Yeah all those stereotypes and tropes you spout and double down on are sure indications of Jew love.
🤣Yes, Israel Is Committing Genocide
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
🤣
That's how I know Dan hates Jews. Every position he takes would have a direct and immediate result of more Jewish deaths and long term insecurity.Yeah all those stereotypes and tropes you spout and double down on are sure indications of Jew love.
Dan flip flops. I’ve read posts where he was saying Israel wont let the Palestinians leave and next he’s saying they’re trying to evict them from their homeland. Truth is, Hamas doesn’t want to leave and their weapons and money suppliers, Iran, don’t want them to either.
Whether it’s on the playground or battlefield, don’t pick a fight with someone that can kick your ass.
Hamas doesn’t care about putting their women and children in danger.
Whether it’s on the playground or battlefield, don’t pick a fight with someone that can kick your ass.
Hamas doesn’t care about putting their women and children in danger.
Sorry Dan, no wall is impenetrable and any standing defensive position can be attacked and defeated. What you ask, while it might sound reasonable, it doesn't accomplish what you think it will.
Remember George Patton's thinking, overly relying on fixed fortifications could lead to complacency and a false sense of security. Another one of Patton's philosophies, the only sure defense is offense.
I have not flip flopped. Israel had basically imprisoned the people in Gaza, blocked their sea ports, destroyed their airports, cut off access to Egypt and made it virtually impossible to go into Israel. Oct 7 happened, an incredibly stupid move by Hamas, which gave Netanyahu and his far right Likud maniacs just the excuse they’ve waited for to kill as many Palestinians as possible and drive the remaining Gazans out, going so far as trying to bribe some of the most vile corrupt African nations to take some of them in, and then brazenly saying it would be voluntary emigration! It has been the goal of Zionists from the beginning to create an Arab-free Jewish-supremacist nation and Oct 7 allowed them to finally quit couching their rhetoric in niceties and say and do exactly what they‘ve wanted to do for a very long time. You’re trying too hard to find a flaw in my recitation of history, but this is not one.
So Israel intentionally kept them there so they could wipe them out? LOL. Who provoked it? The Palestinians had opportunities to develop and become seaport economy but chose terrorism instead. You blatantly disregard my point in the previous post. You only hear and profess what fits your narrative.
The Palestinians spent the billions in humanitarian aid on weapons and building tunnels to attack Israel.
No, Israel kept them there because they had no place else to put them. But the goal from the beginning was always to rid the land of them by hook or by crook. The Palestinian’s “opportunities to develop” is a sham, they never had much opportunity to develop because they were under the thumb of the Israeli government who had no desire to see them prosper, that would make it harder to drive them out so they could put in their own settlements, and became an occupying force that for all practical purposes controlled every aspect of life in Gaza. I’m not sure what point you made in your previous post I disregarded. Hamas doesn’t want yo leave? Check, Hamas doesn’t want to leave, it wants to go back to the land it got kicked out of. As do most Gazans I would presume. Don’t pick a fight you have no chance if winning? I couldn’t agree more! The attack on Oct 7 has to be one of the stupidest things Hamas could have done. To this day I can’t figure out what they thought would happen if they pulled off such a bloody stunt. They know they are outnumbered by a factor of 100 or so and outgunned as in rifles vs nukes. Hamas doesn’t care about putting women and children in harm's way? You may be right, but you don’t know that for a fact, you’re speculating because you see them operate from within populated areas, conveniently ignoring that *all* of Gaza is a populated area, they have no option but to put women and children in harm’s way. Maybe they don’t care, maybe they do, maybe some don’t care while others do, maybe they are so consumed with resentment and hatred they are incapable of caring. But one thing we know for sure - at least I know for sure, you apparently do not - they couldn’t operate from an unpopulated area even if they wanted to because there is no unpopulated area in Gaza. Now I can see you’ll read this and confirm to yourself once again I’m rooting for Hamas, but you’d be wrong, I’m doing my best to look at reality as it exposes itself. And reality is showing us that Hamas is evil and does evil things, and the same holds true for Israel. I’m rooting for an end to the bloodshed, not one side or the other.
Yes, exactly! Of course an argument can logically be made that every organization running a country is a terrorist organization.
I'm struggling to follow you Dan. You're recommendation was for Israel to wall of Gaza.
