Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Deportation of Khalil
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 17:01:14 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 135
Message-ID: <vth8mr$35l1r$9@dont-email.me>
References: <vteolb$1evbb$1@dont-email.me> <m60pcoFds6aU1@mid.individual.net>
 <vtgv8g$35l1r$6@dont-email.me> <dm7ovjlgeb4ni73gh6djpgn9h8q2mbps4r@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 23:01:17 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b0088da07de9f4c52059a2eeb09d60a9";
	logging-data="3331131"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18xOQ+WXIIKXms0d7OIqfU0J1OAOAeETHE="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:LUUpTfexwy+1QaTu8lmC/N60zlw=
Content-Language: en-CA
In-Reply-To: <dm7ovjlgeb4ni73gh6djpgn9h8q2mbps4r@4ax.com>
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 250413-8, 4/13/2025), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Bytes: 7503

On 2025-04-13 4:40 PM, shawn wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Apr 2025 14:19:59 -0400, Rhino
> <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2025-04-12 11:29 PM, Robin Miller wrote:
>>> Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>
>>>> I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values and
>>>> is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
>>>> misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side
>>>> is anti-Palestinian.
>>>
>>>
>>> These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in
>>> Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups
>>> have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
>>> protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
>>> ideological descendants of Nazis.
> 
> If that is the case then it should be easy enough to prove. Either
> he's been out there supporting Hamas in public or he hasn't.
> 
>>>
>> If Hamas had taken the honourable - and legally required - approach to
>> war, none of this "genocide" would have happened. They would have put
>> their fighters in uniform and fought away from civilian areas instead of
>> deliberately hiding among the civilian population and civilian
>> infrastructure. But they didn't.
> 
> They would have lost on the first day because Israel is just that much
> better armed and trained. It's why they are hiding among the civilian
> population in the hopes that will help protect them. It shows that
> they are willing to sacrifice their fellow Palestinians in order to
> keep themselves safe.
> 
> That doesn't support their own attack on Israel civilians. That takes
> them from soldiers fighting a war to terrorists who deserve what ever
> they get. Not that the Palestinians they hide amongst are deserving of
> suffering with Hamas.

We have no idea what proportion of the human shields acted as such 
voluntarily and how many were forced at gunpoint to stay in place rather 
than seeking shelter away from the bombing and fighting. Given that 
Hamas won an election to become the legitimate governing party of Gaza, 
we have to assume significant public support but whether this support 
has survived all the years since that election is unknown and possibly 
unknowable. I'd be shocked if the percentage of willing shields was zero 
and I'd be shocked if it was 100%.

>> If Hamas cared about the citizens they represent, they would have let
>> them shelter in the extensive tunnel network that they built under Gaza,
>> rather than forbidding them to do so because the tunnels were reserved
>> for fighters and rockets. But they didn't.
> 
> That would have been better but it likely would have just led to
> Israel using bunker busting type bombs to get at the people in the
> tunnels.
> 
You're using a pragmatic/political calculation to deduce that and I 
don't disagree with your assessment. But where is the moral component? 
Surely it is simply WRONG to deny your own people shelter when it exists 
and has been paid for with aid money given with the intent of making 
life better for Gazans.

>> If Hamas wanted to end the suffering and death, they would have given up
>> the hostages months ago and laid down their arms. But they didn't.
> 
> I wouldn't expect them to put down their arms so long as Israel is
> treating the Palestinians as they are. That said I don't see the point
> in holding on to the hostages. It doesn't give them the sort of
> leverage they hoped for and just provides Netenyahoo (yeah, I know it
> isn't his name) cover for doing what he and his far right supporters
> want.
> 
You're using a pragmatic/political calculation to deduce that and I 
don't disagree with your assessment. But where is the moral component? 
Surely it is simply WRONG to perpetuate a war you can't win and is 
kiliing your own people.

>> If Hamas had a shred of honesty, they would have ensured that the health
>> ministry in Gaza - which is run by Hamas - wouldn't be exaggerated and
>> would distinguish between dead fighters and dead civilians. But they
>> didn't.
> 

> Probably because they think that strengthens their position. No idea
> if it helps or not but at least I can see why they would do that. Also
> why would you give your enemy information on how effective their
> attacks have been. That's never been a good idea.
>
Fine, then they shouldn't have reported any numbers at all. But that 
would have reduced the amount of sympathy they got from gullible 
"progressives", which they were counting on to drive support from 
politicians that wanted to be seen as being "progressive", like Canada's 
own Melanie Joly, who talked about recognizing Palestine and got a thank 
you letter from Hamas due to her efforts on their behalf. Again, where 
is the moral realization that it is simply wrong to claim a hospital was 
devastated and 500 people were killed by an Israeli bomb when it was the 
parking lot that was hit with a much lower death toll and the Israeli 
bomb was actually one of Hamas' own rockets?

> 
>>> The government's position that a protestor at a university "would have
>>> potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United
>>> States" is preposterous on its face. Rubio's statement contained no
>>> evidence for his assertion.
>>>
>>> More generally, the contention that people legally in the US can be
>>> thrown out of the country--or legally harmed in any way--for taking a
>>> political position different from that of the government effectively
>>> nullifies the First Amendment.
>>>
>> Those two paragraphs are essentially what Adam are saying.
> 
>>
>>> The more extreme that Israel becomes, the more extreme becomes the
>>> repression by governments allied to Israel--and the fanaticism of
>>> Israel's supporters.
>>>
>>> Zionism is a genocidal political philosophy that must be eradicated.
>>>
>>
>> BTR1701 responded to that point already and I have nothing to add to his
>> response.
>>
>> Mahmoud Khalil has gone beyond just speech, as Douglas Murray points out
>> in this video:
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCWjWAiAIG4 [8 minutes]
>>
>> (Be patient, he gets there....)


-- 
Rhino