this people try to not to have a conversation about Palestinians suffering. There have been 18,000 people dead. This senators just dance with the money!
That guy was there only for the money . Didn’t give a sh#t about what was being discussed and decided or the statements that were being formulated. Has , by his own admission, not a clue as to what was going on . It’s ? Either that or he is morally bankrupt!! Probably both.
Totally agree. My son once to me "I'm Chilean" country in which I was born. I have to correct him by saying and explaining to him that he was AUSTRALIAN, beautiful country that he was born. And that was Australian, born in Chile of Spanish/British descent.
You're right those who fears AIPAC will take away their jobs. What Isreali allegiance got to do with local judge nomination? If I were him I'll have said what I believe which : Isreal is Aparthied State which annihilated 20,000 ppl 7,500 were children whlist 6,000 were Mothers & young girls.
Why do you think it’s been ongoing for the longest time? It is the last front. And they’re the ones meddling in others businesses. When has the Middle East ever invaded America? Not even in history. Because we all know who “discovered” it!
Why? Did you know about that before watching this? Do you know every political statement made by someone you work with, or live near? Israel was established by settlers after great violence against British forces, as Britain was ruling that area after WWII.
Good things to teach our new generations today. We can be Hateful, Scammers, Manipulators and con-artist to others. We can use the sympathy card when we need to.🤦The world is upside down🤦
I guess it is up to interpretation I mean I know how I would feel if my grandparents were forcibly removed from their homeland while generations of my relatives are cordoned off to a giant outdoor prison.
Funny how you want an American to be nominated but have no issues with been occupied by the Israeli lobby who work and make policies in the interest of Israel at the expense of the Americans…… The Irony😂 Here we are all thinking its only Palestine that occupied.
What has the holocaust got anything to do with the question.millions off people around the world think israel is a colonial state.thousands off jewish people think what the current government is doing is wrong.its absurd these queations.and its all to do with one thing.the israel lobby.its worth millions to politicians in america.and as long as it lasts no one will speak out.why?because your finished if u do.
@twelvecatsinatrenchcoat The guy is probably on a dozen boards and he is supposed to know the letters that every member of every board he's ever sat on has written. I know right wingers love Hawleys yes or no grandstanding but he's just part of the lowering of discourse.
Don't you think the senator is the person off on a tangent here? What does Israel having a right to exist have to do with the US third-circuit court? Hawley embarrassed himself trying to "gotcha" this guy, "HOW COULD YOU NOT BE AWARE OF THIS LETTER!?!" - "Uh... that advisory board only met once a year."
Zionist Leader David Ben-Gurion what did he say about creation of Isreali ? “If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?” David Ben-Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121. “Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. … Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice.” - David Ben Gurion. Quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky’s Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan’s “Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech. “We must do everything to insure they (the Palestinians) never do return.” David Ben-Gurion, in his diary, 18 July 1948, quoted in Michael Bar Zohar’s Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet, Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157. Ben Gurion also warned in 1948: Assuring his fellow Zionists that Palestinians will never come back to their homes: “The old will die and the young will forget.” “We should prepare to go over to the offensive. Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine. We shall establish a Christian state there, and then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate Trans-Jordan; Syria will fall to us. We then bomb and move on and take Port Said, Alexandria and Sinai.” David Ben-Gurion May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, a Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978. “If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel.” Ben-Gurion (Quoted on pp 855-56 in Shabtai Teveth’s Ben-Gurion in a slightly different translation). “It’s not a matter of maintaining the status quo. We have to create a dynamic state, oriented towards expansion.” -Ben Gurion “Every school child knows that there is no such thing in history as a final arrangement - not with regard to the regime, not with regard to borders, and not with regard to international agreements.” - Ben Gurion, War Diaries, 12/03/1947 following Israel’s “acceptance” of the U.N. Partition of 11/29/1947 (Simha Flapan, “Birth of Israel,” p.13) “We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population? ‘Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said ‘ Drive them out! ‘ “ Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 23 October 1979. Partition: “after the formation of a large army in the wake of the establishment of the state, we will abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine “ - Ben Gurion, p.22 “The Birth of Israel, 1987” Simha Flapan. “The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan. One does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today - but