uncle bernard

Yes, that's exactly what I said.

incredibly stupid!

This is a tad disingenuous when the books they're removing are for political reasons, not space reasons. I'm all for voicing opinions on the quality of books, but government entities shouldn't be choosing what's politically correct to have in a library, be it for liberal or conservative reasons.

The way the phrase "book ban" is typically used today means removing from schools/libraries. No books are being totally banned, that's for sure. Which books are D's banning from schools and libraries? I can't find anything online.

US generals also work with proxies to attack iran/iranian proxies. i suppose you think they should be able to assassinate our generals if they want right?

calling it an assassination of two iranian generals in a sovereign country doesn’t really change anything buddy. what point do you think you’re making? and if israel has the right to assassinate generals of a country that they accuse of funding hamas, why doesn’t that country have the same right to respond to a direct attack on their citizens? maybe both things are bad and make the world worse? crazy thought.

i condemn it as strongly as i condemn israel’s embassy strike.

he knows nothing about the issue that he didn’t read in a tweet (and that tweet was probably from someone who knows even less than him). at least you seem to know the basic events. you just disagree on the decisions made.

“midst of a genocide” “world resolution” “and bad at history” the holocaust had been over for years before the Nakba. the balfour declaration happened in 1917 (that’s pre-holocaust if you don’t know) as a result of the british taking control of the land from the ottoman empire. the british gov saw giving the jews a homeland as a convenient way of importing friendly white europeans into a hostile colonial state. and it wasn’t a “world resolution.” it was done by the British government. one of the biggest issues with the whole thing is that there was little input from “the world” unless you think the world only means europe and not anywhere that isn’t western/white. britain relinquishing control of the territory to the jewish settlers it had been importing for 30 years was done as reparation for the holocaust and due to their diminished ability to maintain a global empire after fighting two world wars. and that’s not my problem either! i think anybody has the right to live wherever they want. i don’t think you can do it by violently displacing the people who already lived there. jews have every right to return to their holy land. but so do the palestinians they displaced. the whole project was doomed from the start by the behavior of the first settlers, colonial powers, (and yes) the palestinian locals. the british gov gave israel control of land without properly including the land’s current inhabitants in the process. people whose families had lived in the same house for hundreds of years were told they had leave. people resisted as people always do when their home is under threat. the resulting turmoil resulted in the displacement of 750,000 Palestinians (on top of those who lost their homes in the original declaration) and doomed any prospect of Israel ever being at peace. “bad at history” lmao I’d say your only understanding of this issue comes from reading the wikipedia page, but i think you’re too lazy to even do that!

israel’s raided (and destroyed) all the hospitals in gaza they claimed to have the secret hamas headquarters. still haven’t found it. killed a ton of civilians in the process though!

native americans. they certainly lived on it longer and far more recently than israeli jews. if you think european jews had a right to return and take land in israel, you better also believe the same about native americans.

they can go after hamas all they want. they can’t do that by bombing indiscriminately and killing thousands of women and children.

yes. does that give them the right to do wrong in return? that’s toddler morality. I suppose you think the Sioux should establish an ethnostate in the Dakotas and sequester the current white inhabitants into open air prisons under military siege? After all, we committed a genocide against them and it was their land until only a couple hundred years ago (as opposed to 2000 years).

both sides have broken ceasefires.

the world didn’t start on 10/7. actions have consequences and our country has the power to put a stop to this madness for the good of both sides but that doesn’t aid our imperial aspirations in the region so we keep funding our proxy state who is apparently intent on suicide.