Blocked by Yousef Munayyer (AKA Useless Manure). Peace and Brotherhood for All Humanity (Except those Israelites who have to fight for their rights).
Joined August 2019
- Tweets24.7K
- Following2.2K
- Followers1.2K
- Likes8.5K
Comnsense retweeted
To many people are still failing to see and understand what the genocide lie is all about. The Islamists and their supporters aren’t accusing Israel of genocide because they believe it’s actually committing genocide. They’re accusing Israel and imprinting it into people’s minds to gain a falsified global justification to commit a genocide against the Jews. They showed the world their intent on October 7. They filmed it and celebrated it. Then all focus turned to invert it and blame the Jews for it. They worked hard to delegitimize and deny the Holocaust and used specific words to describe a false Nakba that never happened as the real one.
What the Islamists are doing is preparing the world openly for the fact that they fully plan to commit a genocide against the Jewish people and have the support of millions around the world to do it.
They’re not trying to stop a genocide, because there isn’t one and they know there isn’t one.
They’re wanting to commit a genocide and have laid the foundation and groundwork in order to do it. By the time they start mass killing Jews, nobody will condemn them. Millions will cheer them on. And they won’t stop at Jews. Millions have given them the green light to genocide so many different groups of people, including the ones supporting them.
Comnsense retweeted
After months of in-depth regression analysis, ChatGPT concluded my account is "Distribution Regulated/Restricted" (i.e. Shadow Banned) & there is nothing I can do to increase my following or post impressions.
Let me know if you want me to walk you through checking your account.
Comnsense retweeted
Their goal is single payer, but the ultimate goal is to bankrupt the US. And the resulting destruction of America
Comnsense retweeted
Don’t let Abdul El-Sayed and his fellow Communists fool you. “Medicare for All” is not some wonderful new program. It is theft from hardworking Americans like me who paid into the Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund and the Supplementary Medical Insurance (SMI) Trust Fund over the years. Just like Social Security, we were promised that the funds we paid into would be used to support our healthcare costs starting at 65. El-Sayed and his fellow Commies plan to raid these funds to pay for socialized medicine, denying seniors like me healthcare WE PAID FOR! The result of Medicare For All will be No Medicare For Seniors. Just like Obamacare, it is a LIE! This will NOT increase healthcare. It will not add a single physician. It will not add a single nurse. It will not add a single hospital bed, operating room or ER unit. It will simple take my money and use it to pay for someone else’s medical expenses. Besides, we all ready have Medicaid to pay the healthcare expenses of the needy. This is just another lie from the Communist wing of the Democratic Party.
Comnsense retweeted
BREAKING: An UNRWA teacher in Gaza has just exposed the entire system.
She details a culture of death being cultivated in the schools.
Billions of European tax dollars are flowing to this organization.
Comnsense retweeted
On this day—October 22, 2010
Andrew Whitley, director of UNRWA’s New York office, told a Washington conference that the Palestinian “right of return” was unlikely to be exercised to any significant extent inside Israel, that most refugees would remain where they were, and that it was cruel to leave them with the illusion that they would one day return to homes inside what is now Israel. For saying these words, Whitley was attacked and forced into a retraction.
UNRWA’s goal has been clear for decades: make “refugees” out of the descendants of Palestinian refugees so instead of shrinking as they resettle, they never resettle and the number grows exponentially to be used as a demographic weapon ensuring any “two state solution” would actually create two Arab states.
UNRWA responded to Whitley saying his comments did not reflect the agency’s policies. Whitley gave in to the pressure quickly. He sent a letter retracting his comments and called them “inappropriate and wrong.” UNRWA released the letter publicly.
Under UNRWA’s rules, refugee status is transmitted to descendants, producing a registered population that has grown from about 700,000 in 1948–49 to nearly six million today. This is unique to UNRWA and does not apply to any other refugees on Earth. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees seeks durable solutions including local integration and resettlement. UNRWA, on the other hand, keeps refugees as refugees no matter where they live in the world, no matter how successful they may have become, and no matter how far removed they are from the 1948 conflict.
In short, UNRWA is one of the greatest weapons used against Israel’s continued existence.
Whitley’s initial remarks were consistent with the outcome of every other major refugee population in the 20th century. The public reaction from Palestinian officials, Jordan, and others, followed by the agency’s disavowal and Whitley’s retraction, was a blatant example of UNRWA’s real “mandate.”
Comnsense retweeted
Your friends xitter.gq/koshercockney/status/2…
Comnsense retweeted
Precisely, Maarten. Antisemitism has always been the canary in the coal mine—a leading indicator of a society in moral and civic decline.
