An Israeli sniper from the IDF’s Nahal Brigade detailed in comments to Haaretz the killing of unarmed Palestinians, including children, who were attempting to get aid in Gaza.
“It started about two months ago,” the soldier, who went by the pseudonym Benny, told the Israeli paper as part of a story focusing on the mental toll on IDF soldiers in Gaza. “Every day we have the same mission: to secure the humanitarian aid in the northern Gaza Strip.”
The report said that Benny and his fellow soldiers began their day at 3:30 am when they set up sniper positions near where aid trucks arrive to unload their contents. He said that Gaza residents try to move forward to get a good spot in line, but often cross an invisible line set by the IDF.
“A line that if they cross it, I can shoot them,” Benny said. “It’s like a game of cat and mouse. They try to come from a different direction every time, and I’m there with the sniper rifle, and the officers are yelling at me, ‘Take him down, take him down.’ I fire 50-60 bullets every day, I’ve stopped counting kills. I have no idea how many I’ve killed, a lot. Children.”
“The battalion commander would yell over the radio, ‘Why aren’t you taking them down. They are heading our way. This is dangerous,’” Benny said. “The sense is that we are being positioned in an impossible situation, and no one had prepared us for this. The officers do not care if children die, they also do not care what it does to my soul. To them, I am just another tool.”
“I saw the bodies of two children, maybe 8 or 10 years old, I have no idea. There was blood everywhere, lots of signs of gunfire, I knew it was all on me, that I did this. I wanted to throw up. After a few minutes, the company commander arrived and said coldly, as if he wasn’t a human being, ‘They entered an extermination zone, it is their fault, this is what war is like,’” he added.
A provision authorizing extrajudicial murder exists within Jewish law. Din rodef — “law of the pursuer,” permits the killing of those who are deemed a threat to individual Jews or the Jewish state, without the benefit of due process.
In the book Torat Hamelekh (The King’s Torah), Rabbis Yitzhak Shapira and Yosef Elitzur explain that din rodef “applies even when the pursuer is not threatening to kill directly, but only indirectly… anyone who weakens our own state by word or similar action is considered a pursuer.”
Din rodef explains what has happened to so many strong men in the West — they have been covertly maimed, poisoned or killed while still boys or young men.
I see the opioid crisis, the fentanyl crisis and the covid vax in this light.
The covid plandemic was the same but used mind-control to bring about widespread death and disabling.
Covert warfare over several generations will destroy any society, and this is especially true if political and other leaders are bought off, paid to not notice. ABN
Doha used the strike as a permission structure to pivot away from the hosting model.
It wasn’t a “soft-power failure”.
It was a structural pivot.
Qatar treated “hosting Hamas” as a proxy-asset whose position turned negative.
For a decade, the asset had positive utility. The US got a reliable conduit, Israel tolerated Qatari cashflow management into Gaza, and Doha monetised access into mediator prestige.
That setup existed because the US originally wanted a reachable Hamas channel in a US-aligned host (Al Udeid as the ultimate security umbrella).
So until now, that channel still priced in that utility.
But now it’s over.
Qatar’s “mediator” brand only worked while those conditions held.
There’s a reason why these conditions no longer remain useful. And i’ve explained this before.
Proxies are time-sensitive assets.
They remain useful during stalemated negotiations. Once they obstruct normalization or capital flows, sponsors reroute;
budgets thin, access tightens, and the proxy gets integrated, contained, or abandoned.
There’s PLENTY of signals we’re at the end of this curve.
Maintaining mediator role is just a toxic position now.
Stop looking at the past to determine what the future should be. That’s not how statesmen think. They evolve all the time.
What Qatar needs to do now, is exit the hosting role, and keep the convening brand. It should facilitate talks without residency.
There’s several reasons why it needs to accelerate this pivot.
The Hamas/Israel deadlock has became a liability.
The mediation channel has stalled.
When a channel stops producing swaps/ceasefire increments, it stops buying Qatar influence and starts costing it.