the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concerns of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them.” P. 53, “The Birth of Israel, 1987” Simha Flapan October, 1936, during the Jewish Agency Executive meeting Ben-Gurion arguing in favor of transfer as a policy, he said “We are not a state and Britain will not do it for us…” although “there is nothing wrong in the idea.” “If it was permissible to move an Arab from the Galilee to Judea, why it is impossible to move an Arab from Hebron to Transjordan, which is much closer? There are vast expanses of land there and we are over crowded….Even the High Commission agrees to a transfer to Transjordan if we equip the peasants with land and money. If the Peel Commission and the London Government accept, we’ll remove the land problem from the agenda.” The Arabs, Ben-Gurion claimed, would not become landless as a result of Zionist land acquisition; they would be transferred to Transjordan. October 29, 1936 the 21 member of the Jewish Agency Executive endorsed the proposal of a transfer of displaced Arab farmers to Transjordan. Only two of the four non-Zionist members opted to dissent. Flapan, Zionism and the Palestinians, citing protocols of the Executive meeting, p. 261 12 July 1937, Ben-Gurion entered in his diary: “The compulsory transfer of the Arabs from the valleys of the proposed Jewish state could give us something which we never had, even when we stood on our own feet during the days of the First and Second Temple” - a Galilee free from Arab population. Ben-Gurion went so far to write: “We must prepare ourselves to carry out” the transfer [emphasis in original] 27 July 1937, Ben-Gurion wrote in a letter to his 16 year old son Amos: “We have never wanted to dispossess the Arabs [but] because Britain is giving them part of the country which had been promised to us, it is fair that the Arabs in our state be transferred to the Arab portion” 5 October 1937, Ben-Gurion wrote in a letter to his 16 year old son Amos: “We must expel the Arabs and take their places…. And, if we have to use force-not to dispossess the Arabs of the Negev and Transjordan, but to guarantee our own right to settle in those places- then we have force at our disposal.” “It is very possible that the Arabs of the neighboring countries will come to their aid against us. But our strength will exceed theirs. Not only because we will be better organized and equipped, but because behind us there stands a still larger force, superior in quantity and quality …the whole younger generation of Jews from Europe and America.” Ben-Gurion, Zichronot [Memoirs], Vol. 4, p.297-299, p. 330-331. See also Teveth, Ben-Gurion and the Palestinian Arabs, p. 182-189 Ben-Gurion in an address to the central committee of the Histadrut on 30 December 1947: “In the area allocated to the Jewish State there are not more than 520,000 Jews and about 350,000 non-Jews, mostly Arabs. Together with the Jews of Jerusalem, the total population of the Jewish State at the time of its establishment will be about a million, including almost 40 percent non-Jews. Such a [population] composition does not provide a stable basis for a Jewish State. This [demographic] fact must be viewed in all its clarity and acuteness. With such a [population] composition, there cannot even be absolute certainty that control will remain in the hands of the Jewish majority…. There can be no stable and strong Jewish State so long as it has a Jewish majority of only 60 percent.” On the 6th of February 1948, during a Mapai Party Council, Ben-Gurion responded to a remark from a member of the audience that “we have no land there” [in the hills and mountains west of Jerusalem] by saying: “The war will give us the land. The concepts of “ours” and “not ours” are peace concepts, only, and in war they lose their whole meaning” (Ben-Gurion, War Diary, Vol. 1, entry dated 6 February 1948. p.211) Addressing the Mapai Council the following day, Ben-Gurion declared: “From your entry into Jerusalem, through Lifta, Romema… there are no Arabs. One hundred percent Jews. Since Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans, it has not been so Jewish. In many Arab neighborhoods in the west one sees not a single Arab. I do not assume that this will change… What had happened in Jerusalem… is likely to happen in many parts of the country …in the six, eight or ten months of the campaign there will certainly be great changes in the composition of the population in the country.” (Ben-Gurion, War Diary, Vol. 1, entry dated 7 February 1948. p. 210-211) And two months later, Ben-Gurion speaking to the Zionist Actions Committee on 6 April, Ben-Gurion declared: “We will not be able to win the war if we do not, during the war, populate upper and lower, eastern and western Galilee, the Negev and Jerusalem area….I believe that war will also bring in its wake a great change in the distribution of the Arab population.” [Ben-Gurion, Behilahem Yisrael, Tel Aviv, Mapai Press, 1952, pp. 86-87] Ben-Gurion wrote in his diary on 12 July 1937: “the compulsory transfer of the Arabs from the valleys of the projected Jewish State…. We have to stick to this conclusion the same way we grabbed the Balfour Declaration, more than that, the same way we grabbed at Zionism itself.” (Ben-Gurion, Zichronot [Memoirs], Vol. 4, p. 299)
Whatever the outcome of the war against hamas…….this has highlighted the world of anti Jewish sentiment and hatred across the world. Both politically and publicly, a blinding light has been shone into the putrid darkness of racism and hatred of certain ethnic groups and faiths. It’s been absolutely shocking but essential to see this unfolding everywhere across the globe.
