#i/p //

[barszcz-czerwony-i-biali]

I hate how every time something like this happens all the news is like well not all of the Jews were being perfect saints so this is why the violence against them occured.

I'm so tired....

[xclowniex]

I have seen multiple posts going around making fun of, or minimizing, what happened in Amsterdam from antizionists. So I want to give a timeline of what happened.

Pre the attack:

Before people arrived in Amsterdam for the football match, there were people organizing the pogrom. Stuff like wanting to steal jews passports, were shared on social media. Yes, the word used on social media was jews not Israelis. The main people organizing the attack were arab and muslim. We do not know at this point if all the attackers were arab and muslim, but we do know that at least a majority were. This fact does not mean that all Muslims and arabs want to harm all jews, however the extremism which lead to the attack and antisemitisms place in it can and should be talked about.

The Israeli government got wind of this attack and warned the Netherlands Police, who decided to not do anything to protect jews.

This did not happen because the Israeli team lost, despite what certain people are saying.

Day before or of the attack (unconfirmed which day it was):

Once in Amsterdam, there were some fans who did tear down Palestinian flags and chant a racist anti arab chant. Whilst this is still very much racist and should be labeled as such as viewed as bad, it's not out of character for for European football culture, and has happened before with other fans which have not lead to them being hunted down. The pogrom was pre planned and still not a proportional response.

The attack:

Jews were hunted down, beaten, run over, and many more things. They were also forced to say "free gaza" and "free Palestine"

The attack harmed far more than just those who were racist. They attacked jews and anyone they perceived as Jewish indiscriminately.

Jews were saved by an Arab Israeli football player speaking to them loudly in Arabic so people assumed they were arab Israeli or just Arab.

A Greek man was attacked because he could not prove to the attackers that he wasn't jewish and was in fact Greek.

A brittish man was punched because he helped save jews. And when he told his attackers that he was brittish and not israeli or jewish (not sure if he wasn't, but he told his attackers he wasn't), he was told "but you helped a jew"

Jewish businesses were also broken into.

How and why it is antisemitic:

If at this point, you still cannot see why it was an antisemitic attack, let's recap.

• It was a planned attack on jews, not Israelis, jews. And it was planned before any racist things happened.

● jews were spared if they were perceived to be non jews, including being perceived as arab Israeli and non jews were attacked for being perceived as jews and for helping jews

• Jewish businesses were broken into. If it was about breaking into zionist businesses, ones own by non Jewish zionists also would've been broken into, but they were not.

• Non Israeli jews were attacked

It is antisemitic, as the targets of the attack were specifically jews. It was not revenge for palestine or for racist comments.

Israel intervened and flew people out of Amsterdam as it was no longer safe for jews in the city. Not because they lost the match.

[mascula-sappho]

a free multiethnic Palestine requires you to stop murdering Jews and taking them hostage.

[kosherkept]

was it not less than 24 hours after the amsterdam pogrom that people began to justify the attacks by saying “oh well, the jews weren’t all the best people to ever live, so any jew who isn’t a saint probably deserves it anyway.”?

there is no such thing as a “good jew.” you may be “one of the good ones” for a time, if you disavow israel enough, but eventually the “bad jews” who won’t do that just won’t be enough anymore. antisemites will want more targets and you’re next on the chopping block. the only thing that trying to make yourself into “one of the good ones” will do is buy yourself time. and i don’t believe any of you are honestly wise enough to know what to do with that time. who would be? the goal posts shift too fast.

i can’t stop thinking about the man who was recorded in the alleyway telling his attackers “i’m not jewish, im not jewish,” to try to get them to leave him alone, but he got assaulted anyway. after he finishes talking he gets punched clean across the face. was he jewish? i have no clue. but whether he was or wasn’t: trying to distance himself from jewish people wasn’t good enough. they wanted him hurt or dead anyways. once antisemites have recognized you as a jew, as best, you have a little bit of time to spend on some very thin ice before they decide you’re up next. at worst, that happens, because they don’t even listen to you. this whole thing makes my head hurt. pay attention during purim for the love of g-d, for my sake.

[notaplaceofhonour]

Update/clarification: the screenshotted slide was quietly deleted from the post.

