these monsters worship the devil
https://xcancel.com/i/status/2035653705106657545
they inserted metal rod through the infant leg:
these monsters worship the devil
https://xcancel.com/i/status/2035653705106657545
they inserted metal rod through the infant leg:
'The most moral army' my arse.
Ladies and Gentlemen, the "most moral army in the World" fully showing their "Western values".
Every politician in the west not calling this out is evil and a liar.
They will have to do better than one fake article with an AI generated image.

The image is from an older attack (Oct 2025, after the "ceasefire") and is likely not AI:
The images of this story are these ones. There was also a video interview of the mother somewhere.
But yes, the article from www.aa.com.tr is shit
Both are Turkish sources. I'm reminded of when the daughter of the US Ambassador to Kuwait perjured herself before congress claiming to be a nurse and having witnessed Iraqi solders rip babies out of hospital ventilators as justification for the first Gulf War.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony
This story is rage bait.
Who are "they"?
Are "they" here with you right now?
“Everything I don’t like is AI”
The real problem with AI isn’t that you can make up fake things. It’s that real things can be hand waved as fake.
I mentioned in my comment from the start and before making any edit that this cannot belong to the jewish religon. Same thing happened with ISIS who adopted a false supremacist murderous and evil idology of Islam. They enslaved Yazidi women and slaughtered kids and men whom they viewed as not from the chosen people.
How the fuck was ISIS bad but Zionism is supported by Europe and the US and Western values? ISIS never represented Islam the same way Zionism does not represt Judaism.
ISIS mirrors Zionism to the tee btw. They were colonizing lands that was promised to them by god, slaughtering and raping people for their promised Khalifite who will lead their people to rule the world. They also needed a country for them to escape "the prosecution" they experienced everywhere in the world to practice their idology. Does ISIS have the right to exist??
So lets not pretend these monsters dont exist regardless of what they claim their belief is; We judge them by their actions. The Episten files showed him and Donald Trump impregnating and aborting a mentally disabled kid numerous times. Also showed him mocking a girl who was asking Jesus for help because he absolutely does not believe in any god. Also showed his 1500 galons of acid tank that is connected to the swerage system beneath. There is an ongoing investigation regarding missing bodies in his NM ranch. There is hard undeniable evidence that this monsterous elite Epestien class exist and they do everything above the laws without shred of humanity.
As an ex-muslim. I'd like to correct you that everything that ISIS did is mentioned in Quran and is actually a valid interpretation. In fact, a lot of it is mentioned directly by hadith and verses in the quran. Hence why you will never hear any religious institution calling them "kuffar" or people who have strayed and adopted a false supremacist view. They just really can't do that because everything ISIS did can, and is justified by the quran and hadith.
However, that is NOT to be taken in an islamaphobic way. The majority of the muslim population have no idea about this, as was I when I was still muslim. Simply because we don't get taught in schools about it. Islam is a cancer, it has the potential to be used to justify horrible atrocities because the quran and hadith contain so much shit like this. Just like any religion really, but it also happens to be overrun by extremists who spread their extremist views.
Pretty sure that's this is religion as a whole, even buddihist texts/guidance somehow call for violence.
Isis was armed and paid by Israel. Religions are theaters of the class war, not ennemies in themselves
Religions are tools to control the masses and yes the rich use them for this purpose. Thus it should eventually be dismantled if possible, or restrained at least. Because when religious institutions have too much power and influence we can agree that nothing good happens out of it.
No one cares too much about what their book says. We dont care if someone said they follow the Satanic Temple; however we judge them on what they actually do. Zionism is a genocidal settler-colonial cult idology, and its followers inflect evil inhumanity and injustice and pain violating every humanright and crime in international laws, and any interpretation of humans moral norms..
So quran says, in order to be a muslim, you have to kill other muslims?
Dude, how can you get this conclusion from what I said? Or is this a strawman or what?
As I said, the definition of "muslim" differs by interpretation because like any other religion, people interpret the text differently. Shia muslims say that they are right. Sunnis think they are right, and within each there is more and more denominations that think they are right and none but them. There is so much infighting between them it makes leftist-infighting look like child's play.
