Electronic Intifada as a source:
The EI is...quite the source. It has argued Hamas is akin to the ANC of South Africa,[1] quietly ignoring that the ANC did and does not do many of the horrific atrocities Hamas commits against its own citizens[2] (let alone Israeli citizens), glorifying Hassan Nasrallah[3], declaring without evidence that Israel is not a nation that is deeply traumatized (the majority of its citizens having been genocided for 2,000+ years) and also evidently not knowing the first thing about epigenetics[4], advocating against posters that simply state that people have been kidnapped and held hostage in Gaza and declaring such a thing to have 'genocidal sentiment'[5], defending and glorifying October 7 at least five times[6] and even referring to Hamas soldiers killed because...um...they were soldiers attacking civilians as martyrs[7], arguing Zionism--a Jewish idea from the start--is rooted in antisemitism, showing a drastic misunderstanding of what that implies (that a Jewish state is needed because the world simply cannot be trusted with Jewish safety)[8], do something effectively equivalent to asking the general US population what counts as transphobia or racism or Islamophobia, rather than the trans, Black, and Muslim communities respectively[9]. But I will humor them.
>["all" of Israel being built on land Palestinians were expelled from in 1948]
This claim is easily and demonstratably falsifiable. Much of Israel was owned by Jews in 1945[10]. And much of the rest of it was 'public and other' land, no more Palestinian than Jewish (and the public land could be transferred to the Jewish country by the UN or Britain, of course).
>[genocide claim]
This is a genuine question that I have asked people many times and never gotten an answer to - is this genocide or simply the high (and horrific) death toll that comes with urban warfare? Gaza, after all, has a population density higher than New York City. It would be difficult for even the most humanitarian army imaginable to wage war in New York City without many civilian casualties. Among urban warfare in similarly-dense areas, or projected death tolls for those (I'm sure the US government has done some report on the projected civilian deaths from a war in NYC), is Gaza exceptional?
Of course, there is much more to a genocide than the death toll -- but that is what outlets like EI tend to lean into, although a death toll does not a genocide make.[11]
>[rape as a lie]
This is a disgusting claim. The rapes have been corroborated by the UN (as the Electronic Intifada has noted). Furthermore, much evidence cannot be gotten, because the witnesses are dead, and the bodies themselves, one hopes, quietly buried. There was massive rape, and Hamas at least seems to have been lax about punishing it, if not encouraging it top-down.
They treat deaths by Hamas of fleeing fighters as somehow Israel's fault because Hamas was waiting for Israeli soldiers. By this logic, most if not all of the adult male Palestinian deaths in Gaza are actually Hamas's fault; Hamas, after all, is little-distinguished from the civilian population.
[The baby]
Their defense is that...er. They were trying to kill adult civilians? That's not a good defense.
[Hannibal Directive and civilian deaths]
Haaretz has published a thorough investigation of the deaths here: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-04-18/ty-article-st.... (If you can't read it, they accept email accounts generated with email services like Temp-mail or 10minutemail.) Very few of the deaths are attributable to the IDF, simply because the IDF was occupied defending its own bases and responding.
> history didn't start on October 7th
For hominids in that region, it appears to have started about 1.5 million years ago (https://www.persee.fr/doc/paleo_0153-9345_1988_num_14_2_4455), although they didn't have writing. Some of the earlier historical records we have (historical here construed to mean non-Biblical) are interesting because they appear to affirm a Hebraic presence three thousand years ago[12]. Other historical records confirm Rome's forced exile of Jews, the discriminatory policies Jews suffered under, the 1948 attacks by everyone around, and the 1948-67 failure of Jordan and Egypt to set up independent Palestinian states in the West Bank (including Jerusalem's Jewish Quarter, which Jews were expelled from and prohibited from entering to pray at the Western Wall, the holiest still-standing site; but that's another story) and Gaza respectively. There is a long history, and starting the clock in 1967 isn't accurate either.
