Monday, October 9, 2023

Nothing to See Here.

 It is clearly impossible that there could be even the most remote or tiny connection between Joe Biden's choice to release of $6 billion to Iran, well know as a sponsor of terrorist groups including Hamas, and the brutal attack on Israel over the last few days.  


FYI, any of y'all with Ukraine flags, or who've been uncritically supporting unaccountable billions to Ukraine need to step up, be consistent, and support Israel.    Of course, it's more likely you'll support those who are indiscriminately raping, beheading, kidnapping, and killing innocent civilians.

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

Of course, we strenuously oppose this despicable attack on innocent people in Israel. Of course, we always and consistently oppose any harm or oppression of innocent people.

Of course.

We are consistent, that way, of course.

And of course, we were/are opposed to the oppression of innocent Palestinian people over the years by Israel. Of course, we stand opposed to any attacks on innocent Palestinians by Israel in seeking to punish Hamas.

Of course, any suggestion that we might support attacks on innocent people is just damnably stupid.

Of course, we will be consistently opposed to the harm of innocents.

The question, then, is can you all say the same thing?

I hope so.

Craig said...

"Of course, we strenuously oppose this despicable attack on innocent people in Israel. Of course, we always and consistently oppose any harm or oppression of innocent people. Of course. We are consistent, that way, of course."

Of course you do. Because openly supporting the terrorist group Hamas, flying their flags, and protesting Israel is how you support the innocent civilians and tourists being treated barbarically. I wept as I read your heartfelt and moving blog posts, and Facebook posts dedicated to the suffering of innocents in Israel. I was moved by your explicit condemnation of Hamas and Iran for their barbarism and support of barbarism. Because of course, you vocally and rapidly condemn these sorts of actions every single time they occur. Because you cloak yourself in the assumption that you can remain silent in the face of barbarism to innocents. Real people are undergoing real harm, and you remain silent. Of course you do, the perpetrators of barbarism those you support.

"And of course, we were/are opposed to the oppression of innocent Palestinian people over the years by Israel. Of course, we stand opposed to any attacks on innocent Palestinians by Israel in seeking to punish Hamas. Of course, any suggestion that we might support attacks on innocent people is just damnably stupid. Of course, we will be consistently opposed to the harm of innocents."

Of course, you'll do so silently because the oppressors you support are the barbarians.

"The question, then, is can you all say the same thing?"

Since you've said virtually nothing except a mealy mouthed, namby pamby attempt to justify your silence, I'd hope I could say more than silence and assuming that one's bland, vague, platitudes about violence and barbarism apply equally to all.

"I hope so."

No, you don't.

Anonymous said...

Wow. How many posts have YOU made condemning the oppression of Palestinian people over the years? How about condemning the criminalization of homosexuality in nations?

The reality is, I'm a finite man. I gladly admit I do not speak on every possible topic in the world on my blog. If being finite is a sin, I'm guilty.

Again, I repeat: of course, I condemn the oppression of innocents and brutal taking of innocent civilian lives. I condemn this attack by Hamas that has killed hundreds of innocent lives AND I condemn the retaliation by Israel that has taken hundreds of innocent lives.

Do you?

Dan

Anonymous said...

You see, that's the nice thing about having consistent values: when you're a person in a community that consistently condemns violence against innocents, then, when a new instance of violence happens, you do not need to ask if you condemn the violence. It's a given.

I'm hoping the same is true for you, but you tell me.

Dan

Craig said...

"You see, that's the nice thing about having consistent values: when you're a person in a community that consistently condemns violence against innocents, then, when a new instance of violence happens, you do not need to ask if you condemn the violence. It's a given."

Nice excuse for your silence.

"I'm hoping the same is true for you, but you tell me."

It's irrelevant. Especially as you constantly hide behind this when your silence is mentioned, while demanding that others must speak out on events even when we've consistently spoken against whatever you decide is particularly heinous.

I think it says all that is necessary that you haven't actually addressed the specific barbarities being perpetrated by a group of people that you generally support.

"Wow. How many posts have YOU made condemning the oppression of Palestinian people over the years? How about condemning the criminalization of homosexuality in nations?"

