Hamas: Oct 7 was 'necessary, normal response' to 'Israeli conspiracies'

[Morch]

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

And for those who believe the UN funded the tunnels as a diversion from Netanyahu's complicity, the amount of funds funneled by Qatar to Hamas with the complicity of Netanyahu amounted to $1.8 billion and was the largest source of Hamas funds by far.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatari_support_for_Hamas

 

@ozimoron

 

It does not negate the possibility of UN and international aid funds being funneled for Hamas purposes.

It's just you going for a lame obfuscation.

[Captain Monday]

17 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   It is considered to be Anti semetic to compare Jews to Nazis and it is also offensive to Jews as well 

That might be so, to people suffering fundamental misunderstandings.I responsible am not for their false grievance and illigimate feelings. 
 

I made a comment about heroic Jewish resistance in the ghetto. I did not compare Jews to Nazis. I compared Israel’s actions to Nazis.  To say that is comparing “Jews to Nazis” is just as fallacious as to say that “all Germans were Nazis” 

Israel is not “Jews”. It is a state created by UN agreement that has rights and responsibilities under international law.
 

One of the problems we have is their propagandists frequently claims to be the representative of all Jews and the state acts in their benefit and even on their behalf. This is a completely false and illegitimate claim to be roundly rejected. Further lately if you listen to the talking heads on CNN etc and down you will hear that  any criticism of Israels actions is antisemitism. Even the BDS movement is antisemitism. Well these talking heads have a very warped and definition of it the word. I am sure you are aware many fundamentalist Jews do not agree with the existence/concept of a Jewish state under religious grounds at all. Are they antisemites? 

 

 

[Nick Carter icp]

4 minutes ago, Captain Monday said:

 

I made a comment about heroic Jewish resistance in the ghetto. I did not compare Jews to Nazis. I compared Israel’s actions to Nazis.  To say that is comparing “Jews to Nazis” is just as fallacious as to say that “all Germans were Nazis” 

? 

 

 

 

   The Children and Grand children of that heroic Jewish resistance in the ghettos in the 1930's are now also resisting  the present day Nazis  in 2024 .

   Hamas want to continue what the Nazis started .A final solution to the Jewish problem is also the Hamas ideology 

The 1930's Jews didn't have the means to defend themselves , today Jews have the means to defend themselves .

   Never again will Jews allow themselves to be slaughtered en masse 

[Captain Monday]

41 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

What 'crimes against humanity'? People on here are tossing labels and terms about like these are decided, accepted things. They are not.

What would you have Israel do? Stop at the border? Beg Hamas to return the hostages? Accept all Hamas demands? You offer meaningless words instead of addressing actual circumstances.

What is a CAG? Use your common sense I know it is there under the slick rhetoric and programmed talking  points.

 

As you likely know a  determination of whether crimes against humanity occurred   would be made by the judgements of the ICC or other international tribunal. Now, if such a determination would ever be made  Israel with full diplomatic cover from Uncle Sam would never allow its officials or Officers be subject to its jurisdiction, judgement or punishment so it hardly matters.

 

 

As for what Israel "should have"  do the framework for such has existed for decades has been known and accepted by "nearly the entire international community" . That being except Israel, US, Nauru, the Republic of Palau and the other client states.

 

It is a little late for that now.

[Morch]

23 minutes ago, Captain Monday said:

What is a CAG? Use your common sense I know it is there under the slick rhetoric and programmed talking  points.

 

As you likely know a  determination of whether crimes against humanity occurred   would be made by the judgements of the ICC or other international tribunal. Now, if such a determination would ever be made  Israel with full diplomatic cover from Uncle Sam would never allow its officials or Officers be subject to its jurisdiction, judgement or punishment so it hardly matters.

 

 

As for what Israel "should have"  do the framework for such has existed for decades has been known and accepted by "nearly the entire international community" . That being except Israel, US, Nauru, the Republic of Palau and the other client states.

 

It is a little late for that now.

 

Comparing Israel with the Nazis is widely considered an expression of antisemitism. That you feel you're justified in doing so bears no relevance on the fact that you are trading in antisemitic tropes. I'm not even getting into the hyperbole nature of the comparison, which is ludicrous. As often pointed out - such comments are either born of ignorance or malice. Up to you.

 

Your nonsense about the 'framework' tries to make it as if things are entirely up to Israel, and that the Palestinians did not and do not play a part in it at all. This is beyond nonsense.

 

As for 'a little late for that now' - so what was your point, then?

[WDSmart]

BINGO!    (Provisional  and long-overdue  Bingo) 

The International Court of Justice’s Rebuke of Israel Was Swift and Scathing | The New Republic

Edited January 27 by WDSmart
Added some opinions

[WDSmart]

15 hours ago, Morch said:

 

@ozimoron

 

It does not negate the possibility of UN and international aid funds being funneled for Hamas purposes.

It's just you going for a lame obfuscation.

