Dear @ComicDaveSmith,

I know that your 'thing' is spreading misinformation, and that even though you're 'not an expert' you are entitled to your opinion. That is true.

But just so you know, your opinion here as in so many cases is comically, farcically, wrong.

Here is why:

https://twitter.com/ComicDaveSmith/status/1933320234838188527

@ComicDaveSmith Words have meaning. A war of aggression (comes from Article 231 of the Treaty of Versailles) is a military conflict waged without the justification of self-defense, usually for territorial gain and subjugation, in contrast with the concept of a just war.

Dear @RepMTG,
I used to excuse your antisemitism based on your obvious stupidity, but there comes a time where even half-wits must be held accountable.

Everything you said here is wrong, and you are antisemitic.

Let me explain:

https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1932213741086499225

First, of course all hate crimes are wrong, and this resolution never said anything to the contrary. And Congress does vote on matters concerning hate crimes committed against other people.

The new Harvard article about antisemitism is wrong.
The authors' central claim is that Zionism is not a protected Title VI characteristic because it is just a belief. Here is what they don't get:
Zion is not an idea: Zion is a hill, in Jerusalem, Israel, where Jews are from. For the vast majority of Jewish people across time and space, Zionism is a core part of their actual physical identity- Zion is, in the most literal sense, their racial/national origin.

Dear @ChrisVanHollen,
It appears you didn't actually read the decision.
Ironic, because the Judge made the same grave mistake that you often make: He got it wrong because he minimized the dangers of antisemitism.
Here is why he is incorrect- and how I know you didn't read it: @ChrisVanHollen First the easy part- your self-righteous post about the First Amendment is more of an embarrassing self-own given this key paragraph in the opinion:

Dear @MoKhan_3,
You are one stupid self-righteous antisemite, and you appear hellbent on destroying your own future way faster than @stoolpresidente ever could. It seems you lack the capacity for self-reflection and the intelligence to understand basic principles.
Let me help: Most modern antisemites are smart enough to hide their hatred of Jews behind at least a thin veil of camouflaging anti-Zionism. Not you!

You argue that a “Fuck the Jews” sign is just one way of raising awareness about Israel.

Lol. Even Hamas pretends its not a "Jew" thing.

Dear Mayor @StevenFulop,
Your stance against the IHRA bill is dangerously misguided. You claim “most people in the Jewish community haven’t read it” but it genuinely seems like you are the one who hasn't. How can I be so sure?
I wrote it.
Let me explain:
rb.gy/7guvn8 @StevenFulop First, to be clear, this is not a debate- the bill is literally in black and white here- feel free to read along:
pub.njleg.state.nj.us/Bills/2024/A40…

Dear @aoc,
You are wrong on the facts and the law. Khalil is not being held for speech, he is being held for his actions, which go so far beyond the legal threshold that the only risk in this case is creating an artificially high standard for future deportations. Let me explain: @AOC Khalil is the leader and public mouthpiece of Columbia University Apartheid Divest (“CUAD”), an association of student organizations formed in 2016 by Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP).

Dear @aoc,
You are wrong on the facts and the law. Khalil is not being held for speech, he is being held for his actions, which go so far beyond the legal threshold that the only risk in this case is creating an artificially high standard for future deportations. Let me explain: @AOC Khalil is the leader and public mouthpiece of Columbia University Apartheid Divest (“CUAD”), an association of student organizations formed in 2016 by Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP).

Dear @JudiciaryDems ,
You are so incredibly wrong, and I can prove it.
A thread, in response to yours.
The only difference? Mine has citations.

Let me explain:

https://twitter.com/JudiciaryDems/status/1899148780114735377

@JudiciaryDems To begin, the Immigration and Nationality Act § 212(a)(3) contains a number of activities for which a person can be deemed ineligible based on security and related grounds. Subsection (B)(i) has nine grounds related to terrorism.
uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req…

Dear @SenSanders:

International law is clear on these points, but you are either illiterate or willfully ignorant about what the laws actually say.

Either way, you are wrong and I can prove it because- unlike you- I will bring the receipts.

Let me explain: @SenSanders Yes, Israel has decided to cut off aid to Gaza because Hamas steals all the supplies and prevents the civilian population from getting them.

