I have this, and Twitter. You haven’t been banned or silenced from either.
There is also a Telegram channel.
Unlike this and Twitter, there are rules there, posted as you enter.
If you got banned there—the channel is moderated—it’s because you broke a rule. And we don’t ban without warning, which means you broke a rule twice, once after being told not to.
Now kindly stop spreading lies about me not having the guts to confront dipshits like you and Montana.
Fucking document your allegations, or shut the fuck up.
However, you must always be aware that evil mighty-ones, the envious, slanderers, deceivers, liars, thieves and all kinds of other negative powers, who will also undertake murderous attacks on you, will try to impair and destroy your entire work and energy, whereby also a stop will not be made to accusing you of malicious things in court in order to destroy your mission.
Therefore, it is not necessary for you to defend yourself against the attacking behaviour directed at you, because all who take action against you in any kind of negative form will only harm themselves.
Therefore, always react neutrally in regard to all attacks against your person or against your mission.
Learn to control yourself in these things and to always remain calm, because that is the best weapon and the best defence against any attack.
Unless it's a physical attack, why bother wasting your time defending yourself, letting them get under your skin?
Contact Report 868
Billy:
But that is not so important, because I have all the FIGU members and friends etc. around me here in the Center and all around on Earth, as well as all you Plejaren on Erra, and also many of your federates, and dear human beings who support me with all their strength.
I am not bothered by the attacks that constantly pelt me with all sorts of things.
The Coordination and Liaison Administration (CLA) for Gaza is responsible for implementing the civilian policy concerning the Israeli government towards the Gaza Strip.
I find it difficult to see how Hamas goes from being extraordinarily well prepared and competent on October 7, to bumbling and incompetent later, while fighting on terrain they designed for this purpose.
I also find it hard to square how Israel went from being utterly incompetent to the epitome of professionalism literally overnight.
I’m also struck by Sy’s source talking about the political future of Netanyahu. I don’t see a political future for Netanyahu.
Nutty Yahoo made a speech yesterday (or day before) and immediately after Gollant and another POS who's name escapes me ignored him and went in to a conspiratorial huddle.
That Hamas is a political party recognized by Israel as representing the interests of the Palestinian people. That any governing body must act in the interests of those they govern. That Israel is engaged in an ongoing occupation of Palestine deemed illegal by the UN. That Hamas is resisting that occupation using the means available. That Hamas is not a terrorist organization, but a legitimate resistance movement.
In the time it took you to write this screed you could have done a basic search to verify most if not all the sources that factually sustain the points made in this article.
I assume most people who read my articles are familiar with the topic at hand. None of my assertions are from outlier sources, but rather mainstream, often Israeli, sources.
The details about October 7 aren’t the driver for this article—like I said, they are readily available to anyone with a passing familiarity of the issues.
My article was focused on the military nature of the Hamas action, and the consequences of such.
I guess you missed that by focusing on the non-existent links.
Scott, I too will become a paid subscriber. You are the very best reporter when it comes to analyzing military actions. I'm glad you made clear that Hamas did not attack as "terrorists" as the whole world spewed out immediately. When it happened, my first thought was what else were they to do...it was inevitable. Did the Jews think the Gazans would finally just lie down and die? The military raid was a welcome event to some of us. I hope they continue to fight. Might as well; better than submission to those arrogant cowards.
"....Hamas did not attack as "terrorists" as the whole world spewed out immediately."
The speed of the spread of"(dis)information(?) suggests that the entire episode was orchestrated to some extent?
The Zionists would have no qualms about sacrificing even several thousand civilians, if it gave such a huge PR win! Quite obviously the "News releases" were prepared in advance.
It reminds me of the reporting on the "collapse of building 7 " (20 minutes before it happened?) Or the spontaneous Declarations of the Covid "pandemic"???
The plans are laid and the teams in place, long before the actions happen.
The operation was very well planned. In Herzliya. Mossad attacked while the IDF had stand-down orders for ten hours. The rest is, as they say, history.
If you want to make an omelet, you have to break some eggs. The eggs in this case are Israeli and Palestinian civilians. The omelet is the entire Gaza strip soon ready for more illegal settlements, or Kibutzes, as Mr. Ritter still call them.
The Israelis (and various other Western players) are after clearing the Palestinians off the land, but not for anything so trivial as a bit more agriculture or making "settlers" happy.
Natural gas and oil resources have been discovered under Gaza and the seas off shore. Such riches are NOT for the likes of Palestinians.
The second Suez canal. The long term wealth generated for Israel from transits by that project, plus the need for all using it to guarantee Israel's safety to prevent their own economic disruption is a huge prize- Plus, diminishing Egypt's income and influence is always a good thing for Israeli power.
And of course, getting rid of all those bothersome Palestinian people.
The Magician is waving his genocidal right hand in your face while his left hand is getting positioned for gathering up the loot.
When Doug Murray discussed the Oct 7 report w/ Piers Morgan, he said the Palestinians were gleeful about the carnage they wrought (26:45). Is that false? He said - and I've read this elsewhere - a Palestinian called his mother and father to boast of his deeds in killing civilians, and his mother and father praised him for his heroism (27:05). Also false?
Murray described a mob of Palestinians abusing the naked corpse of a dead Israeli girl. As he stated, nobody in the crowd objected to their depravity. He may have been referring to this video (21:56):
It may be everything Ritter wrote is exactly as he describes. Difficult to tell, through, without any links or references to what he's saying. Example- he wrote: "Recently released video shows Israeli Apache helicopters indiscriminately firing on Israeli civilians trying to flee the Supernova Sukkot Gathering held in the open desert near Kibbutz Re’im, the pilots unable to distinguish between the civilians and the Hamas fighters." Is it too much to ask to have a link to the recently released video?
I'm a sceptic about everything. I don't believe shit stinks 'til I smell it. And I don't believe anything I read 'til I can cross-check it against other independent sources.
The information is already "out there", in articles, on videos, in English-language Haaretz.
You need not "believe". Search, read or hear, and evaluate sources. You will find many, if you look. It is your job to verify the events on which Scott based his evaluation of Oct. 7. Most people already have done, and so know what he is referring to here.
A substack venue is rather like an ongoing conversation.
I used to frequent, back in the day when it was still a good forum, threads in the 'International' folder at GU, Guardian Unlimited. Occasionally, someone would try to set another on a hamster wheel of providing links, sources.
Old 'Olive Gardens' always said, "Do your own homework." When I didn't know specific history/events he spoke of, that I thought important, I would check. He was always right.
Either you think Scott may be mistaken about what happened OR you think he may be lying. It's yours to deal with.