Why is Hawley a Great Defender of Jewish Americans, and Schumer ( the Jew) is Not! Very puzzling. Not a rhetorical question. I would Greatly appreciate a reasonable explanation. Thanks
"Should American Jews be safe in their homes and on their campuses?" and the dude couldn't answer yes- wtlf?!?!? GOOD JOB AS USUAL HAWLEY- YOU ARE A BLESSUNG TO AMERICA!! ❤❤❤
Think about it from his perspective. This line of questioning was bizarre and completely unorthodox. Given that he's Pakistani, it was perfectly reasonable for him to wonder if Hawley thinks he's from the Middle East and has a personal connection to the current conflict, which he does not.
@themaskedman221 think about it from this perspective, muslims only see atrocities when it is a non Muslim involved. Do you know Saudi killed 200k+ Muslims in Yemen or the fact that Iran is committing atrocities against its own citizens? Where was this condemnation against Saudi then? Don't act naive and don't expect these people to act naively. It is all for the Ummah. That's the name of this game
Well he's talking about his blood that's flowing through his body. That's like saying you're Irish or you're Mexican doesn't necessarily mean you're from Mexico or you're from Ireland and you believe that you are Irish and you have no loyalty to the United states. But I wouldn't doubt it in this guy's case because all these crooked corrupt politicians judges and school academics are corrupt
The fact he won't condemn the statement gives you your answer, it's a simple yes or no question. I suppose we should be thankful that he did say he did condemn it publicly, but then supports it privately, seem that sort of think in the past, people(s) pretending to be against something but secretly support it. Hell countries, big corporations condemn things all the time, then you find out they have been secretly funding the thing they publicly condemn, then say it never happened.
If he asked me if Israel has and still is using violence for colonialism, I can answer the question yes, I know the history though. It would be irresponsible to answer that question yes or no if you do not know the history.
Zionist Leader David Ben-Gurion what did he say about creation of Isreali ? “If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?” David Ben-Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121. “Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. … Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice.” - David Ben Gurion. Quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky’s Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan’s “Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech. “We must do everything to insure they (the Palestinians) never do return.” David Ben-Gurion, in his diary, 18 July 1948, quoted in Michael Bar Zohar’s Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet, Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157. Ben Gurion also warned in 1948: Assuring his fellow Zionists that Palestinians will never come back to their homes: “The old will die and the young will forget.” “We should prepare to go over to the offensive. Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine. We shall establish a Christian state there, and then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate Trans-Jordan; Syria will fall to us. We then bomb and move on and take Port Said, Alexandria and Sinai.” David Ben-Gurion May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, a Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978. “If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel.” Ben-Gurion (Quoted on pp 855-56 in Shabtai Teveth’s Ben-Gurion in a slightly different translation). “It’s not a matter of maintaining the status quo. We have to create a dynamic state, oriented towards expansion.” -Ben Gurion “Every school child knows that there is no such thing in history as a final arrangement - not with regard to the regime, not with regard to borders, and not with regard to international agreements.” - Ben Gurion, War Diaries, 12/03/1947 following Israel’s “acceptance” of the U.N. Partition of 11/29/1947 (Simha Flapan, “Birth of Israel,” p.13) “We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population? ‘Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said ‘ Drive them out! ‘ “ Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 23 October 1979. Partition: “after the formation of a large army in the wake of the establishment of the state, we will abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine “ - Ben Gurion, p.22 “The Birth of Israel, 1987” Simha Flapan. “The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan. One does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today - but the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concerns of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them.” P. 53, “The Birth of Israel, 1987” Simha Flapan October, 1936, during the Jewish Agency Executive meeting Ben-Gurion arguing in favor of transfer as a policy, he said “We are not a state and Britain will not do it for us…” although “there is nothing wrong in the idea.” “If it was permissible to move an Arab from the Galilee to Judea, why it is impossible to move an Arab from Hebron to Transjordan, which is much closer? There are vast expanses of land there and we are over crowded….Even the High Commission agrees to a transfer to Transjordan if we equip the peasants with land and money. If the Peel Commission and the London Government accept, we’ll remove the land problem from the agenda.” The Arabs, Ben-Gurion claimed, would not become landless as a result of Zionist land acquisition; they would be transferred to Transjordan. October 29, 1936 the 21 member of the Jewish Agency Executive endorsed the proposal of a transfer of displaced Arab farmers to Transjordan. Only two of the four non-Zionist members opted to dissent. Flapan, Zionism and the Palestinians, citing protocols of the Executive meeting, p. 261 12 July 1937, Ben-Gurion entered in his diary: “The compulsory transfer of