[wat0n]

It does, you're downplaying the clear significant drop in support for Israel that we're seeing. It's the reality of public opinion versus what you're claiming.

The "reality of public opinion" is that support for Israel is still very high, at around 60% of Americans. It is also part of the "reality of public opinion" that the ceasefire now people couldn't achieve much in the primaries, even among Dems.

Again, you're just wrong about this. See above.

Cope.

Now you're resorting to outright fantasy and lies.

It is not a lie that they are your objective allies on Israel.

It is also not a lie to say communists and Nazis (actual Nazis) were also allies in the past.

This has nothing to do with the ongoing genocide being committed by Israel

There's no genocide.

It has a lot to do with support for Israel.

[Deutschmania]

https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1771917638538523107

But, but , but , Israel has been claiming that Hamas had been sexually assaulting their women . @wat0n has even been maligning those such as myself as being rape supporters , as a result . So , let's see what info I can gather .

https://www.timesofisrael.com/ex-soldier-my-commanders-handed-me-over-to-be-raped-by-jailed-terror-convict/ ,

https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-officer-who-raped-palestinian-was-not-dismissed-for-earlier-sexual-offenses/ ,

https://www.dailysabah.com/world/mid-east/deceased-israeli-soldier-boasted-about-raping-palestinian-woman ,

https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-soldier-who-raped-female-comrade-gets-5-5-years-in-jail/ ,

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/22/claims-of-israeli-sexual-assault-of-palestinian-women-are-credible-un-panel-says

So apparently the IDF not only allegedly has raped Palestinians , but also even their own women .

[Pants-of-dog]

Since there is no evidence for US support for Netanyahu and the IDF is based on terrorism, that tangent can be ignored.

Gallant’# words are a clear sign in intent to kill the entire population of Gaza by starving them and making it impossible for things like hospitals to run.

There has been evidence presented that the IDF and Israeli government are starving Palestinians by artificially limiting the number of trucks into Gaza, according to the WHO chief. That evidence has only been ignored.

And everyone agrees that the IDF and Israeli government are deliberately killing civilians and humanitarian aid workers.

[wat0n]

But, but , but , Israel has been claiming that Hamas had been sexually assaulting their women . @wat0n has even been maligning those such as myself as being rape supporters , as a result . So , let's see what info I can gather .

https://www.timesofisrael.com/ex-soldier-my-commanders-handed-me-over-to-be-raped-by-jailed-terror-convict/ ,

https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-officer-who-raped-palestinian-was-not-dismissed-for-earlier-sexual-offenses/ ,

https://www.dailysabah.com/world/mid-east/deceased-israeli-soldier-boasted-about-raping-palestinian-woman ,

https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-soldier-who-raped-female-comrade-gets-5-5-years-in-jail/ ,

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/22/claims-of-israeli-sexual-assault-of-palestinian-women-are-credible-un-panel-says

So apparently the IDF not only allegedly has raped Palestinians , but also even their own women .

...And those cases were exposed and prosecuted, mass rape apologist.

Since there is no evidence for US support for Netanyahu and the IDF is based on terrorism, that tangent can be ignored.

Hmmm? A strong majority of the US public believes Israel is fully justified in fighting Hamas in Gaza and that any ceasefire should be conditional on releasing all hostages.

Gallant’# words are a clear sign in intent to kill the entire population of Gaza by starving them and making it impossible for things like hospitals to run.

Gallant is clear that he holds Hamas, and not all Palestinians, responsible for the massacre and that it is Hamas, and not all Palestinians, the target of Israeli action.

There has been evidence presented that the IDF and Israeli government are starving Palestinians by artificially limiting the number of trucks into Gaza, according to the WHO chief. That evidence has only been ignored.

No such evidence has been presented.

And everyone agrees that the IDF and Israeli government are deliberately killing civilians and humanitarian aid workers.

And everyone also agrees it is legitimate to kill aid workers who are also part of Palestinian armed groups.

