US fails to win UN condemnation of Hamas militants in Gaza

Checkerboard Strangler said:

Much of what you're referring to might sound reasonable but it's a fact that both Israel and the Palestinian people look all the way back to early British political moves on the issue. The Israelis naturally believe that the British decision on Palestine was right and just, and of course Palestinians see it as a theft and usurpation.

Addressing the British Mandate to rule Palestine calls Israel's existence directly into question, which is something that Palestinians naturally wish to come about.

Intractable, one hundred percent intractable.
I cannot imagine or conceive of any instrument or event which could ever clear this logjam.

Click to expand...

WRT the British Mandate I think its important to recall what it is we are actually referring to. It was , basically , the giving of the deeds to control a territory to one colonial power that had conquered it from another colonial power. I don't know about you but these colonial carve ups don't really have much in the way of righteousness or legitimacy imo They are dated colonialist constructs that don't even have any real merit as to the situation we're in today

I mean how just is it for the leaders of one people to give the land of a second people to a third people ? I can only think that most sane people today , if presented with the same proposition , would not think it to be a righteous and legitimate option/proposition

Recall too that it was the British that had promised both sides self rule in a cynical exploitation of the situation , a classic divide and conquer/control technique that is a perennial winner even today. In fact , as a UK resident and history enthusiast , it was my own countries part in this horror show that led me to study it a little more closely than some other aspects of British history. The fact that it was the Arabs that were forced to pay the price for European antisemitic crimes also played a crucial part in my sense of anger over the situation .

As for the seemingly intractable nature of the conflict and what mechanisms could/should be used in a bid to tackle it , well , they are already there imo. International laws and conventions are already there and designed for the specific purpose of resolving international conflicts. What's sadly lacking ,imo , is the international will to resolve it in a reasonably just way and in particular the US veto power that has undermined something of an overwhelming international consensus at the UNGA for decade after decade

CJ 2.0 said:

The eternal optimist. Willing to sacrifice the last Israeli in pursuit of your most noble ideals.

You have faith in Hamas. You said it yourself. That’s worth a re-examination, along with pretty much every other aspect of your worldview and value system....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

I know many people here much prefer to see/portray Hamas and everyone remotely connected to it as purely psychotic terrorist automatons but they have shown the same pragmatism and followed a similar path , thus far as an organisation , that the PLO ( now Fatah/PA ) have trodden . They want to be taken seriously and given a seat at the table of Palestinian rule and self determination negotiations. Those who want that degree of power/involvement/legitimacy are often , ultimately , forced into amending their ways to achieve it. A fact not lost on Hamas leaders

As for the hyperbole about the " sacrifice ( of the ) the last Israeli " in order to try to achieve a reasonable resolution of the conflict , well , it's just that imo , hyperbole designed to obstruct any resolution , or at least a reasonably just one

I might just as hyperbolically ask why people like you are prepared to sacrifice the last Jew for the continuance of a Jewish state of which some themselves don't even wish to support

oneworld2 said:

I know many people here much prefer to see/portray Hamas and everyone remotely connected to it as purely psychotic terrorist automatons

Click to expand...

Hamas is a psychotic terrorist organization. It is only those who support the murders of innocents that seek to portray terror groups like Hamas/ISIS/Hezbollah/al-Shabab and others as fighters of some sensible cause. As long as you're looking to justify such murders, you can't hope to possibly be taken seriously by anyone who doesn't believe it's fine.

It really makes me wonder how you don't realize that when you constantly stand by such groups of murderers you can't ever hope to make a real effort at a moral argument.
If this wasn't political and you were arguing here in favor of some guy who murdered a 15 year old girl in her sleep because he didn't like the way she looked at him, would you still believe like you do right now that you could possibly make an effort at arguing morality against your obviously moral opposition? How is this situation here different? It isn't, it's really the exact same situation only with the addition of an alleged political/religious cause.

