ozimoron

Clarified that her words should be taken literally.

From your link. Facing mounting criticism, Albanese clarified that she was not justifying Hamas’s “crimes, which I have strongly condemned several times. “I reject all racism, including antisemitism — a global threat. But explaining [Hamas’s] crimes as antisemitism obscures their true cause,” she said.

Editing my post to clarify my thoughts is a just an excuse to avoid rising to the challenge. UN watch is a rabidly anti UN org with no credibility. Frankly, I'm stunned that it's permitted on this forum. What she said was : You said the victims were “not killed because of their Judaism,” but rather “in reaction to Israel’s oppression.” I believe that's right on point and absolutely true. Furthermore the article does not state who "France" and "Germany" are, an indication of obfuscation. Were those people official spokespersons for their respective countries? We can't know but I suggest they were not. Finally, the links to twitter in the article are in a foreign language.

I saw nothi9ng which even remotely suggested that she justified the Hamas attack. That's why I invited you to make an argument to that effect but it appears that you have chosen to just make an incendiary claim and leave it at that.

Why not tell us where you think she justified the massacre? As is stands this is appears to be an unsubstantiated throw away designed to shoot the messenger.

Even dimmer are the Republican Party who hold this kid up as some kind of poster boy for their racist ideals and gun culture.

Netanyahu has been spoiling for a fight with the US. He may not survive this one It also distracts from his stated policy of imploring Qatar to funnel more funds to Gaza to strengthen Hamas, all in order to weaken the Palestinian Authority and render any political negotiations impossible. But this framing allows Netanyahu to placate his rightwing extremist coalition and partners, who have long opposed any form of Palestinian statehood. The second reason is more current and practical: the confrontation is about setting up Biden as the scapegoat for Netanyahu’s failure to achieve “total victory” or “the eradication of Hamas”, two fortune cookie-type slogans that he spews regularly. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/26/benjamin-netanyahu-joe-biden-un-security-council-resolution-ceasefire-gaza

President Joe Biden's decision to have the United States abstain, and thus allow passage of the United Nations Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza was the right call. The resolution demands an immediate ceasefire and the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages. By allowing the resolution to pass the U.S. has staked out a position in favor of ending this horrible war, and in opposition to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's prioritization of his political well-being over the current and future good of Israelis and Palestinians alike. https://www.newsweek.com/israels-netanyahu-forced-bidens-hand-security-council-resolution-opinion-1883334

Netanyahu and his radical right-wing coalition were roiled after the U.S. abstained from a vote of the U.N. Security Council proposal calling for a cease-fire in Gaza during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, allowing the measure to pass. The Israeli prime minister in recent weeks has also publicly seethed over what he says is a bid by the White House and congressional Democrats to kneecap his political standing inside his own country. Far-right elements of Israel’s government also released testy responses, with Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir calling the U.N. vote “proof that President Biden is not prioritizing Israel and the free world’s victory over terrorism, but rather his own political considerations,” as reported by The New York Times. https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4555368-gaza-ceasefire-vote-roils-us-israel-talks-on-rafah/

was the link paywalled?

Oh, not this topic? Damn, hang me high. Meantime, links to Reuters are not permitted here. I might remind you that you didn't provide the link you referred to.

The statement by Hamas is new. How many times have you posted something already said?

I simply posted what Hamas said with no comment, much less a claim that it did.

Hamas said it welcomed the U.N.'s move but said the cease-fire needs to be permanent. “We confirm our readiness to engage in an immediate prisoner exchange process that leads to the release of prisoners on both sides,” the group said. For months, the militants have sought a deal that includes a complete end to the conflict. https://apnews.com/article/un-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-vote-ramadan-b7985fede65e5477aba2c8d2e62a6632

My post included the link. Stop the weasel words.

My post included a link which specifically said that. This only proves that you don't read links adverse to your pov.

You claimed that I forgot that bit. I forgot nothing. https://aseannow.com/topic/1321758-israel-is-at-war-general-discussion-pt3/?do=findComment&comment=18793973

You claimed that I forgot that bit. I forgot nothing. https://aseannow.com/topic/1321758-israel-is-at-war-general-discussion-pt3/?do=findComment&comment=18793973

The politico link clearly states that the two demands were not linked. Your accusation said otherwise.

You're lying. It does.

Here is my link: "The resolution approved Monday demands the release of hostages but does not make it a condition for the cease-fire for the month of Ramadan, which ends in April." https://apnews.com/article/un-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-vote-ramadan-b7985fede65e5477aba2c8d2e62a6632

I didn't forget it, it was clearly in the link that I provided. Can't you even bring yourself to acknowledge that? The rules of this forum prevent me from quoting the entirety of links. Should I have quoted that?