Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ordered the Israeli army and other officials to submit to the cabinet a plan to evacuate Rafah, Gaza’s southernmost governorate.
International humanitarian law prohibits the forced displacement of civilians except when temporarily required for their security or imperative military reasons.
Forcing the over one million displaced Palestinians in Rafah to again evacuate without a safe place to go would be unlawful and would have catastrophic consequences.
I say that its time that all states that are party to the Genocide Convention now have a legal obligation BEFORE IT TOO LATE. To take material steps to put an end to Israel’s genocidal acts in the besieged Strip.
If they dont do so we are very likely entering another long and painful era where armed struggle and violent domination become increasingly and mutually dependent on each other for survival. Yet neither can win.
After Hamas’s deadly attacks in Israel and Israel’s hellish bombardment of Gaza is the world going to sit back and watch what remains of Gaza and its people wiped from the face of the earth, endorsing further murderous violence against civilians.
Who gets to count as human?
The real aim of Israel’s lobbying efforts to undermine UNRWA is the liquidation of the Palestinian identity and the right of return of the Palestinian people that the UN agency has come to embody. If the Western states, and especially the United States, continue to bow down to Israel’s genocidal demands they will only add further weight to the accusations that they are complicit in its genocide in Gaza.
What is at stake today is not only the future of millions of Palestinians and the very viability of the Israeli state, but the stability of an entire region, and the future of the rules-based world order.
The Palestinians will remain. They cannot be eliminated. Israel too will continue to exist. The future is full of unnecessary and horrific bloodshed all around.
Terrorist organisations like ISIL and al-Qaeda could not have asked for a better environment to regroup and mount new attacks on the West, as the global majority now views the West solidly as an enabler of the ongoing genocide of an occupied and oppressed Indigenous people.
The international community must first ensure the safety of the Palestinian people.
Given the current gridlock and the total devastation of Gaza, the first step towards ending occupation should be to bring the Palestinian people – who have now been identified by ICJ as a unique “group” – under international protection.
The inclusion of Hamas in any peace process is crucial as no sustainable settlement can be achieved without acknowledging the concerns and expectations of the group that has led Palestinian armed struggle against occupation for many years.
This means the killing must stop, captives on both sides should be released, the siege should end, adequate aid and basic services should reach all Palestinians in Gaza immediately.
The international community must make it clear to Israel that it cannot infringe on the territorial integrity of Gaza by occupying any part of the territory, establishing a so-called “buffer zone” within it or dividing it into smaller settlements.
The international community must unanimously call for an immediate and unconditional cessation of all illegal construction and land-grabbing activities in the West Bank and demand accountability for the violence and aggression perpetrated by Israeli settlers against the Palestinians. World’s nations must insist on Israel decommissioning all the settlers outposts in the West Bank, and obviating any such intentions in the Gaza Strip.
To ensure that the Palestinian people can live freely and with dignity under the governance of their own elected representatives, the international community should officially recognise a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital and commit to ensuring the swift implementation of the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals in post conflict Palestine.
Desperate western attachment to morally bankrupt double standards bears a large portion of the blame.
All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.
≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: No matter what era we are in — or what new technology comes along — our fundamental beliefs will always be with us. Not True. Algorithms are exploiting the very foundations of everything.
You can write volumes on the state of the world, but one has only to look at the state of the world to see what algorithms are doing.
Algorithms form an increasingly important part of our daily lives, even if we are often unaware of it.
Most of us have no idea what they are — or how we’re being influenced by them.
They have become instrumental in our everyday lives.
Algorithms are making hugely consequential decisions in our society on everything from medicine to transportation to welfare benefits to criminal justice and beyond. Subtly shifting the way our society is operating.
We can see them at work in the world. We know they’re shaping outcomes all around us.
Are we making a mistake by handing over so much decision-making authority to these programs?
This paradox—that the internet is both saviour and executioner of democracy is part of a massive unfolding social experiment.
The proliferation of algorithms is eroding our ability to think and decide for ourselves. They are turning people into products, and they don’t even realize it.
Billions of people around the world are interacting with these technologies, which is why the tiniest changes can have such a gigantic impact on all of humanity.
We will blindly follow them wherever they lead us. There is no one assessing whether or not they are providing a net benefit or cost to society.
WE DON’T HAVE TO CREATE A WORLD IN WHICH MACHINES ARE TELLING US WHAT TO DO OR HOW TO THINK, ALTHOUGH WE MAY VERY WELL END UP IN A WORLD LIKE THAT WHERE ALGORITHMS DECIDE WHO LIVES OR WHO DIES.
How you see the world matters.
————————
Beliefs are the things we holdtrue, regardless of whether we have any proof of their objective truth.
You see, in time, beliefs become labels.
We plaster them on our foreheads and use them to justify our action or inaction. That belief will then drive how you behave as you interpret it as being damning or empowering.
We all would be a lot happier if everyone else around us had the same beliefs as we do, or at least, that they would not challenge us on them. Of course, that is impossible, and this is precisely what fuels most of the world’s conflicts.
And here comes the kicker:
You can decide the direction you take. Your beliefs do not control you, so long as you become self-aware and take charge of your life. Or maybe if you assume everything will fall apart, you never get disappointed.
So, herein lies the persistent conflict of our society:
All of us are driven by our life experiences and by merely being human, but the creeping influence of algorithms in our lives are fucking up the world. We’re increasingly moving towards government by algorithm.
Automated systems are being rolled out with little transparency or public debate, and risk exacerbating existing inequalities.
The algorithm takes the biases and prejudices of the real world and ‘bakes them in’, and gives them a veneer that makes it seem like a policy choice is actually neutral and technical. But it isn’t,”
The problem is, both beliefs and values have strong momentum and seem glued to our character.
How do these beliefs played out in real life?
Are we just becoming throwaway survival machines, following our genetic and neurological programming in an indifferent world?
I believe that human life and the world mean much more than that.
There’s beauty everywhere—we have only to open our eyes to see it.
——————–
When it comes to climate change, the science is settled.
When it comes to technology its all together the opposite.
The sobering truth is that both the climate and technology are out of control.
Given the difficulty of getting the human brain or our political system to tackle anything beyond immediate crises, our attempts to rectify what’s wrong are usual puny compared to what’s really needed.
If you listen to our politicians, there is a strong consensus on climate change.
It consists of four parts.
