I’m hardly an expert though, I’m sure @reichlinmelnick.bsky.social or @daralind.bsky.social would know more

When they say “FBI background check” they most likely mean a “Identity History Summary Check” which i don’t think would mention it.

oag.ca.gov/sites/all/fi...

I thought of the most stupid and bad faith reading I could (not a lawyer): arguing that the OSF is an FTO because it’s founder (Soros) is not a natural born American citizen. That, or even stupider: all organizations inspired by Marx are foreign, because he was not a Citizen.

like there is an actual lack of substance, not your more typical totally incomprehensible ideological reasoning or straight school shooter nihilism

also explains why Patel et al haven't been more explicit about him being a leftist, because it seems like the evidence of his leftist views are more or less him dating a transwoman? and that he just decided to kill Kirk for being hateful

To be fair, Napoleon absolutely should’ve gone to Buffalo wild wings instead of Iberia. Or imagine this: “invade Haiti?” Absolutely not, “Me and Toussaint are going to Bro out at BWW!”

Also, as a member of the “blue tribe” just let me state that no, I do think Osama bin Laden was scum, actually.

Christ, that thing about Osama bin Laden is mind boggling.

Addendum: it’s possible that Lew is mangling the idea of human shields. But even granting that, the existence of human shields doesn’t change the attacker’s responsibility, rather it would mean that the defender is committing a War Crime.

For the purposes of proportionality, distinction, risk transfer, or anything else. Because again, they are children and children are not responsible for their parents. Blood guilt is not real. 2/2

I think we should draw a distinction between strategic bombing, which is what the USAAF tried to do in Europe, and Area bombing, which it often turned into. www.raf.mod.uk/what-we-do/c...

As for when that point actually was reached, everyone has to make their own calculation.

I think Israel clearly had a valid Jus ad bellum after 10/7. If they Wanted to go in and destroy Hamas that was (and is!) absolutely fine. People saying otherwise on 10/8 were not acting in good faith. it's the way Israel went about it in regards to IHL (jus ad bello) made it unjustified.

FWIW I’m not Jewish, and I don’t want to dismiss the concerns people have, but it kind of reminds me of what I’ve been told in therapy. Your feelings are valid, but it doesn’t make them true.

I know you’re describing a reaction, not endorsing it, but it should be worth pointing out that that belief isn’t true as a factual mater. Peaceful efforts are tried first. And even if, worst case, Israel was attacked, it would still exist in the aftermath. Serbia still existed after Allied Force.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11902369/