not yet

They declared the 31st of October a national holiday.
Once again our politics are acting according to a “realpolitik” betraying our alleged ideals, while our population is misinformed by our capitalist-owned medias and unspecialized&rushed journalists, otherwise we’d respect the will of the local population.
A referendum was promised since 1991, but Morocco insisted that the moroccan settlers should be allowed to take part in it, since they know that otherwise they’d certainly lose.

We’ll support separatism in other countries while refusing to support the local population in Palestine, Crimea, the Donbass, or here. It’s not only about double standards, but a refutation of our universal values. We’re not about aiming for righteousness/justice/goodness/…( anymore ?), but about whatever serves our interest, logically generating the world we deserve.

Anyway, that’s how terrorists are created, if i was a sahrawi(, and didn’t desire to be moroccan, united in diversity, which seems to be case for almost all of them), then i’d support Bashir Mustafa Sayed.
But hypocritical westerners will oppose terrorism because “violence is never the answer”.
Or it’s just one more example of ‘our double standards’/‘whatever suits our interests’. We don’t even have a well-defined public goal(, with intermediary objectives).

Edit :
Interesting quote from Confucius(, who cares about appearances, only the substance counts) : https://x.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1986266604926345512

(source, also here with a clear downfall post-2001 and obviously in the 60s-70s, France is no exception with a long-standing mistrust)
Even our journalists don’t trust our politicians, and then we complain about the rise of populists, who claim to at least be honest even if they don’t appear as competent/knowledgeable.
E.Macron talked about pedagogy in the past, something new ‘needed to be’/‘could have been’ created, but he gave up because nothing is ever simple, yet our distrust will continue to stay low, or even fall further, if nothing is done(, more censorship of foreign(&domestic) opponents can’t be the only solution, along with buying newspapers and blocking new candidates from obtaining mayoral endorsements).
I’d personally argue for the solution of direct democracy, even progressively with only 2-3 referendums each year, but there’s undoubtedly dozens of solutions, and we seem to continue on the current/old path without changing anything.

What’s not said is that France’s censorship laws are so authoritarian that we kidnapped a 18 y.o. iranian woman 6 months ago for terrorism apologia because she supported the palestinian resistance to israeli colonization : Mahdieh Esfandiari
We don’t know if it’s a simple release of hostages or if Iran obtained something.

The number of condemnations for terrorism apologia were zero in 2011, five in 2012, 2013, and 2014, but 338 in 2015 and 447 in 2016(, source), because we are Charlie or sthg.
Now it has become a habit, with 60 condemnations for the first quarter of 2025, and we’re still adding new laws to condemn those who think differently from the power in place : disinformation, diffamation, incitation to hate(, 4200), infringements of image rights or privacy, …
There’s also cyberbullying, used to condemn opponents who said something true, but since other netizens sent mean tweets you’re responsible for up to 2-3 years in jail and the new technical possibility of banning you from every social medias for up to 5 years, which is what the numeric identity is for. Thousands of condemnations in 2022-2024, currently used by Brigitte Macron but politicians as well

The law SREN was censored in 2024 by the constitutional council, but the Digital Service Acts does something similar anyway.
It’s not online(, yet?), but the offense of contempt of public authority condemns tens of thousands of citizens each year.
Anyway, our sole argument for sanctioning “dictatorships” all over the world is freedom, especially freedom of speech to western-backed opponents, it’s at the core of our accusations and now we’re giving up on our only argument.
As of now we still believe that we’re more free than the dictatorships we’re fighting against, because we underestimate our authoritarianism and overestimate theirs, and also because we’re forcing them to protect themselves from our attacks.
Sure, continue to destroy our internet, why would i care anyway, it’s none of my concern, just so surprising to see people changing their mind on what was once our core value(, i just saw that but it’s every single day, and one more found randomly a few minutes later, or that one(, they also banned PressTv)).

(I just saw your comment, sry for editing my previous one i didn’t know 😬)
Just know that it wasn’t my intention to defend Israel(, obviously?), i said that because it could benefit the palestinian cause.

