6 ms·

Who is supporting terrorist groups? Pro-Palestinian protesting is not support for terrorism.

by nl 2y ago

jl6 2y ago
This guy perhaps? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c934y9kv07eo.amp https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c934y9kv07eo.amp
adhamsalama 2y ago
Nothing in that article implies supporting terrorism. They support Palestine. People conflating supporting Palestine with supporting terrorism should be ashamed of themselves, as Israel is the biggest terror state in the world.
- thyristan 2y ago
  Well, when it comes to conflating, I'll take your calling Israel a terror state as a standard: The democratically elected government of Gaza-Palestine is the Hamas, which is a terrorist organisation. Thus by your conflation regarding Israel to be a terror state, the Gaza strip part of Palestine is as well. Its population chose a known terrorist organisation, everything is run by a terrorist organisation, they did terrorist things such as bombings, abductions and murders of innocent civilians. Thus (Gaza-)Palestine is therefore a terror state. Supporting it is therefore supporting terrorism. Thus either you apply your conflating standard equally, Palestine and Israel are both terror states, and any support of them is supporting terrorism. Or you rather differentiate, and separate Palestine as an abstract concept of a hypothetical future homestead of the Palestinians from the Hamas, the Fatah and other (mostly terrorist) organisations that govern it, and the population that, in parts, is governed by them and elects and supports or opposes them and their actions. But if you do that, you will also have to differentiate between Israel as a state, its military, government, parties, population and their respective support and actions. In that second case you can support Palestine as an abstract idea without supporting terrorism, you can support the population and their rights, hopes and struggle. As you can do with Israel and their people. However, on pro-Palestine protests, I've never really seen this kind of differentiation applied, I've seen far too many Hamas flags, heard far too many calls to wipe Israel from the map, far too many praises for terrorists (called "martyrs"). Thus, in practically all cases, I'd without hesitation call supporters of Palestine supporters of terrorism.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - whatshisface 2y ago
    I think it's wise to separate the future of both Israel and Palestine from their present. In 100 years there will be surviving Israelis and surviving Palestinians and they'll have a view of the present generation.
  - settrans 2y ago
    "The antisemite does not accuse the Jew of stealing because he thinks he stole something. He does it because he enjoys watching the Jew turn out his pockets to prove his innocence." Although I laud your unassailable argument highlighting yet another instance of double standards against Jews, ultimately there is little upside in engaging with the "no, no, technically there is a difference between anti-Zionism and antisemitism" crowd. I am sad that Hacker News is rife with this kind of bigotry, but I don't see the tide of this battle turning anytime soon. In case, dear reader, you are one of the intellectually curious ones who holds the opposing viewpoint, ask yourself why you demand that only the Jews lack the right to self determination?
    - DiogenesKynikos 2y ago
      I'll bite. Most demands for self-determination were for self-rule on land already inhabited by the group in question. Zionism was unique in that it demanded self-determination on land inhabited almost 100% by a different group of people.
      - settrans 2y ago
        Given that the Jews were forcibly expelled from their homeland by the Romans, by definition, any Jewish self-determination would need to take place in a land that is at least partially[0] already inhabited. You now have two choices: 1. Deny Jews the right to self-determination altogether, continuing the dispossession of an actively persecuted people, indeed, the same one that was about to face the Holocaust in Europe, thereby punishing them for their own historical victimization, or 2. Acknowledge the legitimacy of Jewish self-determination, even if it takes root in their historical homeland and entails negotiating with and sharing the land with other peoples, thereby accepting that historical justice often requires grappling with imperfect realities, and that two national claims can coexist without one invalidating the other. Or are you arguing that self-determination only applies to groups of people who haven't been exiled from their homeland (i.e. the people that need self determination the least)? [0] Before Zionism, the population of Mandatory Palestine was 98% smaller than the same region today. Even the Arab population has increased 26-fold. So, yes, technically it was inhabited, but dramatically less developed. And even then, Jerusalem was 60% Jewish.
thefounder 2y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- jacooper 2y ago
  If that was the case the west bank would at peace, instead it's getting annexed with a pending ethnic cleaning plan. They literally shot ambulances a few days ago on purpose: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/04/world/middleeast/gaza-israel-aid-workers-deaths-video.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/04/world/middleeast/gaza-isr...
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - thefounder 2y ago
    Well Hamas’s massacre didn’t buy Palestine any good will/support, did it? I think the approval rate of Hamas was at historic levels after the massacre so that should tell you about the people in Gaza/Palestine(politically speaking of course) Now Israel can do whatever they want because “nobody” is going to support what seamed like a terrorist state. They chose violence and violence they get. It didn’t pay off. Not many people want to get involved into Palestine now. Not even the Arab states.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

