Verso is giving away a whole lot of their ebooks about Palestine. Anthony Lowenstein just won a Walkley award for his book "The Palestine Laboratory: How Israel Exports The Technology of Occupation around The World", so you know journalists think it's the real deal.
Plenty of others there if you'd like a deeper understanding of what's happening in the middle east right now.
Anthony Lowenstein comes from Jewish heritage
Norman Finkelstein
Mel Brooks
What complete and utter garbage. If Israel truly wanted to commit genocide Gaza would have been levelled weeks ago.
They are cowards, they won’t do it and they can’t do it because the land is not theirs. People of Palestine will be free sooner than you think, they have the patience and resilience that no body has seen in their life and you know why because they know the land is theirs and they will not let the devil take over
Yeah I don't see 9.5 million Israelis suddenly just handing the keys to Palestinian land over to Hamas and the PA under the current situation. Not sure how the Israelis are "the devil" as I'm pretty sure they're just normal human beings like you and me. My guess is that we won't see a free unoccupied Palestinian nation for at least another 30-40 years. Israel is a nuclear power that fundamentally believes that it is at risk of genocide at the hands of neighbouring states including Palestine. Patience and resilience is never going to overcome a lack of military advantage. Israel has shown Palestinians that yes Palestinians can go and kill a bunch of Israelis but if that happens Israel is going to come down hard on them. Gaza is going to have a hard time rebuilding itself with a lack of supplies and a lack of money. I mean, who is going to give money to Hamas for Gaza to rebuild its infrastructure post war when a further conflict is likely and anything built will wind up bombed and destroyed within a few years. My best guess is that we won't see a free Palestine until maybe the 22nd century. I don't see it happening this century. When is "sooner than you think"?
Why do most Western governments (aside from Ireland which has fought against colonisation in its own history) including ours support Israel unconditionally though? Old mate Albo used to support the Palestinian cause back in the days but did a 180 recently, did five eyes have dirt on him or what?
Why was Ireland one of the few Western governments to essentially back the Nazis in WWII and mourn the death of Adolph Hitler - even having the Taoiseach go as far as visit the Nazi German Ambassador to Ireland to express the Ireland's condolences to the Nazi people that Hitler had died. And mind you this was after the horrors of the Holocaust became public knowledge and the Taoiseach had documented evidence of millions of Jews dying at the hands of Germany. Ireland is a weird country that never seemed to have had any issues with the deaths of Jews in the past and so I can't imagine why it would care about Jews dying now. I mean it also was the only European nation to reject Jewish orphans fleeing the Nazis and blocked multiple attempts to take in Jewish orphan refugees after the war.
Rather than take in the orphans the Ministers of Ireland made speeches such as: “There is one thing that Germany did and that was to rout the Jews out of their country and Ireland should follow suit. They crucified our savior 1,900 years ago and they are crucifying us every day of the week.” This was spoken by Oliver Flanagan, a man who served 4 decades in the Irish Parliament and would eventually serve as the Minister of Defense of Ireland.
Ireland has always been a deeply Catholic nation with a strong history of anti-Semitism that probably flows from old Catholic anti-Semitic views. That's typically been one of the reasons they've never really been fans of Israel.
Can someone who's read it give me a summary?
TLDR for anyone: A Jew says Palestinian people are made up.
Thanks for giving away your bias by saying "Jew" instead of "Israeli".
Did he say anything that wasn't factual?
Israel uses Gaza as a testing ground for new war and surveillance tech
Then exports it to other nice countries to use for their protection
ONLY out of necessity though, since they live next too a bunch of thugs that want to wipe them off the map (that's their own words).. I guess that's the ONLY silver lining to living next too murders and plunderers. I hope this book mentions this FACT.. otherwise, this is just dumb propaganda
Your comment is very naive and full of rhetoric. I’m not saying pro or against, just saying you can clearly tell people who know what they’re talking about and people who are media forwarders.
Why did they move next to these thugs then? Should’ve picked nicer neighbours.
