Famine is Very Near in Gaza Again

Why would Hamas do this? /s

 

If a Palestinian state were created in the current climate, dominated by ISIS ideology, i.e creating Islamic State with Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and other Iran-backed jihadist factions, it would resemble ISIS.
Such a state would almost certainly become a base for terror, with no room for Jews or Christians to live in safety—let alone with equal rights.

History already shows us the outcome: when Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, every last Jew was forced out, synagogues were destroyed, and the area quickly became a launchpad for rockets, tunnels, and massacres. Repeating that mistake in Judea and Samaria would only put millions more Israelis within easy range of terrorism.

No ISIS like Palestinin state sgould be created next to Israel. If democratic Jihai free state Jewish setlements can stay there, after all 2 million Arabs live in Isarel. So a million jews can liove in Palestine if such ever created,

 

Yes, the far right radicals, of course, have their excuses canned and ready to go. You definitely got their current favorite.

 

Hostage families sue ICC prosecutor, allege court has become 'branch of Hamas'

EUTERS/PIROSCHKA VAN DE WOUW/FILE PHOTO)
The lawsuit accuses ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan of turning the court into "a branch office of the terrorist organization," Hamas.

 

Theater

 

.

ICC corruption is not a theater.

 

There are radicals everywhere - There is also an ideological notion called the Reconquista, referring to a nationalist concept of reclaiming territories lost by Mexico.
San Diego is on the list, of reclaiming. They want their land back.

The world will be in never ending wars.

One particularly poignant speech comes from Martin Kimani, Kenya’s UN ambassador, delivered during a UN Security Council session on February 22, 2022. In that address, he likened the post-colonial borders of Africa to the lines drawn across maps by colonial powers—lines that Africans did not choose, but inherited. He noted:

• “Our borders were not of our own drawing (...). At independence, had we chosen to pursue states at the basis of ethnic, racial or religious homogeneity, we would still be waging bloody wars these many decades later.”
  
  
• He emphasized the wisdom behind accepting inherited borders over pursuing redrawn lines fueled by irredentism or expansionism:
  
  “Instead, we agreed that we would settle on the borders that we inherited (...). Kenya rejects such a yearning [for reunification] from being pursued by force... We rejected irredentism and expansionism on any basis... we reject it again today.” accord.org.za+13en.wikipedia.org+13fairobserver.com+13
  

This powerful framing captures the essence of your description: a strong admonition against altering land boundaries through conflict, a call to avoid “drawing lines” that might reignite ceaseless wars.

If that’s the speech you're thinking of, I’m happy to provide more context, quote other notable sections, or even suggest similar speeches from other African diplomats. Let me know how you'd like to explore this further!

 

Sure looks like theater! This Karim Khan fellow was born and lives in Britain. The families filed their civil suit in Jerusalem. Note: I had to read three articles to get that Jerusalem bit of information which demonstrates that the news sources carrying this are just presenting it as pure theater not news. I don't know how this lawsuit can be taken seriously? Someone that doesn't even live in Jerusalem! He doesn't appear to have any connection to Jerusalem! I'm not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure this would just be thrown out of court if some lawsuit was filed like this in the USA? Does anyone know?

Here's what Google AI says. See Jurisdiction section below.
quote:
Yes, it is possible to file a civil lawsuit against someone living in another country, but it can be a complex process. You'll need to determine if the U.S. court has jurisdiction over the individual, which often depends on where the injury or event occurred or where the defendant has significant ties. Serving the lawsuit on someone in another country also requires following specific international laws and conventions, such as the Hague Service Convention.
Here's a breakdown of the key considerations:

• Jurisdiction:
  A court must have the authority to hear the case. This usually involves proving that the defendant has sufficient connections to the location where you're filing the lawsuit.
• Service of Process:
  Serving legal documents on someone in another country requires following international agreements and laws. The Hague Convention is a common framework for this.
• Enforcement:
  Even if you win a judgment, enforcing it in another country can be challenging and may require further legal action in that country.

