Slade (and the rest of the board), my apologies. I should have phrased that very differently.
If Hamas is left in charge, they will continue to run the educational system and indoctrinate every child in their ideology.
When you say something like "Israel blowing people up creates more terrorists" you are ignoring the whole "Hamas is left in charge is the alternative" which will also create terrorists.
So apparently _Hamas_ proposed handing Gaza over to the Palestinian Authority. Israel rejected it.
Israel thinks the PA is not up to the task. Maybe it's the shear incompetence and corruption. Maybe it's the PA's ideological support for an Israel destroying "Right to Return"(*). Maybe it's the paying terrorists by the number of Jews they kill.
However, if we use the normal rules for wars, if Israel wins and Hamas surrenders, Israel gets to have more of a say in who runs the place afterwards than Hamas or the PA.
(*) During Trump's first term he proposed a RoR only into a Palestinian state and the PA said that was hot garbage.
Slade: Trying to reach it by causing more people to want to perpetrate them is a questionable strategy.
So in other words, letting Hamas run the educational system and indoctrinate every child into it's ideology will result in fewer people that back Hamas?
Slade: Good Lord, the only existential threat Hamas poses is to its own people.
We went to war after 911.
I fail to see why Israel shouldn't be able to after a worse attack. Especially with the group right there on their border claiming they will do it again.
Israel wants to win and have it's civilians to not be subjected to random terror attacks. That's a reasonable goal but Hamas will never agree to it.
Disney repeatedly cancelling red carpet opening is a strong tell.
It does sound like they went full woke with it. Prince was downgraded to a commoner and Snow repeatedly saves him. Rather than serve the dwarfs when she's at their place Snow just orders them around.
Far as I can tell, the cease fire technically ended a while ago. Ergo Hamas has stopped handing back hostages and Israel and Hamas were supposed to negotiate what comes next.
They disagree fundamentally on pretty core issues (like whether Hamas will continue to exist and engage in terrorism) so resuming the war is almost expected.
First Amendment covers speech. Part of getting a Green Card involves signing legal docs saying you don't support terrorism.
My impression is the Protesters stepped over lines and did things that aren't "speech". Maybe that's wrong but we should check with a judge. Wiki claimed the protesters occasionally supported Hamas and 10-7.
The real world reality is Hamas is a terror organization and 10-7 was a terror attack.
There's a lot of room here for him to have crossed lines that have legal consequences.
The day after the Israeli gov decides to go full genocide all the Palestinians in Gaza will die. Hamas on the other hand has the habit of killing every Jew they can.
Ergo one side is "openly genocidal" and the other is not. So it shouldn't be a surprise that the birth rate in gaza was still above the death rate even over the course of the war.
DavidTC: Urban warfare is extremely prone to causing violence against civilians
And there you go. Israel has no acceptable way to fight Hamas, it's supposed to just tolerate terrorism.
DavidTC: You’ll notice Israel is second (Now, after Oct 7th), but you’ll also notice how many other countries are within spitting distance.
You're comparing Israel to a bunch of failed states. What you mean is, yes, Israel is expected to ignore terrorism like no country in the West would.
DavidTC: Who do you think are defending ethnostates?
The better question is what ethnostates are attacked for being ethnostates. As far as I can tell it's just the Jewish one.
DavidTC: Anyway, Israel is not ‘expected’ to actually let people return. What is expected is that the right of return will be used as _concessions_ in negotiation.
Your statements sharply disagree with the official Palestinian demands in peace negotiations. The closest we've gotten to peace had them drop their requirement down to "only" 150,000 refugees per year.
So yes, the Palestinians are insisting on undoing the various wars, getting their specific land back, and ending the Jewish state. However at Camp David they offered to do it slowly over a period of decades.
DavidTC: Zionism is still an active political idea... constantly taking land in the West Bank.
The protesters weren't disrupting the University over settlements, they were upset the Jews won't tolerate terrorism and were fighting a war.
That makes sense if all of Israel is considered a settlement which seems to be where their heads were at.
DavidTC: It’s very interesting how you had to qualify the destruction ‘as a Jewish state’.
We have lots of examples in the surrounding states on what happens to Jews if they're ruled by Arabs. I don't see why the openly genocidal Palestinians should be assumed to have good intentions.
Full democracy combining the entire area isn't going to work because one side or the other will take control over the state and use it to repress the other.