[Pants-of-dog]

I see the terrorism argument has been abandoned and a different one has been substituted; one that has already been shown to not refute the claim that US support is eroding because of the perception of genocide.

Gallant us not discussing merely Hamas when he talks about not allowing any food, electricity or fuel into Gaza. Even if this is supposed to be an attack on Hamas, only a complete idiot would not understand that this would cause genocide among civilians.

The evidence showing that the WHO chief holds the IDF and the Israeli government responsible for the famine can be found in the linked article.

Note that justifications do not refute the fact that the IDF and the Israeli government are deliberately killing civilians, with a focus on humanitarian aid workers.

[KurtFF8]

The "reality of public opinion" is that support for Israel is still very high, at around 60% of Americans. It is also part of the "reality of public opinion" that the ceasefire now people couldn't achieve much in the primaries, even among Dems.

As I posted above, support continues to significantly decline and there's even a poll showing that the majority consider what Israel is doing to be a genocide.

It is not a lie that they are your objective allies on Israel.

It is also not a lie to say communists and Nazis (actual Nazis) were also allies in the past.

It's a lie that has no basis in reality. Also a lie to claim that they were allies in the past.

There's no genocide.

Another lie.

[wat0n]

As I posted above, support continues to significantly decline and there's even a poll showing that the majority consider what Israel is doing to be a genocide.

And there's a poll saying the opposite, and that more people consider that what Hamas did on October 7 was genocide.

It's a lie that has no basis in reality.

It is indisputably true that neonazis oppose Israel.

It is indisputably true that you both share common goals.

Also a lie to claim that they were allies in the past.

It is also indisputably true that:

1) The USSR tried to join the Axis
2) The USSR agreed with the Nazis a division of Poland.
3) American Communists tried as hard as possible to impede US support for the UK and others fighting the Nazis until Operation Barbarossa.

Another lie.

No court has ruled that.

This is also another claim made by your neonazi buddies.

[KurtFF8]

And there's a poll saying the opposite, and that more people consider that what Hamas did on October 7 was genocide.

Source? Also interesting to note how you're just ignoring that the majority of American consider what Israel is doing to be genocide. Looks like you just ignore the facts when they don't suit your narrative.

It is indisputably true that neonazis oppose Israel.

It is indisputably true that you both share common goals.

I guess you're just trolling at this point since you've just resorted to making things up.

It is also indisputably true that:

1) The USSR tried to join the Axis
2) The USSR agreed with the Nazis a division of Poland.
3) American Communists tried as hard as possible to impede US support for the UK and others fighting the Nazis until Operation Barbarossa.

It's indisputable that
1) The USSR tried to get the Western powers to stop Germany early on, and that the Western powers declined
2) That the USSR never had an alliance with Germany or any fascist regime.

No court has ruled that.

This is also another claim made by your neonazi buddies.

The idea that the claim of Israel committing genocide (a claim supported by the majority of Americans by the way) is somehow tied in any way with neonazis is such an obvious example of you grasping at straws that it really shows it's not worth engaging with you further on this.

Can't tell if you're just trolling at this point or if you're really just grasping at straws.

[wat0n]

Source? Also interesting to note how you're just ignoring that the majority of American consider what Israel is doing to be genocide. Looks like you just ignore the facts when they don't suit your narrative.

Among Americans, 39% say what’s happening to Jewish people in Israel is a genocide. Fewer (32%) say it is not and the remaining 29% are unsure.

About one-third (34%) of Americans say what’s happening to Arabs in the Gaza Strip is a genocide. A similar share (32%) say it is not, while 35% are unsure.

Why would you just ignore this one, I wonder?