@Xizo: Because Jews are indigenous to Israel, have always been there, never left. Sure some moved to Europe, the America's, Asia and even Australia. But then Hitler happened and many who managed to survive the horror of the holocaust moved back, to join still living Jewish settlements throughout the land.
Look at archaeological evidence to put Jews there at least from 3000 years ago. There were no "Palestinians" then, heck there were no Muslims then even.
The thugs don't like Jews, the thugs committed an ethnic cleansing of Jews, just google how many Jews live in Muslim countries today (for most it's 0) vs pre-1948 (about a million were expelled, and I'll leave it to you to find out how many didn't make it because of massacres). It is unbelievable how the pro-Palestinian narrative turns historical facts on their head. Black is white, up is down and if you repeat it enough times then you tire out the listeners and they start repeating the same lies.
Biden once said “if there was no Israel we would have invented an Israel… it’s the best 3 billion dollar investment “
Clearly they had an agenda hence why they Israel exists today,
Where do your buy your tin foil hats? Asking for a friend
testing ground for new war and surveillance tech
See this:
https://twitter.com/KimDotcom/status/1725833921122975768
Displaced Palestinians are forced through two surveillance containers
for facial recognition and touchless downloading of their
smartphone data and installation of backdoors.
Remember how the Nazis forced Jews
to have numbers tattooed on their forearms?
This is much worse.
This looks a lot like something every Western country has implemented in the past 20 years. See London for instance. Where's the evidence for "new war" tech?
No, but I was thinking of buying it after listening to him on Yeah Nah Pasaran a few weeks ago: https://www.3cr.org.au/yeahnahpasaran/episode/antony-loewens… .. listening might be an easy way to get a quick summary if you're interested
need amazon link
I'm Hanz Heinz and I upvote this post.
I'm Hanz Heinz
beanz meanz?
Seeing some of the comments above - my only call is to think about what you type on the internet. Here is a deal, you may be pro it, you may be anti it
People are impacted on both sides, and if you hand on heart feel like you understand the complexities of the issue, then I STILL dont think this is a place to put it. We're here for deals, and it will be disappointing to see comments from naïve people. I'm sure youre all very worldly geo-political experts with no bias so my comment will be ignored. I'm going to run for cover :)
I felt much better in myself the day I decided to no longer participate in internet debates of any kind. You won't change peoples' opinions so the time and effort to type something out is much better spent elsewhere :-)
I'm agreeing that I would prefer non-political posts in our fun deal site.
I disagree! With all of you! You have now entered a debate with me
Yep. It's like that old meme said… arguing on the internet is like running in the special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.
Must have been an old one, they don't tend to use ableist language these days
I agree FA, but they're are many folks who don't know the full facts behind this conflict and just see it as Hamas/ Muslims bad - Zionists good.
You may not change their mind, but if debating it in a factual way helps fill in their lack of knowledge it may help them to make a more informed decision about how they feel about Israel, America and the Middle East in general.
You almost nailed your comment - but forgot to keep it 2 sided.
Anyone who is blanket writing one side good, another bad, is biased and naive. The only way to move past this is with good constructive conversation from both sides.
Remember if youre sitting in your house in Australia, never been a part of a war, never spoken to multiple people from the region on both sides, dont fully understand the history, you are likely naive. I'm not saying dont have an opinion, I'm saying, practice saying "I dont know' more and practice understanding that complex situations are not black and white, but very very dark shades of grey. Hey - I'm sure youre all very anti some of the things happening in Darfur - and if not, maybe you should have stronger opinions on that as well!
Piers Morgan’s family: Good morning Dad
Piers Morgan: Do you condemn Hamas?
Hahaha couldn't be any more true unfortunately.
That could be at the breakfast table,
and Piers' mouth is full,
as he asked "whether hummus is a condiment?"
This will be nice and civil.
Downvote if you want but hummus and falafel is an A tier food.
I don’t think this is right
Would you rather be on the side of Zionists?
Whats wrong with being a Zionist?
