I fully understand the feelings of helplessness and hopelessness with this situation. Lots of people like to imagine what they'd do in certain situations, historical or otherwise. We no longer need to imagine what most people would do in the HOlocaust. We now know: nothing. In WW2, most people could reasonably claim ignorance. Even a lot of Germans could claim ignorance. Now we have livestreamed 4K 60fps evidence that is impossible to ignore.
There's a phrase that's widely attributed (arguably misattributed) to Lenin:
"There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen"
So while the US could end this entire thing with a phone call, it's not true to say that things aren't changing. US support for Israel continues to plummet to new lows [1], to levels I never thought I'd see. Small things like blocking a cycling event in Spain, the future of Eurovision being uncertain, European states recognizing Palestine, problems for the port in Haifa due to changes in shipping because of Houthi rebels, ICC?ICJ investigations, these genocide findings and so on... it all adds up. It all matters. It all compounds to political and economic pressure on the actors involved.
What would that achieve? AIPAC is a domestic organization. Their members are US citizens and permanent residents, making individual political donations of their own free will.
AIPAC vets candidates for their support of Israel, and individual donors rely on them to make an informed decision. But ultimately it is their decision, and their money.
If AIPAC disappeared tomorrow, their members would still be directing their political donations towards pro-Israel candidates, as is their constitutional right. They would simply look for another nonprofit to do the vetting, or do the research themselves.
On top of being ineffective, attacking AIPAC in this way would also be unethical. You may not like that some US citizens prioritize support for Israel in their donations. That doesn't give you the right to suppress their donations. It creates a dangerous precedent where suppressing the political rights of some citizens is justified if they have the "wrong" opinions.
AIPAC is the successor of an organization that the DOJ targeted for lack of FARA disclosure, its simply a reincorporation to slide by
But you’re right - putting the military on the OFAC list will be far more effective as it is practically putting economic sanctions on nearly every person in that country
It will likely impact pro-Israel non-profits as so many persons involved at all angles are also Israeli citizens, many holding US citizenship too, and it will be prohibited to move money to or from sanctioned people
> I find it funny people still find the UN legitimate. They still haven't criticised Hamas attack
I find it funny that you have to lie so much. They did, it's easy to find. My father is from a Christian orphanage in east Jerusalem. My grandmother hosted sisters and priests from Israel who worked in schools, hospice and orphanage all over the two countries. UN school programs there had a lot of issues, but being religious (Hamas was a religious group before being a terrorist one) or close to Hamas wasn't one (having no heating in schools during winter and having to sometime amputate toes from 10 year old was probably the biggest issue that I remember).
Hamas is a terrorist organisation. Does it need to be condemned? Is Hamas a legitimate, recognised state and member of the UN? Israel is a sovereign state and member of the UN; it is therefore subject to higher standards. It should leave the UN or withdraw its staff, incl. its ambassador, if it does not like the UN.
"
251. The Commission’s analysis in this report relates solely to the determination
of genocide under the Genocide Convention as it relates to the responsibility of the
State of Israel both for the failure to prevent genocide, for committing genocide
against the Palestinians in Gaza since October 2023 and for the failure to punish
genocide. The Commission also notes that, while its analysis is limited to the
Palestinians specifically in Gaza during the period since 7 October 2023, it
nevertheless raises the serious concern that the specific intent to destroy the
Palestinians as a whole has extended to the rest of the occupied Palestinian territory,
that is, the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, based on Israeli authorities’ and
Israeli security forces’ actions therein, and to the period before 7 October 2023. The
events in Gaza since 7 October 2023 have not occurred in isolation, as the
Commission has noted. They were preceded by decades of unlawful occupation and
repression under an ideology requiring the removal of the Palestinian population
from their lands and its replacement.
252. The Commission concludes on reasonable grounds that the Israeli
authorities and Israeli security forces have committed and are continuing to
commit the following actus reus of genocide against the Palestinians in the Gaza
Strip, namely (i) killing members of the group; (ii) causing serious bodily or
mental harm to members of the group; (iii) deliberately inflicting on the group
conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or
in part; and (iv) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.
253. On incitement to genocide, the Commission concludes that Israeli
President Isaac Herzog, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then Defence
Minister Yoav Gallant, have incited the commission of genocide and that Israeli
authorities have failed to take action against them to punish this incitement.
The Commission has not fully assessed statements by other Israeli political and
military leaders, including Minister for National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir and
Minister for Finance Bezalel Smotrich, and considers that they too should be
assessed to determine whether they constitute incitement to commit genocide.
254. On the mens rea of genocide, the Commission concludes that statements
made by Israeli authorities are direct evidence of genocidal intent. In addition,
the Commission concludes that the pattern of conduct is circumstantial evidence
of genocidal intent and that genocidal intent was the only reasonable inference
that could be drawn from the totality of the evidence. Thus, the Commission
concludes that the Israeli authorities and Israeli security forces have had and
continue to have the genocidal intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the
Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
255. The Commission concludes that the State of Israel bears responsibility
for the failure to prevent genocide, the commission of genocide and the failure
to punish genocide against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip."