"In the first place take some of the billions American taxpayers are giving them every year and build an impenatrable wall with no gates between the borders, no ingress and no egress. "
For all intents and purposes, this is what Israel did prior to Oct. 07. Then in your next post you say that doing exactly that:
Which provoked the rise of Hamas and the eventual pushback against Israel.
Feel free to correct where I'm misinterpreting your statements, but it does feel like Israel is damned in your statements if they just wall them off, and they're damned in your statements if they fight back. Not seeing you give them any real options. I guess they can bend over and hope Hamas uses vaseline.
Oh, on a side note, it was Egypt that cut off access to Egypt. No sure why (/eyeroll) but they don't want the Palestinians and Hamas in their country either.
"In the first place take some of the billions American taxpayers are giving them every year and build an impenatrable wall with no gates between the borders, no ingress and no egress. "
For all intents and purposes, this is what Israel did prior to Oct. 07. Then in your next post you say that doing exactly that:
Which provoked the rise of Hamas and the eventual pushback against Israel.
Feel free to correct where I'm misinterpreting your statements, but it does feel like Israel is damned in your statements if they just wall them off, and they're damned in your statements if they fight back. Not seeing you give them any real options. I guess they can bend over and hope Hamas uses vaseline.
Oh, on a side note, it was Egypt that cut off access to Egypt. No sure why (/eyeroll) but they don't want the Palestinians and Hamas in their country either.
Riiiight. Joe the Palestinian shoe salesman was handed humanitarian aid and said “no, I don’t want it, give it those who will buy weapons I will never have access to, and dig tunnels I’ll never be allowed in, that’s a much better use in my opinion. Don’t give it to me, give it to terrorists who will cause Israel to rain down hellfire on me!”
Sorry, Ponca, but I gotta call you out on this line of utter BS.
We know that Hamas used a hospital as a staging ground for storing rockets.
And we know Hamas kidnapped children and traded them as 'prisoners of war' in a prisoner exchange for captured Hamas fighters.
These are indisputable facts. And if you can use children as chattel to barter with, then you don't care about putting them in harm's way.
Its gotta be those far left websites he's visiting to get his material from. Its clearly wearing off on him.
Obviously today’s Israeli wall was not impenetrable. I’ve only seen a couple of pictures of the damaged portion of the wall and it looked like fortified chain link fence. Maybe they could use their AI to develop a stronger wall, calculate it’s weakest points and develop ways to strengthen them while having a strong troop presence at those points until they could improve them. That’s a much better use of AI than having it calculate how many civilians are in a building and approving the bombing of it, which they are doing as we speak. The wall they have now is plenty strong enough to keep the vast majority out, but clearly it wasn’t up to the task on Oct 7. No one with the slightest objectivity could look at how Israel has treated the Gazans without recognizing they were/are basically imprisoned. Something like 85% of them have fled their homes and are displaced but can’t get out. That strikes me as classic imprisonment. Pushback by Hamas? There has *always* been pushback by Hamas, that’s why it was founded. We see it as a terrorist organization (because it is); it sees itself as a resistance movement using guerrilla tactics. Build the wall, remove the naval blockade, double up on Iron Dome, and leave them the hell alone to develop Gaza as best they can, no longer dependent on Israel for anything, no longer tyrannized by Israel. Hatred takes a long time to wither away. But the way the two sides are conducting themselves today is making the hatred grow not diminsh.
You did it again. You say to build a wall, then you say that by building the wall, Gazans were imprisoned by Israel. You can't have it both ways.
Hamas captures Israeli children and uses them for barter. That’s about as evil as it gets. But the comment you are highlighting is about Hamas not caring if their *own* children are killed or wounded. Much different context. And for the record Israel has kidnapped children in the past as well.
Hamas used a hospital as a staging area. We know that because the IDF said so, the same group that talked about a vast network of tunnels under Gaza’s largest hospital being used as a primary HQ, but - oops! - there wasn’t one. The IDF showed rockets at one hospital , therefore logic dictates that it should make every hospital unusable. That’s not sound logic. But it is an indisputable fact!
What’s the confusion? Israel built a wall to keep the Palestinians contained in Gaza. It worked so well many of the MAGA crowd pointed to it as the way a wall should be built and we should build one just like it. It kept the Palestinians contained until Oct 7, and to this day it still keeps them contained inside where they are being slaughtered like fish in a barrel. But it isn’t impenetrable, so take some of America’s taxpayer dollars and build a bigger and better one. I’m having trouble understanding what you’re finding confusing.
