry Kissinger said ‘to be a enemy of the US is dangerous but to be a friend is fatal’ - because you become a lapdog and sacrificial lamb for imperial interest.

@kenway True, Owen Jones made a video about the viewing of that 50min video and said no rape or beheadings were seen although atrocities definitely were no doubt. If theirs no dirt to leverage these judges with behind the scenes then surely they will use emotional appeal to pull at heartstrings to compensate for lack of legal or moral grounds. Any sympathy from Oct 7th was abused and misused in disproportionate response. I don’t think we’ll ever get to know what truly happened on October 7th, it could have been a military operation that got messy in confrontation with IDF or independent factions/individuals split off/broke through the fence along with them. Hamas would never admit that they had ordered the raping or killing of civilians rather than just the military objective to get hostages as a bargaining chip in exchange for their women/children political prisoners. Neither will Israel allow for investigation into the rape allegations or the burnt cars that were suspiciously buried - maybe due to evidence pointing only to Israel’s ability to rain down such firepower on them that Hamas don’t posses. Some possible excuses : Trying to put myself in a lawyers shoes to defend Israel and I’m actually lost for any argument. Even saying that if ‘we as Israel wanted to commit genocide we already would have as we have the capability’ doesn’t work. Capability doesn’t mean acceptability by the world or that such actions won’t have consequences for the perpetrator - which is why ethnic cleansing or genocide has to be a slow and covert process rather than a fast and overt extinction like event.

Great summary of what took place. They presented it in such a way that not only is Israel on trial but International law is itself at trial and in the hot seat - almost like a stress test for the international system. Also by comparing other genocides to which they intervened on which were much less devastating and where less explicit genocidal intent was shown puts them in a awkward position if they weren't to intervene to stop a case which is much clearer - and stressing the fact that the founding of the UN and conventions were exactly fit for purposes such as this. They nullified Israel's response of self defence before it's even made like you said as the occupier can't claim such things against the occupied. One defence which is more of a emotional one from Israel's side is that the statements of intent are done by radicals or extremists - yet it was made clear that all such people hold positions of authority to dictate policy and not just some random pedestrian. The argument of cherry picking statements from extremists doesn't work when there's enough quantity of cherries to pick that show a certain rot exists in the basket that contaminates the society, politics and geopolitics of the state. @Danioover9000 Fair to say Israel got legally bodied. Israel likes to use disproportionate force (Dahiya doctrine) - seems like they got a disproportionate response in legal terms and evidence lol A great link outlining all the statements and well categorised: https://crimesbyisrael.com/ Will be interesting to see Israel's defence. Although, one shouldn't let what is decided (or coerced) in the chambers of law to dishearten and muzzle what echoes so loudly in the chambers of the heart as to what is just and right.

@Nivsch True, the mind is cunning at rationalising either way. The problem can be that a legal judgement doesn’t always match a moral judgement. What’s legal may be logically correct but not emotionally right. Legal judgements can be correct in the black and white of ink but not humanely right to the red pulsing essence of blood that runs the heart. A final verdict won’t come till many years but all South Africa is asking for now is to cease the conflict to prevent a genocide in the making a subset of which is ethnic cleansing. It doesn’t have to be a finalised case to affect things only a plausible one which all who are signed to the convention are obligated to act upon in stopping it. There is global pressure on the West to not fiddle around or coerce judgment with the power that they have. Beside Israel being on trial it is also international law itself which is. The eyes of the world are watching it to be applied fairly and if not this sets a dangerous precedent - and only further diminishes the Wests standing due to their stark selective application of the principle of law. It’s telling that South Africa and Yemen have stood up to Israel and the West - we are entering a multipolar world where the global south are emboldened and will not sit by any longer at imperial bullying. Western audiences being drip fed propaganda for decades of their exceptionalism and others lack of it aren’t able to read the room of geopolitical reality.

Al Jazeera are live streaming it on YouTube for those that prefer YouTube. When we witness isolated statements of intent and footage of death and destruction separately it stings but doesn’t paralyse the way it does when it’s shown compiled together the way the South African case presents it - almost like a tranquilliser to your moral compass that could wake anyone with heart and good conscience out of apathy. May justice and peace prevail.

