settler

This didn’t make headlines for obvious reasons, but an Orthodox seminary was set on fire and vandalized by Israeli extremists yesterday in Jerusalem. The offenders wrote “Jesus was the son of a whore” and “redemption of Zion” on the walls of the church.

I know western media outlets like to pretend that only Arab or Muslim states are responsible for the persecution of Christians in the MENA region, but its far from the truth. Israel is complicit in sectarian violence, in this case, it was settlers, but anti-Christian policies exist as well. Israel undoubtedly relies heavily on Islamophobia to justify brutality, occupation and apartheid, but at the core of it, its an ethnoreligious state and that supremacy works against all Palestinians, Muslim and Christian alike.

anonymous asked:

NOT ALL AFRICANS ARE BLACK? Yeeees they are. Everyone else is simply a long lost settler or colonizer. No one invited non native Africans into to Africa, they arrived UNINVITED and decided to permanently set up shop. It's bothersome that non-black "Africans" claim ancestry from lands they stole and invaded, fuck having a seat - TAKE A BENCH.

lol you obviously dont know anything about the continent. This ask just proves to me that you know nothing about Africa go and read a damn book. You’re looking at the world through a eurocentic/us-centric view

And let me tell you something not all “Black Africans” identify as black because they dont have to

and i didn’t say that non-native Africans are ethnically African. That post was specifically about indigenous Africans

anonymous asked:

do you think the immigration fetishism was imported mainly from america? since america pretty much gets off on being the "nation of immigrants"? (despite actually being a nation of white *settlers*)

Yes.

At least in case of Britain, that’s painfully obvious. There are quite a few people on the British pro-immigration side who adopted the American immigration narrative and even started referring to Britain as a nation of immigrants the way America is, which is simply painful to watch.

And then there’s the British media, of which I’ve got the impression that they’re desperate to be more like America, including displaying American social issues as if it were their own (to the point where there were Michael Brown protests in London). It’s just Americanism 101.

Goyim can’t use the word zionism responsibly. So call it colonialism. White goyim you have no right to distinguish Israel from your own colonized state. Israel is not specially evil. It is just like any settler colonial state. So no more zionist this, zionism that. Israel is colonial call it colonialism.

Neglected Historical Fact of the Day: Why the RedCoats?

The British Empire, largest Empire in history, was famous for many things, but one of the most notable was the nifty little Red Jackets they wore.  And as students of American history know, those didn’t always work out for them, making them extremely easy targets.  So why the RedCoats?  Well the fact is, while the jackets were not useful in the US, where most of the counter were dense forests, mountains, or swamp, most of the places where the British fought, the Red Coat was one of the greatest ideas EVAR

    See you need to understand something about combat back in the 17th/18th century, namely smoke…lots and lots of smoke.  See rifles at the time were hardly what we called accurate and unless you were some crazy person who was shooting stuff all the time (AKA American Settlers) you would be hard pressed to shoot a person standing perfectly still 15 feet away from you with their arms outstretched.  So battle formation at the time was based around grouping all of your troops together and having them all fire at once, basically making a “wall of bullets” per say, where nobody could dodge.  Here is the problem. a normal rifle fired by itself produces A LOT of smoke.  An entire line of people shooting rifles equals…even more smoke.  Multiple lines shooting in formation/rotation, yeah that is what we call a hard battle field to deal with.  And this isn’t even taking into account the cannons, enemy shots an the other units.  Battlefields at this time were basically like giant clouds, you couldn’t see a thing.  So how can you know who is your ally, and where your guys were?  Well if they were wearing a bright fucking color of Red, then hey, that is your guy, don’t shoot him.  And if they are walking one way, than that must mean its time to go that way.  And if one dude had a scarlet outfit, then hey its your boss, don’t shoot him.  Also the vast majority of battles the British fought were not in forests where random psychotic snipers were able to take a shot at you, but rather across fields, where the individual redness of a man’s outfit couldn’t really make him a target any more than you know…the line of troops he was with.  And while the Americans were freakishly good shots, remember snipers did not win the American Revolution, it was the Colonial Trained Army and our French allies, the greatest American victories were fought with the british out in the middle of fields…after sniping them for awhile.