But now it’s late & I’m going to bed. Gotta get my beauty sleep!
I find it interesting you lay all blame on Israel for the blockade when the Egyptian's blockade is far more restrictive than that imposed by Israel. Egypt allows nothing into Gaza while all aid and materials intended for Gaza go through Israel. Why is that Dan? Why would Egypt blockade everything while Israel allows aide and materials?
Remember Obama's Arab Spring and the Muslim Brotherhoods attempted take over of Egypt? Some thinking outside the narratives you are swallowing is required to get the big picture.
Then you and Likud would get your way, Egypt would continue the blockade you so admire and Israel would shut off all land routes to get aid into Gaza through them thus starving the whole population of all life’s necessities. You and the Zionists could sit back and watch them die the slow painful deaths you wish upon them. It’s a win-win fot you!
You avoided the questions. Why do you lay blame all on Israel for blockading Gaza, while giving no credit for Israel allowing aid and materials into Gaza? Is there a very good reason for this blockade or is it just Israel and Egypt being mean?
Bottom line Dan, the Palestinians are not the innocent peace loving people you seem to think they are, they never have been. They've been kicked out of ever Arab country in the Middle East and are not allowed to enter to this day. What's up with that and do these fellow Arab countries know something you don't?
Now before you try to compare Arab countries kicking Israelis out, they didn't kick them out. Jewish hating Muslims in those countries killed many Jewish people for no other reason than they were Jewish, the rest of the Jews fled before they to were killed.
I know you want a two state solution but how do you expect that to work when both sides hate and do not trust each other. No matter how hard you try or how much you desire, you will never be able to mix oil and water.
My desire is to solve the problem. I don't give a shit about feelings, who has claim to the land, who wants the land or why. I just want the violence to stop. Israel is not going to give up their land and if push comes to shove, they will start WWIII to keep it, forcing untold suffering not only in the Middle East but around the world as well. You claim to be anti-war but you propose solutions that do nothing to keep them and us out of war. In fact your solutions perpetuate the violence and have absolutely zero chance of solving the problem.
At this point there are only two ways I see the problem being solved once and for all. Israel kicks the Palestinians asses so bad they can never pose another threat to Israel or they are separated and not allowed to interact in any manner until they are able to keep fighting each other, which maybe never. Of course either one of those option is not palatable to the Anti Israel factions but sometimes you have to choke it down for the betterment of peace.
Who knows why Egypt blockades Gaza? Who cares? The topic under discussion is the relationship between Gaza and Israel and what steps could be taken to bring peace between the two. Gaza's acrimony with Egypt, to the extent there is one, is for another thread. I was asked what I thought would help bring peace and I answered. I don't want a two state solution necessarily, I want the two sides to quit harassing and killing each other. They're both guilty, that's the only argument I've ever extended on this board. You simply can't wrap your mind around that.
US military strikes another Houthi-controlled site after warning ships to avoid parts of Red Sea
The U.S. has launched a new strike against a Houthi location in Yemen that was determined a threat, two U.S. officials tell AP.
apnews.com
@Ponca Dan The US is committing genocide. Two of the biggest armies on the planet vs Hamas err Houthi's err Iran. sic em dan
Of course you don’t want to talk about the Egyptian side of this. It complicates your narrative and shows it's not just Israel. It is all related but you won’t talk about it and only want to talk about Israel to further your Israel is the bad guy narrative. What you don't seem to comprehend is this isn't just about the Palestinians it's about the radical Muslim Caliphate movement across the Middle East. As usual the radical Muslim powers that be are using the Palestinians as cannon fodder to advance their goals yet you only see that Israel is the bad guy in this, they aren't it's the radical Muslims. Look around at the chaos going on around the world, it's not a coincidence
@Ponca Dan please comment on this give your opinion not another article or deflection sir.
On October 7, Hamas and its associates slipped into Israel, massacred more than 1,200 people and kidnapped about 240 more. As they did so, they shouted “Allahu Akbar!” (“God is Great!”) and called down curses on “Jews” (they did not use the word “Israelis”) and “dogs” as they shot them and dishonoured their bodies.
Most victims were unarmed. Some were tiny children, or very old. Many were teenagers. Rape and other sexual indignities were committed against women.