I also don't keep a cross-referenced list of source materials at my elbow when I discuss events. I ultimately grew to appreciate "Do your own homework," too, for what I found on my own and learned. The background story is always richer than any reference to it. Try it.
I can suggest a couple good places to search. I like global research dot ca, for articles with footnotes and citations. I like the Unz Review. Bitchute is great for videos, as it is easy to search by subject, and you can choose to order results by relevancy or newest.
I would suggest names of reporters/analysts that I find credible, but that is your call, to make as you research and discern truth as best you can. "Seek, and ye shall find."
Yeah. You're right. I can check it myself. I shouldn't have to.
It's fundamental journalism to cite your sources. In a substack, it's easy-peasy to provide a link. If you're trying to sell someone on an idea, the seller should make it easy for them to buy. Not make them have to chase their tail to check out what you're claiming to see if it's true.
And yes, the substack is like an ongoing conversation. Did I violate a taboo when I stated what I thought, Yvonne?
You ask me, did you "violate a taboo" by stating your opinion.
That is a foolishly combative question.
My disagreement with your POV can hardly be interpreted, at least sanely, as my saying you've no business expressing it.
I stated my own OPINION, and am not concerned with your agreement or disagreement with it.
I did indeed disagree with your opinion, and explained why.
It is your opinion that the writer owes you his time in listing sources.
You have your own way of thinking (obviously). So, how many, and which statements amongst those available would satisfy you as being credible? How does the writer know? He can't. Another reason why you should, IMO, do your own background research.
You are not reading a scholarly journal article requiring citations, here, even if you may prefer that.
As to ease of listing sources, every single thing a person can do along those lines is "easy", and yet time-consuming. I do not agree with you that providing you with sources would be Scott's best use of his own time. And if you are really incapable of seeking information yourself, I am certain it would be useless.
Possibly, he doesn't think so either. If he does, I expect he will work up a list for you.
Scott devotes a great deal of time to distilling the essences of what we are currently living or witnessing in geopolitical reality.
I, for one, am appreciative of that. If I need to check background info, I don't think, "I shouldn't have to." I am not comfortable demanding another's time, as you are.
I don't come on this substack for the fun of trolling Scott Ritter. I started reading Mr. Ritter when he did an expose' on Volodymyr Zelensky. It was well sourced, and I found it interesting and informative. Now, after reading his current piece, I'm wondering if I was suckered by reading something that fit my pre-existing prejudices.
Yes, I do think the writer owes all of us his time in providing his sources. C'mon. It's not as if he has to research it. He knows what his sources are before he starts writing. Right? Unless he's making it up, or passing on rumors. It adds a few words to the essay (I don't think on substack an editor will force him into x number of column-inches), and IMO provides important context to the reader. No, it's not an academic paper, and doesn't require footnotes. For clarity, it would normally not be a list per se, but would flow as part of the prose. ANY reputable publication says where the info came from- even when it's something as flimsy as "unnamed sources at the DOJ tells us....". or "a high-ranking official at the Pentagon claims..." It's asking too much for Ritter to say where the information came from? Really?
There's been A LOT of effort to shift the blame from Hamas to Israel wherever possible. State Media is eager to join in. NYT made fools out of themselves in reporting, "according to Hamas, Israel launched a missile attack against a hospital in Gaza and killed 500 people...." Scarcely a word of it was true. NYT had to walk it back. Meanwhile, a lot of other media had followed their lead.
This piece by Ritter has the same tone. Paraphrasing- "Israel killed their own people.... Israel is covering up..." This verbatim quote by Ritter is flame-throwing: "Moreover, it turns out that the number one killer of Israelis on October 7 wasn’t Hamas or other Palestinian factions, but the Israeli military itself."
My opinion: "If he writes that, he better be able to back it up." It sounds like your opinion is, "this is just a substack conversation, like a bunch of old ladies at a hen party. It's OK for Ritter make inflammatory accusations and not provide sources."
"It's fundamental journalism to cite your sources. In a substack, it's easy-peasy to provide a link. If you're trying to sell someone on an idea, the seller should make it easy for them to buy. Not make them have to chase their tail to check out what you're claiming to see if it's true."
Absolutely! It's ridiculously poor journalism to make a controversial assertion like:
"Recently released video shows Israeli Apache helicopters indiscriminately firing on Israeli civilians trying to flee the Supernova Sukkot Gathering held in the open desert near Kibbutz Re’im, the pilots unable to distinguish between the civilians and the Hamas fighters."
...and not provide a link to support that assertion.
Back at you. If you smell shit, you know it's shit. You don't need to see it.
Epstein was Israel's man. You could smell him. You didn't need to see pictures of his depravity in compromising powerful people to do his and _____'s bidding.
you open links from random people on the internet? may I introduce you to my friend, he's the prince of Nigeria and needs help transferring a large amount of money....
"Example- he wrote: "Recently released video shows Israeli Apache helicopters indiscriminately firing on Israeli civilians trying to flee the Supernova Sukkot Gathering held in the open desert near Kibbutz Re’im, the pilots unable to distinguish between the civilians and the Hamas fighters." Is it too much to ask to have a link to the recently released video?"
It isn't too much to ask. Especially when the veracity of the video he is *probably* referring to has been challenged by multiple organizations, including Newsweek:
Looking back in time, Ritter apparently got a little testy with a commenter and banned him. Don't know what the offense was, but feel lucky I wasn't banned.
Ritter also gave a not-very-good excuse for not attributing his reporting to the source. Just my opinion- there's no valid excuse for a substack author not to attribute. Without attribution, it's just rumor-mongering.
"Looking back in time, Ritter apparently got a little testy with a commenter and banned him. Don't know what the offense was, but feel lucky I wasn't banned."
Indeed...having been banned from blogs from both the political right and political left in the U.S., I'm appreciative of sites like the "Ron Unz Review," whereon I made multiple extremely critical comments regarding Mr. Unz's views on what happened Auschwitz-Birkenau, but was never banned, or even had a comment removed or partially censored. (My view is that "Of course there were gas chambers that killed hundreds of thousands of people at Auschwitz-Birkenau.") (Note: And I'm a person who was just accused yesterday, on the Jerusalem Post website, of having "arab terrorist buddies." ;-))
"Just my opinion- there's no valid excuse for a substack author not to attribute. Without attribution, it's just rumor-mongering."
It's not just rumor-mongering...without attribution, there is no way one can even have a discussion based on facts. For example, I *think* the video to which Scott Ritter was referring was posted on Twitter (aka, "X" ;-)) by "Syrian Girl", and was disputed by Newsweek, per the link I previously provided. But without the attribution, there's no way of even knowing if that video posted by "Syrian Girl" was even the video to which Scott Ritter is referring.
