There are claims that most rural villages are largely untouched but the amount claiming to be from Jaffa, or Haifa would be immigrating to large cities.

Places like Safed might have to triple in size.

How do Anti Zionists envision the migration of Palestinians to those urban centers?

But they totally “don’t want Gaza”, right yall?

Dr Ghassan Abu-Sitta has become one of the most prominent figures in the Palestine movement. His humanitarian work has rightly earned widespread admiration.

But should that place his political rhetoric beyond criticism?

My latest article examines his public record, the GMC proceedings, and the role of Palestine Solidarity Campaign in defending him - arguing that solidarity should never mean abandoning critical judgement.

https://aidanmneal.wordpress.com/2026/07/21/ghassan-abu-sitta-and-what-palestine-solidarity-campaign-chose-not-to-see/

“We don’t even want Gaza”
“Israelis aren’t colonist settlers”
“It’s not genocide/ethnic cleaning/etc etc”

How can you possibly defend this, Zionists?

Ben Gvir’s plan to surround prisons with crocodiles passes another hurdle. What next? Are they going to feed the prisoners to the crocodiles after hanging them? Instead of hanging them?

This opinion piece from The Guardian from 2009, 'Israel bad, Palestine good' is killing us by Seth Freedman, shows that back then, as now, Zionists were amazingly able to construe plain language in such a way as to miss the point, confuse cause and effect, and complain bitterly that they are being cast as a villain while murdering children. It’s been almost two decades and not only do Zionists still not see the murder of Palestinian civilians as wrong, they can’t comprehend why Palestinians might think that it is, or that there is something wrong somewhere when Palestinians are slaughtered and the excuse is that they took up arms after they were slaughtered.

The piece starts off by referring to an infamous t-shirt that some IDF units used to wear that glorified the targeting of pregnant women with “One shot, two kills." The first time around the author defended that t-shirt as “black humor,” "tasteless digs,” “everyone does it,” “Palestinians put up posters of Hamas members,” “the IDF are only human,” “it’s not official IDF policy to kill pregnant women,” “muslims are worse,” “the Palestinians are anti-semites,” and, of course, “the IDF who did this are the victims here!” Sure, they are cheering on murdering pregnant women, but they are only pregnant Palestinian women, so it’s ok to cheer on murdering them and their unborn child.

So what happens when a Palestinian group creates a t-shirt that points out that Israel kills Palestinians and steals land whether they resist occupation violently or not? Seth Freedman sees red and goes off the deep end, of course. What else is a sane Zionist to do if a Palestinian or pro-Palestinian dares to challenge the Israeli narrative?

The offending t-shirt reads:

Suddenly, Freedman needs nuance when discussing Israel committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. Rockets fired are a homicidal barrage against "a terrified civilian populace.” It’s "a throwaway one-liner in a litany of Israeli injustice.” Pregnant Palestinian women or the other targets of Israeli theft and murder aren’t civilians, of course, and killing them isn’t homicide. Why would they be and why would it be? They may not be terrorists, but their civilian status is not evident to Freedman.

This blind supporter of Zionism then decides that “both sides” are to blame - the side that burns olive trees, destroys houses, bombs civilians, kills women and starves their victims, and the side that dared shoot back. And the “both sides” BS lasted almost half a sentence and then it was the Palestinians fault that Israel attacks them because

"Israel's reaction to terror attacks has been, is, and always will be to use the insurgency as cover to mete out ever-more severe reprisals against the Palestinians.”

Yes, you read that correctly. Israel will steal and kill, and if Palestinians dare fire back then Israel will steal and kill more. What happens if Palestinians don’t fire back? We can see that just as clearly today in the West Bank as we could back then - Israel will steal and kill more. So either way Israel will steal and kill, and Freedman implicitly acknowledges this, but it doesn’t matter at all to him.

Seth moves on to an unconnected murder that occurred in April. A Hamas spokesman refusing to lament the death of a 13 year old in Bat Ayin is “unconsionable.” What did Freedman say when Israel killed a mother, her four children and a passer by in Gaza two weeks later? Why, nothing of course. Why would he? What was the response from the Israeli spokesman as to why children were murdered in Gaza? “It’s Hamas’ fault.” Because that is Zionism. Complaining about Palestinians doing what Israel does isn’t hypocrisy, it’s a way of life.

