I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values and
is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side
is anti-Palestinian.
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values and >> is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side
is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups
have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with ideological descendants of Nazis.
The government's position that a protestor at a university "would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States" is preposterous on its face. Rubio's statement contained no
evidence for his assertion.
More generally, the contention that people legally in the US can be
thrown out of the country--or legally harmed in any way--for taking a political position different from that of the government effectively nullifies the First Amendment.
Zionism is a genocidal political philosophy that must be eradicated.
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values and >>is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side
is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups
have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with >ideological descendants of Nazis.
. . .
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values and is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side
is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups
have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests.
Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
The government's position that a protestor at a university "would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States" is preposterous on its face. Rubio's statement contained no
evidence for his assertion.
More generally, the contention that people legally in the US can be
thrown out of the country--or legally harmed in any way--for taking a political position different from that of the government effectively nullifies the First Amendment.
The more extreme that Israel becomes, the more extreme becomes the
repression by governments allied to Israel--and the fanaticism of
Israel's supporters.
Zionism is a genocidal political philosophy that must be eradicated.
--Robin
. . .
Proclaiming support for Hamas aside, there's a big difference between speech >and criminal activity.
Taking over campus property, whether it be a quad or a building or a >classroom, vandalism, assault, theft, ethnic intimidation, etc. all of those >are crimes and all of that was done under the banner of "supporting Gaza" on >universities across the nation and none of it is protected under the 1st >Amendment. To the extent Khalil was responsible for organizing and >participating in that activity, he rightly deserves his deportation.
. . .
Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values and >>> is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side >>> is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups
have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
I'm not going to bother to raise the usual counterarguments, which you've obviously rejected.
Ok, Robin. I'll take it as you intended, that you've told me to go fuck myself. I shall comply. Permanently.
Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values and >>> is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side >>> is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups
have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
I'm not going to bother to raise the usual counterarguments, which you've obviously rejected.
Ok, Robin. I'll take it as you intended, that you've told me to go fuck myself. I shall comply. Permanently.
On 4/12/2025 9:32 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli
values and
is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas
side
is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups
have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
I'm not going to bother to raise the usual counterarguments, which you've
obviously rejected.
Ok, Robin. I'll take it as you intended, that you've told me to go fuck
myself. I shall comply. Permanently.
I don't that's what she intended.
On 4/13/2025 12:11 PM, suzeeq wrote:
On 4/12/2025 9:32 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli
values and
is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas
side
is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in >>>> Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups >>>> have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
I'm not going to bother to raise the usual counterarguments, which
you've
obviously rejected.
Ok, Robin. I'll take it as you intended, that you've told me to go fuck
myself. I shall comply. Permanently.
I don't that's what she intended.
...nor what Adam intends.
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values and
is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side
is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups
have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with ideological descendants of Nazis.
The government's position that a protestor at a university "would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States" is preposterous on its face. Rubio's statement contained no
evidence for his assertion.
More generally, the contention that people legally in the US can be
thrown out of the country--or legally harmed in any way--for taking a political position different from that of the government effectively nullifies the First Amendment.
The more extreme that Israel becomes, the more extreme becomes the
repression by governments allied to Israel--and the fanaticism of
Israel's supporters.
Zionism is a genocidal political philosophy that must be eradicated.
On 2025-04-13 12:38 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/13/2025 12:11 PM, suzeeq wrote:Oh happy day! suzee and moviePig are here to tell us what Robin and Adam REALLY meant!
On 4/12/2025 9:32 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli
values and
is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the
Hamas side
is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's
genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups >>>>> have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
I'm not going to bother to raise the usual counterarguments, which
you've
obviously rejected.
Ok, Robin. I'll take it as you intended, that you've told me to go fuck >>>> myself. I shall comply. Permanently.
I don't that's what she intended.
...nor what Adam intends.
On 2025-04-13 12:38 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/13/2025 12:11 PM, suzeeq wrote:Oh happy day! suzee and moviePig are here to tell us what Robin and Adam REALLY meant!
On 4/12/2025 9:32 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli
values and
is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the
Hamas side
is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's
genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups >>>>> have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
I'm not going to bother to raise the usual counterarguments, which
you've
obviously rejected.
Ok, Robin. I'll take it as you intended, that you've told me to go fuck >>>> myself. I shall comply. Permanently.
I don't that's what she intended.
...nor what Adam intends.