This whole opinion piece by Scott Ritter just boggles my mind. I had vague memories of his work regarding WMD in Iraq, and my vague memory is one of respecting his work at the time. But this opinion piece seems full of blatant misstatements of facts that can be easily checked, logic that is clearly flawed, and topped off with opinions regarding the morality of Hamas's actions that I can't imagine how a former member of the U.S. military could hold.
I agree w/ you- not sure of it's authenticity. But sounds plausible when considered with everything else.
It's also said the attackers made their own GoPro videos of what they did. I've seen some of the tamer ones. Witnesses but not the public have seen some of the more horrific ones.
"Murray described a mob of Palestinians abusing the naked corpse of a dead Israeli girl. As he stated, nobody in the crowd objected to their depravity. He may have been referring to this video (21:56): https://twitter.com/imloverqueen_95/status/1720740145773842597"
"Hmm... this page doesn’t exist. Try searching for something else."
Big disappointment for kgbgb. He pleasures himself while watching this kind of depravity.
Please, kgbgb, tell us what you think is happening in these videos. And while you're at it, where on a scale does it land with Renaissance civilized =0 and Aztec-sacrifice-by-cutting-out-beating-hearts = 10?
You really are difficult to respect. You don't argue that the 40 babies story wasn't a modern Blood Libel. Presumably you can't because there is no evidence produced for it and there is plenty of analysis of its disreputable provenance. But it seems to be of little concern to you that this lie and others have been - and in some quarters still are being - used to raise genocidal hatreds that are being acted on right now. Will you show concern when the deaths caused by this "Blood Libel" have overtaken those caused by the original one? (If they haven't already.)
Instead you attack those who ask for evidence about things that are being used to fan hatred, to make sure that they are not similar lies. Earlier, you yourself said "I'm a sceptic about everything. I don't believe shit stinks 'til I smell it. And I don't believe anything I read 'til I can cross-check it against other independent sources." On the Murray material, which appears to have included the video, you say "I agree w/ you- not sure of it's authenticity."
But when I follow the policy that you advocated a moment before and ask for actual evidence, you go into a disgusting ad hominem that says more about your Onanistic obsessions and your association of sex and violence than it does about me.
In answer to your question, I'd put that video somewhere between a 0 and 5 or so on the inhumanity scale. If it actually is a body being paraded, I'd put it at about a 5, same as the stories (if confirmed) of Israelis relieving themselves over the corpses of Palestinians on the same day. But I don't know that that is the case. What I can certainly tell from the unblurred video is that by blurring it The New York Post got away with lying about the scene to make it more shocking - they said she was naked when her underclothes seemed to me to be undisturbed. I also don't know whether "parading" is actually what is happening. There was a story early on very like this one, and apparently based on a similar video - possibly even this one - which apparently turned out to have been misinterpreted. The young lady, it was said, was injured and unconscious and was being transported to hospital in the back of a pick-up as it was the only transport available. The story I heard, though I cannot find the source for it right now, was that she recovered consciousness later in hospital, and was able to talk to her mother by phone. (Can't defend the little kid doing the ritual spitting thing, but then that's what certain Jewish sects do to Christians all the time.)
So I genuinely don't know what is happening in that video. Unless you have evidence beyond the video itself, I find it concerning that you think you do know. Did you express any doubt over the 40 babies? Or the faked burned baby photo that Ben Shapiro promoted? Or the clearly Hellfire-missile-incinerated bodies blamed on Hamas? Or do you just see a real human being in the power of "the two-legged animals of Gaza", and just know straight away that they must be acting in the depraved way that immediately comes to your mind?
The internet is forever- this turned up again in a recent article. A moment in the video shows people in Gaza beating that dead girl's body w/ sticks. They're savages.
Why don't I listen to what the Palestinians are saying? b/c they lie. Constantly.
They claimed an Israeli missile hit a hospital in Gaza and killed 500 people. At first, US media repeated what Hamas was saying without questioning it. Israel was able to provide sufficient proof it was actually a Hamas missile that had gone astray, and to force our media into the embarrassing admission they were wrong.
Then there's my favorite Tweet about MrFAFO: I refuse to believe things are as bad in Gaza as we are led to believe. It can't be, this fucker has died 17 times this week. #MrFAFO
you believe that was a Hamas rocket? they have a blast radius of about 5m. over 40,000 rockets have been launched into Israel by Hamas and only 69 people have died. If Hamas could build rockets like that Israel would be flattened. use your bain for FFS
Israel - "Evacuate the hospital, we're going to bomb it"
Hospital gets bombed by a missile of much greater magnitude than Hamas is capable of
Israeli minister posts tweet claiming the attack, then deletes it
Israel post video of misfire with wrong time stamp and then deletes it
Israel intelligence - which missed the biggest terrorist attack in 2 decades - apparently found a phone call recording between terrorists within a couple of hours of the hospital bombing
It's not me that said it was a Hamas rocket. NYT repeated the Hamas claim it was an Israeli rocket that hit a hospital and killed 500 people.
THEN, Israel proved to the NYT with video and electronic data it was actually a Hamas rocket that had gone off course. Data from the US military supported what the Israelis were saying.
AND, the missile didn't hit a hospital, it hit a parking lot. Not clear if anyone was killed, but certainly not 500. NYT had to tell the world they should not have made the report they initially made. A lame way of saying they got fooled without saying they got fooled.
The initial source of them being fooled was a Hamas lie.
Funny thing about MrFAFO- BBC hasn't caught on it's the same crisis actor appearing in a lot of different videos in different roles. BBC plays the videos as if they're real.
You're mocking me for pointing out those MrFAFO and other videos. You tell me, what are they trying to do with those phony videos? Hmmm?
If someone came into your house with guns, ran you out, locked the door behind you and shot at you every time you came within range, what would YOU do?
I know what I would do. I would fight to my last drop of blood to get my house back. Israel is a squatter state. It's THAT simple.
The various borders in that part of the world were decreed by the British and then ratified by the UN. Not established by the Jews.
The Jews have also been displaced from their homes in Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and throughout Europe. A lot of other groups have been displaced from their homes throughout history. Palestinians do not have a unique claim on being displaced.
What would I do? One of two things: 1) choose to live peacefully in Israel, as many Arabs do, or 2) build a life in my new home, as my ancestors did when they came to the US.
The Palestinians are tools for people who have accumulated wealth by fomenting violence on behalf of those seeking to destabilize peace- in this case, the mullahs in Iran. Interesting that the Oct 7 terrorism happened just as Israel and Saudi Arab were about to sign a peace agreement.
