Yup, one of my earliest social media interactions (I think it was Shoutwire?), was debunking a memri video.

Exactly.

They did it with Ukraine, and they're doing it now with Gaza. Shortsighted idiocy.

The quoted tweet is a video;

@SkyNews

"I am very puzzled by the constant concern which the world is showing for the Palestinian people," says Dan Gillerman.

"I don't remember people shedding tears for the Taliban," he adds.

https://trib.al/UhI2cvN

📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 and YouTube

Of course they knew it but they didn't care because they didn't like the Palestinians/Arabs any better than they liked the Jews.

Even worse than Jews, because Palestinians/Arabs had been fighting back against their colonialism so they absolutely despised them and actually encouraged Jew VS Arab violence. People tend to forget that countries like Egypt only "broke free" of British Rule not that long ago.

It's interesting to imagine the reaction had Balfour tried to create the Zionist state in one of England's counties. Brings to mind the southern states in the US putting migrants illegally crossing into their states on buses, etc. and sending them north, and the extreme reaction it generated in the northern states. Crude and hurtful to the migrants but effective in pointing out the hypocrisy of northern liberals demanding open borders but only when it minimally impacts them.

Exactly true. The thread kinda touches on that, they would never have been moved to the west (Keep in mind, both Palestine and Brazil as well as other "suggested locations" for Israel, were occupied or formerly occupied by Britain and NOT "European", and were places where the empire wanted to maintain a foothold), because world leaders at the time (and further on), saw Jews as a "problem" locally anywhere they went, and openly stated so (which makes the silly claim of Israelis that Palestinians aren't wanted because they "cause problems where ever they go" even more ironically laughable.)

In fact, one of the lesser talked about aspects, is Hitler straight up offered the world "their Jews", and almost every country that claimed to care came up with excuses not to take them;

Delegates from 32 countries met in the French resort town of Evian-les-Bains between 6 July and 14 July 1938 to discuss ways to help Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazi Third Reich. In the months following Nazi Germany’s annexation of Austria in March 1938, Nazi persecution of Jews in the Third Reich reached horrifying dimensions. Nazi Germany had offered its Jews to the world. Many delegates attending the Evian Conference publicly professed their sympathies for the Jewish refugees. However, most countries, including the USA, Great Britain, and Australia, offered excuses for why they could not accept more refugees. The official delegates from Romania, Hungary, and Poland proposed that their countries also be relieved of their Jews. Only the representatives of the Dominican Republic, and later Costa Rica, agreed to increase their quotas. That the world seemed to turn its back on the German and Austrian Jewish refugees, not surprisingly, provided the Nazi regime’s anti-Semitic campaign with a propaganda bonanza (Morse, 1968: 214; Weiss, 1996: 331; Friedlaender, 1997: 248–50; Marrus, 1985: 167–9). The failure of the delegates at the Evian Conference to aid European Jew

Notice anything about which countries were willing to take them, and which weren't?

The failure of the delegates at the Evian Conference to aid European Jewry was not exceptional as an example of worldwide indifference to the fate of European Jews on the eve of the Holocaust. For in the aftermath of the Evian Conference, International Political Science Review (2004), Vol 25, No. 1, 35–53 DOI: 10.1177/0192512104038166 © 2004 International Political Science Association SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi) indifference to the fate of Europe’s Jews included the following: the unwillingness of Hungary and Czechoslovakia to give refuge to the expelled Sudetenland Jews; the American failure to pass the Wagner-Rogers Child Refugee Bill that would have admitted to the USA 20,000 Jewish refugee children from Europe and the US refusal to admit the 936 German-Jewish refugees aboard the ill-fated ship, the St. Louis; Great Britain’s decision to close off Palestine to Jewish immigration; and the reneging on pledges made by Argentina and Brazil to Papal authorities to accept baptized Jews into their countries

It goes without saying that the majority of politicians at the time openly wanted ALL European Jews to be moved to Palestine/Israel (the majority of Europe was very antisemitic even before the holocaust), which is why they loved the Zionists for giving them exactly what they wanted. They like American "Liberals" could get exactly what they wanted, while also being able to put on the mask of "See we're not antisemitic, we're helping the Jews!"

People tend to forget a basic fact; The west didn't fight Hitler because of the holocaust or because they cared about Jews. They did so for their the self preservation of their own governments. In fact, Most media tended to support or speak positively about Hitler, and most of the supposed "respectable" world leaders like FDR and Churchill were either antisemites themselves, or straight up white supremists, all of which they stated loudly and openly, but history has been white washed.

In fact, the US immigration policy during the holocaust explicitly limited the emigration of Jews into the US. Same with European countries.

I'd say the hypocrisy of "Northern Liberals" comes mainly from that fact that they refuse to do anything of note to address the problems that cause immigration in the first place. If they actually bothered to stop their government from coup'ing and bombing and exploiting those countries, people wouldn't leave their countries in the first place, but instead they ignore it, because someone else pays the price.

Hell, they don't even try to stop employers from exploiting those immigrants in the first place, cause "cheap goods", so instead they let the poor downtrodden immigrants that just want a better life face the wrath of those impacted negatively by said employers using them to suppress salaries.

It's legit "Fuck you, I got mine" type thinking, "Divide and conquer" type shit.

Keep in mind, it's the uniparty, not just liberals, because for all the GOP talk about stopping immigration and all that, they ALL (and I mean ALL, even people like MTG), at least implicitly support the wage suppression and benefits to business owners of using immigrants, they just don't do so openly. It's not really a stretch to realize that those refusing to increase the minimum wage, also support anything that suppresses wages in the first place.

So instead, the Uniparty uses immigrants to get exactly what they want, while leading the affected masses to think immigrants are the main cause of their problems, and the immigrants are caught in between in a no win situation; Their countries are destroyed by the uniparty, and they face the wrath of the locals because they're villainized by the uniparty.

If people understood that so called "globalists" are just people that apply fascism on a global level rather than locally, maybe just maybe their "tribe" would expand to include the immigrants that they hate, and united they'd turn against the pieces of shit causing their mutual suffering. But they don't (probably because the PMCs are comfortable), so here we are.

WASHINGTON—Explaining why the United States would not call on Israel to end its continuous airstrikes on Palestinian civilians, the White House warned Wednesday that a ceasefire in Gaza would only serve to benefit humanity. “We know there are voices across the world calling for a ceasefire, but what everyone needs to understand is that the only people who stand to gain from halting the bombing campaign are people who deeply value human life,” President Biden said in an Oval Office address, adding that if Israel was not given time to collectively punish all 2.3 million people who live in Gaza, it would be a great victory for anyone who believes civilians are entitled to basic dignity and security for themselves and their families. “We cannot allow that happen. These humanitarian concerns may be valid, but right now, a pause in hostilities would advance the interests of no one but innocent Palestinians, the many U.S. citizens living in Gaza, and the more than 200 Israelis who were violently abducted by Hamas and are currently being held in unknown locations. That’s not what America stands for.” Biden later extended the argument to explain why the United States spent billions on military aid for Israel while it spent mere millions on humanitarian aid for Gaza.