@Danioover9000 @kenway I think Norman Finkelstein will be commentating the hearing live. Most people won’t read the full 80 page South African document so here’s a tweet thread with interesting parts: Apparently this is one of their defences:

You guys clearly understand the concept of being pushed to the limit of exploding after years and decades of trauma but then can't seem to apply this same concept to the Palestinians or for what Hamas did on October 7th which yes - was horrible. Were women truly oppressed under patriarchy - was the feminist movement including the suffragettes in England who vandalised buildings and committed arson justified in fighting for women's right to vote? The level of resistance will be in line with the level of oppression. When describing situations it doesn't have to be the most absolute use of a word to apply as people can be partially metaphorical to make the point. Like when people refer to Gaza as a open air prison - it isn't true in its most literal sense but partially true in the sense that freedom of movement and restrictions exist for Gaza. If we're talking international law then definitions require more precision to be used and applied (genocide, ethnic cleansing for example). Otherwise, certain words are used as analogous to make a point. A revolt or resistance doesn't have to exclusively be only to the most extreme absolute versions of oppression and it doesn't deny the fact that some form of oppression is occurring that needs resisting to. Ethnic cleansing/displacement is still happening and has been for decades - they aren't supposed to resist that? When people are denied a state their denied a certain type of more 'civilised' and accepted means of protection/deterrence - when a group of people don't have a military, navy, air force, intelligence agencies or the backing of a global superpower they need to resort to guerrilla warfare and other unsavoury uncivilised tactics like suicide or terrorist attacks - which they are then gaslighted as savages for and I get it, it is savage - but it doesn't detract from their cause being a just one of equal human rights, self determination and dignity even though they go about it in undignified unjust ways of which they have been left with little choice.

Correct, so why do they exist and what are they resisting? The same human rights organisations that talk about what Israel is doing and claim it as an occupation and apartheid to which Israelis deny and call anti-Semitic. From today: The West have literally no idea how to defend Israel’s actions when probed properly like above. Snowden commenting on the situation now:

All about the headline not the trendlines. Propaganda is effective when it doesn't trigger people's cognitive alarms ie subtle and often - almost like ingesting microplastics through water. Tiny manipulations build up to warp our minds and control the narrative in favour of the vested interests. Sneaky af. Possibly it could be a risk in terms of intelligence sharing and spying within the state, not really a threat in terms of violence. Beyond that I'm not sure what else would be objectionable about Ariel as my knowledge is limited. Definitely the Palestinians can also be stubborn - but it must be understood why they don't feel they should be the ones conceding as they see themselves as the more wronged party. I think that's all that most of the people in this thread are trying to shine light on and which the Israeli side can be blind to - which is that the Palestinians have been unjustly wronged. From Israel's side they can't see that it seems - maybe due to entitlement to the land ancestrally, the Gods chosen people concept or because their too traumatised and wrapped up in their own trauma caused by people on another continent (Europe) but for which the Palestinians need to suffer and pay for their sins.

Good to see both sides at the table rather than on fighting for sure. The number of proposals is always given as if to show Israel as the peacemaker and the Palestinians as the savages who deny deal after deal - what's left out are the details of the proposals. For example just from the Annapolis conference link you shared: 'Abbas refused to sign on Olmert's peace offer as Olmert did not allow Abbas more than one day to study the map. Nevertheless negotiations continued, but got increasingly difficult as Olmert became entangled in domestic corruption charges.' - surely you should be given more than a day to study the map of what will be your peoples future state. 'The Israeli settlement of Ariel, deep inside a potential Palestinian state, was a controversial issue for Olmert and Abbas' - why would any state have a settlement or area from a former state they had such hostility with which could put their future state at risk. Would Ukrainians ever agree to have a Russian settlement in Ukraine after the war ends? 'Negotiations were formally suspended in January 2009, when Israel invaded the Gaza Strip. But Abbas continued to call on the US to broker a deal.' - sounds like the Palestinian side wanted peace unlike what is portrayed as Abbas called on the US to continue the process. Israels shown a very serious desire for peace? Eating away at land at the West Bank continuously no matter which government has been in power since decades isn't a sign of being serious about it. In the words of Avi Shlaim - Israel is like a man who pretends to be negotiating the division of a pizza while he keeps eating it lol.

Bro we've been over the peace offers before and why they weren't good enough for the Palestinians or deemed as fair. It wouldn't be a true state or sovereign basically. A few Israeli security points would remain, demilitarised, no ability to form alliances or agreements with other nations without Israels approval, resources such as water still within Israels control etc. What difference is there to that and what the current situation is in West Bank? Israeli military control it and what have they done with their power or allowed to be done? Settlement expansion. Also, stopping settlement expansion isn't enough anymore, a lot will have to be removed which is almost impossible considering how far right the settlers are and now that they are armed. Its a tough situation because the land that is actually seen as the holiest part to Jews is in the West Bank which is supposed to make up any future Palestinian state.

Man is animal, but he is also more than animal. If we reduce ourselves just to our instincts then why not just breed like rabbits and eat sugar all day. It's because instinct was harnessed through discipline that civilisations were created, not because we indulged instinct which is what end of empires do when abundance satiates them. Universal consciousness / godhead /life itself is older than even instinct - it's this life that is exploring itself and evolving itself back to its own realisation but through the material world of biology and instinct. Biology and instinct chain down the soul which wants to transmute its limitations, not indulge them risking its own destruction and that of others.

