nein51 said:
Pro Israel professional
His name is CLEARLY Jewish. What kind of a headline is this
historian said:
It's surprising how many prominent universities are intelligently getting rid of the rabid antisemites. It's actually quite shocking since they rarely act sensibly. It's so unusual that I wonder if there is something going on behind the scenes we don't know about.
Anti-Israel protester attacks Alec Baldwin, demanding he shouts “Free Palestine” pic.twitter.com/mS7mcvlOVO
— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) April 23, 2024
boognish_bear said:Anti-Israel protester attacks Alec Baldwin, demanding he shouts “Free Palestine” pic.twitter.com/mS7mcvlOVO
— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) April 23, 2024
We are borrowing +1000x that to give away to ourselves, too....so everyone is fat dumb happy. Literally, nobody cares about the deficit, or the debt. Never, ever, not once in my life have I seen deficits be the driving factor of an election. Yet, that is what you and most of the reactionary right are using to justify a litany of bad decisions on things that have nothing to do with deficits. It's like you want to lose arguments and elections just so you can be jaded about losing arguments and elections.KaiBear said:We have to BORROW the 60 BILLION that we then GIVE AWAY to another country while our own citizens struggle to make ends meet.whiterock said:KaiBear said:sombear said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:
On the plus side almost all of that money comes back to us as it's spent with American defense contractors.
Gee that makes it all worthwhile.
We are borrowing additional billions of dollars in the hope that some of it is spent for bombs, bullets and missiles.
No doubt the vast majority of Americans are supportive of such fiscal priorities.
Look there's very few bright spots here. The two that come to mind are
1) we aren't doing the fighting
2) the money we are giving away is essentially coming right back to us
I didn't say I agreed. I didn't say it's good fiscal policy (like anyone really gives a **** about that anyhow). Fact is most of the foreign aid we give away comes right back to us via the military industrial complex and by most I mean almost 100% of it.
Now we can argue why we spend money on all sorts of worthless government projects though I suspect we probably agree.
I respect your opinion.
But most Americans do not support this insane give away.
Especially when so many are working 2 jobs just to stay fed.
L
I don't recall saying most Americans did. In fact, I'm quite sure I never said that.
Agreed
You certainly did not.
Simply repeating the obvious that most Americans do not want to give Ukraine even more billions .
BTW , wonder how the Russians feel about our representatives waving Ukrainian flags in the middle of our capital building.
Just imagine how Americans would feel if the situation was reversed .
Yet if Russia finally retaliates our media will be 'shocked'.New York Post
Most voters in battleground House districts favor Ukraine aid: poll
Amajority of voters in battleground congressional districts support sending more aid to Ukraine while a plurality of GOP primary voters in deep-red districts also back military assistance for Kyiv in its war against Russia, according to new polls exclusively shared with The Post.
The February poll found that 60% of battleground district voters are in favor of all forms of US aid, with support highest among those 50-64 years old (60%) and 65 and older (80%).
A majority of Republican voters in battleground districts for the 2024 election favor more US aid for Ukraine, according to a poll exclusively shared with The Post. AP Provided by New York Post
A slight majority of battleground voters under 35 (52%) and a plurality of those 35-49 (48%) also backed the additional aid.
Just 34% of all swing district voters were against the funding, while 6% said they did not know whether they supported it.
The survey also showed a majority of Republicans in safe GOP House seats strongly agree that Russian President Vladimir Putin "is an enemy of the United States" and "wants to reestablish the Soviet Union's sphere of influence in Eastern and Central Europe."
In total, 86% of Republican primary voters in deep-red districts had an unfavorable opinion of Putin, and 64% of them strongly agreed that "Russia had no cause and was wrong to invade Ukraine."
Another poll, taken in March, also revealed that 46% of safe district GOP voters back at least the provision of military aid for Ukraine, compared with 40% who oppose all forms of US assistance to Kyiv.
"
Classic propaganda 'cherry picking '.
Bottom line the vast majority of Americans did not want Ukraine to get still another 60 BILLION dollars our country will have to BORROW in order to give it away .
At best, the American people are 50-50 on that question. And I can bury you with polling on the question.
Wording matters. If one asks "would you like for the Ukraine War to end" or "should there be a negotiated settlement immediately"…well, you get very high "yes" numbers.