I generally dislike the use of the word “innocent” in media reports of terrorist attacks on civilians: it implies that soldiers killed in such incidents are guilty. But perhaps the word is worth using in this case. Hamas’s victims were innocent, not only in having committed no wrong, but in the looser sense – innocent of politics, extremism and of the utter wickedness that lurks in some human hearts. Many were kibbutz residents or a young music festival crowd. Their innocence was part of what their murderers wanted to destroy, like wolves on the fold.
Hamas’s greatest joy came because the great majority were Jewish. That was the victims’ only “guilt”. That was why Hamas exterminated (or kidnapped for future bargaining and torment) everyone they could find.
For a few days, the world seemed to understand this. There was no limit to what such killers would do, so people acknowledged that Israel must fight back. It was self-defence, or death.
But only for a very few days. On October 9, for example, the UN Human Rights Council met, and – before Israel had counterattacked – held a moment of silence for “the loss of innocent lives in the occupied Palestinian territory and elsewhere”. “Elsewhere” was the only word that hinted at what had actually happened two days earlier. The suppression of the truth had already begun.
It was a quick move from truth-suppression to truth-inversion. As soon as Israel went after Hamas in Gaza, international bodies, pressure groups, hostile powers and much of the media assailed the “disproportionate” response. Within a fortnight, the Muslim Council of Britain was urging its followers to write to their MP to stop the Gaza “genocide”. On Thursday, South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Hague began, presenting as legal fact the idea that Israel is committing genocide.
The South African delegation includes Jeremy Corbyn, who, famously, was “present but not involved” for a wreath-laying ceremony which included tributes to the terrorists who killed Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. He seems to be playing a similarly decorative political role on this occasion. One of the luminaries in the South African legal team is John Dugard, a former Cambridge law professor who once chaired the UNHCR’s special commission on human rights in the Palestinian territories. He is a leading advocate of the idea that Israel is an “apartheid state”.
Listening to the BBC radio news report of South Africa’s case on Thursday, I heard its diplomatic correspondent, Paul Adams, begin his analysis thus: “The last three months have been shocking enough, but hearing it all summed up by South Africa’s lawyers is devastating. How, many wonder, can this not be a story of genocide?” Many will indeed wonder that if they rely on the BBC for information. Adams’s frail sandcastle of “many wonder” is no defence against his own propagandist tide.
“Genocide” arose as a concept in international law because Hitler killed Jews. There is sadistic bad taste in using the term against the state created to prevent the repetition of such a policy. What does it say about our Holocaust education that this sly libel can be believed?
A recent press release from the Islamic Human Rights Commission describes Israel’s actions in Gaza as “textbook genocide”. What textbook? You can consult the rule itself. The Genocide Convention of 1948 identifies genocide as the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, religious or racial group, as such”. Israel’s sole battle aim is to destroy Hamas in Gaza. If the ICJ decides to regard Hamas as a group such as the Convention describes, then genocide will have become a human right, with its victims rebadged as its perpetrators.
The ICJ is a body in which states may arraign other states. In the immediate post-war world, the framers of the Genocide Convention probably did not foresee the problem of non-state actors – such as Hamas, IS and Hezbollah – who, unlike Israel, sign no convention but fight wars and grab territory, as has been the case in Gaza for many years. Such actors are beyond the reach of international law. States ill-intentioned towards Israel are hoping to achieve by politicised lawfare what a group such as Hamas attempts by unrestrained warfare. South Africa is thus the ally of Hamas.
The ICJ will take years to decide if genocide has been committed, but if it demands interim “provisional measures”, such as a ceasefire, because it suspects genocide, it could help make Israel a pariah nation if it refuses and an endangered one if it agrees.
Imagine such law being applied to Britain during the Second World War. There were powerful arguments against our bombing of German cities, which was far bloodier than anything Israel has done to Gaza. But it would have been a travesty if some non-combatant authority had told us, who were fighting a dictatorship animated by race hatred, that we were committing genocide.
If you look at the current composition of the 15-judge court, you will find plenty of judges from jurisdictions – China, Russia, Uganda, Lebanon, Somalia – where the separation between law and politics barely exists and whose undemocratic politics is anti-Israel. Israel, by contrast, operates in a law-based democracy. Aharon Barak, the judge representing his country at the Hague, is perhaps the leading jurisprudential adversary of its prime minister, Benyamin Netanyahu.