At the end of the day your entire presence and agenda here is to argue for that sick and twisted man who sneaked into an apartment and murdered a 15 year old girl in her sleep.
The "moral battle" with your opposition doesn't even exist.

oneworld2 said:

WRT the British Mandate I think its important to recall what it is we are actually referring to. It was , basically , the giving of the deeds to control a territory to one colonial power that had conquered it from another colonial power. I don't know about you but these colonial carve ups don't really have much in the way of righteousness or legitimacy imo They are dated colonialist constructs that don't even have any real merit as to the situation we're in today

I mean how just is it for the leaders of one people to give the land of a second people to a third people ? I can only think that most sane people today , if presented with the same proposition , would not think it to be a righteous and legitimate option/proposition

Recall too that it was the British that had promised both sides self rule in a cynical exploitation of the situation , a classic divide and conquer/control technique that is a perennial winner even today. In fact , as a UK resident and history enthusiast , it was my own countries part in this horror show that led me to study it a little more closely than some other aspects of British history. The fact that it was the Arabs that were forced to pay the price for European antisemitic crimes also played a crucial part in my sense of anger over the situation .

As for the seemingly intractable nature of the conflict and what mechanisms could/should be used in a bid to tackle it , well , they are already there imo. International laws and conventions are already there and designed for the specific purpose of resolving international conflicts. What's sadly lacking ,imo , is the international will to resolve it in a reasonably just way and in particular the US veto power that has undermined something of an overwhelming international consensus at the UNGA for decade after decade

Click to expand...

Who were they occupying it from? Who were the last people who weren't holding that territory as part of a colonial occupation?
So by what logic do you claim the land was taken from the Arabs "who it belonged to" and given to those it doesn't belong to? By none.
You're recycling failed and debunked arguments that ended with your usual history denial and with your cries about "lawyer terms" being used.

oneworld2 said:

WRT the British Mandate I think its important to recall what it is we are actually referring to. It was , basically , the giving of the deeds to control a territory to one colonial power that had conquered it from another colonial power. I don't know about you but these colonial carve ups don't really have much in the way of righteousness or legitimacy imo They are dated colonialist constructs that don't even have any real merit as to the situation we're in today

I mean how just is it for the leaders of one people to give the land of a second people to a third people ? I can only think that most sane people today , if presented with the same proposition , would not think it to be a righteous and legitimate option/proposition

Recall too that it was the British that had promised both sides self rule in a cynical exploitation of the situation , a classic divide and conquer/control technique that is a perennial winner even today. In fact , as a UK resident and history enthusiast , it was my own countries part in this horror show that led me to study it a little more closely than some other aspects of British history. The fact that it was the Arabs that were forced to pay the price for European antisemitic crimes also played a crucial part in my sense of anger over the situation .

As for the seemingly intractable nature of the conflict and what mechanisms could/should be used in a bid to tackle it , well , they are already there imo. International laws and conventions are already there and designed for the specific purpose of resolving international conflicts. What's sadly lacking ,imo , is the international will to resolve it in a reasonably just way and in particular the US veto power that has undermined something of an overwhelming international consensus at the UNGA for decade after decade

Click to expand...

Thank you. I've learned a lot discussing this issue with you.
I love it when someone teaches me and does it well.
I definitely feel I am better informed on the subject and I am keeping your post in a folder and I will refer to it when I talk to other people, and as a guide for disciplined thinking about the issue.

Apocalypse said:

Hamas is a psychotic terrorist organization. It is only those who support the murders of innocents that seek to portray terror groups like Hamas/ISIS/Hezbollah/al-Shabab and others as fighters of some sensible cause. As long as you're looking to justify such murders, you can't hope to possibly be taken seriously by anyone who doesn't believe it's fine.

It really makes me wonder how you don't realize that when you constantly stand by such groups of murderers you can't ever hope to make a real effort at a moral argument.
If this wasn't political and you were arguing here in favor of some guy who murdered a 15 year old girl in her sleep because he didn't like the way she looked at him, would you still believe like you do right now that you could possibly make an effort at arguing morality against your obviously moral opposition? How is this situation here different? It isn't, it's really the exact same situation only with the addition of an alleged political/religious cause.

At the end of the day your entire presence and agenda here is to argue for that sick and twisted man who sneaked into an apartment and murdered a 15 year old girl in her sleep.
The "moral battle" with your opposition doesn't even exist.

Click to expand...

I think you may have inserted some of your own words in another person's mouth.
More correctly, a LOT of your own words.

oneworld2 said:

I know many people here much prefer to see/portray Hamas and everyone remotely connected to it as purely psychotic terrorist automatons but they have shown the same pragmatism and followed a similar path , thus far as an organisation , that the PLO ( now Fatah/PA ) have trodden .

