"The October 7th massacre and taking of hostages was so barbaric that everything Israel does in retaliation is justified."

The terrorist attack on Israel on October 7th 2023 was depraved and beyond justification. The hostages that remain in Hamas captivity should be released immediately and without conditions. Equally, to punish an entire population for the actions of a minority of combatants is depraved and beyond justification. (It is, in fact, exactly what terrorism is: to inflict indiscriminate harm on innocent people.)

"Most Palestinians are terrorists."

The IDF itself numbers Hamas fighters in Gaza at 30,000. The population of Gaza is 2.3 million. That means Hamas fighters are 0.013% of the Gazan population. 99.987% of the Gazan population are not Hamas. To express this another way: Hamas fighters are 1 in every 7700 people in Gaza. Go ahead and call that a characterizing proportion of the population - and good luck not sounding insane.

By the way, there are also about 50,000 pregnant women right now in Gaza. Those who characterize the entire population as a terrorist hub because of 30,000 people strangely don't also call it a maternity ward because of 50,000. Way to cherry-pick your conflations, folks!

"To support Palestinians is to support Hamas."

A common tactic of those who wish to shut down speech is to disallow nuance.

Let me put that another way. Bigots and scaredy-cats try to stop public opinion evolving in a way they don't like by characterizing those who support the evolution as extremists.

For example, in debates about whether same-sex marriage should be legalized in the United States, opponents of legalization (such as this creep) said it would result in folks marrying their dogs. This data-indifferent, reality-proof claim was an insidious way of associating any deviation from their view of marriage with moral deficiency. It meant those advocating for marriage equality always had to be on the blushing defensive and insist, 'No, really, it's just this bitch I'm into, uh, not the other kind."

I've just given you the number of Hamas fighters in the Gazan population. Please do explain how advocating for the survival and human rights of the 7699 people per 7700 in Gaza who are not terrorists is to "support" the 1 that is.

(Now if you'll excuse me, my wife is barking and needs taking outside to poop.)

"Gazans voted for Hamas. Votes have consequences."

In 2006 Hamas were elected by a plurality, not a majority, of Gazans: 44% voted for Hamas, just 3% more than voted for Fatah. (You may also see this reported as a "parliamentary majority"; careful not to confuse parliamentary majority with public majority.) Exit polling showed that "83% of voters in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem supported peace with Israel, and 75% believed Hamas should change its policy toward Israel." Hamas then violently seized control of the territory the following year, and have quashed elections ever since.

Fast forward to the present time and we see that children (ie. non-voters) now make up 47% of Gaza, and that overall only 8.3% of the present population voted for Hamas back in 2006. We are not, in fact, entitled to punish people militarily for how they voted. But for a moment, let's pretend that we are. In that case, 91.7% of the present population have no electoral responsibility for Hamas and are therefore innocent, even by your absurd, invented culpability.

"Most Palestinians support Hamas."

The falsehood that will just not die! No matter what you've read on Facebook (reminder: Facebook ≠ Factbook), X, ZZZZZ or anywhere else: no, most Palestinians do not support Hamas. (Stanford, October 2023: "About 23% of respondents said they have a great deal or quite a lot of trust in Hamas; 52% had no trust at all in Hamas."; The Washington Institute, July 2023: Every year since 2014, a majority of Gazans "supported a proposal of the PA sending 'officials and security officers to Gaza to take over the administration there, with Hamas giving up separate armed units'.")

Even right now, during wartime (when support for Hamas typically goes up, before falling off again when hostilities cease, a pattern that has established itself through Israel's four previous attacks on Gaza), Hamas has only 44% support in Occupied West Bank ("up from just 12% in September") and 42% in Gaza ("up slightly from 38% from three months ago"). Even with the typical wartime boost, more Palestinians do not support Hamas than do.

"Most Palestinians approve of the October 7th terrorist attack."

Yes, a recent poll has shown that a majority of Palestinians approve of the October 7th Hamas terrorist attack. Specifically, "57% of respondents in Gaza and 82% in the West Bank believe Hamas was correct in launching the October attack". This is disturbing. But there is vital context to this poll result that dehumanizers either do not know or willfully ignore.

First, Hamas told Palestinians that "it acted to defend a major Islamic shrine in Jerusalem against Jewish extremists and win the release of Palestinian prisoners". The poll shows "a large majority" of Palestinians believed this stuff. A large majority of Palestinians also said they have not seen "videos showing the militants committing atrocities".