But if you ask a different question like "do you want Russia to win the Ukraine War"….the numbers are different.
Polling question on funding "too much or too little" is 45/45. Dead split.
Don't project your feelings into the argument. Very few people actually care about the issue driving your own opposition to the war - the deficit. A large majority wants Ukraine rather than Russia to win. It's getting there that's the problem.
Put that simple reality into your ****ing polls and see what the results would be.
Fetterman no filter:
— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) April 23, 2024
"If you show up in a Starbucks with a bullhorn and start yelling at people, that doesn't make you noble, It just makes you an asshole."
pic.twitter.com/uHisWdA8PZ
Reading your post, I think you are in the clown school of foreign policy.whiterock said:We are borrowing +1000x that to give away to ourselves, too....so everyone is fat dumb happy. Literally, nobody cares about the deficit, or the debt. Never, ever, not once in my life have I seen deficits be the driving factor of an election. Yet, that is what you and most of the reactionary right are using to justify a litany of bad decisions on things that have nothing to do with deficits. It's like you want to lose arguments and elections just so you can be jaded about losing arguments and elections.KaiBear said:We have to BORROW the 60 BILLION that we then GIVE AWAY to another country while our own citizens struggle to make ends meet.whiterock said:KaiBear said:sombear said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:
On the plus side almost all of that money comes back to us as it's spent with American defense contractors.
Gee that makes it all worthwhile.
We are borrowing additional billions of dollars in the hope that some of it is spent for bombs, bullets and missiles.
No doubt the vast majority of Americans are supportive of such fiscal priorities.
Look there's very few bright spots here. The two that come to mind are
1) we aren't doing the fighting
2) the money we are giving away is essentially coming right back to us
I didn't say I agreed. I didn't say it's good fiscal policy (like anyone really gives a **** about that anyhow). Fact is most of the foreign aid we give away comes right back to us via the military industrial complex and by most I mean almost 100% of it.
Now we can argue why we spend money on all sorts of worthless government projects though I suspect we probably agree.
I respect your opinion.
But most Americans do not support this insane give away.
Especially when so many are working 2 jobs just to stay fed.
L
I don't recall saying most Americans did. In fact, I'm quite sure I never said that.
Agreed
You certainly did not.
Simply repeating the obvious that most Americans do not want to give Ukraine even more billions .
BTW , wonder how the Russians feel about our representatives waving Ukrainian flags in the middle of our capital building.
Just imagine how Americans would feel if the situation was reversed .
Yet if Russia finally retaliates our media will be 'shocked'.
Most voters in battleground House districts favor Ukraine aid: poll
Amajority of voters in battleground congressional districts support sending more aid to Ukraine while a plurality of GOP primary voters in deep-red districts also back military assistance for Kyiv in its war against Russia, according to new polls exclusively shared with The Post.
The February poll found that 60% of battleground district voters are in favor of all forms of US aid, with support highest among those 50-64 years old (60%) and 65 and older (80%).
A majority of Republican voters in battleground districts for the 2024 election favor more US aid for Ukraine, according to a poll exclusively shared with The Post. AP Provided by New York Post
A slight majority of battleground voters under 35 (52%) and a plurality of those 35-49 (48%) also backed the additional aid.
Just 34% of all swing district voters were against the funding, while 6% said they did not know whether they supported it.
The survey also showed a majority of Republicans in safe GOP House seats strongly agree that Russian President Vladimir Putin "is an enemy of the United States" and "wants to reestablish the Soviet Union's sphere of influence in Eastern and Central Europe."
In total, 86% of Republican primary voters in deep-red districts had an unfavorable opinion of Putin, and 64% of them strongly agreed that "Russia had no cause and was wrong to invade Ukraine."
Another poll, taken in March, also revealed that 46% of safe district GOP voters back at least the provision of military aid for Ukraine, compared with 40% who oppose all forms of US assistance to Kyiv.
"
Classic propaganda 'cherry picking '.
Bottom line the vast majority of Americans did not want Ukraine to get still another 60 BILLION dollars our country will have to BORROW in order to give it away .
At best, the American people are 50-50 on that question. And I can bury you with polling on the question.
Wording matters. If one asks "would you like for the Ukraine War to end" or "should there be a negotiated settlement immediately"…well, you get very high "yes" numbers.
But if you ask a different question like "do you want Russia to win the Ukraine War"….the numbers are different.