First, carbon emissions are causing significant changes to our climate. Second, we need to take urgent action to reduce those emissions, including reaching net zero by 2050. Third, we have already made good progress in reducing emissions. And fourth, the steps we need to take to reduce emissions further will also bring many positive benefits for society.
We have a pretty clear understanding of the threat climate change poses to us, our children and our grandchildren. We are already being forced to cope with more droughts, more floods, more extreme storms. At the same time, we have in our arsenal effective policies that are difficult for rational people to demagogue as crippling to the economy or as a subversion of our cherished way of life.
So why does climate misinformation continue to spread online and in our media?
Dire warnings of the looming climate disaster may just make people throw up their hands in despair, sink into denial, or dig their heels in deeper against government action.
Instead, we seem to firmly believe that climate solutions inevitably mean more government, higher taxes and less freedom — and thus are threats to all our core values and identity.
———————-
Technology’s benefits are numerous in all fields, however in the system’s that effect our daily lives it is becoming a threat to our core values, through the use of algorithms. Pushing us like a digital slave army to mindlessly, unwittingly and unwillingly livestream our digital existences into the commercial coffers of companies that see us as nothing more than walking dollar signs.
Examples:
Every time you pick up your smartphone, you’re summoning algorithms. At this point, they are responsible for making decisions about pretty much every aspect of our lives.
The right to an explanation of an algorithm-generated decision does little to fix “systemic injustices” Getting an explanation but no democratic say in how systems work is like getting a privacy policy without a ‘do not consent’ button.
Deciding who gets access to welfare. Using automated interviews with a virtual border guard, based on “deception detection algorithm. Using algorithms to model when and where crime will happen — an area known as predictive policing — is on the rise. Using algorithms to come up with a personality assessment. Having your credit rating scored decided by an algorithm based on questionable data.
Grading algorithm does not not relied solely on automated means. Substituting a mathematical approach for human judgment does not automatically make it fair.
Profit seeking algorithms. Market making algorithms. Execution algorithms Scheduled algorithms. Participation algorithms. VWAP and TWAP algorithms are time-slicing algorithms. Liquidity-seeking algorithms (a.k.a. opportunistic algorithms) Arrival price algorithms seek to trade close to market prices.
Recent developments in algorithmic trading include clustering and high-frequency market forecasting are playing a central role in finance.
The worst-case scenario is that we fail to disrupt the status quo, in which very powerful companies develop and deploy AI in invisible and obscure ways.
We have no right to see all of the data these companies collect about us, no right to get a percentage when they resell our data without our knowledge or informed consent, no right to ask them to stop. We are for all purposes indentured servants, offered free digital room and board in return for paying with our digital souls and our real-world time.
Social media companies have managed only to create a toxic brew of horrific hate speech that they cannot seem to get rid of.
Algorithms really are so powerful that a few lines of code can push us into any behaviour.
The right message targeted at the right time could mass convert the entire population of a country into mindless zombies who would readily convert even their most deeply held beliefs in an instant.
When it is obvious to all is that the world is changing, responding faster than expected to Technology’s
Why are we being such idiots?
What gives? It’s not that we are stupid or blind our core values are under attack.
If everything is a core value, then nothing is really a priority.
In this age where technology is dominant, core values may seem like something from the past. So core values may not seem like they have a place.
All of this data is used first and foremost to make money from us.
There is a really frustrating lag between what AI is capable of and what it’s legislated for.
Core values are the foundational beliefs held by an individual or an organisation.
Anyone can go to Google and search the meaning of core values,. There are another thing on your to-do list that you don’t have time for, but what about the bigger picture?
When you hear about core values, what comes to mind?
Core values make the biggest difference between successful and failure.
There are more than just words on a wall — it’s how you behave. It’s who you are at your core.
Everyone knows their role, what is expected of them, and they are empowered to act in accordance with their core values.
Once upon a time voting or making decisions in alignment with your core values were the foundation of who we are as individuals. Not any longer with Algorithms running social media.
——————–
To look at it simply, culture is just a collection of people. It is the environment created by the cumulative behaviour of the people.
We all have things that we value deeply, whether we realize it or not.
You remember values, don’t you? You know, those moral thoughts and behaviours we used to hold dear, like decency, civility, honesty and respect, as well ascaring, optimism, empathy, and tolerance?
They were once a beacon of idealism. Rewarding behaviour based on them, and align all of our decisions with them.
Core values represent the lens which we view the world. They must be embedded in everything we do.
These “alt” credos and codes of behaviour are the trademarks of the incivility we witness on a daily basis, often expressed with rancour and rage. They have become commonplace on television, in social media and in everyday life. Of even more concern is that these new “moral standards” serve as models of behaviour for our impressionable children and youth.
Hold one another accountable for staying aligned with the values—it’s better not to profess any values at all.
———————
Education and knowledge were cornerstones of our achievement.
We are now living in society that at large looks to social media /television and film personalities for political advice.
You must ensure they are accurate, meaningful, relatable and fully operationalized.
If we continue our descent into callousness, selfishness and hostility, we negatively impact and harm the quality of our lives. We could lose sight of our basic human values and diminish the essence of what MAKES THE WORLD BEAUTIFUL.
Achieving a more transparent and less manipulative media may well be the defining political battle of the 21st century.
Just as we are using our formidable intellect and creativity to reduce our carbon footprint, we can similarly mobilize our resources to improve our emotional footprint, or how we treat and affect each other.
Values are the criteria by which individuals judge ideas, objects, people, situations, and actions as good, worthwhile, desirable, wrong, worthless, or undesirable
.Values are individuals’ embedded abstract motivations. They guide individuals to understand, justify, and explain norms, attitudes, and actions. One of the limitations of examining values is that values cannot be generalized because they vary between a person and another, culture and another, society and another, even a country and another, thus scrutinizing values will be different in the future.
Core values can be only be fostered in Education, not in schools but with compulsory NATIONAL SERVICE.
ALL HUMAN COMMENTS APPRICIATED. ALL LIKE CLICKS AND ABUSE CHUCKED IN THE BIN.
The U.S. is in danger of slow-walking itself into a war with Iran.
ONE WOULD THINK: THAT AFTER THE RECENT US INVOLVEMENT IN DISASTROUS WARS, THAT IT AND ALL OF US, WOULD LEARN THAT MILARTY DETERRENCES DON’T WORK.
Since Biden refuses to pressure Israel to stop its bombardment of Gaza and accept a ceasefire, he is escalating the US confrontation with the Houthis.