On 2025-04-13 12:38 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/13/2025 12:11 PM, suzeeq wrote:
On 4/12/2025 9:32 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli >>>>>>values and is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's
a misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the >>>>>>Hamas side is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in >>>>>Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups >>>>>have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus >>>>>protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with >>>>>ideological descendants of Nazis.
I'm not going to bother to raise the usual counterarguments, which >>>>you've obviously rejected.
Ok, Robin. I'll take it as you intended, that you've told me to go fuck >>>>myself. I shall comply. Permanently.
I don't that's what she intended.
...nor what Adam intends.
Oh happy day! suzee and moviePig are here to tell us what Robin and Adam >REALLY meant!
On 2025-04-12 11:29 PM, Robin Miller wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:If Hamas had taken the honourable - and legally required - approach to
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values
and
is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side >>> is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide
in Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish
groups have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led
campus protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding
with ideological descendants of Nazis.
war, none of this "genocide" would have happened. They would have put
their fighters in uniform and fought away from civilian areas instead of deliberately hiding among the civilian population and civilian infrastructure. But they didn't.
If Hamas cared about the citizens they represent, they would have let
them shelter in the extensive tunnel network that they built under Gaza, rather than forbidding them to do so because the tunnels were reserved
for fighters and rockets. But they didn't.
If Hamas wanted to end the suffering and death, they would have given up
the hostages months ago and laid down their arms. But they didn't.
If Hamas had a shred of honesty, they would have ensured that the health ministry in Gaza - which is run by Hamas - wouldn't be exaggerated and
would distinguish between dead fighters and dead civilians. But they
didn't.
The government's position that a protestor at a university "would haveThose two paragraphs are essentially what Adam are saying.
potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United
States" is preposterous on its face. Rubio's statement contained no
evidence for his assertion.
More generally, the contention that people legally in the US can be
thrown out of the country--or legally harmed in any way--for taking a
political position different from that of the government effectively
nullifies the First Amendment.
The more extreme that Israel becomes, the more extreme becomes the
repression by governments allied to Israel--and the fanaticism of
Israel's supporters.
Zionism is a genocidal political philosophy that must be eradicated.
BTR1701 responded to that point already and I have nothing to add to his response.
Mahmoud Khalil has gone beyond just speech, as Douglas Murray points out
in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCWjWAiAIG4 [8 minutes]
(Be patient, he gets there....)
On 2025-04-12 11:29 PM, Robin Miller wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:If Hamas had taken the honourable - and legally required - approach to
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values and >>> is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side >>> is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups
have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
war, none of this "genocide" would have happened. They would have put
their fighters in uniform and fought away from civilian areas instead of >deliberately hiding among the civilian population and civilian >infrastructure. But they didn't.
If Hamas cared about the citizens they represent, they would have let
them shelter in the extensive tunnel network that they built under Gaza, >rather than forbidding them to do so because the tunnels were reserved
for fighters and rockets. But they didn't.
If Hamas wanted to end the suffering and death, they would have given up
the hostages months ago and laid down their arms. But they didn't.
If Hamas had a shred of honesty, they would have ensured that the health >ministry in Gaza - which is run by Hamas - wouldn't be exaggerated and
would distinguish between dead fighters and dead civilians. But they
didn't.
The government's position that a protestor at a university "would haveThose two paragraphs are essentially what Adam are saying.
potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United
States" is preposterous on its face. Rubio's statement contained no
evidence for his assertion.
More generally, the contention that people legally in the US can be
thrown out of the country--or legally harmed in any way--for taking a
political position different from that of the government effectively
nullifies the First Amendment.
The more extreme that Israel becomes, the more extreme becomes the
repression by governments allied to Israel--and the fanaticism of
Israel's supporters.
Zionism is a genocidal political philosophy that must be eradicated.
BTR1701 responded to that point already and I have nothing to add to his >response.
Mahmoud Khalil has gone beyond just speech, as Douglas Murray points out
in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCWjWAiAIG4 [8 minutes]
(Be patient, he gets there....)
On 4/13/2025 11:04 AM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-13 12:38 PM, moviePig wrote:I don't agree with moviePig.
On 4/13/2025 12:11 PM, suzeeq wrote:Oh happy day! suzee and moviePig are here to tell us what Robin and
On 4/12/2025 9:32 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli
values and
is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the
Hamas side
is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's
genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish
groups
have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with >>>>>> ideological descendants of Nazis.
I'm not going to bother to raise the usual counterarguments, which
you've
obviously rejected.
Ok, Robin. I'll take it as you intended, that you've told me to go
fuck
myself. I shall comply. Permanently.
