
Canada
Caryma Sa’d is an Ontario lawyer who operates a protest-focused content business via @CarymaRules (X) and @carymasad (IG) where her coverage, partly crowdfunded, centers on pro-Palestinian protests and has drawn criticism for exposing activists to harassment and job loss.
Through @CarymaRules & @carymasad, Ontario lawyer Caryma Sa’d runs a partially crowdfunded protest-monitoring business. Critics argue her coverage misrepresents pro-Palestinian activism, exposes protesters to harassment, and has led to workplace firings, despite neutrality claims
Law & Lobbying
Caryma Sa’d was previously active as a tenant/landlord lawyer in Ontario and continues to hold a license with the Law Society of Ontario.
Focus on Pro-Palestinian Protests
Since late 2023 Caryma has posted extensive documentation of pro-Palestinian marches and rallies, frequently filming participants at close range. Protesters who attempt to shield their faces are often filmed more aggressively, and the resulting footage is published online without blurring. Her account occasionally prompts followers to identify individuals, a practice critics say invites harassment. In November 2023, Caryma posted a video of restaurant staff in Toronto cheering during a pro-Palestinian march. Soon after, CBC News reported that multiple employees of Moxies were fired after the footage circulated (see below). This case has been cited by advocacy groups as evidence of how her coverage can contribute to professional and personal repercussions for participants, contradicting claims from her videographer that the platform avoids “doxxing” or targeting individuals.
Framing and Narrative Tactics
Caryma’s critics argue her protest-surveillance business relies on selective framing and misrepresentation to attempt to delegitimize pro-Palestinian activism. Several examples illustrate this pattern and more can be seen on her X account:
A line of drummers leading a march was described as giving the protest a “militaristic tone and sense of urgency.” Critics say this reframes cultural expression as threatening, fitting a broader pattern of criminalization by suggestion. In one widely criticized instance, Caryma amplified a blogger’s claim that an elderly pro-Palestinian activist was “of interest to Canadian intelligence.” The activist had previously filed a four-year complaint alleging CSIS surveillance, which was formally dismissed in 2017 by the Security Intelligence Review Committee. According to CBC News, the dismissal found no evidence to support claims of CSIS targeting (see links).
Critics argue that by repeating the claim without context, Caryma created the false impression that the activist remained under surveillance, when in fact the matter had been resolved. This has been identified as misinformation by insinuation — planting an unfounded suggestion that a lawful activist might pose a security threat.
Given CSIS’s documented history of disproportionately surveilling Muslim, Arab, and pro-Palestinian communities in post-9/11 Canada (see below) the activist’s complaint, while dismissed, was not inherently unreasonable — yet Caryma’s omission of that broader social context deepens the misrepresentation.
Protesters who resist intrusive close-range filming are often framed as abusive on Caryma’s accounts. Captions have invoked language such as “a look of pure hatred and contempt” or described reactions as “abuse of independent media.” While a small number of activists have at times reacted emotionally — sometimes pushing or grabbing cameras — critics note these are rare exceptions among thousands filmed. They argue such incidents are often provoked by Caryma and her team’s aggressive filming style, which many describe as an invasion of privacy, even in public settings.
Caryma and her team, which include videographer Adam Lee Wasserman, frequently counter this criticism with the one-liner: “You can’t expect privacy in a public space.” Legally, this is true — Canadian law generally permits filming in public. However, critics argue this misses the point: the videos posted on her account are not neutral records but are selectively framed and disseminated to a largely conservative, right-wing, and pro-Israel audience of 63,000 followers.
Posts often include unblurred faces, and in recent years, Caryma has begun posting full names and affiliations of activists. According to observers, this exposes individuals to harassment and doxxing, a risk Caryma is fully aware of given the online behaviour of her audience. Critics argue that by characterizing refusal to be filmed as harassment, while she herself publishes people’s identities without consent, Caryma inverts the reality of the situation.
Activists contend that this dynamic functions as a form of covert cyberbullying: those filmed– many of whom are racialized, Muslim or LGBTQ+ – are left with no real avenue of recourse, while the posts remain online to fuel hostile narratives against them. In practice, this dynamic leaves vulnerable individuals disproportionately targeted while Caryma’s platform and platforms themselves, benefits from heightened engagement whenever reactions occur.
Taken together, these patterns form what critics call an attempt at delegitimization: reframing lawful protesting as aggressive or unlawful while omitting the provocations and power imbalance inherent in surveillance-style documentation. Analysts argue that this combination of aggressive surveillance, misleading framing, targeted exposure, and lack of recourse constitutes a form of harassment and misinformation targeting pro-Palestinian advocacy and other vulnerable individuals and groups.