France didn't import antisemitism. It has a long and shameful history of its own. What it imported was a force multiplier: Islamist extremism, reinforcing prejudices already deeply rooted in French society.
Macron and other Western leaders have mistaken appeasement for tolerance, too often dismissed warnings about Islamist extremism as Islamophobia, and failed to distinguish peaceful political protest from the glorification of terrorism and antisemitic intimidation.
The Palestinian flag, ostensibly a symbol of self-determination, has also become a banner at some demonstrations where the message is one of hatred, destruction, antisemitism, and hostility toward Western values.
When a society tolerates antisemitism, the consequences need not remain confined to its Jewish citizens. The same extremism can threaten the freedoms and institutions on which everyone depends.
It never ends with the Jews.
Comnsense retweeted
We will all soon know what it feels like to be Jewish. In France, they already do.
It will be our just deserts for having abandoned the Jews, ignored their warnings, turned against them, and even marched alongside their oppressors.
For three years, you useful idiots have been parading Palestinian flags, sporting keffiyehs, screaming “From the River to the Sea”, and recognizing a fictitious Palestinian state as a reward for Hamas’s October 7 massacre (looking at you, @EmmanuelMacron). You have boycotted the only Jewish state in the world, vilified the Jewish people’s right to self-determination (aka “Zionism”), and spread the “Gaza genocide” blood libel.
Did you really think that if you fed the crocodile enough Jewish flesh, it would eventually be satiated? All you have done is embolden the monster and whet its appetite.
So you were worried about “colonization”? Look around. The only thing being colonized here are our own Western cities. The Palestinian flag has become a victory banner, proudly waved amid the ruins of looted and vandalized historic buildings—a symbol of hatred for our civilization and everything it stands for.
It never ends with the Jews.
Comnsense retweeted
The following is a copy of an article by Spanish writer Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez and published in a Spanish newspaper on Jan. 15, 2008. It could apply equally to France, Britain, Germany and much of western Europe today. " I walked down the street in Barcelona, and suddenly discovered a terrible truth — Europe died in Auschwitz. We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20 million Muslims. In Auschwitz we burned a culture, thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen people, truly chosen, because they produced great and wonderful people who changed the world. The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of life: science, art, international trade, and above all as the conscience of the world. These are the people we burned. And under the pretense of tolerance, and because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance, religious extremism and lack of tolerance, crime and poverty, due to an unwillingness to work and support their families with pride. They have blown up our trains and turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the third world, drowning in filth and crime. Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the government, they plan the murder and destruction of their naive hosts. And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and superstition. We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of Europe and their talent for a better future for their children, their determined clinging to life because life is holy, for those who pursue death, for people consumed by the desire for death for themselves and others, for our children and theirs. What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe."
Comnsense retweeted
Every single word!
Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal, a Spanish lawyer, writer, and Member of the European Parliament👇
“You did not listen to Israel — the vanguard of the West in the face of barbarism. You chose instead to condemn its right to self-defense, whitewash its terrorist enemies, deny the horrific crimes of October 7, and spread lies about genocide. Today, those who are destroying European cities are waving the Palestinian flag.”
Comnsense retweeted
Jim, this is a brilliant piece that turns belly up the ignorance of Miliband and how uninformed he is. The fact that he occupies the role of Foreign Secretary, and felt emboldened to stand at the dispatch box and make the statement he did, was racism disguised as humanitarianism. The fact that Israel has been singled out from other countries in the way you outline in your piece provides testimony to that.
But there is more involved here than Miliband just being uninformed and ignorant. We know the Labour Party are desperate to appease a certain voting block and win back votes from the Greens in the pending Holborn and St Pancras by election.
But here is the concern that really needs more attention than it is getting. While these two competing factions of radical left useful idiots, a term coined in 1948 to describe a tactic used by a movement that manipulated communist socialists and liberals for their own ends, Islamists push their own agenda behind the guise of the liberal humanitarianism. This is unfolding in real time:
xitter.gq/JewishChron/status/209…
Labour MP calls for UK ‘military action’ against Israel
thejc.com/news/politics/labo…
Comnsense retweeted
The Law Miliband Invokes Doesn't Say What He Claims It Says
Ed Miliband calls Israeli settlements illegal under international law, as though the phrase settles the matter by itself. It doesn't. Article 49(6) of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits an occupying power from "deporting or transferring" parts of its civilian population into occupied territory. Barrister Natasha Hausdorff argues that this regulates state-directed population transfer, not the voluntary movement of civilians, and does not establish a general prohibition on people of a particular nationality living there. She made that case in the Spectator this month, and it deserves wider attention than it's had.
