Since 2015, the UN has passed 188 resolutions condemning Israel. That's more than twice as many as against the rest of the world combined—Russia, China, Iran, and Venezuela included. Yet diplomats sat politely through a speech from Iran, a regime that has killed thousands of its own citizens and still persecutes them. It's not about human rights. It's blatant anti-Israel bias.

The UN is not the humanitarian fairy tale many imagine. It isn’t Sweden with blue helmets and blankets. It’s a dictators’ club with voting rights, budgets, and immunity. Out of 193 states, fewer than half are democracies. The rest are regimes that jail journalists, hang dissidents, and gas civilians. And those regimes are the ones sitting in judgment of Israel, America, and the West. Think about the absurdities. Iran, which executes women for refusing the hijab and hangs gays from cranes, was elected to the UN Commission on the Status of Women. Saudi Arabia, where women couldn’t even drive until yesterday, had a seat on that same committee. Syria, documented for using chemical weapons on civilians, chaired the UN Conference on Disarmament. Cuba, China, and Venezuela sit on the Human Rights Council as if their police states have wisdom to share. And then there are the individuals. António Guterres downplays October 7 while framing Israel as the aggressor, after years of cozy ties with Arafat himself. Francesca Albanese has compared Israelis to Nazis, lectures Europe about “Jewish lobbies,” and has been linked to funding from Hamas-aligned NGOs. Philippe Lazzarini and others in UNRWA have presided over agencies systematically infiltrated by Hamas - where classrooms became sites of indoctrination, textbooks glorified “martyrdom,” and the so-called “right of return” was weaponized as a political tool to erase Israel altogether. On October 7, some UNRWA staff were exposed as active participants in the massacre, and the agency itself even supplied electricity directly to Hamas’s underground headquarters. If there were real justice, these names would be standing trial for enabling terror, not issuing press releases. The failures go beyond personnel. UNIFIL was deployed to keep Hezbollah disarmed in Lebanon. Decades later Hezbollah is stronger than most NATO armies, armed to the teeth under the nose of “peacekeepers” who did nothing. UN kangaroo courts manufacture reports that erase Hamas rockets, ignore Israeli self-defense, and yet pretend to be legal analysis. Judge Julia Sebutinde, the Vice president of the ICJ, herself warned that UN opinions on Israel throw the law out the window. Where is Putin’s warrant? Where is accountability for Myanmar, Sudan, or Xinjiang? These are not courts of law. They are propaganda arms. And when real lives are at stake, the UN is absent. It has done nothing for the Israeli hostages in Gaza. It ignored repeated massacres in Africa. It even halted aid to Yemen after the Houthis kidnapped its staff, punishing civilians instead of confronting terrorists, while lecturing Israel to send aid to their citizens kidnappers. Yet when Palestinian men beat their wives, the UN finds a way to blame Israel - as if that pathology were unique to Gaza, rather than endemic across the Arab world and well-anchored in Quranic verses.. All of this is funded by American taxpayers. The United States pays over 20% of the UN’s budget, nearly 30% of peacekeeping, and gets nothing but scorn in return. Israel is condemned more than all other countries combined, while mass killers sit on committees of “rights.” This is not oversight. It is institutional antisemitism. The truth is simple. The UN does not restrain war. It does not bring peace. It is not a neutral referee. It is a theater where dictators launder crimes, where Europe indulges its oldest hatreds, and where democracies are smeared for daring to defend themselves. If this continues, the precedent will not stop with Israel. It will swallow any democracy facing terror, invasion, or subversion from Russia and China. What the UN is building is not peace. It is a trap. And if the West keeps funding it, the trap will spring back on the very nations writing the checks. The US should stop bankrolling this farce until it is restructured from the ground up - or dismantled altogether. Because no good comes from paying for your own condemnation.