Polling question on funding "too much or too little" is 45/45. Dead split.
Don't project your feelings into the argument. Very few people actually care about the issue driving your own opposition to the war - the deficit. A large majority wants Ukraine rather than Russia to win. It's getting there that's the problem.
Put that simple reality into your ****ing polls and see what the results would be.
I'm in the realist school of thought on foreign policy. It's just so obvious that's the way the world actually works that I'm at a loss to explain how anyone could contest the point. Russian victory in the war in Ukraine drastically increases the chances for war between Nato and Russia, for a long list of reasons. We cannot just "let it happen." Russia must be stopped, or costs go up - more troops in Europe, more weapons in Europe, more military bases in Europe, more foreign aid to stabilize the Eastern tier of Nato. And yet, you guys respond to that not with an alternative application of realism, or an impassioned argument for idealism. You just want to stick your head in a hole and ignore it all, because.....deficits......
Just completely daft that anyone would make the argument that letting Russia have Ukraine will save money.
whiterock said:We are borrowing +1000x that to give away to ourselves, too....so everyone is fat dumb happy. Literally, nobody cares about the deficit, or the debt. Never, ever, not once in my life have I seen deficits be the driving factor of an election. Yet, that is what you and most of the reactionary right are using to justify a litany of bad decisions on things that have nothing to do with deficits. It's like you want to lose arguments and elections just so you can be jaded about losing arguments and elections.KaiBear said:We have to BORROW the 60 BILLION that we then GIVE AWAY to another country while our own citizens struggle to make ends meet.whiterock said:KaiBear said:sombear said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:
On the plus side almost all of that money comes back to us as it's spent with American defense contractors.
Gee that makes it all worthwhile.
We are borrowing additional billions of dollars in the hope that some of it is spent for bombs, bullets and missiles.
No doubt the vast majority of Americans are supportive of such fiscal priorities.
Look there's very few bright spots here. The two that come to mind are
1) we aren't doing the fighting
2) the money we are giving away is essentially coming right back to us
I didn't say I agreed. I didn't say it's good fiscal policy (like anyone really gives a **** about that anyhow). Fact is most of the foreign aid we give away comes right back to us via the military industrial complex and by most I mean almost 100% of it.
Now we can argue why we spend money on all sorts of worthless government projects though I suspect we probably agree.
I respect your opinion.
But most Americans do not support this insane give away.
Especially when so many are working 2 jobs just to stay fed.
L
I don't recall saying most Americans did. In fact, I'm quite sure I never said that.
Agreed
You certainly did not.
Simply repeating the obvious that most Americans do not want to give Ukraine even more billions .
BTW , wonder how the Russians feel about our representatives waving Ukrainian flags in the middle of our capital building.
Just imagine how Americans would feel if the situation was reversed .
Yet if Russia finally retaliates our media will be 'shocked'.
Most voters in battleground House districts favor Ukraine aid: poll
Amajority of voters in battleground congressional districts support sending more aid to Ukraine while a plurality of GOP primary voters in deep-red districts also back military assistance for Kyiv in its war against Russia, according to new polls exclusively shared with The Post.
The February poll found that 60% of battleground district voters are in favor of all forms of US aid, with support highest among those 50-64 years old (60%) and 65 and older (80%).
A majority of Republican voters in battleground districts for the 2024 election favor more US aid for Ukraine, according to a poll exclusively shared with The Post. AP Provided by New York Post
A slight majority of battleground voters under 35 (52%) and a plurality of those 35-49 (48%) also backed the additional aid.
Just 34% of all swing district voters were against the funding, while 6% said they did not know whether they supported it.
The survey also showed a majority of Republicans in safe GOP House seats strongly agree that Russian President Vladimir Putin "is an enemy of the United States" and "wants to reestablish the Soviet Union's sphere of influence in Eastern and Central Europe."
In total, 86% of Republican primary voters in deep-red districts had an unfavorable opinion of Putin, and 64% of them strongly agreed that "Russia had no cause and was wrong to invade Ukraine."
Another poll, taken in March, also revealed that 46% of safe district GOP voters back at least the provision of military aid for Ukraine, compared with 40% who oppose all forms of US assistance to Kyiv.
"
Classic propaganda 'cherry picking '.
Bottom line the vast majority of Americans did not want Ukraine to get still another 60 BILLION dollars our country will have to BORROW in order to give it away .
