How can the Oslo accords be used as an argument against Israeli prosecution if Israel has done exactly nothing to uphold them? What in the dystopian fuck is this?
“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
This is the working definition of antisemitism as per the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. Criticising the Israeli government for behaviour they exhibit does not fall under this definition, and therefore we can't be "antisemitic as hell. By definition".
Stop equating Israel to the Jewish people, they are not the same.
The Palestinian state is recognised by the majority of countries in the world (currently 145 out of 193, and growing, like recently by Spain, Norway, Slovenia and Ireland).
I suggest you look up UN resolution 181 and see what parts of "The British Mandate for Palestina" (interesting last word in that name) were actually given to Israel, and which parts were left to the "Palestinian arab population". You'll find that Israel is occupying large areas of land that the British did not actually give to them.
Just because Israels propaganda does not want a Palestinian state to exist, does not make it so.
Always fun how Israel apologists fall back to "you're an antisemite" once they know they have no valid argument left.
You're devaluating "anti-Semitism" by misusing it, and as a result you are hurting Jewish people. Furthermore, by equating Israel to Judaism, you're propagating that any misbehaviour by the Israeli government reflects the will of the Jewish people, further damaging the Jewish people worldwide.
So you blame Palestina for existing and being constantly under attack by terrorists... "how dare you fight back!" man cant make this shit up
That argument works both ways
(Even if you oppose the classification of Israel as "terrorists" - although fair given the definition - replace terrorist in that sentence with "Israel" and the sentiment is exactly the same)
We kept poking the bear and it eventually got angry, so clearly we have to exterminate all bears.
I guess it will be something like that, but you'd assume it's 1) less of an issue to blur a replay compared to a live session and 2) if you've already blurred it live, you don't have to do it anymore for the replay.
Either way, shitty that they just cut their offering. Sorry for the Frenchies.
How does this work? Why is it allowed for live sessions but not for replays? And I am guessing it's due to vaping sponsorships, since tobacco sponsorship isn't allowed in F1 in the first place?
Lol what? I'm clearly not saying that, I'm arguing Israeli lives are not worth more than Palestinian. My whole point is that a life is a life, I don't give a rats ass what side of an imaginary line on a map that person was born.
Okay, let's assume only half are innocent (that's generous given the statistics of the invasion so far). That's still more than 100 innocent human beings murdered. Families torn apart, children orphaned, parents that have to bury their children, or families that simply stopped existing. How anyone can celebrate that outcome as a success I will never understand.
How deranged do you have to be to think that it's okay to murder more than 200 innocent people to save 4? Imagine that there's a hostage situation somewhere near you, and the outcome is "we saved the 4 hostages, unfortunately 200 bystanders died". I can not comprehend how you can be so mentally disturbed that you can be okay with that.
It's not the first time, and it has likely caused deaths before due to delayed care: https://www.wired.com/story/ransomware-hospital-death-germany/
I will never not chuckle at gravy seals
Curious to see what the Dutch government will do. They have been one of the most loyal lapdogs of the US and Israel, but with the ICC being in The Hague, going against it is not a pretty look either.
We also have a court that has ordered we can't deliver F-35 parts because it's likely they will be used to commit war crimes, and the government is fighting that order. I imagine the ICC saying the same will not help their case.
At this point, I'm not even sure they won't bomb US troops if they were in Gaza, and I am pretty sure the US government wouldn't hold them responsible if they did.
It's so fucking wild to me that we need to resort to completely ineffective shit like floating docks when the reason we can't send trucks by land is that our own ally doesn't allow it, and our governments refuse to hold them accountable. Such a fucking dystopian situation.
My go-to is their "REAL" PLA brand. It's good quality, is made in NL and comes on cardboard spools.
I am a bit fed up with all the shit they throw in with each order though, there's only so many pens and stacks of post-its I need. When I remember, I add a line in the notes field to leave it out.
That's not what I am denying, read my comment again. What I am saying is that the warnings are just for show, because if they follow the warnings and flee, the IDF kills them while they are on the run
Not when reasonable effort to warn civilians is: we're going to bomb you, and if you run we'll bomb you too.
The discussion was literally about sanctions. Seems like a reasonable step compared to the "war" you immediately jump to, no?