Additionally, while not every post portrays protests as dangerous, critics argue Caryma’s influence lies in her and her videographer Adam Lee Wasserman’s careful selection of moments and individuals. They consistently highlight protesters who resist being filmed, post unblurred faces, and sometimes present information with a mocking tone. Even when she avoids directly labeling participants as threatening, observers note that her audience of largely conservative and pro-Israel followers “picks up the slack” by launching harassment campaigns.
Critics emphasize that this selective amplification creates a distorted picture of the demonstrations. If a viewer only follows Caryma’s posts, they might assume that pro-Palestinian marches consist mainly of hostile encounters or moments of tension. In reality, these events are marked by camaraderie, cooperation across faiths, tolerance of differences in opinion, and even open debates with counter-protesters. Not surprisingly, when Caryma’s team isn’t there many of these incidents do not occur. By leaving out these human elements and reality, and focusing instead on heated exchanges or clips likely to spark engagement, critics argue Caryma misrepresents the broader character of the movement.
Police Involvement
Caryma frequently references law enforcement in her posts, tagging @TorontoPolice and characterizing protest incidents as matters for police or intelligence services. She and her team have filed reports against protesters; at the same time, multiple complaints have been filed against them.
Independent reporting by Elisa Hategan in 2024 (see links) documented ongoing police investigations into Caryma’s conduct. Additional allegations have included physical altercations involving her videographer Mitch Hancock, with at least x1 case reportedly under review for possible charges.
Disputed Claims of Neutrality
In September 2024, Caryma published a statement on X addressing criticism that her team provokes protesters:
“People often wonder what triggers the hostility we sometimes face within certain protest circuits. Part of the answer lies in the spread of false narratives, including claims that we intentionally provoke conflict or portray protesters unfairly … To be clear, if there were any actual provocation on our part, there would be endless footage circulating to prove it.”
Community critics contest this, pointing to videos and eyewitness accounts — including alleged instances of her videographer Mitch (@Mitch6669 on X) initiating physical violence and yelling at a group of pro-Palestinian protesters hoping they all “get blown up” — as evidence contradicting her claim.
Community Response
Advocacy groups argue that Caryma and her team’s approach — combining intrusive filming, negative framing, and direct or indirect identification of participants — contributes to a climate of fear and attempted delegitimization of pro-Palestinian advocacy. Her work has been described in analytical terms as:
Last but not least: Retaliatory Targeting
Community members have described a recurring pattern of retaliation in Caryma and her team’s tactics. Individuals or groups who resist her and her team’s filming, call out the impact of her work, or refuse to engage with her on favourable terms are often subjected to intensified focus on her platforms. This retaliation typically involves repeated posting about the same person or collective, portraying them as aggressive, disruptive, or criminal without concrete evidence. Observers argue this does not function as neutral reporting but as retaliatory harassment, designed to punish those who challenge her presence or narrative.








cbc.ca
🔒Dehumanization of Palestinians:
The systematic erasure of Palestinian history and culture is a well-documented effort that has been ongoing since the early 1900s. This erasure has taken many forms, including the destruction of physical records and infrastructure, the suppression of Palestinian voices and narratives, the appropriation of Palestinian cultural heritage and most visibly, the dehumanization of the Palestinian populace.
From the late 19th century to the mid-20th century, Palestinian records, literature, and cultural heritage faced deliberate and concerted efforts to obliterate their existence and narrative. This deliberate "archival silencing" has made reconstructing this period in Palestinian history incredibly challenging, yet the truths that remain paint a horrifying picture of the deliberate erasure and destruction of an entire population and its culture.
The dehumanization of Palestinians has been a deliberate policy, perpetuated through military operations, discriminatory laws, Israeli education and a pervasive culture that fosters prejudice. Dehumanising rhetoric, portraying Palestinians as "roaches" and "rats," lays the foundation for atrocities by stripping away their humanity in the eyes of the oppressor.
Widespread media narratives also project institutional biases ranging from depicting Palestinians solely as militants or desperate victims and erasing their normal daily life to embedding language biases around land, protests and resistance tactics. These patterns collectively indicate how public discourse within segments of Israeli society systematically dehumanize Palestinians while entrenching prejudices against them.
