Jimmy...
Hamas are the ones walking away from a cease fire deal.
They're the ones that want dead Palestinian civilians. Meets their political objectives...
"There's a framework deal," the official said. "The Israelis have more or less accepted it. And there will be a six week cease-fire in Gaza starting today — if Hamas agrees to release" the hostages, the official said.
Hamas puts talks on hold, says Israel "refuses to commit" to a Gaza cease-fire deal, dashing hope for a pre-Ramadan truce.
www.cbsnews.com
It is insane how propagandized this is. Bin, read the damn article again. Consider that
both sides of this have "political objectives". Consider that one side has
explicitly stated its goal being displacement and takeover. Also consider what Israel won't agree to as part of the negotiation… in light of its committing genocide.
Genocide. Ethnic cleansing. Commensurate to its
stated Zionist goal.
Israel wants to rid Palestine of Palestinians. This is Trail of Tears type shit. Except worse.
I know, different lives, valued differently.
Man, it is so easy to research the disproportionate kidnapping, maiming, killing, imprisonment without process or trial between these two entities. So easy. And, yet, somehow, only one side of this story can be presumed wrong, guilty, deserving of deep critical consideration.
These talks in Cairo? Israel refused to even send a delegate.
Maybe consider that Israel has objectives, too, Bin. Maybe read a little on Zionism, who are the most extremist in Zionism, what their publicly-stated objectives are, and how they relate directly to the ongoing genocide and ethnic cleansing that is happening.
Maybe read a little on the historical patterns of settler colonialism — plenty of examples right here in North America — and consider this in that context.
Trail of Tears is an easy one.
Let me offer this as a way of consideration. Let's say we actually are being "invaded" by people from Central and South America. Should the US and its citizens simply allow it? Or do you believe the US should resist? Protect its home? Its freedoms? Its ways of life?
This idea that certain countries/peoples have a right to settle and colonize (almost always to the detriment of those already there), certain countries/nations/peoples have a right to defend themselves against and resist incursions, while others, apparently, don't have that right, well it's just crazy to me that people seemingly have a hard time not just recognizing how prevalent this is in our history, but seemingly are actually incapacitated to pausing, reflecting, and recognizing it in any way, shape or form in real time.
I really do believe that at the core of this is people really do value different lives, differently. A Palestinian child's life has less value than an Israeli child's life. Given the disproportionate maiming and killing throughout the history of Palestine/Israel, it seems to be a factor of around 20 times less valuable.
I actually believe in equality and justice for all. That's always my starting point in going about researching an issue and the people and institutions involved. It's my starting point towards forming an informed and objective-as-possible understanding. Now, if my starting point is that one people or one institution is
better than the other, this is impossible.
I don't value the lives of different people, differently.
I implore you to listen to talks given by Chris Hedges. Read a little about him, his career. Read about how and why he left the NY Times.