He goes on to actually blame Israel… well, almost:

"Israel bears considerable responsibility for the ongoing hostilities… Yet, while Palestinian leaders cannot even bring themselves to condemn child-killings, and armchair supporters overseas reduce thousands of rocket attacks to a pithy sentence on a t-shirt, is it any wonder the Israeli public let their own government get away with murder?”

That seems reasonable. It’s the t-shirt’s fault. And Hamas’ for not condemning the brutal murder of a Jewish child. And of course, it’s the killer’s fault, who was an Israeli Arab and not a member of any terrorist group, and certainly not a member of Hamas. But it’s still Hamas’ fault. Because no matter what Israel or Zionists or Seth Freedman does, nothing they do to the Palestinians is ever their fault.

He then, after some criticism of the Israeli right (which he of course supports) returns to the IDF t-shirt and others like it. “It’s for private use only” he explains. What’s really bad is a magazine carrying a full-page advert for a t-shirt that points out that Israel will mass murder Palestinians and steal and destroy their land regardless of them fighting back or not. That’s the real crime here. The solution is to

“...drive out the apologists in both camps, whose tacit approval of, and support for, indiscriminate killing is what is keeping the fires burning under a cauldron which has been bubbling over for 61 long years.”

Yes, you read that right. After two articles where he was an apologist for Israeli glorification of murdering pregnant women, he wants to drive out the apologists for indiscriminate killing in both camps. Just like the majority of Zionists in this sub and the majority of “pro-peace” Zionists world wide, he will defend Israel murdering and stealing and then display a complete lack of self-awareness.

How do you make peace when people like Freedman are the moderates? You can’t, it’s impossible. For all their talk of fostering peace and driving out apologists everything always boils down to being the Palestinians’ fault, whether it's a crazed Israeli soldier snuffing out most of a family and the majority of Israelis shrug, uncaring, or when a crazed Israeli murders a Jewish boy, and all of Israel is horrified and shocked.

Isaac Herzog, Israel’s president, featured prominently in the ICJ and UN investigations of Israel’s attacks on Gaza and the UN concluded it was direct incitement to genocide when he said:

“It is an entire nation out there that is responsible. It is not true this rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved. It’s absolutely not true. They could have risen up. They could have fought against that evil regime which took over Gaza in a coup d'etat.”

Now, speaking to Saudi TV, some snippets of what he said:

“It is my dream to see peace between Israel and Saudi Arabia,” the Israeli president said, suggesting that the two nations should negotiate directly, with the support from the United States.”

In addition to normalizing ties with Riyadh, Herzog said he would love for Israel to forge peace deals with both Lebanon and Syria.

Herzog also said that his “heart aches” for every innocent Palestinian civilian who is killed, “because this is not our aim or desire in any way.”

It’s funny - almost three years after he blamed every Palestinian in Gaza for the Hamas attack, after hundreds of documented atrocities including direct targeting of children by Israel, including starving babies to death deliberately, and protection of Israeli settlers by the IDF as they openly murder Palestinians, he pretends not to be a monster cheering on the mass murder of Palestinians? Why did it take him almost three years to decide to pretend not to be a genocidal PoS?

Note that he wants peace with Lebanon, Syria and Saudi Arabia. No peace with the Palestinians. He, like almost all Zionists, wants to massacre them and make their lives terrible while ignoring his own past genocidal statements. It’s the Israeli way.

Well well well, behold this happy band of brothers.

More info, from Fortune Magazine:

>Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil is suing the federal government and several private groups, alleging they were part of a conspiracy to suppress criticism of Israel through a coordinated campaign to dox, jail and ultimately deport student activists.

>The civil rights suit, filed in federal court Tuesday, names the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, as the architect of what it describes as an ongoing conspiracy to silence members of the pro-Palestinian movement by smearing them as antisemites.

>Those efforts were aided by Canary Mission and Betar, two pro-Israel groups that maintain online lists of Israel’s critics, often alongside unsubstantiated claims that they are affiliated with Hamas, according to the lawsuit.

