You are simply wrong. That region of the North Atlantic was known for having icebergs in season, and there were warnings to that effect posted at the time the Titanic sailed. Do you suppose it collided with a billboard?
You realize, of course, that you can get a copy of the issue of the New York Times that came out on the date of your birthday. An entire newspaper full of "weird coincidences" of events on the date of your birth. Anyone on the planet can get such a copy. Life is nothing but "weird coincidences." Imagine the poor people born on February 29th. Their coincidences are 4 times more rare.
What is there to explain? This is clearly clopped out of a cheap melodrama where the point is an ironic-shocker "evil triumphs" twist. The satanic imagery is just set dressing, as was even recognized by the characters. And so we are to conclude ...what? That the producer and director are exploiting the "Hollywood is Satanic" byword? And if people like "Green Lives Matter" get all reactive about it, is the video producers' market assessment correct or not?
Satanic plot themes are very old in motion pictures. But so are murder stories. Does that mean that Hollywood is plotting murder on a general scale? One has to discriminate between bad taste and evil deeds. I agree that Hollywood is unsavory and full of bad ideas, but this doesn't prove anything but bad taste.
Who can prove what? The person who asserts something is true as a positive fact has the burden of proof. The reason is that there is no logical way to prove something is not true---except to prove the converse positive fact. So, prove that Israel is using Hamas as a puppet. I have no Reason to think otherwise. (Your challenge is akin to "Prove there are no Leprechauns!" "Prove the Earth isn't flat!") You really ought to study logic. It separates real thinking from sheer foolishness.
And, puppet or not, the puppet has no reprieve from destruction if it is conducting genocide. Because, really, isn't your argument to let Hamas out of jail and have no reprisal for their crimes?
You are using inaccurate language, but the answer is: Yes. So long as you are attacking the enemy, collateral deaths resulting from that attack are on the head of the enemy who has inserted himself into civilian surroundings (hospitals, schools, apartment blocks, homes, warehouses, subterranean refuges beneath homes, etc.). That is the international treaty on the subject. The use of human shields is forbidden. Hamas uses them all the time, and we have seen that for 2 years by the Ukrainians as well.
The Israelis did not compel Hamas to occupy such places. And was abiding by the existing cease-fire on October 7th.
Answer your own question, if you think it needs an answer.
Oh, no problem. Were Z to say anything along those lines, he would be toast. ("Retreat" would always be massaged into something like "regroup to a stronger line of defense.")
This is being reported as a false story. What Zelensky may be saying is irrelevant to what is and will be happening. He would be a fool to make such a statement, as it would mean his utility to the hardline Nazi faction would be finished---and him with it.
We have the same news. We have Hamas embedding in the civilian matrix, operating from hospitals, blocking escape egress of refugees, stealing the international aid supplies. Maybe you live in a bubble where none of this is happening, but it is real enough. And you are obviously ignorant of the international treaty prohibition against the use of human shields, and I can't do anything to dispel your ignorance but inform you. Where do you get your statistics? From Hamas? I wouldn't be surprised. For you, this is all one big excuse for their (Hamas') breach of a pre-existing cease-fire by a clearly genocidal terroristic massacre. Your prejudice is obvious to anyone, but apparently not to you. I don't need to say anything more about that.
The success of a business venture is not a proof (or a disproof) of genius thinking. It hinges on the market, the economic conditions, the legal environment, and the necessary fact that it will have to be implemented by non-geniuses.
We never needed A.I. We only needed good scripts.
Because we are in a debate and I have been trouncing you with your failure to back up your subjective claims. You continue to ignore the points I have made about "mass murder," which has entirely been on the Hamas side of the conflict. All you have is anti-Israel prejudice which you take to be fact. And you can't control your language for polite conversation.
If you don't like responding, then don't respond. Take some ownership of your position.
He needs to arrive with a bulldozer. A clear path will be left behind.
It is more likely you can get demons out of a toaster than you can out of a particle accelerator.
I was watching this unfold on Telegram. The Russians had realized it was driven by Ukraine early in the scenario. They then announced that the West/US would declare the terrorists to be from ISIS. Sure enough...