Everything.
I am a very proud Zionist, and I'll never apologise for that!
JafferMoney, do you even know what the term means?
Would you rather be on the side of rapists and murderers?
Show us any shred of evidence there was rape.
@notbad: As luck would have it, there is website that has a collection of evidence.
It has all of the details of their plans for the future, testimonials, gallery. Much of the evidence is straight from the Go-pros of the Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists that committed the atrocities on the 7th of October. Unbelievable that after asking for evidence and receiving it, what usually happens is that Hamas supporters yell FAKE!
Graphic warning to everyone, don't click on the videos/photos if you don't want PTSD by proxy.
That's the Zionists mate. So no.
You'd rather like candies to be freed
the guy is so caught up with his "free candy" antics that the words "free gaza" anger and confuse him
I'm curious, did they hand out free candies to all the kiddies at the "wag school today" Palestine protest in the city?
Do we really need political agendas posed as "good deals" on here…?
I mean how hard would it really be to find a whole bunch of Pro-this, or Pro-that bumper-stickers / tshirts /ebooks, etc that are on discount to post here and promote your political agenda??
I dont really think we need inflammatory items posted on ozbargain that will obviously incite anger… there are a plethora of online forums you can use for this instead.
Please remove before it snowballs
If it's a Walkley Award-winning book, it's obviously a very good book and it's written by somebody highly respected for their work. This doesn't look to be an emotionally-charged internet post masquerading as a dissertation. This is something that a lot of very smart people, whose sympathies range across the spectrum, have read and have agreed it is very well put - perhaps profound.
People who haven't read it may get upset or begin throwing around accusations, spreading their own perspectives - but this is an award-winning Australian work. Something rated highly by people whose responsibilities are covering this sort of thing. If it's free, it's by definition a bargain.
Agree!
Totally agree with you, this is not a deal it’s someone trying to make a political point, or do something controversial and bring out the popcorn whilst people argue.
Yeah I agree.
jeez man, they're books - free books! jog on if you're troubled by books
They don't gotta burn the books they just remove downvote em
Oh of course, the book written by a Jew is hamas propaganda. Maybe it's time to find another excuse
Care to elaborate as you have not said anything to counter the point.
Are you saying that a Jew cannot support Hamas' progoganda and it's overtly stated genocidal mission? Is that because all Jews are Zionists? But at the same time, hating Zionists is not hating Jews? Make up your mind…. All paths open to you are laced with hypocrisy.
If you believe what a Jew has to say about Israel, I would guess you would also believe what Hamas founder's son says about Hamas.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjOEJumoABg
BTW, Hamas leader promised more attacks on Israel on live TV. Do you condone this?
Not the same. Show me rallies of Palestinians at pro-israeli events. There's certainly Jews at pro Palestinian events
@Big Lez: Oh yes, the peaceful Pro-Palestine protests with slogans of "Gas the Jews, Kill the Jews" at Opera house just 2 days after the massacre of 1400 people in Israel.
If he's Jew he's right?! How about all the PRO-ISRAEL Jews? Or they don't count?
People's religion or race only matters if you can tokenize it. We all want one friend who is "BLANK" so we can make jokes and statements about "BLANK" with disdain and then plead "hey it's okay my friend is BLANK and so it's cool for me to think/say this." It's sort of how when a dog bites a man it's not a story but when a man bites a dog it's big news. A woman writing a book from a feminist point of view is likely not going to get any print unless it's like an outstanding book. A woman writing a book that is anti-feminist can make a lot of money even if she's not a great author or thinker by just selling out her group. Plenty of other people have figured out they can use their status of being part of a group to make money online by being that token person who speaks out against the interest of that group. And meanwhile dudes online here and elsewhere just go "well he's a BLANK" so we have to add more weight to it. Any rational person would go with the consensus of a group. I can find you 1 million doctors who say the COVID vaccine is awesome. But then I can find you like 100 doctors who say it's going to kill you. Those 100 doctors will get a lot more time and be able to make more money off of being vocal because for some reason people appreciate outliers more when it comes to media. And it's so irrational because there's no where else in any situation where you would trust a very small minority opinion over a huge consensus opinion. But the sad reality is that people prefer to feed their bias rather than to actually engage in critical thought. I mean look at all those people who decided to take Ivermectin over an incredibly well tested and scientifically studied vaccine. We live in one of the dumbest times.