I came on the subreddit mentioned to understand why they “needed” the west bank, and instead they insisted that it’s the palestinians who want Israel despite the explicit demands of the 1967 borders, and pretended that it’s the palestinian violence that prevents a two-states solution, the YT channel mentioned in the selftext kinda confirm that the situation is perceived in a weird way by the israelis.
I recognize that it’s an overly strange conclusion, i’m doubting myself. Surveys show that 80% of israelis consider themselves the victims in this conflict, so i.d.k., perhaps more israelis don’t understand the situation that we may think. Look at how they speak about security while it’s their colonization of the West Bank and refusal of the Oslo accords that provoke more attacks ?

It’s not impossible that a palestinian operation could be to send a document in each of their mailbox explaining more clearly that the attacks will continue to happen as long as Israel refuses a palestinian state along the 1967 borders with East-Jerusalem, and more explanations.
They probably wouldn’t be able to do this more than once, but at least afterwards israelis won’t ever have the excuse of not understanding what’s happening, and that Israel is responsible for Hamas&palestinians attacks.

But yeah, unironically, stay cautious about the presence of zionists bots/people on the net, like i can’t understand why that popular french account(, banned in the past, obv. by the authorities who else,) has an almost unanimity of comments opposing him, if you look at his posts with dozen of comments, that kind of weird example. I can’t prove anything but these millions/billions spent ought to go somewhere.

(now i’m searching for surveys proving their brainwashing, but it’s probably not necessary)
(Netanyahu won in 2019, promising to annex the jordan valley, which is 30% of the west bank, meanwhile israelis somehow believe to be the victims, and that there’s nothing they can do, or that it’s a convenient question of irrecoverable trust(, instead of security measures), it’s so weird/unbelievable)

I.d.k. how, but that’d be great :

I’ve learned that israelis seem to believe that the Palestinian Authority only have to desire a two-states solution to obtain it(, they don’t realize that it’s Israel who’s blocking it !), at least that’s what they said on the internet, pretending that they don’t obtain it because of violence while reversing the cause&effect.
If that’s indeed the case(, as unbelievable as it seems), then breaking through their ignorance could benefit the palestinian fight.
(Just a thought i wanted to share because it seemed worth it, /r/IsraelPalestine is disproportionately populated with pro-israelis if you have a few days to spend, i don’t rule out the possibility that none were arguing in good faith because it remains an improbable conclusion on my part)

Long comment ahead, that happens when i leave the phone for the computer, sry :/ :

Einstein’s “god” probably is. Mainstream christian god, as described by the bible, definitely isn’t.

I.d.k. how Einstein described God, if it’s like Spinoza, as we often hear, then i hope that it wasn’t entirely like Spinoza, who was closer to atheists than i first thought.
But you’re mentioning the Bible, what’s the one you’re thinking about, the Eternal ? If so, well, Eternity is difficult to grasp, perhaps that God is only the First Cause(, and what that Cause became).
I’m thinking about that one : I am what I am
Christian theology didn’t stop with the New Testament, just like for every other religion.

Rationality is different from materialism. Theology is based on an explicitly idealist concepts which it then rationally develops.

Religious axioms like the golden Rule ? Ethicists have tried to start from a material standpoint, and theologians as well, like, i.m.o. God’s existence is certain under some definitions : I know that something exist, i can’t doubt that something is existing right now(, Descartes wasn’t the first to start from this), hence God defined as the All necessarily exists, whatever that All may entail.
And my argument would be that God is even greater than the All, e.g. by distinguishing quality and quantity, etc.