Seeing the number of flagged comments, and going from past discussions where any discussion seen as pushback was flagged, this discussion really doesn't belong on hacker news.
I for one will be holding my representatives responsible who continue to vote for the US to enable a genocide. The videos coming out of Gaza have turned me and many others into single issue voters.
I'm afraid the latest spate of "recognizing the state of Palestine" is not, in fact, a sign of coming relief for the people there, but rather a spigot to relieve domestic pressure to engage in substantive actions (sanctions, pressuring the US and other suppliers of arms to engage in sanctions, let alone sending peacekeepers or no-fly zones).
Regardless of how much you're personally invested in the topic, this should break the hearts of everyone who dreamed that the international community could hold each other legally accountable. Indeed, the US would rather sanction individuals at the ICJ than acknowledge any sort of legitimacy—even as our own politicians accuse Russia of engaging in "war crimes". I have no doubt that they are, in fact, I think that the evidence is quite damning. But the double standard is striking, as is the difference between the footage visible on social media and what is acknowledged when you turn on the TV or open the paper.
In the international community the double standard was always against Israel aside maybe when it declared independence. The external enemy to distract the peasants from relevant problems. It doesn't have a lot of maturity. Perhaps the UN will go the league of nations if the current Gx hegemony loses control.
> Regardless of how much you're personally invested in the topic, this should break the hearts of everyone who dreamed that the international community could hold each other legally accountable.
Since the mid 90s the world has proven to turn their head on the other side or pick good/bad narratives out of mere convenience.
It started with the Yugoslavian wars, it absolutely exploded after 9/11 when US could straight up lie about non existing WMD and drag 10 of their allies to fight Iraq "for reasons". It confirmed itself in a countless number of conflicts nobody cared about in Africa, Middle East, Asia.
The reason the US will never go against Israel is the enormous leverage Israel has over the US administration: through the AIPAC, a money laundering operation disguised as political lobbying, a steady flow of money is ensured from the US Treasury to Israel govt. and right back to the Congress. Check the amount your Senator receives from AIPAC here: https://www.trackaipac.com/congress
> AIPAC was founded in 1954 by Isaiah L. Kenen, a lobbyist for the Israeli government, partly to counter negative international reactions to Israel's Qibya massacre of Palestinian villagers that year.
Hopefully we are at the beginning of a change, but I doubt this will come only from the UN.
The UN is the only international democratic institution that - even with its many imperfections - prevents the world to fall into complete anarchy. It's quite telling that it gets ignored since so many years by the country that elevates itself as the world defender of democracy, the US.
The UN has voted for decades for ending the embargo towards Cuba. Every year the outcome of the vote, which has always resulted in a great majority demanding the immediate end of the embargo, has been ignored by the US, resulting in millions of Cubans facing extreme economic consequences since many decades. The last time every country except Israel and US voted for ending the embargo (I might be wrong, maybe a single African state abstained).
In all of this, the only seed of joy I see, was seeing the Cubans a couple of years ago, after decades and decades of seeing their economy strangled by the most powerful country on Earth, roll out their own Covid vaccine just at the same time of those of big Pharma - a vaccine that resulted excellent, effective, and cheap. Hats off for the Cubans. Hope to see some other seed like this also in the Palestinians.
141 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 118 ms ] threadRemove exception to AIPAC political status
Reevaluate AIPAC non profit status entirely
Replicate EO 14046 for Israel which adds the entire ruling party and head of state and spouses and military and affiliated business to the OFAC list
all of this is easy and doesn’t require Congress
but nobody is close to considering those actions with regard to Israel. Notably, other nation’s organizations do not enjoy this courtesy
(Don’t sorry guys, Hamas is already on these lists too)
There's a phrase that's widely attributed (arguably misattributed) to Lenin:
So while the US could end this entire thing with a phone call, it's not true to say that things aren't changing. US support for Israel continues to plummet to new lows [1], to levels I never thought I'd see. Small things like blocking a cycling event in Spain, the future of Eurovision being uncertain, European states recognizing Palestine, problems for the port in Haifa due to changes in shipping because of Houthi rebels, ICC?ICJ investigations, these genocide findings and so on... it all adds up. It all matters. It all compounds to political and economic pressure on the actors involved.[1]: https://news.gallup.com/poll/692948/u.s.-back-israel-militar...
> Reevaluate AIPAC non profit status entirely
What would that achieve? AIPAC is a domestic organization. Their members are US citizens and permanent residents, making individual political donations of their own free will.
AIPAC vets candidates for their support of Israel, and individual donors rely on them to make an informed decision. But ultimately it is their decision, and their money.
If AIPAC disappeared tomorrow, their members would still be directing their political donations towards pro-Israel candidates, as is their constitutional right. They would simply look for another nonprofit to do the vetting, or do the research themselves.
On top of being ineffective, attacking AIPAC in this way would also be unethical. You may not like that some US citizens prioritize support for Israel in their donations. That doesn't give you the right to suppress their donations. It creates a dangerous precedent where suppressing the political rights of some citizens is justified if they have the "wrong" opinions.