You are half-right. There were once significant populations of Jews in Egypt, Persia,, Iraq, and Turkey. Most have been expelled or fled, and few now remain. Some have gone to other nations. Many went to Israel.
Israel left Gaza in 2005. Any claims they are occupying Gaza since that time are lies.
Foreign nations including the US have given $billions in aid to Gaza. Instead of investing the money to make the lives of the people there better, Hamas build over 100km of tunnels for the purpose of carrying out violence against Israel. And have launched missile attacks.
US Presidents Clinton and Carter tried very hard to negotiate peace between Palestinians and Israel. The Palestinian representatives would not agree to peace. The saying about Palestinians became, "The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity."
After invading your property, I seize most of your land and buildings and construct armed camps, on your property, as past of the fortifications to entomb you in your house. I 'leave' your house, I control every window, door, cable, pipe, drain, chimney. road, airport, border, coast that provides access to your house. I control all food, medicine, water and fuel going into your house. When your children need to leave for medical attention, I decide who lives and dies. And I let most die. When people try to enter your house to bring you food, medicine... I kill them. . And if you try to take back your territory I denounce you as a terrorist and proclaim my 'right to exist.' Periodically I enter your house and destroy walls, rooms, plumbing. I don't allow repair equipment or materials to enter your house. I occupy your house. It's utterly true. And you have missed every opportunity to accepting my 'peace.'
But you survive, you endure, you fight back and show the world how weak I am. Your bravery unites your neighbours and terrifies me. I double down on stupid.
I had to interrupt my reading to comment on Scott's distinction between a terrorist attack and a military raid. It's spot on, thank you.
I have been very uncomfortable with the characterization of the Hamas raid as terrorism. In spite of the Western narrative, Hamas is not really a terrorist organization. Like it or not, they currently govern Gaza and like most governing bodies, they have a military wing.
Apparently, they decided that now was the time to launch their raid on Israel. IMNSHO, the trigger was the violation of the Al-Aqsa mosque by the Orthodox Jews. There were certainly other considerations in the strategy behind the raid, e.g., stopping the Saudi/Israeli rapprochement, but they could not let the attacks on the mosque go unanswered.
The extremely careful avoidance of Western Media to avoid Israel's Front Line Crazies invading the Muslim Al-aqsa Mosque, supported by the Israeli Government, is Deafening Silence.
If there ever was a more deliberate Gulf of Tonkin event, this is it.
Of course they avoid it. That would give some justification for the Hamas raid.
However, I disagree with your analogy to the Gulf of Tonkin. There was plenty of publicity about that incident as it was used as the main justification for giving the president the authority to send combat troops to Vietnam. It was also a false narrative, there was no attack on an American Navy ship.
Earlier today I read the transcript of the interview of Michael Hudson by Ben Norton. Dr. Hudson is a brilliant authority on Geoecomics and Geopolitics. It was a long transcript which went in great detail about American foreign policy, how the USA is trying to hold on to its hegemony and the pivotal role the Zionist Apartheid State plays in West Asia/Middle East. Hudson explained how the project of domination was to proceed by military destruction of Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon and finally Iran. 4 down, 3 to go but Russia and China are now throwing a wrench in the works of the Anglo-Zionist Empire of Lies and Hate. The jig is up and the Multipolar World Majority has taken note.
Netanyahu and the Zionist are certainly guilty of everything Scott lays out. But little of none of the inhumanity they have inflicted on the Arab would have been possible without the amoral backing of one U.S. administration after another. A vivid companion piece to Scott's courageious essay is Ben Norton's interview yesterday with the blunt-speaking American economist Michael Hudson, who lays out the long, sordid history of how the U.S. has used Israel as a sledgehammer to control the Middle East. https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2023/11/12/why-us-support-israel-geopolitics-michael-hudson/
GREAT read, I respect the Palestinian people and now completely despise all zionists, whether they are jewish or not. Hamas HAD NO CHOICE but to do this attack, or their dream of a Palestinian state would have been gone forever. The zionists are literally digging their own graves.
Scott, I can't agree with you more. I had to laugh at Torrance Stephens phD when he wrote the demonstrations in the USA on November 10th and 11th were pro-Hamas demonstrations. Stephens is a Neocon who doesn't know what he wrote about or lied. The demonstrations were pro-Palestinian, for Palestinian statehood and against the genocidal behavior of the Zio-Nazi Apartheid State of Israel led by Likud.
I have this, and Twitter. You haven’t been banned or silenced from either.
There is also a Telegram channel.
Unlike this and Twitter, there are rules there, posted as you enter.
If you got banned there—the channel is moderated—it’s because you broke a rule. And we don’t ban without warning, which means you broke a rule twice, once after being told not to.
Now kindly stop spreading lies about me not having the guts to confront dipshits like you and Montana.
Fucking document your allegations, or shut the fuck up.
The Plejaren extraterrestrial Sfath
Saturday, 3rd February 1945
Sfath:
However, you must always be aware that evil mighty-ones, the envious, slanderers, deceivers, liars, thieves and all kinds of other negative powers, who will also undertake murderous attacks on you, will try to impair and destroy your entire work and energy, whereby also a stop will not be made to accusing you of malicious things in court in order to destroy your mission.
Therefore, it is not necessary for you to defend yourself against the attacking behaviour directed at you, because all who take action against you in any kind of negative form will only harm themselves.
Therefore, always react neutrally in regard to all attacks against your person or against your mission.
Learn to control yourself in these things and to always remain calm, because that is the best weapon and the best defence against any attack.
https://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Billy_Meier/Sfath%27s_Explanation
😑 Very ZEN of you...
Wise words from a wise man.
The attacks against the truth will never end.
All truth tellers get attacked.
Unless it's a physical attack, why bother wasting your time defending yourself, letting them get under your skin?
Contact Report 868
Billy:
But that is not so important, because I have all the FIGU members and friends etc. around me here in the Center and all around on Earth, as well as all you Plejaren on Erra, and also many of your federates, and dear human beings who support me with all their strength.
I am not bothered by the attacks that constantly pelt me with all sorts of things.
https://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Billy_Meier/Contact_Report_868
Do me a favor, please.
Document a lie. One lie. Just one.
Show my statement of fact.
Then, with irrefutable documentation, prove it a lie.
Just one.
That’s all.
And when you fail to do so, kindly shut the fuck up.
I’m just curious if you read the same article I wrote.
I mean the entire article, in full context.
Or are you in selective outrage mode?
It was a military raid, not an act of terrorism.
But you’d know that if you read the article.
Why lie? You’re still here. Not muted, canceled. Say what you need to say.
But don’t fucking lie.