Biden and his administration are practically sleepwalking the US into another war.
In the process, Biden risks entangling the US in another open-ended conflict, which islikely to expand by accident or miscalculation, rather than by design.
Either way, it threatens to prolong the forever war.
With persistent support of Israel, the Biden administration has alienated its allies in the Arab world and is now a heartbeat or an election result away from another war that it will lose.
The Gaza invasion has already spilled into clashes in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and the Red Sea.
They all require serious effort and inevitable trade-offs.
Why
Because it’s nearly impossible to dislodge an Indigenous insurgent movement without a huge commitment of ground troops.
Because today’s U.S. military is not designed to fight wars against two major rivals simultaneously.
This isn’t because the United States is in decline.
It’s because unlike the United States, which needs to be strong in all three of these places, each of its adversaries—China, Russia, and Iran—only has to be strong in its own home region to achieve its objectives.
Because in past conflicts, it was always able to outproduce its opponents. That’s no longer the case:
Because in past conflicts, it could easily outspend adversaries. That’s no longer the case:
All of that pales alongside the human costs that the United States could suffer in a global conflict.
In the event of a Chinese attack on Taiwan, the United States would be hard-pressed to rebuff the attack while keeping up the flow of support to Ukraine and Israel.
——————-
The US administration has multiple options to lean on the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.
It could threaten to withhold billions of dollars in military aid, which allow Israel to continue its assault, or it couldstop using Washington’s veto power on the UN security council to quash resolutions calling for a ceasefire.
The Houthis are portraying themselves as one of the few forces in the Middle East willing to stand against Israel and its western allies in defence of the Palestinian cause. Aside from the Houthis and Hamas, the alliance also includes several Shia militias in Iraq and Syria, and the powerful Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.
True global leadership at this moment means de-escalation and forging visions for a just future for all.
Without demanding a ceasefire in the immediate future, the putative US/UK commitment’s to peace rings hollow and feels more like it’s been overshadowed by their own and very real addictions to war.,
Any sane person would hear this.
Do most Americans realize how steeped in violence their country is?
A country beholden to its own violence’s is not limited to mass murderers.
How many of us have read the Creed of a United States Marine? “My rifle is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life,” it states, along with “my rifle, without me, is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless.”
Maybe this makes sense as part of military indoctrination but, let’s face it, culturally, we are all expected to buy into this idea, and with interest.
The truth of the matter is that the US make a lot of war.
Military conflicts make up perhaps 93% of its history. Roughly a quarter of the country has lived only in a time of war. And within that history, American weapons are an industry, a mythology and identity simultaneously.
Why do they call armed, military helicopters “Apache” helicopters for goodness’ sake?
When will the US face the fact that it is a country baked in its own violence, much of it racist in intent and effect? That reflects its own genocidal and racist past. If they were to be honest they would see that this dark heart of violence is not simply a partisan issue but is a much longer and more intimate part of its our own national tragedy.
The double standard with Israel and Palestine leaves us in moral darkness.
Every one of us must stand up and denounce the killing of every civilian, Israeli or Palestinian or otherwise.
What exactly counts as a provocation?
3 or thousands,
Who gets to count as human?
There’s the nagging hypocrisy of the war in Ukraine.
So many around the world support Ukraine’s resistance to foreign occupation (as they should) but
blithely deny Palestinians any way to resist their occupation.
The only war that matters is the war on Climate Change. It will have no Treaty no Deterrence’s, no
Winners, no End.
All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.
The United Nations is the most powerful international organisation in the world. Founded after World War Two, the UN aims to maintain global peace and security though international cooperation and dialogue.
Although the UN is seen as a bed-rock of the post-War world order, it is regularly criticised for its failings.
There are some who say the world would be better without the UN. Bedevilled by a litany of challenges, including gross underfunding, bloated bureaucracy, disunity, and geopolitical rivalry among the permanent members of the Security Council.
Would it be?
Today, many countries still put their own geo-political objectives ahead of any UN requirements.
This is the main failing of the United Nations. Western powers, for example, are overrepresented in the five permanent members. Entire regions lack a permanent seat but nevertheless are bound to Security Council resolutions. Today, it lacks strong support in popular culture.
—————–
The United Nations stands at a crossroads.
The need to reform the United Nations is critical.
Political leaders, experts, and civil society agree that the United Nations is lagging behind global change, failing to anticipate emerging risks, and not adequately resolving or mitigating global challenges.
There is no longer any doubt that three primary threats endanger the existence of humanity: Climate change, infectious disease, and nuclear weapons are the core global challenges but disruptive technological, societal, and ecological developments impose new challenges that require new partnerships beyond the current state-centric global architecture.
The age of disinformation and ever-increasing influence of social media has left truth and facts more coloured by predesignated concepts and ideas.
Ideally, the Security Council should be stripped of veto power when a matter relating to any these existential threats is on the agenda.
The greatest challenge confronting the organization—one that has repeatedly rendered it unable to act decisively on critical global issues—is intransigence among the permanent members of the Security Council.
At a time of profound global change and increasing competition over values, treating climate change as simply another environmental problem rather than a crosscutting factor affecting all aspects of human life should have a dedicated UN institution focusing on Climate change not as one problem among many, but as a unique crisis that affects all activities.
————————
UN reform has been on the agenda since the organization was created in 1945.
The Security Council as currently constituted in terms of membership, functions, and powers cannot effectively respond to the myriad crises engulfing the world.
As powerful countries move toward unilateralism, populism, and nationalism at the expense of multilateralism and collective action, a united and forward-looking Security Council capable of effectively driving the wider United Nations to achieve its goals is sine qua non.
——————-
What would actually happen if the United Nations collapsed, or was disbanded?
Realistically, there are two main ways that the United Nations could collapse. There are many ways that the UN might cease to exist but these can be divided into ‘internal’ and ‘external’ causes.
Internal: Financial collapse, or a major internal scandal, or the UN deciding voluntarily to disband itself.
External: National governments collectively deciding to dispend the UN, some major, or many minor countries deciding to leave or countries withdrawing funding. Data governance at the global level lags well behind technological developments.
The collapse of the UN would also remove a key arena for global dialogue and could be followed by a potential re-alignment of the world order as there would no longer be a forum for dialogue between nations and its conceivable with a vacuum in international law many conflicts could reignite.
