Blocked by @ggreenwald @JesseKellyDC @readealexandra @MeghanMcCain... moderate liberal/fiercely anti-GOP… @PaulKrugman has been my intellectual hero since HS
@Devon_OnEarth Must be nice to live in a world where republicans don’t exist and never win elections and don’t have any power. How’s the weather on your planet?
HORRIFIC: Israeli settler terrorists attacked the village of Jett in the West Bank, setting vehicles on fire.
In this video, settlers smash the windows of two cars with three children inside one of them, and set the cars on fire, in an attempt to burn the children alive.
Hard to believe this is from a guy who inherited $413 million from his father only to declare bankruptcy 6 times before convincing an NBC producer to bail him out by creating a fictional show that he was a successful businessman.
@RashidaTlaib Did you condemn 10/7 without equivocation? No.
Have you ever condemned violence against unarmed, unsuspecting Jews without equivocation? No.
This isn't hard: Condemn violence without equivocation. The reported planned violence and intimidation at the University of Michigan is wrong. This is simple and any leader should be able to say so. The fact my opponent cannot bring himself to say that is concerning.
Funny how leftists now all of a sudden understand the concept of not attacking the nominee relentlessly the entire election. We could’ve used some of that in 2016 and 2024.
The Lancet, one of the most important medical journals in the world, published a petition today calling for the suspension of the Israeli Medical Association (IMA) from the World Medical Association (WMA).
1,150 professionals signed the petition because the IMA "failed to condemn the genocide of the Palestinians, the destruction of Gaza’s healthcare system, and the torture of detainees."
The IMA has, in actuality, spent the entire war advocating for Gazans, petitioning the government to ensure medical supplies were entering Gaza, and demanding that hospitals in Gaza remain safe havens.
But they're evil because they didn't use the word genocide? It doesn't matter what you do for Palestinians or how you fight for them if you don't use a certain word?
What happened to "actions speak louder than words?"
Yes, @mehdirhasan, we should ignore them. Each one failed to apply the legal standards as required.
Amnesty: “However, its [ICJ] rulings on inferring intent can be read extremely narrowly, in a manner that would potentially preclude a state from having genocidal intent alongside one or more additional motives or goals in relation to the conduct of its military operations. As outlined below, Amnesty International considers this an overly cramped interpretation of international jurisprudence and one that would effectively preclude a finding of genocide in the context of an armed conflict.”
B’tselem: “This report relies on a broader analytical framework…”
The UN Commission of Inquiry did not assess reasonable alternative explanations. The only mention of Hamas’ tunnel infrastructure was to discount the tunnel under the European hospital that Mohammed Sinwar was killed in (and where he directed acts harmful to the “enemy” [e.g. Israel]).
The International Association of Genocide Scholars (of which I’m a dues paying member) did not assess reasonable alternative explanations and discount them (which would defeat the only reasonable inference test).
Human Rights Watch did not actually assess genocide, it said that they concluded acts of genocide without any assessment.
And important to note: Amos Goldberg and Omer Bartov are historians who are not qualified to assess the legal elements of the crime of genocide. Citing to them is a logical fallacy of an appeal to authority that makes zero sense.
Not a single accuser assesses the requirements of the Geneva Conventions, particularly GCIV 19 & 28, and API 51(7). Without understanding the implications of these articles one cannot conclude that the only reasonable inference is genocide.
If each accuser refuses to apply the jurisprudence as it stands today to make their conclusion, the problem is that they have a predetermined conclusion, and that they are fitting an analysis to that conclusion. This is fundamentally flawed.
So, yes, we should ignore all of them.
If you must rely on a confirmation bias with fundamentally flawed analyses that are devoid of the legal analysis that is required today, without being honest about the shift in the jurisprudence that they all require, the problem here is you.
I can state that Israel hasn’t committed genocide under the jurisprudence because I can measure alternative reasonable explanations for Israel’s conduct. None of your citations attempted to do this required analysis.
Genocide is not what you want it to be to convict the Jewish state who had its people taken hostage and Hamas, PIJ, and even Palestinian civilians going door to door slaughtering innocent people because of their membership in either the Israeli or Jewish groups.
The more we do this the more we excuse Hamas for its crimes (including genocide), hostage taking, sexual violence, etc. that it committed against the Israeli people, but also its crimes it has committed against the Palestinian people that purposefully inflicted higher incidental harm to them (human shielding, diversion, torture, persecution, murder, etc.).
Mehdi so badly wants Israel to be guilty of the crime Hamas committed that he will excuse Hamas from culpability for its crimes against Palestinians that would fundamentally negate genocidal intent for Israel (as confirmed by a UN report this last week, by the way).
Mehdi is an evil person, as are all those who portend to care about Palestinians while ignoring Hamas just so they can blame Israel.
This is what Hamas militias did to Palestinian civilian Mahmoud Al-Abdala in Gaza.
They first attacked him in his shop. When he fled to his tent seeking safety, they chased him, stormed the tent in front of women and children, and brutally beat him.
They nearly killed him over a Facebook post.
This is why people across Gaza are taking to the streets on June 26, 2026. They have had enough of the repression, intimidation, and brutality.
JUST IN: This Is A Pretty Stunning Observation.
Trump is celebrating a new Iran agreement centered on a commitment that Iran will never obtain a nuclear weapon.
According to ABC's Jonathan Karl, that same commitment appeared in the very first paragraph of President Obama's nuclear deal more than a decade ago.
Think about that.
First came Obama's agreement.
Then Trump tore it up.
Now Trump is celebrating an agreement built around the same core promise.
@WarnerJess98@RachelMoiselle You are the absolute worst type of “ally” and your comment does nothing but harm the cause of Palestinian statehood, freedom and dignity.