A ground-breaking study by a coalition of prestigious academic institutions has concluded that Israel's actions in Gaza since 7 October, 2023, constitute genocide against the Palestinian people. The study, conducted...
You just love to spread immense misinformation. You should actually educate yourself in this particular matter if you want to write and speak on the slogan. Don’t just blabber your personal opinion, give sources. Your personal opinion doesn’t matter, actual evidence does.
According to Wikipedia article for “From the river to the sea”: "Many Palestinian activists have called it “a call for peace and equality” after decades of Israeli military rule over Palestinians while for Jews it is seen as a call for the “destruction” of Israel. Islamist militant faction Hamas used the phrase in its 2017 charter. Usage of the phrase by such Palestinian militant groups has led critics to claim that it advocates for the dismantling of Israel, and the removal or extermination of its Jewish population." So it’s not as clear-cut as you suggested. It says some Palestinians define is as a call for peace, but even if it was taken as such in the past, nowadays I have the impression it’s mosly used as a defense of the destruction of Isreal. If it was just for the peace of Palestine, they’d use a more specific sentence because the way it’s pharsed it includes the Isreal territory in their intentions of “freedom”. But they want to be free from what? Free from the Israeli people presence? The article you linked kind of confirm what the Wikipedia article said: each side has an interpretation of what this sentece entails, but I’m more interested in the practical usage of the sentence today, and in my opinion it’s mostly anti-Isreal.
Not only that, do you know that Israel has made a slogan exactly like that too. So by your definition; Israel wants to exterminate all Palestinian people (and they’re currently doing so with the genocide).
From the same Wikipedia article: “The Palestinian phrase has also been used by Israeli politicians. The 1977 election manifesto of the right-wing Israeli Likud party said: “Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.”” It seems a variation from “from the river to the sea” was used by a specific Isreali right-wing party in 1977. It was strictly a position of said party in 1977, so we cannot pin it on Isreal of 2024.
Israel flat out said they do NOT want a two state solution.
In the article you linked, this is an opinion of Isreali Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after he got spooked by what occured on October 7th. Who know’s what the next Prime Minister will think about it? Israel was explicitly in favor of the Two State Solution in 1937 and 1947, but in both cases the Palestinians refused. Now that missiles are launched from Palestinian territory into Isreal, don’t be surprised if Isreal takes a more conservative approach in the name of its national security.
Also explain to us; what is a Hamas flag? I have never heard about it nor seen one. I have only seen the Palestine flag. So tell us, show us and give us actual evidence with reliable sources.
According to Wikipedia article for “From the river to the sea”: "Many Palestinian activists have called it “a call for peace and equality” after decades of Israeli military rule over Palestinians while for Jews it is seen as a call for the “destruction” of Israel. Islamist militant faction Hamas used the phrase in its 2017 charter. Usage of the phrase by such Palestinian militant groups has led critics to claim that it advocates for the dismantling of Israel, and the removal or extermination of its Jewish population." So it’s not as clear-cut as you suggested. It says some Palestinians define is as a call for peace, but even if it was taken as such in the past, nowadays I have the impression it’s mosly used as a defense of the destruction of Isreal. If it was just for the peace of Palestine, they’d use a more specific sentence because the way it’s pharsed it includes the Isreal territory in their intentions of “freedom”. But they want to be free from what? Free from the Israeli people presence? The article you linked kind of confirm what the Wikipedia article said: each side has an interpretation of what this sentece entails, but I’m more interested in the practical usage of the sentence today, and in my opinion it’s mostly anti-Isreal.
So first of all Wikipedia is not reliable at all. Anyone can edit Wikipedia pages. Here’s a link to Wikipedia’s own page about it. That said; where’s the article? You quote it but don’t give the actual link to it. That’s just air basically.
Once again your impression and opinions do not matter. Actual evidence does. What you think or get the impression out of it doesn’t mean anything. What the phrase stands directly, how was meant from the beginning does.
You’re not qualified for political discussions if, you cannot write without your personal opinions mixed in. Because that basically means, your entire discussion is biased.
But they want to be free from what? Free from the Israeli people presence?
This sentence right here just proved that you clearly have no idea what you’re writing about. They want to be free from Israel’s oppression. Be freed from the Apartheid system, be freed from purposefully murdering of their families, be able to anywhere they like. Have human rights, have an own land, a place to be. I have said this in my previous comment, I’m just repeating it since you apparently didn’t read it.
Israel stole the entire land that the Palestinian people owned, murdered thousands of Palestinian people, build an open-air prison for Palestinians people and you’re asking “be freed from what?”
Half of that wall, of text of yours can be dismissed because it’s only your personal opinion and nothing factual based. So again, your personal opinion doesn’t mean anything but factual evidence does.
Not only that, Israel has been refusing two-state solution even before the 7 October attack. Stop trying to blame this on Hamas.
It is also worth to think about the fact that Israel stole everything of the Palestinian people, murdered entire Palestinian families and then expect the Palestinian people to be “peaceful”.
That’s just not do able. If peaceful revolution is not possible, violent revolution is inevitable.
