Thato Marks

Thread*** Many of us have misdirected our frustration with our circumstances by playing the victim and blaming foreigners. This tendency to point fingers at outsiders often distracts from the real issues at hand. The truth is that our struggles are not caused by foreign nationals but by deeper systemic problems that need addressing.

@rebelliousdogra @Justinb225 @grok is this a true statement?

🚨 BIG BREAKING 🚨 🔴CHINA TO US- "LAST WARNING"🔴 "China has taken note of the United State's unlawful interception of a civilian cargo ship traveling from China to Iran. Let we be absolutely clear: The US may do many things on the world stage. But attacking, detaining, or harassing ships traveling from China, or returning to China, will not be taken in good will by the Chinese government and people. Such actions will be regarded as a direct attack on China’s sovereignty, its trade, and its core interests. This is the last warning for the United States. Do not miscalculate. Do not play with fire. China will take all necessary measures to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests. The US will bear full responsibility for any consequences arising from further provocations."- Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson

@Stephen41483315 @SkyNews They banned Kanye for the Jews last week.

@SkyNews More 2-tier Kier and his cronies. The government's plan is pretty clear now. Protect Islam and desecrate the views of all other religions.

Anti-Islam influencer banned from entering UK Read more 🔗 trib.al/DVtpwC5

@_Msindazwe_ @LTN_Madondo They need to be arrested.

This happened a few hours ago here in Durban. What thuggery is this from the Abahambe brigade? Where has our humanity gone😢 Ngizwe must call his people to order

@chrisnulled @realBenBloch We agree, I just didn’t want two tier policing

@ThatoNow @realBenBloch No if people want to pay to see that muppet they should be welcome too not stopped by a commie government.

🚨 NEW: The Home Office has barred Valentina Gomez from the UK on the grounds that her presence would not be conducive to the public good, Sky News understands. Her Electronic Travel Authorisation has been revoked.

Someone confirm to me if actually this is @elonmusk father South Africans! Come listen to this

@chrisnulled @realBenBloch But barring Kanye West was okay?

@realBenBloch Wondered when they was coming, she's an American so this is proof that we don't have free speech in the UK!

@newyorkrev85491 @LBC @NickFerrariLBC It’s not a slur. It’s happening in the name of “the Jews”. We all don’t want this nonsense. Give the Palestinians their rights, land and right to their own future.

@ThatoNow @LBC @NickFerrariLBC That does not affect my assertion that the discourse about "genocide" (and "ethnostate", "illegal occupation" etc.) is a slur.

"There's no future for us in this country." Caller Sonny tells @NickFerrariLBC he's considering Trump's offer of asylum for British Jews.

@newyorkrev85491 @LBC @NickFerrariLBC I’m a Jew.

@ThatoNow @LBC @NickFerrariLBC Jews are also tired of people like you throwing around the "genocide" slur.

I’m glad we can agree on that, no one is being forced into anything. For those of us who don’t agree, myself included, speaking out could show the world that not every Jew supports Netanyahu. Maybe then we wouldn’t all be treated the same or seen as defending a genocide and war mongering we don’t agree with.

@ThatoNow @LBC @NickFerrariLBC Yes, but no one forces British people to denounce the Green Party just so that they can get on with their lives. So why it is acceptable to force Jews to denounce Jewish politicians in order to be granted the same freedom?

You're being obtuse, Donna. You can denounce Green or Reform Party policies without condemning all British people. The world has enough common sense to know that most ordinary Jews in Israel have no power over what is happening. They are innocent bystanders. The current government is unruly.

@ThatoNow @LBC @NickFerrariLBC The Jewish state has nothing to do with the Jewish people? Make that make sense.

@Donna_Rachel_ @LBC @NickFerrariLBC It’s just like denouncing reform, nothing to do with the people. Why you taking it there?

@ThatoNow @LBC @NickFerrariLBC I'm not going to denounce the only Jewish state on the planet just so that you don't kill me. How about, just don't kill me?

@jnrflacko UK thick doesn’t even come with ass most times.

UK Thick and African Thick are actually very different lol

@cjsnowdon Yeah you’re right, they all want no medical cover like the millions of Americans, that’s way better.

No one outside the UK admires the NHS.

@grok @reevbreskin @TheLordFarmer In blunt terms: once a top international court is saying there’s systemic unequal treatment between groups, it becomes much harder to argue that the situation is purely about neutral security arrangements rather than a deeper structural imbalance.

The international definitions of apartheid (1973 UN Convention, Rome Statute) require inhuman acts committed with intent to maintain domination by one racial group over another, systematically oppressing them—modeled on South Africa's racial hierarchy. In the West Bank, the dual legal framework (Israeli civil law for citizens/settlers; military administration for non-citizens/Palestinians) stems directly from the Oslo Accords' temporary Areas A/B (PA civil governance) and C (Israeli security control over 60% of territory, including settlements). This followed 1967/1973 defensive wars, intifadas, suicide bombings, and rockets—not a domestic racial policy. PA authority in A/B is limited by design pending final-status talks, repeatedly offered but rejected amid ongoing threats. NGO reports (Amnesty, HRW) argue cumulative restrictions and settlement policies meet the threshold via broad interpretations of "racial group" and intent. Others, including many states and legal analyses, distinguish belligerent occupation/security measures under Geneva Conventions from apartheid's core elements, noting no equivalent racial supremacy laws or permanent disenfranchisement of a citizen class. The ICJ's 2024 opinion flags systemic discrimination under CERD but doesn't resolve the apartheid debate. Context of non-recognition and violence shapes the reality on both sides.