The first thing that would happen if the UN collapsed is that funding to the UN’s international programmes would stop.
It is likely that it would be replaced with another inter-governmental organisation.
The pre-curser to the UN was the League of Nations, disbanded in 1946.
Historians generally agree the League of Nations failed for five main reasons. These are:
It failed to encompass all countries, with major powers such as the United States not joining. Many countries also left the League of Nations or only joined for a short-time.
Countries put their own geo-political objectives ahead of the League of Nations requirement for collective security.
The League of Nations did not have its own army, and so relied on member states to use military force. Many were not willing to as their populations did not support another war.
Disarmament was a major aim of the League of Nations, meaning countries were encouraged to reduce military spending. This meant intervening militarily against countries that went against the League was made more difficult.
The League had no power to stop countries taking aggressive action. When countries such as Germany or Japan began attacking their neighbours, the League was powerless to stop them.
——————-
Let’s take each one and see if the modern United Nations could fail for the same reasons?
It currently supports the global order. All major nations, especially those included in the Security Council, have a vested interest in retaining the United Nations as it helps them maintain power.
Another reason why the United Nations is unlikely to collapse is that, although there are many legitimate criticisms of the UN, any organisation that were to replace it would unlikely be more successful.
This is because any global forum of nations requires a degree of flexibility and pragmatism in order to incorporate all countries. Although this means the UN’s power to affect change is limited, a more controlling inter-governmental organisation would see nations leaving when decisions went against them.
———————–
Today, everyone seems to have problems with multilateralism, which is eroding the authority of global institutions.
More than ever the world needs collective action.
Working out how to bring the United Nations closer to “we the people” and remaining relevant for future generations should drive the organization as it enters its next phase.
It’s the place where leaders come and give public speeches but that really nothing meaningful gets done.
The Security Council, which is responsible for maintaining international peace and security, has often been paralyzed by the veto power of its five permanent members – the United States, China, Russia, France, and the United Kingdom. This has made it difficult for the Security Council to take decisive action in conflicts such as the Syrian civil war, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and more recently in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
It is unable to stop war, it is unable to end famine, it is unable to stop conflicts, it is unable to manage migration, it does not push for global disbarment
Somewhere, the spirit of collectivist has to be regenerated.
The ineffectiveness of the UN are simply a reflection of those dysfunctional characteristics of the international system.
The most important prerequisite for an effective global institution may be a concert of powers.
—————
There is no credible alternative in sight so the UN must be retooled and updated to tackle today’s challenges
Can 193 nations with competing agendas undertake major reforms? NO!
However we are inching closer to “a great fracture.” Conflicts, coups and chaos are surging. The climate crisis is growing. Divides are deepening between military and economic powers, the richer North and poorer South, East and West. A new Rubicon has been crossed in artificial intelligence.
Can it be reformed?
THIS CAN ONLY BE ACHIVED IF THE UN IS BROKEN UP INTO A MORE TARGETED ORGANISATION.
By creating an international antivirus consortium, protecting biodiversity, and strengthening warning protocols within UN agencies.
We cannot inch towards agreement while the world races towards a precipice.
It must and we all must unite behind a common purpose, or we all be speaking to an empty room.
All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.
Israel’s post 7/10 resort to massive force, dropping an unprecedented total of about 30,000 bombs by mid-December 2023 (equivalent to two Hiroshima-sized nuclear bombs), has so far failed to eradicate the military force established by Hamas amid the torrent of bloodshed, 25,000 Palestinian dead and the 62,000 wounded, and the mass displacement of 1.9 million Palestinian civilians in Gaza (85% of the population), easily exceeding the toll of the ethnic cleansing that accompanied Israel’s establishment in 1948.
Hamas’s brutal tactics in its 7 October assault have been washed out of Palestinian political consciousness by the subsequent indiscriminate and mass erasure of Palestinian civilian lives.
A TWO MONTH CEASFIRE WITH EXCHANGE OF ISRAELIANS HOSTAGES/ PALISTIAN PRISONERS WILL NOT BRING AN END TO THE WAR.
Its most likely effect will be to remythologise the notion of resistance and sow the seed for future iterations that may be inspired by Hamas but have no necessary connection to its history, ideology or organisational structure.
The real issue is how to incorporate Hamas and its associated “spirit of resistance” into a new Palestinian authority, rather than how to quash or excise it. Within or associated with such an authority, Hamas could be part of the solution; outside, it would remain both a spoiler and an opposite pole of attraction.
Netanyahu and other Israeli officials have made it clear that they will seek to impose a strict and indefinite Israeli-determined security regime over the Gaza Strip for the foreseeable future.
In other words, to reinstitute what amounts to a long-term occupation.
This, in turn, will not only keep the flame of Hamas alive and galvanise Hamas-inspired resistance but will ensure that Israel’s “right of self-defence” will only produce the very insecurity that Israel and its allies claim to be addressing.
It took years for the ANC and IRA to be recognised as partners to a resolution.
Hamas rejects Israel’s right to exist and is committed to its destruction, so a two state resolution would create a Palestinian state ( what left of it ) that would exist alongside Israel.
Another words The world’s largest ‘open-air prison.
It takes one hour to drive from its southern point, Rafah, to Beit Hanoon in the north.
Sixteen years of an Israeli land, air and sea blockade has crippled its economy and tightly restricted the movement of its people in and out of the enclave. Gaza residents need special permission to cross into Israel and Egypt. This is usually for urgent medical treatment but is very difficult to obtain.
The enclave has one of the highest unemployment rates in the world at 45 percent. Access to education and medical treatment is also lacking after years of Israeli air strikes on schools and hospitals.
More than 60 percent of Gaza’s people are refugees from what is currently Israel.
More than 750,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from their homes by Israeli militias in 1948 when Israel declared its independence.
YOU TELL ME IF YOU WERE IN THE GAZA WITH YOUR FAMILY WIPED OUT, WITH YOUR COUNTRY REDUCED TO DUST, WOULD YOU TAKE UP ARMES?
There will be no two state as it requires two states to agree one.
And that’s before dealing with the same difficult details – borders, refugees, security, and the sharing of Jerusalem.
Israel is a very different country to the secular state that was created in 1948 – with far more religious citizens who believe God gave them the land, and who have massive political power. The Palestinians will need to bridge the deep divide between Hamas and Fatah. Because as much as the world might condemn Hamas for the atrocities of October 7 – and much that came before – it’s still there.
