Comments by "You\x27re boring me now" (@You.are.boring.me.now2024) on ""It's OFFENSIVE, It's Genocide!" - Broadcaster On 'From The River To The Sea' Israel-Palestine Chant" video.

  1. The phrase “from the river to the sea” alone is not problematic, it simply defines a geographic area , it is the context in which it is used that makes it problematic e.g. when combined with “…’Palestine’ will be free” , free from what/whom exactly? To the likes of Hamas and many of those on these marches that means the eradication of the Jewish state and the Jewish people. When Netanyahu used it he was talking about Israel having control of that geographic area and not the eradication of the “Palestinian people”.
    3
  2. @lly9621 Again context ! Unlike Hamas Israel is not intentionally killing civilians , genocide requires intent and unlike Hamas Israel lacks that intent. I'm sorry, it is not my problem if you are so blinded by your tribal loyalties to be able to differentiate between these groups.
    3
  3. And ? It only defines a geographic area, it is the context in which it is used that makes it problematic , what does "from the river to the sea , 'Palestine' will be free" mean to you exactly ?
    3
  4. The phrase “from the river to the sea” alone is not problematic, it simply defines a geographic area , it is the context in which it is used that makes it problematic e.g. when combined with “…’Palestine’ will be free” , free from what/whom exactly? To the likes of Hamas and many of those on these marches that means the eradication of the Jewish state and the Jewish people. When Netanyahu used it he was talking about Israel having control of that geographic area and not the eradication of the “Palestinian people”.
    3
  5. Nope, that is talking about Israeli control of the disputed land and not the genocide of a people, whereas when the likes of Hamas use it they do mean the total eradication of the state of Israel and the Jewish people. The "Palestinians" have rejected every offer of a two state solution and have made it clear that any two state solution could only ever be temporary e.g. Arafat talking about the Oslo accords being his "treaty of Hudaybiyya".
    3
  6. "River to the sea" in itself is not an issue as it only defines a geographical are it is the context in which it is used that makes it problematic , "...'Palestine' will be free" free of what/whom , when used by the religious zealots of Hamas and their ilk it means the total eradication of the sovereign state of Israel and its Jewish people.
    2
  7. There is a thing called context !
    2
  8. Which figment of the imagination will be presiding on your flavour of "judgement day" ?
    2
  9. When Netanyahu used the term it was in the context of having control of the region, when Hamas and their ilk use it they are talking about the eradication of Israel and the Jewish people and FYI there is not and has never been an independent/autonomous country/state of "Palestine" and there is not and has never been an ethnically/culturally distinct "Palestinian people".
    2
  10.  @Justiceactivist  Just stating facts, it's not my problem that you do not like it.
    2
  11. "From the river to the sea" simply defines a geographic area , it is what accompanies it and the context in which it is used and meant that is the issue, try not to be so simplistic or maybe even dishonest .
    1
  12. There is something called context and it is generally quite important.
    1
  13. There is not and has never been an independent/autonomous country/state of Palestine or an ethnically/culturally distinct "Palestinian people" and whatever difficulties Muslim Arabs face in Israel they have more freedom that they would have in any of the surrounding Arab countries.
    1
  14.  @h3egypt  ps Islam did not exist until the 7th century and "Muslims" had no part in that land until they took it by force.
    1
  15.  @h3egypt  A province , not an independent/autonomous country/state.
    1
  16. Nobody thinks it is only Muslims protesting and it is a vocal minority who believe what Israel is doing in Gaza is "genocide" , its not it is legitimate military action against a genuinely genocidal group in defence of their own people.
    1
  17.  @jjohn408  What about it , what 's your point ?
    1
  18. Best you do some research yourself, there is not and has never been an independent/autonomous country/state of "Palestine" and nobody ever spoke of a "Palestinian people" before they were invented as a propaganda tool in the 60's.