Follow up for those who do not understand why @amnesty's 'justification' for changing the definition of genocide here is both stupid and circular- not to mention invalid: First- they refer to their new definition as a 'broad' reading. Actually, it is an entirely incorrect reading, and even though they quote opinions that agree with them, those opinions are dissents not decisions and are included only to fool those who do not know how law works.

.@amnesty international literally redefined the legal term of genocide to suit their accusation, stripping the term of its actual meaning in the process. The craziest part? They admit this in their report, correctly assuming that most people won't read all the way to p. 101: 🧵 @amnesty This is not just a failure of factual accuracy; it is a willful misrepresentation of international law.

Dear @SenatorWarnock,
You told the press that you are considering voting in favor of @BernieSanders' hateful resolution which would block arms to Israel as it fights for its existence. Please bear these three important points in mind before you make such a terrible mistake: @SenatorWarnock @BernieSanders 1) The resolutions are based on a mountain of demonstrable lies and libels. Sanders claims that Israel has violated US and international law and used weapons both indiscriminately and disproportionately. And yet...

Dear @TheJusticeDept:
Your letter re: the scope of @UNRWA's immunity makes a lot of assumptions. Some are big, some are small, but most are unfortunately wrong. I hope that you correct them because they can have very dangerous consequences. Here, let me explain:

https://twitter.com/EFischberger/status/1837796376597369312

1) Even absolute immunity is not actually absolute.
In international law, a peremptory norm (jus cogens) is a fundamental principle of international law that is accepted by the international community of states as a norm from which no derogation is permitted.

Dear @aoc and other useful idiots who only discover IHL if they think it hurts Israel:

No, Israel's attack did not violate international law, including your newfound darling 'AP II Article 7' rules against booby traps (which I bet you never heard of until today).

Here is why: @AOC 1) Communication devices issued by terrorists to terrorists for terrorist purposes do not count as civilian objects. Period.

No surprises in today's non-binding ICJ opinion about Israeli settlements:
The question (What are the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel ...) presupposed the answer, and the answer was a restatement of its 2004 Wall opinion. And yet... 🧵 I am always surprised when the Court takes the time to give ahistorical lessons, especially when it does so as a way of avoiding important legal issues. For example:

Dear @macklemore,
Do you even know what the term apartheid means? Bc it genuinely seems like you don't, and aren't sure what crimes against humanity you are supposed to be accusing the Jews of committing while engaging in Holocaust inversion (in Germany no less!).
Let me help:

https://twitter.com/OliLondonTV/status/1797620321488716001

@macklemore There are two generally accepted definitions of apartheid under international law.

Dear @Femi_Sorry,
I don't know you, and won't automatically call you an antisemite. But what you keep saying is actually a dangerously antisemitic form of victim blaming. Let me explain:

https://twitter.com/Femi_Sorry/status/1793006603047674143

@Femi_Sorry Do you blame black people for racism?

Dear @RepRashida,
The Nakba never ended because the Nakba never started. Enough with your falsified Middle East narrative. The modern history of Israel is not lost in the shrouds of time, and there are clear contemporaneous records that give lie to your words. Let me explain:

https://twitter.com/RepRashida/status/1790767225185374635

@RepRashida In 1922, the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine officially established an area in the Middle East to be a national home for the Jewish People and entrusted it to Great Britain.

Dear President Shafik,

Last week in the @WSJ you made the assertion/excuse that drawing First Amendment lines is "difficult" and no one should expect Universities to know how to do this properly.

That is absurd and a complete abdication of your responsibility. Let me explain: @WSJ There is nothing incredibly complicated about enforcing the First Amendment on campus or anywhere else, and we should absolutely expect Universities, like Columbia, to understand its limits.

Tomorrow Congress votes on H. Res. 883, which
expresses the sense of the House that the slogan "from the river to the sea" is antisemitic and should be condemned. The bipartisan effort, led by @RepDesposito and joined by @RepJoshG and @JaredEMoskowitz is important. Here's why: Ever since October 7, debates have been raging about whether the phrase “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” should or should not always be considered a call for the extermination of Israel and the murder of all the Jews who live there—