Distorting 'From the River to the Sea':
The purposeful distortion of the phrase "from the river to the sea" as a call for terrorism, genocide, and the expulsion of Jewish people constitutes a malicious act of disinformation designed to diminish the Palestinian struggle for human rights and self-determination. This inflammatory misrepresentation willfully misconstrues the fundamental meaning behind the expression as a vision of comprehensive freedom and dignity for all people living between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea.
Contrary to these slanderous accusations, the invocation of "from the river to the sea" represents an emancipatory ideal - the aspiration that all inhabitants of historic Palestine, regardless of ethnicity or faith, may one day live in peace, justice and equality. It articulates the hope that oppression, discrimination, and subjugation will be dismantled, giving way to a society where neither colonial dispossession nor segregation determine the fates and rights of any of its peoples.
To falsely conflate this uplifting prospect with genocide is an unconscionable act of propaganda that seeks to demonize the perfectly justifiable demands of the Palestinian people. It paints their yearning to overcome Israel's racist apartheid laws, draconian military occupation, and systemic oppression as somehow tantamount to the very injustices they continue to resist after decades of dehumanizing persecution.
Those crying "genocide" at this call for universal liberties are engaging in a cynical form of projection, perhaps of their own heinous beliefs and views as evidenced in the Likud party’s charter, where they claim ‘from the river to the sea, there will only be Israeli sovereignty’ - accusing their vulnerable victims of desiring the very atrocities that have been perpetrated against them.
Under Zionist occupation, it is the Palestinian people who have endured ethnic cleansing, massacres, land confiscation, and institutionalized discrimination under Israel's regime of supremacy. Their invocations of freedom "from the river to the sea" represent an end to such crimes against humanity, not their perpetration.
This wilful smear is an act of complicity in the continued denial of Palestinian humanity, identity, and rights. It is a shameless tactic to discredit the justness and beauty of their anti-colonial and anti-racist strivings by painting a venerable cause as something untenable and malevolent. In reality, it is those perpetuating occupation, apartheid, and displacement of the indigenous Palestinian people who are advancing the true forces of oppression and ethnic supremacy in the region.
To insist that this emancipatory vision equates to the expulsion of Jewish citizens is also a vicious deception that reinforces a paradigm of segregation and discrimination. The river to the sea idiom seeks the liberation of all peoples within historic Palestine - liberation that is fundamentally incompatible with any form of ethnic expulsion or supremacy.
Instead, it imagines a society where one's ethno-religious identity neither precludes their equality nor human and civil rights, regardless of whether they are Palestinians, Israelis, Jews, Muslims, Christians or any other component of the diverse populace.
At its core, the river to the sea idiom gives a powerful voice to the universal yearning to dismantle all forms of racist oppression, institutionalized discrimination and denial of inalienable human rights.
To brand this righteous civic ideal as genocidal or an affront to Jewish existence is a crass attempt to invert reality and defame those demanding justice, freedom and pluralistic coexistence for all the people of the land. It is a bad-faith rhetorical strategy designed to perpetuate a status quo of subjugation and ethnic domination by falsely portraying the victims as aggressors and oppressors.
Smearing protestors and inciting violence:
The reprehensible act of smearing and inciting violence against pro-Palestinian protesters – even indirectly – represents dangerous attempts to silence advocacy for human rights and suppress criticism of the oppressive policies enacted against the Palestinian people. These unconscionable tactics seek to delegitimize and demonize those standing in solidarity with the struggles against occupation, apartheid, and the denial of self-determination.
By characterizing these demonstrations as violent hate-marches not only serves as an attempt to smear demonstrators in the eyes of the general public but also gaslight them into questioning their own actions. When combined with the false narrative around how these spaces are “unsafe” for Jewish individuals, played up only by inflammatory and incendiary terms like “no go zones” to further divide the movement and block meaningful mass organising between the different pro-Palestinian, anti-genocide and anti-Zionist movements.
This provides a smokescreen to justify forcibly disrupting and violating the fundamental civil liberties of peaceful protestors and conflates lawful expressions of dissent with threats to public order, falsely portraying those decrying injustice as provocateurs and aggressors in need of subjugation by state forces.
This defamatory rhetoric has routinely been deployed by authoritarian regimes throughout history to discredit challengers to their unjust systems of domination and marginalization. By cynically equating criticism of state misconduct with impending chaos, the powerful can recast efforts to hold them accountable as threats to societal stability requiring violent suppression. These divisive strategies are no different to the age-old tactics employed by colonial regimes who label the colonized as terrorists for taking up arms in their quest for liberation.