At best, the American people are 50-50 on that question. And I can bury you with polling on the question.
Wording matters. If one asks "would you like for the Ukraine War to end" or "should there be a negotiated settlement immediately"…well, you get very high "yes" numbers.
But if you ask a different question like "do you want Russia to win the Ukraine War"….the numbers are different.
Polling question on funding "too much or too little" is 45/45. Dead split.
Don't project your feelings into the argument. Very few people actually care about the issue driving your own opposition to the war - the deficit. A large majority wants Ukraine rather than Russia to win. It's getting there that's the problem.
Put that simple reality into your ****ing polls and see what the results would be.
I'm in the realist school of thought on foreign policy. It's just so obvious that's the way the world actually works that I'm at a loss to explain how anyone could contest the point. Russian victory in the war in Ukraine drastically increases the chances for war between Nato and Russia, for a long list of reasons. We cannot just "let it happen." Russia must be stopped, or costs go up - more troops in Europe, more weapons in Europe, more military bases in Europe, more foreign aid to stabilize the Eastern tier of Nato. And yet, you guys respond to that not with an alternative application of realism, or an impassioned argument for idealism. You just want to stick your head in a hole and ignore it all, because.....deficits......
Just completely daft that anyone would make the argument that letting Russia have Ukraine will save money.
I am 100% on Board with you. Take the strategic piece out, some people just don't understand or value the larger strategic picture. The other absurdity is that it is worth allowing a Nation to be subjugated to save money. Russia may win, but it will not be because the US didn't try to give Ukraine what it needed. If a person sees no value in that and thinks that saving money is more important, I am at a loss. Then to take the moral high-ground that helping those people is the wrong in the equation? Some people are just hollow and nothing more than walking cash registers.whiterock said:We are borrowing +1000x that to give away to ourselves, too....so everyone is fat dumb happy. Literally, nobody cares about the deficit, or the debt. Never, ever, not once in my life have I seen deficits be the driving factor of an election. Yet, that is what you and most of the reactionary right are using to justify a litany of bad decisions on things that have nothing to do with deficits. It's like you want to lose arguments and elections just so you can be jaded about losing arguments and elections.KaiBear said:We have to BORROW the 60 BILLION that we then GIVE AWAY to another country while our own citizens struggle to make ends meet.whiterock said:KaiBear said:sombear said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:
On the plus side almost all of that money comes back to us as it's spent with American defense contractors.
Gee that makes it all worthwhile.
We are borrowing additional billions of dollars in the hope that some of it is spent for bombs, bullets and missiles.
No doubt the vast majority of Americans are supportive of such fiscal priorities.
Look there's very few bright spots here. The two that come to mind are
1) we aren't doing the fighting
2) the money we are giving away is essentially coming right back to us
I didn't say I agreed. I didn't say it's good fiscal policy (like anyone really gives a **** about that anyhow). Fact is most of the foreign aid we give away comes right back to us via the military industrial complex and by most I mean almost 100% of it.
Now we can argue why we spend money on all sorts of worthless government projects though I suspect we probably agree.
I respect your opinion.
But most Americans do not support this insane give away.
Especially when so many are working 2 jobs just to stay fed.
L
I don't recall saying most Americans did. In fact, I'm quite sure I never said that.
Agreed
You certainly did not.
Simply repeating the obvious that most Americans do not want to give Ukraine even more billions .
BTW , wonder how the Russians feel about our representatives waving Ukrainian flags in the middle of our capital building.
Just imagine how Americans would feel if the situation was reversed .
Yet if Russia finally retaliates our media will be 'shocked'.
Most voters in battleground House districts favor Ukraine aid: poll
Amajority of voters in battleground congressional districts support sending more aid to Ukraine while a plurality of GOP primary voters in deep-red districts also back military assistance for Kyiv in its war against Russia, according to new polls exclusively shared with The Post.
The February poll found that 60% of battleground district voters are in favor of all forms of US aid, with support highest among those 50-64 years old (60%) and 65 and older (80%).
A majority of Republican voters in battleground districts for the 2024 election favor more US aid for Ukraine, according to a poll exclusively shared with The Post. AP Provided by New York Post
A slight majority of battleground voters under 35 (52%) and a plurality of those 35-49 (48%) also backed the additional aid.
