Hamas strike on Israel - Threadbans in op - mod warning in OP updated 19/10/23

It takes a strange mind to watch a video of kids being shot dead during a conflict in which there is widespread acknowledgement that thousands of children have been killed and to ask has the video been verified.

Like, what do you expect the final moment of the 5000+ dead kids looked like? They just curled up, went to sleep and didn't wake up?

Three civilians shot dead in Jerusalem. Yitzhak Rabin was right. You will never convince hawks like Gallant of that, unfortunately.

That's not the question you were asked though, was it?

Oh and everything Hamas or pro-Hamas sources have published has been reliable has it? You know it has not.

You've been reading the thread, you know the utterly false claims that were bandied around about hospital car park attacks. Don't pretend otherwise.

This is just an example of the blatant double standard in your post.

You tried to allege that Israel's claim about hostage mistreatment was unreliable. Hostages have been mistreated - something you tried to deny, acting as if the notion of a hostage under duress was impossible. As per the witness evidence cited on the thread, which understandably would take time to emerge.

So which source is unreliable?

There are lots of verified examples of children that have been killed by Israeli forces. I'm looking for verification that these two cases seeming to show children being deliberately targeted by sniper fire have been verified by an actual media source.

Nope.

Where did I demand anything? Is that an example of a playing the victim posting tactic ?

You were the one challenging claims about hostages, demanding proof.

And when the actual evidence was produced to backup the reasonable expectations of posters, nowhere to be seen.

I'm not demanding anything of you, I am pointing out that your position on hostages was completely undermined by actual evidence.

Therefore any declarations you make as to what is and isn't true about this conflict are unreliable, or what opinions are or are not legitimate.

I am pointing out that such selective responses demonstrate a complete double standard - that only one set of "guys" can legitimately challenge points.

Now again, you are casting aspersions on those making counter evidence claims.

What was entirely reasonable query - given the level of misinformation about the conflict, which in some cases is just the fog of war and in some cases is misinformation, and in some cases is active disinformation. And, contrary to your selective take on events that Israel is unreliable without any acknowledgement there has been all of the above coming from Hamas and pro-Hamas sources.

Therefore, as long as it is not a "just asking questions" charade ... it is an entirely legitimate to question social media claims about such an incident, despite your attempt to suggest otherwise.

Ok, we can establish that you very clearly support Zionism. There is no comparison between India and Israel and trying to make such a claim is disingenuous, there was no Ideological movement to bring Muslims or Hindus or Seikhs to India, they already lived in that area side by side in large numbers and again, it was British involvement that screwed things up and created the Divisions that came to exist within India. The huge movements of people only occurred after partition when people found themselves on the wrong side. This happened whenever you had partitions along religious/nationalistic/ethnic divisions.

There was no large population of Jewish people in Palestine in 1900 and the movement of Jewish people to Palestine was done with the expressed aim of creating a state on the lands occupied by other people, that is very, very different to what happened in India or anywhere else around the World for that matter.

Zionism was always an ideological movement and I cannot think of any other such movements, perhaps you can point me in the direction of such a movement? As was noted by the Commission of Enquiry in 1919, the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine was not a good idea, but that was ignored in favour of ideology and here we are still dealing with the consequences of putting ideology over realism and pragmatism.

So the truce lasts another day. Hopefully it can continue. Doubt it though. Theyll go back to the rinse and repeat of violence on both sides. You have to wonder how much violence is enough before they sit down and organise a peace. I'd say it'll be decades. It'll calm down at some stage and in a few years we'll be back here watching the same. You'd think people would learn from history. But they never do. And as the ones in power slaughter the innocents suffer.

'Alluding to facts' is not the same as stating the truth is it? It can deceive by omission.

It is a fact that hostages are often mistreated in these scenarios.

What's been undermined is rushing to judgment on the treatment of hostages based on early scenes of release, which were possibly conducted under duress - a possibility you refused to consider when pointed out to you.