Allow me to introduce you to CLA.
https://www.gov.il/en/departments/units/gaza_district_coordination_and_liaison_office
Nothing happens of significance inside Gaza that doesn’t go through the CLA.
It’s like a colonial occupation authority, because that’s what it is.
A precision, this is not about the American CIA.
The Coordination and Liaison Administration (CLA) for Gaza is responsible for implementing the civilian policy concerning the Israeli government towards the Gaza Strip.
I find it difficult to see how Hamas goes from being extraordinarily well prepared and competent on October 7, to bumbling and incompetent later, while fighting on terrain they designed for this purpose.
I also find it hard to square how Israel went from being utterly incompetent to the epitome of professionalism literally overnight.
I’m also struck by Sy’s source talking about the political future of Netanyahu. I don’t see a political future for Netanyahu.
Nutty Yahoo made a speech yesterday (or day before) and immediately after Gollant and another POS who's name escapes me ignored him and went in to a conspiratorial huddle.
He will be knifed in the back.
That Hamas is a political party recognized by Israel as representing the interests of the Palestinian people. That any governing body must act in the interests of those they govern. That Israel is engaged in an ongoing occupation of Palestine deemed illegal by the UN. That Hamas is resisting that occupation using the means available. That Hamas is not a terrorist organization, but a legitimate resistance movement.
In the time it took you to write this screed you could have done a basic search to verify most if not all the sources that factually sustain the points made in this article.
I assume most people who read my articles are familiar with the topic at hand. None of my assertions are from outlier sources, but rather mainstream, often Israeli, sources.
The details about October 7 aren’t the driver for this article—like I said, they are readily available to anyone with a passing familiarity of the issues.
My article was focused on the military nature of the Hamas action, and the consequences of such.
I guess you missed that by focusing on the non-existent links.
Like the forest for the trees.
My article is a compendium of multiple sources combined with original analysis.
Sy's article is simply his recitation of the opinions of two sources, one Israeli, one American.
Sy is an experienced journalist, and I'm sure he vetted his sources before committing to their narrative.
This narrative differs greatly from my own assessment of the situation.
I'm thousands of miles removed from the problem, and I don't have well informed inside sources.
But I'm a pretty good analyst with a solid track record.
History will show who is right.
I will say that there are many errors in the narrative put forward by Sy's sources. But that doesn't mean their conclusions are wrong.
I just don't support their conclusions.
Exceptional, Scott. I feel compelled to support your work.
Scott, I too will become a paid subscriber. You are the very best reporter when it comes to analyzing military actions. I'm glad you made clear that Hamas did not attack as "terrorists" as the whole world spewed out immediately. When it happened, my first thought was what else were they to do...it was inevitable. Did the Jews think the Gazans would finally just lie down and die? The military raid was a welcome event to some of us. I hope they continue to fight. Might as well; better than submission to those arrogant cowards.
"....Hamas did not attack as "terrorists" as the whole world spewed out immediately."
The speed of the spread of"(dis)information(?) suggests that the entire episode was orchestrated to some extent?
The Zionists would have no qualms about sacrificing even several thousand civilians, if it gave such a huge PR win! Quite obviously the "News releases" were prepared in advance.
It reminds me of the reporting on the "collapse of building 7 " (20 minutes before it happened?) Or the spontaneous Declarations of the Covid "pandemic"???
The plans are laid and the teams in place, long before the actions happen.
The operation was very well planned. In Herzliya. Mossad attacked while the IDF had stand-down orders for ten hours. The rest is, as they say, history.
If you want to make an omelet, you have to break some eggs. The eggs in this case are Israeli and Palestinian civilians. The omelet is the entire Gaza strip soon ready for more illegal settlements, or Kibutzes, as Mr. Ritter still call them.
@GreaterIsrahell
The Israelis (and various other Western players) are after clearing the Palestinians off the land, but not for anything so trivial as a bit more agriculture or making "settlers" happy.
Natural gas and oil resources have been discovered under Gaza and the seas off shore. Such riches are NOT for the likes of Palestinians.
The second Suez canal. The long term wealth generated for Israel from transits by that project, plus the need for all using it to guarantee Israel's safety to prevent their own economic disruption is a huge prize- Plus, diminishing Egypt's income and influence is always a good thing for Israeli power.
And of course, getting rid of all those bothersome Palestinian people.
The Magician is waving his genocidal right hand in your face while his left hand is getting positioned for gathering up the loot.
When Doug Murray discussed the Oct 7 report w/ Piers Morgan, he said the Palestinians were gleeful about the carnage they wrought (26:45). Is that false? He said - and I've read this elsewhere - a Palestinian called his mother and father to boast of his deeds in killing civilians, and his mother and father praised him for his heroism (27:05). Also false?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoWViuG5VYs
Murray described a mob of Palestinians abusing the naked corpse of a dead Israeli girl. As he stated, nobody in the crowd objected to their depravity. He may have been referring to this video (21:56):
https://twitter.com/imloverqueen_95/status/1720740145773842597
It may be everything Ritter wrote is exactly as he describes. Difficult to tell, through, without any links or references to what he's saying. Example- he wrote: "Recently released video shows Israeli Apache helicopters indiscriminately firing on Israeli civilians trying to flee the Supernova Sukkot Gathering held in the open desert near Kibbutz Re’im, the pilots unable to distinguish between the civilians and the Hamas fighters." Is it too much to ask to have a link to the recently released video?
I'm a sceptic about everything. I don't believe shit stinks 'til I smell it. And I don't believe anything I read 'til I can cross-check it against other independent sources.
The information is already "out there", in articles, on videos, in English-language Haaretz.
You need not "believe". Search, read or hear, and evaluate sources. You will find many, if you look. It is your job to verify the events on which Scott based his evaluation of Oct. 7. Most people already have done, and so know what he is referring to here.
A substack venue is rather like an ongoing conversation.
I used to frequent, back in the day when it was still a good forum, threads in the 'International' folder at GU, Guardian Unlimited. Occasionally, someone would try to set another on a hamster wheel of providing links, sources.
Old 'Olive Gardens' always said, "Do your own homework." When I didn't know specific history/events he spoke of, that I thought important, I would check. He was always right.
Either you think Scott may be mistaken about what happened OR you think he may be lying. It's yours to deal with.
I also don't keep a cross-referenced list of source materials at my elbow when I discuss events. I ultimately grew to appreciate "Do your own homework," too, for what I found on my own and learned. The background story is always richer than any reference to it. Try it.
I can suggest a couple good places to search. I like global research dot ca, for articles with footnotes and citations. I like the Unz Review. Bitchute is great for videos, as it is easy to search by subject, and you can choose to order results by relevancy or newest.