the Arabs from the valleys of the proposed Jewish state could give us something which we never had, even when we stood on our own feet during the days of the First and Second Temple” - a Galilee free from Arab population. Ben-Gurion went so far to write: “We must prepare ourselves to carry out” the transfer [emphasis in original] 27 July 1937, Ben-Gurion wrote in a letter to his 16 year old son Amos: “We have never wanted to dispossess the Arabs [but] because Britain is giving them part of the country which had been promised to us, it is fair that the Arabs in our state be transferred to the Arab portion” 5 October 1937, Ben-Gurion wrote in a letter to his 16 year old son Amos: “We must expel the Arabs and take their places…. And, if we have to use force-not to dispossess the Arabs of the Negev and Transjordan, but to guarantee our own right to settle in those places- then we have force at our disposal.” “It is very possible that the Arabs of the neighboring countries will come to their aid against us. But our strength will exceed theirs. Not only because we will be better organized and equipped, but because behind us there stands a still larger force, superior in quantity and quality …the whole younger generation of Jews from Europe and America.” Ben-Gurion, Zichronot [Memoirs], Vol. 4, p.297-299, p. 330-331. See also Teveth, Ben-Gurion and the Palestinian Arabs, p. 182-189 Ben-Gurion in an address to the central committee of the Histadrut on 30 December 1947: “In the area allocated to the Jewish State there are not more than 520,000 Jews and about 350,000 non-Jews, mostly Arabs. Together with the Jews of Jerusalem, the total population of the Jewish State at the time of its establishment will be about a million, including almost 40 percent non-Jews. Such a [population] composition does not provide a stable basis for a Jewish State. This [demographic] fact must be viewed in all its clarity and acuteness. With such a [population] composition, there cannot even be absolute certainty that control will remain in the hands of the Jewish majority…. There can be no stable and strong Jewish State so long as it has a Jewish majority of only 60 percent.” On the 6th of February 1948, during a Mapai Party Council, Ben-Gurion responded to a remark from a member of the audience that “we have no land there” [in the hills and mountains west of Jerusalem] by saying: “The war will give us the land. The concepts of “ours” and “not ours” are peace concepts, only, and in war they lose their whole meaning” (Ben-Gurion, War Diary, Vol. 1, entry dated 6 February 1948. p.211) Addressing the Mapai Council the following day, Ben-Gurion declared: “From your entry into Jerusalem, through Lifta, Romema… there are no Arabs. One hundred percent Jews. Since Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans, it has not been so Jewish. In many Arab neighborhoods in the west one sees not a single Arab. I do not assume that this will change… What had happened in Jerusalem… is likely to happen in many parts of the country …in the six, eight or ten months of the campaign there will certainly be great changes in the composition of the population in the country.” (Ben-Gurion, War Diary, Vol. 1, entry dated 7 February 1948. p. 210-211) And two months later, Ben-Gurion speaking to the Zionist Actions Committee on 6 April, Ben-Gurion declared: “We will not be able to win the war if we do not, during the war, populate upper and lower, eastern and western Galilee, the Negev and Jerusalem area….I believe that war will also bring in its wake a great change in the distribution of the Arab population.” [Ben-Gurion, Behilahem Yisrael, Tel Aviv, Mapai Press, 1952, pp. 86-87] Ben-Gurion wrote in his diary on 12 July 1937: “the compulsory transfer of the Arabs from the valleys of the projected Jewish State…. We have to stick to this conclusion the same way we grabbed the Balfour Declaration, more than that, the same way we grabbed at Zionism itself.” (Ben-Gurion, Zichronot [Memoirs], Vol. 4, p. 299)
They are all like that. They will give you a word salad answer that actually answers nothing. In my opinion they pick the guy who can answer without actually answering anything.This is like a test to see if they stand up to questioning under pressure. This is an initiation not a hearing.
@Judahkings unlike your simple minds he realises things are more complicated and myprejudicede decisions he could be making in the futur, which could lead people to claim bias on one side or the other.
@@Ugskdjrdjhdjzsjwjoh what a bunch of crap. He was asking a moral question. It wasn’t difficult to give an answer, and an advanced knowledge of Middle Eastern geopolitics is not needed to provide a moral answer.
@@Ugskdjrdjhdjzsjwj So, supporting Terrorists is now moral? Because honestly if you don't support or defend Israel, and you agree with Hamas than you are supporting Terrorists and continued Terrorism. Hmmmmmmm.......🤔
Asking someone if "Israel is a violent colonial state" is not straightforward at all. It requires a huge amount of historical knowledge and international law knowledge. You will get vastly different answers from highly intelligent people on both sides. It would be irresponsible to answer that question without being an expert in the long history of the area of the world. Unless you are a dishonest politician. Then all you have to think about is how will this look to my voters.
@dakotaeaslick1733 The problem is that this happens a lot at these things. When they don't want to give an answer, that will be on the record and shows what position they have on a subject. They deflect by not saying yes or no. Also, when they are asked to come to these things, they generally know what the topic is and therefore can prepare. This is not an isolated event. This happens every time the answer to the question may hurt them politically. The issue with Israel should not be that hard to answer for an educated person like him. The fact that a yes answer would hurt him with his peers is enough to make you believe he was deflecting on purpose.
