JoannaL

No, this will conveniently get lost in committee. If they had wanted to protect women, they would have put it in this bill and then make later an advanced law. They obviously wanted to make it clear that the rights of women are lesser than the rights of some minorities. Shame on them. It was always clear to some that the fighting alliance for equal rights of women, religious minorities and the queer community had some faultlines. Now it is clear (again) that women always stand alone and are just expected to take it. I stop writing now, i am really getting very angry.

IF I understand correctly there is no protection for women in this law (they say they will do it at a "later date" which is most often another word for "never") I do not support or understand this law, but if such a law is made , I think it absolutely horrific to do it in a fashion to activly not include women. it seems like an invitation for every abuser: "I can not say something against trans people or religious minorities, but hey I can still call a woman a "....", this is still totally ok"

This is not about German guilt. This is a trope of the left. "We can not objectivly see the Gaza war because of the past (we had some demonstrations: "Free Palestine from German guilt") " Thats bullshit. This is not about the past. This is about the present. In this present (which we (who live now) are responsible for opposed to the past -when we were no yet born-) we have antisemitism in our country. Antisemitism of the right and left and migrants. it is shocking and the partying on some street after October 7 and the attack on a Berlin synagogue has deeply disturbed our country. But I think we are fighting back quite clearly and we had strong comments and actions also of the politians of the left and Greens condemming also left and progressive antisemitsim (which is not always the main problem but clearly in this moment) We are not doing fine but we are really trying our best and I have a feeling we really fight to let our Jewsih community see that we will not tolerate their feeling of unsafety. we also now- in the here and now that counts and that can be influenced by us - do not have ivy league heads who can say that the call to genocide on Jews is only wrong regarding the context. These people would be out of job here immediately and perhaps in jail soon after.

But you and everyone else here cite the numbers the hamas government give you about the Palestinian dead. Any reason you just believe the one and just not believe the other? Was the Hamas in the past always truthful? Have you proof that the Israeli girls and women were not tortured and raped and the Israeli lie about this? I mean were the Hamas body cameras which filmed it in real time and screened it gleefully to the world just some Israeli hoax? About the preferences of deaths of our children we will have to agree to disagree.

Why do you think the Israeli authorities are dishonest? "I'll also note that whether you kill a bunch of civilians without malice or anger or you kill them with maniacal glee they're still quite dead. " I disagree if I had a little daughter I would very much prefer her to die by a bomb as collateral damage by unfeeling war than being captured and then being tortured and raped to death by hateful men who thrieve on her pain.

Obviously it is allowed and possible to critizise Israel. when is a critic antisemitic and why do I (and a lot of other people) think Greta qualifies? I went to our governmental sites to see if I could find a useful definiton of antisemitism and they link to the IRHA site about this: https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/resources/working-definitions-charters/working-definition-antisemitism there are examples for antisemitism e.g.: Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor. Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation. Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis. Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

but you talk about two differnt groups: there is the "last generation" (and sometimes Extinction rebellion), that is blocking streets and so on and there is court action against them, and a lot of bad press. And there is Fridays for Future , which was always the friendly- neighbour next door- kind of protest which was supported by almost everyone. Greta Thunberg was some kind of national hero in Germany. when a satirist dared to make a joke about her he was almost publicly crucified. Now this is all over - and you may be right there may be people who are glad that they could also destroy FFF. But before October 7th FFF was well established here and there were tons of politians which liked to be seen with them and there were no prosecution or court action against them that I know of.

ok, last try: Lets say the black people in the US feel that they can no longer live with the descendants of their slavers. Lets say they found another state somewhere else and there are problems with other people who also live there. Lets say part of these troubles lead to a situation when perhaps it can be seen that some indentured labor is happening. would it then be correct of the white people (not only of the US but everywhere) to not just criticize this situation in this country but to call all these black people "slavers" to their face or would this be very traumatic and insulting? I think it would be insulting and hate speech and in this sense Greta Thunberg is antisemitic,- because she wants to insult where it hurts most. this does not mean that it is not possible to critizise the potential indentured labor in my hypothetical country but with other words and taking into account the harms historically done.

No I meant that one. "The horrific murders of Israeli civilians by Hamas cannot in any way legitimise Israel’s ongoing war crimes. Genocide is not self-defence, nor is it in any way a proportionate response." Notice that there is the half sentence -the only half sentence in the whole article- referencing the Hamas atrocities. In the next sentence is genocide.