So yes. One of the interpretations, adopted by ISIS, says that these muslims are considered kuffar (people who have rejected god), because they did not seek to learn about their religion and establish the rules that Allah commanded. Even if they were ignorant about their religion, it doesnt matter, they should have learned as it's their duty as muslims. Thus, it is okay to kill them (Cuz yes, the quran is okay with killing and enslaving non-muslims, in fact it explicitly encourages it.) So this is how they justify killing them.
Obviously this is the niche explanation of ISIS. Not mainstream islamic interpretations.
You said everything ISIS did is mentioned in quran and is valid interpretation of it. Yes?
Quran defines muslims as people who believe in oness of Allah and Prophet Muhammad as the final messenger of Allah.
Quran is very explicit about this terminology. The part of the quran revealed in Madinah (first islamic state), tackles this question of people who say they are muslim but do not act like it. They are called munafiqs (not kuffar), in fact this is the biggest topic of madni quran.
So when you say that actions of ISIS are from quran, that is categorically wrong.
That's my whole point. Which is very very apparent if a non-muslim were to read it without an anti-muslim agenda.
I don't even wanna go into your other false claims cuz the internet is literally filled of their refutations if anyone want to look into that those topics.
You said everything ISIS did is mentioned in quran and is valid interpretation of it. Yes?
Everything ISIS did is a valid interpretation of quran and hadith. Sunni muslims use two sources to make rulings, one is the qur'an and the second is hadith. Because the atrocities are countless, let's talk about two things they did often:
Slavery, as you see, is permitted in islam and is mentioned countless times in the quran itself. You can look up the verse I mentioned.
Not only that, it is also supported by hadith in multiple Sahih hadith (which is the highest degree of trust in a hadith being correct and traced back to the time of Muhammed by muslim scholars).
The first hadith talks about his wife Safiyyah Bint Huyayy. She was enslaved during the battle of Khaybar, taken at first by Dihyah Al-Kalby. Muhammed then heard about her beauty and status and decided to take her for himself. I would also like to mention by the way, that she lost her husband and father that day, killed in the battle. She was then taken by Muhammed as a slave, and he slept with her on their way back that night. Not even 24 hours after the death of her father and her husband.
So yes. Muhammed himself partook in slavery.
Another one was about Aayisha and how she set one of her slaves free, then told Muhammed about it. His own response was "Had you given her to one of your uncles would have been of higher reward to you from Allah." I don't remember the hadith verbatim, but it's along those lines. Again, I encourage you to look this up.
Verse 4 from Surat Muhammed justifies this by telling those who believe in god that: "if they ever meet anyone who is a non-believer they should hit their necks [with their swords] until they kill a large number of them, then take the rest as prisoners of war, until the war ends, and if god wanted he'd win this war...etc (Look up the verse)."
As for the difference between Makkah quran and the quran of Madina, you will find a great shift of tone from the "peaceful co-existence" tone in Makkah quran, to talking about Munaffiqeen and fighting kuffar in Madina Quran. The difference is crazy that the verses contradict one another. Especially verses in surat Al-Tawbah. Scholars solve this problem of contradictions by saying that the latter surahs and verses (and even hadiths in some cases!) essentially override the early verses (Something called Naskh).
So yes.The actions of ISIS can be justified from the Quran and Hadith. I am also willing to argue that this was the way of life of Muhammed and his Sahabah 1400 years ago. A life of war, genocide, and enslavement, as is supported by countless Hadiths and verses from the quran, of which I only told you very few lol.
Now, again I would like to stress. The fact that they do this against other muslims as well by saying they are kaffir, is as I said, not the mainstream view. In fact, most muslim sheikhs and scholars throughout history took the idea of calling a mulsim kafir as taboo. Because they believed only Allah was allowed to say that about someone. The reason is that by saying someone is kaffir you are essentially saying they are going to hell. Thus, making a ruling that only Allah is allowed to make.
So only minority groups of muslims like ISIS do such thing, while even large institutions like Al-Azhar in Egypt and other muslim institutions refrain from using that language against ISIS.
Isn't there a decent amount of evidence that ISIS is in fact, the IDF. ?
False flag operation.
There is not.
Weird how ISIS only targets other Muslims.
Even though it's legit against the Muslim religion to kill other Muslims.
Even though it's legit against the Muslim religion to kill other Muslims.
Not really. Islam has a lot of denominations and interpretations of the quran. ISIS justify killing of other muslims as that these muslims are "kuffar" because they have not actively implemented the teachings of Allah and are silent and complicit in not implementing sharia law.