I would suggest names of reporters/analysts that I find credible, but that is your call, to make as you research and discern truth as best you can. "Seek, and ye shall find."
Yeah. You're right. I can check it myself. I shouldn't have to.
It's fundamental journalism to cite your sources. In a substack, it's easy-peasy to provide a link. If you're trying to sell someone on an idea, the seller should make it easy for them to buy. Not make them have to chase their tail to check out what you're claiming to see if it's true.
And yes, the substack is like an ongoing conversation. Did I violate a taboo when I stated what I thought, Yvonne?
You ask me, did you "violate a taboo" by stating your opinion.
That is a foolishly combative question.
My disagreement with your POV can hardly be interpreted, at least sanely, as my saying you've no business expressing it.
I stated my own OPINION, and am not concerned with your agreement or disagreement with it.
I did indeed disagree with your opinion, and explained why.
It is your opinion that the writer owes you his time in listing sources.
You have your own way of thinking (obviously). So, how many, and which statements amongst those available would satisfy you as being credible? How does the writer know? He can't. Another reason why you should, IMO, do your own background research.
You are not reading a scholarly journal article requiring citations, here, even if you may prefer that.
As to ease of listing sources, every single thing a person can do along those lines is "easy", and yet time-consuming. I do not agree with you that providing you with sources would be Scott's best use of his own time. And if you are really incapable of seeking information yourself, I am certain it would be useless.
Possibly, he doesn't think so either. If he does, I expect he will work up a list for you.
Scott devotes a great deal of time to distilling the essences of what we are currently living or witnessing in geopolitical reality.
I, for one, am appreciative of that. If I need to check background info, I don't think, "I shouldn't have to." I am not comfortable demanding another's time, as you are.
I don't come on this substack for the fun of trolling Scott Ritter. I started reading Mr. Ritter when he did an expose' on Volodymyr Zelensky. It was well sourced, and I found it interesting and informative. Now, after reading his current piece, I'm wondering if I was suckered by reading something that fit my pre-existing prejudices.
Yes, I do think the writer owes all of us his time in providing his sources. C'mon. It's not as if he has to research it. He knows what his sources are before he starts writing. Right? Unless he's making it up, or passing on rumors. It adds a few words to the essay (I don't think on substack an editor will force him into x number of column-inches), and IMO provides important context to the reader. No, it's not an academic paper, and doesn't require footnotes. For clarity, it would normally not be a list per se, but would flow as part of the prose. ANY reputable publication says where the info came from- even when it's something as flimsy as "unnamed sources at the DOJ tells us....". or "a high-ranking official at the Pentagon claims..." It's asking too much for Ritter to say where the information came from? Really?
There's been A LOT of effort to shift the blame from Hamas to Israel wherever possible. State Media is eager to join in. NYT made fools out of themselves in reporting, "according to Hamas, Israel launched a missile attack against a hospital in Gaza and killed 500 people...." Scarcely a word of it was true. NYT had to walk it back. Meanwhile, a lot of other media had followed their lead.
This piece by Ritter has the same tone. Paraphrasing- "Israel killed their own people.... Israel is covering up..." This verbatim quote by Ritter is flame-throwing: "Moreover, it turns out that the number one killer of Israelis on October 7 wasn’t Hamas or other Palestinian factions, but the Israeli military itself."
My opinion: "If he writes that, he better be able to back it up." It sounds like your opinion is, "this is just a substack conversation, like a bunch of old ladies at a hen party. It's OK for Ritter make inflammatory accusations and not provide sources."
We'll just have to agree to disagree.
Since you dont doyour own research https://thegrayzone.com/2023/10/27/israels-military-shelled-burning-tanks-helicopters/
Hope your day gets better Yvonne
"It's fundamental journalism to cite your sources. In a substack, it's easy-peasy to provide a link. If you're trying to sell someone on an idea, the seller should make it easy for them to buy. Not make them have to chase their tail to check out what you're claiming to see if it's true."
Absolutely! It's ridiculously poor journalism to make a controversial assertion like:
"Recently released video shows Israeli Apache helicopters indiscriminately firing on Israeli civilians trying to flee the Supernova Sukkot Gathering held in the open desert near Kibbutz Re’im, the pilots unable to distinguish between the civilians and the Hamas fighters."
...and not provide a link to support that assertion.
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/10/27/israels-military-shelled-burning-tanks-helicopters/
Links ? What about links to links.
Reason and argument are far more powerful than "links" stated as fact when all it is, is opinion.
The "winners" of any debacle are the ones who can spin the narrative in their favor regardless of the number of casualties and physical destruction.
Back at you. If you smell shit, you know it's shit. You don't need to see it.
Epstein was Israel's man. You could smell him. You didn't need to see pictures of his depravity in compromising powerful people to do his and _____'s bidding.
Epstein was Mossad's #1 in Israel, Maxwell Ghislaine, her father "Mossad Founder" Barr's Father ( Trumps FBI ) CIA founder;
In the pedo-dollar ( Saudi accepts USD, USA returns child brides 10k/year since 1972 ) world no apple falls from the satanic tree
you open links from random people on the internet? may I introduce you to my friend, he's the prince of Nigeria and needs help transferring a large amount of money....
"Example- he wrote: "Recently released video shows Israeli Apache helicopters indiscriminately firing on Israeli civilians trying to flee the Supernova Sukkot Gathering held in the open desert near Kibbutz Re’im, the pilots unable to distinguish between the civilians and the Hamas fighters." Is it too much to ask to have a link to the recently released video?"
It isn't too much to ask. Especially when the veracity of the video he is *probably* referring to has been challenged by multiple organizations, including Newsweek:
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-does-video-show-israel-helicopter-shoot-festival-goers-1842754
Thank you.
Looking back in time, Ritter apparently got a little testy with a commenter and banned him. Don't know what the offense was, but feel lucky I wasn't banned.
Ritter also gave a not-very-good excuse for not attributing his reporting to the source. Just my opinion- there's no valid excuse for a substack author not to attribute. Without attribution, it's just rumor-mongering.
"Looking back in time, Ritter apparently got a little testy with a commenter and banned him. Don't know what the offense was, but feel lucky I wasn't banned."
Indeed...having been banned from blogs from both the political right and political left in the U.S., I'm appreciative of sites like the "Ron Unz Review," whereon I made multiple extremely critical comments regarding Mr. Unz's views on what happened Auschwitz-Birkenau, but was never banned, or even had a comment removed or partially censored. (My view is that "Of course there were gas chambers that killed hundreds of thousands of people at Auschwitz-Birkenau.") (Note: And I'm a person who was just accused yesterday, on the Jerusalem Post website, of having "arab terrorist buddies." ;-))
"Just my opinion- there's no valid excuse for a substack author not to attribute. Without attribution, it's just rumor-mongering."