By the way, this part is also very, very interesting:

As with all surveys, the wording of questions may have affected the findings. An experiment conducted in a followup survey this month looked specifically at how the situation in Gaza was described. A randomly selected half of respondents were shown the same text as in the original survey: "Arabs in the Gaza Strip (2023 - present)." The other half were shown: "Palestinians in the Gaza Strip (2023 - present)." The survey results showed that nearly two months after the original survey, little had changed in American opinion about whether Arabs in the Gaza Strip were experiencing genocide: 32% say they are. But 40% say Palestinians in the Gaza Strip are experiencing genocide. The difference is equally large among Democrats, Independents, and Republicans. But there are differences by age: The wording change has no effect among adults under 30, while increasing the share of people 65 and older who characterize the events as genocide by 18 percentage points.

I guess you're just trolling at this point since you've just resorted to making things up.

Are you really disputing that American neonazis oppose Israel and stand with Palestine?

It's indisputable that
1) The USSR tried to get the Western powers to stop Germany early on, and that the Western powers declined

Yes, and that was and is still seen as a big mistake.

2) That the USSR never had an alliance with Germany or any fascist regime.

That didn't stop it from trying.

German–Soviet Axis talks occurred in October and November 1940 concerning the Soviet Union's potential adherent as a fourth Axis power during World War II. The negotiations, which occurred during the era of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, included a two-day conference in Berlin between Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov and Adolf Hitler and German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop. The talks were followed by both countries trading written proposed agreements.

After two days of negotiations from 12 to 14 November 1940, Germany presented the Soviets with a draft written Axis pact agreement that defined the world spheres of influence of the four proposed Axis powers (Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union).[1] Hitler, Ribbentrop and Molotov tried to set German and Soviet spheres of influence. Hitler encouraged Molotov to look south to Iran and eventually India, to preserve German access to Finland's resources and to remove Soviet influence in the Balkans.[2]

Molotov remained firm and sought to remove German troops from Finland and gain a warm water port in the Baltic. Soviet foreign policy calculations were predicated on the idea that the war would be a long-term struggle and so German claims that the United Kingdom would be defeated swiftly were treated with skepticism.[3] In addition, Stalin sought to remain influential in Bulgaria and Yugoslavia. Those factors resulted in Molotov taking a firm line.[2]

According to a study by Alexander Nekrich, on 25 November 1940, the Soviets presented a Stalin-drafted written counterproposal accepting the four power pact but including Soviet rights to Bulgaria and a world sphere of influence, to be centred on the area around Iraq and Iran.[4] Germany did not respond[5][6] and left the negotiations unresolved.

Regarding the counterproposal, Hitler remarked to his top military chiefs that Stalin "demands more and more", "he's a cold-blooded blackmailer" and "a German victory has become unbearable for Russia" so that "she must be brought to her knees as soon as possible."[7] Germany ended the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact in June 1941 by invading the Soviet Union.

In the following years, the Soviet Information Bureau published a book titled Falsifiers of History, largely edited by Stalin himself, in which the Soviet premier claimed that he was simply testing his enemy. This became the official version of events that persisted in Soviet historiography up until the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. According to Soviet diplomat Victor Israelyan, the book "certainly did nothing to disprove the existence of Soviet-German cooperation in the first years of World War II, a cooperation that to a certain degree assisted Hitler's plan".[8]

Seriously, even the Soviets don't deny the attempt even if they simply claimed Stalin was trolling (basically). But then, why would the Comintern use its American proxies to try to keep the US out of the war in Europe until the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union?

The idea that the claim of Israel committing genocide (a claim supported by the majority of Americans by the way) is somehow tied in any way with neonazis is such an obvious example of you grasping at straws that it really shows it's not worth engaging with you further on this.

Can't tell if you're just trolling at this point or if you're really just grasping at straws.

Truth is indeed hard to accept, isn't it?

[ingliz]

@wat0n


I see you are using a well-worn Israeli government ploy to control the narrative today. It is so well-worn they use it to control their own population if they question policy.

