Raze

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9yeIKMy12Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vhrTErrZD8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtChcxeaukQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ne9DL27eyEo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HkRoeshhCg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkpHzoRVAjU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXOWoki5eiE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SdiL9XFKkU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5JJQt_nHzQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAqHBrErF7s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23Z6BUi-jnQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpmAWcMtBFw https://www.girlschase.com/article/how-start-picking-girls-beginner-guide https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twTrrGiRXtY

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/idf-says-documents-found-in-gaza-show-hamas-was-falsifying-prominent-polling-results/ This is interesting. I’m inclined to believe this because the IDF is strongly claiming it has proof, also this data doesn’t exactly make the operation look better as it means much of the suffering of Gazans isn’t even of Gazans who privately supported Oct 7. If this is really true I wonder what Hamas’s actual goal is, as the second the war ends even if they remain in power, it’s entirely possible the Gazans will revolt against them if they are this unpopular.

I recommend these interviews, Sachs gives some insane insider knowledge

It says this in the document So we are supposed to not believe this statement but believe the other one, within the same document? If this really was Israel’s issue then explain why 1) they purposefully funneled money to Hamas and officials privately admitted they wanted Hamas to win the election & purposefully blockaded Gaza to put the economy on the brink as a putative tool 2) why they continue carving up the West Bank, forget about Hamas and Gaza, why not give the West Bank Palestinians freedom as Hamas has no control there, not only is the PLO not attacking Israel it isn’t even practicing self defense as settlers and IDF constantly kill Palestinians and rarely does anything happen to them The occupation itself creates a threat. Leaving thousands of orphans trapped in Gaza to be recruited & letting settlers steal homes and hunt Palestinians, all while also refusing to give them any future will continue to create anti Israel sentiment. Do you expect them to just decide to roll over and die? That is not naive, that’s playing out before our eyes. If a state puts Israel at threat, what does the occupation do? Palestinians don’t have a state and they’ve just suffered the worst attack in their borders in their entire history, a huge amount of international criticism, and certainly motivated extremists to rally against them for decades. And what happens if this persists, it will be more of the same. Palestinians stage violently resist, Israel slams down on them, international outcry, extremists use it to recruit, ect. Eventually it will be too much.

So why aren’t Palestinians reasonable to attack Israel when it is in favor of destroying Palestine? Israel kept 2 million locked in Gaza, settlers and IDF regularly kill and steal land in the West Bank, the Israeli government openly says it is against Palestinians ever having a state. If Israel can attack Palestinians groups that are against Israel’s existence, why can’t Palestinians attack the israel government hostile to theirs? Hamas has offered long term cease fires in exchange for a state multiple times. https://inkstickmedia.com/israel-rejected-peace-with-hamas-on-five-occasions/ The PLO hasn’t engaged in armed resistance against Israel for decades and said they recognize Israel. Yet the blockade was still on Gaza, and the West Bank was still being carved up. Most Muslim countries were no longer funding anti Israeli resistance, Saudi Arabia said and still says it will make a deal with Israel if Palestinians have a state. Except the continued occupation is worsening the cultural shift source: https://news.gallup.com/poll/512828/palestinians-lack-faith-biden-two-state-solution.aspx This was an exit poll done on the Gaza election that brought Hamas to power: https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/478 Palestinians like any pretty much any group resort to violence when they have no alternative.

1) After the shah was overthrown the US engaged in a strategy to encircle and try to destroy Iran, they put them under massive sanctions and funded anti Iranian groups such as Iraq during their war. Iran countered this by trying to fund their own rebel groups and expand influence around their country. 2) they use proxies so neither Israel nor the US can easily justify attacking them when they want to strike 3) you’re not understanding my point that Iran cannot destroy Israel if Palestinians have a state. For one it would be much harder for Iran to recruit Palestinians to fight for them if they now had something to lose. Hamas itself offered to throw down its arms if Palestinians were given a state and the leader of Hezbollah said he’ll accept what the Palestinians accept and no longer attack Israel if the situation is resolved. 4) You assuming a Palestinian state means instantly giving them a massive military. There are plenty of solutions to this. Work out an arrangement where they get security from a mutually agreed third party. Have them agree they cannot take funding from Iran or they’ll suffer huge sanctions, or that if they attack Israel, the US and Israel will respond. Also, I don’t see how Palestinians having a state suddenly gives Iran the ability to destroy Israel anymore than they have now, at best they could make another small rebel group that the IDF would still dwarf. As you mentioned Iran doesn’t even directly attack Israel, it just finds small rebel groups. 5) Apartheid and mass murder against a population because you fear otherwise a different country will arm them and they’ll attack is not ethnical. You can’t justify war crimes based on what you think might happen. During the Syrian civil war Israel and the US supplied rebels trying to overthrow Assad, would it be ethical for Assad to occupy Israel and the US eternally and strip their people of rights if he could as they were trying to destroy him? No. 6) If the occupation is was making Israel safer the largest attack on them in their history wouldn’t have happened, but it did on oct 7 7) Long before Iran was funding Hamas, Israel was still brutally occupying the Palestinians. So it doesn’t really make sense to say it’s just a measure of safety against Iran. 8) Iran has itself shown willingness to negotiate multiple times. They offered to turn the Middle East into a nuclear weapon free zone and got rejected, they offered to suspend funding of Palestinian militants and got rejected, offered to suspend their nuclear program in the nuclear deal but Israel pressured the US to reject it. It’s not really accurate to say they are hell bent on war. 9) Handling Iran will probably fail based on US attempts at handling smaller countries in recent history ending in far worse situations. US military reports actually found Iran had low military spending and was mostly basing its strategy on defense. However they have expanded it after the US and Israel continually threatened to invade and assassinated their leaders and scientists.

