Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less

[kaku06]

Piers Morgan thinks he is very convincing when he says he’s neutral but you can see the slimebag where he stands in all of this. Has zero interest before October 7th. Has zero interest in Palestinian suffering and has zero interest in atrocities committed in the West Bank. All his interviews revolve around two questions.

But credit to the slimebag for bringing as many people as he could for the interviews from all sides.

 

[The Corinthian]

I'm posting on behalf of a newbie.

Ah - you've let yourself down here.

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

Quite a charge questions. I am not Muslim but I'll bite anyway:

1) Irrelevant. Israel is there and will stay. A most appropriate and possible question is if Palestine has the right to exist, and the Israel government, voted by a majority of israelians seems to say, no
2) Irrelevant. Whataboutism of the biggest of the magnitud. If muslims in the forum say no, it will had nothing to do with the Israel-Palestine discussion. If muslims in the forum say yes, it will had nothing to do with the Israel discussion and would only be used as an entrance disingenuous point. Not to speak that the majority of muslim majority population countries do not follow the sharia law in its strict form. Why europe reaching this point should be in the minority?

Good post.

 

[the_cliff]

Piers Morgan thinks he is very convincing when he says he’s neutral but you can see the slimebag where he stands in all of this. Has zero interest before October 7th. Has zero interest in Palestinian suffering and has zero interest in atrocities in the West Bank. All his interviews revolve around two questions.

But credit to the slimebag for bringing as many people as he could for the interviews from all sides.

Yeah I'd have to agree there. Many of my colleagues that didn't know a thing about the Palestine situation pre October 7th now see things in a different light. Instead of lying the blame solely on Hamas

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

Douglas Murray: lies lies lies
Piers: "Would you debate Norman Finkelstein?"
Murray: "God no, are you crazy?!?!?"

Murray was so glad 9/11 happened because he could craft out a 20 year career peddling Islamophobia and have a justification for it.

A horrible, pernicious scrote.

 

[The Corinthian]

Piers Morgan thinks he is very convincing when he says he’s neutral but you can see the slimebag where he stands in all of this. Has zero interest before October 7th. Has zero interest in Palestinian suffering and has zero interest in atrocities committed in the West Bank. All his interviews revolve around two questions.

But credit to the slimebag for bringing as many people as he could for the interviews from all sides.

He's chasing clicks and likes and retweets of his guests with soundbites. A totally disingenuous human being.

 

[kaku06]

He's chasing clicks and likes and retweets of his guests with soundbites. A totally disingenuous human being.

I know and I feel dirty for giving any credit to the cnut for that knowing how dishonest he is.

 

[VorZakone]

I know and I feel dirty for giving any credit to the cnut for that knowing how dishonest he is.

Yet I've seen pro-Palestinian voices on his show. Can't fault him for only inviting one side.

 

[Giggsyking]

Bringing Murray after him was a disgrace.

 

[4bars]

Yet I've seen pro-Palestinian voices on his show. Can't fault him for only inviting one side.

But what is better, not giving them voice? or using them in a very facetious way trying to diminish the pro-Palestinians point to push his agenda? Because a proper journalist should invite all POV and try to remain as neutral as possible, not side with one side and berate the other

 

[The Corinthian]

Bringing Murray after him was a disgrace.

But what is better, not giving them voice? or using them in a very facetious way trying to diminish the pro-Palestinians point to push his agenda? Because a proper journalist should invite all POV and try to remain as neutral as possible, not side with one side and berate the other

Also this idea that he's the arbiter of morality, and his morality starts on Oct 7th is such a dumb way to host a debate. Its classic Piers - make himself the centre of the story, and the room. He's literally the most unimportant person when he has his guests on, but it has to be 'do you condemn x, I do?'. He should be called out for it.

 

[Kaos]

I don't like Piers, and find his interview style a little infuriating, but I do appreciate he's actually offered his platform to those on the Palestinian side, which is a lot more than you can say for most outlets. Granted he's doing it out of the views he generates instead of a genuine commitment to a balanced discourse, but I'll take it. The Bassem Youssef interviews were pivotal ones I think, and I'm glad he's given the likes of Professor Finkelstein a stage too.

