My partner and I were talking about the brutality of airstrikes vs other forms of killing people (knives, guns etc) and how airstrikes are depicted as less brutal and personal. I made the point that there is literally no American cultural memory of being bombed under virtually any circumstances.

One movie that I thought did a great job of depicting the terror of airstrikes was the battle of lake changjin, the 2021 Chinese blockbuster about the PLA’s counterattack against American invaders in Korea. American bombers were terrifying in that film.

Houthi official to Germans:

“The reason that led your country’s government to persecute Jews in the past is the same reason that has led your current government to persecute Palestinians, namely your lack of sufficient moral values ​​to stop it.”

If you ever feel useless or powerless, just remember that the UN exists.

CW - IOF body bags

https://streamable.com/sasu6t

Israeli soldier says they have trouble keeping the bodies of their soldiers, they smell very bad even though it has only been 1 day since they died. Notable video I think because of the mention that these were all within 1 day.

Can someone explain why every leftist (online and on the streets) seems to support PFLP but not DFLP? Did DFLP do something bad, or is it that DFLP just isn’t doing enough in their eyes? DFLP is also part of the Democratic Alliance List with PFLP, supports a one-state solution, and the Omar Al-Qasim Forces (their militant wing) have been active alongside the Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades (PFLP’s militant wing) in storming IDF watchtowers and fighting the IOF. And the DFLP doesn’t have any recent history of massacres at synagogues or killing teenagers… Yet I never hear any support for them, see their flags at marches, etc.

Also, noting PSL being accused of opportunism yesterday, can someone explain the beef between PSL and FRSO? Is it ideological or just personal drama?

I am pretty plugged out so please forgive me if these questions sound like attacks.

At Anti-“Israel” March in D.C., Explicit Expressions of Support for Terror and Antisemitism

The ADL has been to an anti-genocide march in Washington DC to look for expressions of antisemitism. And while they managed to find some actually problematic stuff like a placard talking about someone “pulling the strings” of genocide Joe, they also managed to find lots of other stuff, including:

Lamis Deek, a leader with the anti-Zionist group Al-Awda, called Israelis a “cult of torturers” who enjoy inflicting pain on children […] She also venerated terror; called to “dismantle every institution of Zionist violence in the world;”

One poster replaced the Jewish Star of David in the Israeli flag with an emoji of feces, suggesting Israel be thrown in the garbage.

Raja Abdulhaq, a New York City-based political organizer and anti-Israel activist, said that an aim of Israel’s “war on Gaza” is to stifle political movements that oppose capitalism, playing into historic themes about Jews and money.

An attendee carried a poster calling Zionism “a cancer to this planet.” An overwhelming majority of Jews consider Zionism to be an integral part of their Jewish identities (regardless of their views about specific Israeli policies).

An attendee carried a sign that read, “Down with Zionism” and an Arabic phrase that translates to “Death to Zionism.”

Marte White from the Atlanta chapter of Community Movement Builders emphasized the Palestinians’ right to resist “by any means necessary:”

“…one of our principles is to stand in solidarity with other oppressed people fighting for self-determination, especially Palestinians. The first thing I want to get into here is that Palestinians are showing us what decolonization really looks like. This shit is real. Palestinians have a right to rebel. But that means that they have a right to right to free their land from the river to the sea by any means necessary. And I do mean any means necessary.”

An attendee held a poster suggesting support for all forms of action against Israel, including terrorism.

A participant carried a poster with the words “Resistance is Justice” and the likeness of PFLP leader and terrorist Leila Khaled.

Former Polish President Lech Walesa said that, according to his information, terrorist attacks are being prepared in Poland after the elections

“Not everything in Poland ended with elections. I have information that a number of events are planned, including those of a terrorist nature. The party that lost the elections is capable of anything not to give up power,” Walesa wrote on Facebook.

“A number of activities are planned, including of a terrorist nature. The losing side of the election is capable of anything not to give up power,” - wrote Walesa in social networks.

The former Polish President said that he would soon send a statement to law enforcers “on the commission of a crime.” He said he hoped they would “quickly and efficiently catch these losers.”

PIS terrorism

Pope forcibly removes a leading US conservative, Texas bishop Strickland

Bishop Strickland is a conservative who is active on social media and has been a fierce critic of the pontiff and some of his priorities

Pope Francis on Saturday forcibly removed the bishop of Tyler, Texas, a firebrand conservative prelate active on social media who has been a fierce critic of the pontiff and has come to symbolize the polarization within the U.S. Catholic hierarchy.

A one-line statement from the Vatican said Francis had “relieved” Bishop Joseph Strickland of the pastoral governance of Tyler and appointed the bishop of Austin as the temporary administrator.

Strickland, 65, has emerged as a leading critic of Francis, accusing him in a tweet earlier this year of “undermining the deposit of faith.” He has been particularly critical of Francis’ recent meeting on the future of the Catholic Church during which hot-button issues were discussed, including ways to better welcome LGBTQ+ Catholics.

Earlier this year, the Vatican sent in investigators to look into his governance of the diocese, amid reports that priests and laypeople in Tyler had complained and that he was making unorthodox claims.

The Vatican never released the findings and Strickland had insisted he wouldn’t resign voluntarily, saying in media interviews that he was given a mandate to serve as bishop in 2012 by the late Pope Benedict XVI and couldn’t abdicate that responsibility.

The conservative website LifeSiteNews, which said it interviewed Strickland on Saturday, quoted him as saying one of the reasons given for his ouster was his refusal to implement Francis’ 2021 restrictions on celebrating the old Latin Mass.

Francis’ crackdown on the old liturgy has become a rallying cry for traditionalist Catholics opposed to pontiff’s progressive bent. Strickland told LifeSite he refused to implement the restrictions “because I can’t starve out part of my flock.”