Just 34% of all swing district voters were against the funding, while 6% said they did not know whether they supported it.
The survey also showed a majority of Republicans in safe GOP House seats strongly agree that Russian President Vladimir Putin "is an enemy of the United States" and "wants to reestablish the Soviet Union's sphere of influence in Eastern and Central Europe."
In total, 86% of Republican primary voters in deep-red districts had an unfavorable opinion of Putin, and 64% of them strongly agreed that "Russia had no cause and was wrong to invade Ukraine."
Another poll, taken in March, also revealed that 46% of safe district GOP voters back at least the provision of military aid for Ukraine, compared with 40% who oppose all forms of US assistance to Kyiv.
"
Classic propaganda 'cherry picking '.
Bottom line the vast majority of Americans did not want Ukraine to get still another 60 BILLION dollars our country will have to BORROW in order to give it away .
At best, the American people are 50-50 on that question. And I can bury you with polling on the question.
Wording matters. If one asks "would you like for the Ukraine War to end" or "should there be a negotiated settlement immediately"…well, you get very high "yes" numbers.
But if you ask a different question like "do you want Russia to win the Ukraine War"….the numbers are different.
Polling question on funding "too much or too little" is 45/45. Dead split.
Don't project your feelings into the argument. Very few people actually care about the issue driving your own opposition to the war - the deficit. A large majority wants Ukraine rather than Russia to win. It's getting there that's the problem.
Put that simple reality into your ****ing polls and see what the results would be.
I'm in the realist school of thought on foreign policy. It's just so obvious that's the way the world actually works that I'm at a loss to explain how anyone could contest the point. Russian victory in the war in Ukraine drastically increases the chances for war between Nato and Russia, for a long list of reasons. We cannot just "let it happen." Russia must be stopped, or costs go up - more troops in Europe, more weapons in Europe, more military bases in Europe, more foreign aid to stabilize the Eastern tier of Nato. And yet, you guys respond to that not with an alternative application of realism, or an impassioned argument for idealism. You just want to stick your head in a hole and ignore it all, because.....deficits......
Just completely daft that anyone would make the argument that letting Russia have Ukraine will save money.
FLBear5630 said:historian said:
It's surprising how many prominent universities are intelligently getting rid of the rabid antisemites. It's actually quite shocking since they rarely act sensibly. It's so unusual that I wonder if there is something going on behind the scenes we don't know about.
Daughter works for Harvard, it is taking a toll financially. They are trying hard to figure a way to walk a tightrope. Their President didn't help them....
historian said:FLBear5630 said:historian said:
It's surprising how many prominent universities are intelligently getting rid of the rabid antisemites. It's actually quite shocking since they rarely act sensibly. It's so unusual that I wonder if there is something going on behind the scenes we don't know about.
Daughter works for Harvard, it is taking a toll financially. They are trying hard to figure a way to walk a tightrope. Their President didn't help them....
I honestly believe that almost every university in the country, and probably most other large organizations, could cut in half the top administrators and function better. There would be a lot less waste & corruption.
FLBear5630 said:Take the strategic piece out, some people just don't understand or value the larger strategic picture. The other absurdity is that it is worth allowing a Nation to be subjugated to save money. Russia may win...whiterock said:We are borrowing +1000x that to give away to ourselves, too....so everyone is fat dumb happy. Literally, nobody cares about the deficit, or the debt. Never, ever, not once in my life have I seen deficits be the driving factor of an election. Yet, that is what you and most of the reactionary right are using to justify a litany of bad decisions on things that have nothing to do with deficits. It's like you want to lose arguments and elections just so you can be jaded about losing arguments and elections.KaiBear said:We have to BORROW the 60 BILLION that we then GIVE AWAY to another country while our own citizens struggle to make ends meet.whiterock said:KaiBear said:sombear said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:KaiBear said:nein51 said:
On the plus side almost all of that money comes back to us as it's spent with American defense contractors.
Gee that makes it all worthwhile.
We are borrowing additional billions of dollars in the hope that some of it is spent for bombs, bullets and missiles.
No doubt the vast majority of Americans are supportive of such fiscal priorities.
Look there's very few bright spots here. The two that come to mind are
1) we aren't doing the fighting
2) the money we are giving away is essentially coming right back to us
I didn't say I agreed. I didn't say it's good fiscal policy (like anyone really gives a **** about that anyhow). Fact is most of the foreign aid we give away comes right back to us via the military industrial complex and by most I mean almost 100% of it.