It's not just rumor-mongering...without attribution, there is no way one can even have a discussion based on facts. For example, I *think* the video to which Scott Ritter was referring was posted on Twitter (aka, "X" ;-)) by "Syrian Girl", and was disputed by Newsweek, per the link I previously provided. But without the attribution, there's no way of even knowing if that video posted by "Syrian Girl" was even the video to which Scott Ritter is referring.
This whole opinion piece by Scott Ritter just boggles my mind. I had vague memories of his work regarding WMD in Iraq, and my vague memory is one of respecting his work at the time. But this opinion piece seems full of blatant misstatements of facts that can be easily checked, logic that is clearly flawed, and topped off with opinions regarding the morality of Hamas's actions that I can't imagine how a former member of the U.S. military could hold.
Mark, you and I are together.
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/10/27/israels-military-shelled-burning-tanks-helicopters/
I saw the Murray stuff days ago, again, not sure on its authenticity but have heard it from others before Murray said it....
I agree w/ you- not sure of it's authenticity. But sounds plausible when considered with everything else.
It's also said the attackers made their own GoPro videos of what they did. I've seen some of the tamer ones. Witnesses but not the public have seen some of the more horrific ones.
"Murray described a mob of Palestinians abusing the naked corpse of a dead Israeli girl. As he stated, nobody in the crowd objected to their depravity. He may have been referring to this video (21:56): https://twitter.com/imloverqueen_95/status/1720740145773842597"
"Hmm... this page doesn’t exist. Try searching for something else."
Another 40 babies story?
Are you saying you doubt the video ever existed?
https://tinyurl.com/2pzunmbb
Here's another view of the same video. Not as graphic. It's been pixilated.
https://nypost.com/2023/10/07/horrifying-videos-show-hamas-terrorist-invasion-of-israel/
Another view where the image is blurred.
https://newsable.asianetnews.com/video/world/disturbing-israeli-woman-soldier-allegedly-killed-and-paraded-naked-by-palestinians-watch-viral-video-snt-s25ffg
Big disappointment for kgbgb. He pleasures himself while watching this kind of depravity.
Please, kgbgb, tell us what you think is happening in these videos. And while you're at it, where on a scale does it land with Renaissance civilized =0 and Aztec-sacrifice-by-cutting-out-beating-hearts = 10?
I'd give it an 11.
You really are difficult to respect. You don't argue that the 40 babies story wasn't a modern Blood Libel. Presumably you can't because there is no evidence produced for it and there is plenty of analysis of its disreputable provenance. But it seems to be of little concern to you that this lie and others have been - and in some quarters still are being - used to raise genocidal hatreds that are being acted on right now. Will you show concern when the deaths caused by this "Blood Libel" have overtaken those caused by the original one? (If they haven't already.)
Instead you attack those who ask for evidence about things that are being used to fan hatred, to make sure that they are not similar lies. Earlier, you yourself said "I'm a sceptic about everything. I don't believe shit stinks 'til I smell it. And I don't believe anything I read 'til I can cross-check it against other independent sources." On the Murray material, which appears to have included the video, you say "I agree w/ you- not sure of it's authenticity."
But when I follow the policy that you advocated a moment before and ask for actual evidence, you go into a disgusting ad hominem that says more about your Onanistic obsessions and your association of sex and violence than it does about me.
In answer to your question, I'd put that video somewhere between a 0 and 5 or so on the inhumanity scale. If it actually is a body being paraded, I'd put it at about a 5, same as the stories (if confirmed) of Israelis relieving themselves over the corpses of Palestinians on the same day. But I don't know that that is the case. What I can certainly tell from the unblurred video is that by blurring it The New York Post got away with lying about the scene to make it more shocking - they said she was naked when her underclothes seemed to me to be undisturbed. I also don't know whether "parading" is actually what is happening. There was a story early on very like this one, and apparently based on a similar video - possibly even this one - which apparently turned out to have been misinterpreted. The young lady, it was said, was injured and unconscious and was being transported to hospital in the back of a pick-up as it was the only transport available. The story I heard, though I cannot find the source for it right now, was that she recovered consciousness later in hospital, and was able to talk to her mother by phone. (Can't defend the little kid doing the ritual spitting thing, but then that's what certain Jewish sects do to Christians all the time.)
So I genuinely don't know what is happening in that video. Unless you have evidence beyond the video itself, I find it concerning that you think you do know. Did you express any doubt over the 40 babies? Or the faked burned baby photo that Ben Shapiro promoted? Or the clearly Hellfire-missile-incinerated bodies blamed on Hamas? Or do you just see a real human being in the power of "the two-legged animals of Gaza", and just know straight away that they must be acting in the depraved way that immediately comes to your mind?
I don't give a fuck if you respect me or not.
The internet is forever- this turned up again in a recent article. A moment in the video shows people in Gaza beating that dead girl's body w/ sticks. They're savages.
https://tinyurl.com/3n3vk6r7
You tried to pretend my original post of the video was phony, you little twerp. I do not respect you in the least.
Why don't I listen to what the Palestinians are saying? b/c they lie. Constantly.
They claimed an Israeli missile hit a hospital in Gaza and killed 500 people. At first, US media repeated what Hamas was saying without questioning it. Israel was able to provide sufficient proof it was actually a Hamas missile that had gone astray, and to force our media into the embarrassing admission they were wrong.
Then there's my favorite Tweet about MrFAFO: I refuse to believe things are as bad in Gaza as we are led to believe. It can't be, this fucker has died 17 times this week. #MrFAFO
https://twitter.com/MajorGowen_/status/1720618201791295501
Finally, this bit of play-acting is HILARIOUS!:
https://twitter.com/jgkl1711/status/1720649186075459690
Can you please explain it to me, DorianGray? What is going on in that video?
Palestinians have made it clear. They do not want any peace unless it involves the annihilation of Israel. Am I wrong?
you believe that was a Hamas rocket? they have a blast radius of about 5m. over 40,000 rockets have been launched into Israel by Hamas and only 69 people have died. If Hamas could build rockets like that Israel would be flattened. use your bain for FFS
Israel - "Evacuate the hospital, we're going to bomb it"
Hospital gets bombed by a missile of much greater magnitude than Hamas is capable of
Israeli minister posts tweet claiming the attack, then deletes it
Israel post video of misfire with wrong time stamp and then deletes it
Israel intelligence - which missed the biggest terrorist attack in 2 decades - apparently found a phone call recording between terrorists within a couple of hours of the hospital bombing
It's not me that said it was a Hamas rocket. NYT repeated the Hamas claim it was an Israeli rocket that hit a hospital and killed 500 people.