The emergence of a neo-Nazi gang is an unprecedented manifestation of deviance in Israel. It has undermined the moral order and shaken the delicate nerves of Israeli society, which lives in the shadow of the Holocaust. Drawing principally on Israeli newspaper coverage, the study examines the dynamics of social discourse among policymakers, the press, and pressure groups. The analysis shows that initial formulations of moral panic derived from a profound concern about changes in the social and moral order of society due to immigration. Moreover, conceptually situated within theorizations of moral risk, this moral panic was a temporary rupture in processes of moral regulation and served governing agents, which increased social control by constructing risks and dangers.

— Revital Sela-Shayovitz (2011) Abstract, Neo-Nazis and moral panic: The emergence of neo-Nazi youth gangs in Israel. Crime, Media, Culture: An International Journal, Volume 7, Issue 1

[wat0n]

@ingliz what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

I recall that 4 years ago everyone who questioned the Left's narrative and actions on the George Floyd issue was a racist because white supremacists did. I remember that happening here, too.

Back then I also distinctly remember leftists demanding tearing the statues and other monuments honoring every racist they did not like down, but when someone brings up the racism of people the Left likes (e.g. Marx) and consequently demands tearing all monuments honoring him down leftists suddenly become very concerned about the preservation of historical monuments.

The Left doesn't like it when its own arguments and logic are used against it, so I'll keep doing that. It's fun.

[Potemkin]

@ingliz what's good for the sauce is good for the gander.

The proverb is actually, “What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.” A ‘gander’ is a male goose, and the word ‘goose’ usually refers to the female of the species. As you know, the meaning of the proverb is that the same sauce is appropriate for both male and female geese, because they both taste the same. What is appropriate for X is also appropriate for Y.

[wat0n]

The proverb is actually, “What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.” A ‘gander’ is a male goose, and the word ‘goose’ usually refers to the female of the species. As you know, the meaning of the proverb is that the same sauce is appropriate for both male and female geese, because they both taste the same. What is appropriate for X is also appropriate for Y.

Thanks for the correction, @Potemkin

[Potemkin]

Thanks for the correction, @Potemkin

No problem. I always enjoy smugly correcting other people’s grammatical errors. You can’t see, but I’m smirking obnoxiously right now.

[wat0n]

No problem. I always enjoy smugly correcting other people’s grammatical errors. You can’t see, but I’m smirking obnoxiously right now.

Grammar must be correct at all times

[Potemkin]

Grammar must be correct at all times

World’s First Grammar Nazi Parade

Grammar Nazi Pride. It’s now a thing. *wipes away a tear of joy*

[Pants-of-dog]

The former USSR, Marx, neo-Nazis, and witty maxims are all irrelevant to the question of genocide in Gaza.

In Gaza right now, the IDF and Israeli government have barred UNRWA from distributing aid in northern Gaza. This is the area where famine is most imminent. UNRWA has not been able to provide a shipment to the area since the 29th of January.

Deliberately cutting off the main source of food during a rime of imminent famine is a deliberate policy of starvation of a populace.

[wat0n]

The former USSR, Marx, neo-Nazis, and witty maxims are all irrelevant to the question of genocide in Gaza.

Sure.

It is still true you're objectively allied to neonazis.

In Gaza right now, the IDF and Israeli government have barred UNRWA from distributing aid in northern Gaza. This is the area where famine is most imminent. UNRWA has not been able to provide a shipment to the area since the 29th of January.

Deliberately cutting off the main source of food during a rime of imminent famine is a deliberate policy of starvation of a populace.

This presumes UNRWA is the only body handing aid to Palestinians, including in northern Gaza. This is factually wrong.

Also, famine has been declared "imminent" since October last year, so either these assessments were wrong and therefore one should not trust them or aid is, in fact, reaching the civilian population.

