Benjamin Netanyahu: 'Suicide by hubris'
- And maybe not just his own suicide, but that of his entire nation.

He probably shouldn't have thought he was so smart.
Did he allow the Oct 7 attack to happen or was it really a surprise?

His well publicised objective was to 'Destroy Hamas'.
He hasn't achieved it.

What he's achieved is worldwide demonstrations and condemnation against himself, his nation, and his government (Don't forget anti-semitism is up 500%) - including by a world court that has jurisdiction over war crimes, and the Palestinians (the victims) are signatories.

AND, I might add...

Is completely deserving of that criticism and condemnation.

Not only has he foolishly embarked on a recruitment drive for Hamas;
- But now numerous people inside of Western countries themselves are openly supportive of them.

http://twitter.com/jacksonhinklle/status/1786093299671179631
Why do ISRAELI TERRORISTS keep wearing the clothes of GAZAN women they've killed?

I just came across an old saying among Jews: “The antisemite does not accuse the Jew of stealing because he thinks he stole something. He does it because he enjoys watching the Jew turn out his pockets to prove his innocence.”

Since 7 October, more and more Jews are being told to turn out their pockets and are refusing to do so.

"Pell was not found innocent."

No. He was found 'not guilty'. He was already innocent.

I've explained this to Foxy more times than you'd think necessary, but courts don't find people innocent. They find them guilty or not guilty. They are already innocent. This is the beauty of the British justice system. I don't know if this is beyond Foxy's capabilities to understand or if its just another in the long list of things she doesn't want to be true and therefore rejects despite the facts.

"The High Court did not exonerate Pell"

Well in fact they did. Indeed its the very definition of exoneration. Found guilty by one court, exonerated by a more senior court.

"Pell may have won on a legal technicality"

This is quintessential Foxy. She didn't want Pell innocent, so she looks for a reason to reject his innocence. This is how Foxy always works. Form a view and look for something to give it a veneer of research. In this case she found some hack who told her what she wanted to hear, and Foxy always, ALWAYS, falls for that. But when I showed her an article by an extremely qualified QC explaining that he was exonerated because the evidence didn't support a guilty verdict, she ignored it. Believe the hack, ignore the qualified QC. Foxy to a tee.

AC, desperately searching for some reason to hope that Hamas might yet be saved, pins his hopes on university kids.

These are the kids who, having occupied a building in Cambridge, asked that their protest be catered!!

These are the kids who, when the police started arresting them, cried that they needed to be allowed to go home to mummy because exams were next week.

These are the kids who, at "U. Wisconsin Anti-Israel Protesters Chant[ed] ‘Heil Hitler’ at Jewish Students.

Oh, now I see why AC feels affinity with them.

mhaze,

The Pell case has been covered so many times on this
forum. I am a skilled, trained, professional in gathering
facts and presenting them in discussions

In the case of Pell? Law Professor Ben Matthews and
Senior Lecturer in the School of Law at the University
of Queensland - gave full
explanations of Pell's case which I cited in the past.

It is important to note as the two academics tell us
"That the high court appeal did not aske whether Pell
committed the offences.

It asked whether the two judges in the Victorian Court of
Appeal, in dismissing Pell's earlier appeal, made an error
about the nature and application of correct legal
principles."

Anyway. I'll be kind and won't argue with you about this
case any further.
The cardinal is dead. Hopefully he's now at peace.

I'm going now - to watch "Compass" Antony Loewenstein is on
discussing the Middle-East conflict.

Bye.