The two state solution has thus far failed because the Palestinians refuse to give up the RoR, i.e. the right to destroy Israel.
DavidTC: Let me guess. You’re going to bring up examples...
I'll quote myself: Urban warfare is “genocide” if Jews do it, but not if anyone else does. Israel shouldn’t be an ethnostate because ethnostates are bad, however all non-Jewish ethnostates get a pass. Israel should put up with terrorism that non-Jews would never tolerate. Israel is expected to deal with a generational Right to Return.
DavidTC: justify the Nakba.
Normal countries are forgiven the crime(s) of their own creation, the Jewish one is not.
DavidTC: it took a good two decades for Palestinians to ramped up to even throwing-rocks-at-soldiers levels of violence, the first Intifada, in 1987.
The PLO was created in 1964 to destroy Israel. The stated goal of all of Israel's neighbors up until 1979 (when Egypt broke ranks) was to destroy Israel because it was Jewish.
10-7 was an effort to end it. That was what anti-zionism looks like in the real world, and the protesters are proclaiming themselves to be allies to that.
Some of them understand that, some of them don't. However it's very fair that they be treated as what they're claiming they are.
DavidTC: Not antisemitism, mind you. Anti-Zionism.
Zionism is the idea that the Jews should have a country. Ergo anti-Zionism is the idea that they shouldn't, i.e. Israel should be destroyed as a Jewish state.
That seems seriously antisemitic on the face of it, and that's without the real world likelihood that it would require a second holocaust.
I've pointed this out on this thread before that many of the "arguments" used against Israel are never used against non-Jews.
Page/Report has been removed. I read it before it vanished and it was interesting.
Hamas was totally air-brushed out of the picture. Not sure I'd even know their name if all I had was that report. That also gets rid of the hostages. It also means Hamas (because they don't exist) did no disruptions of aid and so on and had zero involvement in any of Gaza's civilians suffering.
If Israel blew up something or killed someone the only conceivable motivation was to attack civilians and make them suffer. Israel alone was responsible for the entire war.
It was kind of impressive. Maybe they took it down because someone pointed that out?
Columbia is not punishing the students for what they've said, just for the things that are normally illegal. Almost like the things which are normally illegal are still illegal, even if you call it "speech".
BREAKING: Columbia University Starts Expelling Anti-Israel Agitators
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8aMWhQDTZ8
Slade: We’re going to need a cite for this: “multiple states funding what are basically IslamicNa.zi arguments”.
If you mean "the funding" then most of the media in the Arab countries is state controlled. Their various positions in the UN are also state controlled. Al Jazeera has an English feed, try listening to them for a while.
If you mean the arguments themselves, then the idea that the Jews control everything is na.zi antisemitism, as is the idea that they are especially evil and should be held to different standards because they're evil.
If the arguments only make sense when used against Jews and make no sense at all when applied to non-Jews, then that's a problem.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Trump’s CDC Director Nominee Withdrawn Before Hearing”
Kennedy is extremely good at presenting anti-science views as being pro-science.
It seems Weldon is not.
On “Open Mic for the week of 3/17/25”
Slade (and the rest of the board), my apologies. I should have phrased that very differently.
If Hamas is left in charge, they will continue to run the educational system and indoctrinate every child in their ideology.
When you say something like "Israel blowing people up creates more terrorists" you are ignoring the whole "Hamas is left in charge is the alternative" which will also create terrorists.
"
So apparently _Hamas_ proposed handing Gaza over to the Palestinian Authority. Israel rejected it.
Israel thinks the PA is not up to the task. Maybe it's the shear incompetence and corruption. Maybe it's the PA's ideological support for an Israel destroying "Right to Return"(*). Maybe it's the paying terrorists by the number of Jews they kill.
However, if we use the normal rules for wars, if Israel wins and Hamas surrenders, Israel gets to have more of a say in who runs the place afterwards than Hamas or the PA.
(*) During Trump's first term he proposed a RoR only into a Palestinian state and the PA said that was hot garbage.
"
Slade: Trying to reach it by causing more people to want to perpetrate them is a questionable strategy.
So in other words, letting Hamas run the educational system and indoctrinate every child into it's ideology will result in fewer people that back Hamas?
How does that work exactly?
"
Slade: Good Lord, the only existential threat Hamas poses is to its own people.
We went to war after 911.
I fail to see why Israel shouldn't be able to after a worse attack. Especially with the group right there on their border claiming they will do it again.