I first learned about materialism//idealism in regard to consciousness, and in that regard, i believe that consciousness is a product of our material body(, in other words the pseudo-material body, that we’re being conscious of, only exist in our consciousness ; while our really material body exists outside of our consciousness, and that holds true in the case of a simulation), even if i leave some room to entertain a twist.
On the other side, i hope that you’re not materialist to the point of denying that there are at least two worlds(, an infinity more would say Spinoza i.i.r.c., i never went beyond the beginning of two of his books t.b.h.), one of Idea(l)s and the other material. Saying that the world of Idea(l)s is inside or produced by the material world would only make it a qualitatively different subworld inside the material world, justifying the distinction. Mesuring a nervous signal and linking it to a complete chart to give it some meaning wouldn’t be the same as measuring a thought or a qualia. But since you probably agree that there are obviously at least two distinct world, material and immaterial/ideal, then that paragraph wasn’t useful.
God is both in the material and ideal world(, and the others inaccessible to humans), i don’t understand the materialist point of view. (edit : i was thinking that God defined as Highness could be seen as (the )All ; but if Highness is seen as Maximum/Perfection, then S.H…e would exist in the ideal world, yet only in potential in the material world)
If you’re stating distinctions like “it’s not idea(l)s that creates the environment, but the environment that creates our idea(l)s”, then it’s kinda obviously both ? And it’s not because humanity discovered God, or at least the few we can fathom, that God was hence created, just like scientific inventions that are discoveries of a now unveiled pre-existing potential of our reality.

What i agree with is that in order to change the material conditions, then having a materialist approach is useful(, and we can see God in the inviolable rules of our reality, as well as in causality), however changing the spiritual conditions is useful as well, and that was the point of this post : material conditions will never be enough to quench our thirst. Leaders of nations should probably be more materialists than idealists in their decisions, they should especially precede them with experiments to fully understand the consequences. However, individuals should perhaps be a bit more idealists than materialists when we’re interacting with other persons, as well as when planning for the future ?
Wouldn’t you say that stoics are idealists when they say “you’re sad because of your consciousness and not because of the world, so it’s your decision to stop being sad” ? Would a materialist like you claim that prayers have no use ?
I believe that attributing a consciousness to, e.g., a car or a computer, will make me take more care of it, such feelings bring material consequences.

But i agree with you that educating the masses won’t change their social position, most crimes are made by young males in poor urban areas, i don’t&won’t deny the evident influence of material conditions on ideas, we imperatively need to have the same standard of living throughout Earth.
But our standard of living is higher and our population is multiplied and yet we/i still look at the past with the admiration of something unreachable, everyone in the Renaissance expressed h.er.im.self beautifully, we’ve lost that. And our present could be worse though, but we don’t even aim for a well-defined goal, so what promise are westerners even standing for.

I doubt our discussion would be of much value. I won’t be able to come up with anything that’s not been written already by Engels and later Lenin.

I believe that this sentence could be taken on the first degree, but if it’s also a reference to the way i ended that comment, then it’d be a pertinent critic, and i use that occasion to rectify myself and say instead that i should have no good reason to refuse a debate, since it’d be like refusing to learn, i.e. to be better. (“no good reason” was a bad choice of word, i feel late and i’d like to hurry up so it does feel like debating/learning/‘becoming better’ isn’t the best use of my time, and perhaps yours as well)
I don’t think i’ve read Lenin’s “Socialism and Religion”(, even if it’s possible with such title), it’s now added to a list of books i should read.

This song, from Max Romeo, who died recently, is the first that Red Creators Network made.
Joshua is an interesting name, because Jesus can be written Yehoshua (יְהוֹשֻׁעַ) YHWH saves, in aramean Yeshua (יֵשׁוּעַ), and Joshua is also the name of the son of Nun, an homonym with the equivalent of the First Cause in Egypt, and the successor of Moses, in other words “Joshua, son of Nun” echoes “Jesus, son of God”.
Moreover, nun(נוּן or nun–vav–nun) means fish in hebrew, and is also the 14th letter in the middle of the alphabet, with a numerical value of 700, that apparently gave us the N through semitic/phenician similarities with the greek, but it looks like a J : נ. You also have other interpretations apparently, such as the snake here, or seed there. The wiki article confirms the link with the snake, who’s never assimilated to the devil in Genesis.
Many names in the old testament start with a J, even Mark was named John(, “YHWH has shown grace”), Mark being his greco-roman name. It’s perhaps not coincidental that the name of the first two gospels of Mark and Matthew look similar, with the M preceding the N. Unlike Mark, Matthew was an hebrew name that means gift of YHWH. There’s also the tribe of Judah and Simeon.