1. Excellent job of trying to divert attention from your silence.

2. Interesting. As I've condemned both of those things, by your standards, I shouldn't need to. But you'll hide behind this double standard and remain silent on this particular situation. Hiding behind your vague, bland, general disavowal of generalities.

"The reality is, I'm a finite man. I gladly admit I do not speak on every possible topic in the world on my blog. If being finite is a sin, I'm guilty."

Haven't seen the "finite" excuse in a while, it's especially amusing in combination with your attempt to hold me to a standard you don't hold yourself to.

"Again, I repeat: of course, I condemn the oppression of innocents and brutal taking of innocent civilian lives. I condemn this attack by Hamas that has killed hundreds of innocent lives AND I condemn the retaliation by Israel that has taken hundreds of innocent lives. Do you?"

No, I don't draw a false equivalency between terrorists engaging in barbarities and using women and children as human shields to hide behind, and a nation state defending it's citizens and visitors from terrorist attacks.

Marshal Art said...

Dan's lying once again, pretending to be "Christian" while allowing for extreme barbarity. There's been no "oppression" of those who falsely call themselves "palestinians". There's only been defensive actions against vile animals who live to destroy Israel and the Jewish people.

The vermin Dan pretends is "oppressed" by Israel hides behind their women and children...shooting from behind them...using schools and hospitals to store arms for use against Israel. They send their women and children to detonate explosives strapped to their bodies in order to murder.

“We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children. We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us” ---Golda Meir

It seems pretty clear to me that there will only be peace when there no longer exists any Arab children who will grow up. They're taught to hate Jews. Thus, the hate perpetuates throughout the generations because it's what they are. Pallies "oppressed" by Israel? Bullshit.

It's a simple thing which has been said before. If the pallies put down their guns there will be peace. If the Jews put down their guns there will be no more Jews.

Dan's posturing is pathetic and vile.

Craig said...

Art,

Given Dan's continued propensity to defend the version of Islam that he's constructed based on his claims and hunches based on a tiny sample size, it doesn't surprise me that he does so here. I suspect that he's uninformed regarding the history of that part of the world since the end of the Ottoman Empire. He probably believes the propaganda that paints the Jews as the aggressor/oppressors. He probably has an excuse for the mobs chanting that the Jews should be "burned". He certainly fails to understand that everything the Jews built in Israel, the Arabs could have built for themselves post 1946. Hell, the Brits intentionally left the Arabs with every possible advantage, and they couldn't engage in genocide against the Jews despite their best efforts. He ignores the fact that the surrounding Muslim nations are responsible for keeping those who left Israel in '48, because their fellow Muslims made promises they couldn't keep.

Even though charity toward fellow Muslims is one of the 5 pillars of Islam, that charity doesn't extend to these refugees, who their fellow Arabs caused to be expelled from Israel.

Hell Egypt could annex Gaza tomorrow, disarm and disband Hamas and incorporate Gaza into Egypt if they wanted, but for some reason they don't want to. As I've heard it, the "pure" Arabs (Egyptians, Saudi's, Iranians, etc) look on these refugees as lesser and refuse to incorporate them into their countries.

Craig said...

You're correct that it is the only acceptable form of genocide left. The make the Israelis stop defending themselves and allow themselves to be exterminated.

Craig said...

It's interesting that Dan often uses crimes against children as examples of things that are the most heinous actions, and actions most deserving of punishment and scorn. Yet as we literally watch footage of graphic evidence of children having been brutally killed, maimed, and possibly dismembered some are still trying to make those vile, barbaric actions against children morally equivalent to trying to engage in a military engagement with a terrorist organization. If the IDF kills children as collateral damage, because Hamas has intentionally chosen to hide in places where children will be harmed by those who are pursuing them, is it really the fault of the IDF?

Similarly, if Hamas chooses to place it's HQ under a hospital and to hide there after committing terroristic depredations, who is really responsible for injuries to patients. How strange it is that those who follow the religion of peace would have so little regard for children and the sick, that they would use them to hide behind to protect their cowardly asses.

Marshal Art said...

I really don't care about collateral damage in Gaza given those people voted for Hamas to run their "country".

Craig said...

Art,

That sort of lack of concern for collateral damage is exactly the reason why Hamas is so incredibly vile. I understand that when Hamas chooses to use women, children, and the elderly for human shields that it increases the chances for collateral damage. I don't think that showing a lack of some basic level of concern for the lives of woman, children, and the elderly is appropriate. Especially since that's what Hamas does. But to each their own.