@Nivsch People can see Israel's side in this - they just don't agree to the entitlement that some of its population have. When people mention apartheid, occupation or ethnic cleansing they're referring to West Bank or Gaza more so than Israel proper. Like that video you shared of that girl asking where is apartheid - its like showing Beverly Hills mansions and saying where is the income inequality? But completely missing out the ghettos of LA. You have acknowledged the settlers are a problem also so you're aware of it, maybe just not the scale or how big of a problem it is. The settler expansion in West Bank gets in the way of a two state solution. But if there isn't going to be a two state solution because the settlers aren't going to move then what is Israels choice? To go on as its going on and hope the world just forgets about Palestinians? It can't go on the way it is.

Instinct, unconsciousness and evolution aren't higher though. Hitler took Nietzche's concept of the superman (ubermensch) and perverted it. It takes a level of wisdom and consciousness to understand the same level of wisdom and consciousness. Hitler became a false prophet of Nietzche's philosophy and not only misinterpreted it but acted upon that interpretation to create the atrocity he did. When Nietzsche talks of the will to power it doesn't mean will to dominate and win the survival of the fittest - to be absolutely darwinian. Yes, its intoxicating, grand and stroked the ego - but this is the same myth and archetype of the Hero which other cultures feel affinity to. It's just not done at the expense of others. Power isn't a problem, its the misuse of it that is. Power in the service of lower forces wreak inhumane atrocity.

Resistance is baked into occupation - it can be expected until that occupation has completely subjugated the original population, genocides or cleanses them or has finally integrated them into a democratic state like America and Australia for example. How this occupation is resisted will differ - India mostly had peaceful resistance against British occupation while the Algerian, Kenyan, Vietnamese or South African resistance included violence. Are Nelson Mandela from South Africa or Matt turner from the slave revolt terrorists? The level of resistance depends on the level of oppression. The feminist suffragettes in England for example protested, vandalised property and committed arson in order to obtain the right to vote. Were they oppressed to the level Palestinians are? When the avenues to peaceful protest have been blocked oppressed people are left with no other option. The BDS movement which helped end South African apartheid is out lawed legislatively - theres no talks of a two state and if there is one its only dangled like a carrot to keep them pacified and waiting while their land gets rapidly taken away in West Bank - any discussions of a state only offer 'less than a state' in the words of Rabin with limited right of return, security presence etc which fails meeting the international standard of a sovereign state. Israel thought it can just go on as is and the Palestinian issue is just a thorn on its side that needs removing whenever it pricks them - that the world will forget about them and it could go on to normalise with the Arab nations - this is why they had a uprising and put their cause back on the world stage including Israel's atrocities which they self incriminate themselves with boastfully - it was a cry for the world not to forget them, a violent cry.

Besides the details, doesn’t this whole conflict basically boil down to when Israel was created, how it was created, and how it currently exists. Israel was established during a time when nationalism was popular but colonialism wasn’t. It was a humanitarian cause done on the back of European atrocities to the Jews culminating in the Holocaust - it was colonial power with the entitled colonial mindset which aided its establishment. British colonial interests married to a humanitarian one. The first Zionist bank established was named the ‘Jewish Colonial Trust’ - the endeavour was supported by the ‘Palestine Jewish Colonization Association’ which willed its land assets to todays Jewish National Fund that which serves as a global fundraiser for Israeli settlement expansion. The right to self determination and national consciousness came into the world, fine - but this doesn’t mean the right to self determination at the expense of dominating another group. The Palestinian locals were expected (without consultation) to give away a majority share of their land (56% in the partition plan) to a minority of recently arrived settlers who had been there at most 20 years and only made up a third of the population. If Israel’s creation had occurred this way a few decades earlier it would have encountered less resistance and condemnation as it does in modern times as back then might was right. The few nations that remain today (Anglosphere) from colonisation developed over a much larger span of time - multiple decades to centuries and during a time where strength was respected and accepted once it had established itself over weakness. Israel faces ongoing conflict and condemnation due to its perceived artificial creation and its ongoing occupation and subjugation of the inhabitants unlike states that organically evolve more naturally over time due to the geographic, political and cultural situation of the land and people. Remaining states that started as colonies do so by integrating the locals in a democracy. Israel wasn’t a grassroots movement so much as it was a top down implant. People from elsewhere revived a dormant language (Hebrew) used mostly in the context of religion for their newly formed nation, claimed it as their native tongue and tied it to their ancestral land. This creation was not in harmony with the region's natural circumstances and naturally caused disruption as it was thrust on already existing people for which it had little context or receptivity. Would it be correct then to say the project of Israel was a unnatural foreign imposition done in such a rapid space of time - in a time when colonialism was dying and in a world which now rejects any remains of it including the remaining colonial mindset that entitles one to take another's land and subjugate any locals resistance to this, which then gaslights this resistance as terrorism and any criticism as racist. The region still feels the shockwaves of Israel's inception and the locals are still undergoing oppressive dispossession till today.

