Comments by "Gaza is not Amalek" (@Ass_of_Amalek) on "Piers Morgan is Wrong" video.

  1. well, he had already been arab-famous. I will say that piers morgan does platform pro-palestinian advocates more fairly than literally the entire western mainstream media, simply by letting almost all of them speak long enough uninterrupted to deliver complete arguments and responses - which says a lot about the general media coverage. but he has also likely done quite a bit of harm by platforming bad palestine advocates, namely nerdeen kiswani and to a lesser degree rahma zein, who took it as an opportunity to center themselves by grandstanding on not condemning the hamassacre in any way. that was always an idiotic position to take - the correct thing to do was to define whatever nuance you want, such as that you consider it to be a response to worse israeli oppression, that you consider hamas to be legitimate resistance to whatever degree, or that you support their attacking of the military, or that you reject israel's supposed right to bomb or invade or besiege gaza in response, but what was necessary was to acknowledge that the operation largely or primarily targeted civilians, and that the targeted killing and kidnapping of civilians was unjustifiable and civilian hostages ought to be released (technically taking soldiers as hostages also is a war crime, but nobody knows and will ask about that, and it's basically what's done in all wars when parties take prisoners to exchange them, which ends up being a good thing because it creates the option for soldiers to surrender and probably not be executed). particularly promoting that venomous narcissist nerdeen kiswani as aface of palestine was horrible - she was featured opposite to an also horrible pro-israel propagandist, but I bet kiswani did more harm to palestine in that one video than that woman is able to do with a whole year's work. bad advocacy is a very powerful tool for the other side, and that was terrible advocacy. morgan also repeatedly platforms douglas murray, and actively supports him in disseminating vicious lies in support of israel with strong white supremacist undertones.
    31
  2. added point at the end: according to thegeneva conventions, belligerents not only are banned from attacking hospitals, with limited exceptions, but are actually obligated to SUPPORT the operation of hospitals. israel is obligated to activelY enable hospitals at least under its direct control to be supplied, and to operate ambulances. it's not doing that AT ALL, it has now shut down every hospital in northern gaza (and probably intends to blow them all up). but of course that's no surprise, given that israel is equally strictly banned from blockading the necessary supply ofessential goods to sustain the lives ofthecivilian population, and is doing just that even today, and has been boldenough to openly say it from the starty and has not received ANY pushback from its allies on it. keir starmer even explicitly endorsed the policy, and only pretended that he had not after a public backlash.
    3
  3.  @aycc-nbh7289  yes, the geneva conventions apply in palestine because the palestinian authority ratified them, and partially also because parts are considered universal customary law. jurisdiction is defined in relation to territory, not to the enemy one claims to be fighting against. the military value of a target must be high in proportion to the civilian collateral damage to justify striking it, regardless of whether those civilians are actively used as human shields. and there is zero military value to israel's ground forces shutting down al shifa by kicking everybody out days after invading it. at that point they had plenty of ability to distinguish, and had the obligation and the ability to restart operations of al shifa and other hospitals under its control. the IDF itself says that it faced no resistance while entering al shifa - yet they were firing tank shells and bullets at hospital buildings all around, and inside they tossed and tore open equipment and breached doors and walls with explosives. well, they're also known for avoiding open streets during parts of their raids by blasting their way through the walls of occupied homes one by one - which by the way, besides disproportionately harming civilians, also is deliberate human shielding. the same goes for israel's ubiquitously common practice of invading any palestinian home in the west bank that happens to be in an opportune location, blast open walls as needed, and make those homes into firing positions while detaining the inhabitants inside. though in gaza today, I suppose they are more likely to just murder them.
    2