Saw Norman Finkelstein at an event on the Lower East Side a few weeks ago. He is a powerhouse of knowledge and morality. He should debate anyone and everyone on Palestine.
Finklestein accuses the Israeli government of having this policy: "mowing the lawn" in Gaza. He repeats it over and over; never explaining what the hell that means. It sounds ominous though. Like a lot of meaningless and concocted meme-words circa the 21st century. Or old terms rewritten to suit - like "fascist" and "climate". Now without meaning.
I do, however, know exactly what the phrase "From the river to the sea" means. as that is extremely well documented. It is a phrase that means genocide; or perhaps in more immediate usage... it's a call for ETHNIC CLEANSING.
Finkelstein has been a voice for the Palestinians for 40 years or so... this man deserves so much of our respect. Not only because he stands for our Muslim brothers and sisters but because he stands for humanity and justice. I was shocked when he praised the resistance while most Jews/Israelis are so angry as if the holocaust was caused by the Gazans. He is so brave. Will defo read his book once I finish reading yours, The New Crusades. Pen>Sword ❤️
I suppose that depends on what your expectations are form a man with a pen. To be actively telling what he has witnessed. To refuse to live on a land that is actively being stolen. To be anti-Zionist because his religion is pretty much hijacked. After all he’s an activist.
"To refuse to live on a land that is actively being stolen"
I have not seen at any time, not once, an attempt to take the land we call Gaza. I have not seen Israel, not once, strike Gaza without having been struck (typically with rockets). When you say "Stolen" then, give me something, anything, to back that claim up. I have seen attacks always going one way first and never-ending threats to "kill all Jews" (and Americans by the way). I have also heard the same claims, like yours, made for 40 years, asked for evidence of that, and gotten nothing. To me, this is "here we go again, again, again". I am not a Jew not have ancestry anywhere near that region of the planet. But those who do claim that ancestry won't leave me the hell alone about their argument. That's why I am asking again (again). The answer has not changed in 40 years. Being forced then to "pick a side", all I can see and hear is Palestinians throwing rock(et)s and calling for the death of all Jews... oh, after that, my children as well. Maryam... are you calling for the death of my children too? Because, though I could be wrong, it sounds like you are siding with people who do say that. And they have been saying it for quite awhile. I've been listening.
Wow! I’m sorry I don’t have time to go to the drawing board for you, but all I will say is that the man that I said I respected and we started talking about him initially, is actually a Jewish man. You are contradicting yourself. You hated on the Jewish man yourself and then now you are accusing me of being genocidal. Wow! Check yourself!
I saw/heard this guy on a podcast. That is an hour of my life I really wish I had not yielded to him. It's not that he said anything I did or could disagree with. HE SAID NOTHING.
He just asserts his authority as a holocaust survivor by proxy, draws irrelevant analogies rather than sticking to the facts, and when he does get into why they struck John, you're left wondering "well why would Israel simply up and do such a thing?" there's no attempt to provide a motive.
On the podcast he appealed to emotional arguments over and over "if you were a parent... if that was your child" - well I am a parent and grandparent and I don't need some guy declared "intellectual" by those I find suspicious to begin with, wasting my time. Get to the point man!
If Finkelstein was an honest broker, he'd sound like it. He'd have solid evidence. He'd present a cogent argument. He didn't. He doesn't. I smell a charlatan.