The rest of the post is still there, otherwise intact as far as I can tell. It’s still making the same core claim of a “retraumatization machine” in which “sane voices” are “drowned out by propaganda feeding our emotions by weaponising charged language and associations”. in the original version of the post, the screenshotted slide makes it clear the “charged language and associations” in question is the understanding that the attacks were a pogrom. with that slide removed, the point isn’t changed, it’s just left to the reader to fill in the blanks as to what they mean by “charged language and associations”.

Except, the original post already explained exactly what they meant. And if that isn’t convincing enough, they also clarified in an insta story what they meant, and it’s very clear they’re a) dodging any acknowledgment that they might have been wrong—if people are offended it’s not because of anything they said, it’s because their words were “misinterpreted” or we’re too in our feelings because of trauma to see reality—and b) the crux of the post is that “in order for us to… understand how to move forward” we must “recognize the difference between this attack and a pogrom”.

As of the time of writing it’s still up and automatically expires in a few hours. I do not see how this follow-up statement could possibly be compatible with interpreting the removal of the formerly screenshotted slide as reflecting any change in position.

The fact that they can spare multiple paragraphs to defend the post, including doubling down on the idea that understanding the pogrom as a pogrom is antithetical to combatting antisemitism (???), and they can’t be bothered to issue a single sentence retraction when they remove a slide that changes nothing except obscuring its initial specificity, does not engender any trust that this change is anything more than a tactical/rhetorical move to say the same thing without having to deal with flacc for saying something so obviously offensive out loud.

Whether it’s SJP, Standing Together, or a medical journal, a good rule of thumb is: never trust redaction without retraction.

If people cannot demonstrate that they understand what they got wrong, don’t assume they do.

aaand now Standing Together is denying it was a pogrom & saying calling it that is just “feeding off our emotions” 🙃

[some-israeli-guy]

Europe needs to wake the fuck up and realize they allowed a violent, racist, savage ideology to fester within them.

Condemning violence and hatred isn't "Islamophobic". Stop throwing away your values in the name of tolerance.

This cannot be tolerated. It needs to be stamped out, deported, and jailed. Or else Europe will see themselves become the new Syria or the new Iraq.

[applesauce42069]

x

[tryingto-survivethis]

I think we were being too generous by referring to them as “useful” idiots, it appears they are more useless after all.

[boreal-sea]

Look.

I have made you a chart. A very simple chart.

People say "You have to draw the line somewhere, and Biden has crossed it-" and my response is "Trump has crossed way more lines than Biden".

These categories are based off of actual policy enacted by both of these men while they were in office.

If the ONLY LINE YOU CARE ABOUT is line 12, you have an incredible amount of privilege, AND YOU DO NOT CARE ABOUT PALESTINIANS. You obviously have nothing to fear from a Trump presidency, and you do not give a fuck if a ceasefire actually occurs. You are obviously fine if your queer, disabled, and marginalized loved ones are hurt. You clearly don't care about the status of American democracy, which Trump has openly stated he plans to destroy on day 1 he is in office.

EDIT:

Ok fine, I spent 3 hours compiling sources for all of these, you can find that below the cut.

I'll give at least one link per subject area. There are of course many more sources to be read on these subject areas and no post could possibly give someone a full education on these subjects.

Biden and trans rights: https://www.hrc.org/resources/president-bidens-pro-lgbtq-timeline

Trump and trans rights: https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/trump-on-lgbtq-rights-rolling-back-protections-and-criminalizing-gender-nonconformity

The two sources above show how Biden has done a lot of work to promote trans rights, and how Trump did a lot of work to hurt trans rights.

Biden on abortion access: https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/08/politics/what-is-in-biden-abortion-executive-order/index.html

Trump on abortion access: https://apnews.com/article/abortion-trump-republican-presidential-election-2024-585faf025a1416d13d2fbc23da8d8637

Biden openly supports access to abortion and has taken steps to protect those rights at a federal level even after Roe v Wade was overturned. Trump, on the other hand, was the man who appointed the judges who helped overturn Roe v Wade and he openly brags about how proud he is of that decision. He also states that he believes individual states should have the final say in whether or not abortion is legal, and that he trusts them to "do the right thing", meaning he supports stronger abortion bans.

Biden on environmental reform: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/10/07/fact-sheet-president-biden-restores-protections-for-three-national-monuments-and-renews-american-leadership-to-steward-lands-waters-and-cultural-resources/

Trump on environmental reform: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/climate/trump-environment-rollbacks-list.html

Biden has made major steps forward for environmental reform. He has restored protections that Trump rolled back. He has enacted many executive orders and more to promote environmental protections, including rejoining the Paris Accords, which Trump withdrew the USA from. Trump is also well known for spreading conspiracy theories and lies about global climate change, calling it a "Chinese hoax".