Click to expand...

At the very least, Hamas has failed to organize itself in the least. They can send messages of cooperation all the livelong day but in the end, if they're still promoting blood jihad, praising martyrs and asking for more martyrs, it is difficult to take their entreaties to cooperation seriously.

It's not that I don't believe that a radical or even terrorist organization can make moves toward legitimacy, the Irish Republican Army and Sinn Fein have managed to at least make some moves in the direction of a rational actor, even FARC has made furtive moves in that direction.

I am unable to give Hamas much credit in that vein. It's not that I believe Israel is any more serious, by the way.
I think a lot of Netanyahu's identity is caught up in continuing the status quo, and the far Right in Israel is only too happy to kill anyone who tries to make moves toward peace. Witness Yitshak Rabin and witness the fact that Bibi pays regular visits to his assassin and believes him to be something of a heroic figure.

These reasons and many more are why I truly believe that this problem will still be with us in the year 2100, and even beyond, if mankind even makes it that far.

Apocalypse said:

Hamas is a psychotic terrorist organization.

Click to expand...

Nope, they are a Palestinian political party that have engaged in terrorist acts and still engage in them. They are also one of the Palestinian organisations that have not given up their right to armed struggle and have also engaged in acts of legitimate resistance in a struggle for national self determination.

If their crimes necessitate their exclusion then the likes of Likud should also be excluded for the crimes committed by their decisions and actions. Group terrorism only differs from state terrorism on scale imo

It is only those who support the murders of innocents that seek to portray terror groups like Hamas/ISIS/Hezbollah/al-Shabab and others as fighters of some sensible cause. As long as you're looking to justify such murders, you can't hope to possibly be taken seriously by anyone who doesn't believe it's fine.

Click to expand...

ISIS and al Shabab are not the same as Hamas and Hezbollah and you know it. You just want to lump them together in order to con people here . Both Hezbollah and Hamas are recognized political parties in their respective territories and have seats in the national government. Their remit is confined to their territories defence and attacks on the enemies engaged in warfare against that territory.

ISIS and al Shabab are international jihadist militant groups waging war against the " enemies of Islam " and are not political parties with seats in national governments

Additionally, there were no words of " support for the murder of innocents " in my post, there never are. What we see is your wish/penchant for dishonest smearing of those that hold a different view than yourself appearing in post after post with startling regularity.

It really makes me wonder how you don't realize that when you constantly stand by such groups of murderers you can't ever hope to make a real effort at a moral argument.

Click to expand...

You cannot try to moralize when you are so dishonest about what people say in their posts. Well , you can , but you won't be taken seriously by me or anyone else who can see through that dishonesty

If this wasn't political and you were arguing here in favor of some guy who murdered a 15 year old girl in her sleep because he didn't like the way she looked at him, would you still believe like you do right now that you could possibly make an effort at arguing morality against your obviously moral opposition?

Click to expand...

You are not a " moral opposition ". Never have nor will be. Far too dishonest to claim any moral superiority. The fact is that this is political and has nothing to do with any 15 year olds being murdered. That's just your resort to sensationalism because without dishonesty and hyperbole you have not much else to offer

How is this situation here different? It isn't, it's really the exact same situation only with the addition of an alleged political/religious cause.

Click to expand...

The mistake you make is that you lie and then treat it as the truth. Nobody has supported the murder of any innocent person AFAIR especially not me. I gave something of a summary of Hamas that in no way mentioned or supported what you claim it did. It's your lie so should be treated with the contempt all lies should receive imo

At the end of the day your entire presence and agenda here is to argue for that sick and twisted man who sneaked into an apartment and murdered a 15 year old girl in her sleep.
The "moral battle" with your opposition doesn't even exist.

Click to expand...

My presence here is to try to sift through the BS of this conflict and offer perspectives that are not common here. Your presence is to smear any critics of Israeli policies and or actions with as vile a mixture of invectives as you can get away with coupled with any abhorrent moral positions you can foist upon them ,just like you have throughout this post that is based on nothing but your own lies and general dishonesty. Same old, same old

Checkerboard Strangler said:

I think you may have inserted some of your own words in another person's mouth.
More correctly, a LOT of your own words.

Click to expand...