[11] Genocide requires intent. To take two examples - suppose Australia decides to attack Nauru, a small island nation of about 1,100 people. They embark on a campaign to systematically exterminate every Nauruan for some inexplicable reason, and succeed. This is a clear-cut case of genocide. But suppose on the way, Australia acquires a nuclear bomb and plans to detonate it over Nauru, ensuring no survivors. Unfortunately, the plane gets derailed, and the confused pilot accidentally detonates it over Singapore, killing 100,000 Singaporeans. While this killed many more people than Nauru, it was not a genocide itself; it was an accident (and an attempted genocide of Nauruans). The proportion of the population is also iffy. If Australia's plan was a small land invasion (which killed 2 Nauruans before being repelled) and then, if that failed, dropping five nukes on the island, but all five went off track and dropped on poor Singapore, killing 1,000,000 Singaporeans, despite the fact that that killed many more Singaporeans both in absolute numbers and proportionally than Nauruans, it could still be described as an attempted genocide of Nauruans and not one of Singaporeans.
Note also that this applies solely to Ashkenazi Jews, the ones the conspiracy theory generally applies to and the most reasonable (a 1,000 foot pile of bullshit rather than a 1,001 foot pile, to be clear). However, this doesn't even matter, because most Israeli Jews are Mizrahim, from the Middle East and North Africa. I fail to see how a kingdom that was roughly from the Caucasus and extended into southern Ukraine could manage to get its genes into those of Jews whose ancestors lived in, say, Libya for centuries or millennia (and were expelled following Israel's independence, if you're wondering how they ended up in Israel. The whole exodus of Jews from Muslim countries was roughly equal to that of Palestinians from Israel. The reason you don't hear about the plight of those refugees is that Israel, at the time a young new state still working things out, accepted them quickly and without delay, often proactively getting Jews out to safety.)
I agree that it's not ethnic cleansing, but that's an awful support. Just because you're bad at evil doesn't make you not evil. Like, I assume Israel's population has gone up since October 7, which doesn't make it any less attempted genocide.
TL;DR: After spending more time than reasonable gathering sources, I can conclude that, save for the first sentence in point 3 (and questions), every single sentence either justifies Israel's current conduct, is a flat-out lie, or both. It took me very little time to actually gather one source against these claims, I just wanted a ton.
> brutal...revolt
It was a rebellion. Against a settler-colonial group. You have previously expressed support for the exact same thing.
If that justifies genocide, what complaints do you have about Gaza? You should be cheering Israel on - Hamas killed innocents, back then they killed the people actually responsible (still bad but a different level).
Unless, of course, what really matters is that in one case it's the Jews being killed.
>DNA analysis
Also, about DNA analysis - what kind of DNA analysis do you have? Jews absolutely are connected genetically[1] and culturally[2]. Nice try, but false.
Also, most Israeli Jews aren't even European, as anyone with even the slightest amount of knowledge would know - they're from the Middle East and North Africa, having been pushed out by rising antisemitism after the creation of the state of Israel.
Also, reminder: historically, conversion was not allowed, neither was intermarriage, and even if it was it would not have been at all accepted by anyone, and given that Jews often had no legal recourse, were sold as slaves, and were at one point (following our revolt but that's beside the point) raped so much the rabbis decided "screw it Judaism is matrilineal now", and that genes can't tell you how they got there, this is in all probability blaming us for being raped too much.
Also: genotype is not indigenousness. End of goddamn discussion.
> slave trade
First of all, IF Dutch Jews controlled the slave trade, then the logical solution would be for Dutch Jews to partially pay reparations. But most Jews aren't Dutch; my family, for instance, traces its origins to places like Lithuania, Germany, Russia, Moldova, et cetera -- eastern Europe. (Before that, of course, Israel. But that's beside the point.) And as noted, most Israeli Jews are also not of Dutch descent. If it is Dutch Jews, one would think, well, Dutch Jews ought to be responsible, and not Jews whose ancestors never set foot in the Netherlands. (Never mind that the slave trade was only a small part of slavery).
But more importantly: they didn't. Your claim, as usual, is factually incorrect, in two ways. First of all, the Netherlands wasn't that big a player in the slave trade[3] and secondly it wasn't run by Dutch Jews[4].
In fact, it can be established that at most 70 percent of slave traders could be Jews.[5] ("Could be" meaning "if the moment they were allowed back into a country they immediately took over all slave trading by that country and also if they were let in in 1786 but 1776-1800 are lumped together they were let in 10 years early", to be clear.)