All the walls and barber wire (which Israel has now learned) does not and will not bring security.
Any future agreement must make it impossible for either side to inflict the horrors we are now witnessing.
Leaving behind all the religious conations there can only be a one state solution and that is a Federal/Confederation State with a written constitution that protects all its citizens both Jews and Arabs.
To make two states, you would need to create a new state of Palestine. And to do that, you would need to agree where its borders would be.
The steady and systematic expansion of settlements [is] moving Israel in the wrong direction.
The prospect of a two-state solution has become even more remote, with Mr Netanyahu naming settler activist Itamar Ben-Gvir — a convicted criminal, with a rap sheet that includes inciting racism and supporting a terrorist organisation — as minister for national security and another settler leader, Bezalel Smotrich, controlling planning in the west bank. (He caused an uproar in March when he quoted French-Israeli Zionist Jacques Kupfe: “There is no such thing as Palestinians, because there is no such thing as a Palestinian people.”)
A one-state solution would mean absorbing everyone in Israel and the Palestinian territories into a new nation with the Holy Sites of Al-Aqsa and the Temple Mount, as their capital city.
How it can remain a Jewish state if the majority of its population is Palestinian.
When this crisis is over, there has to be a vision of what comes next. Lasting peace must follow the bloodiest fighting between Israelis and Palestinians for decades.
A confederation with a written constitution is the only solution.
What it present is a flexible model:
As a means of facilitating a two-state/one state solution, providing a new framework for the negotiation
A permanent solution between the two sovereign states of Israel and Palestine, and not as a substitute for it.
Under the confederation plan, Israelis living in settlements deeper in the West Bank would be able to choose whether to relocate to homes inside Israel or stay where they are as Israeli citizens who are permanent residents of Palestine, agreeing to abide by the new state’s laws. A comparable number of Palestinian citizens would be able to move to Israel on the same terms.
A setup between states rather than citizens; that is, the citizens belong to their respective state and are not direct members of the confederation.
This would involve both states in joint strategic defence through close coordination and would focus them on maintaining internal law and order.
The Old City of Jerusalem could host some of the joint authorities, paving the way toward dual sovereignty or other creative solutions over that sensitive area of less than 1 km2 or 0.39 mi2.
The first step would be to negotiate a permanent agreement and establish an independent Palestinian state, without the confederal umbrella. An implementation period of up to 30 months would follow.
Palestine and Israel would live side by side as sovereign States and only at the end of the implementation period, they would establish the HLC (Holy Land Confederation) if they want it.
The European Union, which does not call itself a confederation, is the most successful and consequential confederation ever.
The EU, which has changed Europe and fostered a continent of peace after centuries of endless wars, is a miracle in the eyes of many. It includes aspects of a federation (freedom of movement, currency, trade, and agriculture) and aspects of a confederation (no common language, separate education
systems, no joint army, and relatively weak central institutions), as well as aspects of sovereign states. In many ways, the EU is sui generis, but its structure is very close to that of a confederation and may serve as a model for the HLC.
We have to distinguish between aspiration and reality. The odds are very, very low. It’s essentially mission impossible as we will be left with two deeply traumatised societies. What is lacking on both sides is leadership and political will. Both sides need to wake up after this horrible war and find new leadership.
Rest assured if not Israel will go down in history not as a country that was found on compassion for the Jews but a
Compassion knows not whom it chooses to help in some way, shape or form, it just knows it’s the right heartfelt thought to have for another and to bestow some type of good upon another.
One thing sees another, but two things feel together, creating unity.
#Compassion is one of Judaism’s highest values. The existence of the entire world depends on this virtue.
Below link to one written by Israel, which would have to be amended to accommodate the few Palestinian left a live.
All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin
The technology behind the atomic bomb only exists because of a cooperative hive mind: hundreds of scientists and engineers working together. The same unique intelligence and cooperation also underlies more positive advances, such as modern medicine and technology.
We owe our complex reasoning abilities to it, but we have similarities with everything else in nature; it would be astonishing if we didn’t.
We were once “rational animals” pursuing knowledge for its own sake. Now more and more of us, thanks to the smart phone, are becoming Know it all Google it ‘brainless dead.
Human societies are built on collaborative activities. That means that the interactions of humans beings in their environmental contexts, situated in their historical locations, and with available technologies are always subject to the ecological and survival pressures that have existed since time immemorial.
In the world of self learning algorithms this is no longer true.
Take Mr Musk hopes that #Neuralink can be used to merge humans with computers, allowing them to interact with artificial intelligence simply by thinking, for instance.
It stands to reason, that It won’t be long in coming. Digitalised algorithmic citizenship, with a Neuralink’ Brain chips in the head owned by a Tec company. Driven by blockchain, without any reasoning, who will only cooperate if there is something in it for them.
Thank all the gods I wont be around to see it. AI intelligence demonstrated by machines, as opposed to the natural intelligence displayed by humans.
Consequently.
AI allows machines to increasingly approach human capacities for perception and reasoning.
This process is resulting in a hollowing-out of nation-state space through rescaling, undermining its heretofore privileged position as the only natural platform and geographical expression for the monopoly of sensory and political power so far.
Such frameworks cover demands for data privacy, ownership, sovereignty, donation, co-operation, self-determination, trust, access, and ethics as well as AI transparency, algorithmic automatization, and, ultimately, democratic accountability for digital citizenship, which inevitably may transform our current interpretation of the nation-state as ‘the clear and coherent mapping of a relatively culturally homogeneous group onto a territory with a singular and organized state apparatus of rule’ (Agnew Citation2017, 347) and its relationship with digital citizenship.
On the one hand, regarding the techno-political awareness of data, these dynamics involve addressing concerns about biometric technologies (e.g. vaccine passports), rolling out algorithmic identity tools for citizenship (e.g. the ongoing e-Residency policy framework) and engaging in counter-reaction to extractives data models (e.g. through digital rights claims).
The technology that defines us can also destroy worlds.
When we – Homo sapiens – first appeared about 200,000 years ago we weren’t alone. We shared the planet at least four other upright cousins; Neanderthals, Denisovans, the “hobbit” Homo floresiensis and a mysterious fourth group.
Humans aren’t the only species that kill each other. We’re not even the only species that fight wars. But our intelligence and social prowess mean we can do so on an unprecedented scale.
We have an immense capacity for good. At the same time we risk driving our closest relatives to extinction and destroying the only planet we have ever called home.
