2 Israeli Embassy staff members killed in shooting outside of event at the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, DC

[Ahlevah]

Making it impossible to live in the area, by removing basic infrastructure like schools, hospitals and so on.. yes it is genocide.

Could that be because Hamas was using hospitals, apartment buildings, schools, mosques, etc. as venues for conducting military operations? You can’t give a militant a helmet with a red cross on it, put him in an ambulance transporting weapons, and then call him a humanitarian after he’s sent to Allah in pieces from an Israeli missile. He becomes a legitimate military target. If that’s true, then, no, Israel is not committing genocide. However, Hamas is committing war crimes.

 

[Bodecea]

Since you are quite obviously confused, I will clear it up for you. There should be no need to separate violent crime into two categories, violent crime and hate crime. All violent crime is hate-crime and should be punished to the full extent of the law. The punishment of the crime should not be more or less due to one's race. If you attack a white individual with a baseball bat and then go two blocks over and attack a black individual with a baseball bat, it's the same level of crime. Looking at it any other way is racist.

And there it is....just as I said it has been with con-servatives.

 

[cpwill]

Maybe the shooter thought they were Palestinians

Given that he targeted the event and the people he did, extremely unlikely, but, then, you knew that.

 

[cpwill]

Making it impossible to live in the area, by removing basic infrastructure like schools, hospitals and so on.. yes it is genocide.

Every Major War Is A Genocide is not a good definition of Genocide.

 

[cpwill]

It's impossible to live in an area without a university?

Also, no medical facilities or schools were harmed in WWII. It is well known, for example, that all the bombs and shells dropped had very specific "No Schools Or Medical Facility" guidance chips on them.

No siege has ever occurred in the history of warfare. Ever.

Except when and if it's done by Jews - then it's Genocide because, I'm sympathetic to their enemies, and therefore want to throw the most emotionally charge verbiage out that I can, without considering if I'm cheapening it or not.

And everyone who disagrees with me is a Nazi.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Given that he targeted the event and the people he did, extremely unlikely, but, then, you knew that.

They've been marching around calling for violence, so it's unsurprising that someone finally did it like this

 

[Phys251]

The IDF may partially destroy schools when they know Hamas is there.

We already know that the IDF commits war crimes. You don't need to remind us.

Read his article about so called refugee camps:

Palestinian refugee camps - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

you will see that hat were actual camps in the lat 1940s are now large cities. For example Those in the Gaza strip had a population of 198,000 in 1951 and over 1,4 million in 2018.

Gaza is one big open-air prison, run by the tyrant Israel. And that's in the best of times.

 

[MAGAnificent]

And there it is....just as I said it has been with con-servatives.

You are hopelessly confused as usual.

 

[Ouroboros]

Why do you suppose your term is so deeply unpopular amongst MAGA? You raise a fair point that not even Don Jr. and Eric can be bothered to use it.

No asking new questions until you tell us what level of middle school you identify with. I know it's the Mad Lib thing to do, to condemn yourself out of your own mouth and then complain that Mad Cons have misquoted you, but really-- resist the obvious.

 

[Ouroboros]

More details about this murderer. After the female victim was shot, she tried to crawl away. He followed her, shot her, reloaded, and shot her again.

Once the decedents fell to the ground, RODRIGUEZ is captured on the video advancing closer to the decedents, leaning over them with his arm extended, and firing several more times. As Decedent-1 attempted to crawl away from RODRIGUEZ, he followed behind her and fired again. After a brief moment, RODRIGUEZ appeared to reload his firearm. At the same time, Decedent-1 sat up. Once he reloaded, RODRIGUEZ fired several times at Decedent-1.

The New Details About the Israeli Embassy Staffers' Assassinations Are Horrifying

townhall.com

This is what happens when people yell “Globalize the intifada”.

Which ought to qualify the use of the phrase as hate speech.

 

[JMB1911A1]

Which ought to qualify the use of the phrase as hate speech.

Agreed. And so do others.