Gazans do not live in a free society like we do. This is a territory as poor as Haiti, presently under relentless bombardment. They don't have good information, and they don't have the means to fact-check, even if they had the time in their busy schedules of trying not to die. Also consider that even if they heard the reality from Israeli or international sources, why would they believe it? In some ways, why should they? This is a far-right Israeli government that refuses to acknowledge the "Nakba" in 1948, let alone to make reparations for it as this rabbi suggests. ("Al Nakba" is the Arabic word for the 1948 displacement and dispossession of Palestinians from the land we now call Israel, sometimes with bloodshed and violence.) Gazans are stuck between two extremist governments, both of whom have an aggressive interest in self-mythology. It would be a small miracle if Gazans had a single untainted fact in their heads at all.

So, before we rage at Palestinians cheering crushed babies, we should remember that we have no real idea of their understanding of the situation. We are projecting.

Judge a person by the contents of their character when they are free, or help them become free. In my view, those are the only fair options we have, those of us fortunate enough to be standing in freedom looking on.

"In its war on Gaza, Israel has done everything it can to protect civilians. It's tragic that so many Palestinians have been killed, but that's war."

In fact, it is not at all clear that Israel has done everything it can to protect civilians.

From day one, Israel has not permitted food, water, fuel or medicine to enter the Gaza Strip at anything like the required scale. If this is not in itself to inflict suffering on the entire population regardless of combatant status (again, Hamas constitute 0.013% of the Gazan population), what is? Lincoln proposed that a limb is wisely amputated to save a life. Well, what is it to starve the entire life to punish the limb?

In Israel's military operations too, evidence is mounting that its efforts to protect civilians are not as concerted as its allies and well-wishers would like. Since October 7th, Israel has dropped over 29,000 bombs on Gaza (again, a population that is 99.987% non-combatant). This density of bombardment, one former UN war crimes investigator said, has "not been seen since Vietnam". United States intelligence has revealed that nearly one in every two of these bombs was 'dumb', a form of unguided, imprecise munition. Military experts have suggested the use of 'dumb' bombs "undercuts the Israeli claim that they are trying to minimize civilian casualties." Finally, a recent New York Times investigation has found that "[d]uring the first six weeks of the war in Gaza, Israel routinely used one of its biggest and most destructive bombs in areas it designated safe for civilians".

The US has noted the difference between Israel's statement concern for civilians and the results on the ground. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has called it a "gap". That's one way of putting it. Another would be: an egregious failure to meet the standards of conduct demanded by international law. Israel is a sophisticated military power the US is presently fanning with billion-dollar checks. Failure in its humanitarian obligations is inexcusable.

"Israel has a right to defend itself."

It certainly does. Nobody in their right mind could expect a country attacked in the way Israel was on October 7th to just shrug it off as "shit happens". But who defends themselves by killing thousands of women, children and other non-combatants? (The United Nations estimates that almost 70% of those killed in Gaza - at time of writing, a total of nearly 21,000 - are women and children.) What military purpose does that serve? What does it achieve except exactly the combination of loss and bitterness in which extremism takes root? As I have mentioned, support for Hamas in Occupied West Bank has now almost tripled to 44% since October 7th. Israel might as well be handing out Hamas kitbags.

Military precision in accordance with international law is very firmly within Israel's capability. It is also very firmly within its duty if it wishes to remain a respected member of the world order. In addition to its right to defend itself, Israel has an obligation to defend itself responsibly.

"There was a ceasefire on Oct 6th. Hamas broke it. Everything that happened afterward is on Hamas."

On October 6th the Palestinians in Gaza were enduring their sixteenth year of blockade by Israel and Egypt. (David Ben-Gurion himself called a blockade "an act of war" - when Egypt was doing it to Israel, that is. Sadly, we cannot ask him what he thinks now that Israel and Egypt are doing it to Gaza.)

I cannot tell you what words a Palestinian would choose for the impact of this sixteen-year siege on life in Gaza before October 7th: its crippled economy, its dependency on humanitarian aid to combat food insecurity, its Haiti-level poverty. I doubt very much, though, that among those words would be "peaceful". One human rights organization called conditions in Gaza under the blockade "unlivable... unconscionable".