I’ve heard it said that red uniforms would make the blood of a wounded man less notable, thus helping moral, but I don’t know if there is any actual evidence to support this written by the British themselves.  Another reason I do know for a fact is that red was a much cheaper die than what was being used on the continent, like green, blue, Violet, yellow etc.  It is also fucking scary, seeing a line of red men emerging from the smoke in perfect lines, that is what we call fucking terrifying.  

The first recorded use of the British Redcoat was the New Model Army under Thomas Fairfax and Oliver Cromwell during the English Civil War, AKA the single most badass unit in the entire war.  

Red uniforms didn’t go out of style for the British the mass adaptation of the rifle in the 1850s, and finally the invention of smokeless powder in 1880s, where suddenly visibility was a much bigger deal and the BRitish switched to Khaki.  

Many people misunderstand the nature of the struggle for Palestine. They consider Palestine to be contested land between Israelis and Palestinians. The facts about the struggle are simple: 
1. There was no entity called Israel before 1948 
2. There was no Israelis before 1948 
3. There is no meaningful verifiable connection between modern Israeli and the Israelites of the Bible. Modern Israelis are not Semitic and came to Judaism through conversions.Also, the Hebrew Bible, the only source of the mythology about Israel and the Israelites, is unreliable. 
4. European colonial settlers transported mainly from Europe settled and colonized historic Palestine by force and without the consent of the indigenous population, the Palestinians. 
5. The settler colonists established Israel in Palestine in 1948 by Jews of Jews for Jews with the active support of western colonial powers after ethnically cleansing the majority of the Palestinians, destroying more than 530 Palestinian towns and city sections, and committing scores of heinous crimes against Palestinian civilians to bring about their expulsion. 
6. Since 1948 Israel created an elaborate apartheid system that favors Jews, discriminates against the Palestinians, and is designed to maintain control and dominance of Israeli Jews over Palestinians by using genocidal methods and preventing their return, equality and normal living conditions. 
Palestine is not a contested territory. Palestine has its rightful owners, the Palestinians.Palestine is settled, colonized, and occupied by a foreign population..!

3

Israeli settlers - who live illegally on Palestinian land and shouldn’t be there in the first place - regularly destroy and uproot olive trees belonging to Palestinians, often striking at night to go unnoticed.

Olive trees are a livelihood for many families, and a key component of the Palestinian economy. That’s how they are meant to survive. 

These attacks are by no means limited to agriculture. They also burn and vandalize churchesmosques, homescars and… cemeteries

I saved the worst for last. Israeli soldiers escort Israeli settlers to attack Palestinians then stand by and watch, if not join in too. 

According to the UN the annual rate of Israeli settler attacks against Palestinians has almost quadrupled in eight years.

GIFs from 5 Broken Cameras (2011)

The women were lounging about the houses, some cleaning fish, others pounding rice; but they do not care for work, and the little money which they need for buying cloes they can make by selling mats or jungle fruits.
— 

some English lady who spent 5 weeks in Malaya in 1879 that Syed Hussein Alatas quotes in The Myth of the Lazy Native. The joke practically writes itself, but Alatas says it for us: “We may ask the author what is meant by work here? Is cleaning fish and pounding rice not work? Work here means wage earning outside the home. Are making mats and selling fruits not work? It is clear that work here means that activitiy introduced by colonial capitalism. If the ladies became coolies or servants of British planters or firm officials, she would then have considered them as working.”

So when the settler colonials say Indigenous people are lazy, they really mean “they won’t work for us to help us engineer their economy for our benefit”.

4

A list of all massacres of Indigenous Australians that happened in Victoria. I feel this information needs to be shared as people don’t know nearly enough about Indigenous Australians and do not know how horribly we were and still are treated. Nothing else needs to be said as the list tells it all. Click the photos to save a bigger image for reading the list clearly. 

Photo/display credit: Brambuk - The National Park & Cultural Centre.