Any rational person would go with the consensus of a group
Lol that is the opposite of rational… it is faith in authority over logical process. You are actually trying use the argument from authority logical fallacy here which is a rookie error…
Imagine claiming to the rational one then demonstrating that you don't understand the first thing about it…
And it's so irrational because there's no where else in any situation where you would trust a very small minority opinion over a huge consensus opinion
In science it happens all the time. Maths wins over opinion. But most people like yourself don't actually understand the scientific method. You want the authority of science with none of the rigour.
people prefer to feed their bias rather than to actually engage in critical thought
Like you are doing now…
over an incredibly well tested and scientifically studied vaccine
Pfizer admitted under oath to parliament that it lied about the testing of it's vaccine. But you know, tRuSt ThE eXpErTs!
@1st-Amendment: An argument from authority fallacy has nothing to do with what I'm stating. Please do yourself a favour and read up on your fallacies as you clearly don't understand them. A consensus isn't an authority - it is consensus gentium - basic human understanding. It's how we look at the world scientifically. We understand that the consensus of those who deeply study and understand something carries a lot more weight than a small minority of people who haven't studied something and just believe something to be true. I understand that fallacies can be hard to understand but there's some very good websites out there that can help you in your journey to master them. I do however recommend when you respond to someone's argument that you use your own words and just respond to the argument rather than claim a fallacy as it makes you appear like you're in high school as in reality no one really uses those terms, they just use their words.
Also your claim about Pfizer shows the lack of critical understanding you have in these matters. Pfizer tested its vaccines just fine and if you read those studies you would have seen that they were studies designed to test efficacy of a drug to prevent disease from a virus. The problem is that a lot of lay people don't understand vaccine studies and made some inferences that the vaccines were shown to prevent transmission. But if you just read the studies you could see clearly that that wasn't the design of any of the studies and no reasonable data collected to make those sort of claims. To be clear Pfizer never made those claims - lay people did. But anyone with any understanding of how vaccine trials are done would have read those studies and saw that those claims were never made. So your statement that Pfizer admitted to lying under oath is just ridiculous. It never lied. People such as you who don't understand or don't commonly read studies made some ignorant inferences. That's fine - that's why expert consensus driven by repeatable data does matter over what a bunch of what lay people believe something says.
And yes I typically do trust the experts within a western democracy that's reasonably uncorrupt. That's typically a good way of ensuring you stay healthy and safe. But you do you bro. Much love to you and yours.
A consensus isn't an authority
It is to you, you made that very claim…
Pfizer tested its vaccines just fine
"just fine" is your expert scientific diagnosis? This is comedy…
lay people did
Like when Anthony Fauci said that right here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK8OB8wlMGA&t=68s
Oopsy…
And yes I typically do trust the experts
So faith then, not rationality…
@1st-Amendment: Nope I didn't make that claim. Please go back and try to read what I did write rather than what you inferred due to your bias or lack of reasonable reading skills.
Yes Pfizer's methodology in testing its vaccines were just fine as in the definition of "of a high quality." Not sure why it's funny to you but okay. You do you.
And did you listen to Fauci. He said it is likely. He didn't say that the research proved this. He made a statement that given those parameters that is it likely that these other situations exist. He didn't say it was certain just that it was likely. Again, you've made a key error in misunderstanding what words mean.