I have only spot checked this video but it appears to be the original one made by Eric Hufschmid, I believe in 2003, perhaps containing some supplementary material. There are other versions of Painful Deceptions, which seem to be the same or similar but narrated by someone other than Eric and about 20 min shorter than the version above. The one above is clearly in Eric’s voice. Whatever, Hufschmid’s video stands as the earliest comprehensive foundation of the 9/11 story. If you have never seen this video, it is important to watch it. If it’s been awhile since you last saw it, it’s well-worth a quick review. ABN
Just a couple of days before Kirk was killed I’d discovered that Tucker Carlson was planning to release a multi-part documentary series on the 9/11 attacks on the anniversary. Just before Kirk’s death I’d watched his hour-long interview on the Piers Morgan show, in which I thought he’d done an excellent job.
Apparently Carlson’s documentary would declare that everything we’d been officially told for twenty-four years about 9/11 was a lie so his series had the potential to massively jump-start the strong revival of the 9/11 Truth movement.
I’d been planning to make Carlson’s 9/11 series the topic of my new article until the Kirk killing blew everything out of the water and also led Carlson to delay the release for a couple of weeks.
Carlson and Kirk are quite friendly and assuming that Carlson’s documentary was as good as I’d expect, I’d think that Kirk would have strongly endorsed it to his huge number of mainstream conservative follower.
Hitherto, 9/11 Truthers have overwhelmingly been leftists, so Kirk’s support could have made it a completely bipartisan, and the resulting political impact would have been enormous.
So if Israel did arrange Kirk’s, I think that’s the reason that they needed to do so before the release of Carlson’s 9/11 series.
Does this look like a secured scene, or does it look like they just wrapped up filming a movie set?
Officers, tactical teams, and medics were visible, but no inner perimeter was enforced, no witnesses were staged, and no forensic control was established?? A real active-shooter response would; freeze the hot zone, mark and collect ballistics, deploy biohazard cleanup for blood, and lock down the campus until the threat was neutralized.
None of that happened. Instead, civilians wandered freely, surfaces were contaminated, and no hazmat or spray crews ever appeared.
Even more telling, no aerial assets were dispatched, despite protocol calling for air support when a gunman is at large. If they truly believed a shooter was active, security would have escalated instantly and comprehensively.
The absence of those steps only makes sense if there was no genuine threat—if the event was managed optics rather than a real emergency.
Why would anyone preserve the forensic integrity of a staged incident?
Well put and exactly right. This is one of the strongest reasons to doubt the sloppy official story as it slithers along. ABN
This is mind-control paid for by US taxpayers with repurposed US aid to Israel, of which a pittance will wash back into USA to fund the campaigns of these ‘reps’ as ‘donations’ from AIPAC and the like. All sides and levels of this scam are immoral and should be illegal. What’s worse is ‘our reps’ sell us out for practically nothing. ABN
Why do you think the Vatican keeps its underground libraries closed to the public? Why don’t they digitize the books and share them with the world? We know that they possess ancient knowledge, but why keep it for a select few?
Do you think it’s because they care about us or because they want an advantage?
The mainstream narrative is that they want to preserve the books because they are old, and are now slowly digitizing and publishing them online. But in reality, there are millions of books, transcripts, manuscripts, etc., and they have published only a few thousand. How can we know they are not being selective?
This is a Deep Rabbit Hole Thread (1/10)🧵
They say, ‘Knowledge is power,’ but also, ‘Ignorance is bliss.’ Do you really think that the masses are not ready for the truth? And do you really believe that only the select elite is able to handle the knowledge?
They renamed the library from the ‘Vatican Secret Archives’ to the ‘Vatican Apostolic Library,’ and the ‘Vatican Secret Archives’ to the ‘Vatican Apostolic Archives,’ to stop drawing attention to their secret! (2/10)🧵
There surely is more context to this snippet, but whatever that is, I do not at all support law enforcement pursuing people who merely speak with hatred.
Hate is not illegal.