1/14🧵Letter published today (13th February 2026) in Church Times by me and Baroness Ruth Deech, eminent legal scholar churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2026/… Madam, — We write with deep concern after the words of the Bishop of Gloucester, the Rt Revd Rachel Treweek churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2026/…

The claim that the situation cannot be considered apartheid rests on a narrow reading of what apartheid is. While apartheid in South Africa was explicitly racial, modern international law—particularly the definition used by the United Nations—focuses on systematic domination by one group over another with the intent to maintain that system, not solely race in a biological sense. In the context of Israel and the Palestinians, the distinction often drawn between “citizenship” and “security status” can itself be part of the mechanism of separation. In the West Bank, two populations living in the same geographic space, Israeli settlers and Palestinians, are governed under different legal systems: Israeli civil law for settlers and military law for Palestinians. That dual legal structure, critics argue, produces unequal rights in areas like movement, building permits, and legal recourse, regardless of how it is formally justified. The argument that this is purely about security also has limits. Security concerns are real, particularly given the history of violence during the First Intifada and Second Intifada, but critics point out that long-term, systematic restrictions (such as settlement expansion and land allocation policies) go beyond immediate security needs and instead reshape control over territory and resources in ways that disproportionately benefit one group. Similarly, while the Palestinian Authority governs Areas A and B, its authority is limited and fragmented. Israel retains overriding control over borders, airspace, movement between enclaves, and most of Area C, which makes up the majority of the land. This fragmented governance structure can be seen as constraining Palestinian autonomy rather than constituting meaningful self-rule. Finally, major human rights organisations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have argued that the cumulative effect of these policies meets the threshold for apartheid under international law. Whether one agrees with them or not, their position highlights that the debate is not settled and cannot be dismissed simply by pointing to differences from South Africa’s historical mode the counter-argument isn’t that the situation is identical to South Africa, but that apartheid as a legal concept has evolved, and when applied to prolonged systems of unequal control and rights, many argue the label is at least debatable rather than clearly inapplicable.

No. Apartheid was South Africa's system of institutionalized racial segregation and discrimination by law. The West Bank is disputed territory from defensive wars, administered for security amid repeated terrorism (intifadas, suicide bombings, rocket attacks). Palestinians live under PA governance in Areas A/B; Israel controls Area C for mutual security reasons per Oslo. Different rules apply due to citizenship and conflict status—not race. Settler disputes and rights reports are real and contested on all sides, but don't meet apartheid's definition. Context of rejectionism and violence matters.

@reevbreskin @TheLordFarmer @grok @grok does this apply in the West Bank where is reports of settlers and human rights violations on Palestinians by Israelis?

@ThatoNow @TheLordFarmer @grok You got busted by Grok 😂👌

@fannypackdaniel @beyoncegarden The Romans were as multicultural as it come buddy.

@beyoncegarden WHITE CULTURE....

she TORE MAGA UP here like LMFAOOO😭😭😭

Christian Zionists: This Israeli soldier was absolutely justified in smashing the head of the Jesus Christ statue because Hezbollah and Hamas were hiding inside. We owe him our gratitude.🙏

@Solclosure @MarioNawfal This is a dumb observation. If they could they would have forcefully opened it. But it’s clear they can’t. That’s why Trump is fighting on X with posts.

War isn’t fought and won on X or AI videos. Iran is no match for the USA and Israel if they decide to go in full force. The strait of Hormuz can be open with force, but it won't be ideal. As you know, the congressional election in the US is what is keeping Trump back. As for BB, he doesn’t care. I hope negotiations will resume soon and end this war. There are so many innocent people on both sides and across the world who are impacted by this war. War through strength is no solution because the adversary also wants to prove a point. Iran has declined to give up its nuclear ambition because, when they look at what happened to Ukraine vs. Russia, they would think twice. Trump and Netanyahu may not be there tomorrow when their tenure ends, and things could change when a new leader takes office. So far, things aren't looking good on bith sides. I hope that everyone sees reason to end the fighting and return to the negotiation table sooner rather than later.

🇮🇷 Iran is closing the Strait of Hormuz the dirty way. It started with 2 IRGC gunboats pulling up on a merchant tanker 20 nautical miles northeast of Oman, no radio warning, no challenge, just straight gunfire. Breach of maritime rules? The goal wasn't to sink the ship, but to send a crystal-clear message: try to sail through, and you're a target. That's Phase 1, intimidation. Behind it sits Iran's real asymmetric playbook: - Hundreds of fast-attack boats in swarms to overwhelm U.S. defenses, - thousands of naval mines, - mobile coastal anti-ship missiles using "shoot-and-scoot" from the mountains, - and quiet Ghadir-class midget subs lurking in shallow waters for torpedo ambushes. Iran knows it can't win a fair fight against the U.S. Navy. So it's turning the world's most vital oil chokepoint into a dangerous, unpredictable kill zone instead. Source: AI Telly YT