What a ridiculous question. The real answer, and the one commonly accepted in any Arab country, is I don’t condemn resistance movements. I only blame them for not doing more to avoid civilian casualties that’s all.
You have to understand this question isn’t about the actual question. 90% of a debate is won by who gets to frame the issue. The other 10% is just tactical wrangling within whatever narrow frame was established, heavily favoring whoever chose the frame. This question is about framing the issue. Just don’t accept it. Don’t accept the framing. Don’t even waste a minute responding to it in any way whatsoever.
“Do you condemn the ongoing genocide? The ongoing apartheid? Do you condemn the Nakba?”
I don’t think there is a PR friendly answer as such since you either condemn hamas unconditionally or you are soft on them.
My response generally has been “Objectively the only strategy that can stop the existence of Hamas is to forcefully stop the Israeli campaign of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and apartheid, if you want to bomb Hamas out of existence that objectively means bombing every single Palestinian to death.”
This is of course, not condemning Hamas, so its not PR friendly.
“Palestine has a right to defend itself.” “Do you deny Palestines’s right to exist?”
Getting into semantic debates with imperial citizens about an objective definition of “terrorism” is useless, because “terrorism” has been effectively defined in the imperial consciousness since at least 2001 as “subhuman enemy without rights under law”.
No