Steps to consider:

1. 1. Consult with an Attorney:
   It's crucial to consult with an attorney experienced in international litigation. They can help you assess the specifics of your case and navigate the legal complexities.
2. 2. Jurisdictional Analysis:
   Your attorney will help determine if the U.S. court has jurisdiction over the individual based on where the incident occurred, where the individual resides, or where they have other significant connections.
3. 3. Service of Process:
   If jurisdiction is established, your attorney will guide you through the process of serving the lawsuit on the individual in their country, often involving translation and specific forms.
4. 4. Consider the Cost and Likelihood of Recovery:
   Litigating against someone in another country can be expensive, and the chances of recovering damages may be uncertain. Your attorney can help you weigh these factors.
5. 5. Enforcement (if needed):
   If you win a judgment, you may need to pursue legal action in the defendant's country to enforce it. This can involve navigating their legal system.

 

ICC is god, never makes mistakes. Even god regreted at one point fo rmaking mankind.
They did Hamas a servcice, directly or indirectly, I don't know.

Hamas is not releasing hostages, whom they abuse beyond recognition, and ICC current leadership helped Hamas murderers who are like ISIS jihadis, with one goal.

 

How did the ICC help Hamas? The filed arrest warrants for Hamas leaders.

 

The ICC’s move creates false moral equivalence.
Filing warrants for Hamas leaders doesn’t erase the fact that the ICC, by also targeting Israel’s leaders, has handed Hamas a massive propaganda victory.
Hamas thrives on portraying itself as an equal “side” in a symmetrical conflict, when in reality it is a designated terrorist group whose founding charter calls for Israel’s destruction.

I think - placing a democracy defending itself on the same level as the group that carried out the October 7 massacre. That narrative boost is exactly what Hamas needs to rally supporters, deter Arab states from normalizing with Israel, and pressure Israel’s allies.

In short, even if they filed warrants for Hamas leaders, the ICC simultaneously delegitimized Israel’s self-defense, lending Hamas a political shield it could never win on the battlefield.

 

This sounds just as serious as Melania Trump’s lawsuit against Hunter Biden for saying she was connected to Epstein.

Theater.

 

I thought you are not a drinker? Comeback when you are sober.

Just kidding, but your comparison is ridiculous.

 

Apologies, I had a drink and sobered up now. I have switched to the Israeli Cool Aid and now I support unilateral destruction of Palestinians as well as universally reclassifying falafel as an Israeli food and not the result of cultural appropriation.

 

Yes,
“keffiyeh” (كوفية kūfīyah in Arabic) is originally linked to the city of Kufa in Iraq. - Mesopotamia.
historically, the name literally means “of Kufa” or “Kufan.”

In the early 1500s, after the Ottoman conquest (1516–1517), the entire population of the area that would later be called Palestine was very small — estimates range from 150,000–250,000, mostly concentrated in Jerusalem, Nablus, Gaza, Safed, and scattered village
For much of the 16th–18th centuries, Palestine was a relatively poor and neglected part of the Ottoman Empire, with low population growth due to disease, poor sanitation, famine, and political instability.

Egyptian Rule (1831–1840):

Muhammad Ali of Egypt occupied Palestine and brought Egyptian soldiers, officials, and peasants.
Some Egyptians settled permanently, especially in Jaffa, Gaza, and the coastal plain.
British and French consular reports mention villages of Egyptian origin in the 1840s–1850s.
Other Arab Immigration Streams:
Syrians and Lebanese (mainly Christians) moved to Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and Nazareth.Bedouin tribes from the Negev and Transjordan moved into the Beersheba area and the Jordan Valley.
Small numbers of North Africans (Maghrebi Arabs) came via pilgrimage to Jerusalem and settled in the “Maghrebi Quarter” near the Western Wall.
Official British Mandate statistics show that between 1920 and 1945, roughly 100,000–130,000 Arabs immigrated into Palestine from surrounding Arab countries (Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon, Iraq, and elsewhere). These figures come from legal work permits, seasonal agricultural labor, and recorded permanent moves.

 

I just heard one KM saying - On October 7, 2023, the chapter of Arab Gaza history ended and side by side died. Annexing the whole of Gaza and the Judea and Samaria has a reason, it's the only way to bring lasting peace. If millions of Arabs live in Israel, millions of Jews can live in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.
I'm not clear on if he wants to grant Israeli citizenship to all Arabs in those areas.

 

This is the only way. Nothing more peaceful than occupying, annexing, and relocating an entire group of people to a new land. Why not then expand to Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria after to revive the Kingdom of Israel? They have a historical claim to them, at least parts of them, as well.