Is Israel practicing apartheid? If no, then why Palestinians living in the West Bank live under martial law and Israelis in the West Bank live under martial law???
@@HusseinDoha It will be a long answer for me and the Senator cannot answer because either he is an atheist or non-religious. Senator and his comrades need to be schooled. Muslims do not hate the Jews or Children of Israel. The fact that Jews or Children of Israel are addressed directly so often in the Qur'an should tell us something. Allah wants to address Jews, to give them dawah [the message], to give them the Qur'an, instead of having stereotypes about them. Islam doesn’t allow stereotypes. Everyone is equal in the eyes of Allah, and the only thing that makes some people better than others is Taqwa [faith/belief]. In the Bible, Joshua 21:43-44 states: “So the Lord gave to Israel all the land of which He had sworn to give to their fathers, and they took possession of it and dwelt in it. The Lord gave them rest all around, according to all that He had sworn to their fathers. And not a man of all their enemies stood against them; the Lord delivered all their enemies into their hand. Not a word failed of any good thing which the Lord had spoken to the house of Israel. All came to pass”. This passage suggests that the Israelites had already taken possession of all the land that God had promised to their forefathers even before the creation of modern State of Israel. The promise of land belonging to the Children of Israel is never permanent. It comes with conditions: “Surely, following the ˹heavenly˺ Record, We decreed in the Scriptures: “My righteous servants shall inherit the land.” (Qur'an 21:105) Psalm 37:29 states that “The righteous shall inherit the land, and dwell therein for ever”. This passage is often interpreted as a promise of God’s blessing for those who live righteously. It is believed that the righteous will be rewarded with a place in the land of Israel, which is often referred to as the “promised land”. Similarly, G-d is sovereign over the nations and history. He raises up and brings down kings and empires according to His will. He uses human agents, even pagan ones, to accomplish His purposes. He is the Lord of hosts, who controls the armies of heaven and earth (Jeremiah 1:15; 25:9; 27:5-7; 32:17) If Zionists claim that G-d had given the land of Palestine to the Jews is true, then why Abraham had to negotiate with the Hittites to purchase a burial plot for his wife, Sarah [Genesis 23]? Why didn't Abraham just take the land like the Zionists did? The so-called "promised land" was given to descendant of Abraham - Isaac only. Likewise, descendants of Ishmael never lay claim to land of Arabia! In addition, Moses and his followers did not enter the "promised" land due to their disobedience. Qur'an 7:128 states: Said Moses to his people, “Seek help through Allah and be patient. Indeed, the earth belongs to Allah. He causes to inherit it whom He wills of His servants. And the [best] outcome is for the righteous.” Jews are no longer G-d chosen people. The Israelites did not keep their part of the covenant. Here is the evidence: Jeremiah 31:31-34: “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” It had already been prophesized in the Bible that the descendants of Ishmael/Arabs shall administer the Temple Mount/Jerusalem. Isaiah 60:7 "All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered together unto thee, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister unto thee: they shall come up with acceptance on mine altar, and I will glorify the house of my glory." All the flocks of Kedar - On the word 'Kedar,' see the notes at Isaiah 21:16. The Kedarenians were a wandering tribe that frequently changed their residence, though it is probable they usually dwelt in the south part of Arabia Desert, or the north of Arabia Petraea. They are mentioned as dwelling in beautiful tents Sol 1:5 : 'I am black, but comely as the tents of Kedar,' see Psalm 120:5; compare Isaiah 21:16-17; Isaiah 42:11. The language here also means that that which constituted their principal wealth would come and enrich Jerusalem. The rams of Nebaioth - Nebaioth was also a son of Ishmael Genesis 25:13; 1 Chronicles 1:29, and was the father of the Nabatheans. They were a people of Arabia Petraea, and lived principally by plunder, trade, and the keeping of flocks. The country of Nabathea extended, it is supposed, from the Euphrates to the Red Sea, and embraced Petra, the capital of Arabia Deserts, and also Medaba. It is not possible, however, to fix the exact boundaries of the various tribes of Arabians. The general idea is, that their most valuable possessions would be devoted to God. The second Temple had been completely destroyed as predicted by Jesus in Luke 21:5-38. For 500 years or more, it had been left in ruins by the Jews. When Umar Ibn al-Khattab, the second caliph of Islam, captured Jerusalem in 638 CE, there was not a single Jew in Jerusalem. Now, as prophesized by Isaiah, Jerusalem is administered by descendants of Ishmael/Arabs. Dome of the Rock is the Third Temple. There are some interpretations of the Bible that suggest that the construction of the Dome of the Rock is prophesied in the Book of Daniel. Specifically, some people believe that Daniel 12:11 is a prophecy about the building of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. "And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days." [Daniel 12:11] Rabbi Isser Weisberg of Machon Mishne Torah in Lakewood, explained that the “appalling abomination” spoken about in the Book of Daniel is the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, which was completed in the year 692. Counting 1290 (a thousand two hundred and ninety) years from the completion of the Dome of the Rock “you get 1982 and the 1335 (one thousand three hundred and thirty-five) ends in 2027. So that’s the window (1982-2027) when the Moshiach has to come.” This may confirmed the Qur'anic message. In Qur'an 17:104 says "And We said to the Children of Israel after Pharaoh, “Reside in the land, but when the promise of the Hereafter comes to pass, We will bring you all together.” The modern state of Israel was promised by British and its allies and not by G-d. In ancient Israel, G-d had prepared Moses for 80 years to lead His people Israel. 