this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
290 points (92.9% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7211 readers
383 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Drusas@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (6 children)

No, she was censured for seemingly calling for the end of Israel. That is not the same as Palestinian freedom.

[–] coradora@beehaw.org 24 points 1 year ago (4 children)

She only called for the end of the apartheid state that systematically tortures the Palestinians under its brutal occupation. She called for equal rights for all Palestinian people so that they are no longer second class citizens.

It was wrong when America, Britain, South Africa, and countless other colonialist countries did it in the past, and it is wrong for Israel to do it now. Apartheid is a disgusting system that brutalizes millions of innocent civilians. The average age in Gaza is like 19 years old. They are mostly children.

Do you condemn Israel for the murder of over 4000 children?

[–] Drusas@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

This has nothing to do with me. I'm just stating a fact. She was censured for the river to the sea comment, not for calling to end the apartheid state.

[–] coradora@beehaw.org 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What do you think the statement from the river to the sea means? It means that in all lands of current day Israel/Palestine, the Palestinian people should exist as first class, free citizens of the state. Not as second class citizens of an apartheid government.

It’s not calling for the genocide of Jews. It’s calling for the end of Israel’s brutal occupation and for the peaceful coexistence of all people, like they lived before the region was carved up by European colonial governments.

[–] prole@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago

It refers to a one-state solution. A legitimately possible solution with a lot of support. And no, it's not anti-semitism and it's not about killing or getting rid of anyone. It's bad faith to frame it as such.

[–] Drusas@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

You're arguing that to the wrong person. I understand nuance. Apparently House representatives do not.

load more comments (1 replies)