Laws to be introduced this week include up to two years in prison for distributing, displaying or reciting prohibited phrases to harass or offend
Stupid ass government
From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free
what river, what sea, free from what, how is that to be done, free to do what?
From the Indian to the Pacific Australia will be Aboriginal specific.
⬛
🟡
🟥Get packing, Whitey🧨 💥
The fuck?
I don’t understand all of the connotations of the phrase, (I doubt queensland parliamentarians do either). I do understand palestinians ancestral land is bordered by the river and the sea.
That said, this sounds very much like making wrong think a crime. Nobody is allowed to acknowledge that Israel used to be Palestine because that would upset the Israelis.
In Australia in the last decade there has been a movement towards recognising first australians as the traditional owners of the land on which we live and work. It’s often mentioned in podcasts, emails, public announcements et cetera. More and more signage has both European and Aboriginal place names.
The term “truth telling” has emerged to describe the practice of acknowledging historical facts rather than pretending they didn’t happen.
If a group of indigenous Australians chanted “from the desert to the sea”, would that be hate speech ?
Nobody is allowed to acknowledge that Israel used to be Palestine because that would upset the Israelis.
It never existed as a state. It was “The British Mandate of Palestine”.
Am not saying it shouldn’t exist as a state in future, just being pedantic with the history.
Jordan is effectively a Palestinian state.
If your slogan implies genocide, as your example also does, yes it is hate speech. You cannot undo colonization by disposing the occupiers. Any nation is occupying some native land in one form or another.
You’re going to have to elaborate on how “from the desert to the sea” implies genocide.
It means there won’t be any Israelis left between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
Hamas’s stated purpose for existing is to vanquish not only the state of Israel, but all Israelis and more broadly all Jews. That’s overtly genocidal.
And before you call me a zionist, I don’t support the Israeli government. What it’s doing to Palestinians is atrocious. But I’m capable of discerning between Israelis and the the Israeli government, just like I’m capable of discerning between Palestinians and Hamas.
Israelis and Palestinians alike deserve peace, justice, security, autonomy, and self-determinism, just like every other human being in the world deserves these things.
The Israeli government and Hamas, on the other hand, are both genocidal organizations and need to be replaced with something more civilized.
It doesn’t, any more than “from the river to the sea”.
The only way you can think “river to sea” slogan implies genociding the Israeli occupiers is if you can’t possibly imagine any other way to transfer ownership than brutal imperialistic colonizer-like expansion. You know, like what Israelis are currently doing to Palestinians.
Framing it as “you’re calling for genocide” is just another way zionists try to conflate criticism of Israel with antisemitism.
It seems to me like people like this are telling on themselves that they’re stuck in Colonial/imperial mindsets and lack imagination.
In the 1960s and 70s it became the signature phrase of the Palestine Liberation Organization to indicate the replacement of the State of Israel with a State of Palestine extending “from the river to the sea,” including the expulsion of Jews.
Hamas have since called for the expulsion of all Jews.
Hamas proclaims it in its 1988 founding, charter document, The Hamas Covenant. The second paragraph declares to all the world that, “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.” The introduction section promises “[o]ur struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious” and will only end when “the enemy is vanquished and Allah’s victory is realized,”
It refers to genociding the Jews to get back the area. Technically it doesn’t, like saying ‘all lives matter’ isn’t technically anti-black, but it is. Wearing a swastika might mean you support the Hindu notion of well-being, but it doesn’t.
Symbols have meaning and hiding behind technicalities allows dog whistling and regressive behavior.
Yes, Israel is abhorrent in its actions in Gaza, and a form of shared peaceful cohabitation in the area would be ideal. But allowing slogans that are known to represent genocide, doesn’t help.Sure. But at some point the symbol takes on a new meaning. No one (in the west) is wearing a hindu peace symbol, thats no longer the intent/meaning of that symbol.
And I’d say 99% of people in Australia saying river to the sea aren’t supporting the original intent of the Hamas documents and ideals.
They know the connotation. They are supporting Hamas. If they had an aversion to supporting Hamas, they’d steer clear of it. It’s clear dog whistling.
dumb as fuck
The same activists who claim this is a totally peaceful statement claim “From the river to the Sea, Israel will be free” is appalling and horrifying.
They know what they are doing.
Where’s all the people that were saying that these laws only would apply if the people involved were part of a recognised hate group?
That is a recognized hate slogan. Western activists claim it is ambiguous. Discuss.
Ha. “Between river and sea” is the motto of Mosman Park council in WA.
Hate crime?“🎵 FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA, ISRAEL WILL BE FREE 🎶”
What… You are outraged by this song ? Why?
Israel is a genocidal fascist ethnostate and it should be dissolved and their government arrested, tried for crimes against humanity, and executed. This is the absolute bear minimum any human should accept. We should not tolerate these actions.
Do you mind telling the audience what your plan entails for all the Israeli civilians living in Israel, many of whom don’t approve of their government or its actions?