Biden on healthcare and prescription reform: https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2023/06/09/biden-administration-announces-savings-43-prescription-drugs-part-cost-saving-measures-president-bidens-inflation-reduction-act.html

Trump on healthcare reform: https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/07/politics/obamacare-health-insurance-ending-trump/index.html

I'm rolling healthcare and prescriptions and vaccines and public health all into one category here since they are related. Biden has lowered drug costs, expanded access to medicaid, and ACA enrollment has risen during his presidency. He has also made it so medical debt no longer applies to a person's credit score. He signed many executive orders during his first few weeks in office in order to get a handle on Trump's grievous mishandling of the COVID pandemic. Trump also wants to end the ACA. Trump is well known for refusing to wear a mask during the pandemic, encouraging the use of hydroxylchloroquine to "treat" COVID, and being openly anti-vaxx.

Biden on student loan forgiveness: https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/biden-harris-administration-announces-additional-77-billion-approved-student-debt-relief-160000-borrowers

Trump on student loan forgiveness: https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamminsky/2024/06/20/trump-knocks-bidens-vile-student-loan-forgiveness-plans-suggests-reversal/

Trump wants to reverse the student loan forgiveness plans Biden has enacted. Biden has already forgiven billions of dollars in loans and continues to work towards forgiving more.

Infrastructure funding:

I'm putting these links next together because they are all about infrastructure.

In general, Trump's "achievements" for infrastructure were to destroy environmental protections to speed up projects. Many of his plans were ineffective due to the fact that he did not clearly outline where the money was going to come from, and he was unwilling to raise taxes to pay for the projects. He was unable (and unwilling) to pass a bipartisan infrastructure bill during his 4 years in office. He did sign a few disaster relief bills. He did not enthusiastically promote renewable energy infrastructure. He created "Infrastructure Weeks" that the federal government then failed to fund. Trump did not do nothing for infrastructure, but his no-tax stance and his dislike for renewable energy means the contributions he made to American infrastructure were not as much as he claimed they were, nor as much as they could have been. Basically, he made a lot of promises, and delivered on very few of them. He is not "against" infrastructure, but he's certainly against funding it.

Biden was able to pass that bipartisan bill after taking office. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Plan that Trump tried to prevent from passing during Biden's term contains concrete funding sources and step by step plans to rebuild America's infrastructure. If you want to read the plan, you can find it here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/build/guidebook/. Biden has done far more for American infrastructure than Trump did, most notably by actually getting the bipartisan bill through congress.

Biden on Racial Equity: https://www.npr.org/sections/president-biden-takes-office/2021/01/26/960725707/biden-aims-to-advance-racial-equity-with-executive-actions

Trump on Racial Equity: https://www.axios.com/2024/04/01/trump-reverse-racism-civil-rights https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-37230916

Trump's racist policies are loud and clear for everyone to hear. We all heard him call Mexicans "Drug dealers, criminals, rapists". We all watched as he enacted travel bans on people from majority-Muslim nations. Biden, on the other hand, has done quite a lot during his term to attempt to reconcile racism in this country, including reversing Trump's "Muslim ban" the first day he was in office.

Biden on DEI: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/06/25/executive-order-on-diversity-equity-inclusion-and-accessibility-in-the-federal-workforce/

Trump on DEI: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-tried-to-crush-the-dei-revolution-heres-how-he-might-finish-the-job/ar-BB1jg3gz

Biden supports DEI and has signed executive orders and passed laws that support DEI on the federal level. Trump absolutely hates DEI and wants to eradicate it.

Biden on criminal justice reform: https://time.com/6155084/biden-criminal-justice-reform/

Trump on criminal justice reform: https://www.vox.com/2020-presidential-election/21418911/donald-trump-crime-criminal-justice-policy-record https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/05/trumps-extreme-plans-crime/678502/

From pardons for non-violent marijuana convictions to reducing the federal government's reliance on private prisons, Biden has done a lot in four years to reform our criminal justice system on the federal level. Meanwhile, Trump has described himself as "tough on crime". He advocates for more policing, including "stop and frisk" activities. Ironically it's actually quite difficult to find sources about what Trump thinks about crime, because almost all of the search results are about his own crimes.