It doesn’t prove anything about Jesus-Christ, it may have been a relatively frequent jewish name, Isaiah/Yesha‘yahu also means “YHWH saves”, and is the most cited in the Gospels. There are other layers to the appellation son of God, such as stating that Adam was the son of God and that we descend from Eve&Adam, or discussing the differences between the son of Man and the son of God. If you read the gospels, you’ll see that their authors weren’t lying because they talked in symbols, sometimes signs, and others straight-out explanations. These texts were meant to provide for a lifetime of contemplation, and were deeply thought of, probably at first from memory through many announcements, and in a very specific time, the second temple being destroyed in 70 A.D., around the first gospel of Mark, etc.
Don’t doubt that the people of the past knew this if they’ve read the gospels with a minimum of devotion, it’s written clearly enough, more than in some places of the old testament, but we’re still ignoring that great mystery in 2025, and unavoidably it’ll leak from the Internet one day, it’s kinda miraculous that it hasn’t already have, it’s not even really hidden(, and i’m not even tempted to read a book to know all of them, it’s a pleasure to understand by oneself).
There are some books of the Bible that are meant to be interpreted allegorically, and others more rationally. Even if there’s always a mix of both, the Gospels followed the former while the holy Quran followed the latter.
(Edit : and it’s been some time since i began to think that christian teachings are more adapted to individuals, and islamic teachings to states/leaders, making a fusion easier)
I’veno doubts about overly weird “coincidences” though(, i still remember three of them that happened this year), if it means that God sees us then it’s frightening. I can only hope to somehow lighten the weight of my sins, and wouldn’t trust someone that doesn’t recognize s.he’s a sinner(, and/or who isn’t scared of lengthening its list).

In short, i choose both materialism and idealism, sorry if i wrote this too long comment while missing the point of view that you have on this, i.d.k. much about the opposition idealism//materialism.

(Before you block me or this community : i’m sorry if i gave you a bad opinion of catholics or religions in general, i’d have preferred to avoid that(, and i edited my comment afterwards).
If i may give my opinion : don’t be so sensible, strength is a virtue and weakness is a vice, if you feel like losing your sanity because of your environnement then perhaps work on hardening yourself ? (feels like a stupid sentence)
I( will) love you, it’s even easier since you’re a complete stranger, may you forgive my aggressiveness.)

Thanks for developing 👍

I obviously disagree, but that would be a long debate once again…

I intended to do other things today, but in short :

• Many definitions of God are rational(, e.g. the First Cause, the Maximum/Perfection, the Truth, the ultimate nature of reality, and at least dozens more) ;
• It’s just the anti-religious propaganda of the XIXth century that insisted to oppose science and religion while theology was taught rationally for millenias ;
• science only means knowledge, the scientific method isn’t a revolution, and only litteralists are shocked by Darwin(, we’ve already known about artificial selection for millenias, natural selection wasn’t a big step), Galileo wasn’t killed but condemned to stay at home and because he published a book portraying the Pope as Simplicio, despite him financing most of Galileo’s researchs throughout his life, and way less witches were burned that you would assume ;
• too many things to say, but the Church never rejected the results of experiments, only their interpretations

religion is just another tool of control

Because it makes you content ? Wouldn’t you say the same about sports or video games ?
It’s social engineering to make people more virtuous, a collective pledge. Its goal is to create God’s Kingdom/City/Utopia, hard to deny it, it’s even in the Lord’s prayer.

I wrote that quickly, and probably won’t answer you for the next 8-12h

You’re not answering to me, but would you say that communism is incompatible with religion ?
I can’t even begin to see the link, except that it was during a century when people rejected everything(, antithesis moment), including religions for more than one reason(, republicanism//royalism, sciences//faith, miracles, rational morality, …).
If you believe that religions are incompatible with communism i’m a little bit interested.

Don’t hesitate to be more precise on what you didn’t understood. And say that you didn’t understood the context, not that there is none(, or that i’m a schizo, w/e that may mean, it’s a bit of an all-encompassing term currently).
I’m sometimes imprecise on purpose, but it doesn’t feel like i overdid it here, did you read the selftext ?