Now we can argue why we spend money on all sorts of worthless government projects though I suspect we probably agree.
I respect your opinion.
But most Americans do not support this insane give away.
Especially when so many are working 2 jobs just to stay fed.
L
I don't recall saying most Americans did. In fact, I'm quite sure I never said that.
Agreed
You certainly did not.
Simply repeating the obvious that most Americans do not want to give Ukraine even more billions .
BTW , wonder how the Russians feel about our representatives waving Ukrainian flags in the middle of our capital building.
Just imagine how Americans would feel if the situation was reversed .
Yet if Russia finally retaliates our media will be 'shocked'.
Most voters in battleground House districts favor Ukraine aid: poll
Amajority of voters in battleground congressional districts support sending more aid to Ukraine while a plurality of GOP primary voters in deep-red districts also back military assistance for Kyiv in its war against Russia, according to new polls exclusively shared with The Post.
The February poll found that 60% of battleground district voters are in favor of all forms of US aid, with support highest among those 50-64 years old (60%) and 65 and older (80%).
A majority of Republican voters in battleground districts for the 2024 election favor more US aid for Ukraine, according to a poll exclusively shared with The Post. AP Provided by New York Post
A slight majority of battleground voters under 35 (52%) and a plurality of those 35-49 (48%) also backed the additional aid.
Just 34% of all swing district voters were against the funding, while 6% said they did not know whether they supported it.
The survey also showed a majority of Republicans in safe GOP House seats strongly agree that Russian President Vladimir Putin "is an enemy of the United States" and "wants to reestablish the Soviet Union's sphere of influence in Eastern and Central Europe."
In total, 86% of Republican primary voters in deep-red districts had an unfavorable opinion of Putin, and 64% of them strongly agreed that "Russia had no cause and was wrong to invade Ukraine."
Another poll, taken in March, also revealed that 46% of safe district GOP voters back at least the provision of military aid for Ukraine, compared with 40% who oppose all forms of US assistance to Kyiv.
"
Classic propaganda 'cherry picking '.
Bottom line the vast majority of Americans did not want Ukraine to get still another 60 BILLION dollars our country will have to BORROW in order to give it away .
At best, the American people are 50-50 on that question. And I can bury you with polling on the question.
Wording matters. If one asks "would you like for the Ukraine War to end" or "should there be a negotiated settlement immediately"…well, you get very high "yes" numbers.
But if you ask a different question like "do you want Russia to win the Ukraine War"….the numbers are different.
Polling question on funding "too much or too little" is 45/45. Dead split.
Don't project your feelings into the argument. Very few people actually care about the issue driving your own opposition to the war - the deficit. A large majority wants Ukraine rather than Russia to win. It's getting there that's the problem.
Put that simple reality into your ****ing polls and see what the results would be.
I'm in the realist school of thought on foreign policy. It's just so obvious that's the way the world actually works that I'm at a loss to explain how anyone could contest the point. Russian victory in the war in Ukraine drastically increases the chances for war between Nato and Russia, for a long list of reasons. We cannot just "let it happen." Russia must be stopped, or costs go up - more troops in Europe, more weapons in Europe, more military bases in Europe, more foreign aid to stabilize the Eastern tier of Nato. And yet, you guys respond to that not with an alternative application of realism, or an impassioned argument for idealism. You just want to stick your head in a hole and ignore it all, because.....deficits......
Just completely daft that anyone would make the argument that letting Russia have Ukraine will save money.
boognish_bear said:Fetterman no filter:
— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) April 23, 2024
"If you show up in a Starbucks with a bullhorn and start yelling at people, that doesn't make you noble, It just makes you an asshole."
pic.twitter.com/uHisWdA8PZ
Redbrickbear said:boognish_bear said:Fetterman no filter:
— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) April 23, 2024
"If you show up in a Starbucks with a bullhorn and start yelling at people, that doesn't make you noble, It just makes you an asshole."
pic.twitter.com/uHisWdA8PZ
Where were these reasonable Democratic party leaders during BLM?
How much harassment and intimidation did we see during that summer....and yet no one spoke out against it.
