Genocidal-Islamic Mamdani's Stunt

Islamo socialist Mamdani knew he couldn't "arrest", Bibi, but as a fascistic hater, he is, consumed with disgust. So thirsty for his venomous demonization Jihad, that he wanted one more public chance to hurl the Pallyweid G slur. Knowing full well [just like UN's Goebbels Francesca Albanese and her ilk], his buddies, the Gaza genocidal government uses civilians to maximize deaths [the 'Dead Baby Strategy']. It is why it has prevented humane-IDF urgent pleas for evacuations; had attacked aid distributions and has used even hospitals for its murderous actions. Mamdani is a perfect enabler of "Palestine" routine of the diabolical tactics to use its people as cannon fodders.

It's all a cybical criminal game by these "activist."

Yair Kleinbaum. Jul 22, 2026
https://www.jfeed.com/news/mamdani-netanyahu-arrest-warrant

Part II:

Mamdani is also upset about the sexual crimes ICC’s head Karim Khan has been accused of, linked to his rush to issue an “arrest,” at the time. Yet he publicly lied. Truth is, the ICC did not rule a “genocide.” In fact, even pressed by another Islamic bigot, Mehdi Hasan, Khan still refused to.

ICC prosecutor Khan undercuts Gaza genocide narrative against Israel.
26 May 2026 — ICC prosecutor Khan undercuts Gaza genocide narrative against Israel. Activist pressure cannot substitute for evidence.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/may/26/icc-prosecutor-khan-undercuts-gaza-genocide-narrative-israel/

This is all a well-funded campaign by Arab states (primarily Qatar) to discredit Israel and the Jewish people not only from claims to JUDEA and SAMARIA (a.k.a. the “West Bank” AND a state of Israel) but to discredit, isolate and then destroy Israel.

Every lie, every fabrication, every distortion of the facts all lead to dead Jews which is what the Mufti of Jerusalem wanted in the 1930’s and 40’s. They still want the same outcome...

Since then there has been a well funded (by the KGB) to establish a fake identity, with fake claims to the Land of Israel, (PLO).

Had these scum agreed to some kind of compromise in 1917, 1920, 1929, 1930-1940, 1947-1948, 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982, 1991, 1993 (Oslo debacle), 2000 and to the present day we would have peace now for a few generations.

Unfortunately, the word “compromise” does not exist in the Arabic violent culture. Personal and national pride is more important to them than life itself or the lives of their children (who they constantly put in the line of fire) in order to create a “Shahid” or martyr. They kill their own kids to shame and “Nazify” Israel and the Jewish people.

Any people, even these lowest scum on Earth who can open their eyes, be intellectually honest and compromise will have peace.

It may take these scum another few generations to figure out what the rest of the world has known since the Enlightenment.

Unfortunately, these scum live in the dark ages, in caves and should be called, “PALEOstinians”.

Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News
Wednesday, July 22, 2026
The New York Times’ One-Scholar Consensus on Genocide
Argumentum ad verecundiam is also known as “appeal to authority,” that an argument should be believed because the person making it is an expert.

An appeal to authority becomes fallacious when expertise is presented as a substitute for evidence, or when the authority’s conclusion is treated as dispositive without engaging competing evidence or expert disagreement. Beyond that, it is a tacit admission that the argument itself is weak enough that the arguer must shore it up with his or her credentials.

The New York Times has used Omer Bartov for argumentum ad verecundiam four times in headlines on his op-eds in the New York Times.

I searched the New York Times Opinion archives for comparable first-person headlines built around professional authority (”I’m a...,” “As a...,” etc.). While doctors, economists, and other experts occasionally reference their professions, I could not find another topic in which the newspaper repeatedly made the author’s credentials themselves the central persuasive device in the headline.

Genocide scholarship is not unanimous. Numerous genocide scholars, international lawyers, military law experts, and historians dispute Bartov’s conclusions. Yet the Times repeatedly presents Bartov’s expertise as if it settles the matter. The New York Times doesn’t give those who disagree op-ed space as guest columnists, let alone a headline announcing their expertise. (Columnists like Bret Stephens have argued against the genocide accusation.)

The New York Times repeatedly promotes one side of a highly contested scholarly and legal question by emphasizing one author’s credentials rather than foregrounding the evidence or acknowledging substantial expert disagreement.

Any newspaper may occasionally highlight an author’s expertise. But four separate headlines over less than three years using essentially the same rhetorical device for the same author on the same controversial issue suggest something more than coincidence. They reflect an editorial decision to encourage readers to weigh Bartov’s credentials as evidence for his conclusions rather than simply presenting his arguments for evaluation.
https://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2026/07/the-new-york-times-one-scholar.html

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.