You haven't seen any posts from anyone doing so?

This was posted to the thread in last 24 hours, strange that you didn't see it...

A Thai foreign worker who was released in recent days from Hamas captivity is quoted by Channel 12 news saying that Israeli hostages with whom he was held were beaten by their captors, including with electric cables. He says there was little to eat for the hostages — a pita a day, sometimes a tin of tuna to share between four, and sometimes a piece of cheese. Held for more than seven weeks, he says they were allowed to shower once. “We were with Israelis, and they were guarded all the time,” he is quoted saying. “The Jews who were held with me were treated very harshly, sometimes they were beaten with electric cables.”

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121435115/#Comment_121435115

3 innocent people were killed in Jerusalem.

2 gunmen opened fire at a bus stop full of people going about their day.

Will we have any marches or demonstrations against this war crime?

I'm neutral on Zionism. I've no dog in the fight. I just like to base my opinions on fact.

Before 1840 there weren't many people of any ethnicity or religious belief in Palestine. The population growth corresponded with the influx of Zionist Jews. Therefore the assertion that the Muslim population of the region can claim lineage going back to antiquity is false. It is true to say that the vast majority of the 300,000 people who did live there before the Zionist influx were Muslims but that's not the same thing at all. It also doesn't delegitimise the argument that the Jews had no right to move there and that Zionism dispossessed and, at the very least, disenfranchised the local Muslim population.

I agree that the report of the 1919 King-Crane Commission was against the establishment of aa Jewish State but it also assumed (or maybe hoped) that the Mandates it recommended be established would turn into liberal democracies. That is particularly the case with Syria, the country that they envisioned would encompass Palestine. The reality is that the Ottomans, themselves an Imperial colonial power, had kept the lid on the fundamentalists for generations but the First World War blew that lid off.

The actions of the Western Powers from before the turn of the 20th Century until after the Second World War created a myriad of problems in the Middle East (and elsewhere). That is at the root of the current conflict.

I'm certainly not saying this applies to you but those blaming Israel in isolation shows a wilful lack of historical knowledge.

Which post?

You guys are going to have to learn that just responding to me and claiming I am wrong, does not make it so.

Immigration to Palestine prior to WW1 was blocked by Ottoman policy. The Jewish population of the area in 1900 was about 4%, Christians about 11% and the rest Moslems or "Ottomans" per the census.

You can't keep your story straight.

This is what you wrote earlier on the thread:

That post, is another piece of evidence, and there have been many, that show that Hamas have been treating the hostages in a much more humane way than the media and Israel/US said they would.

the evidence of how Israeli hostages have been treated is close to 100% the opposite of how Israel said they would be treated. And it is another piece of evidence to show how the narrative that Israel is trying to present is consistently flawed. That's just a simple fact.

Now it is is

"I'm not at all surprised that some hostages have reported being treated poorly."

When earlier you were dismissive of the possibility of the hostages speaking under duress, or speaking publicly out of concern for unreleased hostages.

Talking of how released hostages seem to you are not facts. Those are your comments on events. You are misrepresenting your interpretation of the footage as a fact. It is no such thing. It is your opinion, which you are entitled to, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

Then you double down on the error in your post, by jumping from that non-fact to declare another non-fact about the Israeli narrative.

I think posters can judge for themselves the reliability of your posts on the subject of hostage treatment, or what you declare to be 'facts'.

Being beaten with electrical cables is "being treated poorly" ???

Poorly?

Being beaten with electrical cables is being treated in a humane way is it?

And is that a fact? Or is it only a fact that it has been reported?

And note the phrasing "reported poorly".

But when someone queries whether footage of an reported incident is verified as being from the current conflict, they have a "strange mind".

Speaks volumes about the double standards demonstrated in the posts, your opinions are declared as facts.

Yes it was but they still arrived there. Look at the link you posted. The influx of Zionist money and technology increased living standards in the region and caused a high level of inward migration.

