Alex Fox

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

@academic_la Piker glazing Mao while speaking to the future of the Democratic Party isn’t going to end well.

The “edgy podcaster who wants peace” line is giving serious To Be or Not To Be Vibes…

https://t.co/Xb7aNuKYfT

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

I literally cannot think of any less convincing example of a threat to the LGBTQ community in Israel than this video of a Jewish actor antagonizing folks in a Haredi community. The “chase” scene should have the theme to Benny Hill playing over it.

Jace, what happens if a “LGBTQ community member” dressed like that and with the last name Cohen travels to any part of the WB and Gaza and does what Sasha Baron Cohen did there?

And, how would you ever know whether it was because he is “LGBTQ” or because he is Jewish?

It is also peak irony that your example required you to show footage of a performative movie stunt set up specifically to provoke a response. It’s quite Ro Khanna-esque.

Now, if I want to show institutional Palestinian intolerance towards the LGBTQ community all I have to do is read the legal code criminalizing homosexuality in Gaza or show the numerous examples of bans against LGBTQ public demonstrations in the WB.

Or, I can just look up the addresses of the two main Palestinian LGBTQ advocacy groups, Al-Qaws and Aswat which are based in E. Jerusalem/Haifa, not Nablus.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

@academic_la @zionismisdead12 Now we can resume our daily programming of screaming at each other over the ME.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

@academic_la @zionismisdead12 I disagree with you on most everything regarding world politics but I hope everything checked out fine and that you are healthy.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

@zionismisdead12 @academic_la Not unless they preach about the virtues/lack of virtues of other countries and show zero self-reflection towards the actions of their own community/country.

Something based on your profile that I’m sure you would never do.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

@dansenor Pyrrhic victory for us long term Jets fans.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

@MosabHasanYOSEF She did a particularly bad job of dodging embarrassment even by her subterranean standards.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

@OlegFilimonovic @academic_la Wow, your virtue shines so bright.

Man, you got to be careful b/c you can’t always recognize these white, European settler-colonial, genocidal, ethnic cleansing, Apartheid loving, pink washing, baby killers at first sight.

I’ll be praying for ya.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

Nice anecdote.

While it’s not quite as powerful evidence as “as someone else pointed out”, here are some polls from hotels and other hospitality industry sources that, go figure, list the French and Russians as the worst behaved travelers. But, you keep pointing out the Israeli bogeymen. Fits your narrative.

Oh, and yes, Israelis are loud and blunt as fuck and it is arresting if you aren’t familiar with Israelis. They will also give you the shirt off their backs.

Give a rest Shaiel. It’s tiresome.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

@VishBurra @GBNT1952 Yeah, it’s pretty clear you don’t do much reading of any sort.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

Yep. Netanyahu referenced Rome (answering a question by a reporter asking him what he was reading) b/c he was reading about the failed Jewish revolts against the Romans 2k years ago.

He said Israel “can’t lose the next one” meaning against current existential threats to Israel ie. Iran proxies Hamas (sort of), Hezbollah, the Houthis and Harvard (JK).

Where ahistorical, ALP fueled, Father Coughlin-esque rants by Tucker falls below Harvard on this list remains to be seen.

Looking forward to reading your take on Tucker, Jon.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

You are a lawyer. So was my father. Finished his career as a judge. He told us not to go into the law. At the moment, seems like sage advice. He was a pretty smart guy.

Diversion? How?

Your response here is a total red herring. It’s a non response, response.

In a court, I believe the objection would be relevance and/or argumentative/non-responsive.

But you are the attorney, I just play one on X.

So, care to provide analysis of the video compared to Khanna’s portrayal of it?

On Being Violently Detained / Fearful for Life
• Interview: “They had violent settlers detain American citizens, including an American government official… We were detained for about 20 minutes, fearful of our lives.”

On Kicking the Van / Mocking
• Interview: “Kicking the tires of our van, laughing at us, mocking at us, videotaping us.”

On the IDF Siding with the Settlers
• Interview: “They block off the road and then they call the IDF and the IDF is on their side, not on the side of the Americans.”

• X Post (July 13): “…I saw firsthand the IDF taking the side of violent settlers much like the police forces sided with segregationists in the Jim Crow South.”

Additional X Post Context
• X Post (July 11): “How about being on Team America Greg and calling on @USAmbIsrael to demand that the IDF soldiers & violent settlers who threatened & detained American passport holders should face consequences.”

Does the video show any of this? Maybe they didn’t get the stuff he is referring to on camera but then why show the video as proof?

So how about answering my question about evidentiary standards?