Those who peddle such dangerous rhetoric against Palestinian activists engage in an obstruction of truth and an assault on the sacrosanct rights of free speech, free assembly and freedom of conscience. They provide ethical and rhetorical cover for the repression of noble grassroots movements born of moral outrage in the face of subjugation and apartheid policies.
This results in the violent suppression of voices by police regimes, a reality we’re already seeing unfold before our very eyes across the global north. While it’s predominantly only extremist individuals committing acts of violence against their peers who are choosing to protest against the active genocide, it’s a worrying trend that should be
Any claims of such demonstrations being “inconvenient” or “not winning any hearts” only demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the core tenets of protests, civil disobedience and the philosophy behind demonstrations. Protests, in their very nature, are intended to disrupt and cause inconvenience, because at the end of the day, they’re a community’s desperate efforts to get their peers to listen, pay attention and take direct action.
By instead ignoring these calls to action and discussing how the protests affect you personally, you not only undermine the wider collective’s efforts but shift focus away from the core goal of saving lives and ensuring equality for all.Defenders of the indefensible find themselves resorting to such duplicitous vilification because they cannot counteract substantive criticism of the injustices and human rights violations they enable through truthful argument and moral reasoning. Smears and incitements become their only available tactics to obfuscate and deflect righteous condemnation.
Those genuinely committed to democratic values and universal human rights must firmly resist such ignoble efforts to denigrate and endanger pro-Palestinian demonstrators. In reality, portraying pro-Palestinian solidarity as an incitement of violence is, in itself, an incitement against the nonviolent civil resistors who represent the continued march toward universal freedom, dignity, and adherence to international law. This vilification of protestors is merely a desperate attempt to preserve an outmoded ethnonationalist order through the weaponization of misinformation and undemocratic physical force.
Conflating Zionism with Judaism:
While the Jewish faith and cultural identity not only long predate and but have no inherent connection to the racist political ideology of Zionism, the modern Israeli regime has deliberately pursued an ethnic supremacist agenda rooted in Jewish ethno-religious identity — yet built upon the demolition of Palestinian homes, the theft of Palestinian lands and the generational uprooting, displacement and dehumanization of the Palestinian people at large.
The harrowing cost of human suffering, loss of life and deprivation of the most basic liberties and security has been unconscionable and now, Zionism represents an utterly deplorable ethnic supremacist ideology that has enabled unconscionable acts of violence, displacement and subjugation against the Palestinian people for almost a century.
Its real-world impacts have been nothing short of a calculated campaign of ethnic cleansing, cultural erasure and apartheid racism - a horrific legacy that cannot be decoupled from Zionism's founding vision of creating an exclusionary Jewish ethno-state through the denial of Palestinian self-determination and indigeneity.
The forced expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinians from their ancestral homes and villages during the Nakba, rendering millions stateless and exiled as refugees, was an act of premeditated ethnic purging. With the willful destruction of Palestinian property, demolition of homes, uprooting of ancient olive groves, and obliteration of cultural resources further demonstrating a systematic effort to erase Palestinian identity, history and any enduring claims to the land.
Subsequent decades have seen this brutal ethnic persecution, land confiscation and denial of human rights institutionalized through severely discriminatory policies, illegal settlements, violence by occupying forces, arbitrary detentions, torture, and most notably, systemic oppression under Israel's racist apartheid regime.
These are not mere "realities" for Palestinians who remain, but grave crimes against humanity perpetrated through Zionism's new brand of unrelenting, institutionalized cruelty. This utterly shameful legacy of calculated ethnic cleansing, apartheid governance and flagrant violations of international law is inextricably intertwined with how Zionism's racist, supremacist and anti-democratic ideology has been implemented on the ground by Israel.
Any attempt to decouple or whitewash these egregious atrocities from Zionism itself is a form of explicit denialism and complicity in oppression of the highest order. No ethnic, religious or any other group deserves an ethno-supremacist theocratic state constructed through the forcible subjugation of indigenous populations as second-class citizens stripped of all rights, dignity and humanity.
Such an abhorrent exclusionary system based on racial hierarchy is fundamentally incompatible with even the barest notion of true democracy, self-determination or universal human rights regardless of ethnicity or faith.
Statehood, sovereignty and self-determination can never legitimately emerge from such systematic violence, discrimination, forced displacement and ethnic persecution as political Zionism has perpetrated against the Palestinian population.
