Mosby
Mosby's JournalThe Silence From International Bodies Over Hamas' Mass Rapes Is a Betrayal of All Women
Note the article has very graphic descriptions of the attacks on Oct 7.Two days after the horrific Hamas attack of October 7, I met Rotem, a young mother of two small children from a Kibbutz on the Gaza border. I held my breath as she recounted how she ran with her children to hide while terrorists rampaged through their home, how they made it to the safe room and desperately held the door, praying the terrorists wouldn't enter.
Her terror echoed accounts I've heard from abused women, except now the threat was not from a violent husband. And Rotem was not alone; she is one of thousands of Israeli women who simultaneously faced murder and rape by Hamas terrorists on that fateful day.
At the President of Israel's Residence in Jerusalem, we are preparing for the day the United Nations General Assembly has designated the International Day for the Prevention of Violence against Women, which is observed every November 25. Every year, I host victims, civil-society leaders, activists, and scholars committed to women's rights and safety on this day.
But this year will be different. Many things changed on October 7 when thousands of Hamas terrorists massacred Israeli families, burnt children and the elderly, and kidnapped hostages. This deeply impacted our visceral understanding of the cruelty of gender-based sexual violence—and our faith in the international organizations that claim to care about women.
https://www.newsweek.com/silence-international-bodies-over-hamas-mass-rapes-betrayal-all-women-opinion-1845783
New video of tunnels under the Shifa hospital.
https://twitter.com/IDF/status/1727409278636478519They've had 75 years to negotiate a permanent settlement
And they haven't, instead they embraced terrorism.
That's on them.
Are you and I blameless for Iraq? I didn't kill anyone nor did I vote for Bush. How about the overthrow of the government in Iran? Me and my family didn't have anything to do with that either.
The first step towards peace and reconciliation involves taking ownership for your mistakes, something that the Palestinians aren't even remotely interested in doing,in fact they still keep externalizing their locus of control, and create false historical narratives that absolve them of all responsibilities. Just look at what Abbas said recently denying that Israeli women and children were killed in the Oct 7th attack.
Hello, hello my name is Wyatt
https://twitter.com/jimstep260853/status/1721527880092368900The remnants of the Canaanite people are in Lebanon.
Continuity and Admixture in the Last Five Millennia of Levantine History from Ancient Canaanite and Present-Day Lebanese Genome Sequenceshttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5544389/
Jews and Arabs both have Canaanite markers but a linguistic analysis provides more details.
Historical linguists have dated the separation of Arabic from Northwest Semitic around a thousand years earlier than the period when the Canaanite languages diverged from each other. This is not consistent with Ishmael being the father of the Arabs, for Arabic goes back to a much early branch of the Semitic family than the divisions between the the members of Abraham's family.
Over time, Arabic speakers displaced some of earlier Canaanite nations, including the Moabites and the Edomites, who had dwelled around Arabah rift valley and the Dead Sea. The Edomites were pushed to the north, into the southern edge of Judea, which became known known in Greek as Idumea. It seems that the Ishmaelites had been displaced centuries earlier.
https://www.meforum.org/57936/ishmael-father-arabs
Palestinians are a modern group, only developing a national identity less than a hundred years ago. So it's disengenous to claim they descended from Canaanites.
The purpose of the “Canaanite” narrative, however, is not to shed light on the Palestinians’ real ancestry, but to deny the Jews’ narrative. Why the Canaanites? Because they were in the country before the Israelite tribes were and thus have precedence. According to Nabil Shaath, Jewish history is but a “potpourri of legends and fabrications.” The Canaanite narrative cannot promote reconciliation and compromise but only the destruction of the Israeli-Jewish narrative, according to the same principle by which the various communities are now destroying each other in Syria.
Hence, it is important to clarify how the Palestinians themselves view their own ancestry. Indeed, not a single Palestinian tribe identifies its roots in Canaan; instead, they all see themselves as proud Arabs descended from the most notable Arab tribes of the Hejaz, today’s Iraq, or Yemen. Even the Kanaan family of Nablus locates its origins in Syria.
Some families are Kurdish or Egyptian, and in Mount Hebron, there are traditions about Jewish origins.
This study does not deny the right of the Palestinian families as a whole to define themselves as a Palestinian people. It would be better, however, if the Palestinian leadership were to choose a positive and constructive narrative and not a baseless one that is intended to negate that of the other.
https://jcpa.org/article/who-are-the-palestinians/
HRC on a ceasefire.
https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1718836678029435269She's completely right, as usual.
Background: Arafat didn't negotiate - he just kept saying no
The call from Bill Clinton came hours after the publication in the New York Times of a "revisionist" article on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. On holiday, Ehud Barak, Israel's former prime minister, was swimming in a cove in Sardinia. According to Barak, Clinton said: "What the hell is this? Why is she turning the mistakes we [ie, the US and Israel] made into the essence? The true story of Camp David was that for the first time in the history of the conflict the American president put on the table a proposal, based on UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, very close to the Palestinian demands, and Arafat refused even to accept it as a basis for negotiations, walked out of the room, and deliberately turned to terrorism."
Clinton was speaking of the two-week-long Camp David conference in July 2000 which he had organised and mediated and its failure, and the eruption at the end of September of the Palestinian intifada which has continued since. Halfway through the conference, apparently on July 18, Clinton had "slowly" - to avoid misunderstanding - read out to Arafat a document, endorsed in advance by Barak, outlining the main points of a future settlement. The proposals included the establishment of a demilitarised Palestinian state on some 92% of the West Bank and 100% of the Gaza Strip, with some territorial compensation for the Palestinians from pre-1967 Israeli territory; the dismantling of most of the settlements and the concentration of the bulk of the settlers inside the 8% of the West Bank to be annexed by Israel; the establishment of the Palestinian capital in east Jerusalem, in which some Arab neighborhoods would become sovereign Palestinian territory and others would enjoy "functional autonomy"; Palestinian sovereignty over half the Old City of Jerusalem (the Muslim and Christian quarters) and "custodianship," though not sovereignty, over the Temple Mount; a return of refugees to the prospective Palestinian state though with no "right of return" to Israel proper; and the organisation by the international community of a massive aid programme to facilitate the refugees' rehabilitation.
Arafat said no. Enraged, Clinton banged on the table and said: "You are leading your people and the region to a catastrophe." A formal Palestinian rejection of the proposals reached the Americans the next day. The summit sputtered on for a few days more but to all intents and purposes it was over.
Today Barak portrays Arafat's behaviour at Camp David as a "performance" geared to exacting from the Israelis as many concessions as possible without ever seriously intending to reach a peace settlement or sign an "end to the conflict".
"He did not negotiate in good faith; indeed, he did not negotiate at all. He just kept saying no to every offer, never making any counterproposals of his own," he says. Barak shifts between charging Arafat with "lacking the character or will" to make a historic compromise (as did the late Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in 1977-79, when he made peace with Israel) to accusing him of secretly planning Israel's demise while he strings along a succession of Israeli and Western leaders and, on the way, hoodwinks "naive journalists".
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/23/israel3
At the bottom of this page
https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=124&page=20I clicked on "discussion forums" and it came up.
I think du2 is still running on one of their servers, but it's locked to new replies.
Israel released almost 1000 terrorists for shalit.
That kind of thing isn't going to work this time due to the sheer number of hostages.
No one claimed that the US went into Afganistan after 9/11 for revenge or retribution. The media and public accepted the need to erode al qaeda abilities, capture it's leadership and bring them to justice.
The framing here though, is designed to demonize Israel and the IDF.
Profile Information
Member since: Sat Dec 6, 2008, 12:53 PMNumber of posts: 16,350