I don't that's what she intended.
...nor what Adam intends.
Adam REALLY meant!
On 2025-04-12 11:29 PM, Robin Miller wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values and >>> is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side >>> is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups
have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
If Hamas had taken the honourable - and legally required - approach to
war, none of this "genocide" would have happened. They would have put
their fighters in uniform and fought away from civilian areas instead of >deliberately hiding among the civilian population and civilian >infrastructure. But they didn't.
If Hamas cared about the citizens they represent, they would have let
them shelter in the extensive tunnel network that they built under Gaza, >rather than forbidding them to do so because the tunnels were reserved
for fighters and rockets. But they didn't.
If Hamas wanted to end the suffering and death, they would have given up
the hostages months ago and laid down their arms. But they didn't.
If Hamas had a shred of honesty, they would have ensured that the health >ministry in Gaza - which is run by Hamas - wouldn't be exaggerated and
would distinguish between dead fighters and dead civilians. But they
didn't.
The government's position that a protestor at a university "would haveThose two paragraphs are essentially what Adam are saying.
potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United
States" is preposterous on its face. Rubio's statement contained no
evidence for his assertion.
More generally, the contention that people legally in the US can be
thrown out of the country--or legally harmed in any way--for taking a
political position different from that of the government effectively
nullifies the First Amendment.
The more extreme that Israel becomes, the more extreme becomes the
repression by governments allied to Israel--and the fanaticism of
Israel's supporters.
Zionism is a genocidal political philosophy that must be eradicated.
BTR1701 responded to that point already and I have nothing to add to his >response.
Mahmoud Khalil has gone beyond just speech, as Douglas Murray points out
in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCWjWAiAIG4 [8 minutes]
(Be patient, he gets there....)
On Sun, 13 Apr 2025 14:19:59 -0400, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
On 2025-04-12 11:29 PM, Robin Miller wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:If Hamas had taken the honourable - and legally required - approach to
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values and >>>> is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side >>>> is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups
have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
war, none of this "genocide" would have happened. They would have put
their fighters in uniform and fought away from civilian areas instead of
deliberately hiding among the civilian population and civilian
infrastructure. But they didn't.
If Hamas cared about the citizens they represent, they would have let
them shelter in the extensive tunnel network that they built under Gaza,
rather than forbidding them to do so because the tunnels were reserved
for fighters and rockets. But they didn't.
If Hamas wanted to end the suffering and death, they would have given up
the hostages months ago and laid down their arms. But they didn't.
If Hamas had a shred of honesty, they would have ensured that the health
ministry in Gaza - which is run by Hamas - wouldn't be exaggerated and
would distinguish between dead fighters and dead civilians. But they
didn't.
The government's position that a protestor at a university "would haveThose two paragraphs are essentially what Adam are saying.
potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United
States" is preposterous on its face. Rubio's statement contained no
evidence for his assertion.
More generally, the contention that people legally in the US can be
thrown out of the country--or legally harmed in any way--for taking a
political position different from that of the government effectively
nullifies the First Amendment.
The more extreme that Israel becomes, the more extreme becomes the
repression by governments allied to Israel--and the fanaticism of
Israel's supporters.
Zionism is a genocidal political philosophy that must be eradicated.
BTR1701 responded to that point already and I have nothing to add to his
response.
Mahmoud Khalil has gone beyond just speech, as Douglas Murray points out
in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCWjWAiAIG4 [8 minutes]
(Be patient, he gets there....)
24yrs ago we all watched as Islamic terrorists flew planes into buildings on American soil. Fast forward to today and we have a lot of progressive Democrats who praise people who share the same ideology as those terrorists. Some like "the squad" even get elected to Congress.
Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
On 2025-04-13 12:38 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/13/2025 12:11 PM, suzeeq wrote:
On 4/12/2025 9:32 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli
values and is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's >>>>>>> a misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the
Hamas side is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in >>>>>> Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups >>>>>> have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with >>>>>> ideological descendants of Nazis.
I'm not going to bother to raise the usual counterarguments, which
you've obviously rejected.
Ok, Robin. I'll take it as you intended, that you've told me to go fuck >>>>> myself. I shall comply. Permanently.
I don't that's what she intended.
...nor what Adam intends.
Oh happy day! suzee and moviePig are here to tell us what Robin and Adam
REALLY meant!
People mean what they've written. It's not subject to reinterpretation
by others.
I didn't think Robin and I were being subtle in any way and I didn't
think I had to explain Usenet 101.