1948+80= 2028 may be the complete systematic dismantling of the modern state of Israel by God All-mighty. It is a heresy/unholy to think that Jews shall administer Temple Mount/Jerusalem as it had been clear in the Holy scripture that descendants of Ishmael/Arabs had been ordained by G-d to administer Jerusalem/Temple Mount. In Hebrew Bible, Devarim 32:17 reads as follows: "They sacrificed to demons, not God, to gods they had not known, new gods that had come recently, whom your ancestors had not feared". The medieval commentator Ibn Ezra suggested that the “new gods” mentioned in this verse were actually the gods of foreign nations that the Israelites had come into contact with. "new gods" is today's Zionism. Zionism is a nationalist movement that emerged in the 19th century to enable the establishment of a homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine. The movement initially emerged in Central and Eastern Europe as a national revival movement in the late 19th century, both in reaction to newer waves of antisemitism and as a consequence of Haskalah, or Jewish Enlightenment. Since the establishment of Israel, Zionism became an ideology that supports “the development and protection of the State of Israel”. One cannot deny that the conflicts in the middle-east is caused by the Zionism movement and the violations of the 3 Oaths made by the Jews found in the Talmud (Song of Songs 2:7, 3:5, 8:4): The Oaths: First Oath: Israel should not ascend to the land in a wall (i.e., en masse or forcefully). Second Oath: The Holy One adjured Israel not to rebel against the nations of the world. Third Oath: The Holy One adjured the nations not to oppress Israel excessively. Jews worldwide are now paying the price for the violations of the 3 Oaths Zionism ("new gods") is only around 100 years old. It is the transformation from religion to nationalism, to materialism created by non-religious Jews who hated their religion. The reason why they use the name Israel, the Star of David, hijacking, stealing the identity of Judaism and the Jewish people is in order to gain a legitimacy for their existence that should lead people to say, 'oh, it is God given to them' and that they should use fear and intimidate people from speaking out against their actions because they will call those that do anti Semitic; it couldn't be anything further from the Truth. Leviticus 26:18 “And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins.” Qur'an 62:5 "The example of those who were entrusted with the Torah and then did not take it on is like that of a donkey who carries volumes [of books]. Wretched is the example of the people who deny the signs of Allah. And Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people."
Yeah except no one punishes discrimination against ‘non’ jewish caucasians. Ever. Not a peep. Btw ashkenazi jews are genetically Northern italian. They settled in germany in the early 1500s. And in the 1850’s jewish academics formulated and spread socialism and communism. Funded it. And ultimately brought it to the USA and proliferated and difussed it through movies. Music. Culture. Politics. Where is hawly’s vitriol and heated rhetoric? Anything. Where is it. Ask yourself honestly
@@twelvecatsinatrenchcoat he can be awesome without being ‘your guy’. I get that you’re attempting to be clever. Failing isn’t wise. You’re omitting that you likely support and vote for people you’ve never vetted or skeptically criticized. People who form your beliefs, which are inevitably cartoonish low resolution jelly brain filtered abstracts of political theater, which is what this was. My criticism was actually informed by an actual education. And the ability to think independently of anyone or anything. To your point whatever your ‘guy’ is, try gathering real knowledge, by actually pursuing it. Not having topical media beats flood your already limited cognitive resources with social engineering by a corrupt and now adversarial federal government that you scarcely understand. But by developing an actual intellect with research including all that the modes of transmitting mediums of ancestral knowledge by reading original sources and compiled analysis of it. Then cross reference all cultures, religions, across known history and you’ll understand the precise framework for the present guiding philosophies, legal theories, and constitutional morphism we now see, in contrast with say the guidelines of the federalist papers. Read the philosophies of john locke. Look now at a congress plying the easily manipulated into seeing only the distraction, not the misdeeds we all know Washington for decades has been culpable of. Read of similar intrigue and betrayal at the highest levels of histories greatest civilizations. Ponder the cost of decadence and complacency. The lack of seriousness inherent in your comment here. Try it. Think
@@azurebadger Youre trying to sound intelligent while standing up for a grand-standing **politician** making a show for social media trying to ask a **District Court Judge** nominee what his opinion is of a war that is 6000 miles away from the US 3rd Circuit and has literally nothing at all to do with confirming a judge. This nominee isn't "dodging" his questions like ya'll are saying. He's literally confused. He's completely befuddled why this politician is asking a Judge about foreign policy.