Former Biden Diplomat: 'No Question' that 'Free Palestine' Slogan is a Call for Violence

A former diplomat from the Biden administration is raising serious concerns about a slogan widely us

townhall.com

A former diplomat from the Biden administration is raising serious concerns about a slogan widely used in pro-Palestinian demonstrations, stating there is “no question” that “Free Palestine” is often a call for violence. Ambassador Deborah Lipstadt’s remarks challenge the narrative pushed by many on the left that the phrase is purely symbolic or peaceful.

“I think there’s no question, whatever its initial intent and whatever people were saying initially or meant it, it has become a call for violence, and not violence against Israelis, which is wrong, but violence against Jews," Lipstadt told CNN's "Inside Politics" host Dana Bash.

“And anybody who tries to separate the two and try to say, ‘Oh, I’m just against Israel’s policies in Palestine or in Gaza, and I’m not antisemitic,’ this was antisemitism pure and simple. That he happened to have killed two Israeli staff didn’t matter. It was a Jewish event, they were targets.” She continued.

 

[Ouroboros]

Agreed. And so do others.

Former Biden Diplomat: 'No Question' that 'Free Palestine' Slogan is a Call for Violence

A former diplomat from the Biden administration is raising serious concerns about a slogan widely us

townhall.com

A former diplomat from the Biden administration is raising serious concerns about a slogan widely used in pro-Palestinian demonstrations, stating there is “no question” that “Free Palestine” is often a call for violence. Ambassador Deborah Lipstadt’s remarks challenge the narrative pushed by many on the left that the phrase is purely symbolic or peaceful.

“I think there’s no question, whatever its initial intent and whatever people were saying initially or meant it, it has become a call for violence, and not violence against Israelis, which is wrong, but violence against Jews," Lipstadt told CNN's "Inside Politics" host Dana Bash.

“And anybody who tries to separate the two and try to say, ‘Oh, I’m just against Israel’s policies in Palestine or in Gaza, and I’m not antisemitic,’ this was antisemitism pure and simple. That he happened to have killed two Israeli staff didn’t matter. It was a Jewish event, they were targets.” She continued.

The big problem is that SCOTUS tends not to restrict speech unless one can show a "clear and present danger" from said speech. From "Terminiello vs. Chicago:"

[F]reedom of Speech," Justice William O. Douglas wrote for the 5-4 majority, is "protected against censorship or punishment, unless shown likely to reduce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest ... There is no room under our Constitution for a more restrictive view."

In the case of this killer, the people he hung with can probably disavow involvement. Still, Libs always say that free speech does not immunize citizens from using tactics like shaming and doxing to put hate-speechers in the crosshairs. Maybe that should happen (non-violently) to these activist Marxist/jihadist groups.

 

[Master Debator]

Which ought to qualify the use of the phrase as hate speech.

The big problem is that SCOTUS tends not to restrict speech unless one can show a "clear and present danger" from said speech. From "Terminiello vs. Chicago:"


In the case of this killer, the people he hung with can probably disavow involvement. Still, Libs always say that free speech does not immunize citizens from using tactics like shaming and doxing to put hate-speechers in the crosshairs. Maybe that should happen (non-violently) to these activist Marxist/jihadist groups.

There there. Pobrecito.

 

[Mika-El]

1. If anyone on this forum disagrees with specific policies of Israel's government at the present time in Gaza I again repeat what Appocolypse said and what all people on this forum whop defend Israel's right to defend itself against Hamas repeat over and over again-your citiicism of what the IDF is currently doing in Gaza is acknowledged;

2-We also have stated over and over again-the status quo, which means leaving in Hamas holding Palestinian civilians hostage as well as anywhere from 29-58 remaining Israaelis in Gaza hostage and continuing a vow to remove Israel off the map as a Jewish state by any means necessary including using its remaining civilians as fodder to die is morally unacceptable;

3-The death of any Gaza or Israeli citizen is not acceptable;

4-If Hamas is not removed from Gaza once and for all-Gaza and Israeli citizens will continue to be killed by them.