It's his MO here tbh and those that frequent here often enough are , or should be , fully aware of it imo

Checkerboard Strangler said:

I think you may have inserted some of your own words in another person's mouth.
More correctly, a LOT of your own words.

Click to expand...

Nonsense.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

At the very least, Hamas has failed to organize itself in the least. They can send messages of cooperation all the livelong day but in the end, if they're still promoting blood jihad, praising martyrs and asking for more martyrs, it is difficult to take their entreaties to cooperation seriously.

It's not that I don't believe that a radical or even terrorist organization can make moves toward legitimacy, the Irish Republican Army and Sinn Fein have managed to at least make some moves in the direction of a rational actor, even FARC has made furtive moves in that direction.

I am unable to give Hamas much credit in that vein. It's not that I believe Israel is any more serious, by the way.
I think a lot of Netanyahu's identity is caught up in continuing the status quo, and the far Right in Israel is only too happy to kill anyone who tries to make moves toward peace. Witness Yitshak Rabin and witness the fact that Bibi pays regular visits to his assassin and believes him to be something of a heroic figure.

These reasons and many more are why I truly believe that this problem will still be with us in the year 2100, and even beyond, if mankind even makes it that far.

Click to expand...

Unlike the IRA, terror groups like Hamas/al-Qaeda/Hezbollah/ISIS are Islamist terror groups, motivated by religious fanaticism and a religious goal. It's different.

Also no idea what you're talking about regarding Bibi paying visits to Rabin's killer and believing him to be heroic. It seems like wherever you get your facts from is not a place to depend on as your posts are filled with ignorance.

oneworld2 said:

It's his MO here tbh and those that frequent here often enough are , or should be , fully aware of it imo

Click to expand...

What did I insert?

Your MO is to make baseless claims and once called out on them to disappear. Let's see if you'll grant us a satisfying answer to that question.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

Thank you. I've learned a lot discussing this issue with you.
I love it when someone teaches me and does it well.
I definitely feel I am better informed on the subject and I am keeping your post in a folder and I will refer to it when I talk to other people, and as a guide for disciplined thinking about the issue.

Click to expand...

Thx for the kind words

You're most welcome and credit to you for having the open mindedness and curiosity required to try to sift through some of the parts that make up the whole of this dreadful conflict

Obviously mine is just one of any number of opinions to consider here and I don't wish to present myself as some sort of expert. Just someone whose nationality and sense of justice combined to steer them in a direction that made them spend more time studying this subject over some others they have flirted with .

I too love the fact that every day is a school day if you want it to be. Nothing better than hitting on new and interesting material in which to lose yourself for a while imo

I always find myself conflicted in these moments....which side, given that both sides engage in the slaughter of children, should I support?

Meh...think I'll find a Christmas special to watch instead.

No one is innocent in the middle east.

oneworld2 said:

Nope, they are a Palestinian political party that have engaged in terrorist acts and still engage in them.

Click to expand...

They are a terror group. A terror group is a group that engages in terrorism as part of an agenda, which is what they do. If you deny that, as you do, you cannot claim that "nothing in your words is a support for the murder of innocents", as clearly this is exactly the same thing as saying "I support the murder of innocents". If we weren't talking about politics here and were talking about the Hamas in the form of a group of thugs who breached into some guy's home and murdered his little daughter while she was sleeping because he didn't pay them protection money or whatever, and you were here saying "this group is not a psychotic murderous group", you'd be seen as supporting acts of murder.

This isn't different. Your words are thus in support of acts of murder, contrary to your empty denial and diversion nonsense.

They are also one of the Palestinian organisations that have not given up their right to armed struggle and have also engaged in acts of legitimate resistance in a struggle for national self determination.

Click to expand...

Yet more attempts to grant legitimacy to a group of psychotic murderers and later claiming "nothing in my words is in support of murder". This too is a support of murder above, second one in only this post. Keep it up with the empty denial.

If their crimes necessitate their exclusion then the likes of Likud should also be excluded for the crimes committed by their decisions and actions. Group terrorism only differs from state terrorism on scale imo

Click to expand...

Your state terrorism accusations are imaginary and debunked through countless threads already. You deal with that which is not reality, with propaganda nonsense and lies.