The_barBEARian said:Redbrickbear said:boognish_bear said:Fetterman no filter:
— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) April 23, 2024
"If you show up in a Starbucks with a bullhorn and start yelling at people, that doesn't make you noble, It just makes you an asshole."
pic.twitter.com/uHisWdA8PZ
Where were these reasonable Democratic party leaders during BLM?
How much harassment and intimidation did we see during that summer....and yet no one spoke out against it.
Can you post this in the Campus Protest thread?
Alec Baldwin’s scuffle with anti-Israel agitator ‘Crackhead Barney’ spilled out onto sidewalk outside NYC coffee shop, photos show https://t.co/mJP1Hra9Gl pic.twitter.com/igDtRBEbMn
— New York Post (@nypost) April 23, 2024
historian said:
Fetterman us definitely NOT. Your typical Democrat today. Frankly, he's sounded more like a republican the past few months on many issues, especially Israel.
Pelosi says Netanyahu should resign, calling him an obstacle to a two-state solution:
— Axios (@axios) April 23, 2024
• "I don't know whether he's afraid of peace, incapable of peace, or just doesn't want peace, but he has been an obstacle to the two-state solution." https://t.co/VfIBdTEG3F
The only sensible reply to that meddling old biddy:boognish_bear said:Pelosi says Netanyahu should resign, calling him an obstacle to a two-state solution:
— Axios (@axios) April 23, 2024
• "I don't know whether he's afraid of peace, incapable of peace, or just doesn't want peace, but he has been an obstacle to the two-state solution." https://t.co/VfIBdTEG3F
nein51 said:
Yeah that and that Hamas has already said they won't accept a 2 state solution.
#BREAKING MASS ARRESTS as hundreds blocked Brooklyn street outside Schumer home, during 'Seder in the Streets' as they chant "Stop Funding Genocide" their shirts reads "Jewish voices for peace" as they demand to stop arming Israel.
— Oliya Scootercaster 🛴 (@ScooterCasterNY) April 24, 2024
Video by @yyeeaahhhboiii2 Desk@freedomnews.tv… pic.twitter.com/IiTBnAWR5i
The_barBEARian said:nein51 said:
Yeah that and that Hamas has already said they won't accept a 2 state solution.
Neither will Netanyahu
historian said:The_barBEARian said:nein51 said:
Yeah that and that Hamas has already said they won't accept a 2 state solution.
Neither will Netanyahu
Why should he? Israel has no reason to want a terrorist state of genocidal maniacs on their border. Hamas is the modern equivalent of the Nazi party. They literally seek to annihilate all Jews.
I do not understand how anyone can claim to be civilized and also support Hamas. The two ideas are incompatible.
If you really can't tell the difference, then you either need to radically change how you gather information... or you are really stupid.The_barBEARian said:historian said:The_barBEARian said:nein51 said:
Yeah that and that Hamas has already said they won't accept a 2 state solution.
Neither will Netanyahu
Why should he? Israel has no reason to want a terrorist state of genocidal maniacs on their border. Hamas is the modern equivalent of the Nazi party. They literally seek to annihilate all Jews.
I do not understand how anyone can claim to be civilized and also support Hamas. The two ideas are incompatible.
Again, I fail to see the difference between Hamas and the IDF... but ultimately I don't give a *****
May the most homicidal maniac win!
Tired of both sides and the Christian Zionists sucking us into a conflict over ancient prophecies and blood feuds.
It wasnt that long ago America was still a beautiful place and our attention should be placed on getting back there.
I've yet to see any actual proof of all of that. Forgive me if I dont take Ben Shapiro's hysterical shrieking word for it. I have seen videos of lots of blown up children and have seen video of the IDF shooting at teenagers and laughing about it.ShooterTX said:If you really can't tell the difference, then you either need to radically change how you gather information... or you are really stupid.The_barBEARian said:historian said:The_barBEARian said:nein51 said:
Yeah that and that Hamas has already said they won't accept a 2 state solution.
Neither will Netanyahu
Why should he? Israel has no reason to want a terrorist state of genocidal maniacs on their border. Hamas is the modern equivalent of the Nazi party. They literally seek to annihilate all Jews.
I do not understand how anyone can claim to be civilized and also support Hamas. The two ideas are incompatible.
Again, I fail to see the difference between Hamas and the IDF... but ultimately I don't give a *****
May the most homicidal maniac win!