Last month, the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) compiled a 45-minute film of the October 7 massacres, not for general release. I was invited to a showing in Parliament. I refused, thinking it would be almost voyeuristic to watch such horrors. But as truth-inversion became so extreme that even some quite moderate people were denying atrocities, I changed my mind, and went to a later showing this week.
The film has no commentary. It simply reproduces, with factual captions, visual (and some audio) recordings from the day. This includes GoPro film from Hamas fighters, dashcam, mobile phone and social-media footage from the same, and a couple of intercepted phone conversations; dashcam and mobile footage from survivors and first responders; CCTV film which catches the murderous intruders, and their terrified victims failing to escape. The atrocities are explicit, but the faces of the victims are pixillated to spare the bereaved families. In some cases, pixillation is unnecessary, the faces being so mutilated by burning, beating or shooting as to be unrecognisable.
The most chilling scenes, even worse than the whooping celebrations of blood, are those in which the gunmen search to kill, stalking the little houses, shooting at torso height through a row of portaloos in which festival-goers are hiding, unearthing with head torches an entire family hiding under a table and then murdering them.
This was the worst day in the history of the state of Israel. When the victorious powers permitted Israel’s creation in 1948 (the same year as the Genocide Convention), they could not guarantee eternal protection for the Jews, but they did at least give them a fighting chance. Now many want to make their fight illegal. The grim reality is – no fighting, no chance.
On October 7, Hamas and its associates slipped into Israel, massacred more than 1,200 people and kidnapped about 240 more. As they did so, they shouted “Allahu Akbar!” (“God is Great!”) and called down curses on “Jews” (they did not use the word “Israelis”) and “dogs” as they shot them and dishonoured their bodies.
Most victims were unarmed. Some were tiny children, or very old. Many were teenagers. Rape and other sexual indignities were committed against women.
I generally dislike the use of the word “innocent” in media reports of terrorist attacks on civilians: it implies that soldiers killed in such incidents are guilty. But perhaps the word is worth using in this case. Hamas’s victims were innocent, not only in having committed no wrong, but in the looser sense – innocent of politics, extremism and of the utter wickedness that lurks in some human hearts. Many were kibbutz residents or a young music festival crowd. Their innocence was part of what their murderers wanted to destroy, like wolves on the fold.
Hamas’s greatest joy came because the great majority were Jewish. That was the victims’ only “guilt”. That was why Hamas exterminated (or kidnapped for future bargaining and torment) everyone they could find.
For a few days, the world seemed to understand this. There was no limit to what such killers would do, so people acknowledged that Israel must fight back. It was self-defence, or death.
But only for a very few days. On October 9, for example, the UN Human Rights Council met, and – before Israel had counterattacked – held a moment of silence for “the loss of innocent lives in the occupied Palestinian territory and elsewhere”. “Elsewhere” was the only word that hinted at what had actually happened two days earlier. The suppression of the truth had already begun.
It was a quick move from truth-suppression to truth-inversion. As soon as Israel went after Hamas in Gaza, international bodies, pressure groups, hostile powers and much of the media assailed the “disproportionate” response. Within a fortnight, the Muslim Council of Britain was urging its followers to write to their MP to stop the Gaza “genocide”. On Thursday, South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Hague began, presenting as legal fact the idea that Israel is committing genocide.
The South African delegation includes Jeremy Corbyn, who, famously, was “present but not involved” for a wreath-laying ceremony which included tributes to the terrorists who killed Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. He seems to be playing a similarly decorative political role on this occasion. One of the luminaries in the South African legal team is John Dugard, a former Cambridge law professor who once chaired the UNHCR’s special commission on human rights in the Palestinian territories. He is a leading advocate of the idea that Israel is an “apartheid state”.
Listening to the BBC radio news report of South Africa’s case on Thursday, I heard its diplomatic correspondent, Paul Adams, begin his analysis thus: “The last three months have been shocking enough, but hearing it all summed up by South Africa’s lawyers is devastating. How, many wonder, can this not be a story of genocide?” Many will indeed wonder that if they rely on the BBC for information. Adams’s frail sandcastle of “many wonder” is no defence against his own propagandist tide.
“Genocide” arose as a concept in international law because Hitler killed Jews. There is sadistic bad taste in using the term against the state created to prevent the repetition of such a policy. What does it say about our Holocaust education that this sly libel can be believed?