Anonymous said...

 "if Hamas chooses to place it's HQ under a hospital and to hide there after committing terroristic depredations, who is really responsible for injuries to patients."

If ANYONE knowingly and deliberately bombs a hospital full of innocents, then they are responsible for their actions. Period.

What's strange is that you have to ask.

What's become of modern conservatism? Or is it the case they've always been like this (Hiroshima?)

Dan

Anonymous said...

"I really don't care about collateral damage in Gaza"

And there it is.

You don't have to ask progressives if we condemn the killing of innocents. We're consistent.

Conservatives? The party of "moral values.."?

Not so much.

Dan

Marshal Art said...

The concern has been the trademark of countries like Israel since the 1940's. What good has it done for them. Again, the people of Gaza put Hamas in charge. They are all of the same mindset. Thus, and especially given how they fight their "enemies", the entirety of the population are enemy combatants and if they care about their women, children and elderly at all, they must be the ones to keep them from harm. Their well-being is not the concern of those they intend to totally destroy and remove from existence. Those they intend to destroy have lost women, children and elderly because they chose to concern themselves with the women, children and elderly of Gaza. I think it's time for a different mindset in dealing with those who chose Hamas over peace.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

In full-fledged war, which is now declared by Israel, it's difficult to always avoid collateral damage to civilians due to the nearness of military targets. The "Palestinians" purposely attacked only civilians and no military targets (except those who guarded the border). I say again, their targets were civilians and they did the typical Muslim brutality, savagery. Islam is a demonic system of religion/government.

Craig said...

Art,

You correctly note the double standard as it applies to Israel and Hamas. Israel is held to a much higher standard of conduct than Hamas is. It seems germane to note that Israel is making every effort to provide safe zones for noncombatants, while Hamas intentionally targets noncombatants.

Israel, in this case, is the party that was attacked. They are responding to an act of war, by any definition, by waging war in return. I think Isoroku Yammamoto who, before Pearl Harbor, said something about sowing the wind and reaping the whirlwind. He was absolutely correct, unfortunately Hamas isn't quite so wise. Unless, this is their endgame. They are willing to sacrifice thousands of their own women and children in some bizarre attempt to rally the rest of the Arab/Muslim world to avenge their sacrifice and destroy Israel. But, it's not their fault.

Craig said...

The notion that every action will provoke a reaction, and that sometimes the reaction will be larger, is a known and accepted part of statecraft and has been for centuries.

Marshal Art said...

Regarding your 8:12AM comment, it is indeed their endgame, especially for the Shiite faction running Iran. They're good with the total destruction bringing about the end times as they understand it. Destroy Israel or suffer from the attempt is of equal value for these morons.

Craig said...

I agree that this is an under reported facet of the conversation. We're literally dealing with a bunch of religious zealots who are willing to kill anyone and destroy anything that stands in their way. It's why I keep pointing out that anything that happens to them is a natural result of their actions, thus the responsibility is on them.

Just imagine if Hamas was to renounce violence, destroy all of their military offensive weapons. Imagine of they poured their billions of dollars into rebuilding Gaza into a place where people wanted to live. Imagine if they made peace with Israel. Does anyone really think that Israel would continue to wage war or retaliate militarily? From a purely PR standpoint Israel would be insane to do anything but cooperate with a peaceful, Gaza with a leadership who desire peace. To do anything else would be insane, and would allow those on the political left the leverage to cut ties with Israel and worse. Unfortunately, the very suggestion that Hamas renounce violence and their stated goal of eradicating Israel is anathema to them and the status quo will remain.

Craig said...

One of the best things that happened after WW2 was that the US was the primary leader in the postwar process. The reality is that the Axis countries greatly benefited from losing the war. My hunch is that Israel would treat Gaza similarly to the way the US treated the Axis, if Israel was able to actually defeat Hamas and negotiate a surrender. Again, Hamas would never stand for that, so status quo.

Marshal Art said...

As I've repeated, if muslims lay down their arms, there will be peace. If Israel lays down theirs, they will be destroyed.

Craig said...

That is absolutely True.