Tired of both sides and the Christian Zionists sucking us into a conflict over ancient prophecies and blood feuds.
It wasnt that long ago America was still a beautiful place and our attention should be placed on getting back there.
One group goes out of their way to try and avoid killing babies, while the other group intentionally targets women & babies. The primary goal of Hamas on Oct 7th was to rape women and kill as many civilians as possible. It was not an accident that they killed babies in their cribs, or placed babies in ovens to burn them alive while raping the mothers.
Honest question: Are you unaware of the atrocities committed on Oct 7th?
Are you joking? CNN and MSNBC (not exactly in love with the IDF) posted photos and videos which CLEARLY show baby cribs and kids beds covered in blood from the Oct 7th attack. This isn't debated by anyone. The "evidence" that the babies in ovens was AI generated was clearly debunked... those images were confirmed to be real.muddybrazos said:I've yet to see any actual proof of all of that. Forgive me if I dont take Ben Shapiro's hysterical shrieking word for it. I have seen videos of lots of blown up children and have seen video of the IDF shooting at teenagers and laughing about it.ShooterTX said:If you really can't tell the difference, then you either need to radically change how you gather information... or you are really stupid.The_barBEARian said:historian said:The_barBEARian said:nein51 said:
Yeah that and that Hamas has already said they won't accept a 2 state solution.
Neither will Netanyahu
Why should he? Israel has no reason to want a terrorist state of genocidal maniacs on their border. Hamas is the modern equivalent of the Nazi party. They literally seek to annihilate all Jews.
I do not understand how anyone can claim to be civilized and also support Hamas. The two ideas are incompatible.
Again, I fail to see the difference between Hamas and the IDF... but ultimately I don't give a *****
May the most homicidal maniac win!
Tired of both sides and the Christian Zionists sucking us into a conflict over ancient prophecies and blood feuds.
It wasnt that long ago America was still a beautiful place and our attention should be placed on getting back there.
One group goes out of their way to try and avoid killing babies, while the other group intentionally targets women & babies. The primary goal of Hamas on Oct 7th was to rape women and kill as many civilians as possible. It was not an accident that they killed babies in their cribs, or placed babies in ovens to burn them alive while raping the mothers.
Honest question: Are you unaware of the atrocities committed on Oct 7th?
So post some links. I googled it to try to find proof and all that came up was a daily mail article that says eye wtiness claims etc. I dont believe anything any more especially from our "greatest ally".ShooterTX said:Are you joking? CNN and MSNBC (not exactly in love with the IDF) posted photos and videos which CLEARLY show baby cribs and kids beds covered in blood from the Oct 7th attack. This isn't debated by anyone. The "evidence" that the babies in ovens was AI generated was clearly debunked... those images were confirmed to be real.muddybrazos said:I've yet to see any actual proof of all of that. Forgive me if I dont take Ben Shapiro's hysterical shrieking word for it. I have seen videos of lots of blown up children and have seen video of the IDF shooting at teenagers and laughing about it.ShooterTX said:If you really can't tell the difference, then you either need to radically change how you gather information... or you are really stupid.The_barBEARian said:historian said:The_barBEARian said:nein51 said:
Yeah that and that Hamas has already said they won't accept a 2 state solution.
Neither will Netanyahu
Why should he? Israel has no reason to want a terrorist state of genocidal maniacs on their border. Hamas is the modern equivalent of the Nazi party. They literally seek to annihilate all Jews.
I do not understand how anyone can claim to be civilized and also support Hamas. The two ideas are incompatible.
Again, I fail to see the difference between Hamas and the IDF... but ultimately I don't give a *****
May the most homicidal maniac win!
Tired of both sides and the Christian Zionists sucking us into a conflict over ancient prophecies and blood feuds.
It wasnt that long ago America was still a beautiful place and our attention should be placed on getting back there.
One group goes out of their way to try and avoid killing babies, while the other group intentionally targets women & babies. The primary goal of Hamas on Oct 7th was to rape women and kill as many civilians as possible. It was not an accident that they killed babies in their cribs, or placed babies in ovens to burn them alive while raping the mothers.
Honest question: Are you unaware of the atrocities committed on Oct 7th?
Much of the raw footage & photos of the rapes & murders comes from social media posts by the Hamas butchers themselves.
Wow... where are you even getting your info? From the Hamas website?