I myself repeat again-it is easy to say, Israel is a demon for continuing to fight-what is not easy is for those of you who say that to suggest what the alternative is for Israel and Gaza civilians not to continue to be attacked by Gaza. I have yet to see an anti Israeli on this board ever suggest an alternative.

In fact I am one of the loudest critics of Netanyahu on this board but unlike anti Israelis, I do not simply blame him or the IDF. I state-those critics of Israel, particularly Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, all ARab Lrague of Nations countries, Iran, by sitting back and not providing an alternative which is to remove Hamas and recognize Israel as a Jewish state-enable Hamas, Iran, terrorists, extremist Muslims and as well extremist Israeli right wing powers to continue to add fuel to the fire and empower Hamas.

Instead of France, the UK, my country Canada condemning Israel, what alternative do they suggest? They do not. As for the US? I strongly argued against Netanyahu allying with Trump over and over on this board. I again argue Trump is an anti-semite of the worst kind and has no alliances with anyone other than what makes him personally money in any given moment and he showed that in his recent trip to Saudi Arabia and Qatar and his treatment of Ukraine.

I loudly called out Netanyahu for abandoning Ukraine in a UN vote condemning Russia to placate Putin and Trump.

I have argued from the get go Trump will sell anyone out at any given time and is a pathological liar. I have argued by being a stooge of Putin he has removed the US as the only possible peacemaker at this time on the international stage. China and Russia have always been anti Israel although both countries cynically in secret are the first to ask Israel for help in obtaining anti Muslim terrorist info.

I argued that the notion of forcefully removing the 2 million people of Gaza (those who are NOT Hamas) is not possible but I also argued Hamas hiding as civilians in their midst have to be removed and in that mission as horrible as it is, civilians are dying as they hide within them as the IDF tries to remove them.

Unlike anti Israelis on this board while I loath Netanyahu I do NOT take the easy way out and simply blame him and stop there. That is bullshit. I argue he must make better efforts to restore diplomatic channels with the EU, China, Indonesia, certain other nations that are Muslim like Saudi Arabia, UAE,, Jordan, Egypt and get on the same page as them in all concentrating on a way to remove Gaza of Hamas and find a neutral police force to maintain Gaza while it can be rebuilt.

That suggestion is wrought with pitfalls as it has been tried over and over and each time Hamas has penetrated, stolen the funds for rebuilding to rearm and attack.

Now as for the current two deaths-blaming all leftists or liberals for it is as stupid as blaming all Gaza civilians for Hamas, blaming all Israelis for Netanyahu policies, blaming anyone for anything.

The acts of the idiot who killed the two people begin and end with his own decisions. The man had a history of anger and unresolved conflict and the real issue that enabled him once again is not his opinions but the fact he was mentally unstable and could easily access a weapon.

It always comes down to that in the US.

 

[phoenix2020]

No asking new questions until you tell us what level of middle school you identify with. I know it's the Mad Lib thing to do, to condemn yourself out of your own mouth and then complain that Mad Cons have misquoted you, but really-- resist the obvious.

What middle school do you identify with, and was your Mad Libs bit popular there? What does it feel like to be associated with name-calling so unpopular that even Don Jr. won’t bother to follow your lead? Have you considered ditching your failed slander for the more successful Libruls or Demonrats, or are you sticking with it like Donald on crypto?

 

[Ouroboros]

What middle school do you identify with, and was your Mad Libs bit popular there? What does it feel like to be associated with name-calling so unpopular that even Don Jr. won’t bother to follow your lead? Have you considered ditching your failed slander for the more successful Libruls or Demonrats, or are you sticking with it like Donald on crypto?

Oh, you're going to stick with your failed metaphor to the very end.

Well, that's definitely the Mad Lib thing to do. Kind of like being the band on the Titanic, playing as the ship sinks, but in the scenario where they ignore the lifeboat escape because they just wanna keep playing the same song.

