L. G. Brandon 📟

Well this sure throws a monkey wrench into our planning.

Why haven't the evil zionists of Israel made incursions into Jordan? Oh yeah. Because Jordan hasn't allowed itself to be used as a staging spot to attack Israel. Rockets aren't coming into Israel from Jordan & Israel leaves Jordan alone. Amazing how that works.

One of the best visuals of the US vs Canada's military strength. I had no idea just how ill-equipped we really were. We should be incredibly thankful that they are our neighbors.

Well that ends the debate on deaths in Gaza. Hamas itself is admitting that 80% of casualties were combatants. There was never a genocide. You have been lied to and manipulated.

Flashback: Joe Biden attempts to decree a non-existent Constitutional Amendment into law, just because he said so. “It’s the law of the land, now!" The No Kings types clapped and cheered.

No Queens

The ridiculous "nakba" narrative is so fucking tiresome. 🚨The Jews spent 100 years building the modern state of Israel , beginning in the mid 1800s. 🚨The Jews built the modern state of Israel from NOTHING, using Jewish capital and Jewish ingenuity. 🚨The Jews paid top dollar for the land they developed, including land sold to them by the leading so called Arab nationalists. 🚨No western power assisted the Jews. In fact, Great Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration almost immediately after GB was awarded the Mandate of Palestine. 🚨Every single country in the Levant was created under the same mandate system . 🚨The Jews built all the infrastructure , civic organizations etc. and had established a state in every sense of the word but international recognition by 1939. In fact, the Jews had acquired more than 25% of the land they ultimately owned in 1948 by 1925. 🚨As reflected in the anti Zionist Peel commission report, the Jews rid the area of malaria, made the desert bloom and turned a forgotten, backwater shithole of the Ottoman Empire into a thriving , productive country that benefitted both Jews and Arabs. 🚨 Although the Mandate of Palestine explicitly stated that ONLY THE JEWS had the right to sovereignty in Mandatory Palestine, the Jews were willing to comprise and bent over backwards to reach a peaceful resolution with the Arabs. The Arabs rejected two offers of statehood --in 1937 (Peel commission offer) and 1947 ( UNGA resolution 181). 🚨Instead of compromising, the Arabs first waged a civil war against the Jews, bringing in THOUSANDS of Arabs , armed by the British, from surrounding Arab states to attack the Jews. 🚨When the Arabs' civil war failed, the surrounding Arab states waged a war of annihilation against the Jews. Despite being armed, trained and funded by the British, Americans and others, these Arab armies lost their war and the state of Israel emerged! The pathetic cries of victimhood by the 8th generation descendants of Arabs who waged these wars, fled prior to the wars, or were forced to flee as a direct result of these wars their ancestors started ,is beyond tiresome and pathetic. Get over it!!!

It’s not every day that one gets to listen to a former British Prime Minister recite from memory the opening passages of The Iliad in Ancient Greek, with no notes, in response to a random question from an undergraduate—and all while wearing what appear to be Thomas The Tank Engine socks. But today was one such day. My thanks to my good friend Brad LaMorgese for the opportunity to see the colorful and comic Boris Johnson speak tonight at the University of Dallas.

wow. The Middle East Forum analyzed 1,378 news articles covering the war and found... 98% cited Gaza Ministry of Health figures. Only 5% mentioned Israeli casualty figures for combatants killed. The New York Times cited militant casualty numbers in 0% of its articles analyzed. CNN and the Guardian managed 1%. Only 15% of all articles even noted that Hamas doesn't distinguish combatants from civilians in its data. HonestReporting found that over a four-month period (February-May 2024), 84% of major English-language publications failed to make the combatant-civilian distinction in their total casualty numbers. The effect is that every figure gets absorbed by the audience as a civilian death count. The framing compounds the numbers problem. Journalists routinely cited aggregate totals as purely civilian. CNN's Fareed Zakaria referenced "35,000 civilians dying." CBS's Major Harrison Mann asked, "I don't know how you kill 35,000 civilians by accident." The UN itself produced videos titled "25,000 Civilians Killed" without distinguishing combatants. Meanwhile, asymmetric source scrutiny was the norm. Hamas figures were questioned in roughly 1% of articles. IDF data was challenged in 50% of the limited cases where Israeli sources were cited at all. Nearly 20% of articles cited GHM numbers without even attributing them to Hamas.