I will also note that the UN itself cut aid to the population in the Tigray over aid misappropriation, leading to the starvation of 1,329 to death, without anyone saying it is UN policy to starve Tigray's populace to death. Why? Because:

Article 23 - Consignment of medical supplies, food and clothing

Each High Contracting Party shall allow the free passage of all consignments of medical and hospital stores and objects necessary for religious worship intended only for civilians of another High Contracting Party, even if the latter is its adversary. It shall likewise permit the free passage of all consignments of essential foodstuffs, clothing and tonics intended for children under fifteen, expectant mothers and maternity cases.

The obligation of a High Contracting Party to allow the free passage of the consignments indicated in the preceding paragraph is subject to the condition that this Party is satisfied that there are no serious reasons for fearing:

(a) that the consignments may be diverted from their destination,

(b) that the control may not be effective, or

(c) that a definite advantage may accrue to the military efforts or economy of the enemy through the substitution of the above-mentioned consignments for goods which would otherwise be provided or produced by the enemy or through the release of such material, services or facilities as would otherwise be required for the production of such goods.

The Power which allows the passage of the consignments indicated in the first paragraph of this Article may make permission conditional on the distribution to the persons benefited thereby being made under the local supervision of the Protecting Powers.

Such consignments shall be forwarded as rapidly as possible, and the Power which permits their free passage shall have the right to prescribe the technical arrangements under which such passage is allowed.

Or:

Article 70 - Relief actions

1. If the civilian population of any territory under the control of a Party to the conflict, other than occupied territory, is not adequately provided with the supplies mentioned in Article 69 , relief actions which are humanitarian and impartial in character and conducted without any adverse distinction shall be undertaken, subject to the agreement of the Parties concerned in such relief actions. Offers of such relief shall not be regarded as interference in the armed conflict or as unfriendly acts. In the distribution of relief consignments, priority shall be given to those persons, such as children, expectant mothers, maternity cases and nursing mothers, who, under the Fourth Convention or under this Protocol, are to be accorded privileged treatment or special protection.

2. The Parties to the conflict and each High Contracting Party shall allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded passage of all relief consignments, equipment and personnel provided in accordance with this Section, even if such assistance is destined for the civilian population of the adverse Party.

3. The Parties to the conflict and each High Contracting Party which allow the passage of relief consignments, equipment and personnel in accordance with paragraph 2:

(a) shall have the right to prescribe the technical arrangements, including search, under which such passage is permitted;

(b) may make such permission conditional on the distribution of this assistance being made under the local supervision of a Protecting Power;

(c) shall, in no way whatsoever, divert relief consignments from the purpose for which they are intended nor delay their forwarding, except in cases of urgent necessity in the interest of the civilian population concerned.

4. The Parties to the conflict shall protect relief consignments and facilitate their rapid distribution.

5. The Parties to the conflict and each High Contracting Party concerned shall encourage and facilitate effective international co-ordination of the relief actions referred to in paragraph 1.

So it seems those aid cuts, even though they led to the deaths of hundreds, were not - in fact - illegal. Neither are Israel's inspections and other measures intended to prevent contraband and misappropriation, even more so since there are no similar reports of deaths by starvation of hundreds thus far.

[Pants-of-dog]

UNRWA is the main relief agency working in Gaza. Cutting off the main supply of humanitarian supplies (even if it is not the only one) is a deliberate choice to starve the population of northern Gaza. Pointing out that an insignificant trickle is coming in from other sources is illogical and ignores the evidence from the WHO. Note that the WFP has not been allowed into northern Gaza since February 20. This means the two biggest suppliers of humanitarian aid are being blocked by the IDF and the Israeli government.

It is also illogical to assume that famine is not imminent because of some unsubstantiated idea that people have been claiming famine has been imminent for months now.

[wat0n]

I don't see how it is unsubstantiated to say the UN's assessments have been systematically wrong.

It is also not accurate to say no aid is reaching northern Gaza given the constant postponement of the imminent famine.

It is also legal for Israel to place conditions on aid delivery as cited from the Geneva Conventions and also how the UN itself did, even though doing so starved 1,329 people to death.

This sounds like a talking point your neonazi buddies make.