>Activists placed on those lists “were nearly automatically targeted by the Federal Defendants for arrest and removal,” the suit claims, adding that the “process of nomination to punishment was frictionless.”

>Lawyers for Khalil argue this “public-private partnership” could violate the Ku Klux Klan Act, a Reconstruction-era law that sought to restrict government coordination with vigilante groups.

Seems to hit all the points. Here is a link to CCR, their press release and lawsuit

https://ccrjustice.org/home/press-center/press-releases/mahmoud-khalil-sues-trump-administration-officials-and-ant

When I see so many discussions about whether Israel is applying apartheid policies on Palestinians or not, I constantly remember Chomsky's several interviews and article in which he described the situation in Palestine after the 1st intifada, when Israel decided to implement a total closure against the Palestinians, and therefore decrease its dependance on Palestinian labor.

2014 Interview:

Many reasons. Take, say, the term “apartheid.” In the Occupied Territories, what Israel is doing is much worse than apartheid. To call it apartheid is a gift to Israel, at least if by “apartheid” you mean South African-style apartheid. What’s happening in the Occupied Territories is much worse. There’s a crucial difference. The South African Nationalists needed the black population. That was their workforce. It was 85 percent of the workforce of the population, and that was basically their workforce. They needed them. They had to sustain them. The bantustans were horrifying, but South Africa did try to sustain them. They didn’t put them on a diet. They tried to keep them strong enough to do the work that they needed for the country. They tried to get international support for the bantustans.

The Israeli relationship to the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories is totally different. They just don’t want them. They want them out, or at least in prison. And they’re acting that way. That’s a very striking difference, which means that the apartheid analogy, South African apartheid, to the Occupied Territories is just a gift to Israeli violence. It’s much worse than that. If you look inside Israel, there’s plenty of repression and discrimination. I’ve written about it extensively for decades. But it’s not apartheid. It’s bad, but it’s not apartheid. So the term, I just don’t think is applicable.

2020 interview

Israel does not want Nablus, doesn’t want Tulkarm, doesn’t want Palestinians. So, nothing like the anti-apartheid struggle, where the white population needed the black population, and in fact tried to subsidize the Bantustans, tried to make them look decent to the international community. This is quite different. Israel just wants the Palestinians out. It does use them for cheap labor, but they can get cheap exploited labor from Thailand or other places, and do in fact.

They just want the Palestinians out. What they’ve been doing for fifty years and what you see before your eyes, which you can see if you drive around the West Bank, is a greater Israel. Israel takes over all the valuable areas, the Jordan Valley, about a third of the territory, the fertile land, and kicks out the population on one or another pretexts.

Take greater Jerusalem, a huge area about five times the size of what Jerusalem ever was, or take the city of Ma’ale Adumim east of Jerusalem, built up mostly in the Clinton years, corridor to it, pretty much bisects the West Bank. Same to the north with the town of Ariel, the town of Kedumim. Leave out the Palestinian population concentrations, and don’t take Nablus, that’s for them, until Israel finally manages to get rid of them.

The rest of the Palestinians who live in the areas that Israel’s taking over, put them in isolated enclaves, separated from their olive groves, agricultural areas, herds, with checkpoints, which occasionally are open at the will of Israeli soldiers. Keep them in isolation, subjected to constant attacks by what are called hilltop youth and other terrorist crazies and just make life impossible for them.

This analysis for me at least is much more accurate than easily say it's an apartheid, however, I understand why people can't find another word to describe what Israel is doing, because this word hasn't existed yet.

"As humanitarian and human rights organisations that have worked for years in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, we are appalled by the Israeli Knesset’s decision to approve a bill that makes death penalty effectively mandatory in the West Bank and which will de facto apply exclusively to Palestinians."

https://www.un.org/unispal/document/adoption-of-death-penalty-law-by-the-israeli-knesset-requires-urgent-eu-measures-joint-statement-2april2026/

To the pro-Israeli/Zionists on here....
Does this atleast count as something akin to apartheid? Or no?

Is there any other country in the world that has a death penalty law exclusively for one ethnicity? I can't think of any?