Again, you cut out the remainder of the statement I made. I trust experts in any reasonable democratic system that lacks substantial corruption. Yes I tend to believe in general consensus about subjects I don't have the time or interest or expertise to be able to study myself. I typically don't believe that experts in a field are going to all get together and fake data and create false studies and then publish them and not be found out quite quickly. If I get numerous doctors giving me the same medical opinion I am likely going to believe that opinion over what my plumber tells me is wrong with me. That's typically how most human beings function. When my sink is leaking and I have 20 plumbers telling me the same thing I'm probably going to take their opinion even if I get 20 doctors telling me something else considering it's not in their area of expertise. If you're not doing that then I don't know how you function as a human being as you must have to critically analyze everything and you must scrutinize the food you get given at a restaurant as you can't seem to trust anyone after all.
Nope I didn't make that claim.
What claim? Learn to quote so your sentences make sense…
you cut out the remainder of the statement I made
For brevity, there is no need to quote your entire post again it's right up there if you need to see i all. A snipped quote is just to help give context to the reply, you should learn how to do it…
I trust experts
Which is fine, you do you. But don't then claim this is not an 'argument from authority'. You are specifically arguing something is true purely because the 'authority' on the subject said so. This is not rational it is faith.
When my sink is leaking and I have 20 plumbers telling me the same thing I'm probably going to take their opinion
What about if 8 say one thing, 6 say another, 4 throw their hands in the air and 2 don't even show up?
You see, hardly anything in life is so certain. Anyone offering certainty in an uncertain field should be treated as suspicious.
If you're not doing that then I don't know how you function as a human being
It's quite easy, simply don't trust anything anyone says just because they have a funny hat on.
I wonder the opposite, how does someone who can't think critically get by in life without falling down the nearest hole?
you must have to critically analyze everything
Most of the time yes, Critical thinking is an important skill and once learned it is easy to apply. And it's a simple as just asking questions. If the 'authority' can't answer those question then there's a good chance they are lying to you.
Any rational person would go with the consensus of a group.
No, you're making the logical fallacy of authority from popularity (argumentum ad populum).
In any case, it's not "just" one Jewish guy, it's a number of Jewish people and Jewish organisations, a few prominent examples including Norman Finkelstein (Holocaust survivor as a baby, respected academic), Jewish Voice for Peace (human rights organization based in the U.S.), b'tselem (human rights organisation based out of Israel who report on human rights violations in the Occupied Palestinian territories, their reporting and research capabilities are respected by Israeli news organisations and even the IDF have cross checked with them on their figures in the past), Breaking the Silence (Israel based organisation dedicated to letting former IDF members speak about their activities while on duty in the Occupied West Bank), Judith Butler/Noam Chomsky/Naomi Klein (well known academics), and many, many other ordinary Jewish people. There are also Jewish people who are pro-Palestinian freedom for religious as well as humanitiarian reasons, largely Orthodox Haredi Jews (I will admit I don't know much about them outside of the fact they exist).
Also I'm just going to say, debate is arguably one of the key traditions of Judaism… You might be speaking about the general tokenistic "blank" friend, but since it's a discussion about Israel, I think it's pretty relevant to bring this up when you're trying to invoke a logical fallacy of authority from popularity…
@labyrinthinecities: How was Norman Finkelstein a Holocaust survivor as a baby? He was born in 1953 in NY. What Holocaust was there in NY in 1953????
Also on what planet are you on where Norman Finkelstein is a respected academic? I mean he's the guy to celebrated the deaths of a dozen people murdered at Charlie Hebdo because they published a cartoon of Muhammed. He's never been tenured. He's widely considered a crank by everyone other than people who read his books and just accept his footnotes which are absolutely horrendous. The reason why Finkelstein is somewhat prominent is that he's a very good talker and he's tokenized which makes him way more interesting to bring onto TV or speak about in any media. The guy is absolutely unhinged.
No I'm not making an argument that we should only listen to an opinion because it's popular. You've confused ad populum and consensus gentium. What I am saying is that where we have consensus in scholarship that yes that consensus matters. It matters not because it is popular, it matters because it has been clearly analyzed by a large group of people who have arrived in good faith at the same outcome. That's how science works. You're confusing popularity with scientific consensus which are two different statuses. I agree with you 100% that popularity doesn't matter. The general understanding of mankind does though.