It’s impossible to get a good clear understanding of people’s thoughts about their future without talking directly with them.
Somehow, our language abilities need to be “switched on”,
As far as we know, we are the only creatures trying to understand where we came from. We also peer further back in time, and further into the future, than any other animal.
Digital Citizenship Education is now vital.
All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.
2024, Global climate trends are cause for both deep alarm, and our continuing denial of the absurdity of the verbal discussions on the subject, a task which is now monumental.
“We have built a civilization based on a world that doesn’t exist anymore.”
“We are conducting an unprecedented experiment with our planet,”
We have now unmoored ourselves from our past, as if we have transplanted ourselves onto another planet.
Without immediate action, we are at grave risk of crossing irreversible tipping points in the Earth’s climate system. +2.0C+3.6F with our current policies is the reality by around 2050s.
The world has already heated up by around 1.2C, on average, since the preindustrial era, pushing humanity beyond almost all historical boundaries,
AND WE STILL CANNOT EXCEPT THE INEVITABLE.
The enormous, unprecedented pain and turmoil caused by the climate crisis is often discussed alongside what can seem like surprisingly small temperature increases – 1.5C or 2C.
“The difference between 1.5C and 2C is a death sentence”. No amount of global warming can be considered safe and people are already dying from climate change.
A severe heatwave historically expected once a decade will happen every other year at 2C.
The fingerprint of climate change on recent extreme weather is quite clear, In fact, extraordinary, with the oceans alone absorbing the heat equivalent of five Hiroshima atomic bombs dropping into the water every second. The oceans have heated up at a rate not seen in at least 11,000 years.
——————
These temperature thresholds will again be the focus of upcoming UN climate talks and Climate Summits
Thirty years of climate summits: Where have they got us?
All have proved that its nearly impossible to achieve any coordination, with the whole process becoming too business-friendly, to the detriment of other perspectives and voices.
It is important to look at the bigger picture.
By most standards the world’s governments are currently failing to avert a grim fate.
To COP28 UN Climate Change Conference in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates, was the biggest of its kind. Some 85,000 participants, including more than 150 Heads of State and Government, were among the representatives of national delegations, civil society, business, Indigenous Peoples, youth, philanthropy, and international organizations in attendance at the Conference from 30 November to 13 December 2023.
Given these problems and repeated failures, why continue with the COP meetings?
Because we are arriving at tipping points that represent thresholds which, when crossed, will trigger abrupt and self-perpetuating changes to the world’s climate and oceans.
They are threats of a magnitude never before faced by humanity – one-way doors we do not want to go through.
Governments are more concerned about Energy and food price rises mean that governments face a cost of living and energy security crisis, with some threatening to respond by returning to fossil fuels, including coal.
The climate disaster is here. There is no huge chasm after a 1.49C rise.
Superimposed on top of these long-term warming trends overshadow the real-world hazards they amplify: Heat waves, floods, droughts, wars and mass migration.
Meaning that people and ecosystems are dying, that people are losing their livelihoods, that agricultural land will be unusable.
For climate scientists, this is the “I told you so” moment they never wanted.
So what we’re seeing now is only a foretaste of what could happen if efforts to reduce emissions aren’t successful.
I hope that maybe more people will realize that this is really happening and put pressure on their representative to put actions on the top of their agendas. Our individual choices can challenge the status quo, and force things to change.
Like cleaning up the Advertising Industry to sustainability rather then consumerism across all their out lets – Main Stream TV, Socially Media, Bill Boards and the like.
To cut out the hypocrisy in Trade deals that are not Green, along with home grown policies to grow the economy above genuine climate demanding Projects. To push for a consumer chapter to be included in future deals which reflects the issues that are most important to consumers.
So what’s stopping us from getting there?
The rules governing global trade policy mean that powerful countries and corporations escape accountability.
One of the biggest examples of hypocrisy is the EU’s common agricultural policy – or CAP – established over 50 years ago and currently under reform. This policy, thanks also to the support of highly protective tariffs and agro-chemical companies, has allowed destructive intensive practices to become the default way European food is produced.
Why are French farmers protesting? Their slogan reads “It doesn’t make sense” ~Shat Upon by Regulations, on environmental protection.
They are not being paid enough TO FUCK IT UP.
Perhaps our slogan should be: # ITSALLBOLLOCKS.
We can challenge the myth that we have to choose between protectionism versus free trade, and end the myth that free trade brings any meaningful benefit to the average consumer.
All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.
Man is said to have evolved from monkeys and apes …but we still have monkeys and apes.
We live in a world of verball diarrhoea, another words every Joe saop has an opinion.
However the world today is being expressed as a single unified, interconnected and interdependent global system, and since we wish to remain as our individualistic egoistic selves while the world becomes more and more connected, we experience such tightening connection as suffering.
Characterized by intricate interconnections, rapid advancements in technology, globalization, diverse geopolitical challenges, and a multitude of social, economic, and environmental issues.
Since everyone understands the world from his/her own perspective which may be different from others due to religions beliefs we cannot understand what wholeness is.
Our world is beautiful but screwed.
71% water, average 93,000,000 miles away from a white star, around which it completes an elliptical orbit every 365.25 days with a dominant species are Homo Sapiens, which can live anywhere. It has one large satellite measuring 2,159 miles in diameter which is some 239,000 miles distant and is tidally locked.
—————–
With it’s current greedy drive for more – more this, more that, more me, me, me. causing greater and greater stress to the planet, earth is experiencing its hottest year on record and massive floods, fires and other climate-related disasters have taken root.
And lack of action on climate change threatens billions of lives and livelihoods.
Most of us know this but we don’t know when something amazing or horrible will happen next and it could be the greatest or worst thing for this world.
Like the opening of a massive technological gap between the global rich and the poor.
As our World becomes more disaster prone due to the extreme changes to our Climate, these vestibules of self-interest will be dumped for hardline practical leaders who will do whatever is necessary for the survival of mankind.
In the mean time all we do is fight over utterly meaningless bullshit.
———————————–
We carry affordable supercomputers in our pockets, and that is even more powerful than it sounds.
It has created multiple civilizations, none of which has been able to achieve a satisfactory minimum level of quality of life; the poorest people still live in inhumane conditions; the very few richest people own more than the all of the rest put together.
Most markets are moving online, moving from the physical world into the digital app world, until they’ll be purged there too by oligarchies; which will be the next medium?