So you could not disagree with anything he said therefore that makes his opinion redundant and unfactual? That is a very interesting conclusion to draw. Here's the thing, I also watched him in the interview with Candace Owens. He provided plenty of factual evidence citing reliable sources such as B'T Selem, the main Israeli Information Centre of the Occupied Territories, who advocates for both Palestinians and Israelis. He refers to the statements of Israeli government officials (which you can fact check yourself) in which they refer to the Palestinians as 'Amalek' which is extremist language derived from the Bible. Religious texts are often used by government leaders to dehumanise populations and manufacture consent for Genocide. This is ILLEGAL under International Law, specifically Article III of the Geneva Convention. Furthermore, Dr Finklestein also mentions the denial of food, water, fuel or electricity which has been widely documented. This is also illegal under Article 55 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. It states that the Occupying Power “has the duty of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population,” and “it should, in particular, bring in the necessary foodstuffs, medical stores and other articles if the resources of the occupied territory are inadequate.” This is also a fact. He also goes on to point out what many news outlets have referred to as "the starvation diet". In 2006, after Israel imposed a land, sea and air blockade on Gaza in 2007, its government produced a document know as "Red Lines". This document found that in 2007, the Israeli Government calculated the minimum number of calories need to keep Gazans alive, but malnourished. Palestinians in Gaza campaigned against these food restrictions for many years. Israeli Human Rights group, Gisha fought a hard and long legal battle in order to get the Israeli Ministry of Defense to finally hand over this document through the Israeli Court in 2012. This is a fact that you can corroborate by various media outlets such as Haaretz, IMEC, BBC, the Guardian and more.This policy was also openly declared in 2006 by Dov Weisglass, a senior advisor to the then Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. His justification was that the policy was designed to "put Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger". That is also a fact and is illegal under International law. These are some of the facts Dr Finklestein refers to in the interview. Not sure how you came to the conclusion that he had "no solid evidence". You also question why Dr Finklestein repeatedly makes references to his own family experiences, that draws on the Holocaust. It is precisely because of the events of the Holocaust that Dr Finklestein is able to recognise that Palestinians are being ethnically cleansed and systematically genocided. Similar policies were enacted by the Nazis during their extermination of Jews. Gaza is also a concentration camp. Illegal weapons and chemical agents such as white phsophorus are being used to kill Palestinian civilians at an alarming rate. Entire families are being wiped off the Civil Registry. Artillery shells, incendiary bombs and anti-tank missiles are being used to kill a population in which, children make up half of the population. As someone who had both sides of his family exterminated, Dr Finklestein can understand the devastation this brings upon Palestinians families. The grief, the trauma, the loss of their loved ones. He is appealing to our humanity, after all when has it ever been acceptable to kill 20,000 children and try to justify it as 'collective punishment'. I am sure that's what the Nazis also believed when they wiped out entire bloodlines.
He has spent more than 40 years of his lifetime studying on this subject. You told me he did not have solid evidence? He is pro facts and truths. The claims he asserted are always or least usually backed up with credible sources. He only uses his Holocaust card when is necessary and compelled to. I would recommend you to read the book and hope you can realize something. I can see your humanity if you are a parent and a grandparent. If you have a heart, you will be crying for the children of Gaza.
Saw Norman Finkelstein at an event on the Lower East Side a few weeks ago. He is a powerhouse of knowledge and morality. He should debate anyone and everyone on Palestine.
Great article! From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free 🇵🇸! #EndEthnicCleansing ! #CeasefireNow !
Finklestein accuses the Israeli government of having this policy: "mowing the lawn" in Gaza. He repeats it over and over; never explaining what the hell that means. It sounds ominous though. Like a lot of meaningless and concocted meme-words circa the 21st century. Or old terms rewritten to suit - like "fascist" and "climate". Now without meaning.
I do, however, know exactly what the phrase "From the river to the sea" means. as that is extremely well documented. It is a phrase that means genocide; or perhaps in more immediate usage... it's a call for ETHNIC CLEANSING.
Finkelstein has been a voice for the Palestinians for 40 years or so... this man deserves so much of our respect. Not only because he stands for our Muslim brothers and sisters but because he stands for humanity and justice. I was shocked when he praised the resistance while most Jews/Israelis are so angry as if the holocaust was caused by the Gazans. He is so brave. Will defo read his book once I finish reading yours, The New Crusades. Pen>Sword ❤️
OH good. A fan of Finklestein's. You should know.
Why does he deserve my respect? In what way does he stand for humanity and justice?
Not asking for you to write an essay but could you be a bit specific? All I have heard from and about this man is platitudes.
I suppose that depends on what your expectations are form a man with a pen. To be actively telling what he has witnessed. To refuse to live on a land that is actively being stolen. To be anti-Zionist because his religion is pretty much hijacked. After all he’s an activist.
"To refuse to live on a land that is actively being stolen"
I have not seen at any time, not once, an attempt to take the land we call Gaza. I have not seen Israel, not once, strike Gaza without having been struck (typically with rockets). When you say "Stolen" then, give me something, anything, to back that claim up. I have seen attacks always going one way first and never-ending threats to "kill all Jews" (and Americans by the way). I have also heard the same claims, like yours, made for 40 years, asked for evidence of that, and gotten nothing. To me, this is "here we go again, again, again". I am not a Jew not have ancestry anywhere near that region of the planet. But those who do claim that ancestry won't leave me the hell alone about their argument. That's why I am asking again (again). The answer has not changed in 40 years. Being forced then to "pick a side", all I can see and hear is Palestinians throwing rock(et)s and calling for the death of all Jews... oh, after that, my children as well. Maryam... are you calling for the death of my children too? Because, though I could be wrong, it sounds like you are siding with people who do say that. And they have been saying it for quite awhile. I've been listening.