And did I dispute that you couldn't find Jews to be able to criticize Israel? I am saying that they are few and far between. But of course they exist. I could find you Black scholars and pundits who would be able to say that slavery was the best thing that ever happened to African Americans but what's the point or purpose? I'm not interested in outliers I'm far more interested in consensus. When we focus only on the most far gone outlying opinion and represent it as somehow equal to the consensus we are enteriing a world of utter bad faith and utter irrational thinking.
And for some reason you are confusing academics with activists. Noam Chomsky's area of expertise is linguistics. Naomi Klein is an activist and author and not an academic (she's a college dropout). Judith Butler's area of expertise is gender studies and philosophy. Just as you wouldn't go to your dentist to have your prostate checked I wouldn't recommend going to people with limited expertise on a subject to try to glean a reasonable level of knowledge. Activists aren't academics. They are two substantially different groups of people with two completely different goals. Activists are essentially trying to propagandize an idea while academics ought to be trying to reach the truth (although some do fall into activism over scholarship). A real scholar looks at the data and then sees where it lands. An activist like Chomsky, Finkelstein, Klein and Butler use data to support their political or philosophical beliefs. They are absolutely two different mediums. And if you're reading Chomsky, Finkelstein, Klein or Butler's works on Israel/Palestine thinking you're getting academic scholarship you're mistaken. You're getting activist propaganda. And that's fine. There's nothing wrong with activist propaganda but it should not be confused with academic scholarship.
Also, with kindness and warmth, I recommend in the future you don't just use the tactic of pointing out supposed fallacies to try to undermine someone's argument. You should be able to make the retort without labelling the fallacy because it's typically bad form in debates to throw out a reference to a fallacy other than maybe an ad hominem. Let your words do the work of describing the fault in the other person's argument. Also I highly recommend learning about fallacies before using them as when you misuse them it can really undermine your argument.
Lastly, just so you know various sects of Haredis are against Israel as they see it as a violation for Jews to self impose a Jewish state until such time as their Messianic Age. They see it as a violation of the Three Oaths. Really has nothing to do with Israel's actions and overall more of a belief that there's the creation of Israel goes against a religious tenet of their belief. Here's a wikipedia on what that is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Oaths
What I am saying is that where we have consensus in scholarship that yes that consensus matters
Wtf does 'consensus in scholarship' even mean?
That's how science works.
It doesn't actually. Science works on evidence and proof and reliable predictions, opinion and consensus count for zero. Only Arts student think like this, it sounds very much like you are one of them.
Every breakthrough in science was a result of one or a small group of people against the much larger consensus, that is what breakthroughs are. Scientific progress actually requires the consensus to be wrong.
That fact you are getting this wrong tells me you have very little science education.
You should be able to make the retort without labelling the fallacy because it's typically bad form in debates to throw out a reference to a fallacy
Rational arguments are entirely about calling out logical fallacies when identified as it helps keep the discussion rational rather than emotional. You simply can't have a rational argument if one side keeps falling into the same logical falsehoods over and over…
Let your words do the work of describing the fault in the other person's argument
'Trust the experts' is the argument from authority logical fallacy. It is logical impossible to continue a rational argument if you continually fall back to this error in logic. If you want to continue rationally, then present an argument that doesn't rely on having faith in 'experts'.
@1st-Amendment: Consensus in scholarship means a consensus reached by advanced scholars in a specialized field of study or investigation.
That's not at all how science works. Science is held together by consensus - ie. scientific theories. They can change over time as more data is presented. But your believe that small groups work against a larger consensus is not how science works. Understanding grows and deepens and new data emerges. When new reliable data emerges people have to see if the old consensus fits the new data and if it doesn't then that consensus is abandoned in favour of a new one. That's how science works. Not sure why I have to teach a grown-up about it but here I am. This is why science deals in theories because they are the views of the consensus and not a dogmatic belief.
