Morch

You want to be disingenuous, that's your choice.can take it as you like. The fact is that both were linked more than once on recent parallel topics. To deny knowledge of the 'river to the sea' thing is bizarre.

It's clearly wrong, and quite obviously an oversight. But proof? If Israel wanted this it would have happened long ago. One indication would be that it was actually a news story and a headline - as in something that doesn't happen every day. On the other hand, many Palestinians and 'pro-Palestinian' protests include chants of 'river to the sea', and maps of the supposedly 'historical' Palestine (presenting all the territory as Palestinian) are often posted (including on here) or used in Palestinian schools. Not too many headlines on that, not much outrage, and no complaints from the likes of you.

Both posted on these topics more than once. Both appearing on news reports often. Not buying your 'I haven't seen any'.

Are there many USA ground troops deployed? Something that would indicate involvement in the manner you insinuate? To date, most of what was deployed are Naval and Aerial assets. That's not quite what you're on about. The 'whack a more' was clearly a reference to Hamas in the Gaza Strip - not what you implied. USA citizens were murdered and abducted. You can continue to ignore or minimize this fact. Another fact would be that the American people seem to be in favor of supporting Israel on this. Apparently, you seem to think that if a terrorist organization carries out a major attack, nothing should be done about it and no media reports should be aired, for fear of terrorists and their supporters carrying out further attacks. Maybe you didn't think it through? South Africa's stance toward Israel is traditionally hostile. Nothing new there.

It's clearly wrong, and quite obviously an oversight. But proof? If Israel wanted this it would have happened long ago. One indication would be that it was actually a news story and a headline - as in something that doesn't happen every day. On the other hand, many Palestinians and 'pro-Palestinian' protests include chants of 'river to the sea', and maps of the supposedly 'historical' Palestine (presenting all the territory as Palestinian) are often posted (including on here) or used in Palestinian schools. Not too many headlines on that, not much outrage, and no complaints from the likes of you.

Israel stated it's goals. That you think they are not the 'real' ones, without offering support, doesn't carry a whole lot of weight.

Oh, I think the greater effect would be on saving Palestinian lives - which what you were whining about earlier. Now you deflect by making it about Israeli lives only. Whatever. I don't think Israel should stop the attacks so long as Hamas is entrenched bellow the Gaza Strip, the hostages nor released and the Strip not being demilitarized.

Of course you won't. And of course you have a right to hold differing opinions. But how is 'genocide' a matter of opinion? Your position as to historical references etc. was already answered. This is news forum, not a history class. It mainly deals with ongoing, current affairs. Referencing historical context is one thing, trying to turn it into the main issue at hand is another. There was at least one comment on this by the moderating team as well.

Al Jazeera is state owned by Qatar. The same Qatar that plays host to Hamas leadership, and spends a whole lot of money in the Gaza Strip. There are normally no stories appearing on AlJazeera that can be construed as seriously critical of even investigative into anything not in line with Qatar's policies. But you already knew that.

No evidence on both sides? Israel supplied evidence to support its version. Hamas did not. Your newfound obsession with the NYT aside, did you take a look at the pictures of the blast cite from the morning after? What do they tell you? There is no need to apologize when you keep referring to to it as 'bombing' or claim that the hospital was bombed. The blast actually occurred in the hospital's car park, and there's no extensive damage to the hospital.

Well, you do have a history of posting revisionist Holocaust material, for example (good memory here). You do not actually seem to know much about Israel, Judaism or Zionism. That you post of these is mostly false, out of context, propaganda materials, etc. You do not 'promote' peace. Posting falsehoods and referencing dodgy sources on an in internet forum is not it.

Hamas could always show goodwill toward this by releasing the hostages. You seem to think Hamas should be rewarded for attacking Israel and for putting Gazans in harm's way.

You should really read the parts of the topic you missed, and get clearer idea of the context in which the comment was posted.

The issue was that Hamas announced 500 death just a short time after the blast. This was immediately taken up as headline by many news channels (disclaimers are fine, but cannot compete with something like this). Same things with alleging it was an Israeli bombing attack. Figures cited later on refer to various numbers close to the initial 500 meme - but as far as I can tell all originate from the Gaza Strip's Ministry of Health, which is under Hamas control. In past instances, they showed a tendency to inflate the casualty lists some, etc. So while many people probably died there, the initial '500' was not a fact at the time of reporting, and the later figures are difficult to clearly verify. If one looks at the pictures of the blast cite taken the morning after, the damage is not extensive.

Sure. Look up topic.

The only information you promote on these topics is (at least) one of these: 1. Anti Israel. 2. Pro-Palestinian. 3. Anti-American. 4. Pro-Russian. Sometimes you get lucky and get all four in one dodgy link/post.

I'd imagine that by now you'd know better. RT and TASS are not considered reliable on this forum. And pretty much the same in most of the West. Most times you don't even bother sourcing your stuff, just link to social media. You constantly put up clips of 'reports' taking place a short time after an event (when there's no full take on what's going on) as proof. What millions of people, mostly on the Arab world think, is immaterial. And misguided.

What are you on about? And for that matter, what 'facts' did you present? Anyway, since when do you care about facts? You just pushed the Israel-bombed-a-hospital without any facts, and in the face of factual evidence.

Don't feed him.

Stop twisting my words. I did not say that he lied. If the transfer of the money occur more than a year ago, it is unlikely it played a role funding the attack. I don't think even Fox and the Republican Party offer that all of that money went to Hamas.

The full story (from the same source) is linked bellow, and quite obvious why you chose linking the clip instead. Biden admin sent tens of millions in COVID relief funds to group accused of harboring Hamas terrorists https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-admin-sent-tens-millions-covid-relief-funds-group-accused-harboring-hamas-terrorists So the funds were not actually given to Hamas, but to UNRWA. Shouldn't be too difficult to check the ledgers and see what's what.

The claim that these funds were used to sponsor the attack is bogus if one considers the timeline. The story is not verified, probably not nuanced, and is delivered on Fox News by Biden's political rivals. That you treat it as fact, rather as questionable claim, doesn't make it so.

Let me put it another way. The Gaza Strip is, generally, not a great place to live in. Palestinians living there do not have much choice about it. They cannot simply emigrate. Now, if Egypt (and/or other Arab countries) were to change their policy and allow them a path to citizenship, settlement and so on - do you still think Palestinians would turn down the offer? Apologies if it sounds callous, but a line from one of Bill Hicks's shows come to me - "What....and leave all this?". I guess some are tied to the place, and that's fine. Some will remain for the 'struggle'. But I doubt many would pass on such an offer, if it was made.

Making things up, again.

Your main point was about that Palestinian should be offered compensation. It was answered. You chose to address a related side issue mentioned instead. Your generalization is cute, but not necessarily correct or germane. There were wealthy Jews living in Arab countries and there were poor ones. Given that they had to let go of property and possessions meant that they generally arrived poor. I don't think that the Palestinian refugees were overall richer, many were poor farmers. If you want to push that 'colonial sponsors' nonsense, you'll have to find someone else to discuss this with.