@@twelvecatsinatrenchcoat everyone knows something about that situation 6000 miles away. He was on the board of what again? Heisnt confused. Its called filibustering. Have you never listened to these hearings before? Or any politician in similar circumstances ever? I recently read an account of this political ambiguity dance in Rhodesia in the 70’s. Same exact thing. Are you trying to sound smart? I however can predict the simplicity of your every opinion. By all means continue oif you want your belief system dramatically rearranged, as if you could endure it. You missed all of my points. You simplified all framework on the matter and rendered a shallow rationalization. Thats the proper definition of what you attempted. Thats something that belies the issue i spoke to. You have your remedy. Get on with it and stop wasting time talking to people you scarcely comprehend let alone possess the power to persuade. Again you didnt catch my meaning. And the first comment here was mine and you couldnt see it, so devastating was my critique of thetheatrics of congress apparently. Thats something you should note. Off you go
Not really.. sad thing is, he’ll be nominated and the world will move on, just as we will after getting pissed off about these videos. The day after, we’ll be back at our jobs etc, and all will continue..
So I could construct a line of questioning about arming the contras, arming Saddam Hussein, arming Bin Laden, arming Hamas, arming ISIS, arming South American cartels and so long as it exemplified your ability to produce a truthful response, the line of questioning is irrelevant? I could concoct some LSAT quiz where you are being asked by an FBI informant to kidnap the governor of Michigan, contrasting your loyalty and duty to your friends to break the law vs your objective moral duty to resist peer pressure, and so long as you produce a truthful response the content of your response is irrelevant? I don't think you care about the truth (and know these lawmakers don't.) I think you know that they are trying to clarify his political attitudes which he has no duty to testify, especially if he believes he can conduct his official business without being affected by this bias. And I think they are trying to fundraise off a tragedy by sucking up in public hearings. We shouldn't have to endure Adam Schiff's McCarthyism only coming from Republicans instead. Americans have a right to say, think and feel that Israel should be a sheet of nuclear glass in the desert. We certainly do with dozens of other countries.
On occupied territory and denying the indigenous of their rights. Would have to do to the Palestinians what America did to the native Indians to feel safe
It's just crazy ! When someone doesn't want to answer obvious and simple questions, it means that it's risky for him to admit the truth. What a shame !
It is very disgusting to use holocaust to justify the savage Israeli crimes against innocent Palestinian people and blackmail any one say the truth about israeli occupation and i think 7 October was the reaction to all atrocities to the Palestinian people for more than 70 years
Not even I could come to that high level of humor as you and I consider myself to have a higher sense of humor than those good for nothing late night TV talk show hosts humor.
I like how one of his defenses was “I am from Pakistan” and therefore he doesn’t know anything or need to know. Good, go back to Pakistan then. This isn’t acceptable here.
“Sir I don’t want to answer that question because I may get my head sawed off if I answer incorrectly…..oh ah I mean..I didnt grow up in the Middle East.”
Give em a state a in the USA then, there was no Israel 75years ago... read the origins of zionism, they wanted a state on a land where muslims resided.
Adeel Deception, Lying and Taqiyya Does Islam permit Muslims to lie? Muslim scholars teach that Muslims should generally be truthful to each other... unless the purpose of lying is to "smooth over differences" or "gain the upper-hand over an enemy." There are several forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, the best known being taqiyya (the Shia name). These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause of Islam - in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.
What's up with these people using Taqiya as an example for their arguement 😭 ITS ONLY FOUND WITHIN THE SHIAS WHO ARE A MINORITY GET THAT INTO YOUR HEADDDDDD! ITS LIKE COMPARING CHRISTIANS TO CATHOLICS 😭😭😭
@@itswobblypancake7981 Oh we get it.. So what you are saying is that you follow a man who tells you that you can not have friends who does not believe what you believe as in 3:28 and in 5:51 and 60:1 and what is it you have to do to make us think how peaceful you are.. WHEN in REALITY what is it you feel towards the People of the Book... What was it that as one who believes in al-Lah must do towards the Jew when they are hiding behind a Rock...?? Now Are you able to say what the man Muhammad really is..because we have a different name for what he has taught, what those men can do to "the little ones".... and it isn't prophet. Tell the Truth.. if you can that is.............