No rational arguments are not about calling out fallacies. That's like a middle school understanding of arguments. Arguments about are about a search for truth in which one party builds upon another's argument or challenges their premises to critically expose them to see if they withstand scrutiny. The point of an argument isn't for one side to win or lose it's to ascertain whether premises are valid or not. Bringing up fallacies is a silly juvenile way of debating. No one outside of children ever do that. You never see that happen in a court of law. Instead one just explains in their own words why the argument fails.
I don't have faith in experts I have faith in the scientific method which, again, relies on consensus forming in the unearthing of new and reliable data. An argument from authority implies that I view the authority as infallible and I put my faith in them. That's not what I've stated. I've stated time and time again that my strategy for life is to rely on the consensus of rigorous academic inquiry in any uncorrupt liberal democracy. I firmly believe that the processes of the method typically provide the best system for how to navigate reality. Scientific/Academic consensus is essentially the extent of human understanding at that moment in time. For the purposes of me navigating the world I am best served to use that consensus to my advantage and use it to improve my life especially in areas where my expertise is slim. That's the best port of call for anyone to go to to try to ascertain the best means forward at that moment in time. And of course there may be a day where there's a different consensus but you can only operate at the moment in time you're living in. Just as how new technology will enter into our lives so will new consensuses and new understanding. This doesn't mean you can pretend that scientific consensus doesn't exist or that it's a failure of human knowledge when a consensus is replaced with another. Human understanding is a journey of growth and taking steps towards that growth.
@rightguy: So… I spent awhile trying to respond/thinking of how to respond to this comment. First of all, apologies for the mistake on Finkelstein, I saw the video of him saying he was a Holocaust survivor as a baby and didn't look into it further.
Look, the point of my original comment… Mainly I was trying to point out that there are lots of Jewish people who are critical of Israel to varying degrees, and it's not so much a fringe minority opinion like that of Covid deniers… Your original comment talked about "the consensus of a group" - to me, that reads as you talking about "consensus of Jewish people as a group". Hence the accusation of making a logical fallacy arguing from popularity, especially when like… Look, I'm not Jewish, so I listen to friends who are Jewish when they say/post on social media stuff like the way Israel = Jews is taught in Jewish institutions (like schools and places of worship) is kinda "cult like"/"indoctrination-y" and it's sold to them as "we are Israel and Israel is us" type of thing. I'm ethnically Chinese, so while there have been attempts by the C.P.C. to spread that kind of rhetoric, the Chinese diaspora is way too big and chaotic to have that work, though having to learn the P.R.C. national anthem in Mandarin language school while here in Australia was whacky.
As for the people I mentioned… You say they're not real academics and are a fringe opinion (the fringe opinion being the criticism of Israel), and that they cherry pick data to support their politics or philosophical beliefs. But what data or information is there to cherry pick? The fact that Palestinians are subjected to a whole bunch of human rights abuses? That Palestinians get raided randomly in their homes in the night as an intimidation tactic? That kids get tried in military courts for throwing rocks at people and sentenced to ridiculously long sentences? The fact that while Palestinians and Arabs have some rights, there are still messed up things like streets where if you're Palestinian, you're not allowed to walk on them? That non-military settlers will come to Palestinian houses and villages and "evict" the people there under threat of violence? The fact that these things and more lead to an extremely disturbing picture which people smarter than me call "aparthied"? And "settler-colonialism"?
And if you say they're not real scholars (in this field), they're activist propagandists, they're people with extreme fringe opinions, then who/what would you suggest as reliable scholarship?
edit: so on second thought, I'm really really really not interested on debating with you, but I would be appreciative if you could provide examples of what you consider reliable scholarship on the topic as alternatives to the people I mentioned, since they're the ones whose work I've been reading.
With regard to the Haredi Jewish people… Maybe I'm just being naïve here, but when I see videos of Haredi Jewish people marching at protests, their banners usually talk about the humanitarian reasons for criticising Israel. When I've watched video interviews of Haredi Jewish people, including Rabbis, they've talked about the human rights and humanitarian reasons, with some of them also talking about their religious reasons. I'm not actually interested in modern religion, so I tend to zone out or skip through those sections. So… if it "really has nothing to do with Israel's actions" then do you mean to say they're just… Lying or being untruthful or misleading about their motives?