Biden on military support for Israel: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/biden-obama-divide-closely-support-israel-rcna127107

Trump on military support for Israel: https://www.vox.com/politics/353037/trump-gaza-israel-protests-biden-election-2024

Biden supports Israel financially and militarily and promotes holding Israel close. So did Trump. Trump was also very pro-Israel during his time in office and even moved the embassy to Jerusalem and declared Jerusalem the capitol of Israel, a move that inflamed attitudes in the region.

Biden on a ceasefire: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2024/06/05/gaza-israel-hamas-cease-fire-plan-biden/73967659007/

Trump on a ceasefire: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-israel-gaza-finish-problem-rcna141905

Trump has tried to be quiet on the issue but recently said he wants Israel to "finish the problem". He of course claims he could have prevented the whole problem. Trump also openly stated after Oct 7th that he would bar immigrants who support Hamas from the country and send in officers to American protests to arrest anyone supporting Hamas.

Biden meanwhile has been quietly urging Netanyahu to accept a ceasefire deal for months, including the most recent announcement earlier in June, though it seems as though that deal has finally fallen through as well.

[normal-thoughts-official]

Please stop seeing politics as an identity and start seeing it as a collective means for change

[xclowniex]

So an actual pogrom just fucking happened in Amsterdam

And like, either way you spin it, as just anti israel or anti jew, it's still fucking disgusting and sickening.

Like you can boycott the Israeli soccer team for playing and be upset at that, and boo at people for supporting them, but to actually attack the supporters?????? That's like 10 steps too far.

And not all of the supporters were Israeli, there were Dutch and other European jews there, showing up to support the team.

Assuming the only motivation is being anti israeli, it's still absolutely sickening and wrong to attack Israelis and people supporting an Israeli soccer team for literally supporting a soccer team. Like call for a boycott of the Israeli team, protest their ability to play in the Netherlands. But to attack their supporters? That's fucked up and too far.

And this certainly isn't freeing Palestine. This isn't telling jews who are thinking about moving to Israel to not move. It's not telling Israeli jews to up and leave israel. It's telling jews both diaspora and Israeli, that Israel is the only safe place for us. Which should not be the message people are portraying, but it is.

And I don't want to scare monger and go "Israel is the only safe place for jews" as A) it shouldn't be and B) it's not. That is just the message people around the world are sending, intentional or not.

And whilst being anti israel seems like the main motivation, there is heavy antisemitic undertones because of the message this attack has sent. Like you can't see this and go "erm it's purely because they're anti israel". Because there has been no documented attack on a sports team supporters because of the teams country. And if there has been, which I will concede if I've missed one or two, like it's not common and this would then be one of the first instead of the first. Even when kiwis protested the springbok rugby tour here in NZ during aparthied, there wasn't any mass attacks. You're telling me that the thing which sets Israel a part from other countries, being the only jewish state in the world, plays no part in this pogrom at all? Nah, you'd have to be actually insane to think that

Edit: apparently the attackers were posting on social media before the attack that they were going to steal "jews passports" not israeli, jews. You can't tell me antisemitism was never a fucking part in this shit

[a-very-tired-jew]

Part of what deradicalized me from a lot of my extreme Leftist positions was this continuous "Liberals" and "neo-Liberals" are bad speech that I kept seeing on the Left.

The Left is just as bad as the Right when it comes to "owning the Libs" and it makes no sense.

Both sides have used "neo-Lib, neo-Liberal, Lib, and Liberal" as a pejorative to mean the same thing, which is incorrect and detached from their actual meanings, and it's alarming.

If you claim to be a progressive Leftist who is worried about XYZ, then why are you using pejorative language often used by persons who stand diametrically opposed to what you are fighting for?

That is a huge red flag to anyone in any space.

It's an indicator that whoever is using said terms is consuming and regurgitating extremist and radical politics and rhetoric that overlaps in the back of the horseshoe. What they say they're fighting for might be something you wholly agree with, but the manner in which they go about it and the rhetoric they use is poisoned and should be avoided.

Khymani is a very clear example of this, as well as many of these other college aged activists. We see them use antisemitic terminology coined by the KKK and other hate groups. We see them use rhetoric and terminology that can only come from the back of the horseshoe in the radical sphere that has creeped its way up into activist spaces.