holy shit i asked claude to make a video on western civiization

Take note: Francesca Albanese in this interview is not explaining antisemitism; she is completely rewriting its meaning, and in the process distorting the history of the Holocaust. Her remarks reveal astonishing ignorance, and malice. First, Antisemitism was not coined to describe hatred of “Semitic peoples,” or of Middle Easterners whom Europeans regarded as foreign. When Wilhelm Marr introduced the term in 1879, he meant hostility to Jews, expressed it in the racial language of his time. “Semitic” denotes a family of languages. It does not make antisemitism a general category of prejudice that can be reassigned to other peoples. Second, the Nazis likewise targeted Jews as Jews. They did not begin, as Albanese suggests, with a broad campaign against “the non-white, the impure, the non-Christian” that later happened to “crystallize” into hatred of Jews. Her account takes a campaign of extermination directed at Jews and makes its victims sound interchangeable. Third, Albanese's claim about Jews being called “Muslims” as they were taken to the gas chambers is especially grotesque. Primo Levi, who survived Auschwitz, explained that Muselmann was camp slang for “the irreversibly exhausted, worn-out prisoner, close to death.” It described a prisoner’s condition. It did not mean the Nazis regarded Jews as Muslims, or sent them to the gas chambers under that identity. Indeed, Albanese’s theory cannot explain why Hitler welcomed and collaborated with Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem. The two met in Berlin in 1941, and the Nazi regime financed the Mufti’s antisemitic broadcasts to Muslim audiences. The SS enlisted the Mufti to help recruit Bosnian Muslims into its Handschar division. Addressing the division’s imams, he called Nazi Germany their ally and identified “World Jewry” as a common enemy. That is the historical record Albanese’s theory cannot accommodate: Nazi leaders recruited Muslims to their cause while pursuing the extermination of Jews. Criticism of Israeli policy requires none of these falsehoods. Albanese first stretches antisemitism until it ceases to identify hatred of Jews, then claims that invoking it is a device to “silence debate.” Her argument depends on stripping the word of its meaning before dismissing those who use it. This is the same Francesca Albanese who wrote in an open letter to her family priest that America was “subjugated by the Jewish lobby.” Only when later confronted, she called her words “infelicitous, analytically inaccurate and unintendedly offensive.” Yet now she offers a definition under which antisemitism is no longer specifically hatred of Jews. How convenient. These remarks distorting the Holocaust and the meaning of Jew hatred are appalling from anyone. From a United Nations human rights mandate holder, they demand a public answer. We are calling on all UN member states to denounce Albanese’s distortion of antisemitism and the Holocaust. In particular, we are calling on the member nations of the Human Rights Council, including France, the Netherlands, Italy, Czechia, Estonia, Switzerland, Spain and the United Kingdom. The Council must not allow someone speaking under its authority to erase the identity of the Jews murdered by the Nazis.

He’s 22. State-certified EMT. Already runs into burning buildings as a volunteer. Fremont, Nebraska told Andrew Coates he can’t be a paid firefighter — because he was homeschooled. Then they rewrote the job posting to lock it in. The military takes homeschoolers. This city won’t take a kid who already does the job. Make noise. Fremont needs to hear it.

I am absolutely livid. We had to drive to the Walgreens in Alma because the Van Buren Walgreens no longer has a pharmacy, and my husband has a prescription we can only get through Walgreens. We get there and they tell us the copay is $190.79. It has ALWAYS been $23. It was $23 last month. So we questioned it right there at the window. The employee was snotty and arrogant and acted like we were just a couple of clueless old people who couldn’t possibly know what we normally pay. He insisted $190.79 was correct. So we called our insurance company. The copay is $23. Now here’s the part that really gets me. Walgreens has our credit card on file and had no problem charging $190.79 to it, but they apparently can’t refund the overcharge to that same card unless we physically return to the store. That means another 50-mile round trip because someone couldn’t be bothered to double-check something we specifically questioned while standing right in front of him. Mistakes happen. I can deal with a mistake. What I have a problem with is arrogance when a customer tells you something isn’t right and you can’t be bothered to check. And sometimes those “clueless old people” standing at your window actually know exactly what they’re talking about. @Walgreens

Nice try. Netanyahu shortened his trip to get back to Israel before Sukkot begins Friday evening. It’s roughly a ten-hour flight. Israel is seven hours ahead of New York right now, so sunset in Jerusalem is about 11:30 a.m. Friday New York time. That’s a deadline, not a mystery.

Email went out.

You know how long it takes to coordinate a single show???? Dude had a full tour ready to go. Knew exactly what he was doing and fucked over Ed Sheeran to do it. What a piece of shit

The UN is a joke. The League of Nations failed and wasn’t nearly this corrupt.