 

[JagUTD]

It changes nothing.

It would, if accurate. We've previously had figures posted and used to show Israel isn't even getting who it claims to be after. Can't remember off the top of my head but something like 500 out of 5000 was the claim.

It would not justify the deaths of innocent people. Nothing does, each one is and always be a tragedy. But it would paint a different picture in terms of whether or not Israel is even achieving what it's claims to want.

It should also bring more questions, for both Israel and Hamas. Where they killed being the first, when and who else suffered because of it?

I think some of you get so caught up in your anger towards Israel, you forget there's another set of bad guys who's actions are contributing significantly to the suffering of people in Gaza, to the point it now widely claimed in here that Israel is intentionally targeting civilians which must imply they're not even going after Hamas.

These figures would challenge that view.

 

[Giggsy PO]

What a disgusting interview. Calling Hamas actions heroic because to His knowledge at that time there were only 50 victims? Really? WTF? How can he look in the mirror?

Denying the nature of atrocities - it is up for a question? It is shocking.

Utterly deplorable words. And in some countries such statements would be prosecutable by law (crime endorsement).

 

[Halftrack]

What a disgusting interview. Calling Hamas actions heroic because to His knowledge at that time there were only 50 victims? Really? WTF? How can he look in the mirror?

Denying the nature of atrocities - it is up for a question? It is shocking.

Utterly deplorable words. And in some countries such statements would be prosecutable by law (crime endorsement).

Which countries are those?

 

[stevoc]

This matters though. Maybe not on here but then what exactly can we do from a forum? Are the endless dodgy tweets helping anyone? No, probably causing more problems if anything (less of them now though, more discussion as requested by the mods).

It matters when it comes to Israel and Palestine finding peace. The point of no return has not been reached and genocide is that point. There's no coming back from it, no possibility of peace after that. So if you think we have reached that point, then it's over as far as there ever being coexistence. Thankfully the people who will ultimately make that distinction don't think we have crossed the line so there's still hope.

There's also the fact that misusing a word dilutes it's meaning. There's a reason genocide isn't something levied at groups very often, why until 1944 it wasn't even a word despite there having been many historical examples of mass slaughter.

Anyway, I'll leave it there.

Correct, it has no relevance to this discussion. A thread on an Internet football forum I'd wager will play no part in any possible peace between Israel and Palestine.

Fair enough.

 

[stevoc]

I'm posting on behalf of a newbie.

This forum still has a promotion system as far as I know. If the mods/scouts thought that Newbies posts were worth reading then I'm sure they'd be promoted by now and they could post it themselves.

 

[calodo2003]

What a disgusting interview. Calling Hamas actions heroic because to His knowledge at that time there were only 50 victims? Really? WTF? How can he look in the mirror?

Denying the nature of atrocities - it is up for a question? It is shocking.

Utterly deplorable words. And in some countries such statements would be prosecutable by law (crime endorsement).

Which person was interviewed?

 

[The Corinthian]

Which person was interviewed?

Finkelstein

 

[calodo2003]

Finkelstein

Thanks!

 

[Kaos]

What a disgusting interview. Calling Hamas actions heroic because to His knowledge at that time there were only 50 victims? Really? WTF? How can he look in the mirror?

Denying the nature of atrocities - it is up for a question? It is shocking.

Utterly deplorable words. And in some countries such statements would be prosecutable by law (crime endorsement).

To be fair he said he was under the assumption those 50 were killed in a firefight, so he interpreted as Hamas breaking the siege and engaging Israeli security forces. Hence his parallels with the Warsaw Ghetto. I don't think he at any point commended or endorsed the murder of civilians.

 

[Giggsyking]

 

[jadaba]

Obviously we would need to wait for confirmation, if it ever comes, but are these 5000 part of the overall death tolls reported by Hamas?