 

[Ouroboros]

There there. Pobrecito.

You remind me of the Norm MacDonald joke. Goes like, "I think it would be terrible for some rogue Jihadists to get hold of a dirty bomb, and kill a bunch of people, because the blowback to innocent Muslims would be horrific."

 

[Aristaeus]

For the record, genocide is the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group. In other words, the targeting and killing of civilians must be the primary motive.

Killing large numbers of civilians and not caring about how many you kill in the process of attacking military targets would not meet the definition of genocide. It certainly meets the definition of a war crime though.

I don't know if what Israel has done meets the definition of genocide. I'm not an expert and I will respect the ICJ's verdict however they rule.
My gut instinct is that the intent isn't there, but I may be wrong.

 

[phoenix2020]

Oh, you're going to stick with your failed metaphor to the very end.

Well, that's definitely the Mad Lib thing to do. Kind of like being the band on the Titanic, playing as the ship sinks, but in the scenario where they ignore the lifeboat escape because they just wanna keep playing the same song.

Why do you keep playing the same stale, unpopular Mad Lib song as though you're the band on the Titanic?

How does it feel to know that none of your fellow MAGA are interested in your Mad Libs bit, and even Donald himself can't be bothered to even consider it?

 

[Ouroboros]

Why do you keep playing the same stale, unpopular Mad Lib song as though you're the band on the Titanic?

How does it feel to know that none of your fellow MAGA are interested in your Mad Libs bit, and even Donald himself can't be bothered to even consider it?

I can't hear the music of your horn because it's beginning to fill up with water. Keep on playing the same sad song though.

 

[Mika-El]

For the record, genocide is the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group. In other words, the targeting and killing of civilians must be the primary motive.

Killing large numbers of civilians and not caring about how many you kill in the process of attacking military targets would not meet the definition of genocide. It certainly meets the definition of a war crime though.

I don't know if what Israel has done meets the definition of genocide. I'm not an expert and I will respect the ICJ's verdict however they rule.
My gut instinct is that the intent isn't there, but I may be wrong.

No you are legally correct. It can not meet the test of genocide. The term genocide is used because its a deliberate tactic of the technique known as holocaust inversion something used against any thing Israel has done to defend itself in wars or terror attacks.

Have war crime been committed? The problem with proving a war crime is you also have to prove the intent was there to be dangerous, reckless, deliberate in choice of force used.

I am not making a blanket statement and saying the IDF has not made mistakes. I am saying unless someone has proper proof from first hand credible witnesses its hard to prove.

Also the IDF is usually responding to Hamas in the heat of the pursuit and moment when arm chair experts claim what they do is genocide or a war crime-the problem there is such judges think you can ignore what Hamas is doing and simply isolate what the IDF are doing when determining genocide or a war crime. No it does not work that way. If you could show the IDF acted in a vacuum then the argument for a crime becomes more probable.

On this and all political forums, those with an anti Israeli agenda are silent on what Hamas does when the IDF is responding and want the actions of the IDF judged dettached from Hamas and ignoring what Hamas has done leading up to, during and after a clash including how it chooses to operate using civilians as cover.

 

[Aristaeus]

No you are legally correct. It can not meet the test of genocide. The term genocide is used because its a deliberate tactic of the technique known as holocaust inversion something used against any thing Israel has done to defend itself in wars or terror attacks.

Have war crime been committed? The problem with proving a war crime is you also have to prove the intent was there to be dangerous, reckless, deliberate in choice of force used.

I am not making a blanket statement and saying the IDF has not made mistakes. I am saying unless someone has proper proof from first hand credible witnesses its hard to prove.

Also the IDF is usually responding to Hamas in the heat of the pursuit and moment when arm chair experts claim what they do is genocide or a war crime-the problem there is such judges think you can ignore what Hamas is doing and simply isolate what the IDF are doing when determining genocide or a war crime. No it does not work that way. If you could show the IDF acted in a vacuum then the argument for a crime becomes more probable.

On this and all political forums, those with an anti Israeli agenda are silent on what Hamas does when the IDF is responding and want the actions of the IDF judged dettached from Hamas and ignoring what Hamas has done leading up to, during and after a clash including how it chooses to operate using civilians as cover.

What Hamas is doing makes no difference as to whether Israel commits war crimes, which it certainly does. By the way, Hamas also commits war crimes.

 

[Mika-El]

What Hamas is doing makes no difference as to whether Israel commits war crimes, which it certainly does. By the way, Hamas also commits war crimes.

No you are absolutely incorrect and this is because you do not understand what standard of proof is required to prove Israel has commited a war crime. I can try explain but I doubt you will read my explanation.

At this time the basis being claimed for genocide against Israel comes from Amnesty International which relies on INDIRECT circumstantial evidence but not direct evidence.to infer genocide However to be able to infer npt just genocide or any war crime in law you must still be able to prove that the only reasonable inference that can be drawn from Israel’s military conduct in Gaza.is genocide.

SImply assuming because Gaza civilians die which is what Amnesty is doing by itself proves war crimes and/or genocide is NOT sufficient legal evidence.

To successfully argue there is genocide or war crimes by inference the accuser must show there was/is no other purpose in Gaza for the IDF to have done and do what it does other than to wipe out Palestinians. Yoiu mjust prove there is NO OTHER reasonable explanation for what the IDF does.

To do that the ICC accusers and Amnesty have deliberately ignored what Hamas has done and is still doing that is directly related to why the IDF does what it does. The ICC accusers and Amnesty engage in this exclusion because of their political bias which incorrectly omits considering Hamas' role and instead simply isolates what the IDF does or has done in a vacuum with no consideration of Hamas interrelated actions.

That is akin to saying if a man points a loaded gun at your head and younshoot him with your gun, the Judge excludes any consideration of the gun pointed at your head as the reason you pulled your gun and shot him-the Judge just asks-did you pull a gun and shoot, and if the answer is yes you are guilty of a crime.

Now legal determination does not do that It looks at the entire chain of events. It doesn't politically isolate and select only certain portions of the event to determine a crime.

This slective bias of considering IDF actions in the absence of inter-related Hamas actions prevents the proper legal analysis required to determine any criminality.

I repeat again criminal legal analysis and the definition of both genocide and war crime does not operate in a vacuum-the analysis considers the full extent, cause, intent and nature of a crime. It has to look at the entire chain of events and sequences and break them down one step at a time when considering the elements required to prove a crime.

For all those reasons your comments are legally incorrect.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

They are not starving until they are dead. And if they do die as a result of starvation caused by the Israeli blockade of food aid, it is Hamas’s fault.

Heads, Israel wins. Tails, Palestinian civilians lose.

Who do you think will receive that food once the blockade is removed? Hamas or Palestinian civilians?

 

[Ouroboros]

We already know that the IDF commits war crimes. You don't need to remind us.



Gaza is one big open-air prison, run by the tyrant Israel. And that's in the best of times.

If Gaza is a prison it could be because a lot of Palestinians keep committing crimes, ever since the hijacking of the Achille Lauro in '85.

Partisans of Palestine generally tend to say, "there can only be peace if Palestine gets everything it wants." But what proof can anyone offer that Palestine, under the control of Hamas, will quietly fold its tents and go back to being good citizens (last seen prior to the existence of Israel)? I'm not claiming that Israel has not been a bad "prison guard." But the idea that Palestine is innocent of repeated crimes is absurd.

Consider that Hamas' entire scheme since October 7 has been to place Palestinian citizens in harm's way in order to get them killed and to excite worldwide public outrage against Israel. You can believe that everything Israel has ever done to curb Palestinian terrorism is unjustified, okay. But if the governing body of Palestine exploits its own citizens in that manner, simply in order to steal a march on Israel, why would they stop such exploitation if Palestine gets total autonomy? This simplistic belief, that if you open all the prisons the criminals will be grateful and become good citizens, has never worked before and never can.