And, of course, my home country, the USA, is still funding the Zionist attacks on Gaza and the West Bank.  This funding, however, is starting to become a political issue for Presiden Biden in the upcoming presidential election in November. 

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

And, of course, my home country, the USA, is still funding the Zionist attacks on Gaza and the West Bank.  This funding, however, is starting to become a political issue for Presiden Biden in the upcoming presidential election in November. 

 

Your home country does not share your warped views. Nor does it share your obsession with misguided use of terms. Unless mistaken there was an almost unanimous vote regarding funding and support a short while ago? But don't let that get in the way of your delusional ramblings.

[Bkk Brian]

2 hours ago, WDSmart said:

BINGO!    (Provisional  and long-overdue  Bingo) 

The International Court of Justice’s Rebuke of Israel Was Swift and Scathing | The New Republic

You should check the latest, Hamas and SA are not celebrating and your in the wrong topic with that too

 

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1318095-provisional-decision-today-icj-weighs-emergency-measures-amid-allegations-of-genocide-in-gaza

 

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

You should check the latest, Hamas and SA are not celebrating and your in the wrong topic with that too

 

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1318095-provisional-decision-today-icj-weighs-emergency-measures-amid-allegations-of-genocide-in-gaza

 

 

A link to another topic is not proof of anything.

[Morch]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

A link to another topic is not proof of anything.

 

@ozimoron

 

It's 'proof' that there's another topic specifically dealing with this.

Got to love how you need to stupidly argue about everything.

[WDSmart]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Your home country does not share your warped views. Nor does it share your obsession with misguided use of terms. Unless mistaken there was an almost unanimous vote regarding funding and support a short while ago? But don't let that get in the way of your delusional ramblings.

Yes, I'd agree that the majority in my home country (USA) does not share my views on this crisis, but that's, IMO, is because they have not been presented with all the facts and the viewpoints from both sides. That, however, is changing. CNN, my primary source of news, is now presenting more information about the Palestinian and Arab perspectives. And, of course, yesterday's ruling (provisional) by the International Court of Justice will also cause more people to re-examine their positions on this crisis. I don't think the majority will every come around to my viewpoint, but I do believe the percentage will grow and grow as they learn more facts about this.

I do not believe my opinions are delusiions. They are based on the "facts" I know from what I have viewed and read over the past 20 years, and that are being reinforced every day of this tragedy. 

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

A link to another topic is not proof of anything.

Deflection. Providing a link to the appropriate topic for his post. 

[Morch]

Just now, WDSmart said:

Yes, I'd agree that the majority in my home country (USA) does not share my views on this crisis, but that's, IMO, is because they have not been presented with all the facts and the viewpoints from both sides. That, however, is changing. CNN, my primary source of news, is now presenting more information about the Palestinian and Arab perspectives. And, of course, yesterday's ruling (provisional) by the International Court of Justice will also cause more people to re-examine their positions on this crisis. I don't think the majority will every come around to my viewpoint, but I do believe the percentage will grow and grow as they learn more facts about this.

I do not believe my opinions are delusiions. They are based on the "facts" I know from what I have viewed and read over the past 20 years, and that are being reinforced every day of this tragedy. 

 

Considering your own warped views, I doubt that you're one to recommend anything on 'viewpoints', or complain about other's lack of knowledge.

 

Somehow, you expect others to change their views, but at the same time take pride in your own views being unchanged. And that's despite them odd 'opinions' of yours being addressed, taken apart, and demonstrated as nonsense. Fancy that.

[WDSmart]

10 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

You should check the latest, Hamas and SA are not celebrating and your in the wrong topic with that too

 

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1318095-provisional-decision-today-icj-weighs-emergency-measures-amid-allegations-of-genocide-in-gaza

 

I do not care if Hamas and SA (who are they?) are not celebrating with me. 

How could the International Court of Justice's ruling not be pertinent to the topic of this thread? Isn't it about the Zionist's response to Hamas' Oct attack, just as the court's ruling is?

The International Court of Justice’s Rebuke of Israel Was Swift and Scathing | The New Republic

[Morch]

1 minute ago, WDSmart said:

I do not care if Hamas and SA (who are they?) are not celebrating with me. 

How could the International Court of Justice's ruling not be pertinent to the topic of this thread? Isn't it about the Zionist's response to Hamas' Oct attack, just as the court's ruling is?

The International Court of Justice’s Rebuke of Israel Was Swift and Scathing | The New Republic

 

SA is South Africa. I'm sure you'll come up with your new idiosyncratic term at some point.

There is a specific topic dealing with the ICJ's provisional ruling, there is no need to discuss it on any related topic separately.

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, WDSmart said:

I do not care if Hamas and SA (who are they?) are not celebrating with me. 

How could the International Court of Justice's ruling not be pertinent to the topic of this thread? Isn't it about the Zionist's response to Hamas' Oct attack, just as the court's ruling is?

The International Court of Justice’s Rebuke of Israel Was Swift and Scathing | The New Republic

You know exactly who they are. 