    1
  19. The phrase “from the river to the sea” alone is not problematic, it simply defines a geographic area , it is the context in which it is used that makes it problematic e.g. when combined with “…’Palestine’ will be free” , free from what/whom exactly? To the likes of Hamas and many of those on these marches that means the eradication of the Jewish state and the Jewish people. When Netanyahu used “from the river to the sea” he was talking about Israel having sovereignty/control of that geographic area and not the eradication of the “Palestinian people”. Context matters.
    1
  20.  @KismetMulhaneski-to3wg  Yes it is a copy/paste of my comment in answer to the mindless drone army parroting the same ignorant point, why would I type each time when Microsoft have provide the perfect tool and so far not a single person has made a cogent argument in response . Where have I said it originated after Oct 7th ? Where have I even mentioned Oct 7th ? It is irrelevant when the term "river to the sea" started it alone is simply reference to a geographic area and when the Israeli's use it they are talking in terms of sovereignty/control of all of Israel and not the annihilation of a people which is the context in which Hamas and their ilk use it.
    1
  21.  @KismetMulhaneski-to3wg  Late edit to your comment? Easy to make unsubstantiated allegations. Funny that you mention the ICJ , they were asked to call for an immediate cessation of military action due to its "genocidal" nature, they chose not to do that rather they warned Israel to take care in how they prosecute their war on Hamas i.e. they did not see an ongoing "genocide" they accepted that Israel was acting lawfully in defence of its own people. The ICJ did however call for the immediate and unconditional release of all Israeli hostages being held by Hamas for any other group, has that happened? No, do you care that it has not happened? I doubt it. I'm not a bot but you are definitely part of a the drone army flooding these comments sections.
    1
  22. Hamas has demonstrated that what happens at the ICJ is totally irrelevant.
    1
  23. So in your mind calling for the genocide of the Jewish people is okay ? Before you claim that Israel if committing a genocide look up the definition of the word and contemplate on the ruling of the ICJ who did not call for an immediate cessation of military action in Gaza by the IDF, they chose to warn them to take care in how they prosecuted their war on Hamas i.e. they did not see a genocide by a sovereign state taking legal measures in defence of its people.
    1
  24.  @Titus9508  Do you understand the meaning of the word context ? "From the river to the sea" simply defines a geographical region .
    1
  25. The phrase “from the river to the sea” alone is not problematic, it simply defines a geographic area , it is the context in which it is used that makes it problematic e.g. when combined with “…’Palestine’ will be free” , free from what/whom exactly? To the likes of Hamas and many of those on these marches that means the eradication of the Jewish state and the Jewish people. When Netanyahu used "from the river to the sea" he was talking about Israel having control of that geographic area and not the eradication of the “Palestinian people”. Context is king, why are Islamoleftists such simplistic thinkers?
    1
  26. Nobody other than YT delete comments.
    1
  27.  @KismetMulhaneski-to3wg  You cannot delete anybody else's comments only your own !
    1
  28.  @KismetMulhaneski-to3wg  Yes and it is not possible for me to delete any of your comments , click on the three little dots next to my comment and see what options you get .
    1
  29.  @KismetMulhaneski-to3wg  So it is you that does not know how to use YT and it was you that was lying , now run along!
    1
  30.  @KismetMulhaneski-to3wg  YT filtered my last comment so I will try again. Yes I support Israeli action against Hamas and the effort they put in to reduce civilian casualties and where have I called you an apologist for Hamas ?
    1
  31.  @KismetMulhaneski-to3wg  ps What did the "prophet" of Islam have to say about innocent women and children being killed by his troops during their raids on the enemy ?
    1
  32. That statement talks about sovereignty i.e. political control of a region and not the genocide of a people , not the same thing at all and to suggest it is, is disingenuous at best.
    1
  33. There is not and has never been an independent/autonomous state or country of "Palestine" and the "Palestinian people" are an invention of the PLO from the 60's. The Arabs have rejected every single offer for a two state solution , they are not interested in a permanent peace with Israel, they want it and the Jewish people gone. The original two state solution was Israel for the Jews and the much larger area of what is now the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan for the Arabs. "Palestine" has only ever been a geographic region and was named as such by the Romans in the 2nd century as a taunt to the Jews.
    1