So be aware of where you are in your fights. Be aware of the language people are using. If there's a charismatic figurehead or leader using terms you've only heard the worst people use before, the likelihood is that person is also one of those worst people. They're just in a flavor you can handle.

In a since-deleted post on X, James acknowledged in April that he had said several months earlier in an Instagram Live video: “Zionists don’t deserve to live,” and “Be grateful that I’m not just going out and murdering Zionists.”

...

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the [CUAD] group said in its statement. “Where you’ve exhausted all peaceful means of resolution, violence is the only path forward.”

[thecorvidforest]

in light of a four day ceasefire in Gaza being agreed upon, i am once again asking you all not to lose sight of the big picture. Biden and the Israeli Government are trying to frame this as a major democratic victory and as a favor respectively. they have no intention of a total ceasefire. they have no intention of stopping their genocide. remember - a ceasefire is the very first step. it’s not even the bare minimum.

the absolute bare minimum in this situation is 1) a complete ceasefire and immediate humanitarian aid in Gaza, 2) complete halt of all military foreign aid to the Israeli government, 3) the Israeli government being prosecuted for its war crimes in the International Criminal Court, and 4) land back and reparations for the Palestinian people. free Palestine means free Palestine, not just temporarily stop carpet bombing Palestine.

a temporary ceasefire is something, but it’s not even close to the end goal. we cannot let up pressure when things seem to be looking up. keep protesting, boycotting, spreading awareness, contacting politicians, etcetera. keep your eyes on Gaza. free Palestine.

[deulalune]

Bethlehem, Palestine.

Usually there is a festive parade to celebrate Christmas.

But today it is a silent march for the lives lost in Gaza.

20,000K+ dead. Countless under the rubble and so many more injured.

[alexcaninnit]

Today is the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. Keep talking about it. Keep it on the front page. Do not let a genocide continue in silence.

[gingerswagfreckles]

I think people need to understand that when someone says the situation in Israel/Palestine is complicated they are not necessarily saying that the discussion of who the oppressor vs oppressed is complicated. The Israeli government has been oppressing the Palestinians for a very long time, that is clear, and it is not complicated to understand that at least since the 80s they have had dramatically more financial and military power to keep control of the territory in the way they like.

However, it is reductive and dismissive to insist that there is no complexity in the potential ways to move forward to bring peace to the region. Despite what people on tumblr.edu like to believe, "Israel should never have been created" is not a practical solution to an incredibly heated geopolitical situation in the present day. Israel was created and it does exist. 10 million people live there. 74% of the population is native born and the country has existed for 75 years. Hand waving these fact away with the opinion that "they should move back to where they came from" may make you feel good about being a Radical Leftist, but it does not give anyone a road map for how exactly millions of people without dual citizenship are supposed to just up and evaporate. Nor does it acknowledge the reality that 21% of Israelis are Arabs, the very people you are claiming to want to give the land back to.

Insisting that there's nothing complicated about expecting an entire country's population to willingly dissappear with no consequences is not a productive way to think about this conflict. It ignores the many massive superpowers that have an interest in proping up different states in the region, the power dynamics involved in any land back movements, and the inevitably negative consequences of totally dissolving an established state without a plan. It is also completely and almost comically unrealistic, so much so that it makes it hard to believe that anyone who's opinion starts and ends with this idea really gives a shit about anyone who lives in the area as much as they care about their online leftist clout.

There's nothing complicated in understanding that the Israeli government is and has been maintaining an oppressive apartheid state for decades. It is, however, very complicated to come up with a realistic way to resolve some of the most intricately entangled land disputes on the planet without plunging the region into total chaos. Not everyone has to be deeply educated on every geopolitical situation, but it is very hard to take people seriously when they know nothing about the politics or history of a region and yet insist that there is nothing complicated about it at all.

There's a lot of people on this website who are getting dangerously smug about their own ignorance, and are starting to go down Qanon type anti-intellectual paths in the name of being sufficiently radical. Not knowing the details of a very convoluted land dispute isn't something to brag about online as you call for intentionally reductive solutions. You can support the Palestinian cause and be aware of the oppression they have faced while also holding off on calling people trying to do real analysis and de-escalation work bootlickers. We need to get control of the urge to fit every global issue into a simplistic YA novel narrative structure that appeals to Western revolutionary fantasies.