If a state were to arise organically through democratic processes that enshrine equality, safety and liberty for all citizens regardless of ethnicity or faith, it would have legitimacy. But any racist system of ethnic domination erected through brute force subjugation and calculated ethnic supremacy, as Zionism has done, is an egregious affront to justice and human rights that requires being dismantled - not enshrined - with a new equitable path forward established.
Amplified Zionist Lies:
This individual has used their voice and platform to echo and amplify egregious Zionist lies but also perpetuate the subjugation, torture, brutalisation and murder inflicted by the Israeli-occupation of Palestinian and its attempts to erase Palestinian identity, culture, heritage and statehood. [1] [2] [3] [4]
These egregious and dangerous lies MAY include but are not limited to: [5]
Spreading misinformation and hateful propaganda against Palestinians is a deplorable act of dehumanization that directly enables human rights abuses, ethnic cleansing and violence against the Palestinian people. [35] [36] [37] [38]
By employing such malicious tactics to deny Palestinian realities and whitewash war crimes, home demolitions and the systematic deprivation of human rights under military occupation, this individual has provided racist cover for 75+ years of subjugation. [39] [[40]] (https://www.un.org/unispal/document/human-rights-situation-in-opt-unohchr-23feb-2024/)
This misinformation doesn't just distort the truth, it actively endangers Palestinian lives and inflames hatred, justifies atrocities like the active genocide and obstructs any path to justice through the wilful erasure of the Palestinian lived experience. [41] [42] [43]
For more information about amplified Zionist lies, please visit:
Affirming Israel's "right to exist":
The phrase “Israel’s right to exist” is not grounded in international law but functions as a political demand designed to erase and neutralize the foundational violence upon which the Israeli state was established. No country has an enshrined “right to exist” under international law; what is codified, instead, is the right of peoples to self-determination. Yet Palestinians — an indigenous population subject to forced displacement, occupation, and apartheid — are uniquely coerced to affirm not just Israel’s existence, but its existence as a Jewish ethnostate. The demand to recognise an illegal state built on the erasure of Palestinians serves a clear colonial function: to reframe a settler-colonial project as a matter of mutual recognition, while masking the dispossession and ongoing subjugation of the native population.
Reaffirming this “right” without condition is not neutral — it is a weaponized narrative that forces the oppressed to validate the conditions of their own oppression. It silences the Nakba, the mass expulsion of over 750,000 Palestinians in 1948; it ignores the demolition of over 500 villages; it legitimizes the denial of the right of return, a right Palestinians hold under UN Resolution 194. In reality, this dog-whistle turns a settler-colonial enterprise into a moral imperative, requiring Palestinians to grant legitimacy to a state that continues to colonize their land, suffocate Gaza, fragment the West Bank, and implement apartheid policies across all territories it controls.
This language operates as a form of colonial gaslighting by shifting the global discourse from justice, land, and liberation to “recognition,” painting Palestinians as irrational or hostile if they refuse to validate a system structured on their displacement. It allows Israel to demand unconditional acceptance while giving nothing in return — not rights, not reparations, not even a meaningful recognition of the Palestinian people as equals. Internationally, it upholds a model where settler-colonialism is not only protected but sanctified, positioning Israel as eternally under threat while Palestinians are cast as aggressors for simply insisting they too have a right to exist with dignity on their ancestral land.
In this way, the assertion that “Israel has a right to exist” functions not as a principle of peace, but as a discursive tool of imperial domination, maintaining asymmetry and preventing justice. To challenge it is not to deny Jewish safety or personhood — it is to refuse the erasure of a people whose lives, land, and future have been systematically stripped under the banner of legitimacy. True peace cannot be built on the demand that the colonized affirm the righteousness of their own dispossession.
Liberal Zionism:
Liberal Zionism masquerades as a "moderate" or "progressive" strain of Zionism, blending Jewish nationalism with cherry-picked liberal values like democracy and human rights as a means to justify the existence of the illegal settler colonial ethnostate known as “Israel” [1].
And Liberal Zionism is one of the greatest threats because of its political camouflage [2]. By co-opting progressive language, Liberal Zionism inoculates Zionism against true anti-colonial solidarity, dividing the left and derailing BDS movements [3]. It ensures the ongoing Nakba – from Gaza's ruins to Hebron's checkpoints – persists under a democratic veneer, making decolonization seem radical rather than just [4] [5].
Emerging from early 20th-century Labor Zionism — the very movement that orchestrated the 1948 Nakba which ethnically cleansed over 750,000 Palestinians through mass expulsions and village destructions — liberal Zionism has always served as the velvet glove over the iron fist of settler-colonialism [6] [7].