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

Ah… So, you are saying that your evidentiary standards for corroborating the stories of trained dog rape against Palestinians in Israeli prisons that you wrote about are similar to the evidentiary proof provided by this video to support Rep. Khanna’s claims of being “detained and threatened with violence” by the settlers?

Welp, that explains a lot.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

Morons on top of morons…

Non-sequitur (noun)
Pronounced: /ˌnɒn ˈsɛkwɪtər/ (non SEK-wi-ter)
Definition:
A statement, conclusion, or remark that does not logically follow from the previous statement or argument. It is a type of logical fallacy where the response or claim is irrelevant or disconnected from what came before it.
• Literal Latin meaning: “It does not follow” (non = not, sequitur = it follows).

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

I attacked your argument not you. And, your legal breakdown is just an exegesis of the postmodernist hijacking of international law.

Natasha’s opinion is backed by the laws of the time of the mandate which were only superseded later by partisan activist jurists.

Still all of this is irrelevant. The core issue is the Arab/Palestinian rejection of Jewish sovereignty in any part of the land between the river and the sea. You have offered not one piece of evidence to contradict this because you can’t.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

This is the type of post that diminishes your credibility.

You accuse someone who makes a legal argument using specifics (easy to fact check and show how legally the argument is “complete nonsense”) of a “Trust Me Bro” legal opinion using the definition of “Trust Me Bro” logic “as someone who has studied international law”.

Can’t be bothered to show what specifically is incorrect? We are just supposed to TRUST you bro?

My favorite is when the next response is to list a whole bunch of NGO’s who, as Natasha points out, bend the law to arrive at a pre-determined conclusion.

Bottom line is that all of this is a distraction from the core issue.

The Arabs of Palestine/Palestinians have always and still refuse to accept Jewish sovereignty over any part of the land between the river and the sea. It’s an empirically verifiable historical fact.

The evidence is consistent and overwhelming. The British Mandate was 45k sq miles. 77% given to form Transjordan/Jordan. Peel would have given the Arabs of Palestine 80% of the remaining 23% of the land so 95% of the total mandate. It was rejected because whatever moderate voices, like in this case the Nashashibis, have always been overruled by the supposed extremists, in the case of Peel, Husseini.

95% of the mandate and still no. At some point if the supposed extremists always make the decisions then they aren’t extremists they are the consensus.

Partition rejected in 1947 and again after losing the war, if it meant accepting Jewish sovereignty anywhere in the land.

Were the Arabs of Palestine interested in a two state solution between 1949-1967? If so, based on what evidence? They were living under Arab control in the territories that were meant to be their future state and they did what exactly to build its foundations?

After 1967, they and the Arabs made what proposals for peace based on two states? Zero.

The only thing to come out of the 67 war on the Arab side were the three no’s of Khartoum. Again rejectionism enabled by the Arab world and the world at large. If Natasha’s argument about the laws of occupation are nonsense, why didn’t the Arabs of Palestine reject Jordanian and Egyptian occupation of their territories from 1949-1967.

Because then, like today with the majority of Palestinians of the WB and Gaza, they see the entirety of the land between the river and the sea as their land to eventually be reclaimed as part of the Ummah by force. The mindset is the same.

Oslo was signed but the goal of Oslo rejected by Arafat. Taba is irrelevant.

The post Oslo years leading up to Arafat’s rejection and the years directly following Arafat’s rejection are conveniently memory holed and/or contextualized to make excuses or out and out erase the waves and waves of Palestinian violence used to attempt to thwart the peace process post Oslo through 2005 (and actually to the current day).

The counter always is misdirection ie. to point to the assassination of Rabin by an Israeli extremist. But this actually shows the clear difference between the Israeli and Palestinian priorities. After Rabin was murdered, Peres surged in the polls leading Bibi by as much as 30 points. This was a clear rejection of political violence and mandate to continue the peace process. What did the Palestinians do? A horrific series of suicide bombings inside Israel’s borders that tanked Peres and got Bibi elected. Again clear priorities on the PA side. No peace.

Still Bibi was voted out in favor of Barak to make peace. Arafat rejects it and then unleashes the second intifada. More violence.

Sharon pulls out of Gaza. Concrete proof of the will/ability to remove settlements and again nothing gained in terms of peace. Hamas elected.

Abbas walks away from Olmert’s plan because “he wasn’t given a map to study”. Always an excuse to divert from the core.

The playbook is to reverse engineer the causes. Deir Yassin 1948 doesn’t show Israeli intent unless Hebron in 1929 shows Arab intent. Right

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

@DavidAgam4 @TheModerateCase You are avoiding the core problem. Messianic Jews are a distraction.

[Alex Fox @wineomite]

@DavidAgam4 @TheModerateCase I was there in 94-96 and regularly took the 18 bus. Now offer a specific critique of what I wrote.