He said he stood by his decision, would do it again and “I feel very much at peace in the Lord and the truth that he died for.”

His firing sparked an immediate outcry among some conservatives and traditionalists who had held up Strickland as a leading point of Catholic reference to counter Francis’ progressive reforms. Michael J. Matt, editor of the traditionalist newspaper The Remnant, wrote that with the firing, Francis was “actively trying to bury fidelity to the Church of Jesus Christ.”

“This is total war,” Matt wrote on X, formerly Twitter. “Francis is a clear and present danger not only to Catholics the world over but also to the whole world itself.”

The two Vatican investigators sent into investigate Strickland — Bishop Dennis Sullivan of Camden, N.J., and the retired bishop of Tucson, Ariz., Bishop Emeritus Gerald Kicanas — “conducted an exhaustive inquiry into all aspects of the governance and leadership of the diocese,” said the head of the church in Texas, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo

After their investigation, a recommendation was made to Francis that “the continuation in office of Bishop Strickland was not feasible,” DiNardo said in a statement Saturday.

The Vatican asked Strickland to resign Nov. 9, but he declined, prompting Francis to remove him from office two days later, DiNardo’s statement said.

It is rare for the pope to forcibly remove a bishop from office. Bishops are required to offer to resign when they reach 75. When the Vatican uncovers issues with governance or other problems that require a bishop to leave office before then, the Vatican usually seeks to pressure him to offer to resign for the good of his diocese and the church.

That was the case when another U.S. bishop was forced out earlier this year following a Vatican investigation. Knoxville, Tenn. Bishop Richard Stika resigned voluntarily, albeit under pressure, following allegations he mishandled sex abuse allegations, and his priests complained about his leadership and behavior.

But with Strickland, the Vatican statement made clear he had not offered to resign, and that Francis had instead “relieved” him from his job.

Francis has not been shy about his concerns about the right wing in the U.S. Catholic hierarchy, which has been split between progressives and conservatives who long found support in the doctrinaire papacies of St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI, particularly on issues of abortion and same-sex marriage.

Strickland backed Vigano’s conspiracy theories (theories rather than conspiracies themselves, right?) about the COVID-19 pandemic, and on Saturday Vigano wrote that Strickland’s ouster showed a “cowardly form of authoritarianism” by Francis. “This affair will reveal who stands with the true Church of Christ and who chooses to stand with His declared enemies,” Vigano wrote on X.

Western leaders using “Never Again” Holocaust messaging to justify a ongoing genocide, becoming the equivalent of the Nazi-appeasers before/during WW2 upon who we look back on with such disgust (ignoring that leaders like Churchill were relatively pro-Nazi before it all kicked off, of course) would have shattered my previous liberal brain into a trillion pieces. The whiplash we’ve experienced in such a relatively short time (over the last 3-4 years or so) between:

1. the coronavirus pandemic telling us that we’re all ultimately disposable and that over a million people can and should die, shoveled like coal chunks into the furnace of the economy, then

2. the war in Ukraine telling us that actually, people are worth things again, human life is precious and Russia is bad for destroying it, and we must arm Nazis, then

3. the Canada Hunka incident telling us that murderers who freely volunteered to commit atrocities against Jews and Roma and other groups is actually complicated and those anti-semitic genocidal atrocities could even be justified because of how bad the USSR was, so human life isn’t actually precious anymore, then

4. the Gaza genocide telling us that, actually, any Jewish person being killed even if they’re the equivalent of concentration camp guards is an unspeakable atrocity and resistance is unjustifiable if there’s any violence involved, “they go low, we go high” but also we love Israel anyway so we don’t even really think they’re going low

From a non-racist liberal point of view (as in, they’re still racist but don’t think saying slurs is good, etc), this all must seem totally bonkers at least on a subconscious level. All liberal values seem to be currently in this violent political vortex, where sometimes a statement like “killing ethnic minorities is complicated” is not only true in one case (Ukrainian Nazis killing civilians in WW2, killing Palestinians in Gaza, etc) and false in another (Jewish settlers in Israel, who obviously aren’t a minority in Israel but are on a global scale; the “Ughyur genocide”, etc), but true and false for the exact same conflict. The only way to come out of this chaos with even a vaguely coherent political ideology is to either become a socialist or become an all-out racist and apologist/supporter of imperialism - and we’re watching many people become the latter. Otherwise, you’re just watching the news on the TV or your phone or your computer with a slack-jawed face while the words enter your brain without the slighest post-processing and then go about your day not ever thinking about how like, Russia killing 500 children in ~2 years is intentional, planned genocide but Israel killing over 4000 in a month is just an unfortunate Thing That Happened.

I don’t think that people who do genuinely believe in the rules-based international order (“Yeah, the United States should try and maintain justice and order around the world, we can’t let evil forces try and disrupt how great things are for everybody, sucks about the bad side effects but it’s better than if Russia or China were in charge, can you imagine?”) are like, having mental breakdowns or crises of faith about their ideology or anything, at least partially because they don’t even think they have an ideology in which to have a crisis about, but it does express itself in a general kind of malaise or alienation about the world and general events or even everyday life. “There’s a sense in which things kinda suck, but maybe it’s just because I didn’t meditate this morning or take my multivitamin or that my co-worker was being annoying or something, IDK.” At least, this is what I observe in my friends and family.

The contradictions have accelerated so rapidly in just a short amount of time that I literally cannot imagine where we’ll be in, say, 2030.

I’ve noticed some liberals state: “The casualties aren’t high enough to be a genocide”. This is such a wild and ugly retort to the outcry against this campaign against Gaza.