I look forward to your detailed rebuttal with well-documented, reliable, citations (no, Protocols of the Elders of Zion does not count)! Or your acceptance that you are factually inaccurate. Either one is fine; the former demonstrates a willingness to back up claims, the latter a willingness to admit wrongness. For now, I consider my copious citations sufficient to shift the burden of proof to you.
[3] https://oxfordre.com/africanhistory/display/10.1093/acrefore.... "The Dutch share in the Atlantic slave trade averaged about 5 to 6 percent of the total...During the first eighty years after Columbus, the Atlantic slave trade remained firmly in the hands of the Portuguese [who, I note, had expelled their Jews in 1496]." See also the first link in footnote 5 below.
Breaking: killing kids[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] including a NINE MONTH OLD BABY[17] not evil when done to Jews (never mind that some weren't)
Do you realize how contradictory you sound? It's one thing to say Israel is eviler. It's quite another thing to say Hamas isn't evil at all.
The only conclusion I can come to is that you are antisemitic or (willfully, there is no excuse for speaking as if you know and not knowing the first thing, not now, not with so much information easily available) blind.
The fact Jews emigrated to the Muslim world is an indictment of the Christian one, not praiseworthy for them. If we're killed every Tuesday in Europe but every other Tuesday in the Islamic world and move there it does not mean they were good to us.
I do not normally swear, but what the fuck? We absolutely were expelled (genocided, really).
Or what else would you call the Romans banning us from our holy city Jerusalem (and renaming it, just like they renamed the whole region to try to deny our indigenousness, and also bulldozing our temple--you can go see it today, it's underneath the Al-Aqsa Mosque) and selling us as slaves around the empire and subsequent rulers forbidding us to return!?
I don't know if it's just me, but it feels like a very deliberate choice that this wasn't written in the easy-to-comprehend, easy-to-grasp style that's so prevalent online. It's harder. It requires, to some degree, even slightly, conscious effort to parse.
It feels like the perfect union of form and content, at least given the constraints of it being online, which by its very nature encourages distractions, flitting from one thing to another, reading many things, comprehending none, constantly switching what we're doing. (I noticed this while reading that - the urge to read something easier, simpler, with more shiny attention-grabbing things. It's the first time I've seriously experimented with Google's reading mode.) But, of course, a print publication, better-suited to the form, would get much less traction.
Electronic Intifada as a source: The EI is...quite the source. It has argued Hamas is akin to the ANC of South Africa,[1] quietly ignoring that the ANC did and does not do many of the horrific atrocities Hamas commits against its own citizens[2] (let alone Israeli citizens), glorifying Hassan Nasrallah[3], declaring without evidence that Israel is not a nation that is deeply traumatized (the majority of its citizens having been genocided for 2,000+ years) and also evidently not knowing the first thing about epigenetics[4], advocating against posters that simply state that people have been kidnapped and held hostage in Gaza and declaring such a thing to have 'genocidal sentiment'[5], defending and glorifying October 7 at least five times[6] and even referring to Hamas soldiers killed because...um...they were soldiers attacking civilians as martyrs[7], arguing Zionism--a Jewish idea from the start--is rooted in antisemitism, showing a drastic misunderstanding of what that implies (that a Jewish state is needed because the world simply cannot be trusted with Jewish safety)[8], do something effectively equivalent to asking the general US population what counts as transphobia or racism or Islamophobia, rather than the trans, Black, and Muslim communities respectively[9]. But I will humor them.
>["all" of Israel being built on land Palestinians were expelled from in 1948]
This claim is easily and demonstratably falsifiable. Much of Israel was owned by Jews in 1945[10]. And much of the rest of it was 'public and other' land, no more Palestinian than Jewish (and the public land could be transferred to the Jewish country by the UN or Britain, of course).
>[genocide claim]
This is a genuine question that I have asked people many times and never gotten an answer to - is this genocide or simply the high (and horrific) death toll that comes with urban warfare? Gaza, after all, has a population density higher than New York City. It would be difficult for even the most humanitarian army imaginable to wage war in New York City without many civilian casualties. Among urban warfare in similarly-dense areas, or projected death tolls for those (I'm sure the US government has done some report on the projected civilian deaths from a war in NYC), is Gaza exceptional?
