
"Israel Is Meant to Be Jewish and Democratic; It Cannot Be Both"
Monday, January 27, 2025
For the 4th time since the start of the war on Gaza, the United States vetoed a UN Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Israel’s war on the Gaza Strip.
The draft resolution, which was supported by 14 countries and opposed by only the United States, called for “an immediate, unconditional and lasting ceasefire to be respected by all parties” and “the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.”The draft resolution stressed the need for the parties to co
mply with their obligations under international law regarding the persons they are holding captive and to enable the civilian population in the Gaza Strip to immediately obtain basic services and humanitarian assistance essential to their survival.
The draft resolution at the same time rejected any action that would lead to the starvation of Palestinians, and called for the facilitation of full, rapid, safe and unhindered humanitarian access to the Gaza Strip and all its areas to reach all Palestinian civilians in need, including civilians in the besieged northern Gaza Strip who are in dire need of immediate humanitarian relief, under the coordination of the United Nations.
The draft resolution called on all parties to fully comply with international law, including international humanitarian law, in particular its provisions relating to the protection of civilians, including in particular women, children and persons hors de combat, as well as its provisions relating to the protection of civilian objects.
The United States alone voted against the resolution, using its veto as a permanent member of the council to prevent its passage as it did many times before.
Mainstream media guests include those who normalize acts of state terrorism, when the state of Israel turned communication devices into indiscriminate bombs.
CNN describes the exchange that took place in its own studios with this introduction:
"CNN says a right-wing commentator will not be welcomed back on air after he made a racist remark on “CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip.”
On Monday’s prime time show, after Muslim journalist Mehdi Hasan stated that he supports Palestinians, conservative commentator Ryan Girdusky responded, “I hope your beeper doesn’t go off.” The comment referenced the thousands of pager explosions in Lebanon targeting Hezbollah militants. CNN has learned the attacks were carried out by Israel." - CNN
Nika Soon-Shiong, a 31-year-old activist who has no official role at the newspaper but has previously been accused of meddling in its coverage, told The New York Times that she and her father made the decision not to endorse Harris. Nika Soon-Shiong reportedly said:
“Our family made the joint decision not to endorse a Presidential candidate. This was the first and only time I have been involved in the process... As a citizen of a country openly financing genocide, and as a family that experienced South African Apartheid, the endorsement was an opportunity to repudiate justifications for the widespread targeting of journalists and ongoing war on children.”
Before Biden dropped out, it was argued that Gaza Genocide will be for Biden what Covid-19 was for Trump. Harris, not making a clear shift in Biden's policies and approach made her inherit his legacy and that will likely sink her bid for the presidency. Young Americans, especially, are not willing to look past the atrocities in Gaza and now Lebanon happening under Biden's watch and by his support.
Princeton Praised a Professor for Winning a MacArthur; and at the same time, Princeton launches a Probe Into Her stance on Palestine.
As congratulations poured in for the recipients of this year’s MacArthur Award, Dr. Ruha Benjamin, a professor of African American studies at Princeton University, should have been celebrating a career-defining achievement. But the full story was a bit more complicated. Around the same time that she had been awarded one of the most prestigious prizes in intellectual circles, Dr. Benjamin was being chastised for pro-Palestine activism by her university.
Western media and Western government reactions to Iran’s retaliatory attack on Israel raises serious concerns. Before sharing some of these reactions, some context, then some questions that would drive world community perception of governments' reactions to these developments.
On October 1, Iran struck several military and security
sites in Israel in response to Israel’s assassination of Haniyeh, Nasrollah,
and Iranian officials. Iran described the attack as “legal, rational and
legitimate”.
These positions might be convenient at the
moment. However, long term, the West might come to regret their reactions and
non-reactions to the events of the last weeks and months because their positions expose
their disdain to the life and dignity of other peoples, compared to how they avenge the deaths of their own. These are critical moments
that require principled response. Few
facts will illustrate the problem the West faces.
1. If Iran’s attack failed, why are Western governments condemning
it in the strongest terms possible? And did it fail because it did not kill
Israeli civilians? Because many of the rockets landed, and they seem to have
landed in specific locations, which means if they were aimed at civilian centers they would have landed in civilian centers. Is the West's measure of failure and success determined by the number of civilians killed?
2. Whenever Israel attacks another country and such attacks result in countless deaths of civilians including children and women, the West does not condemn such attacks; instead reaffirms Israel’s right for self-defense. If they believe in a principle of self-defense, Western governments need to answer the questions: Do other peoples and other countries have the right to such self-defense, too?
3. When Israel attacks in self-defense, civilians, including
children and women, as acknowledged by France’s president are killed. In fact,
in retaliation for the Oct. 7 attack, Israel killed 13 Palestinian children for
1 Israeli death for a total of 16,000 Palestinian chidlren and counting; or 33 Palestinians for 1 Israeli, for a total of 41,000 Gazans and counting. Is this an acceptable
formular for self-defense killings?
Answers to these questions are not an exercise in morality speak; answers to these questions can form a practical, sound foundation for ending the cycles of violence.