Bernie “First Class” Sanders flying to 1 of his 3 homes. Fight the Oligarchy!

This day (March 26) in 1964, Egyptian President Nasser told the UAR National Assembly: “The danger of Israel lies in the very existence of Israel as it is in the present and in what she represents.” No fig leaf about “occupation,” no UN resolutions, no “human rights” jargon—just raw, unvarnished, exterminationist truth. The Jewish state’s "crime" was existing. Three years later, in 1967, Nasser attempted to carry out this planned genocide by gathering the armies of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and others for what they openly called the final solution to the “Zionist problem.” PLO founder Ahmad al-Shuqayri was even more direct: “We shall destroy Israel and its inhabitants… and as for the survivors—if there are any—the boats are ready to deport them.” Iraqi President Abdul Rahman Arif promised Arab forces would “remove Israel from the map” and meet in Tel Aviv. The rhetoric wasn’t subtle. It was genocidal - ACTUALLY genocidal. What happened next is history’s blunt rebuttal: tiny Israel, outnumbered and surrounded, destroyed the combined Arab air forces in hours and ended the war in six days. Nearly 60 years later, it’s almost refreshing to remember how openly these "anti-Zionists" once said the quiet part out loud. Now we hear the same eliminationist goal, but in thinly veiled language of “human rights” or so-called “resistance.” When Nasser made clear the problem was Israel's very existence - in 1964 - he wasn't talking about "67 borders." After all, Egypt was occupying the Gaza Strip and Jordan had illegally annexed the entire "West Bank." Just as it was at modern Israel's inception in 1948, it remains today: the problem to so-called "anti-Zionists" is and always has been Israel's very existence.

If you can't see the difference between terrorists who behead babies, celebrate it, and hide behind their own children to avoid consequence, and soldiers who attempt to avoid civilian casualties, you are not "morally sophisticated." You are a fool, and a dangerous fool at that.

@misfitpatriot_ @SethDillon 🤣

@SethDillon I’m gonna run this test later too but I’m gonna do so much trolling with it. My page is gonna look like a fuckin barmitzvah for a few hours 🤣

You can only reply to this if you’re in North America (or know how to use a VPN).

Under international law, unilateral annexation is prohibited where one state seeks to claim sovereign territory *of another state*. There is no legitimate state of “Palestine” from which a claim of annexation can attach as no sovereign state of “Palestine” has ever existed in accordance with the 1934 Montevideo Convention on Statehood from 1920 to present. And you citing a bunch of factually and legally flawed maps doesn’t change that analysis. San Remo, the LON 1922 mandate, and UN Charter Art. 80 all conferred Judea and Samaria for a future Jewish state. That it was illegally occupied by Jordan from 1948 to 1967 does not change the calculus as no independent State of “Palestine” existed during that time.

Again, the requirement to withdraw was *only* predicated on the final agreement to the two-state solution. Again, there is no final agreement because your PLO heroes categorically refused to assent to one. And even assuming arguendo that Israel were to annex Area C, their claim to that territory is far superior to that of the PLO because international treaties ranging San Remo to the 1922 Mandate to UN Charter Article 80 all held that those lands were mandated for a future Jewish state. And again, if they annex Area C and grant the Arabs living only in Area C Israeli citizenship, then there would *still* be no apartheid. You’re out of your depth, dude. In fact, you’re letting your emotions get the better of what should be a sound factual and legal analysis (of which you have provided neither facts nor law to your proposition).

“They Looked Iranian”: Security Footage Shows Trump Negotiating With White House Patio Umbrellas for Six Hours theshovel.com.au/2026/03/25/the…

The Ayatollah’s last words

To take little girls to hospital after they get raped, beaten and brutalised by Pakistani-Muslim gangs

Is Israel stealing water from the Palestinians? Israel is sharing, not stealing, water. It is giving its own water to Palestinians in significantly greater quantities than it agreed to do under the Oslo Accords (40 percent more in 2008). Nor does Israel use West Bank water. It uses the same water sources today that it used prior to 1967, and communities are connected to Israel’s national water system. Furthermore, Israel helped Palestinians modernize the West Bank’s water system between 1967 and 1995, helping triple the fresh water available (66 MCM per year to 180 MCM per year), and the number of towns connected to running water rose by over 7,600 percent (four to 309). Today, water usage and planning are regulated by Palestinians and Israelis together in the Joint Water Commission. #FactCheck

I hate my clients