If true and part of the reported deaths it does slightly change the perception, though before anyone jumps, does not in anyway reduce the pain and suffering of innocent Palestinians whatsoever. Just in terms of optics and the "aims" of Israel.

But how do you even know if someone is Hamas. Besides them hiding amongst civilians, they basically are civilians. They're not in camo, half the time they'll be with family, with groups of the public blending in.

Also, do Hamas actually announce Hamas deaths? As in separate to not combative deaths?

Should note that the article itself and the Israeli military source do not present the 5,000 figure as a proper estimation, but rather in very speculative terms.

The paragraph itself states: "A senior Israeli military official said the assault had “significantly hurt” 10 of Hamas’s 24 battalions, which before the war each had about 1,000 soldiers. Including the roughly 1,000 militants killed in Israel after Hamas launched the October 7 attack, Israeli officials estimate that 5,000 of Hamas’s roughly 25,000 fighters have now been killed. “It’s not 10,000, but it’s not 1,000. It’s something in the middle,” the senior military official said."

Gaza immediate reporting of death tolls from past wars have a strong track record of accuracy, and there's a strong logic and incentive for them to remain accurate now. They're reporting that two-thirds of the 14,500 killed are women and children, meaning nearly 5,000 would be men. If the Israeli military is broadly referring to these numbers too, then it's possible that practically every killed man is being considered as a Hamas member.

 

[ManUtd1999]

I don’t know why Israelis insist on “shame on you” and disrespecting when they talk with others. Not gonna help.

 

[Wibble]

One more time, there is no Palestinian race.

I believe the correct term is ethnonational group. But does the exact term really matter as we all know who we are talking about?

 

[Wibble]

What boundaries have I pushed? What are they complaining about? We had @gfactor86 literally replying to posters with 'feck you' and saying Palestine isn't a real place. What are you doing about that?

You are one of the most often reported posters in this thread and one the modmins have almost unanimously noticed as being biased and quite inflammatory in your postings at times. Far from the only one of course.

@gfactor86 by contrast has been thread banned from both the Israel/Palestine thread, the Islamophobia/Anti-Semitism thread, and now the stabbing in Ireland thread for his input on the issues. Plus warnings and numerous posts deleted. He is now on thin ground entirely of his own making. It may just be that the pro-Israeli posters push the boundaries even further than the pro-Palestinian posters, but I also suspect that we moderate pro-Palestinian posters more sympathetically as they are usually mainly protesting the civilian deaths/suffering aspect of the whole thing - which is as it should be I'd say.

 

[Super Hans]

I don't like Piers, and find his interview style a little infuriating, but I do appreciate he's actually offered his platform to those on the Palestinian side, which is a lot more than you can say for most outlets. Granted he's doing it out of the views he generates instead of a genuine commitment to a balanced discourse, but I'll take it. The Bassem Youssef interviews were pivotal ones I think, and I'm glad he's given the likes of Professor Finkelstein a stage too.

Based on this post I started watching the Bassem Youssef interview. First answer was gold

 

[Super Hans]

What a disgusting interview. Calling Hamas actions heroic because to His knowledge at that time there were only 50 victims? Really? WTF? How can he look in the mirror?

Denying the nature of atrocities - it is up for a question? It is shocking.

Utterly deplorable words. And in some countries such statements would be prosecutable by law (crime endorsement).

50 victims when the world was aware that Israeli military had been a large share of it (and I may be wrong but I think when Israel released the names of the dead a few weeks later a huge proportion had military designations in front of their names).

But let me ask you, when Nat Turner and his accomplices hacked and beheaded 50 odd civilians in 1831, do you now view that in the same way?

 

[Sly]

The rules say don't post gratuitous - the video isn't gratuitous at all.

What boundaries have I pushed? What are they complaining about? We had @gfactor86 literally replying to posters with 'feck you' and saying Palestine isn't a real place. What are you doing about that?

