"Zionists know that the Jewish people need a state to protect their existence. You want the country destroyed that’s home to half the world’s Jewish people. Zionism is necessary because of people like you."

Zionists focus on their "need" but completely discount other peoples needs or rights. And you use it as a justification for crimes. You fail Kant's simple ethic test right off the bat, which is: "what if everyone did that"

The Palestinians and Syrians have even more of claim on the reasoning you put forth than you do-- even if we accept such clumsy justifications as legitimate, which they clearly are not. Its the logic of an angry 3 year old who hasnt learned that we need a system of sharing that we all follow, not simply that the 3 year old gets whatever they want.

why are you using the logic of a 3 year old? Why are you entitled to such a viewpoint where others are not?

[+] Samskara@sh.itjust.works -6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

People like you only tolerate Jews when they’re a persecuted minority. You can’t stand them taking their destiny into their own hands.

I also support Palestinian rights to self determination in peaceful coexistence. I don’t support settlement of the West Bank.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Cute (and flagrantly dishonest) how when someone criticizes zionism you instantly try to frame it as a stance against all jews.

You can’t stand them taking their destiny into their own hands.

You misrepresent massive war crimes against civilians with ziuonist terrorists "taking their destiny into their own hands."

If you read about the mass murder, terrorism, biological warfare, and theft that occurred in the nakba https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba

and then you go on to support the state of israel, I dont think you can say you support peaceful coexistence -- because the Nakba -- the foundation of Israel still continues-- it never stopped. Murder, terrorism, biological warfare, and herding 750,000 Palestinian civilians at gunpoint into gaza and the west bank, and now more ethnic cleansing exactly like the last round. Its all one big long war crime. One of the worst I have ever heard of. And its not dusty history, its now. Dont tell me you were in a concentratiuon camp or that you are in any danger today or are being kept in an armed camp starving to death. You're not in that danger and never have been. Nor do I agree that jewish people were in imminent danger broadly and a state was in any way required. It was desired, not required. The justification zionists use is that the land was promised by their religious texts. Its all bloodthirsty criminal nonsense.

And it was taken from actual people, the land Israel sits on wasnt empty. It was stolen.

And stop pretending you are defending jews, you are not. You put them in danger by trying to ascribe zionist terrorism with all jews.

[+] Samskara@sh.itjust.works -7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

Nakba

900,000 Jews were expelled from Arab and Muslim countries after Israel‘s foundation. Most went to Israel.

And it was taken from actual people, the land Israel sits on wasnt empty. It was stolen.

Until Israel‘s war of independence, all land was legally bought.

Israel is a tiny country founded by refugees, who didn’t have anywhere else to go. They had to fight in 1947/48 for their own survival.

Peace was offered many times over but refused by the Arabs every time.

And stop pretending you are defending jews, you are not. You put them in danger by trying to ascribe zionist terrorism with all jews.

Half the world‘s Jews live in Israel. The vast majority of Jews worldwide support the existence of Israel and thus are Zionists.

Nor do I agree that jewish people were in imminent danger broadly and a state was in any way required.

You want Jews to be an oppressed minority in exile from their ancestral homeland.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

in exile from their ancestral homeland.

"ancestral homeland?" wtf. It was not their land. Thats the crux of this isnt it. You dont get to take it at gunpoint (not just their land, but their houses and businesses and all their possessions) because you owned that land 3000 years ago.

Thats not how land ownership works.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

900,000 Jews were expelled from Arab and Muslim countries

thats not what your linked data shows. If you click through it says "migrated or fled". and your citation claimed it said "were expelled".

So once again, you're just flat out lying. Cant you even talk in good faith? Why the constant lies and distortions? This isnt even your first lie in this conversation. How do you expect to be taken seriously if you're trying to pass through cheap transparent BS all the time? At least have the basic self respect to be truthful and not try to pass lies.

[–] tane@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago

All Zionists will be eradicated. Better get your affairs in order soon

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Actions have consequences. Those countries didnt expel before Irgun terrorism and zionist terrorism was so active, did they. Its almost like those people didnt embrace zionist terrorism murder and lend theft done in order to create Israel.

Almost like all that brutality had some consequences and created problems for jewish people around the world.

Yes some people seem to have blamed all jews for what the zionists did, which is exactly the crime the zionists are committing again now, but it sure seems like zionists started the battle with them via the stupid nakba and rampant terrorism and now are bellyaching when the exact same things they do was done back to them.

Crybullying, in short.

[–] wick@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

As demonstrated from this clip. To be clear it wouldn't surprise me if an Israeli judge shoehorned some weird scriptural shit into a decision, but I won't believe this psychotic clowns interpretation of it.

He quotes a tweet and an article. Curiously the article, which would potentially be the only credible source he uses, seems to contradict most of his claims in the very next sentence to the one he highlights. Classic badempanada.