If you believe that my (rhetorical )question would be answered by opposing material conditions with the afterlife, then you may have missed my explicit mention of God’s kingdom, as well as the tweet mentioned ?
If i’m vulgar : what’s the point of all being wealthy enough if we’re also all assholes ?
The quote about our eternal thirst that can’t be quenched is infinitely more rich&eloquent.

I’m a theocrat first, and a communist second, a libertarian and other stuff as well, like in favor of a real/direct democracy, e.g. through sortition like in Athens, and don’t see an incompatibility.
So if you’re saying that religions deal with the Sky while secular institutions deal with the Earth then i’ll disagree.
A transition to theocracy should be progressive though, with many decades or even 1-2 centuries of cohabitation with atheists.
Worth adding my discovery 1-2 week ago that some venezuelan communes are very pious.

I don’t think that talking about it will be useful, nor do i aim to convince you.

The conclusion, which seems like basic morality towards fellow living beings :

So :

- 1) The Court has jurisdiction to give the requested advisory opinion ;
- 2) The Court agrees to give that opinion ;

- 3.a) Israel must ensure that palestinians have essential supplies(, food, water, shelter, medicine, etc.) ;
- 3.b) It must facilitate all humanitarian relief operations, not obstruct them ;
- 3.c) It must protect medical personnel ;
- 3.d) It must not deport palestinians ;
- 3.e) It must allow the Red Cross visits to detained palestinians ;
- 3.f) It must not use starvation of civilians as a method of warfare ;
- 4) It must fulfil the human rights of palestinians ;

- 5) It must cooperate with the UN and its agencies, including UNRWA ;
- 6) It must ensure respect for UN privileges&immunities, under article 105 of the UN Charter ;
- 7) It must respect the inviolability of UN property, including those of UNRWA ;
- 8) It must respect the privileges&immunities of UN officials and experts on mission in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

On one side, i wouldn’t want such imperfect/corruptible u.n. or i.c.j. to decide for the states, with their thousands of rules, it’s too dangerous(, but i still desire a handful of world rules, and a world army[1]).
On the other, by choosing to reject for decades the palestinian ‘offer to live side-by-side’/‘justified demand that the Holy Lands don’t only belong to one abrahamic religion’, Israel is digging its own grave, and i hope that it will be given some area of lands in the west after its warranted destruction.

Also, Francesca Albanese new report reveals how states actively enabled Israel’s oppression of palestinians.

[1] : Since it’s also linked to Venezuela, and any other country wishing to follow through, i’d like to develop.
This world army could only intervene in two cases :
- if a state refuses to pay the tax required to maintain that world army ;
- if a state invades another(, this only deals with overt operations, the covert ones being treated by some ideally incorruptible international tribunal)
That army would never be able to intervene for civil wars, or alleged genocides against separatists(, especially if we assume that a tribunal can only confirm covert operations and not stop them), or any other cases, i suppose.

Well, i.d.k. if i’m missing cases.
That world army is sent for each natural disaster to help the local population for free, as long as the state concerned agrees.
And there’s a case for retrieving individuals responsible for grave crimes abroad if they won’t stop acting.
It’s worth thinking about deeply before creating or joining a system that won’t allow secession/‘refusing to pay the ensuing tax’, hence sacrificing the possibility of disunity for the benefit of ensured diversity/security.

The link with Venezuela and its communes is that a nation could implement internally how it imagines that a world government should be to obtain the most unity and the most diversity at the same time. If leaders indeed do not follow, they just haven’t found yet how to experiment successfully in their new approach, and sanctions clearly don’t help.
However, like palestinians for israelis, they may benefit from informing americans of the reality of the situation somehow ; if advertisements are forbidden, then an illegal campaign in mailboxes, or on the internet, or by calling, bots as well since everyone’s doing it. It could cost billions each year though.