The claim that Israel occupies foreign sovereign territory assumes a Palestinian state existed in 1948 or 1967 with recognised title to the West Bank. None did. Under the ordinary legal doctrine of uti possidetis juris, applied from Latin American independence to the break-up of Yugoslavia, a new state inherits the boundaries of the administrative territory it emerges from. On that application of uti possidetis juris, Israel inherited the Mandate's boundaries. The 1949 armistice lines were explicitly described by the parties who signed them as ceasefire lines, not borders. The documents themselves are explicit on that point.
Even granting the occupation framing for argument's sake, the "illegal settlements" claim still collapses on its own terms. Professor Eugene Kontorovich's peer-reviewed global study documented eight comparable cases of prolonged occupation with substantial settler populations, Turkish settlement in Northern Cyprus affecting over 100,000 civilians, Moroccan settlement in Western Sahara involving hundreds of thousands, Indonesian settlement in East Timor. None drew the sustained legal condemnation, sanctions or ICC pressure now aimed at Israel. If the legal principle were being applied consistently, these cases would have triggered the same response years ago. They didn't. The principle is not being applied consistently, but invoked selectively against Israel.
Miliband's own Commons statement contained a specific, checkable claim: that Bedouin communities in Khan al-Ahmar have lived on that land for generations. Israeli researchers, using aerial photography going back decades, have repeatedly shown the site itself was largely empty until settlement began in the 1970s and grew through the 1980s and beyond. Even the Times of Israel was forced to issue a correction after reporting the "since the 1950s" version uncritically.
That doesn't mean the Jahalin tribe lacks a longer history of displacement. It doesn't. Their displacement traces back to expulsion from the Negev in the 1950s. But the specific claim about this specific site, generations of continuous habitation, doesn't survive contact with the documentary record, and a Foreign Secretary citing it as settled fact in Parliament should have checked first.
None of this requires pretending settlement expansion is uncomplicated or that Palestinian grievances aren't real. It requires applying the same legal standard consistently, rather than reaching for uti possidetis juris everywhere except the one country it's politically convenient to ignore, and rather than repeating a specific factual claim about Khan al-Ahmar researchers have already contested with evidence.
Miliband built his case on "international law is clear." The law he's citing isn't clear in the way he needs it to be, and the one fact he offered in support of his argument doesn't hold up to the aerial photographs taken of the very ground in question. A Foreign Secretary asking Britain to sanction an ally on legal grounds owes the Commons more rigour than that.
"Miliband says international law settles the argument. Natasha Hausdorff argues that the law says something rather different."
Comnsense retweeted
Listen you moron. If Israel had the intent to genocide Gaza, the Israeli Air Force could done it in two weeks without losing a man.
But instead they went in on foot, seeking the tunnel rats who used civilians as their human shields.
Hamas designed the Gaza War to achieve maximal civilian casualties. I’m sure they’re very disappointed how FEW civilians died.
Comnsense retweeted
Justin Pozmanter, The Algemeiner
There has been an ongoing narrative across the press, social media, and anti-Israel activist groups that Palestinians have a “right to resist” the “Occupation of Palestine.”
There are two fundamental problems with this narrative:
Historically, and legally, there is no occupation of Palestine. There has never been a sovereign entity called “Palestine” to occupy nor has there ever been any “Palestinian territory” that could be occupied by Israel or anyone else. When it comes to Gaza specifically, before Oct. 7 there hadn’t been a single Jew or Israeli, alive or dead (except for hostages) there since 2005, with the only exception being when soldiers entered the Strip for very short periods of time to quell ongoing rocket fire on civilian communities in Israel. Gaza was fully administered by Hamas and shared a border with Egypt. How do you “occupy” a territory without soldiers or civilians, without controlling all the borders, and without any legal, educational, or policing responsibilities there?
What Palestinians, and their naïve Western supporters, define as “resistance” is not a legitimate right under any rule of armed conflict, occupation, international law, or basic human decency or morality. Even a people actually under occupation cannot engage in the barbaric way in which the Palestinians — whether Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, Black September, or “innocent” Gazan civilians on Oct. 7 — have acted towards Israelis and Jews for decades.
As is the case with most of the Palestinian narrative, what exactly constitutes the occupation is entirely inconsistent, as is the remedy. For some, the occupation began in 1948, for others in 1967.
Between 1948 and 1967, Egypt controlled Gaza but did not claim it as sovereign territory, while Jordan controlled the West Bank and parts of Jerusalem and attempted to permanently annex it, a move backed by almost no foreign state.
During this time, the Arab population that lived in each territory engaged in acts of terrorism against their Jewish neighbors in Israel. That is to say, at a time when no Jews lived in the West Bank or Gaza — many having been ethnically cleansed from those areas during the War of Independence — there were attacks on Jewish civilians within sovereign Israel on a regular basis. Many of these attacks were conducted by fedayeen units trained and equipped by Egypt.