She did not say Holocaust. She didn't have to.

Criticize Israel yes, throw the Holocaust in the face of all Jews no.

I do not think you may find in any German mainstream article in any German newspaper the genocide prejudice against Israel- which is the state of the Jews- in this moment - not even on the far left. this does not mean that there are no articles about the Palestinian suffering or the awful politics of Netanjahu and the Israel government. Why this problem with the genocide accusation? to accuse someone of genocide is obviously very harsh and you would need good proof, but to accuse the state of the Jews of genocide is also in itself quite tasteless and full of enmity - and this enmity may be antisemitsm and /or be the cause of it. here is an interesting article in the Guardian about the Jews-and-genocide relationship, which may say it better: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/03/charging-jews-with-genocide-declare-them-guilty-precisely-what-was-done-to-them-middle-east I think this explains quite clearly what I mean: "There is a sadistic triumphalism in charging Jews with genocide, as though those making it feel they have their man at last. The sadism resides, specifically, in attacking Jews where their memories of pain are keenest. By making them now the torturer and not the tortured, their assailants wrest their anguish from them, not only stealing their past but trampling on it" and "When, for the sheer irreligious hell of it, we begin withdrawing fellow-feeling from Jews, upturning the moral universe and declaring them guilty of what was done to them, this impiety shows itself first as thinking the unthinkable, then as saying the unsayable. It is impossible not to ask – how long before we do the undoable?" so , for me , using the word genocide is going too far, and I also do think that Greta knows exactly what she is doing since she is always repeating and renewing her attacks (beginning with awful kraken picture which was obviously antisemitic)

another very disturbing (and by German definition antisemitic) article by Grata Thunberg regarding the Gaza war. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/05/gaza-climate-justice-human-rights-greta-thunberg content: october 7 only half a sentence and worse: Israel committing "genocide" In Germany this is all over the news again. Friday for Future Germany which is historically a very strong section of FFF is fighing for weeks now to distant themselves from Greta, but this time it may be just too much. the whole climate movement it Germany is flailing because ot this totally unnecessary involvement in the Hamas attack and following war. Personally I can say that at my daughthers school all FFF groups and activities stopped about 5 weeks ago. No one is doing anything for the climate any longer, which is stupid, because climate problems will not go away only because some activits are antisemites (though they would claim they aren't). But perhaps another movement, which is not FFF , is needed now.

and the other go home with the feeling they can be attacked and slaugthered without mercy at any moment like on october 7th

Thats nonsense, sorry I do not understand what you want to say. What did 2 year old girls do? Isreal did not detain any young children. Only the Hamas terrorist did. Obviously there is a difference.

Doron Katz Asher, 34, and her two daughters Raz, 4, and Aviv, 2, are free. I had seen an interview with their desperate husband and father in german television some time ago, and i remember thinking how unlikely a good outcome is, and how awful this situation was for this poor man (hoping and hoping and in the end only death). I am so glad that I was wrong.

Yes, thank you, the palestinians obviously want an ethnostate , so it is totally absurd to support that and critizise other ethnostates. Also about the hostages, really its in the hand of Hamas, they took them. Sometimes its sound that this is the fault of the Israeli but it isnt. Its the fault of Hamas.

I think it farfetched that this was just for public relation. Also in the article it is said that BBC activly searched for and contacted this dentist. Is not the easiest explaination the most likely? That the IDF -in the cases whe some forewarning doesn't hurt- just wants to warn civilians? I

Interesting. Do you have sources.

We do not know why these building were targeted the civilian also didnt know. This does not mean there was no reason. Why should the Israeli discuss this with a dentist if there were Hamas in there or tunnels ?

Very interesting article in bbc. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67327079 The israeli military called a palestinian civilian to help with evacuation before bombing. I think this is extraordinary and I do not know of any other army ever which did that. It likely saved a lot of lives.

Also its Californian, so in this case they are on site

No, I alsways thought that the LA times is mauch more reliable than Foxnews. And it is not a republican leaning newspaper

do you have a scource for the police press relaease? the Latimes https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-11-06/man-dies-after-fight-at-protest-westlake-village-israel-hamas-war states "Jewish man in California dies after being hit in the head during dueling Israel-Hamas war protests" and "Kessler, of Thousand Oaks, was struck in the head, knocked backward and hit his head on the ground, deputies said."

I think there is a difference between just stumbling and falling or being attacked?