Of course, there is much more to a genocide than the death toll -- but that is what outlets like EI tend to lean into, although a death toll does not a genocide make.[11]
>[rape as a lie]
This is a disgusting claim. The rapes have been corroborated by the UN (as the Electronic Intifada has noted). Furthermore, much evidence cannot be gotten, because the witnesses are dead, and the bodies themselves, one hopes, quietly buried. There was massive rape, and Hamas at least seems to have been lax about punishing it, if not encouraging it top-down.
They treat deaths by Hamas of fleeing fighters as somehow Israel's fault because Hamas was waiting for Israeli soldiers. By this logic, most if not all of the adult male Palestinian deaths in Gaza are actually Hamas's fault; Hamas, after all, is little-distinguished from the civilian population.
[The baby]
Their defense is that...er. They were trying to kill adult civilians? That's not a good defense.
[Hannibal Directive and civilian deaths]
Haaretz has published a thorough investigation of the deaths here: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-04-18/ty-article-st.... (If you can't read it, they accept email accounts generated with email services like Temp-mail or 10minutemail.) Very few of the deaths are attributable to the IDF, simply because the IDF was occupied defending its own bases and responding.
> history didn't start on October 7th
For hominids in that region, it appears to have started about 1.5 million years ago (https://www.persee.fr/doc/paleo_0153-9345_1988_num_14_2_4455), although they didn't have writing. Some of the earlier historical records we have (historical here construed to mean non-Biblical) are interesting because they appear to affirm a Hebraic presence three thousand years ago[12]. Other historical records confirm Rome's forced exile of Jews, the discriminatory policies Jews suffered under, the 1948 attacks by everyone around, and the 1948-67 failure of Jordan and Egypt to set up independent Palestinian states in the West Bank (including Jerusalem's Jewish Quarter, which Jews were expelled from and prohibited from entering to pray at the Western Wall, the holiest still-standing site; but that's another story) and Gaza respectively. There is a long history, and starting the clock in 1967 isn't accurate either.
[1] https://electronicintifada.net/content/why-west-wrong-about-...
[2] eg 44 (!) summary executions (https://www.btselem.org/inter_palestinian_violations/death_p...), torture (https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/05/gaza-palestin...), summary punishment and more torture (https://www.hrw.org/report/2012/10/03/abusive-system/failure...), prison terms for exposing corruption (https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/02/gaza-journali...), et cetera, et cetera.
[3] https://electronicintifada.net/content/hasan-nasrallah-died-.... For reference, Hezbollah is widely despised by Lebanese as well.
[4] https://electronicintifada.net/content/israels-holocaust-tra...
[5] https://electronicintifada.net/content/kidnapped-posters-ser...
[6] https://electronicintifada.net/content/what-did-7-october-ac..., https://electronicintifada.net/content/myth-israels-invincib..., https://electronicintifada.net/content/just-another-battle-o..., https://electronicintifada.net/content/hamas-fighters-gaza-s.... See also citation 7.
[7] https://electronicintifada.net/content/tearing-down-gazas-ir...
[8] https://electronicintifada.net/content/anti-semitic-roots-zi...
[9] https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/nora-barrows-friedman/c...
[10] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Palestin...
[11] Genocide requires intent. To take two examples - suppose Australia decides to attack Nauru, a small island nation of about 1,100 people. They embark on a campaign to systematically exterminate every Nauruan for some inexplicable reason, and succeed. This is a clear-cut case of genocide. But suppose on the way, Australia acquires a nuclear bomb and plans to detonate it over Nauru, ensuring no survivors. Unfortunately, the plane gets derailed, and the confused pilot accidentally detonates it over Singapore, killing 100,000 Singaporeans. While this killed many more people than Nauru, it was not a genocide itself; it was an accident (and an attempted genocide of Nauruans). The proportion of the population is also iffy. If Australia's plan was a small land invasion (which killed 2 Nauruans before being repelled) and then, if that failed, dropping five nukes on the island, but all five went off track and dropped on poor Singapore, killing 1,000,000 Singaporeans, despite the fact that that killed many more Singaporeans both in absolute numbers and proportionally than Nauruans, it could still be described as an attempted genocide of Nauruans and not one of Singaporeans.
[12] https://web.archive.org/web/20160304045731/http://prophetess...