Some denominations would say that those muslim people are ignorant and so there's no blame to be put on them. ISIS's sees that ignorance is not an execuse because in their opinion it is every muslim's duty to learn their religion, and that if they did, they'd see that they must implement sharia law.
No, this is the Jewish religion. They believe you do not have a divine soul, you are inherently lesser, you will be a slave to them when their messiah returns, and if you read about any of their heinous beliefs in the Talmud you should be killed. This is the consequence of allowing a religous ethnostate to control the most controversial region of the world.
it is as much jewish as trump is christian

Hey speaking of. Have you ever wonder why he wouldn’t shave his sideburns and slicks them back, or why many staffers came out in 2019 and said he converted to Judaism with his daughter.
Israelis get unlimited privilages from Zionism even if they were atheists and dont believe shit on the inside; They get to basically kill people and steal their free homes without accountability under Israel's aparthied judiciary, they get richer from land theft, and occupation, and survaliance control, and aparthied enslavement of Palestinians, and wars on neighboring countriea, and when they spend $250 millions bribing US congress, they get $15 billions back.
It’s an ethnic religion. Even the atheist jews are included in end time prophecy where jews will rule the world with all of us as slaves. Of course they benefit from genocide and expansion of a jewish state and bribing, lobbying, or blackmailing politicians in the world’s strongest country to support them.
He's not doing this shit because he's Jewish you elder protocol schmuck. It's because Israel is a convenient attack dog for the US in the middle east. And probably because Mossad has heinous shit on him.
Humanity needs to decide what level of barbarism we will collectively tolerate.
Israel has been way over the line for a while.
If we allow them, Team Trump, and the rest of the greed first lobby to continue, i can only hope for total and complete nuclear destruction.
Israel and USA have led by example and demonstrated what the world needs to do - targeted assassinations.
Humanity needs to decide what level of barbarism we will collectively tolerate.
I think it already decided and the decision was that this is fine.
Unfortunately the strongest lobbies seem to decide what is doable, not humanity at large
Humanity needs to decide what level of barbarism we will collectively tolerate.
Historically, the bar has been set extraordinarily low. But that's largely based on the question of informed consent. Articles like this aren't going to show up on FOX or ABC or CBS, so long as the people perpetrating the crimes are Israeli. By contrast, if an Iranian or Russian or Chinese or police force engaged in such an act, it would be held up as an excuse for carpet bombing their power plants and assassinating their university professors.
If we allow them
We aren't in a position to allow or disallow without a large scale mobilization of labor. Even then, a lot of what you're talking about begins with boring bureaucratic shit like petitions and marches. The violence doesn't just go away because some pollster can show a broad public disgust (for - again - events the major Western media isn't interested in covering).
Without assess to mass media, the public remains broadly uninformed and disinterested. Without a mobilized labor movement, there is no organizational support for individual dissent.
Even when such things do exist (Italian and Spanish citizens have been at the forefront of the BDS movement), there are countervailing forces among the plutocracy that obstruct material change.
The belief that you can unilaterally or rapidly affect sweeping international policy changes - that you are some Great Man of History who has volunteered to be apathetic - is going to drive you insane, if you let it.
There needs to be a better way to enforce geneva conventions and UN resolutions for countries at the top. Otherwise they'll only bring them up when it's convenient for them.
I mean we've been allowing this shit to happen all over the world, and worse -- it's just not in the news because news about israel gets more clicks
The fact that people aren't talking about sudan and Myanmar where worse happens is telling, but this has better video coverage.
We can only hope for nuclear destruction, it's one of the few things that ANYONE can do to pay for the crimes of Israel
Israel becoming a country was a mistake, if this is the price of it.
they were given one without consent from the indigeneous population.
It's harder to separate Israel from its long term hard right conservative government, it's like if Bush was president for the last 30 years.
It's just splendid that world gets to watch a genocidal colonial settler project akin to what European colonial powers were up to two hundred years ago all because Britain promised land to a group of people one hundred years ago. For an empire that loved beuraucracy how were they such absolute shit at drawing borders? I mean we know they believed in a global race based caste system (they believed white people were born superior) and were antisemitic enough to be excited at the prospect of Jewish people leaving their country but how do you fuck up the world this bad? Major skill issue in my opinion.
Blaming Israel's current shittiness on some lines we drew in the sand 70 odd years ago is a bit weak mate.