Wow! I’m sorry I don’t have time to go to the drawing board for you, but all I will say is that the man that I said I respected and we started talking about him initially, is actually a Jewish man. You are contradicting yourself. You hated on the Jewish man yourself and then now you are accusing me of being genocidal. Wow! Check yourself!
I made observations and asked questions about them. That IS checking myself.
You call that "hating on" people and making accusations.
However, you gave me all the information I expected. Less than none.
I know I am determined to purchase the book of Finklestein In Sha Allah
I saw/heard this guy on a podcast. That is an hour of my life I really wish I had not yielded to him. It's not that he said anything I did or could disagree with. HE SAID NOTHING.
He just asserts his authority as a holocaust survivor by proxy, draws irrelevant analogies rather than sticking to the facts, and when he does get into why they struck John, you're left wondering "well why would Israel simply up and do such a thing?" there's no attempt to provide a motive.
On the podcast he appealed to emotional arguments over and over "if you were a parent... if that was your child" - well I am a parent and grandparent and I don't need some guy declared "intellectual" by those I find suspicious to begin with, wasting my time. Get to the point man!
If Finkelstein was an honest broker, he'd sound like it. He'd have solid evidence. He'd present a cogent argument. He didn't. He doesn't. I smell a charlatan.
There is probably no greater expert on the subject than Finklestein. Your remarks hold zero weight.
So you could not disagree with anything he said therefore that makes his opinion redundant and unfactual? That is a very interesting conclusion to draw. Here's the thing, I also watched him in the interview with Candace Owens. He provided plenty of factual evidence citing reliable sources such as B'T Selem, the main Israeli Information Centre of the Occupied Territories, who advocates for both Palestinians and Israelis. He refers to the statements of Israeli government officials (which you can fact check yourself) in which they refer to the Palestinians as 'Amalek' which is extremist language derived from the Bible. Religious texts are often used by government leaders to dehumanise populations and manufacture consent for Genocide. This is ILLEGAL under International Law, specifically Article III of the Geneva Convention. Furthermore, Dr Finklestein also mentions the denial of food, water, fuel or electricity which has been widely documented. This is also illegal under Article 55 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. It states that the Occupying Power “has the duty of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population,” and “it should, in particular, bring in the necessary foodstuffs, medical stores and other articles if the resources of the occupied territory are inadequate.” This is also a fact. He also goes on to point out what many news outlets have referred to as "the starvation diet". In 2006, after Israel imposed a land, sea and air blockade on Gaza in 2007, its government produced a document know as "Red Lines". This document found that in 2007, the Israeli Government calculated the minimum number of calories need to keep Gazans alive, but malnourished. Palestinians in Gaza campaigned against these food restrictions for many years. Israeli Human Rights group, Gisha fought a hard and long legal battle in order to get the Israeli Ministry of Defense to finally hand over this document through the Israeli Court in 2012. This is a fact that you can corroborate by various media outlets such as Haaretz, IMEC, BBC, the Guardian and more.This policy was also openly declared in 2006 by Dov Weisglass, a senior advisor to the then Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. His justification was that the policy was designed to "put Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger". That is also a fact and is illegal under International law. These are some of the facts Dr Finklestein refers to in the interview. Not sure how you came to the conclusion that he had "no solid evidence". You also question why Dr Finklestein repeatedly makes references to his own family experiences, that draws on the Holocaust. It is precisely because of the events of the Holocaust that Dr Finklestein is able to recognise that Palestinians are being ethnically cleansed and systematically genocided. Similar policies were enacted by the Nazis during their extermination of Jews. Gaza is also a concentration camp. Illegal weapons and chemical agents such as white phsophorus are being used to kill Palestinian civilians at an alarming rate. Entire families are being wiped off the Civil Registry. Artillery shells, incendiary bombs and anti-tank missiles are being used to kill a population in which, children make up half of the population. As someone who had both sides of his family exterminated, Dr Finklestein can understand the devastation this brings upon Palestinians families. The grief, the trauma, the loss of their loved ones. He is appealing to our humanity, after all when has it ever been acceptable to kill 20,000 children and try to justify it as 'collective punishment'. I am sure that's what the Nazis also believed when they wiped out entire bloodlines.
He has spent more than 40 years of his lifetime studying on this subject. You told me he did not have solid evidence? He is pro facts and truths. The claims he asserted are always or least usually backed up with credible sources. He only uses his Holocaust card when is necessary and compelled to. I would recommend you to read the book and hope you can realize something. I can see your humanity if you are a parent and a grandparent. If you have a heart, you will be crying for the children of Gaza.