If Israel alone is allowed to define what war is, then, yes, there was a ceasefire on October 6th. But definition is collaborative and takes into consideration both sides.

Make no mistake: even if decades of oppression were to be considered tantamount to war by another name, terrorism is not a legitimate response. But that same precision in meaning that puts terrorism beyond legitimacy must also apply to "ceasefire". If terrorism is not legitimate (and it isn't) because it hurts innocent civilians indiscriminately, then how can a blockade that hurts innocent civilians indiscriminately be legitimized with words like "ceasefire"? Both terrorism and the Israel-Egypt blockade are obstacles to peace that have no place in the future for this region.

"Hamas is using civilians as human shields. That makes Hamas responsible for the civilian deaths in Israel's bombardment, not Israel."

The use of "human shields" is a war crime, and one Israel has claimed Hamas is perpetrating. As the investigation of war crimes is not an overnight thing, particularly in the present climate of restricted access and relentless bombardment, this claim has not yet been independently verified. Were it proven true, it makes no difference to Israel's responsibilities under international law. Paragraph 8 of Article 51 of the Geneva Convention makes very clear that a war crime on one side in no way releases the other from Article 57, which mandates "constant care" and "all feasible precautions" to protect civilians. Bombing an entire building you know to be full of civilians because you figure a bad guy is in there is not to take "constant care" and "all feasible precautions". There is no cover under international law for disregard for civilian life.

"Young people supporting Palestine are so ignorant. If only they'd read a history book."

Because unconditionally supporting Israel as it repeats the exact same mistakes that the US made after 9/11 is to learn from history? Right...

"Hamas numbers for the Palestinian dead should not be trusted. Those numbers are probably made up!"

In November 2023, the US State Department confirmed the numbers are not only probably accurate, they are in fact likely an undercount.

(Note that the Gaza health ministry - part of the Hamas government - does not distinguish between civilian and combatant deaths in its numbers. So when we quote Gaza health ministry figures, that includes dead Hamas fighters as well. As mentioned earlier, the United Nations estimates that two-thirds of the Gaza health ministry total are women and children. Remember that the IDF numbers Hamas fighters in Gaza at 30,000 - meaning most men in Gaza are not Hamas fighters. So, of that remaining third of the dead, a considerable number are also going to be innocent non-combatants; simply being male is not culpability!)

"Since 1948, Israel has done everything it can to bring about a two-state solution but Palestinians have turned down all offers. Palestinians just don't want peace!"

Over the years, there have been painstaking efforts from multiple governments - Israeli, Palestinian and international - to fix this thing. That much is true. Dehumanizers like to get into Wikipedia-sprinkled spats about the time way back in [insert fargone year here], when Palestinians had their chance for peace and blew it. The energy this brings feels very unhelpful and exploitative, because those using the past to justify punishing Palestinians sometimes weren't even alive at the time, may have no idea what the deal actually said, and, like everyone else, have no special access to the thoughts of Palestinians about it either way.

So, in the spirit of a bored therapist to a married couple, may I suggest we shut the fuck up about the past and let's start working on a way forward from here. There is a huge impediment to this goal that cannot go unaddressed. Whatever was the case in the past, and whatever is the level of Palestinian desire for a two-state solution these days (polls continue to show majority Palestinian interest in a two-state solution, but that majority has dropped from substantial in 2006 to slim in July 2023), here is the reality now: it is Netanyahu and his far-right base who do not want a two-state solution.

If you have any doubt of this, here's Netanyahu last week boasting of having prevented a Palestinian state. In recent years he was so committed to preventing statehood, in fact, that, as the New York Times reports, he "not only tolerated... [but] encouraged" million-dollar monthly payments from the Qatari government to Hamas. Netanyahu figured that if things were bubbling along nicely (reality: miserably) in Gaza, there would be no agitation for a two-state solution. They'd all just Fuhgeddaboudit! Let me say that again: Netanyahu was happy to perpetuate the funding of a terrorist organization in order to dodge two-state talks. If this does not immediately and permanently disqualify Netanyahu from office, I'm not sure what does.

It's not clear, though, that simply removing Netanyahu would solve the problem. What also needs to go with him is rightwing Israel's deluded ideas about Jewish entitlements. For example, the Likud party's founding charter in 1977 includes the line, "Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty." Judea and Samaria is Israel's name for Occupied West Bank. That territory is internationally recognized as Palestinian, and any alt narrative coming out of the Israeli far-right is as noxious as Russia's alt narrative about Ukraine.

