When have you ever in your life been to a protest like this? It looks like a movie protest. These people do not even have backpacks.

Image caption:

A group of young protesters holds pictures of Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump outside federal court in New York City on July 8, 2019. | Luiz C. Ribeiro/New York Daily News/Tribune News Service via Getty Images

Source of image: Vox - Democrats are right to flirt with Trump-Epstein conspiracies

For context, July 8, 2019 is the day Epstein was charged with sex trafficking of minors by FBI/DOJ.

I don't know what comm to put this in. I put in "slop" in case the topic is getting on people's nerves.

It isn’t Hamas’s fault that the settlers terrorised hundreds of thousands of Palestinians into a small pocket of land back in 1948, nor can Hamas be blamed for Gaza’s seizure in 1967, nor can Hamas be blamed for the apartheid régime having control over Gaza’s electricity and all of the other resources that can’t get in. Like I said two years ago: if the IOF merely wanted to get rid of Hamas, they could have done it less violently.

Interestingly, Herzlians never pause to ask theirselves why Hamas exists in the first place. The implication is that it simply materialized out of nothingness and to even so much as hint that the apartheid régime had anything to do with its early success or survival makes you an antisemite and possibly even worse than every Axis official and Axis collaborator combined.

By camouflaging among civilians—placing weapons, tunnels, and command posts in and under hospitals, schools, mosques, and apartment buildings—Hamas has committed an act of dehumanicide.

Oh look, it’s this trope again. Yawn.

This article is so generic that a computer programme could have churned it out. It comes with flagrant disregard for international institutions:

the highly politicized International Criminal Court is a total sham.

Dubious claims:

I'm sometimes asked what I think of Israel's "genocide." I reply by asking them what "genocide" means. Their typical reply to me? A blank look.

Sheer boneheadedness:

Israel is not trying to wipe a people off the Earth, and the evidence for that fact is all around—from Israeli troops' presence on the ground in Gaza (why would that be if they were trying to wipe Palestinians out?), to Israel's conduct in Judea and Samaria (where there is no active war against the Palestinians, much less something more dramatic)

And, of course, war crime denial:

The real tragedy is not an imaginary genocide by Israel, but the systematic dehumanization of Palestinians by their own supposed leaders.

Systematic dehumanization of Palestinians by their own supposed leaders? Yeah, Netanyahu and his cronies are systematically dehumanising the Palestinians. We know that already!

Finally, the seal of quality:

Jason D. Greenblatt was President Donald Trump's Middle East envoy between 2017 and 2019.

Tweet

I am a man boiling with rage.

Yesterday, I went with my son to watch the new Superman movie. Superman! The ultimate superhero, a character created by two Jewish immigrants, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, in the 1930s. The character is supposed to represent hope, justice, and light.

The actor playing Superman? Jewish. The studios? Owned by Jews.

Even the character of Superman himself, symbolically and historically, is considered to have Jewish roots. A refugee sent from crisis and war to save a better world, created to empower the Jews who returned from the Holocaust.

And what did the pathetic progressives in Hollywood do? They trampled all over this. Instead of presenting a character who defends the weak and fights for justice, they turned it into a disgusting political caricature, where Israel (under a different name) is portrayed as a fascist state, a warmonger, and a close ally of the U.S., which supplies advanced weaponry to fight "poor and miserable farmers (the good Palestinians) with pitchforks and stones."

And Superman? He comes to save them from bloodthirsty Israel. This is literally a film of incitement against us.

I sat there, next to my son, watching how the film had one purpose: to brainwash the world. They took the ultimate childhood hero, who was supposed to represent absolute good, and turned him into a one-sided, distorted, superficial propaganda tool. They ruined my childhood, they ruined the experience for me, but not only for me, they ruined it for the next generation.

Because my son, with his innocent eyes, asks me: “Dad, why is Superman against Israel? Isn’t he Jewish?”

So let's talk about hypocrisy.

About how the progressive Jewish studio owners, who hate Israel, hide behind this movie, sitting in their luxurious homes in California, feeling safe in their ivory towers. Aside from having a bar mitzvah for their dog, they have no connection to Judaism and choose to disconnect from the homeland that was founded on the ruins of the people who behaved like them in Europe in the 1930s.

It will come back to them like a boomerang. No matter how much they decorate their houses for Christmas, they will pay the price because history always repeats itself.