I've pushed for him to be dealt with in the scouts thread but that has nothing to do with your continuous abrasive behavior, don't deflect because there's no double standard. At least you have apologized to @That_Bloke. I have defended you in the past because of your posting historial pre October 7 and contribution to the the thread but I insist on you following thread guidelines since you keep getting signaled or called out. You have been afforded far more chances than posters usually do.

 

[BootsyCollins]

Palestine?

Are the mods taking down your post or have you just completely stopped responding to posters?
On the last pages, when you have written something in this thread, gets an answer with some pushback to what you wrote and then nothing from you in return. Its seems like you starts a conversation and then just drops out of it when your views are challenged.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

It says a few posts above that the user is banned from the thread.

 

[Giggsyking]

It would, if accurate. We've previously had figures posted and used to show Israel isn't even getting who it claims to be after. Can't remember off the top of my head but something like 500 out of 5000 was the claim.

It would not justify the deaths of innocent people. Nothing does, each one is and always be a tragedy. But it would paint a different picture in terms of whether or not Israel is even achieving what it's claims to want.

It should also bring more questions, for both Israel and Hamas. Where they killed being the first, when and who else suffered because of it?

I think some of you get so caught up in your anger towards Israel, you forget there's another set of bad guys who's actions are contributing significantly to the suffering of people in Gaza, to the point it now widely claimed in here that Israel is intentionally targeting civilians which must imply they're not even going after Hamas.

These figures would challenge that view.

I do not believe these numbers. If they mean 5000 of all the 14000 died are Hamas fighters, then they mean all the men killed until now in Gaza are combatants. Do you really believe that?
Obviously the pressure is getting stronger by the minute and they have to justify their atrocities.

People only talk about the death count, what about the city that is uninhabitable for 1.7 m civilian. When this war stops, kids have no schools to go to, sick people no hospital, and ordinary Gazan has no roof upon his head and will have to sleep in a tent for gods know how many months if not years.

70% percent of the Gazan population are already displaced Palestinians from the Nakba and the Naksa and they already had to rebuild their lives away from their actual homes, how is this fair on them.

Altogether unjust.

 

[africanspur]

Are the mods taking down your post or have you just completely stopped responding to posters?
On the last pages, when you have written something in this thread, gets an answer with some pushback to what you wrote and then nothing from you in return. Its seems like you starts a conversation and then just drops out of it when your views are challenged.

Mixture of the two. He's been thread banned I think but does have a habit of ignoring points he can't answer.

 

[BootsyCollins]

Mixture of the two. He's been thread banned I think but does have a habit of ignoring points he can't answer.

It says a few posts above that the user is banned from the thread.

Thanks guys.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

I think some of you get so caught up in your anger towards Israel, you forget there's another set of bad guys who's actions are contributing significantly to the suffering of people in Gaza, to the point it now widely claimed in here that Israel is intentionally targeting civilians which must imply they're not even going after Hamas.

I don't see how that follows.

Hamas attacked a bunch of civilians, intentionally. But that does not imply they weren't going after the IDF nor that there wouldn't be many IDF casualties. You can have multiple objectives.

 

[Giggsyking]

I don't see how that follows.

Hamas attacked a bunch of civilians, intentionally. But that does not imply they weren't going after the IDF nor that there wouldn't be many IDF casualties. You can have multiple objectives.

Even if we believe the IDF numbers of Hamas combatants who died until this moment (which I do not believe), it is stil the same combatant to civilian death ratio to the Hamas attacks. How does that make the IDF any different from Hamas?

 

[flameinthesun]

What a disgusting interview. Calling Hamas actions heroic because to His knowledge at that time there were only 50 victims? Really? WTF? How can he look in the mirror?

Denying the nature of atrocities - it is up for a question? It is shocking.

Utterly deplorable words. And in some countries such statements would be prosecutable by law (crime endorsement).

His explanation for why he posted what he posted was fair. Whether he should have deleted it after or not is a fair conversation to have as well.