Israel wants to win and have it's civilians to not be subjected to random terror attacks. That's a reasonable goal but Hamas will never agree to it.
"
Philip: and the proper Israeli response is to resume bombing civilians?
Israel blew up 4 Hamas leaders and their crews. We don't know how many civilians were killed.
Yes, Hamas claims that every death is a civilian death. I suggest we not treat that claim seriously.
RE: negotiations
Again, they disagree on pretty core issues and they're always going to disagree.
"
Disney repeatedly cancelling red carpet opening is a strong tell.
It does sound like they went full woke with it. Prince was downgraded to a commoner and Snow repeatedly saves him. Rather than serve the dwarfs when she's at their place Snow just orders them around.
"
Reviews are really bad. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSLKrkSAq9o
Rotten tomatoes is extremely low for a Disney movie.
Rachel Zegler's songs are one of the few high points of the movie.
Plot was redone to go serious girl-boss in charge.
"
Hamas has convinced Israel it is an existential threat. Full stop.
Implications:
Israel isn't willing to leave Hamas in power, that's their top priority.
If Hamas insists on staying in charge and continues to launch terror attacks and/or hold hostages, the war will go on.
This also means the two state solution is off the table for now. Israel isn't giving Hamas a state.
Also off the table is rebuilding Gaza.
And I get that actually destroying Hamas is probably impossible, so this is the new normal.
"
This is like saying only the Germans can remove Adolf from power and reshape Germany.
Israel can keep the war up in Gaza forever. If they insist on living in shattered rubble rather than have peace then that's their choice.
Let the civilians of Gaza flee to whatever country will take them.
"
Far as I can tell, the cease fire technically ended a while ago. Ergo Hamas has stopped handing back hostages and Israel and Hamas were supposed to negotiate what comes next.
They disagree fundamentally on pretty core issues (like whether Hamas will continue to exist and engage in terrorism) so resuming the war is almost expected.
"
DavidTC: we’re nearing the point where the government is going to be start held in contempt in multiple places.
And what happens at that point?
If it's not [this specific lawyer will have something bad happen to them] then I'm not hopeful anything will change.
"
Probably should have Biden announce that he approved all those pardons while he's still able to.
Also I strongly expect this was more Trump running his mouth than any sort of legal evaluation.
On “From The New York Times Editorial Board: The Authoritarian Endgame on Higher Education”
I don't see how to justify giving Obama's kids a helping hand because their supposed ancestors suffered institutional wrongs.
On “Columbia, Mahmoud Khalil, and Protest Expectations”
First Amendment covers speech. Part of getting a Green Card involves signing legal docs saying you don't support terrorism.
My impression is the Protesters stepped over lines and did things that aren't "speech". Maybe that's wrong but we should check with a judge. Wiki claimed the protesters occasionally supported Hamas and 10-7.
The real world reality is Hamas is a terror organization and 10-7 was a terror attack.
There's a lot of room here for him to have crossed lines that have legal consequences.
On “Open Mic for the week of 3/10/25”
DavidTC: The protest was literally over the fact that the university was investing in companies that profited off the conflict.
First sentence, in bold, from your link: College students across the country are protesting Israel’s attacks on Gaza.
It is not useful to pretend that the students were protesting something other than they were.
DavidTC: We have an actual list of demands
Which includes insisting that trying to prevent terrorism/mass-murder is "genocide" when Jews do it.
DavidTC: ...the openly genocidal Israeli government...
The day after the Israeli gov decides to go full genocide all the Palestinians in Gaza will die. Hamas on the other hand has the habit of killing every Jew they can.
Ergo one side is "openly genocidal" and the other is not. So it shouldn't be a surprise that the birth rate in gaza was still above the death rate even over the course of the war.
DavidTC: Urban warfare is extremely prone to causing violence against civilians
And there you go. Israel has no acceptable way to fight Hamas, it's supposed to just tolerate terrorism.
DavidTC: You’ll notice Israel is second (Now, after Oct 7th), but you’ll also notice how many other countries are within spitting distance.
You're comparing Israel to a bunch of failed states. What you mean is, yes, Israel is expected to ignore terrorism like no country in the West would.
DavidTC: Who do you think are defending ethnostates?
The better question is what ethnostates are attacked for being ethnostates. As far as I can tell it's just the Jewish one.