They are turning Israelis into the "bad guys," the Palestinians into the "good guys," and missiles and terrorism into the "struggle of freedom fighters." This is their coffin nail as they align with the politically correct studios of Walt Disney.

So yes, I am offended. I am angry. I am disgusted. They are cowards.

And I will tell you here, clearly: The liberal Jews in America are the main contributors to anti-Semitism in the U.S. They, and the push for progressivism in America, the takeover of communication and financial power, and the use of tools to brainwash our children in order to spread your distorted nonsense.

Take your hands off Superman because those who believe in goodness, justice, family, and identity are we — you, your god, is money. Nothing more. You’re nothing but zeros! There is no greater enemy to an Israeli than the progressive American Jew.

also happens to be 14 words and the first letters make an anagram

TECLIRSITTFASC

"clitter fascist"

Who would have predicted that replacing Assad with an genocidal Jihadist terror group backed by Isntreal would be bad for Syria.

bet you regret not supporting israel now

I still refuse to believe this is real

Stolen from here

The actual article

My husband’s family has a trust that owns rental properties. One of them is a commercial property with several tenants. One of the tenants is Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and they use it as a “short-term holding facility” (their description).

We receive income from the trust, which earns money from several other things as well; it’s all bundled together. Figuring out what portion of my rental income comes from the ICE client is not possible, as the family member who manages it declines to go to the trouble, which I understand is considerable.

I feel pretty horrible about getting money from an immigration prison, but I’m the only beneficiary of the trust who cares. I could resign from the trust, but my husband of 50 years would get my share — and anyway, our funds are completely mingled.

I’m not sure you can make me feel any better about this, but I’m curious about the ethics of receiving money from an entity you consider kind of evil. I went to a lot of Catholic schools, including a Jesuit university. I don’t know all the finer points, but it feels unethical. My husband and his family think this is ridiculous. What is your opinion? Is there a correct action? — Name Withheld

From the Ethicist:

It’s understandable that you’re troubled. Court rulings, investigative reporting and firsthand accounts have shown that ICE has acted in ways that not only harm noncitizens but also erode the rights of citizens.

Even so, the existence of an immigration-enforcement agency isn’t inherently the problem. Most people accept that states have a right to control their borders and that there’s a legitimate role for authorities charged with enforcing immigration policy, especially when it comes to those who have committed serious crimes. ICE also investigates trafficking, smuggling and other transnational offenses that clearly require federal oversight.

The core issue is less the agency’s mandate than its methods. Well-documented abuses — denials of due process, inhumane conditions and politically motivated enforcement — have undermined public trust and raised serious ethical concerns. The worry is not whether immigration law should be enforced but how, and at what human cost.

The holding facilities ICE uses are part of this system: They house people awaiting deportation, court appearances or further investigation. What’s in dispute isn’t the need for such spaces; it’s the treatment of detainees within those spaces. Many facilities have drawn criticism for degrading or dangerous conditions. Still, as a beneficiary of a trust that rents a property to ICE, your leverage is minuscule. You can’t unilaterally break the lease. Even if you could, ICE would simply relocate its facility. And while moral complicity is a serious concern, receiving income from a legal tenant, however problematic, isn’t generally considered an ethical transgression on its own.

We’re all entangled in systems we don’t control. As citizens, we’re already implicated in the actions of government agencies that act in our name and that we help fund. If those actions are shameful, they cast a shadow on all of us. But that shared entanglement also opens the door to shared responsibility — and response.

You mentioned your Jesuit university. You’ll probably remember, then, the emphasis placed on “discernment” — not just abstract moral reasoning but the habit of examining one’s own position in the world, with clarity and courage, and then acting on that understanding. So here’s one constructive path: If this money feels tainted, redirect it. Use it to support organizations that advocate for the rights you believe ICE has violated — groups like the A.C.L.U., the American Immigration Council or local legal-aid nonprofits that provide support for detainees. Back candidates pushing for humane immigration reform. It’s a way to turn your sense of passive complicity into a measure of active redress. You may not be able to change the trust’s lease, but you can choose what your share of the proceeds stands for.

https://xcancel.com/AlecStapp/status/1944939797362937889

🎯

Proud of Mr. Trump.

thanks for the insight cum dracula

and of course the libs are clapping like seals and posting the most unfathomably incorrect takes like they know their shit