We aren't telling them to torture kids or bomb civilians, they're doing that all on their own.
America is not only not telling them no, we're selling them the weapons to do it with
To be fair, they were doing it when those lines were drawn (in a different location, because they expanded their territory through war) too. The lines just gave them legitimacy. They started colonizing before the lines were made, and we're in conflict fighting the locals then. It obviously wasn't the scale it is today, but the whole project is propagated through conflict.
Britain and their drawing of lines in the sand is absolutely responsible for plenty of the shittiness we see around us in the world today. Total coward power move by Britain to try and weasel out of all of the trouble their colonialism has caused.
Without the Balfour declaration we would not have had the Zionist colonial settling of mandatory Palestine. The local Arabs fought for their freedom from the Ottoman empire during WW2 and were double crossed by the British who wanted the land for themselves and a little bit for the French for some reason. The British know more than anyone how the process of colonialism works being the best in the world at it. They were also aware how viciously settler colonials tend to treat the native people when settling a new land, they just didn't care because they had their own greedy motivations.
Britain had a huge part to play in stoking tensions between the local Palestinian communities and the newly arrived settler Jews using their time honoured "divide and conquer" strategy.
Britain and their colonial fuckery is a huge part of the Israel story.
If we zoom out and look at the bigger picture, Israel would not exist as it does today without Britain's steadfast backing.
The empire's successor (America) has provided similarly unwavering support.
Throughout most of my lifetime I have watched Western countries (mostly vassals of the US) turn a blind eye to genocide in Gaza.
More recently the double standards have become most apparent with the war in Ukraine. Western nations took the diplomatic approach of wagging their finger at nations maintaining relations with Russia while asking "have you thought what this will do to your credibility?"
All while giving their full throated support to Israel for most of the past 50 years and before that. Any thought to how that affects your credibility?
These are the double standards that slowly rot away the foundations of civilization.
Imperialism bad if it's being done to me, ok if we are doing it to someone else. Surely we can be more sophisticated than that.
"Some lines" - what a dismissive way to put it. A British child rapist (Louis Mountbatten, great uncle of present day child rapist former prince Andrew) haphazardly drew a border in South Asia which led to the largest forced migration in human history and two million deaths. The idea that lines don't mean anything speaks to an abysmal state of history education. There are libraries of work commenting on how the lines drawn by colonial powers in Africa, the Middle East and South Asia contribute to ongoing conflicts in these regions.
they’re doing that all on their own.
no, they are doing it with our governments help.
If you’re American this is some hilarious projection, btw America is funding all of this
Oh America is as if not more accountable.
I decided to focus on where this started. It's well known that America is the successor of the British empire. There was a massive transfer of wealth or colonial loot that occurred when the Nazis absolutely decimated Britain, as the Brits spent essentially all of their savings on weapons purchases from America.
America acquired two thirds of the worlds gold through world war II which allowed it to subsequently establish the Breton Woods system, kicking off its past 75 years of empire.
Your history isn't exactly right. While it is the popular reasoning, the plan is older than the war itself, so the logic doesn't really make sense. It also started before the war ended, so the timing doesn't line up either. They also started colonizing before the League of Nations decides on that plan, which forced their hand.
It's all a whole lot murkier, messy, and bad than the version you gave.
They are historic fact, as in they're older than what you said. Here's a Wikipedia page that has more information. Check out "Background". Notice the date of the letter talking about "the zionist project" is 1902. Even in 1896 he talking about them colonizing Palestine. That's well before the war. This plan was being set up, and enacted, far before what you said.
Jews have been in that area for 5000 years since the Canaanites
Dude, the people that ended up calling themselves jews and the other people from the region come from the same people. Judaism comes from religions in the area. No one was there before anyone else, because they're the same people. Canaanites is just a made up term that the jews used to refer to everyone else, so they could tell stories about how they were better, but they're all literally the same people. Jews didn't magically appear as a distinct group. Israelites of the time literally are Canaanites.
Anyway, those are not the people moving there. They're European Jews mostly. Sure, they share some genes with those early people, but far less than the people who literally still lived there. If you want to argue they have some cultural claim somehow, then what they hell do you even measure? They're all coming from literally the same group of people and the same culture. If your claim is that the term "Jew" is older than the term "Muslim" then I guess you can make that argument, but it'd be a really dumb one.