Lastly… I mean I guess thanks for the tip, but I'm not a debater or interested in being one? To be frank, I'm just a dumb university dropout schmuck who gets to see videos of Palestinian civilians being slaughtered, mass graves, "wounded child no surviving family", graphic images of violence and it's aftermath every day on Instagram, while in the Instagram and Snapchat geotags for Israel I see people living life up, having slow days at work, partying, drinking, eating little canapes… And yes, I saw the footage and pictures posted of the aftermath of Hamas's attack. It was awful and horrifying. But in the end, one group is currently partying it up, living the usual social media glam life style, while I've been watching videos of the other group, on the daily, pulling dead bodies out of rubble, kids mutilated, people having to go through surgery without anesthetic, and general suffering. I hope you understand, I'm not interested in "debating" that part at all, because there is nothing in the world that can justify to me the level of slaughter and cruelty against civilians we've seen recently (from either side, but again, proportionality). I just want to know more in general about the context behind it all.
Do you think the author can be a hamas spy?
"Anthony Lowenstein just won a Walkley award for his, so you know journalists think it's the real deal." 😂
so you know journalists think it's the real deal.
Yeah but who would trust a journalist these days?
This will be constructive.
Whether or not you agree with the author, this is probably not an “OzBargain” type of deal.
Great read! Thanks
At least this deal is actually respectable content, unlike the Daily Wire tripe that was posted a few months ago.
I won't say anything about the conflict itself, but Netanyahu's government has been trying to get rid of judicial overview by stripping the high court of Israel of their powers to review the legislature. Terrible move and shows that he's only interested in securing power for himself.
That tells you all you need to know.
i wholeheartedly support the liberation of palestine but im not convinced these sorts of posts do anything other than stir zionists up and make the already-suffering-today ozbargain servers struggle even more. do zionists find these posts thought-provoking? maybe, but i feel like all posts like this one do is have people come in and share their own questionable takes everywhere, leading to arguments and general Unproductive Rubbish.
…having said that, this does look like a good read.
It's called balance when the alternative view is provided. The MSM just spews out the same one sided US Israel propaganda.
A war crime is a war crime. Flags don't come into it
A war crime is a war crime. Flags don't come into it
You can believe that. But its not the way the world works.
Were Bush, Blair and Howard ever charged with war crimes for invading Iraq when it clearly met the legal criteria for a war crime?
And the same will happen for this one. No one will be charged with war crimes, even though both sides have committed them, because if any Hamas officials are charged the world will insist Israel's military and leaders are too, and they are protected. Like Bush, Blair and Howard are. Because of the flags they acted under.
"Were Bush, Blair and Howard ever charged with war crimes for invading Iraq when it clearly met the legal criteria for a war crime?" They should have been
I totally agree with your entire post
That was my point above
Does it also come with a Free copy of Mein Kampf?
…autographed by Mental Yahhoo?
HAHAHA
Read this book a while ago. Worth reading without a doubt. The other 5 free books are excellent too. Though, I recommend reading 'Ten Myths About Israel' by Ilan Pappe before 'The Palestine Laboratory'.
Plenty of others there if you'd like a deeper understanding of what's happening in the middle east right now.
From another well respected Jewish scholar Dr Norman Finkelstein:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlkFLVCGacE
Piers Morgan is now wishing he didn't invite Dr Finkelstein to his show for a debate.
Yeah, he hates having anyone on, who shades his partial intellect
Classic clip
![[eBook] 6 Free eBooks on Israel-Palestine Relations and Conflicts @ Verso Books](https://files.ozbargain.com.au/n/14/815514.jpg?h=c168c5ed)
What did Ukraine do to trigger Russia's violence? I'm failing to see the clarity in this analogy.