Despite claiming it merely seeks a "Jewish and democratic state," this rhetoric is actually code for an ethnostate where Jewish supremacy trumps Palestinian equality, enshrined in laws like the 2018 Nation-State Law that demotes Arabic and prioritizes Jewish settlement [8] [9].
At its core, liberal Zionism rejects the colonial origins of Israel and instead attempts to frame the Zionist project as a "return" or "liberation" rather than a European settler invasion that erased indigenous Palestinian society [10].
As a political movement, liberal Zionism emerged as a response to antisemitism and the Holocaust but quickly pivoted to justifying land theft under the guise of "self-determination," ignoring how Zionism fits classic colonial patterns: displacement of natives, resource extraction, and demographic engineering to maintain a Jewish majority [11].
As of 2025, amid the Gaza genocide and West Bank annexation pushes, it clings to a fading two-state illusion, providing diplomatic and financial cover for Israel's crimes while silencing Palestinian voices as "antisemitic" [12].
“Zionism is a colonialism, not a simple radical nationalism: even in its left-wing version, it is a colonialist nationalism." – Zeev Sternhell, liberal Zionist historian exposing his own ideology's flaws [13].
Normalization:
Israel enforces normalization as a fundamental tactic of its settler-colonial regime and apartheid system, compelling the depiction of its occupation, ethnic cleansing, and genocide as everyday realities while suppressing Palestinian resistance and rights to justice, return, and liberation. Normalization portrays Israel's domination as a legitimate state worthy of standard diplomatic, economic, cultural, and academic engagements, ignoring demands for dismantling oppression and reinforcing Jewish supremacy over Indigenous Palestinian land and people. This strategy is egregious because it whitewashes the continuous Nakba, land expropriation, and systemic violence, isolating Palestinians and bolstering settler colonialism by undermining international solidarity and legitimizing illegal expansions that perpetuate genocide. [1]
Through diplomatic channels, Israel advances normalization via agreements like the 2020 Abraham Accords with the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco, forging full relations without mandating an end to occupation or apartheid. These pacts favor economic and security benefits for authoritarian leaders while forsaking Palestinian self-determination, directly sustaining settler violence by allowing unchecked settlement growth, home demolitions, and refugee denial amid increasing trade and tourism. Such normalization is harmful as it fragments Palestinian society, deepens territorial apartheid, and obstructs land returns, contributing to ethnic cleansing by normalizing the oppressor-oppressed dynamic without addressing root injustices. [2] [3]
Culturally and environmentally, Israel promotes "eco-normalization" through entities like the JNF, using tree-planting over razed villages to frame dispossession as advancement. Academically and artistically, collaborative projects often impose false equivalence between occupier and occupied, disregarding underlying oppression. This is egregious because it colonizes minds by presenting apartheid as inevitable, supporting occupation through deceptive coexistence narratives that erode resistance and enable further genocide, as seen in events that cover up root causes without pursuing justice. [4] [5]
The Palestinian-led BDS movement rejects normalization as complicity in oppression, mandating that joint activities with Israelis recognize Palestinian rights and focus on co-resistance against occupation, settler-colonialism, and apartheid. Normalization activities, such as festivals or conferences portraying symmetry, are boycottable for being morally reprehensible and intellectually dishonest, perpetuating false premises of equal responsibility. By isolating Palestinians and validating Israel's actions, normalization sustains settler-colonial violence, allowing expansion of illegal settlements and denial of basic rights while fragmenting global opposition. [6]
Normalization undermines the Palestinian struggle by treating Israel's regime as normal, countering anti-colonial efforts like BDS that draw from South African anti-apartheid precedents. It decolonizes minds from hegemonic attempts to accept colonialism, emphasizing that genuine relations require dismantling structures of domination first. This tactic is appalling as it reinforces genocide by whitewashing oppression under slogans of peace, contributing to ethnic cleansing through economic ties that fund military occupation and displace communities. [7] [8]
Human rights analyses confirm that such international engagements maintain apartheid by failing to address crimes like dispossession and persecution, allowing Israel to evade accountability. Normalization isolates the oppressed, portraying resistance as abnormal while entrenching settler privileges, as evidenced in Arab-Israeli projects that ignore Palestinian rights. Ultimately, it perpetuates a colonial order where occupation becomes routine, demanding rejection to achieve liberation and end the ongoing Nakba. [10]
Tell us why Caryma Sa’d should be removed by emailing us at [email protected]