Right wing politics and populism continue to gain ground through advocating individual freedom to prosper, while left wing politics is failing to establish and administer a necessary minimum of social equality and governmental regulation, which continues to propagate financial deregulation aka greed is good which in turn prevents a normal fluctuation of economy turning it into steep growth and catastrophic chain reaction crashes.
The extreme conservatism of certain societies founded on medieval concepts and flawed morals coupled with perpetual poverty and social stagnation certainly help maintaining inequality in the world.
Alternatively, we may destroy ourselves in the midst of our seemingly endless growth, and nature will resume its course over the centuries and millenia to come.
How can anyone with an active mind, who is aware of all this, neatly summarize his or her POV “of the world today” with A SINGLE WORD???????
Pretty nonsensical, if you take a couple of minutes to think about it.
The chances of wholeness happening now are roughly zero.
Why?
Because politicians who were starved of intelligent thinking and ARE BEING ELECTED INTO OFFICE BY DIGITLIZED CITIZENS RUN BY PROFIT SEEKING ALGORITHMS.
Recent advances in artificial intelligence raise a variety of questions about how to control a technology that could improve or threaten civilization in countless ways.
The Doomsday Clock that has been ticking for 77 years. The clock isn’t designed to definitively measure existential threats, but rather to spark conversations about difficult scientific topics such as climate change. Trends continue to point ominously towards global catastrophe.
Due to ongoing concerns about the war in Ukraine, the Israel-Gaza conflict, the potential of a nuclear arms race, and the climate crisis, its almost impossible to get people’s attention about existential threats and the required action.
We can reduce them but doing so is not easy, nor has it ever been. It requires serious work and global engagement at all levels of society.
The war in Ukraine poses an ever-present risk of nuclear escalation. And the October 7 attack in Israel and war in Gaza provides further illustration of the horrors of modern war, even without nuclear escalation.
A more realistic endpoint to both wars would be a military ceasefire, in which increasingly exhausted combatants see frontline positions harden around a line of control. That will become clearer by the summer or autumn, and will at some point prompt a question for its western backers: how long should the west continue supplying military aid at current levels to Ukraine/Israel
This requires a collective even harder stance.
A political earthquake. That’s the metaphor that stuck.
——————–
What if science itself is in some way culpable for all this?
We don’t know the real answer yet, and we probably will never know, but this is the moment to anticipate what such a finding might ultimately mean. It could obliterate the faith of millions.
This may be the great scientific meta-experiment of the 21st century. That the common people of the world have been forced into a real-life lab experiment, at tremendous cost — there is a moral earthquake on the way.
All of these disasters brought to you by the total, self-assured unanimity of the highly educated people who are supposed to know what they’re doing, plus the total complacency of the highly educated people who are supposed to be supervising them.
A perfect storm, as institutions crumpled and collapsed. with new fault lines targeting up the most powerful country on the planet.
Don’t disengage as digital technology is disrupting international politics in myriad ways.
To start, it is bringing new dimensions to the authoritarian playbook, enabling governments to more easily manipulate information consumed by citizens, to monitor dissent and track political opponents, and to censor communications.
Democracies, meanwhile, are struggling to strike the right balance between rewarding economic innovation and reaping the financial benefits of Big Tech, while protecting user privacy, guarding against surveillance misuses, and countering disinformation and hate speech.
Can democracies strike an appropriate balance between safeguarding their societies from dangerously polarizing online rhetoric while maintaining commitments to protecting free expression?
Can civic activists, independent journalists, and human rights advocates continue to find innovative ways to push back against government repression using new tools, tactics, and technologies?
The answers to these questions are not foretold—all of them represent major areas of contestation.
But one thing is clear. There is an expanding set of countries relying on facial recognition technology, big data analytics, predictive policing techniques, and safe city systems to enhance their security capabilities. There is now a close relationship between authoritarian regimes, constraints on political freedoms, and corresponding government reliance on digital repression techniques.
What technological methods are Gulf states using to enact their political agendas?
What can civil society make of the growth of internet shutdowns and social media blockages around the world?
Government disdain for international human rights principles “is pushing resistance to the breaking point.”
Disinformation has become the tool of choice for many illiberal regimes. From extreme political movements, particularly far-right groups, which harness social media to propagate falsehoods, spread conspiracy theories, and foment polarization and identity politics.
Flooding social media channels with competing or distracting information that overwhelms legitimate information sources, and deliberately post offensive content online to provoke or disrupt conversations
.A bigger question is how much governments should hold platforms responsible for facilitating the spread of bad information .
It is insufficient to blame Facebook or Twitter’s poor leadership for the much more complicated proliferation of politically motivated falsehoods.
These varying global perspectives shed light on emerging areas of contestation and highlight the complexities, urgency, and dangers involved in the advance of digital technologies and their effects on politics globally.
One has only to look at technology usage in the current wars in order to relise that Alogrithms are ruling not just how lives or dies on the battle fields but the direction we all going in our everyday lives.
All human comments appriciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.
These are the two broad ways the Israeli-Palestinian conflict might end.
The “one-state solution” would merge Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip into one big country.
(Each version of the one-state solution is unacceptable to one side or the other, and it is difficult to see how one could be implemented in the foreseeable future without significant violence.)
Virtually the entire world, including most Israelis, rejects this option.
The “two-state solution” would create an independent Israel and Palestine, and is the mainstream approach to resolving the conflict.
(It comes in two versions. One, favored by some leftists and Palestinians, would create a single democratic country. Arab Muslims would outnumber Jews, thus ending Israel as a Jewish state. The other version, favored by many on the Israeli right, would involve Israel annexing the West Bank and either forcing out Palestinians or denying them the right to vote.)
BUT THERE IS ANOTHER SOLOUTION WHICH HAS NOT BEING PROMOTED TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS.
Around 25 federated nations exist today, including many of the largest democracies and 40 percent of humanity
I belive that most will accept the loss of a sovereign state in return for equal rights under Israeli rule, after all, the current arrangement on the ground is essentially a federation already – just one that is neither equitable nor logical.