A recent press release from the Islamic Human Rights Commission describes Israel’s actions in Gaza as “textbook genocide”. What textbook? You can consult the rule itself. The Genocide Convention of 1948 identifies genocide as the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, religious or racial group, as such”. Israel’s sole battle aim is to destroy Hamas in Gaza. If the ICJ decides to regard Hamas as a group such as the Convention describes, then genocide will have become a human right, with its victims rebadged as its perpetrators.
The ICJ is a body in which states may arraign other states. In the immediate post-war world, the framers of the Genocide Convention probably did not foresee the problem of non-state actors – such as Hamas, IS and Hezbollah – who, unlike Israel, sign no convention but fight wars and grab territory, as has been the case in Gaza for many years. Such actors are beyond the reach of international law. States ill-intentioned towards Israel are hoping to achieve by politicised lawfare what a group such as Hamas attempts by unrestrained warfare. South Africa is thus the ally of Hamas.
The ICJ will take years to decide if genocide has been committed, but if it demands interim “provisional measures”, such as a ceasefire, because it suspects genocide, it could help make Israel a pariah nation if it refuses and an endangered one if it agrees.
Imagine such law being applied to Britain during the Second World War. There were powerful arguments against our bombing of German cities, which was far bloodier than anything Israel has done to Gaza. But it would have been a travesty if some non-combatant authority had told us, who were fighting a dictatorship animated by race hatred, that we were committing genocide.
If you look at the current composition of the 15-judge court, you will find plenty of judges from jurisdictions – China, Russia, Uganda, Lebanon, Somalia – where the separation between law and politics barely exists and whose undemocratic politics is anti-Israel. Israel, by contrast, operates in a law-based democracy. Aharon Barak, the judge representing his country at the Hague, is perhaps the leading jurisprudential adversary of its prime minister, Benyamin Netanyahu.
Last month, the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) compiled a 45-minute film of the October 7 massacres, not for general release. I was invited to a showing in Parliament. I refused, thinking it would be almost voyeuristic to watch such horrors. But as truth-inversion became so extreme that even some quite moderate people were denying atrocities, I changed my mind, and went to a later showing this week.
The film has no commentary. It simply reproduces, with factual captions, visual (and some audio) recordings from the day. This includes GoPro film from Hamas fighters, dashcam, mobile phone and social-media footage from the same, and a couple of intercepted phone conversations; dashcam and mobile footage from survivors and first responders; CCTV film which catches the murderous intruders, and their terrified victims failing to escape. The atrocities are explicit, but the faces of the victims are pixillated to spare the bereaved families. In some cases, pixillation is unnecessary, the faces being so mutilated by burning, beating or shooting as to be unrecognisable.
The most chilling scenes, even worse than the whooping celebrations of blood, are those in which the gunmen search to kill, stalking the little houses, shooting at torso height through a row of portaloos in which festival-goers are hiding, unearthing with head torches an entire family hiding under a table and then murdering them.
This was the worst day in the history of the state of Israel. When the victorious powers permitted Israel’s creation in 1948 (the same year as the Genocide Convention), they could not guarantee eternal protection for the Jews, but they did at least give them a fighting chance. Now many want to make their fight illegal. The grim reality is – no fighting, no chance.
He probably thinks the Warsaw Ghetto Rebellion was an asymmetric response against the poor Polish civilians.
This is exactly what they did. And Joe, the Palestinian shoe salesman, had no say. The terrorists run the joint.
I'm telling you all, it's futile. As long as this guy continues to ascribe legitimacy to Hamas as a governing entity, all arguments will hit a brick wall. Claiming Gazan civilians have any say whatsoever where "aid" is directed is a preposterous notion.
I think they all should keep their problems over there. My problem with all this HAMAS and Russian/Ukrainian bullshit is we are all paying for it purely for business interests.
I almost forgot to mention........
FVCK JOE BIDEN! 😁
I almost forgot to mention........
FVCK JOE BIDEN! 😁
Except I don’t ascribe legitimacy to Hamas and never have. You just think that because you think any criticism of the Israeli government means ascribing legitimacy to Hamas.
Make up your mind. Did Joe the Palestinian shoe salesman voluntarily give his humanitarian aid to Hamas so they could carry out terrorist plots knowing that he will be the recipient of the blowback, or did Hamas take the money from Joe without his consent?
I think this is something you need to dig deep in yer thinking Dan. Dig deep my man. 👍