This is simply false. There was no documented “day one” offer by Hamas to release all the hostages “unconditionally.” Contemporary reporting describes negotiations over exchanges: Israeli women and children for Palestinian terrorists, and later broader releases in return for pauses, additional terrorist prisoners and other concessions. Nothing was unconditional. I say this as a hostage family member who served as an international envoy for the hostage families and was privy to some of the discourse behind closed doors with relevant stakeholders. Those conversations concerned negotiations, conditions, categories of hostages and concessions, not the simplistic narrative you now declare “well established and proven.” Hamas did not even treat many civilian men as civilians. My brother-in-law, Omri Miran, was a civilian father kidnapped from his home in Kibbutz Nahal Oz, in front of his wife and two little girls. He was held for 738 days, physically tortured, deprived of food and water, and psychologically abused. Hamas used Omri and other beautiful human beings as bargaining chips: women, children, the elderly, civilian men, soldiers, Israelis and foreigners. Taking civilians hostage is a war crime, and captured soldiers cannot lawfully be held as hostages to coerce concessions either. There is plenty to criticise about the Israeli government’s conduct, including decisions made during negotiations, even if those were ultimately decisions for a democratically elected government to make. Hostage families have hardly been silent about them, and many of us still demand accountability and the establishment of a national commission of inquiry. But none of that transfers responsibility from the perpetrators: Hamas and its accomplices, and the state actors that funded and sponsored their activities. That is what makes your rhetoric so repulsive. You erase Hamas’s agency, recast conditional negotiations as an unconditional “offer to release them on day one,” and shift responsibility from the hostage-takers to the society they attacked. Hamas kidnapped these people, categorised them according to their value, demanded concessions for them, abused them and held people like Omri for years. Turning that into “Israel refused to save them because it wanted vengeance” is not an established fact. It is an inversion of perpetrator and victim that sanitises Hamas’s responsibility for one of its most grotesque crimes, a distortion you have pushed in bad faith since the war Hamas launched on October 7.

Hey @NYCMayor Zohran Mamdani: You say media must be “independent.” Then explain why your office runs a private channel feeding more than 200 influencers daily talking points and clips. And why city agencies pay some creators for messaging campaigns. If independence is your standard, start at City Hall.

NEW SHORT FILM— Propaganda Warfare: Israel, Hamas & the Weaponization of the Narrative

OMG. Look what we just dug up on Abdul El-Sayed... His super PAC paid $25,000 to Politiclip, a social media distribution company that pushes political content through thousands of accounts. El-Sayed is essentially paying to fabricate support for his campaign online. Everything about Abdul El-Sayed is FAKE.

Amnesty International on page 101 of their report said that the jurisprudence would preclude a finding of genocide. B'tselem said they used a "broader analytical framework." Human Rights Watch actually did not assess intent or genocide, they just made a conclusion which was weird. Anyways, do you want to keep going, @mikehawryluk?

ANOTHER HISTORY LESSON ON YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY CARD: Just in case some of you young ones (& some older ones) didn’t know this. It’s easy to check out, if you don’t believe it. Be sure and show it to your family and friends. They need a little history lesson on what’s what and it doesn’t matter whether you are Democrat or Republican. Facts are FACTS. Up until the 1980's, Social Security cards expressly stated the number and card were not to be used for identification purposes. Since nearly everyone in the United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the "NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION" message was removed. Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. His promises are in black, with updates in brackets. 1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary [No longer voluntary], 2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program [Now 7.65% on the first $90,000, and 15% on the first $90,000 if you’re self-employed], 3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year [No longer tax deductible], 4.) That the money the participants put into the independent ‘Trust Fund’ rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program [Under Johnson the money was moved to the General Fund and spent], and 5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income [Under Clinton & Gore up to 85% of your Social Security can be taxed]. Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month — and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to ‘put away’ — you may be interested in the following: Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent ‘Trust Fund’ and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it? A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate. Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding? A: The Democratic Party. Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities? A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the ‘tie-breaking’ deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US AND MY FAVORITE: Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants? A: That’s right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it! Now, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away! And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it! If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe changes will evolve. Maybe not, though. Some Democrats are awfully sure of what isn’t so — but it’s worth a try. How many people can YOU send this to?

More Ukrainians died in Mariupol alone in less than a year than people died in decades of Israel Palestine conflict. Anyone who prioritizes Gaza over Ukraine (or Sudan, or Congo) is either an idiot or a paid propagandist. Or maybe both.

Steve Hanke looked at an unmanned armored vehicle built to eat an IED in the road and sold it as a remote-controlled explosive robot rolling down civilian streets. That is not analysis. That is a caption written for people who have never cleared a route. Hamas does not leave those roads empty. They bury charges under the asphalt, inside the rubble, and along the approaches they know an army has to use. The old way of finding that out is a manned vehicle and a funeral. The newer way is a machine you can afford to lose so the soldiers behind it do not have to be the first ones to learn where the bomb was. Calling that an explosive robot on civilian streets is the same trick they have used for three years. Take a tool designed to keep Israelis off a trigger, strip the purpose off it, and feed the picture to an audience that already wants the worst reading. If the vehicle is meant to survive a blast laid in the road, it is not a suicide gadget. It is an answer to people who turned the street itself into a weapon. Trump can argue about how quiet Gaza is. Hanke does not get to rename a route-clearance platform into a war crime because the footage looks unfamiliar from a Johns Hopkins office. Send a professor to drive the first truck over that stretch and see how quickly the vocabulary improves. @steve_hanke you really need to either learn about military equipment or stop pretending you have a clue because you read it on a propaganda post by someone who clearly knows as little as you do.