DavidTC: Anyway, Israel is not ‘expected’ to actually let people return. What is expected is that the right of return will be used as _concessions_ in negotiation.
Your statements sharply disagree with the official Palestinian demands in peace negotiations. The closest we've gotten to peace had them drop their requirement down to "only" 150,000 refugees per year.
So yes, the Palestinians are insisting on undoing the various wars, getting their specific land back, and ending the Jewish state. However at Camp David they offered to do it slowly over a period of decades.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit#Refugees_and_the_right_of_return
"
DavidTC: Zionism is still an active political idea... constantly taking land in the West Bank.
The protesters weren't disrupting the University over settlements, they were upset the Jews won't tolerate terrorism and were fighting a war.
That makes sense if all of Israel is considered a settlement which seems to be where their heads were at.
DavidTC: It’s very interesting how you had to qualify the destruction ‘as a Jewish state’.
We have lots of examples in the surrounding states on what happens to Jews if they're ruled by Arabs. I don't see why the openly genocidal Palestinians should be assumed to have good intentions.
Full democracy combining the entire area isn't going to work because one side or the other will take control over the state and use it to repress the other.
The two state solution has thus far failed because the Palestinians refuse to give up the RoR, i.e. the right to destroy Israel.
DavidTC: Let me guess. You’re going to bring up examples...
I'll quote myself: Urban warfare is “genocide” if Jews do it, but not if anyone else does. Israel shouldn’t be an ethnostate because ethnostates are bad, however all non-Jewish ethnostates get a pass. Israel should put up with terrorism that non-Jews would never tolerate. Israel is expected to deal with a generational Right to Return.
DavidTC: justify the Nakba.
Normal countries are forgiven the crime(s) of their own creation, the Jewish one is not.
DavidTC: it took a good two decades for Palestinians to ramped up to even throwing-rocks-at-soldiers levels of violence, the first Intifada, in 1987.
The PLO was created in 1964 to destroy Israel. The stated goal of all of Israel's neighbors up until 1979 (when Egypt broke ranks) was to destroy Israel because it was Jewish.
"
Slade: There exists Jewish state...
10-7 was an effort to end it. That was what anti-zionism looks like in the real world, and the protesters are proclaiming themselves to be allies to that.
Some of them understand that, some of them don't. However it's very fair that they be treated as what they're claiming they are.
"
DavidTC: Not antisemitism, mind you. Anti-Zionism.
Zionism is the idea that the Jews should have a country. Ergo anti-Zionism is the idea that they shouldn't, i.e. Israel should be destroyed as a Jewish state.
That seems seriously antisemitic on the face of it, and that's without the real world likelihood that it would require a second holocaust.
I've pointed this out on this thread before that many of the "arguments" used against Israel are never used against non-Jews.
"
Page/Report has been removed. I read it before it vanished and it was interesting.
Hamas was totally air-brushed out of the picture. Not sure I'd even know their name if all I had was that report. That also gets rid of the hostages. It also means Hamas (because they don't exist) did no disruptions of aid and so on and had zero involvement in any of Gaza's civilians suffering.
If Israel blew up something or killed someone the only conceivable motivation was to attack civilians and make them suffer. Israel alone was responsible for the entire war.
It was kind of impressive. Maybe they took it down because someone pointed that out?
"
Columbia is not punishing the students for what they've said, just for the things that are normally illegal. Almost like the things which are normally illegal are still illegal, even if you call it "speech".
BREAKING: Columbia University Starts Expelling Anti-Israel Agitators
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8aMWhQDTZ8
"
Can you disrupt the educational institution to that degree and have it still be "speech"?
"
DavidTC: This is on top of the fact that the government is clearly doing this because of the content of the _speech_
I think the disruption of the educational institution and threatening some of it's students takes us well beyond "content of speech".
"
Suggesting we cut off aid 22 years from now is a way to not talk about it for 20 years.
"
Slade: We’re going to need a cite for this: “multiple states funding what are basically IslamicNa.zi arguments”.
If you mean "the funding" then most of the media in the Arab countries is state controlled. Their various positions in the UN are also state controlled. Al Jazeera has an English feed, try listening to them for a while.
If you mean the arguments themselves, then the idea that the Jews control everything is na.zi antisemitism, as is the idea that they are especially evil and should be held to different standards because they're evil.
If the arguments only make sense when used against Jews and make no sense at all when applied to non-Jews, then that's a problem.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.