J’ai vu ton édition, et c’est idiot de prétendre que quelqu’un qui passe sa vie à lutter contre le fascisme est un fasciste(, l’accusation de racisme est nouvelle à ma connaissance). Tu m’expliques comment c’est compatible avec la démocratie directe ?
Ou pas, fais comme tu veux, triste France comme même.
Comme quoi, toi aussi tu crois bêtement ce que les médias te racontent, et je suppose bien que moi aussi je dois faire gaffe, comme tout le monde.

Ok, et laisse tomber la chaîne que je t’ai conseillé en fait elle est bof, il est israélien pas extérieur comme je le pensais, et si un palestinien avait fait ces vidéos il aurait probablement eu le biais inverse(, edit : en fait ça semble impartial, juste que c’est facile de sélectionner les micro-trottoirs et il dit que tous sont gardés, parfois on voit bien que les gens comprennent mal la question et le contexte de la situation qu’il décrit, elle est posée trop brute et sans avoir/prendre le temps de creuser aussi, 'fin bref). Mais ça semble confirmer que les israélien·ne·s pensent que ce sont les palestinien·ne·s qui refusent la paix, pff.
Dsl pour le follow-up si ça t’a ennuyé, 'nuit.

Edit : oui, ils/elles semblent vraiment croire en majorité que les palestinien·ne·s refusent une solution à deux États, malgré la position claire de l’Autorité Palestinienne maintenue depuis Oslo. Je suis surpris, est-ce qu’une majorité ignore réellement le point de vue de l’Autorité Palestinienne à ce sujet ? C’est ce que les vidéos montrent, c’est dingue si c’est la situation réelle sur le terrain, juste une manipulation de masse(, ça expliquerait comment plus de 80% des israélien·ne·s peuvent se permettre de penser que leur victimation est plus grave que les autres partis de ce conflit malgré la colonisation continue, les faits historiques, et les statistiques ; c’est juste qu’ils ne savent pas que c’est Israël l’unique responsable de l’échec d’Oslo, des autres accords, et du refus actuel).

Juste par curiosité(, vu que tu connais probablement les liens du canard réfractaire avec lui), en un mot : sur une échelle de -10 à +10, tu mettrais quelle note à Étienne Chouard(, et aux idées qu’il défend) 🙃 ?

Je viens de voir ça par coïncidence et j’ai pensé à toi, je m’étais dit que toi aussi tu le trouverais peut-être intéressant 🤷, je regarde les autres videos de sa chaîne actuellement
Juste des gens normaux semblant surtout se préoccuper de leur vie personnelle.

Certains répétent que les palestiniens veulent juste tuer des juifs et je me demande depuis quelques semaines quel pourcentage de la population est au courant que l’Autorité Palestinienne insiste pour une solution à deux États depuis longtemps(, presque personne ici ne semblait être au courant alors que c’est un sub dédié, et que ce genre de connaissance est la base, comment peut-on ignorer ça ? Enfin, en vérité je me doute bien que les israéliens sont au courant et que ces gens sur reddit sont juste bizarrement sous-informés malgré leur présence assidue sur ce sous)
Je ne sais pas comment les israéliens justifieraient la colonisation des terres palestiniennes s’il leur avait posé cette question(, edit : ici)(, pas le prétexte de la sécurité, vu que détruire la Palestine n’augmentera pas leur sécurité, que des mesures de sécurité pourraient les protéger, etc.), mais leur réaction de déni surpris aurait peut-être été la même qu’ici.

Tu sais, je trouve que l’on était pas mieux durant les attentats de l’État islamique et que tout le monde prétendait qu’ils étaient juste fous sans se demander pourquoi on se faisait attaquer(, c’était quelques semaines/mois après ça, comment on a pu se démerder pour l’ignorer à plus de 95% ?), c’était une situation différente mais un peu semblable.
D’ailleurs, eux aussi ont été traité de façon affreuse après leur capture, avec plein de victimes civiles présentées comme boucliers humains, et plein d’atrocity propaganda, et les choses habituelles.
Cette fois-là, on applaudissait, et la prochaine fois on recommencera, de même que l’on continuera de soutenir Israël au prochain attentat plutôt que de faire pression pour la création d’un État palestinien.