If speech rises to an actual threat on someone’s life or encourages killing someone, that is already illegal and that’s enough.
We do not need this level of control to come from government.
If employers want to fire someone for what they said, that’s fine with me.
But mere hate speech alone is not now and never should become illegal.
I do not like people mocking Kirk’s death or saying he deserved it but none of that is illegal.
Society and interpersonal relations, including employment, can deal with people who hated Kirk or anyone else.
We do not need or want Bondi to use government power in this way. ABN
UPDATE: OK, this is fine with me. Pam Bondi in context:
Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment. It’s a crime. For far too long, we’ve watched the radical left normalize threats, call for assassinations, and cheer on political violence. That era is over.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c), it is a federal crime to transmit “any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another.” Likewise, 18 U.S.C. § 876 and 18 U.S.C. § 115 make it a felony to threaten public officials, members of Congress, or their families.
You cannot call for someone’s murder. You cannot swat a Member of Congress. You cannot dox a conservative family and think it will be brushed off as “free speech.” These acts are punishable crimes, and every single threat will be met with the full force of the law.
Free speech protects ideas, debate, even dissent but it does NOT and will NEVER protect violence.
It is clear this violent rhetoric is designed to silence others from voicing conservative ideals.
We will never be silenced. Not for our families, not for our freedoms, and never for Charlie. His legacy will not be erased by fear or intimidation.
The elderly political activist who became the first person detained after claiming he’d shot Charlie Kirk told police he lied in an attempt to let the real killer get away.
George Zinn, a 71-year-old Utah resident, was initially suspected of being the shooter as he was taken into custody moments after Kirk, 31, was shot in the neck at an event at Utah Valley University last week.
Police documents now claim Zinn – who has several prior arrests for trespassing – admitted to causing a distraction to keep law enforcement away from the shooter, now alleged to be 22-year-old Tyler Robinson.
Zinn had repeatedly asked to see his attorney before making the confession.
He was later taken to a hospital to deal with a pre-existing medical condition and made a further disturbing admission, saying he ‘wanted to be a martyr for the person who was shot.’
Zinn was released from the hospital and then taken to the Utah County Jail after being ordered by a judge Monday to be held without bail, according to Utah Political Watch.
A month before Charlie Kirk’s killing, billionaire pro-Israel moneyman Bill Ackman arranged an intervention in the Hamptons during which sources say he and others “hammered” Kirk for the conservative leader’s growing criticism of Israeli influence in Washington. Kirk came away fretting about Israeli “blackmail,” sources say, as he contemplated a Catholic conversion.
On September 11, one day after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, billionaire pro-Israel moneyman Bill Ackman took to Twitter/X to trumpet his relationship with the late conservative operative. “I feel incredibly privileged to have spent a day and shared a meal with @charliekirk11 this summer. He was a giant of a man.”
The Grayzone has spoken to five people with intimate knowledge of Kirk’s meeting with Ackman, which was held in early August under the guise of a summertime Hamptons lunch. According to one source, Kirk was left upset after the gathering turned into an “intervention” where he was “hammered” for his increasingly skeptical views on the US special relationship with Israel, and for platforming prominent conservative critics of Israel at his TPUSA events.
When his hosts presented him with a detailed list of every offense he supposedly committed against Israel, Kirk was “horrified,” said one person. At one point, according to another source, Ackman angrily chastised Kirk for his disobedience. The Zionist billionaire also allegedly demanded Kirk rescind his invitation for Tucker Carlson to speak at his upcoming America Fest 2025 in December.
The Grayzone reported on September 12, citing an associate of Kirk, that Netanyahu had offered to organize a massive infusion of pro-Israel money into TPUSA, and that Kirk refused. Another longtime friend of Kirk has told The Grayzone that the conservative activist also rejected an offer Netanyahu delivered two weeks before his death to meet with him in Jerusalem.
Kirk, according to one person with inside knowledge of the meeting with Ackman, said he left feeling as though he’d been subjected to “blackmail.”
American Buddhist Net 