 

Unless there was a mistranslation in the original interview (I watched with subtitles), the reason is straightforward: Israel recognizes and respects the League of Nations’ 1920 and 1922 decisions, which established the international legal framework for the region. Those decisions created four separate Arab mandates while designating the Land of Israel—including Judea and Samaria—as the Jewish National Home, with safeguards for the civil and religious rights of all inhabitants.

Article 80 of the UN Charter preserved those rights and obligations, and no later UN resolution has the legal authority to erase them. The territory’s status is disputed, but the legal claim remains valid under international law.

Israel has never declared any intent to forcibly relocate Arabs from Judea and Samaria—quite the opposite. The policy focus is on security and sovereignty, not ethnic expulsion.

 

The genocide continues! Israel tries to accelerate the genocide by searching for a country that they can move Gazans to. Those Palestinians need to be cleared out of Gaza one way or the other is the obvious goal. IIRC Lerner explicitly stated that Israel would not and has not thought about this. This was in spite of the fact that whenever Netanyahu visits Trump then Trump publicly states that he wants to turn Gaza into another Rivera and another time ship a million Gazans to Libya. And as Trump is publicly making these statements after the meetings, Netanyahu is standing next to him grinning ear to ear.


Israel Is Quietly in Talks to Relocate Palestinians From Gaza
quote:
Israel and the U.S. are pushing forward efforts to relocate hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip, a move they have presented in humanitarian terms but which governments in Europe and the Arab world have criticized as unrealistic and a potential violation of international law.

The idea, which Israeli officials have publicly mulled since the beginning of the war in Gaza, got its biggest airing early this year when President Trump said the U.S. should take over the enclave and redevelop it as an international tourist destination while relocating many of its two million residents.

 

Here's an excellent opinion article written by an American Jew. I agree with this completely. He's very concerned that American public opinion is turning really poor for Israel. The rest of the world is turning quickly against Israel. If things keep going like they are going then America could also turn against Israel. This could spell a long term disaster for Israel.

Netanyahu and his evil government is blind to this reality.

Opinion | Americans Are Changing Their Views of Israel. That’s a Problem.
quote:
The most common question from one of the most heavily Jewish congressional districts in the country was some variation of, “What are you going to do about the starvation in Gaza?”
...
In 2025, however, the political tide has turned against Israel. This is evident on the global stage, but it is definitely true within the United States as well.
...
The question to ask is whether, in a world of dissolving norms, the genocide label matters anymore. But however you answer it, the very fact that the discussion is taking place is a sign of a significant shift in political tectonics that should be worrisome both for Israelis and American supporters of Israel.
...
Israel’s culpability in Gaza’s suffering is equally clear. As my colleague Alex de Waal recently explained, “Starvation takes time; authorities cannot starve a population by accident.” The term “genocide” has a freighted meaning in international politics — but it is not out of place when characterizing what Israel is doing in Gaza. Regardless of who is responsible for the start of this conflict, the Israeli government is culpable for its own actions in Gaza right now. Furthermore, Israel’s right-wing government is now openly talking about displacing Gaza’s entire population to make way for Jewish settlements — the very epitome of settler colonialism.
...
As the humanitarian situation in Gaza has gone from very bad to war-crimes-tribunal-level bad, global and U.S. opinions have undeniably shifted on Israel. Consider the array of leaders in the West who have called on Israel to do something to stop what even Donald Trump calls “real starvation” occurring in Gaza
...
Do these shifting political sands matter? This depends on whom we are talking about. For an American Jewish community already ripped apart by Israel’s actions during this war, the latest shift in public attitudes will lead to some discomfiting High Holy Days sermons. As a Jewish international relations scholar, I have my own not-inconsiderable baggage to lug around whenever I discuss this topic. The thought that Israel is sacrificing its status as a democracy and a member in good standing of the international community is extremely disturbing for someone who wants Israel to exist as a safe space from any global pogrom. And yet, my fury at Israel’s government for its culpable actions — and the Jews who have weaponized antisemitism to stifle all substantive debate over the war in Gaza — is only growing. I am quite certain I am not the only Jew who feels this way.
...
Nearly two years after the Oct. 7 attacks, Israel is undeniably more secure. But the price has been high and will only get higher. After the United States imposed sanctions, the apartheid-era regime in Pretoria lasted less than five years. If U.S. public hostility to Israel increases, leading to a shift in policy, the Israeli government’s days could be similarly numbered.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/08/16/israel-criticism-americans-gaza-shift-00506649?cid=apn