Now about the “Hamas Flag”;
It’s not necessarily a Hamas flag. I don’t think you are able to read Arabic (do you? Genuine question).
The written text on the flag says “la ilaha illallah muhammadur rasulullah” which translates to “There’s no god but Allah and Muhammad (PBUH) is his messenger”.
It’s the Shahada of the Islamic religion (IE: Religious flag) and not a ”Hamas” flag. Yeah they’re using the Shahada, doesn’t mean they “own” the Shahada.
In every comment you give to people, you purposefully mix things up to confuse other people, throw your own personal opinions in, you don’t give reliable sources, you write about things you clearly have no idea about and you flat-out lie.
There’s nothing you can write to justify killing 36 000 people, the things that was said by Israeli officials and the lying of the Israeli government.
Note: use paragraphs next time, it’s not really easy to read a wall of text.
According to Wikipedia article for “From the river to the sea”: "Many Palestinian activists have called it “a call for peace and equality” after decades of Israeli military rule over Palestinians while for Jews it is seen as a call for the “destruction” of Israel. Islamist militant faction Hamas used the phrase in its 2017 charter. Usage of the phrase by such Palestinian militant groups has led critics to claim that it advocates for the dismantling of Israel, and the removal or extermination of its Jewish population." So it’s not as clear-cut as you suggested. It says some Palestinians define is as a call for peace, but even if it was taken as such in the past, nowadays I have the impression it’s mosly used as a defense of the destruction of Isreal. If it was just for the peace of Palestine, they’d use a more specific sentence because the way it’s pharsed it includes the Isreal territory in their intentions of “freedom”. But they want to be free from what? Free from the Israeli people presence? The article you linked kind of confirm what the Wikipedia article said: each side has an interpretation of what this sentece entails, but I’m more interested in the practical usage of the sentence today, and in my opinion it’s mostly anti-Isreal.
From the same Wikipedia article: “The Palestinian phrase has also been used by Israeli politicians. The 1977 election manifesto of the right-wing Israeli Likud party said: “Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.”” It seems a variation from “from the river to the sea” was used by a specific Isreali right-wing party in 1977. It was strictly a position of said party in 1977, so we cannot pin it on Isreal of 2024.
In the article you linked, this is an opinion of Isreali Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after he got spooked by what occured on October 7th. Who know’s what the next Prime Minister will think about it? Israel was explicitly in favor of the Two State Solution in 1937 and 1947, but in both cases the Palestinians refused. Now that missiles are launched from Palestinian territory into Isreal, don’t be surprised if Isreal takes a more conservative approach in the name of its national security.
Sure: Hamas Flag, Palestine Flag.
So first of all Wikipedia is not reliable at all. Anyone can edit Wikipedia pages. Here’s a link to Wikipedia’s own page about it. That said; where’s the article? You quote it but don’t give the actual link to it. That’s just air basically.
Wikipedia is a wiki, meaning anyone can edit nearly any page and improve articles immediately
Once again your impression and opinions do not matter. Actual evidence does. What you think or get the impression out of it doesn’t mean anything. What the phrase stands directly, how was meant from the beginning does.
You’re not qualified for political discussions if, you cannot write without your personal opinions mixed in. Because that basically means, your entire discussion is biased.
This sentence right here just proved that you clearly have no idea what you’re writing about. They want to be free from Israel’s oppression. Be freed from the Apartheid system, be freed from purposefully murdering of their families, be able to anywhere they like. Have human rights, have an own land, a place to be. I have said this in my previous comment, I’m just repeating it since you apparently didn’t read it.
Israel stole the entire land that the Palestinian people owned, murdered thousands of Palestinian people, build an open-air prison for Palestinians people and you’re asking “be freed from what?”
Half of that wall, of text of yours can be dismissed because it’s only your personal opinion and nothing factual based. So again, your personal opinion doesn’t mean anything but factual evidence does.
Not only that, Israel has been refusing two-state solution even before the 7 October attack. Stop trying to blame this on Hamas.
It is also worth to think about the fact that Israel stole everything of the Palestinian people, murdered entire Palestinian families and then expect the Palestinian people to be “peaceful”. That’s just not do able. If peaceful revolution is not possible, violent revolution is inevitable.
Now about the “Hamas Flag”;
It’s not necessarily a Hamas flag. I don’t think you are able to read Arabic (do you? Genuine question).
The written text on the flag says “la ilaha illallah muhammadur rasulullah” which translates to “There’s no god but Allah and Muhammad (PBUH) is his messenger”.
It’s the Shahada of the Islamic religion (IE: Religious flag) and not a ”Hamas” flag. Yeah they’re using the Shahada, doesn’t mean they “own” the Shahada.
In every comment you give to people, you purposefully mix things up to confuse other people, throw your own personal opinions in, you don’t give reliable sources, you write about things you clearly have no idea about and you flat-out lie.
There’s nothing you can write to justify killing 36 000 people, the things that was said by Israeli officials and the lying of the Israeli government.
Note: use paragraphs next time, it’s not really easy to read a wall of text.