Muslims are literally from the same group. They follow the same god and have the same holy book (with some new ones). El (hence Elohim, which interestingly is plural) is also the god they both come from, which is where the name Israel comes from, being the land of the people who follow El. They all follow (what was formerly known as) El, although it's been mixed with other local gods too. Notably neither Jews nor Muslims follow what could be reasonably identified as El, so neither of them have any nominal claim to Israel. Maybe there are still some small local groups who do, in which case Israel, by name, is theirs.
Ah, yes. Giving historical context is rambling.
is your point that everyone is one people?
No? You said Jews have some kind of claim over the land. If they do, the native people have an even stronger one. Everyone isn't one people. The people in the region are from one group (which we often call the Canaanites), which the Jews of the period are also a part of. None of them have any special claim to the land. Just because someone's super special book tells them that they are chosen by the super cool guy in the sky doesn't actually give them any legitimate claim. If you want to discuss it with people who don't believe in fairy tales, you need something stronger. Since they're the same group of people they all have equal historic claim.
how you can claim that two religions whose inceptions are thousands of years apart...
OK, you apparently don't know anything about Islam or Christianity. That's fine. They aren't incepted thousands of years apart. They're the same continuity. The prophets in the Jewish faith are also in the Christian faith, plus some extras. The prophets in the Christian faith are also in the Muslim faith, plus some extras. They're from the same inception. Jews just don't believe all the stuff of the other faiths past a certain point.
For example, if you stop following Marvel movies after Iron Man 2 or something, but someone else follows ones that came after, it doesn't mean their understanding was incepted later. They just kept adding stuff. They're all Marvel movies. They don't become not Marvel movies because you stopped watching.
... or ignore the differing cultures...
That's exactly my point. The Jewish culture has diverged from the one they had when living in that region, as has the people who still live their. How do the Jewish people have a stronger claim despite their culture diverging when they didn't even live there anymore? If it's a claim by culture, the people who still live there have a stronger claim.
... but whatever, you do you.
You don't get to just spread lies and propoganda, then say "whatever" when it's pointed out you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Try to educate yourself. Maybe you can not make the same mistake again, instead of just saying "whatever" as if you weren't wrong. Growth is a virtue, not a vice. You need to be able to admit mistake in order to grow.
"Funny" you should bring up 1948 specifically.
What specific event happened in that year?
Ah, yes. "Israel declared independence" ... right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba
"The 1948 Palestine war[b] (30 November 1947 – 10 March 1949) was fought in the territory of what had been, at the start of the war, British-ruled Mandatory Palestine.[16] It began as a civil war between the Arab and Jewish communities following the United Nations Partition Plan and became an international conflict with the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel,[c] the termination of the British mandate, and the entry of the armies of neighbouring Arab states into Palestine. During the war, Zionist forces[d] conquered about 78% of the former territory of the mandate causing the expulsion and flight of over 700,000 Palestinians."
No, that one's on the british for deciding to divvy up land that wasn't theirs.
"Although the Jewish Agency accepted the partition plan, it did not accept the proposed borders as final and Israel's declaration of independence avoided the mention of any boundaries. A state in part of Palestine was seen as a stage towards a larger state when opportunity allowed. Although the borders were 'bad from a military and political point of view,' Ben Gurion urged fellow Jews to accept the UN Partition Plan, pointing out that arrangements are never final, 'not with regard to the regime, not with regard to borders, and not with regard to international agreements'. The idea of partition being a temporary expedient dated back to the Peel Partition proposal of 1937. When the Zionist Congress had rejected partition on the grounds that the Jews had an inalienable right to settle anywhere in Palestine, Ben Gurion had argued in favour of acceptance, 'I see in the realisation of this plan practically the decisive stage in the beginning of full redemption and the most wonderful lever for the gradual conquest of all of Palestine."
I take issue with the MEANS by which the state of israel invaded, and the fact the state agreed with the original plan with the undeniable intent to further invade.
And with Israel's continued actions after the UN agreed to give israel more than half of Palestinian land
In some ways we should be treating the state of Israel as a serial killer. Obviously we and any courts are better knowing about this. But should we be concerned that publication changes behaviour?
In some ways “hopefully” they are brazen and psychologically disturbed enough that it doesn’t. Because this baby could’ve quite easily just disappeared, if they thought this coming out would make them look worse. I’m sure it’s happened.
top 96 comments