Who is supporting terrorist groups? Pro-Palestinian protesting is not support for terrorism.

by nl 2y ago

Who is supporting terrorist groups? Pro-Palestinian protesting is not support for terrorism.

jl6 2y ago

This guy perhaps? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c934y9kv07eo.amp https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c934y9kv07eo.amp

adhamsalama 2y ago

Nothing in that article implies supporting terrorism. They support Palestine. People conflating supporting Palestine with supporting terrorism should be ashamed of themselves, as Israel is the biggest terror state in the world.

thyristan 2y ago
Well, when it comes to conflating, I'll take your calling Israel a terror state as a standard: The democratically elected government of Gaza-Palestine is the Hamas, which is a terrorist organisation. Thus by your conflation regarding Israel to be a terror state, the Gaza strip part of Palestine is as well. Its population chose a known terrorist organisation, everything is run by a terrorist organisation, they did terrorist things such as bombings, abductions and murders of innocent civilians. Thus (Gaza-)Palestine is therefore a terror state. Supporting it is therefore supporting terrorism. Thus either you apply your conflating standard equally, Palestine and Israel are both terror states, and any support of them is supporting terrorism. Or you rather differentiate, and separate Palestine as an abstract concept of a hypothetical future homestead of the Palestinians from the Hamas, the Fatah and other (mostly terrorist) organisations that govern it, and the population that, in parts, is governed by them and elects and supports or opposes them and their actions. But if you do that, you will also have to differentiate between Israel as a state, its military, government, parties, population and their respective support and actions. In that second case you can support Palestine as an abstract idea without supporting terrorism, you can support the population and their rights, hopes and struggle. As you can do with Israel and their people. However, on pro-Palestine protests, I've never really seen this kind of differentiation applied, I've seen far too many Hamas flags, heard far too many calls to wipe Israel from the map, far too many praises for terrorists (called "martyrs"). Thus, in practically all cases, I'd without hesitation call supporters of Palestine supporters of terrorism.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- whatshisface 2y ago
  I think it's wise to separate the future of both Israel and Palestine from their present. In 100 years there will be surviving Israelis and surviving Palestinians and they'll have a view of the present generation.
- settrans 2y ago
  "The antisemite does not accuse the Jew of stealing because he thinks he stole something. He does it because he enjoys watching the Jew turn out his pockets to prove his innocence." Although I laud your unassailable argument highlighting yet another instance of double standards against Jews, ultimately there is little upside in engaging with the "no, no, technically there is a difference between anti-Zionism and antisemitism" crowd. I am sad that Hacker News is rife with this kind of bigotry, but I don't see the tide of this battle turning anytime soon. In case, dear reader, you are one of the intellectually curious ones who holds the opposing viewpoint, ask yourself why you demand that only the Jews lack the right to self determination?
  - DiogenesKynikos 2y ago
    I'll bite. Most demands for self-determination were for self-rule on land already inhabited by the group in question. Zionism was unique in that it demanded self-determination on land inhabited almost 100% by a different group of people.
    - settrans 2y ago
      Given that the Jews were forcibly expelled from their homeland by the Romans, by definition, any Jewish self-determination would need to take place in a land that is at least partially[0] already inhabited. You now have two choices: 1. Deny Jews the right to self-determination altogether, continuing the dispossession of an actively persecuted people, indeed, the same one that was about to face the Holocaust in Europe, thereby punishing them for their own historical victimization, or 2. Acknowledge the legitimacy of Jewish self-determination, even if it takes root in their historical homeland and entails negotiating with and sharing the land with other peoples, thereby accepting that historical justice often requires grappling with imperfect realities, and that two national claims can coexist without one invalidating the other. Or are you arguing that self-determination only applies to groups of people who haven't been exiled from their homeland (i.e. the people that need self determination the least)? [0] Before Zionism, the population of Mandatory Palestine was 98% smaller than the same region today. Even the Arab population has increased 26-fold. So, yes, technically it was inhabited, but dramatically less developed. And even then, Jerusalem was 60% Jewish.

thefounder 2y ago

[flagged]

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
jacooper 2y ago
If that was the case the west bank would at peace, instead it's getting annexed with a pending ethnic cleaning plan. They literally shot ambulances a few days ago on purpose: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/04/world/middleeast/gaza-israel-aid-workers-deaths-video.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/04/world/middleeast/gaza-isr...
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- thefounder 2y ago
  Well Hamas’s massacre didn’t buy Palestine any good will/support, did it? I think the approval rate of Hamas was at historic levels after the massacre so that should tell you about the people in Gaza/Palestine(politically speaking of course) Now Israel can do whatever they want because “nobody” is going to support what seamed like a terrorist state. They chose violence and violence they get. It didn’t pay off. Not many people want to get involved into Palestine now. Not even the Arab states.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]