Both leaders lack the spine to stand up to Trump. Its kind of pathetic.

I wonder if they got angry that the Israeli government is trying to silence their journalism, which is just making them double down on getting these stories out there.

Full access version: https://archive.is/kEcgp#selection-767.0-780.0

And, unsurprisingly, the way they’re going to define the above “support of terrorism” will almost certainly include “criticized the Israeli government’s actions in any way”.

Sure, but the bigger issue, as noted from the quotes in my comment, is how can the IMF even do a real evaluation when Russia is almost certainly lying about its economic and trade figures? If the IMF does try to make a statement taking a definitive stance on Russia’s current economy, then we’ll all know the IMF is agreeing to push Russia’s bullshit.

“What recommendations does the IMF want to give Russia at the end of the consultation? How to better run a war economy?” one senior eurozone official told Reuters.

Tim Ash, a Russia analyst at the foreign affairs thinktank Chatham House, said in a blogpost: “Clearly while article IV reviews are about surveillance they are also about providing policy advice to countries as to where they are going wrong and trying to provide advice as how to improve their economic outturns.

“Inevitably therefore IMF officials, in making the trip to Moscow, will be helping Russia improve its economy and by so doing will be leaving themselves open to being accused of helping Russia in the conduct of the war against Ukraine.”

Robin Brooks, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, said: “A basic requirement for IMF membership is data transparency, which Russia clearly no longer satisfies on a number of fronts.

“Russia has stopped publishing lots of data and there are questions around whether the data it continues to publish are accurate.”

Brooks said the Kremlin was publishing trade figures that showed low income from oil produced in the Urals, even though the price of Russian oil has remained “quite elevated”. It meant the current account, which measures the net effect of trade and financial flows, would disguise the size of Russia’s war chest.

“Russia should be suspended from the IMF while these data questions persist,” he said.

I didn’t know the courts could just say “no strike”. Aren’t most strikes by definition going against the rules?

Expect this thread to get deleted by the mods, since mine of the same link was deleted just a moment ago. No reason given, but given past history, I presume it’s because it’s not a “mainstream” enough news source for the mods.

West Bank wasn’t an “active war zone” until Israel invaded it the other day. Prior to this, it was just a bunch of Israeli illegal aliens trying to take over the land and attacking the Palestinian civilians living there.

They’re seriously trying to claim that none of the drones actually hit anything and all of the damage we’re seeing (the rather extensive damage) is all just “debris” from them downing the drones.

Sure, Jan, sure.

Israel has described the operation as a strategy to prevent attacks on Israeli civilians, which since the start of the war have increased in the West Bank, including near settlements that the international community largely considers illegal. In return, the Palestinian Health Ministry noted a surge in Palestinian deaths by Israeli forces, with 663 killed in the West Bank in the nearly 11 months since the war began.

In central Gaza, Israeli airstrikes hit a multi-story building housing displaced people in and around Nuseirat, a built-up refugee camp in central Gaza, further south in Khan Younis and northward in Gaza City, officials at hospitals in the three areas said on Saturday morning.

Among the dead were a physician and his family and a child whose right leg had been previously amputated, according to an initial list of casualties from the hospital and footage released on Saturday by civil defense officials who operated under Gaza’s Hamas-run government.

So even Israel’s claimed reason for the attack on West Bank is because of Palestinians defending and retaliating against violent illegals in their country?

The “group of individuals” was the local movement company. They were assisting getting to the destination and there was no evidence that they made any hostile actions. That’s what ANERA says in this article even. So they didn’t admit to any of the made up nonsense that IDF or this Times of Israel article is claiming.

So, they’re not even trying to hide their actions at this point. Doing this in West Bank shows the goal is indeed the ethnic cleansing of the population and forcing them out so the land can be taken. We already know that has been the prerogative for decades, but this is a pretty blatant example.

Haaretz is the only real source of coverage of such opposing voices. And the Israeli government has already been trying to make moves to have them be shut down for daring to not support the will of the government.

There’s definitely people protesting in Israel and have been since the start. But it is indeed unclear on whether they’re protesting regarding their government’s actions in Gaza or just protesting against Netanyahu more generally (which they had also been doing prior to all this anyways).

I honestly feel like if the national powers at the time had been actually serious about the Jewish people deserving a homeland after the horrors of the Holocaust, then Israel should have been created out of a portion of western Germany.

That combined with the “Killology” guy really explains how worthless and barbaric the entire US police system is.

Please, please let them all ship themselves to Siberia.

So, criticizing you for raping a child is “bullying” you? I don’t think the claimed rehabilitation happened. He should still be in jail.

One funny thing to note is that, outside of just overt racism, all the arguments to use against Harris (that were used in the last election and primarily from the left) are ones that…won’t exactly make her seem bad to conservatives. Like, are you really going to use a “she’s tough on crime” argument against her?