As for the offers put to the Palestinians over the years: are we to assume these offers were so immaculately fair that they could not reasonably be turned down? Or is it that the Palestinian people are obliged to accept any offer put to them, even if it is a lousy one? Why?

All reasonable offers to the Palestinians would radiate outward from the recognition that the two indigenous people at war here are equals in their ancestral claim to live on this land. So let's see an offer that does that.

"To criticize Israel is anti-semitic. If you support Palestine, the truth is, you hate Jews."

There are numerous aspects of the Israeli government's conduct and policy (particularly under Netanyahu) that simply will not align with human rights, and for which criticism of that government is therefore not only warranted but imperative.

There is Israel's indiscriminate and disproportionate military violence both before and since Oct 7th; its detention and mistreatment of Palestinians, including children, without due process; its open flouting of international law over settlements in Occupied West Bank, sometimes with unpunished Israeli violence; and its racially discriminatory Nation-State Law of 2018 that Arab parliamentary members called "apartheid". Human rights organization after organization after organization (including Israeli ones) have cried foul over the conduct of the Israeli government and military for years, and the international response has been feeble, to say the least. This cannot be defended without invoking a double-standard: one rule for literally everyone else in the world, and another for Israel.

There is no principle of equality or justice that permits such a double standard. It follows that those shutting down reasonable criticism of the Israeli government are not acting on any principle of equality or justice. What that leaves is agenda and self-interest. Nothing motivated by agenda and self-interest, absent any principle of equality or justice, should be encouraged in society. Logically, all it does is perpetuate inequality and injustice.

And by the way, do you know a key tenet of Judaism? The fearless defense of human rights. To criticize the Israeli government for its disregard for human rights is an articulation of Judaism, not an attack on it.

"Israel has a right to exist." / "Never again is now."

These mantras are totally meaningless unless they are applied with equal fervor to all human beings. Every person alive has a "right to exist", regardless of their nationality, religion, political beliefs, voting history, or anything else. Accordingly, every human right possessed by an Israeli is mirrored by an equal right in a Palestinian. "Never again" means that persecution and violence inflicted on an entire people because of their identity must never happen again anywhere in the world, to any people in the world, including Palestinians. Jews and Arabs, Israelis and Palestinians, all have an equal right to exist.

"Palestinians have brought this misery on themselves by refusing to accept the Biblical right of Jews to all the land."

Respectfully, I disagree. The Bible is not a legal document. The barbarity of the Holocaust (orchestrated by white Christian Europeans - a reminder to Islamophobes that extremism comes in all shapes and sizes) propelled Jews to officialize as our homeland territory that we falsely declared a "land without a people". There were people in it, in fact, and they have an absolute and equal right to co-exist and have respected their ancestral claim to a homeland in this region as well. That means an absolute and equal right to thrive and to roam freely in self-governed space without byzantine roadblocks, "security" raids on their homes, arbitrary detention, violence of any kind, or Israel's permission for anything.

Equally, Israelis have an absolute and equal right to thrive and roam freely without safe rooms, bomb shelters, rockets, violence of any kind, and the all-hours paranoia induced by a next-door terrorist organization obsessed with their destruction.

Finally, every person the world over has a right to see all alleged war crimes by Hamas and Israel painstakingly investigated without bias or outside influence, and with the responsible parties tried in an international court when the evidence warrants. One sure way to dishonor the memories of all those who perished in the Holocaust would be to allow any parties of war to trounce all over the Geneva Conventions (formulated in part because of the Holocaust), and then have the international community do absolutely nothing.

Very few of us, condemned to watching events unfold from thousands of miles away, can do anything to ensure that any of the above happens. But there is one thing we can do, all of us. We can choose to call out and condemn the very dehumanization through which Jews were once themselves reduced to less-than-animal status. Nothing that Hamas has done reduces in any way the humanity of Palestinian civilians and our obligations to them per our own humanity.

If we do not speak up against the dehumanization of Palestinians, then, for the rest of our lives, each of us owns a little piece of the consequences. Gaza will not be the only thing in ruins. So will any sense of self we might have that isn't hollow with hypocrisy and shame.

In dehumanizing Palestinians, we dehumanize ourselves. Stop.