This is from the Jewish Virtual Library so I expect it is putting a positive spin on Zionism but the data and quotes seem to be accurate.

Quote:

A Population Boom

As Hussein foresaw, the regeneration of Palestine, and the growth of its population, came only after Jews returned in massive numbers. The Jewish population increased by 470,000 between World War I and World War II while the non-Jewish population rose by 588,000. In fact, the permanent Arab population increased 120 percent between 1922 and 1947 to more than 1.3 million.

This rapid growth was a result of several factors. One was immigration from neighboring states – constituting 37 percent of the total immigration to pre-state Israel – by Arabs who wanted to take advantage of the higher standard of living the Jews had made possible. The Arab population also grew because of the improved living conditions created by the Jews as they drained malarial swamps and brought improved sanitation and health care to the region. Thus, for example, the Muslim infant mortality rate fell from 201 per thousand in 1925 to 94 per thousand in 1945 and life expectancy rose from 37 years in 1926 to 49 in 1943.

The Arab population increased the most in cities with large Jewish populations that had created new economic opportunities. From 1922-­1947, the non-Jewish population increased 290 percent in Haifa, 131 percent in Jerusalem, and 158 percent in Jaffa. The growth in Arab towns was more modest: 42 percent in Nablus, 78 percent in Jenin and 37 percent in Bethlehem.

Jewish Land Purchases

Despite the growth in their population, the Arabs continued to assert they were being displaced. The truth is from the beginning of World War I, part of Palestine’s land was owned by absentee landlords who lived in Cairo, Damascus and Beirut. About 80 percent of the Palestinian Arabs were debt-ridden peasants, semi-nomads and Bedouins.

Jews went out of their way to avoid purchasing land in areas where Arabs might be displaced. They sought land that was largely uncultivated, swampy, cheap and, most important, without tenants. In 1920, Labor Zionist leader David Ben-Gurion expressed his concern about the Arab fellahin, whom he viewed as “the most important asset of the native population.” Ben-Gurion said, “under no circumstances must we touch land belonging to fellahs or worked by them.” He advocated helping liberate them from their oppressors. “Only if a fellah leaves his place of settlement,” Ben-Gurion added, “should we offer to buy his land, at an appropriate price.”

It was only after the Jews had bought all this available land that they began to purchase cultivated land. Many Arabs were willing to sell because of the migration to coastal towns and because they needed money to invest in the citrus industry.

When John Hope Simpson arrived in Palestine in May 1930, he observed: “They [Jews] paid high prices for the land, and in addition they paid to certain of the occupants of those lands a considerable amount of money which they were not legally bound to pay.”

In 1931, Lewis French conducted a survey of landlessness and eventually offered new plots to any Arabs who had been “dispossessed.” British officials received more than 3,000 applications, of which 80 percent were ruled invalid by the Government’s legal adviser because the applicants were not landless Arabs. This left only about 600 landless Arabs, 100 of whom accepted the Government land offer.

In April 1936, a new outbreak of Arab attacks on Jews was instigated by a Syrian guerrilla named Fawzi al-Qawukji, the commander of the Arab Liberation Army. By November, when the British finally sent a new commission headed by Lord Peel to investigate, 89 Jews had been killed and more than 300 wounded.

The Peel Commission’s report found that Arab complaints about Jewish land acquisition were baseless. It pointed out that “much of the land now carrying orange groves was sand dunes or swamp and uncultivated when it was purchased....there was at the time of the earlier sales little evidence that the owners possessed either the resources or training needed to develop the land.” Moreover, the Commission found the shortage was “due less to the amount of land acquired by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population.” The report concluded that the presence of Jews in Palestine, along with the work of the British Administration, had resulted in higher wages, an improved standard of living and ample employment opportunities.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/aunt-says-hamas-forced-12-year-old-hostage-to-watch-videos-of-atrocities-aimed-gun-at-him-when-he-cried/

We can all see the 'sentiment' in your posts.