One of the greatest lies ever told is that one. Settlement building is ethnic cleansing. Go ask the Tutsi’s what ethnic cleansing really is. A few thousand houses being build on land no one is living on currently is hardly comparable.
2 Likes
What happened in Rwanda was genocide. A deliberate process of killing.
Ethnic cleansing is different. It’s about removing an ethnic group from land your ethnic group wants, via fear, deprivation, discrimination, and/or involuntary replacement.
Try convincing a Palestinian that this isn’t happening to them.
And before anyone says ‘they think that but they’re wrong!’ - it MATTERS what they think, because what they think drives their actions.
2 Likes
G, can you see what you have written here?
As I understand it, Israel believes that Jewish people have a right to return to Israel, even though their ancestors have NEVER been from Israel. You would know better than me about peoples who have converted to Judaism centuries ago, from places as diverse as the areas now known as Russia and Ethiopia, and others.
If it is good enough for these people whose ancestors never lived in what is now called Israel, why is it not good enough for people whose grandparents were “displaced” in the last 70 years or so?
4 Likes
Amazing hypocrisy
Israel is not doing that. It is not removing people from land they want, they are building homes on land that no one currently lives on. Your argument is false.
Ask the Tutsi’s if that was not also ethnic cleansing. it was genocide but it was also about ethnic cleansing, about removing one group from the land they lived on, by any means necessary.
1 Like
I agree. The argument is complete crap. They don’t believe that Moore and Franken are equal, but they will use it to distract attention from their ethically weak decisions.
Why assume they don’t want it (or indeed have any claim to it) just because they don’t currently live on it? Is this the terra nullius argument?
Those settlements are heavily subsidised.
I was told that the land for the new settlements has been purchased off the legal owners.
If that’s the case then well and good I suppose. But there has been a long string of settlements has there not? Under various circumstances? The question was more a general one, in response to a general statement.
Depends on who the owners are in the eyes of the law. Probably someone with a close connection to Netanyahu.
Suits filed against Trump for his appointment of Chief of Consumer Finance- probably not only unqualified, but possibly also conflict of interest. Not one he can settle out of court.
Truth. But, one can also replace “The GOP” with “The USA”
1 Like
As the world’s most powerful country, the USA has been able to stand aside on international consensus on matters like Geneva Conventions on military crimes,Climate Change etc , including in abstaining from votes against Israel in the UN. So far this has not attracted overt criticism by its allies , balanced against the good it does elsewhere. And it has been able to encourage others to join in some disastrous military ventures , despite their misgivings.
But when the US ceases to be seen as a world leader, it may not last. The criticism of the decision on Jerusalem by some allies ( not us though) is unusually loud.
All those State Department unfilled vacancies are a big worry.
1 Like
Kushner failed to disclose that he was Co-Director of a Foundation establishing a West Bank settlement. This has since been rectified but he has sought to intervene in UN voting to favour Israel.
He’s breaking records for failing to disclose or revising disclosure statements.
3 Likes
I’m in public service and if you fail to disclose information regarding security clearances processes and are caught you don’t pass go. He should have been sacked.
2 Likes
Genuine question: Has K actually been appointed to any specific position or is he just on Trump’s personal staff ( like Ivanka).
Don’t think he has a security clearance yet, so is not supposed to see anything classified above a certain level.
1 Like
Not sure. In the APS you need a baseline clearance to enter the public service. Baseline allows relatively normal BAU type access. The more classified the more invasive the security process. You can expect to wait up to 2 years here for a very high level clearance due to the due diligence required. Of course there are waivers available but these occur when there is already some sort of baseline clearance and requires sponsorship from the Department.
1 Like
2 Likes