But you’re right - putting the military on the OFAC list will be far more effective as it is practically putting economic sanctions on nearly every person in that country
It will likely impact pro-Israel non-profits as so many persons involved at all angles are also Israeli citizens, many holding US citizenship too, and it will be prohibited to move money to or from sanctioned people
I find it funny that you have to lie so much. They did, it's easy to find. My father is from a Christian orphanage in east Jerusalem. My grandmother hosted sisters and priests from Israel who worked in schools, hospice and orphanage all over the two countries. UN school programs there had a lot of issues, but being religious (Hamas was a religious group before being a terrorist one) or close to Hamas wasn't one (having no heating in schools during winter and having to sometime amputate toes from 10 year old was probably the biggest issue that I remember).
" 251. The Commission’s analysis in this report relates solely to the determination of genocide under the Genocide Convention as it relates to the responsibility of the State of Israel both for the failure to prevent genocide, for committing genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza since October 2023 and for the failure to punish genocide. The Commission also notes that, while its analysis is limited to the Palestinians specifically in Gaza during the period since 7 October 2023, it nevertheless raises the serious concern that the specific intent to destroy the Palestinians as a whole has extended to the rest of the occupied Palestinian territory, that is, the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, based on Israeli authorities’ and Israeli security forces’ actions therein, and to the period before 7 October 2023. The events in Gaza since 7 October 2023 have not occurred in isolation, as the Commission has noted. They were preceded by decades of unlawful occupation and repression under an ideology requiring the removal of the Palestinian population from their lands and its replacement.
252. The Commission concludes on reasonable grounds that the Israeli authorities and Israeli security forces have committed and are continuing to commit the following actus reus of genocide against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, namely (i) killing members of the group; (ii) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (iii) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and (iv) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.
253. On incitement to genocide, the Commission concludes that Israeli President Isaac Herzog, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, have incited the commission of genocide and that Israeli authorities have failed to take action against them to punish this incitement. The Commission has not fully assessed statements by other Israeli political and military leaders, including Minister for National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir and Minister for Finance Bezalel Smotrich, and considers that they too should be assessed to determine whether they constitute incitement to commit genocide.
254. On the mens rea of genocide, the Commission concludes that statements made by Israeli authorities are direct evidence of genocidal intent. In addition, the Commission concludes that the pattern of conduct is circumstantial evidence of genocidal intent and that genocidal intent was the only reasonable inference that could be drawn from the totality of the evidence. Thus, the Commission concludes that the Israeli authorities and Israeli security forces have had and continue to have the genocidal intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
255. The Commission concludes that the State of Israel bears responsibility for the failure to prevent genocide, the commission of genocide and the failure to punish genocide against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip."
Has the rules around political non technical articles changed? Can we get an Epstein thread for the frontpage sometime this week?
Regardless of how much you're personally invested in the topic, this should break the hearts of everyone who dreamed that the international community could hold each other legally accountable. Indeed, the US would rather sanction individuals at the ICJ than acknowledge any sort of legitimacy—even as our own politicians accuse Russia of engaging in "war crimes". I have no doubt that they are, in fact, I think that the evidence is quite damning. But the double standard is striking, as is the difference between the footage visible on social media and what is acknowledged when you turn on the TV or open the paper.
Since the mid 90s the world has proven to turn their head on the other side or pick good/bad narratives out of mere convenience.
It started with the Yugoslavian wars, it absolutely exploded after 9/11 when US could straight up lie about non existing WMD and drag 10 of their allies to fight Iraq "for reasons". It confirmed itself in a countless number of conflicts nobody cared about in Africa, Middle East, Asia.
From AIPAC themselves: (https://www.aipacpac.org/)
> Being pro-Israel is good policy and good politics.
> %98 of AIPAC-backed candidates won their general elections.
> $70M contributed through AIPAC to support pro-Israel candidates.
> We helped defeat 24 candidates who would have undermined the US-Israel relationship.
Democracy anybody?
Now imagine Russia had a similar organization, what would the reaction be? Yet when it's Israel, it's somehow fine.
From Wikipedia: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIPAC)
> AIPAC was founded in 1954 by Isaiah L. Kenen, a lobbyist for the Israeli government, partly to counter negative international reactions to Israel's Qibya massacre of Palestinian villagers that year.
Towards that end I offer up unwatch.
https://unwatch.org/
The UN is the only international democratic institution that - even with its many imperfections - prevents the world to fall into complete anarchy. It's quite telling that it gets ignored since so many years by the country that elevates itself as the world defender of democracy, the US.
The UN has voted for decades for ending the embargo towards Cuba. Every year the outcome of the vote, which has always resulted in a great majority demanding the immediate end of the embargo, has been ignored by the US, resulting in millions of Cubans facing extreme economic consequences since many decades. The last time every country except Israel and US voted for ending the embargo (I might be wrong, maybe a single African state abstained).
In all of this, the only seed of joy I see, was seeing the Cubans a couple of years ago, after decades and decades of seeing their economy strangled by the most powerful country on Earth, roll out their own Covid vaccine just at the same time of those of big Pharma - a vaccine that resulted excellent, effective, and cheap. Hats off for the Cubans. Hope to see some other seed like this also in the Palestinians.