For sure. I will scream fuck Hamas until my voice goes hoarse.
The problem is the grey zone where it there is no clear line. Is using the word “genocide” crossing a line? Is using a rhetorical inversion of that line from Likud’s 1977 manifesto (“from the river to the sea”) crossing a line? Is “free Palestine” crossing a line? I don’t think so. But the article has examples like that.
Calling “from the river to the sea” an “inversion of Likud’s manifesto” is a talking point. Take a time machine and go talk to hard line Likudniks of the past 50 years, you will hear plenty of colorful and distasteful slogans, but not that one. For decades pro-Palestinians have shouted it, rallied around it; they own it, no one else. Just like the Israelis own “we need to delete Gaza” - it is not “an inversion of Iran’s call to wipe Israel off the map”.
It takes a very fearful settler mentality to interpret “will be free” as “murder the Jews”. In particular the kind of mentality that would write something like “the establishment of a “Palestinian State,” jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population” (same manifesto).
On the other hand “between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty” is very very explicit.
Talking points? I don’t know. When someone says who they are, believe them.
For sure. I will scream fuck Hamas until my voice goes hoarse.
The problem is the grey zone where it there is no clear line. Is using the word “genocide” crossing a line? Is using a rhetorical inversion of that line from Likud’s 1977 manifesto (“from the river to the sea”) crossing a line? Is “free Palestine” crossing a line? I don’t think so. But the article has examples like that.
Calling “from the river to the sea” an “inversion of Likud’s manifesto” is a talking point. Take a time machine and go talk to hard line Likudniks of the past 50 years, you will hear plenty of colorful and distasteful slogans, but not that one. For decades pro-Palestinians have shouted it, rallied around it; they own it, no one else. Just like the Israelis own “we need to delete Gaza” - it is not “an inversion of Iran’s call to wipe Israel off the map”.
It takes a very fearful settler mentality to interpret “will be free” as “murder the Jews”. In particular the kind of mentality that would write something like “the establishment of a “Palestinian State,” jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population” (same manifesto).
On the other hand “between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty” is very very explicit.
Talking points? I don’t know. When someone says who they are, believe them.
Now now it’s only racist when brown people say it.