What's the problem? I'm discussing it. I gather you don't what to hear or consider what I have to say. It is curious to me that whether a point is substantial (or not) is not as important to you as whether fools have justified talking about it more.
I repeat: the logic is bogus. Just because someone decides to put teeth into a fabulous claim does not make the claim true. Just because an honorable person doesn't know anything about the subject doesn't make his remarks true. Flynn knows nothing about contrails, but at least I have been to Fort Huachuca.
And you will shortly find that the legislation is equivalent to a ban on magic. There will be no indictments, no charges, no findings of guilt, and contrails will continue to cross the sky. Wake me up if this ever goes to court.
Look, you don't reply to the points of argument. You just slide past them and go on to another. You have no integrity in debate and you violate the rules by calling me insults and names.
Symbols can only make sense if you already know them and there is supporting context. Do they communicate a sentence's worth of information? No, they do not.
The answer to the first question is "no." Nothing "innocent" about 75% civilian approval of a Hamas government. No war crime is attached to attacking combatants, no matter where they are. Human shields are not recognized in the international law of warfare (nor should they be). You assume the proof of "false flags" where none is evident (believing it is so, doesn't make it so). There would have been no campaign if the "palestinian people" (a PR slogan) had not countenanced an act of savage genocidal terrorism during the peace of a negotiated cease-fire.
I wouldn't be so sanguine about the outcome. What people are failing to realize is that the diversity-equity-inclusivity (DEI) principle (and its general outlook) has first taken hold of the top echelons of a company. As it drives downwards, the company will systematically lose the expertise to discern competence, discipline, and unity. Leaning on their productive few? How will they know who those are? I was number one ranked in my company for my entire 40-year career, and at the end they didn't know what to do with me, and began to (illegally) assign me to work that was not covered by my employment contract.
There will be no easy comeback when the company leadership is clueless.
One is obliged to "deny likelihood" when "likelihood" is entirely subjective. It is not even a relevant concept. What is at issue is what HAS happened, not what was "likely" to have happened. You keep on thinking "it could conceivably be so" is equivalent to "it is so."
Not obvious at all. Admiral Canaris wound up spying for the Allies. Does that mean that Hitler was an allied plant? You are a stranger to logic. And arguments over origins do not dispel the reality of the present. You really have no logical argument against my position of (1) crush Hamas, and (2) crush any co-conspirators.
I can see it now: "Washington bans hunting of sasquatches"...therefore, they must exist. "Scotland bans capture of Nessie"...therefore it must exist. "Arkansas passes law to require 2 + 2 = 5" ...therefore it must be so. "Texas passes law to ban maps depicting a spherical Earth, and outlaws conventional geographic coordinates based on sphericity"...need I say more?
The general principle is that if mainstream politicians finally become convinced that a fictitious wrongdoing is taking place, and pass legislation against it, then it is no longer fiction. By what stretch of the imagination can that be possible? Has any testimony for the law established any facts to support it?
But they can have their fun and walk around contented. Now watch what happens when contrails continue to cross the sky and no one can be charged with a crime. Nothing. Not only a crime without victims, but a crime without evidence---a crime without a crime. A big public relations win... (Kind of like a gun-free zone.)
"Oh, they're sharp ones in Tennessee---all their heads come to a point!"
You are dreaming. For you, it is all about "comms." You are only extracting symbology out of a Rorschach blot. The majority of CERN discoveries are obscure attempts to publicize their work for the sake of continuing their funding. No more "symbology" than a circus sideshow---and it sucks you in completely, to be convinced that they are "communicating about topics that really matter."
A symbol, by the way, is not a communication. It is, at best, a word. Communication requires sentences and is for the purpose of reducing uncertainty about (1) WHETHER there is a message, and (2) WHAT the message is.
I just read what you have to say. And, from what I have already said, I do not support any subterfuge by Israel; re-read what I said about charging, trying, and convicting culprits. But, as with most "false flag" theorists, you put theory before facts.
You should also include China's penetration into sub-Saharan Africa, to the point of actual immigration-colonization.
When a ship hits an iceberg, there is nothing "behind it" besides being in the wrong place at the wrong time, heading in the wrong direction.