The current situation is an existential threat to Palestinians as they have few rights and are massacred daily. 2 million are stuck in Gaza which is becoming uninhabitable and settlers and idf have killed 400 in the West Bank while actively removing others from their homes and holding thousands in prison without charges. This is the actual threat to Israel as it riled up hatred towards them and outside groups can fund Palestinian resistance. The former head of Shin Bet himself said during his term when two states negotiations was looking like it was going well, he saw a decrease in attacks. Even if Israel would be safer with a Palestinian state, they aren’t entitled to deprive millions of people of their rights and safety just incase. Should America have kept slavery or segregation in case blacks when given freedom would seek revenge? Should the UK have continued stifling Irish freedom in case they’d seek revenge if they had independence? No, and in both cases it actually reduced resentment and conflict to give people their rights. That especially makes no sense when Israel is actively destroying Palestine, so Israel is allowed to destroy a people because they might try to destroy israel if they had freedom, but no one is allowed to try to resist Israel as it actively destroys them? It also is not true. Egypt was Israel’s mortal enemy for decades but made peace with them despite Israel treating the Palestinians worse and worse. It would have probably been even easier to make peace with them if the Palestinian issue was resolved. Iran would have near zero support If they tried attacking Israel when it wasn’t occupying Palestinians. That’s the entire basis of their behavior. They’d also lose their biggest assets, men to recruit, as many would simply not join if they had a future. Hezbollah only formed initially as resistance to the Israel occupation of Lebanon. Oct 7 as well proved definitively the threat to Israel’s safety is the occupation, it breeds resistance. On the other hand when Israel deals with with states it fares much better. You can make peace with states, not with people who you occupy. If Israel is truly that afraid of a Palestinian state than make a true one state, tell Palestinians they can be Israeli citizens with full rights. But endless occupation of a people just creates violence and ethnic cleansing them is a crime.

You’d feel the same way if you walked in on your parents going at it but conservatives are A-ok with that

That doesn’t conflict with what I said, I’m offering a perspective on where the origin of believing it’s a perceived threat comes from.

The conservative homophobia today stems from religions, mostly Abrahamic ones. Societies that pre-date them such as Greece and Rome had normalized homosexuality even among conservatives.

Simple, rape was used as a method of domination and war on men for forming status hierarchies, similar to how it suddenly appears so commonly in prisons or war where rules of civilization collapse, so over time that trauma caused prejudice against gays and developed into adopting anti homosexual regulations which ended up in religions and were passed down. Probably this is a reason why the taliban were particularly harsh on it as many of them were actually raped by US backed war lords when they were trained as child soldiers.

What ways can you offer value

You need to focus on building connections, getting on the good side of wealthy donors, becoming a compelling speaker, and building a brand and following with a message showing dedication to the donors interests

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDMJs3hDyk8 https://www.girlschase.com/content/state-control-pt-2-how-get-state https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ytv1ktOYWxg

It’s not, I’ve seen four others at least. We need to compile a common issues resources page or something. I never saw his posts so I couldn’t recommend any links. I’ve seen other posts where I know a solution but the user is long gone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ojq1AAMvZvg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRnP8wL2hO8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j83HjUFJhas

https://whdh.com/news/israel-launches-large-scale-west-bank-raid-as-minister-calls-for-gaza-style-operation/

Take this challenge and you can make some money and get free coaching https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEQWLSNajYk

http://bactra.org/chomsky-on-postmodernism.html

Demagogues and dictator wannabes aren’t unique, there are endless examples in history, including ones that take over democracies. Even if he wouldn’t now, if more and more of behavior like this is normalized, a future president can.

But you’ve been saying Trump is going to end democracy? If governments have free reign to shut down speech so would a trump like figure if they get in office.