You've probably seen this image, or some version of it. (thread)
The image is created by and for western sympathizers with Palestinian violence. The slogan after all is written in English. (2/x)
The people who display the poster do not intend to participate in the violence themselves. They live in western countries with effective police. Violence, in their imagination, is work for poor Third World people to do for their entertainment. (3/x)
Violence is entertaining, however, only when sanitized. The gunman in the image is not fighting. He is posing. He is not aiming the rifle at a target. Aiming requires two hands. He needs one of his to flash Churchill's V for victory (English, again!) at the photographer. (4/x)
If that photogenic masked Palestinian gunman dared make an actual in-person appearance on the Gaza battlefield against Israel's defense forces, he would get very, very dead, very, very fast. (5/x)
The uselessness of the gunman's posing raises a question about the slogan around him. Is terrorist violence in fact a "necessary means"? If so - follow-up question - to what end is terrorism the necessary means? (6/x)
The iconography of the poster-the scarf, the color scheme - evokes Palestinian nationalism. Presumably the "end" to which the gun is the "necessary means" is Palestinian aspiration. (7/x)
Palestinian Arabs have often tested the promise in the poster. They have sought to achieve aspirations by violence again and again since the anti-Jewish Hebron pogrom of 1929. Not once has the promise come true. How can something be "necessary" when it never works? (8/x)
The violence celebrated by today's poster-carriers is the mass murder/rape/infanticide/abduction of October 7, 2023. However enthralling that experience felt to anti-Israeli onlookers at the time, it has led to utter destruction for the perpetrators and their community. (9/x)
Palestinian gains, when they have been achieved, have been achieved by diplomacy under US authority. If you want an accurate image for your "By Any Means Necessary" poster, it's this. (10/x)
Or this. (11/x)
Or - if you're truly a Palestinian determined to make any sacrifice for your people, however distasteful - even this (12/x)
That's the way, and the only way. The image below is just play-acting in front of a mirror and a selfie-cam. (13/x)
If you seek a peaceful and prosperous national existence for Palestinian people, cooperation with Israel under US protection is the only way. But of course, that's not the "end" that the poster carriers have in mind for their "necessary means." (14/x)
For them, violence is the end - violence as ideology, violence as redemption. Middle Easterners do the killing, Middle Easterners do the dying, Westerners get the show, Westerners get the thrill. In English. For Instagram. (15/x)
When the current spasm of violence subsides, Israel will emerge stronger than ever. Palestinian self-rule will recede further away than ever, because Palestinians will have deprived themselves of the truly requisite "necessary means": Israeli trust and American support. (16/x)
The people who carry the "any means necessary" posters won't care. They've had their fun. They'll soon shift to their next cause - or no cause at all, meditation maybe. They're not sleeping in tents where homes used to stand. (17/x)
But if you actually do care, send this message to the people of Gaza, the West Bank, South Lebanon, etc.: lay down your arms. Your wars against Israel have failed. Make peace. Accept cooperation. By any means necessary. END.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So many people quote the famous line from Thucydides - "The strong can do what they can, and the weak must suffer what they must" - and forget that the amoral imperialists who used that line in the end lost their war and their empire.
Thucydides does not offer the line, "The strong do what they can," as a neutral analysis of how international affairs operate. He offers it as an expression of the reckless arrogance that brought about the destruction of the Athenian Empire.
The lesson to take is that no power is strong enough to disregard justice and legitimacy. Arrogant and aggressive states, no matter how strong, conjure an even stronger coalition of enemies against them. See Charles V, Louis XIV, Napoleon, the Second Reich, the Third Reich.
1) It's the law. The Department of Defense and Secretary of Defense were so named by the National Security Act amendments of 1949. Only Congress has the power to change the name. nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/28655…
2) It's commonsense. Not all national security threats take the form of outright wars. EG the US is not at war with the Houthis of Yemen, but it does defend sea traffic against Houthi terrorism. (Or anyway it tries to, if only the SecDef would quit blabbing operational details.)
While I was on CNN at 1 pm predicting that the Trump administration would use the Charlie Kirk murder as an excuse to deploy government power against peaceful and legal political competition in 2026 ...
... Vice President Vance and other Trump officials were simultaneously on Charlie Kirk's podcast vowing to use the murder as an excuse to deploy government power against peaceful and legal political competition in 2026. nytimes.com/live/2025/09/1…
1) The Trump administration is corrupt on scale almost beyond comprehending. If they lose control of Congress in 2026, they face all kinds of legal jeopardy. nytimes.com/2025/09/15/us/…
Government taking control of private companies ...
Supply shortages and price increases due to government attacks on free commercial exchange;
The government imposing huge fines on media corporations for First Amendment protected speech that displeased the president ...
Enormous tax increases imposed on Americans without any vote by Congress;
Violent convicted criminals released onto the streets because they directed their violence against persons the president targeted as his personal enemies ...
In a few minutes, @theAtlantic will release video of the episode of David Frum show featuring ex ambassador to Ukraine Bridget Brink. Audio is already posted on your favorite platform. (thread)
The interview with Ambassador Brink and the opening monologue were recorded before today's news of Trump cut-off of essential weapons of self-defense to Ukraine. But both were recorded in ominous awareness that Trump abandonment of Ukraine was imminent. 2/x
A point I make in opening: while Trump's Putin-subservient abandonment of Ukraine deserves as much anger and scorn as the non-Putin side of the political spectrum can muster ... a word also has to be said about Biden administration's lack of urgency to aid Ukraine in time. 3/x
The Benin artifacts previously delivered to Nigeria from UK and Germany have disappeared from public view. They are not on display in any museum. Some or all may have been sold into private markets. (Links in next tweet)
The late PJ O'Rourke had a great line: "Just as some things are too strange for fiction, other things are too true for journalism." The fate of artworks delivered to Nigeria is one of those subjects too true for journalism. Fiction and fantasy are reported as moral imperative.