His point regarding Nat Turner's rebellion is a fair one as well as his response to Pier's question regarding what his parents would think of what he posted. Its an uncomfortable discussion point for people because it puts them in a moral quandary. Nat Turner's rebellion killed loads of innocent people including women and children, yet to a large number of people he is seen as a hero and an example of resistance. If Jews within the concentration camps had been given the opportunity to break out of their camps and take revenge on the Nazi soldiers and their families, there is a high likelihood that they would have.

If say for example in 50 years time Gaza and the West bank are unified as 1 Palestine, the people there have been restored their rights and they are able to live their lives to the fullest, how would actions like October 7th be seen to those future Palestinian people? There would be a good chance that Oct 7th would be viewed to them as Nat Turner's rebellion is viewed now. Alternatively, if there is no Palestine in 50 years Oct 7th would be viewed as one of the greatest terror attacks ever because at that stage history will be written by Israel.

Now that is not to endorse Oct 7th or what Israel is doing, however it highlights the silliness of the stance of people like Piers. Piers knows full well that if he was born in Gaza, living under those conditions, treated like animals then most likely he would have been one of those breaking through into Israel.

 

[Giggsyking]

I maybe missed something in the past few days, but what are these indisputable evidens of the Hamas Command center?

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

There was an article two days ago in Politico which starts: "The Biden administration has been providing Israel with the location of humanitarian groups in Gaza for weeks to prevent strikes against their facilities. But Israel has continued to hit such sites."

A UN official is quoted as saying "we don’t see eye-to-eye on what they consider collateral damage or military necessity and what we consider a very high civilian toll, whether it’s in life or in infrastructure, including ours. The response we get is, ‘Well, your school is in the middle of what we consider to be a military or an operation area."

The article states that "those who’ve worked for aid groups in the region say Israel is deserting practices it has used previously to protect humanitarian groups."

This is weeks after a similar article in the Washington Post about Israel's standards. In that article, the director of the Ceasefire Center for Human Rights is quoted as saying "the Jabalya strike, because it was a planned attack, shows that Israel must have a tolerance for civilian casualties which is orders of magnitude greater than that that was used by, say, the U.S. Air Force in the war against ISIS."

The same author wrote a longer piece for Lawfare which concludes: "the accepted circumstances of the Oct. 31 Jabalia attack and the light shed by the IDF statement on planning for the attack suggest that Israel’s tolerance for civilian casualties is now completely out of step with that employed by the U.S. and its coalition partners in the war against ISIS and other counterterrorism operations in Iraq and Afghanistan over two decades."

 

[Dirty Schwein]

So watched that Norm Finklestein segment on Piers and feck me that's not an interview, it's an interrogation.

Firstly, this guy is older than Old Spice, he needs more than the measly 20 or so minutes allocated to him.

Piers introduces him as a controversial voice. He is one but let the audience decide. The lower third ticker also said things like "critics describe him as a self-hating Jew". The picture they painted before he even got to speak a word was disgusting.

Piers normally tries to bully his pro-Palestinian guests for the first half about something they may have said/done controversial (as he did with the first Hijab interview, the Piker interview etc) then has a handful of set topics which he asks his guests but here, the interview was very different. He just kept trying to character assassinate without actually ever discussing the Israel-Palestine talking points beyond "would you condemn Hamas?".

It's clear that Piers had no intention of interviewing this dude. A few posters alerted me to Norm on this thread and I have been looking into him a fair bit and he has dedicated his life to this conflict. He is the perfect person to ask all the questions Piers normally asks his guests but here, he just wants to talk about a statement Norm put out prematurely. He had zero interest in hearing anything Norm had to say on the real issues that affect the conflict and the discourse around them.

And if that wasn't enough, he then lets Douglas Murray unload on Norm uninterrupted and unchallenged for five minutes straight to finish out the show. I wonder why...

Piers said he wants Norm back on the show so hopefully we get a proper debate that's at least an hour long if it does happen because the one yesterday was a mockery of a "debate".