 

Oh and no ceasefire and order for immediate release of all hostages. If that's the party you are attending join the relevant topic......

[WDSmart]

5 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Considering your own warped views, I doubt that you're one to recommend anything on 'viewpoints', or complain about other's lack of knowledge.

 

Somehow, you expect others to change their views, but at the same time take pride in your own views being unchanged. And that's despite them odd 'opinions' of yours being addressed, taken apart, and demonstrated as nonsense. Fancy that.

I hope those who disagree with me will at least reconsider their views as they get more information. Some of that information is new, but some of it is old and has either been ignored by them or never presented to them. 

The International Court of Justice did not think South Africa's charges were nonsense, and those charges are compatible with the viewpoint I've had for many years.

The International Court of Justice’s Rebuke of Israel Was Swift and Scathing | The New Republic

[Morch]

36 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I hope those who disagree with me will at least reconsider their views as they get more information. Some of that information is new, but some of it is old and has either been ignored by them or never presented to them. 

The International Court of Justice did not think South Africa's charges were nonsense, and those charges are compatible with the viewpoint I've had for many years.

The International Court of Justice’s Rebuke of Israel Was Swift and Scathing | The New Republic

 

So you do not reconsider anything, refuse to absorb and assimilate 'new' information, but expect others to do so. Gotcha.

Already pointed out there's a specific topic dealing with the provisional ruling, and a link was provided above.

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, WDSmart said:

I hope those who disagree with me will at least reconsider their views as they get more information. Some of that information is new, but some of it is old and has either been ignored by them or never presented to them. 

The International Court of Justice did not think South Africa's charges were nonsense, and those charges are compatible with the viewpoint I've had for many years.

The International Court of Justice’s Rebuke of Israel Was Swift and Scathing | The New Republic

Very childish off topic

[WDSmart]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

SA is South Africa. I'm sure you'll come up with your new idiosyncratic term at some point.

There is a specific topic dealing with the ICJ's provisional ruling, there is no need to discuss it on any related topic separately.

I thought you might mean SA Saudi Arabia. I see now why you included SA in your previous post.

I haven't seen the topic on the ICJ's provisional ruling. I'll check that out. Thanks for alerting me. However, I do think the ruling itself is an appropriate item to mention in this topic. I've not tried to discuss it in detail.

[WDSmart]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

So you do not reconsider anything, refuse to absorb and assimilate 'new' information, but expect others to do so. Gotcha.

Already pointed out there's a specific topic dealing with the provisional ruling, and a link was provided above. Kindly stop trolling, troll.

I responded to your other post. I'm not a troll. I'm a forum participant engaging in disucssions.

[WDSmart]

7 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

You know exactly who they are. 

 

Oh and no ceasefire and order for immediate release of all hostages. If that's the party you are attending join the relevant topic......

I did not know of the other topic, and I did not intend to discuss the details of the ruling here. But I don think a mention of the ruling itself is very relevant to this topic.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I thought you might mean SA Saudi Arabia. I see now why you included SA in your previous post.

I haven't seen the topic on the ICJ's provisional ruling. I'll check that out. Thanks for alerting me. However, I do think the ruling itself is an appropriate item to mention in this topic. I've not tried to discuss it in detail.

 

I thought you might actually pay attention for once. What does SA got to do with this? Also, it wasn't me who posted about SA to begin with.

 

There was a link to the topic provided some posts above, which you have already seen and ignored.

Try harder.

[Morch]

33 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I responded to your other post. I'm not a troll. I'm a forum participant engaging in disucssions.

 

 

You've been provided with a link to the discussion mentioned, you keep on about it regardless.

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, WDSmart said:

I disagree.

This topic is "Hamas: Oct 7 was 'necessary, normal response' to 'Israeli conspiracies'" Not ICJ, if you disagree with that you need help

[ozimoron]

9 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

This topic is "Hamas: Oct 7 was 'necessary, normal response' to 'Israeli conspiracies'" Not ICJ, if you disagree with that you need help

 

The ICJ ruling was a repudiation of the claim made in the topic title. Very much on topic. The ICJ affirmed Israel's right to continue it's attacks on Hamas.

Edited January 27 by ozimoron

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

The ICJ ruling was a repudiation of the claim made in the topic title. Very much on topic. The ICJ affirmed Israel's right to continue it's attacks on Hamas.

 

@ozimoron

 

More pointless argumentative nonsense.

[ezzra]

10 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

The ICJ ruling was a repudiation of the claim made in the topic title. Very much on topic. The ICJ affirmed Israel's right to continue it's attacks on Hamas.

Just as well, because there are  many who still denies that the 7th of October attack ever happened,  same as

those who still denying the Holocaust and other atrocities perpetrated on the Jewish people over the past centuries...

[Bkk Brian]

19 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

The ICJ ruling was a repudiation of the claim made in the topic title. Very much on topic. The ICJ affirmed Israel's right to continue it's attacks on Hamas.

Nonsense