What’s the military objective of cutting food and water? Also:

@Nivsch Israel can make a case that they need to destroy buildings to block the tunnels underneath to trap Hamas or cut fuel which can be used for various needs of Hamas - obviously these have secondary effects which threaten civilian life but they can be passed off as accidents of war. Still, with some logic we can understand what these lead to on the civilians. But I just can’t see any excuse for cutting food, water and hindering aid which are primary effects at threatening life of civilians there. What military objective does it achieve? What’s the excuse? That Hamas will use banana peels to slip up IDF like Mario kart or start a food fight or use water cannons.

True. Exposure to information isn't learning - like sitting in front of food but not eating it, and if eating it not digesting it properly. Education in the original sense of the word and its root means to educe - to draw out and bring out the humanity and best in us. Going by what the Nazi's did that isn't the best of humanity but the worst of it. Excess rationality, logic and intellect has a way of rationing us away from life, atomising our existence and mechanising us to be efficient - but it has no inner light, morality or vision which guides them. Rationality, logic and intellect are tools that the Germans mastered, but they didn't master themselves - the wielders of those tools. They missed their internal essence that they share with humanity and of which those tools would be used in the service of.

What should define a terrorist? A few notable people including John Meirsheimer have stated that Hamas are a resistant group at its core, but with terrorist tactics at its periphery that should be condemned and rightly so. What’s being condemned isn’t the cause itself which is a just one (emancipation) but the methods and actions used in the name of that cause. A rebuttal to this will be then what defines a just or unjust cause? Like you said, terrorist groups exist while no one oppresses them and just for their own sake or for unjust causes they deem just - a cause that includes infringing upon other peoples territory or sovereignty with a orientation towards globalism. A unjust cause and a real threat to be thwarted by a coalition are groups with expansionist aspirations who rely on violence - whose ambition isn't just a homeland but all lands. A important detail that's left out in discussion knowingly or unknowingly is the context of occupation and oppression which are both to be resisted against. There's a difference between a resistance organisation with terrorist tactics vs a terrorist organisation with terrorism as its main strategy and operating system. A resistance group like Hamas choose terrorist tactics like a tool out of a toolbox to achieve their objective - terrorism itself isn't an objective. They aren't a threat to Europe or the region who’s will is to impose sharia law on everyone like ISIS for example. If they were the threat their presented to be more of the world would be in support of this war despite the 'collateral' damage - as the world come together against Nazism. Resistance is baked into occupation - it can be expected until that occupation has completely subjugated the original population, genocides or cleanses them or more humanely has finally integrated them into a democratic state (unlike anything similar to apartheid). How this occupation is resisted will differ - India mostly had peaceful resistance against British occupation while the Algerian, Kenyan, Vietnamese or South African resistance included violence. Are Nelson Mandela from South Africa or Matt turner from the slave revolt terrorists?

Well said. It’s not just truth that is the first casualty of war but in this case it’s the truth tellers also - journalists and press have literally been pressed out of existence under rubble. Israel can make a case that they need to destroy buildings to block the tunnels underneath to trap Hamas or cut fuel which can be used for various needs of Hamas - obviously these have second order effects which threaten civilian life but can be passed off as accidents of war. Yet anyone with minimal logic understands what these lead to but if dishonest will deflect from the responsibility of the consequences. Even then, there just can’t be any excuse for cutting food, water and hindering aid which are first order effects at threatening life. What’s the excuse? That Hamas will use banana peels to slip up IDF like Mario kart or start a food fight - or use water cannons. I’m confident in using the term ethnic cleansing but was hesitant to use genocide as these are heavy words but it’s hard not to anymore.

@kenway It’s crazy how they continue to act and speak in incriminating ways despite knowing of a global hearing in the coming week. Like you said it seems their ramping up bombardments before possibly needing to cease - similar to Lebanon in 2006: ”Over the final days of the conflict, the Israeli use pattern changed dramatically. According to the UN, Israel fired 90 percent of its cluster munitions during the last 72 hours, after the UN Security Council had passed Resolution 1701 calling for a ceasefire on August 11, but before the ceasefire took effect at 8 a.m. on August 14.105 During this period, there was also an intensification of bombardment by other weapons, including artillery strikes as well as the aerial strikes on civilian homes with 500-pound bombs.“ - Human Rights Watch More snippets from recent days: