Hamas Launches Offensive Against Southern Israel
- Thread starter Marduk
- Start date
Morphic Tide
Well-known member
Foreign settlers, actually. "Invader" has organization and violence intrinsic to it that they aren't involved in. Some of the cartel bullshit could constitute small-scale invasion, but phrasing it this way is both less hyperbolic and slams the Leftists in the hypocrisy.
Finally stumbled upon a piece of info that was missing from the conversations about... public support of Palestinian civilian population for Hamas military strategy. Even i didn't expect it to be this high, and i did expect a majority support.
Survey finds majority in the West Bank support the Oct 7 massacre - I24NEWS
The Birzeit University poll finds that Palestinian terror groups are widely supported, with over 80 percent supporting the various factions - Click the link for more details.
www.i24news.tv
Last edited:
posh-goofiness
Well-known member
So 1 in 20 are NOT eligible targets. Got it.
An amusing observation is that in the same poll the support for Hamas is significantly lower in Gaza than it is in the West Bank. Looks like all of that bombing is actually deradicalizing the Gazans. 
mrttao
Well-known member
Gotta nitpick
1. they forgot to ask why they are against it. the 5% against it could be just smart enough to realize that it was strategically retarded. If adjusted for that then the support figure (in favor) is even higher.
2. what assurances did they give the people asked that they won't be executed afterwards for the "crime" of "israeli sympathizer". If adjusted for that then the figure is lower.
One of the things that always pissed me off in the past few decades is that we just let them execute people for the "crime" of being "israeli sympathizer" (read: willing to entertain peace, even if for purely pragmatic reasons) and justified doing nothing with "it is their internal affair".
That said... considering everything else a 95% in favor seems about right.
Last edited:
King Arts
Well-known member
Ironically the Arab man Abraham is in the right here. Assuming you have not left any information out. But if the Qurans owned the Israeli Flag they have the right to protest and even burn flags(this isn’t even an American flag) so the Jewish student who took the flag away is a criminal, and the Qurans were using lawfully self defense of themselves and their property.
Unless the Qurans stole the flag from a pro Israel protestor or whatever.
You're not allowed to assault people in defense of other peoples property typically.
EDIT:
There's probably other legal quirks as well. But I don't think there's a legal case ongoing anyways in either direction.
King Arts
Well-known member
It’s a bit more complicated you can use force to prevent the thief from taking your property but generally not lethal force. Also states have different laws. I don’t think our Jewish thief was killed.
Also kinda strange to see a conservative saying a law abiding man doesn’t have the right to use all necessary force to protect their property from a criminal.
I literally said "Other peoples property" not "Your" property. And who mentioned people being killed?
As it is apparently one of the "Law Abiding" Sons was the one who stopped in the middle of the road to start a fire from the back of a running pick up truck surrounded by people so immaterial anyways.
It's strange for a "Conservative" to state that the Law typically doesn't allow you to use force to protect other peoples property? Stop putting words in my mouth you 'tard. I swear you have an inability to understand my really simple posts so you have to write up a strawman to respond to.
You are aware you can state things that "aren't" your own opinion of what is right or wrong. Or maybe you don't because all you ever do is repeat your opinion ad nauseam like you're in danger of forgetting it lol.
Like if I said "Oh Killing a suspected Pedophile Is Typically Illegal Unless You Catch Them In the Act"
King Arts would be like "kinda strange to see a conservative saying a law abiding man doesn't have the right to use all necessary force to protect children from a criminal."
Also...
Law Abiding Man?
All necessary force?
Please expand on your thoughts.
(Or Maybe Don't Since I Know You Love Derailing This AntiSemitism Thread With Your Nonsense All the Time for Completely Mysterious Reasons)
Last edited:
Apparently the pro-Hamas protests on the Golden Gate Bridge blocked traffic for four hours.
Of note:
Stunning and Brave! This protest coincides with the ongoing international APEC Summit.
abc7news.com
Of note:
ABC7 said:
Stunning and Brave! This protest coincides with the ongoing international APEC Summit.
Around 80 protesters arrested after abandoning cars, blocking westbound Bay Bridge, CHP says
CHP officials say that protesters abandoned their cars and threw their keys into the bay, as they blocked all westbound lanes of the Bay Bridge. Around 80 arrests have been made.
abc7news.com
King Arts
Well-known member
It does not matter, don't make legal statements when you know nothing about the law.
You are allowed to use self defense not just for yourself, but other people. You are also allowed to use force to protect other people's property.(What do you think security guards do?) You are allowed "reasonable force" to protect property, so you are wrong about your statement "You can't assault someone to protect property!" Reasonable force has been held to be non lethal.
Also how about instead of cherry picking biased sources, you actually say what the fuck occurred? Because you haven't said anything about what the guy was doing. Even with your bias I can show that you haven't shown the Arab man to have done a wrong action.
Assault - Wikipedia
Is all you do whine incessantly when the narrative you build shows cracks?It's strange for a "Conservative" to state that the Law typically doesn't allow you to use force to protect other peoples property? Stop putting words in my mouth you 'tard. I swear you have an inability to understand my really simple posts so you have to write up a strawman to respond to.
You are aware you can state things that "aren't" your own opinion of what is right or wrong. Or maybe you don't because all you ever do is repeat your opinion ad nauseam like you're in danger of forgetting it lol.
Like if I said "Oh Killing a suspected Pedophile Is Typically Illegal Unless You Catch Them In the Act"
King Arts would be like "kinda strange to see a conservative saying a law abiding man doesn't have the right to use all necessary force to protect children from a criminal."
Also...
Law Abiding Man?
All necessary force?
Please expand on your thoughts.
Oh and no this is not derailing. You brought up this scenario and I'm arguing it's not anti semitism and the Arab man was justified.
I never made a legal statement. I said.
You're not allowed to assault people in defense of other peoples property typically.
There's probably other legal quirks as well. But I don't think there's a legal case ongoing anyways in either direction.
No legal statements made unlike with you below lol...
I never said "You can't assault someone to protect property!"
I said "You're not allowed to assault people in defense of other peoples property typically.
There's probably other legal quirks as well. But I don't think there's a legal case ongoing anyways in either direction.
Furthermore they aren't merchants or security guards. This isn't shoplifting. And they obviously acted provactively. Maybe you can look up the "legal statements" on that or maybe you should be the one not making legal statements...
The thread is about AntiSemitism. Burning an Israeli Flag in a pro-Hamas protest is AntiSemitism in front of a bunch of Jewish students at a University where a large plurality of the student body is Jewish is Anti-Semitism IMHO.
But just to be clear you think driving your pickup truck through the middle of a group of people multiple times with minors in the back and having one of them set a Jewish flag on fire in front of them is "justified" and not "anti-semitism" and "law biding" and "not a wrong action" in your opinion seems suspect to me. But I'm glad you came out to defend the pro-Hamas instigators as just and good in yet another thread derailment.
Last edited:
mrttao
Well-known member
Should charge them all with 3 counts of murder for those lost organ transplant.Apparently the pro-Hamas protests on the Golden Gate Bridge blocked traffic for four hours.
Of note:
Stunning and Brave! This protest coincides with the ongoing international APEC Summit.
Around 80 protesters arrested after abandoning cars, blocking westbound Bay Bridge, CHP says
CHP officials say that protesters abandoned their cars and threw their keys into the bay, as they blocked all westbound lanes of the Bay Bridge. Around 80 arrests have been made.
But I doubt they would
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
Same opinion here.
Or at least manslaughter charges with a $20,000 fine. Real consequences, enforced ones, will nip all this terrorism in the bud.
Also, the Palestinians are Hamas, and Hamas are the Palestinians. Just because Gaza is now regretting their life choices in being death cultist scum now that Israel is turning the Strip into a parking lot, doesn't absolve them or lend them any sympathy.
If the Palestinians were winning this little "war", there'd be no regrets from them.
Fuck Palastine.
Also, the Palestinians are Hamas, and Hamas are the Palestinians. Just because Gaza is now regretting their life choices in being death cultist scum now that Israel is turning the Strip into a parking lot, doesn't absolve them or lend them any sympathy.
If the Palestinians were winning this little "war", there'd be no regrets from them.
Fuck Palastine.