If a woman in a presidential debate said that she had the "concepts of a plan" for national freaking health care... that would be all the news media talked about for a week and it would functionally end her campaign.
The men in my husband’s squadron were talking about Project 2025 today, & all of the ways it will screw service members over.
This is a group of deeply conservative men—but learning about Project 2025 has them reconsidering their votes
Keep talking about it, y’all. It’s working
As i seem to have lost the ability to block people on here, I’m cutting back my Twitter usage a lot. If you need me, just look for Aenaria on the other platforms. Chances are good that’s me.
TTFN.
(And Twitter stop emailing me post updates. I do not give a shit anymore.)
After going viral this weekend actor Rahul Kohli drops all the parts he auditioned for in the hopes to make the atrocities in Gaza go just as viral as the trivial super hero news. "DONT BE SELECTIVE. SPREAD THIS STORY TOO" #AllEyesOnRafah
Someone ghoul wrote the phrase “legally killed child,” then a team of editors published it. These people are monsters. I hope they suffer the fate they wish upon our children.
Anyone with any intellectual integrity should always study the arguments opposed to theirs in order to reassess whether their position is correct.
In that spirit, let's look at what those criticizing the ICC for its indictment of Israel are saying. This thread 👇, as far as I could see, is very representative of the arguments made.
The main argument is that "Israel’s leaders do not belong in the company" of other national leaders served by the ICC, such as Gaddafi, Putin, and Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir.
This isn't even an argument, it's pure ideology: a supremacist belief that Israeli leaders stand above others and as such above international law. As such, it can be easily dismissed out of hand.
The second argument is that the ICC doesn't have jurisdiction because it's not an ICC member. This is false: the ICC does have jurisdiction because Palestine became a state party to the Rome Statute in 2015. As per the Rome Statute the ICC has jurisdiction when the “conduct in question” was committed on the territory of a state party or by a national of a state party (art 12(2) RS). This thread by @Heidi__Matthews, professor of international criminal law, does a great job looking over the question of jurisdiction: https://t.co/LrDi48O1uJ
The third argument is that the accusation are false because "Israel has conducted the Gaza war in an exceptionally careful manner". I don't think I even need to go into why that's shockingly ridiculous... The author of the thread refers to the comparison you often hear of "the 2016-17 battle for Mosul, supervised by the U.S., approximately 10,000 civilians were killed compared to roughly 4,000 ISIS fighters", implying in effect that if the US mass-murders civilians, Israel can too. The guy is a law professor and a former US State Dept attorney, which is frankly scary. Is it teaching his students that as soon as a state commits egregious crimes, it sets a precedent and grants other states the right to also do so? 🤦
The fourth argument made is that "the ICC is a 'court of last resort,' prohibited by its charter from proceeding in any case unless the relevant government is unwilling or unable to police itself". This is the principle of complimentarily, and it's correct that this is part of the ICC charter.
But in this case, is the relevant government making an effort to investigate and prosecute the serious international crimes the ICC charged Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant with? Absolutely not, and that's the whole point: the ICC exists to ensure accountability when national systems fail to do so, and it's crystal clear in this instance that the entire Israeli system is behind Israel's conduct and that of its leaders in this war. There's widespread criticism of Netanyahu and he is threatened by the Israeli justice system, but not for his actions in Gaza and there's zero realistic perspective that he ever might be.
Last argument: "The ICC warrant applications for Israeli leaders threaten U.S. national security by setting a precedent vey dangerous to U.S. officials".
This is the only correct argument in the thread, and I think the whole world hopes that the ICC will one day hold US war criminals accountable, which would be an extremely positive development.
I understand you likely would not have stood up for your colleague and seem to be confused about racism and misogyny being a “both sides” issue.
But I stand up to bullies, instead of becoming one.
And to the women of Pennsylvania: I’d stand up for you too.
Enjoy your Friday.
Women of color in congress are frequently targeted by misogynistic, xenophobic, ignorant people. I’ve lived it.
One of the shameless extremists we work with insulted @JasmineForUS, and @AOC used parliamentary procedure to demand a standard of decorum.
There is no “both sides.”
He’s my father; my parent. His blood runs through me. This name defines my lineage. My birth and everything after were registered in this name. Tell me why I should suddenly abandon it and take your own father’s name? Would you take my father’s name?
Twitter, I do not block ads because I want an ad-free timeline, it’s because I don’t want right-wing or christian evangelical bullshit pushed at me on my highly curated timeline.