The telegram link is censored in France because our universal value is freedom of expression, but Hamas is saying that it gave every body at its disposition, so it respected the initial agreement :

As well as the final one :

https://x.com/caitoz/status/1978210555061301697

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/10/08/middleeast/israel-hamas-dead-hostages-return-intl
https://x.com/AJABreaking/status/1978678807445078181

He could very easily intercept them instead, and put them on trial.

Ah oui, eh bien là je te rejoins, on vit tous dans une bulle et ils ne font pas exception, après ils n’ont pas (encore? )banni B’tselem ou Haaretz(, tout pourrait toujours être pire ce n’est pas une excuse).
Je n’ai rien à ajouter au final…

(Je vois pas pourquoi toi ou Farhad(@freefree.ps) tenez à mentionner l’utilisateur(, ça ne m’a pas empêché de recevoir la notification 45mn plus tard avec l’app Eternity) ? Enfin bref/‘peu importe’)

Je sais mais non, comme nous ils sont pris dans un narratif, tu crois que les gens sont juste méchants ? Tout le monde se croit être dans le bon camp, rien de nouveau.
C’est pour ça qu’il faut leur parler, enfin bref, je vais pas te prendre la tête là-dessus.

J’avais posté ça récemment si ça t’intéresse, d’autres études montrent que les juifs israéliens se considèrent à 80% les victimes dans le conflit(, dernière page de https://www.pcpsr.org/sites/default/files/Summary Report_ English_Joint Poll 12 Sept 2024.pdf ).

Je serais en faveur qu’Israël soit implanté en France à la place, mais là d’un coup tu verrais les français cesser de supporter les israéliens, donc les discours d’antisémitisme sont juste une autre manipulation, enfin pas la peine de t’en convaincre.
D’ailleurs, on pourrait prétendre refuser une implantation en France par respect des préférences israéliennes, mais on refuse aussi de donner un territoire aux musulmans en échange de leur perte de la moitié des Terres Saintes, en fait on s’en fiche d’avoir un échange équilibré/acceptable, c’est juste la loi du plus fort.

(J’ai lu avant-hier cette citation de Julio Escalona sur la futilité des négociations dans certains cas, j’y ai repensé plusieurs fois depuis car elle est bien exprimée. Sans vouloir tout confondre, elle semble appropriée pour le cas palestinien)

(Le livre est bof, je te le conseille pas mais je le cite comme même)

Et tous ces mensonges&manipulations, genre sur le Venezuela actuellement, mais systématiquement à tous les sujets, franchement j’en ai marre, on ne sait pas “gagner” en ‘étant franc’/‘disant la vérité’, notre parole a moins de valeur que celle des criminels.

Bah, je vis pas en Israël, mais perso je pense que leurs médias sont comme en France : certains(, de gauche objectivement,) vont s’offusquer des conditions de détention, et d’autres vont les sous-estimer ou ignorer, en n’y pensant presque pas.
De même qu’aux États-Unis beaucoup auront déjà oublié Guantánamo sans savoir qu’il y avait plein d’autres cas, et sans en avoir rien à faire.
Vraiment, je crois que l’on sous-estime l’impact des médias dans notre jugement des israéliens, j’ai même l’impression que beaucoup doutent de la sincérité de l’Autorité Palestinienne et que ça les arrange de prétendre que la solution à deux états est un leurre.
Qq chose comme ça, mon analyse est bâclée là, mais j’avais rapidement fait une recherche des médias les plus regardés en Israël et beaucoup sont proches de Netanyahou, tu te doutes qu’ils ne vont pas parler du point de vue palestinien, imagine BFM ou CNews parlant des gilets jaunes mais en pire car ici ce sont des “terroristes” qui ne s’arrêteront pas avant d’avoir tué tou.te.s les jui.f.ve.s, et qui connaît le point de vue des terroristes, c’est même illégal de le présenter(, = d’en faire l’apologie). Oui, clairement j’accuse les médias israéliens.

(Je dois y aller là, si jamais tu m’écris entre-temps je ne vais pas pouvoir te répondre avant ~16h)