ISIS and al Shabab are not the same as Hamas and Hezbollah and you know it. You just want to lump them together in order to con people here . Both Hezbollah and Hamas are recognized political parties in their respective territories and have seats in the national government. Their remit is confined to their territories defence and attacks on the enemies engaged in warfare against that territory.

Click to expand...

They are called the same because it pisses off supports of Hamas to be compared with ISIS and supporters of al-Qaeda with Hezbollah etc. They're all Islamist terror groups, that one starts with the letter I and another has seats in the Lebanese government does not change their nature. That you want argue against it is clearly a statement of support for groups that commit murders, thus a third statement of support for the murder of civilians. Keep it up with your empty denial while delivering three statements of support for groups of murderers in the same post, a post with the intention to deny such support. You're terrible at this.

ISIS and al Shabab are international jihadist militant groups waging war against the " enemies of Islam " and are not political parties with seats in national governments

Click to expand...

What defines a psychotic terror group is its actions, not whether they are holding seats or not. ISIS being accepted into a Syrian government wouldn't change the fact that it's a terror group, ISIS declaring its goals to be against Syrian forms of Fascism for example as ridiculous as it sounds would not change its definition and the definition of its nature. That you believe it would is utterly stupid and shows how weak your defense of murderers is.

Additionally, there were no words of " support for the murder of innocents " in my post

Click to expand...

Yet four more examples of such in this very post. Hysterical.

Apocalypse said:

Also no idea what you're talking about regarding Bibi paying visits to Rabin's killer and believing him to be heroic.

Click to expand...

Of course you have no idea.
I don't read many of your posts, particularly in this forum, but I've read enough of them to know you're a fan of the Likud party, which in this day and age is basically a two-front mule of Gush Emunim and the messianic euphoria of the American Dominionist Christian Right.

I'm done.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

I'm done.

Click to expand...

Hello, brother.

Snipped everything but the most important and useful part of your last statement... Getting started with propagandists was your first mistake.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

Of course you have no idea.
I don't read many of your posts, particularly in this forum, but I've read enough of them to know you're a fan of the Likud party, which in this day and age is basically a two-front mule of Gush Emunim and the messianic euphoria of the American Dominionist Christian Right.

I'm done.

Click to expand...

That you decide to respond to getting called out for telling nonsense with A) not defending said nonsense and B) diverting to discussions about the person and not the subject is very telling as to why you reached such ridiculously ignorant and detached from reality conclusions and came to believe in laughable conspiracy theories.

It's irrelevant to the discussion but I'll admit that I'm not even "a fan of the Likud party" not that there's anything wrong with being one as this isn't a radical party as can be seen by the lack of radical moves from the government it leads for nearly a decade now. Even in your pathetic accusations you fail miserably.

OlNate said:

Hello, brother.

Snipped everything but the most important and useful part of your last statement... Getting started with propagandists was your first mistake.

Click to expand...

I usually stay out of the Israel forums. Not just here...anywhere.
I am not an expert on the region, nor its conflicts, but I do know Netanyahu's politics.
I've always felt more aligned with folks like Rabin and Shimon Peres.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

At the very least, Hamas has failed to organize itself in the least. They can send messages of cooperation all the livelong day but in the end, if they're still promoting blood jihad, praising martyrs and asking for more martyrs, it is difficult to take their entreaties to cooperation seriously.

It's not that I don't believe that a radical or even terrorist organization can make moves toward legitimacy, the Irish Republican Army and Sinn Fein have managed to at least make some moves in the direction of a rational actor, even FARC has made furtive moves in that direction.

I am unable to give Hamas much credit in that vein. It's not that I believe Israel is any more serious, by the way.
I think a lot of Netanyahu's identity is caught up in continuing the status quo, and the far Right in Israel is only too happy to kill anyone who tries to make moves toward peace. Witness Yitshak Rabin and witness the fact that Bibi pays regular visits to his assassin and believes him to be something of a heroic figure.

These reasons and many more are why I truly believe that this problem will still be with us in the year 2100, and even beyond, if mankind even makes it that far.

Click to expand...

I think it's telling that when Hamas was first founded the Israeli state were quite welcoming of it . They saw it as a useful tool with which to try to undermine the PLO , who at that time had not themselves given up the right to armed struggle and were classed as the terrorist group leading the Palestinians to hell in a hand cart. Something of a role reversal has taken place in that regard.Since then obviously things have changed but the divide and conquer/control element is as strong and useful as ever for the state of Israel.