In 1964, the Palestine Liberation Organization drafted its founding original charter. Article 24 of the charter stated the following:
“This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah Area. Its activities will be on the national popular level in the liberational, organizational, political, and financial fields.”
This means that in 1964 the PLO explicitly disclaimed any sovereignty over the West Bank and Gaza while Arab states held them, so the only “occupation” it was formed to “liberate” was Israel inside the original armistice lines. The Palestinians only claimed the West Bank and Gaza after Israel gained control in 1967. “Occupation” to the Palestinians and their supporters consistently has more to do with whether Jews are in control of a piece of land than any true historical or legal rights.
If the “occupation” began in 1967, what were they resisting from 1948-1967? The same thing they were resisting during the 1929 Hebron massacre – the very existence of Jews anywhere in the land.
From 1922-1948 the land was formally administered under the British Mandate for Palestine. The mandate was adopted by the League of Nations Council for the purpose of “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people” and was clear it was “reconstituting their national home.” This indicates that over 100 years ago the nations of the world understood that the land was previously Jewish and would be returned to the Jewish people so they could live in their homeland.
At the time of its adoption, the Mandate for Palestine covered what is now Israel, including the West Bank and Gaza as well as present day Jordan. Then “Transjordan” was removed from the Mandate only months after its adoption, a split affirmed by the League of Nations.
So, historically speaking, the West Bank and Gaza were controlled by the Jordanians and Egypt from 1948-1967, and the entire land by the British from 1917-1948 (Britain controlled the territory from 1917, only formally gaining legal control in 1922). Before this the territories were controlled by the Ottomans from 1517-1917. Given the Ottoman Empire and the British Mandate no longer exist, and Jordan and Egypt make no claims to the land, exactly whose land is Israel occupying?
To be clear, there is a dispute over the territory, and nothing expressed here means that individual Palestinians don’t today, and haven’t always, deserved the same freedoms and human rights as anyone else. It also doesn’t mean that there couldn’t be an agreement at some point in the future that would establish “Palestine” as a sovereign state for the first time. However, the notion they are an occupied nation simply isn’t true. There were attempts to divide the land with the 1937 Peel Commission proposal and the 1947 UN partition plan. In both cases the Jews in pre-state Israel accepted the partition either in principle or in its entirety, while the Arabs rejected them out of hand. And, most ironically, it was only after the state of Israel was founded, and the Palestinians for the first time found a national voice, that they were ever offered a “Palestinian” state as such, and only then by the people they keep trying to destroy, the Israelis. However, like the Arab world before them, the Palestinians have rejected compromise and coexistence at every turn.
Across the major cities of the Western world there have been protests, starting on Oct. 7 itself, with signs like “resistance is not a crime” and “long live the resistance” coupled with chants like “when people are occupied, resistance is justified.” The notion being, of course, that the actions taken by the Palestinians constitute a legitimate form of resistance to oppression and occupation.
This is an interesting notion, and makes perfect sense in a vacuum. If a sovereign state is militarily occupied by another nation, the citizens of the occupied state generally have the right to try and throw off the hostile control of their neighbor.
However, here in the real world, rather than a sterile hypothetical, there is no occupation in this instance. Even if there was, the actions the Palestinians take to “resist” would not be legitimate or just under any circumstances, no matter how grim.
A people under an occupation could plausibly attack the military forces occupying their territory. However, under no reading of international law is invading another country to murder, rape, and kidnap civilians considered “resistance.” Under no code of armed struggle was burning families alive in their homes in Nir Oz or Be’eri legitimate. Under no laws of basic morality was it justified to blow up the Sbarro pizzeria or a public bus. And no decent person can defend massacring Olympians in Munich.
Comnsense retweeted
This is how globalized intifada looks like.
Don't you dare claiming it's not violent.
Comnsense retweeted
FACTS
Palestinians are colonisers .
Their family names tell you that and the fact that they have never recited , said or chanted any prayers connecting them to their ‘ indigenous’ homeland is further evidence.
If more evidence were needed it is the fact that there has never been one archaeological discovery verifying the existence of a group identifying as indigenous Palestinians.
The Palestinians never fought against the historical Babylonian Persian Roman or Greek invaders because the indigenous Palestinians didn’t exist .
There is no evidence of one monument standing or destroyed constructed by indigenous Palestinians in their indigenous homeland
No itinerant scribe from 3000 bc to 1948 ce ever wrote about a people, ethnicity, race , tribe or nationality identifying as the indigenous Palestinians because they never existed.
The indigenous Palestinian is simply a colonising land grabbing Muslim .
Islam has a history of such colonialism