I'll continue to post what I like but I won't force myself on those who
won't have a discussion by following up to what they've written. Anyone
is free to tell me to fuck off; I'll respect their wishes.
Robin can use outrageous rhetoric and vitriol in followup to my articles. I don't have to like it. I'd have preferred that she made an argument
so that we could have had discussion, but how she follows up to me is
her choice. As she doesn't want to have a discussion with me, then I'll respect her wishes and stop following up to her.
On Sun, 13 Apr 2025 14:19:59 -0400, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
On 2025-04-12 11:29 PM, Robin Miller wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli values and >>>> is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas side >>>> is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups
have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
If that is the case then it should be easy enough to prove. Either
he's been out there supporting Hamas in public or he hasn't.
If Hamas had taken the honourable - and legally required - approach to
war, none of this "genocide" would have happened. They would have put
their fighters in uniform and fought away from civilian areas instead of
deliberately hiding among the civilian population and civilian
infrastructure. But they didn't.
They would have lost on the first day because Israel is just that much
better armed and trained. It's why they are hiding among the civilian population in the hopes that will help protect them. It shows that
they are willing to sacrifice their fellow Palestinians in order to
keep themselves safe.
That doesn't support their own attack on Israel civilians. That takes
them from soldiers fighting a war to terrorists who deserve what ever
they get. Not that the Palestinians they hide amongst are deserving of suffering with Hamas.
If Hamas cared about the citizens they represent, they would have let
them shelter in the extensive tunnel network that they built under Gaza,
rather than forbidding them to do so because the tunnels were reserved
for fighters and rockets. But they didn't.
That would have been better but it likely would have just led to
Israel using bunker busting type bombs to get at the people in the
tunnels.
If Hamas wanted to end the suffering and death, they would have given up
the hostages months ago and laid down their arms. But they didn't.
I wouldn't expect them to put down their arms so long as Israel is
treating the Palestinians as they are. That said I don't see the point
in holding on to the hostages. It doesn't give them the sort of
leverage they hoped for and just provides Netenyahoo (yeah, I know it
isn't his name) cover for doing what he and his far right supporters
want.
If Hamas had a shred of honesty, they would have ensured that the health
ministry in Gaza - which is run by Hamas - wouldn't be exaggerated and
would distinguish between dead fighters and dead civilians. But they
didn't.
Probably because they think that strengthens their position. No idea
if it helps or not but at least I can see why they would do that. Also
why would you give your enemy information on how effective their
attacks have been. That's never been a good idea.
The government's position that a protestor at a university "would haveThose two paragraphs are essentially what Adam are saying.
potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United
States" is preposterous on its face. Rubio's statement contained no
evidence for his assertion.
More generally, the contention that people legally in the US can be
thrown out of the country--or legally harmed in any way--for taking a
political position different from that of the government effectively
nullifies the First Amendment.
The more extreme that Israel becomes, the more extreme becomes the
repression by governments allied to Israel--and the fanaticism of
Israel's supporters.
Zionism is a genocidal political philosophy that must be eradicated.
BTR1701 responded to that point already and I have nothing to add to his
response.
Mahmoud Khalil has gone beyond just speech, as Douglas Murray points out
in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCWjWAiAIG4 [8 minutes]
(Be patient, he gets there....)
On 4/13/2025 3:50 PM, EGK wrote:
On Sun, 13 Apr 2025 14:19:59 -0400, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-12 11:29 PM, Robin Miller wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:If Hamas had taken the honourable - and legally required - approach to
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli
values and
is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the Hamas
side
is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's genocide in >>>> Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups >>>> have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
war, none of this "genocide" would have happened. They would have put
their fighters in uniform and fought away from civilian areas instead of >>> deliberately hiding among the civilian population and civilian
infrastructure. But they didn't.
If Hamas cared about the citizens they represent, they would have let
them shelter in the extensive tunnel network that they built under Gaza, >>> rather than forbidding them to do so because the tunnels were reserved
for fighters and rockets. But they didn't.
If Hamas wanted to end the suffering and death, they would have given up >>> the hostages months ago and laid down their arms. But they didn't.
If Hamas had a shred of honesty, they would have ensured that the health >>> ministry in Gaza - which is run by Hamas - wouldn't be exaggerated and
would distinguish between dead fighters and dead civilians. But they
didn't.
The government's position that a protestor at a university "would have >>>> potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United >>>> States" is preposterous on its face. Rubio's statement contained noThose two paragraphs are essentially what Adam are saying.
evidence for his assertion.