To date, no Israeli political party has come out in support of the Federation plan, possibly because both right-wing hawks and left-wing, see a basic problem when Jews don’t receive the superiority that they [feel they] deserve.
would be flooded with returning Palestinians; an issue that could be mitigated by negotiations with neighboring Arab states to arrange citizenship for refugees in their host countries, the European Union would be unlikely to oppose a unilateral status change by Israel if it were to result in “greater equity,” The US too would be unlikely to oppose such a move as it is increasingly removing itself from involvement in the conflict,
The balancing act of centralizing power sufficiently for the country to function, while observing the political identity of states’ (i.e. cantons) worked well for the US and could do so between
A secular federation with a written constitution could provide Israelis and Palestinians the security and peace they’ve been lacking to this day, where other solutions have failed.
The risks are less daunting than continuing to live with the status quo.
Who could or would draw up the constitution so it was non – bias.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN).
It was established in June 1945 by the Charter of the United Nations and began work in April 1946. The seat of the Court is at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands).
The below looks at it in a more detail.
Federal/Confederal Solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian-Jordanian Conflict: Concepts and Feasibility
Daniel J. Elazar
All human comments appriciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin
If God wanted a ‘flagship’ nation that was an example to the world he sure has got one now.
Not just a whaling wall of religious forgiveness, stricking chest’s, in the hope of jolting awakness.. but a land of no promises with a revelation that no matter what you belive in, there go I but for the grace of God.
Forgive us our Father for we have erred… is now burning example of vengeance. Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth not as God said, turn the other cheek.
My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place.” (John 18:36, NIV) I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.
Of course there are Bibilical quotations for ever situtation.
For the Christian, the Holy Land is birthplace of Jesus of Nazareth and the site of his ministry, for the Moslem, Jerusalem’s Dome of the Rock marks the spot from which the Prophet Mohammed is said to have ascended to heaven. The Qur’an specifies that the Land of Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people, that God Himself gave that Land to them as heritage and ordered them to live therein.
For jews its the promised Land. In Genesis, God promised Abraham that his descendants would inherit the land of Canaan, so Canaan became known as The Promised Land. Modern Israel and Palestine encompass the majority of Canaan.
For the rest of us its any land of promised, any place of complete bliss and delight and peace.
In reality the promised land is a theological concept.
————————-
There is no other example in all of recorded human history where a people were conquered, expelled from their country, exiled, dispersed and then, as a unique community suffered persecution, oppression and multiple attempts at genocide over a period of 2,000 years than Palistian.
On the other hand the list of massacres of Jews in Europe is virtually endless, but the birth of the State of Israel in 1948 did not, in any way, reduce antisemitism, which is on the rise.
Any society that has been influenced by Christianity, Islam, or European civilization will have antisemitism in it, even if there are no Jews living there.
The Islamic persecution of the Jews has its own unique history which is in full swing today.
Israil is now a spiritual cancer without a cure.
So tell me what exactly is Israel’s singularly unforgivable fault, because of which a permanent peace deal with it simply cannot be achieved. Fighting wars? Occupying territories? Having security and repressive apparatus? Granting citizenship on ethnic basis? Being set up by the British in early 1900s upon ruins of Ottoman Empire?
What exactly is a person called Jewish?
Judaism isn’t just a bunch of men in black suits and white shirts, it is a mystical religion that is about revealing the divine presence in this world. They spread throughout the world not by conquest and colonization, but by being conquered and scattered around, persecuted and exiled from one place to another.
Who wrote the Torah? (Consists of the five books of the Hebrew Bible, its primary goal is to convince Jewish people that Yeshua (Jesus Christ) is their Messiah.)
We don’t know. The tradition claims it was Moses, but the Torah itself says otherwise.
The black boxes are called “tefillin.” are actually a set of 2, one worn on the head and a second worn on the non-dominant arm is always bearing God and religion in their minds, giving a sense of masculinity and gender roles, since they are only worn by men.
Why do Jews sway from side to side when reading Torah or praying, trembling.
There seems to be no single reason and I am left scratching my head.
The skull cap is called a yarmulke or a kippah.
It is worn as a sign of humility before God. Some say that wearing the kippah is a reminder that God is always above us, others that it helps to remind Jews that we are separate from the rest of the Nations.
God revealed his character in this declaration to Israel:
“I, the LORD, have called you in righteousness; I will take hold of your hand. I will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for the Gentiles, to open eyes that are blind, to free captives from prison and to release from the dungeon those who sit in darkness.”
How is any of that different from any other state in the region?
One of the things which always impressed me about traditional Jewish law (Halakhah) is the principle of pikauch nefesh, which states that if human life is in danger, an observant Jew is not merely allowed, but obliged to break any other of Jewish intricate laws that could stand in the way of saving it:
Now compare that to Hamas’ interpretation of Islam, or for that matter with any fascist’s interpretation of their national or religious idea; that unless you’re willing to kill yourself and as much as other people possible in heroic death for the Grand Idea, you’re a traitor to the cause and deserve nothing but death yourself.
So which of these two approaches do you think will be more likely to win wars, build states, maintain a society and endure in the long run?
The Jewish way has shown itself, time and again, able to survive even under the rule of a fascist death cult; while a fascist way cannot even survive on its own, because it will eat itself alive. Hence, the only thing left for it is to blame the Jews, who ruin everything by refusing to die!
Political Zionism, is seeing it as a an attempt to ‘force God’s hand’.
I supported Israel’s right to exist and defend herself, but not to expand by means of genocide and not to treat others whose homes were there unfairly.
(Since Israel is a Jewish state and governed by Jews, many people throughout the world feel increasing support for the Palestinian cause and concomitant opposition to Israeli policies/actions. These attitudes toward Israel may shift into, or be manipulated into, hatred of Jews (i.e., anti-semitism. Many Jews perceive anti-Israel activities as anti-semitic, though this is subject to some debate even within the Jewish community.)
So long as Judaism exists, (a religion out of time) the validity of Christianity and Islam is cast in doubt.
What it boils down to is their religious stance of “being the chosen people.”
When we wonder, “Did God choose Israel and not the other nations?”
For example Iran, which is notable for its anti Israel policies, does not limit the practice of judaism within the country.
Is there any soloution. One State Two State.
The religious affiliation of the Israeli population as of 2022 was 73.6% Jewish, 18.1% Muslim, 1.9% Christian, and 1.6% Druze.
All prophecies are fulfilled in a Federation with a written constitution ( See previous posts)
“Let there be light” is an English translation of the Hebrew יְהִי אוֹר found in Genesis 1:3 of the Torah, the first part of the Hebrew Bible.
So God created in darkness, hopefull it would turn out all right.
All human comments appriciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.
bobdillon33blog 