THEN, Israel proved to the NYT with video and electronic data it was actually a Hamas rocket that had gone off course. Data from the US military supported what the Israelis were saying.
AND, the missile didn't hit a hospital, it hit a parking lot. Not clear if anyone was killed, but certainly not 500. NYT had to tell the world they should not have made the report they initially made. A lame way of saying they got fooled without saying they got fooled.
The initial source of them being fooled was a Hamas lie.
Funny thing about MrFAFO- BBC hasn't caught on it's the same crisis actor appearing in a lot of different videos in different roles. BBC plays the videos as if they're real.
You're mocking me for pointing out those MrFAFO and other videos. You tell me, what are they trying to do with those phony videos? Hmmm?
If someone came into your house with guns, ran you out, locked the door behind you and shot at you every time you came within range, what would YOU do?
I know what I would do. I would fight to my last drop of blood to get my house back. Israel is a squatter state. It's THAT simple.
The various borders in that part of the world were decreed by the British and then ratified by the UN. Not established by the Jews.
The Jews have also been displaced from their homes in Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and throughout Europe. A lot of other groups have been displaced from their homes throughout history. Palestinians do not have a unique claim on being displaced.
What would I do? One of two things: 1) choose to live peacefully in Israel, as many Arabs do, or 2) build a life in my new home, as my ancestors did when they came to the US.
The Palestinians are tools for people who have accumulated wealth by fomenting violence on behalf of those seeking to destabilize peace- in this case, the mullahs in Iran. Interesting that the Oct 7 terrorism happened just as Israel and Saudi Arab were about to sign a peace agreement.
You are half-right. There were once significant populations of Jews in Egypt, Persia,, Iraq, and Turkey. Most have been expelled or fled, and few now remain. Some have gone to other nations. Many went to Israel.
Israel left Gaza in 2005. Any claims they are occupying Gaza since that time are lies.
Foreign nations including the US have given $billions in aid to Gaza. Instead of investing the money to make the lives of the people there better, Hamas build over 100km of tunnels for the purpose of carrying out violence against Israel. And have launched missile attacks.
US Presidents Clinton and Carter tried very hard to negotiate peace between Palestinians and Israel. The Palestinian representatives would not agree to peace. The saying about Palestinians became, "The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity."
After invading your property, I seize most of your land and buildings and construct armed camps, on your property, as past of the fortifications to entomb you in your house. I 'leave' your house, I control every window, door, cable, pipe, drain, chimney. road, airport, border, coast that provides access to your house. I control all food, medicine, water and fuel going into your house. When your children need to leave for medical attention, I decide who lives and dies. And I let most die. When people try to enter your house to bring you food, medicine... I kill them. . And if you try to take back your territory I denounce you as a terrorist and proclaim my 'right to exist.' Periodically I enter your house and destroy walls, rooms, plumbing. I don't allow repair equipment or materials to enter your house. I occupy your house. It's utterly true. And you have missed every opportunity to accepting my 'peace.'
But you survive, you endure, you fight back and show the world how weak I am. Your bravery unites your neighbours and terrifies me. I double down on stupid.
I gave you a chance to convince me I'm wrong, and you're giving me the lame LOL?
Pit-tee-ful.
I had to interrupt my reading to comment on Scott's distinction between a terrorist attack and a military raid. It's spot on, thank you.
I have been very uncomfortable with the characterization of the Hamas raid as terrorism. In spite of the Western narrative, Hamas is not really a terrorist organization. Like it or not, they currently govern Gaza and like most governing bodies, they have a military wing.
Apparently, they decided that now was the time to launch their raid on Israel. IMNSHO, the trigger was the violation of the Al-Aqsa mosque by the Orthodox Jews. There were certainly other considerations in the strategy behind the raid, e.g., stopping the Saudi/Israeli rapprochement, but they could not let the attacks on the mosque go unanswered.
Stay safe.
The extremely careful avoidance of Western Media to avoid Israel's Front Line Crazies invading the Muslim Al-aqsa Mosque, supported by the Israeli Government, is Deafening Silence.
If there ever was a more deliberate Gulf of Tonkin event, this is it.
Of course they avoid it. That would give some justification for the Hamas raid.
However, I disagree with your analogy to the Gulf of Tonkin. There was plenty of publicity about that incident as it was used as the main justification for giving the president the authority to send combat troops to Vietnam. It was also a false narrative, there was no attack on an American Navy ship.
Earlier today I read the transcript of the interview of Michael Hudson by Ben Norton. Dr. Hudson is a brilliant authority on Geoecomics and Geopolitics. It was a long transcript which went in great detail about American foreign policy, how the USA is trying to hold on to its hegemony and the pivotal role the Zionist Apartheid State plays in West Asia/Middle East. Hudson explained how the project of domination was to proceed by military destruction of Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon and finally Iran. 4 down, 3 to go but Russia and China are now throwing a wrench in the works of the Anglo-Zionist Empire of Lies and Hate. The jig is up and the Multipolar World Majority has taken note.
Thanks, I’ll look for that interview. Is there a site to find that?
https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2023/11/12/why-us-support-israel-geopolitics-michael-hudson/
The U.S. is just another Cokehead with heart beating so fast, it's head can't keep up. The good news is most crackheads have their pump blow up.
Netanyahu and the Zionist are certainly guilty of everything Scott lays out. But little of none of the inhumanity they have inflicted on the Arab would have been possible without the amoral backing of one U.S. administration after another. A vivid companion piece to Scott's courageious essay is Ben Norton's interview yesterday with the blunt-speaking American economist Michael Hudson, who lays out the long, sordid history of how the U.S. has used Israel as a sledgehammer to control the Middle East. https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2023/11/12/why-us-support-israel-geopolitics-michael-hudson/
GREAT read, I respect the Palestinian people and now completely despise all zionists, whether they are jewish or not. Hamas HAD NO CHOICE but to do this attack, or their dream of a Palestinian state would have been gone forever. The zionists are literally digging their own graves.
And may they never stop digging until they lose everything.
Given stated Israeli policy, they already had nothing to lose.
They can still lose all the land they stole. I hope they do.
Scott, when you are right, you're right. Happens a lot :)
I second you on that.
Scott, I can't agree with you more. I had to laugh at Torrance Stephens phD when he wrote the demonstrations in the USA on November 10th and 11th were pro-Hamas demonstrations. Stephens is a Neocon who doesn't know what he wrote about or lied. The demonstrations were pro-Palestinian, for Palestinian statehood and against the genocidal behavior of the Zio-Nazi Apartheid State of Israel led by Likud.
Semper Fi, Sir.