They should be required to answer a yes or no!!! If they cannot answer the goddamn question, it is an automatic buh bye and thanks for playing, Felicia. PERIOD!
This is the kind of senators we all need in the Senate the way that Josh Hawley is going after this nominee that is probably going to be put on the bench regardless of what the Republicans have to say about it don't you think it's time to change your judicial system to where it's not for the senators to put these judges on the bench for lifetime 10 years the simple fact is I don't think any judge should be have a lifetime tenure except for the supreme Court any other judges that are put on the bench regardless of it being a federal bench or a state court or any other court their limits should be to 4 years an 4 Year's only
I have watched hundreds and hundreds of committee hearing like this and it makes me sick that these people who do NOT care about morality, truth or giving honest answers to anything are never accouintable.
Here’s how I see it: The man “can’t” answer because truthful replies to the questions asked would make him look career-wrecking bad - to us Westerners. Here’s why: He said he is from Pakistan, which means he is a MūsIïm. I can tell by the fact that he has been able to arrive in America with his head still attached to the rest of his body. Apart from the “colon-word”, the statement he refuses to address sounds, more or less, like it’s copied and pasted from Muhammad’s Ahadith. Which means that this man secretly agrees 💯 with it. But again, admitting it would end his career.
I consider Isreal our ally. But it is your first amendment right to criticize the state of Isreal, and doing so does not make you anti semetic. The political right has been disappointing lately on this issue as they have really been the only side that seems to actually care about free speech. But since October 7th , most have been perfectly happy to co opt cancel culture on anyone harshly criticizing Isreal or being overtly pro Palestinian. They really should know better and it makes them sound like hypocrites. That being said its also frustrating to always hear these "non answer" answers from judicial nominees. People need to stand by things they have said or give a decent explanation for it.
I'm starting to think, people being specifically questioned like this, should HAVE to answer either yes or no or maybe, and then be allowed to qualify their answer afterwards! There's a reason they refuse to answer yes or no!
They refuse to give direct answers because they under internal pressure from within the organizations they lead. It's a problem when you have polarized Arab students and lecturers along with radical left bullshit ideologists in the college you lead that will see any tiny bit of empathy towards Jews or the victims of Oct 7 or any tiny bit of maybe some tiny little bit of saying a glimpse of a shred of a comment slightly favoring Israel, as a justification for what they think is a Genocide in Gaza. They don't hate Jews, they are simply cowards.
@@Mondo_mog How many protests on campuses do you see about North Korea, Russia, China, Boko Haram etc? Why the relentless focus on the one Jewish nation on Earth? Islamist propaganda.
Prob doesn’t want to incriminate himself, incase of lawsuits so he coward up instead but i bet he talks a lotta shit and feels like a tough guy when he’s home with his family smh
@@Mdtv1982 Simple yes or no would suffice but dude was beating around the bush at every question, so Hawley interjected to avoid the long and unnecessary answers. It’s interesting to see the different viewpoints tho especially when biased. I’m neutral but even I can see what’s happening here
@@CrackedSociety you can’t respond yes or no to a complicated question which is why he didn’t. He also wasn’t given a second to respond which is why the other member apologized to him
Ironically, for a nominee to the bench of a high court of the United States to dodge a direct question in an inquiry and test of facts is a prediction of incompetence in executing his office in the matter, as a referee of adjudication of compelling a witness to answer honestly.
Yes. I recall the look on her face that said, 'Shit, this guy knows I'm an idiot and he's gonna' prove it!' when she was asked for the definition.@@MrHonk58
He should have been permitted to answer completely in his way, then decide what his intention is. If he is to be accepted as a Judge that he has to be more forthright in giving reasons for his judgement.
@@hugoanson2135 yeah, why? Time is money. He should have just said plainly, "sounds like something a doosh bag would say. I condemn that." Rather this dooshbag was all "derpy derp-derp, better make sure the guy buying me dinner didn't say that, derp derp."
@@willsweat1242 Refusing to answer a question is a contemptable offense. Federal law may penalize individuals who refuse to respond to Congressional inquiries, as 2 U.S. Code § 192 states that any person who is summoned before Congress who "willfully makes default, or who, having appeared, refuses to answer any question pertinent to the question under inquiry" shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be subject to a fine and imprisonment if convicted. The problem is, the 'judge' in this case would be Durbin, and he would let liberals get away with pretty much whatever they want. And speaking of contempt, Hunter refusing to show up to a committee subpoena earlier this afternoon, opting instead to do an impromptu speech out on a street corner, is also a criminal offense, which would add another misdemeanor charge to his ever growing list of misdemeanor and felony charges, but we all know how that's probably going to go.