I understand your scepticism about any proclamations Hamas may have made in more recent times and find that Jihad furore disturbing myself . I sometimes review what I have written and chuckle to myself that , as an atheist , if a group of Westerners were taken prisoner by Hamas with me amongst them , I may well be one of the first one against the wall. Alas, my loyalty is more towards principles than it is to peoples or states.

I still hold that their wish to be genuine players will temper their more radical positions as set out in the charter if given a chance. For alleged psychotic automatons to be , as the IDF admitted , " careful to observe the ceasefire agreement " ( 2008 ) shows that some pragmatism exists. But here's where it might get a little interesting imo. Does it suit Israel to allow for any Hamas gains with regards to pragmatism and thus a degree of legitimacy as representatives of the Palestinian people and as such take their place in a unified Palestinian national assembly ? An assembly it would be hard for Israel to dismiss as a genuine negotiating partner for a resolution of the conflict

In short the odious acts and insanity often displayed by Hamas members/forces only play into the hands of the Israeli rejectionist camp and thus make any moves towards a resolution impossible. I'm sure the pragmatists and any moderates amongst them understand this already and , if we are to be honest , there are rejectionists on both sides that will revel in such paralysis but ultimately , if the conflict is to be resolved , they will have to be part of that process. As were the IRA and UDA paramilitaries/terrorists in the Irish conflict as you pointed to yourself. I know you see this already yourself too so sorry if I appear to ramble needlessly here a little but I think it's a crucial part of the equation.

Right now I wish for an agreed ceasefire that enjoys a extended period of time but I am not hopeful. The upsurge in violence , or indeed any violence , only pushes more people over to the extremists on both sides and that's what we have been witnessing for far too long. I do understand your pessimism about it being resolved any time soon but I try to remain hopeful of something like an unexpected event or shift that could effect things.

Checkerboard Strangler said:

I usually stay out of the Israel forums. Not just here...anywhere.
I am not an expert on the region, nor its conflicts, but I do know Netanyahu's politics.
I've always felt more aligned with folks like Rabin and Shimon Peres.

Click to expand...

It's OK not to be an expert, what's not OK is responding to call outs on your words with diversions to personal accusations especially when they're nonsense.

Apocalypse said:

Who were they occupying it from? Who were the last people who weren't holding that territory as part of a colonial occupation?
So by what logic do you claim the land was taken from the Arabs "who it belonged to" and given to those it doesn't belong to? By none.
You're recycling failed and debunked arguments that ended with your usual history denial and with your cries about "lawyer terms" being used.

Click to expand...

What history denial ?

What I put together was factually correct

oneworld2 said:

What history denial ?

What I put together was factually correct

Click to expand...

The kind of history denial that makes you avoid answering the questions you were asked in the comment you just quoted, and the kind that is evident in your claim that "one people gave the land of a second people to a third", key part being "the land of a second people" being completely false.

Apocalypse said:

Unlike the IRA, terror groups like Hamas/al-Qaeda/Hezbollah/ISIS are Islamist terror groups, motivated by religious fanaticism and a religious goal. It's different.

Click to expand...

AQ are an international group with no political representatives in any national governments as are ISIS. You are putting them altogether purely to misrepresent those groups that are fighting wars of national interests against the state of Israel. And also wishing to exploit the war being waged between the West and it's allies and states in the ME that has brought terrorism to the streets on both sides. Transparent once more

For the record the conflicts that include the IRA , Hezbollah and Hamas are nationalist struggles with a religious element and are not the same as AQ , ISIS or the now dropped Al Shebab

Apocalypse said:

The kind of history denial that makes you avoid answering the questions you were asked in the comment you just quoted, and the kind that is evident in your claim that "one people gave the land of a second people to a third", key part being "the land of a second people" being completely false.

Click to expand...

You might think that there have never been any Palestinians living on that territory but reasonable people accept there were. So far from my statement being false it is your own denial of the Palestinian people that is problem

Apocalypse said:

What did I insert?

Click to expand...

What you always insert , your own misrepresentations/lies of/about peoples posts and the positions they hold. It's the first time I have encountered this particular member in this subforum but he spotted it right away because it really is that transparent

What in the post I wrote , that you replied to " supported the murder of innocents " ?