More generally, the contention that people legally in the US can be
thrown out of the country--or legally harmed in any way--for taking a
political position different from that of the government effectively
nullifies the First Amendment.
The more extreme that Israel becomes, the more extreme becomes the
repression by governments allied to Israel--and the fanaticism of
Israel's supporters.
Zionism is a genocidal political philosophy that must be eradicated.
BTR1701 responded to that point already and I have nothing to add to his >>> response.
Mahmoud Khalil has gone beyond just speech, as Douglas Murray points out >>> in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCWjWAiAIG4 [8 minutes]
(Be patient, he gets there....)
24yrs ago we all watched as Islamic terrorists flew planes into
buildings on
American soil. Fast forward to today and we have a lot of progressive
Democrats who praise people who share the same ideology as those
terrorists.
Some like "the squad" even get elected to Congress.
Do they share approval of flying planes into buildings?
On 4/13/2025 3:50 PM, EGK wrote:
24yrs ago we all watched as Islamic terrorists flew planes into buildings on
American soil. Fast forward to today and we have a lot of progressive
Democrats who praise people who share the same ideology as those terrorists.
Some like "the squad" even get elected to Congress.
Do they share approval of flying planes into buildings?
On 2025-04-13 4:51 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/13/2025 3:50 PM, EGK wrote:If they disapprove, I'm sure you can find video of them saying so....
On Sun, 13 Apr 2025 14:19:59 -0400, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-12 11:29 PM, Robin Miller wrote:
Adam H. Kerman wrote:If Hamas had taken the honourable - and legally required - approach to >>>> war, none of this "genocide" would have happened. They would have put
I despise Khalil. He's espousing anti-Western and anti-Israeli
values and
is acting, effectively, as a spokesman for Hamas, It's a
misrepresentation to call him "pro Palestinian" as taking the
Hamas side
is anti-Palestinian.
These are all lies. Khalil's position is to oppose Israel's
genocide in
Gaza, which is the only moral position to take. Numerous Jewish groups >>>>> have taken the same position; Jewish groups have often led campus
protests. Anyone who supports Israel in its genocide is siding with
ideological descendants of Nazis.
their fighters in uniform and fought away from civilian areas
instead of
deliberately hiding among the civilian population and civilian
infrastructure. But they didn't.
If Hamas cared about the citizens they represent, they would have let
them shelter in the extensive tunnel network that they built under
Gaza,
rather than forbidding them to do so because the tunnels were reserved >>>> for fighters and rockets. But they didn't.
If Hamas wanted to end the suffering and death, they would have
given up
the hostages months ago and laid down their arms. But they didn't.
If Hamas had a shred of honesty, they would have ensured that the
health
ministry in Gaza - which is run by Hamas - wouldn't be exaggerated and >>>> would distinguish between dead fighters and dead civilians. But they
didn't.
The government's position that a protestor at a university "would have >>>>> potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United >>>>> States" is preposterous on its face. Rubio's statement contained noThose two paragraphs are essentially what Adam are saying.
evidence for his assertion.
More generally, the contention that people legally in the US can be
thrown out of the country--or legally harmed in any way--for taking a >>>>> political position different from that of the government effectively >>>>> nullifies the First Amendment.
The more extreme that Israel becomes, the more extreme becomes the
repression by governments allied to Israel--and the fanaticism of
Israel's supporters.
Zionism is a genocidal political philosophy that must be eradicated. >>>>>
BTR1701 responded to that point already and I have nothing to add to
his
response.
Mahmoud Khalil has gone beyond just speech, as Douglas Murray points
out
in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCWjWAiAIG4 [8 minutes]
(Be patient, he gets there....)
24yrs ago we all watched as Islamic terrorists flew planes into
buildings on
American soil. Fast forward to today and we have a lot of progressive >>> Democrats who praise people who share the same ideology as those
terrorists.
Some like "the squad" even get elected to Congress.
Do they share approval of flying planes into buildings?
On Apr 13, 2025 at 1:51:08 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/13/2025 3:50 PM, EGK wrote:
24yrs ago we all watched as Islamic terrorists flew planes into buildings on
American soil. Fast forward to today and we have a lot of progressive
Democrats who praise people who share the same ideology as those terrorists.
Some like "the squad" even get elected to Congress.
Do they share approval of flying planes into buildings?
Well, one of them characterized 9-11 as "some people did some stuff", which indicates at a minimum she doesn't think it was any big deal. I'll leave it to
you to guess which one of those four lovely ladies it was that made that comment.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 15:19:12 |
| Calls: | 10,389 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,911 |