When A Ceremonial Monarch Who Largely Didn't Do Anything Died, Tumblr Cheered About It Because She Symbolised

Out of curiosity, what does the UN actually gain from keeping the terrorists in power? Obviously antisemitism but way do they materially gain?

Anon, don't be so quick to dismiss antisemitism. It's a really powerful motivator, for some people even more than money, because it is often to connected to a person's views of themselves, their society and the world. As such, antisemitism can be linked to issues of self-worth or hope for the future. And the place where someone's self-worth depends on demonizing Jews, or their future hopes depends on the notion that their society will be so much better, if only a Jewish collective (whether the Jewish religion, race or state) will be dismantled, they are emotionally invested in ways that can be far more crucial to them than money.

So I personally do think that antisemitism played a big role in how the UN has acted regarding Israel for decades.

For example, the UN sets up a special agency to help Koreans in Dec 1950 (UNKRA). By Jul 1958, less than 8 years later and 5 years after a ceasefire was achieved between the two Koreas, the agency was seen as having served its purpose, and was dismantled. Since then, if there are ever Korean refugees still in need of help, it goes through the general UNHCR (established 1951. It replaced the UN's temporary agency IRO, established Dec 1946, which itself took over from UNRRA, established Nov 1943), the UN refugee agency that takes care of ALL refugees in the world... except the Palestinian ones. Their agency (UNPRP) was established by UN resolution 212 in Nov 1948, and later became UNRWA in Dec 1949.

Now, take a second to consider how there was NEVER any UN agency dedicated specifically to help about 1.5 million Jewish Holocaust survivors at the end of WWII, which is May 1945 (with many of them still being murdered after the end of the war, in places like Poland in Jul 1946 or Libya in the Nov 1945 and Jun 1948 pogroms). No special agency for them, no intervention to protect people who had literally been through and somehow survived the worst genocide in human history, and were still being targeted and killed after it was done, even though the UN had a talent for establishing plenty of refugee agencies just fine during those years. But there was a special agency set up for the Arabs in the Land of Israel, even though they were the aggressors in the 1947-1949 Independence War, and it still operates to this day, unlike UNKRA, which was set up later than UNRWA. Why? What reason is there for treating Holocaust victims worse than the Arabs who declared a war of extermination against Jews in Israel? Or for treating Palestinians better than any other group of refugees in the world, even though other groups often need the help much more?

I can only see one thing in common when it comes to all of these illogical, counterintuitive decisions, and that is antisemitism. Dislike the Jews? Deprive them of getting their own agency, even while others get one. Hate the Jews? Dedicate special resources to the refugees who can be used as a political pawn against the Jewish state, while still counting them as refugees even after being resettled with citizenship elsewhere, unlike every other refugees group.

And never forget, the UN's voting "democracy" (where antisemitic abuse is not penalized in votes) IS inherently vulnerable to the tyranny of the majority. There is only one Jewish state at the UN. There is a block of over 20 Arab countries, another of over 50 Muslim ones, and when they're told a lie such as the one invented by Amin al-Husseini in 1929, that the Jews are attacking the al-Aqsa mosque, then it's easy to recruit all of them against Israel without even much effort. Then add countries which have vested interests in keeping the Arab and Muslim countries on their side, or who have issues with the pro-west, pro-democracy countries (and Israel is not only one of them, it is closely allied with the US, which is the leader of that stance) and basically the one Jewish state has close to no chance.

But over the years, in addition to being invested in keeping the issue of the Palestinian refugees going as a tool against Israel, to present the Jewish state as uniquely oppressive, the UN has also become invested in the jobs that the conflict produces for its members. UNRWA alone employees over 30,000 people and is, by the UN's own admission, one of its biggest employers.

On top of that, the UN also has other workers who deal specifically with the conflict (and therefore are employed thanks to it), such as OCHA oPt. OCHA (Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs) is the "humanitarian arm" of the UN and oPt is its branch that takes care specifically of the Palestinians. WHY is there even a need for this, if the Palestinians already have (UNIQUELY!) an entire UN agency dedicate just to them? And then on top of that (yes! A redundancy on top of a redundancy!) they also have a Palestinian branch for the OHCHR (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights).

Having so many employees dedicated to this specific conflict does make the UN financially invested in keeping it from being resolved. Also, it's probably easier to get donations for the UN when talking about this falsely over-hyped conflict (here's a recent example, a report shows there's no famine in Gaza, the UN has known this and kept it quiet), especially when the hype is fed by so many antisemites happy to spread libels about the Jewish state. Some of the antisemites are likely very rich and happy to donate to any organization targeting Israel (I can even name some very wealthy governments happy to continuously donate to the UN and UNRWA, when they're also known for their antisemism, like financially sponsoring known antisemitic professors at US universities).

I do think the antisemitism is what enabled the creation of the financial aspect to the UN's anti-Israel bias, and interest in preserving the conflict, but now I'll mention one more factor. It's also one that IMO was preceded by the antisemitism and financial interest, but now it adds its own fuel to the fire. Since 2007, when Hamas violently took over Gaza, in order to keep its programs running there, the UN has been collaborating with Hamas. Because that's what happens in an actual dictatorship, which has absolute power over its people, and doesn't allow for any civilian liberties. If you wanna run a UN agency in North Korea, you will HAVE to collaborate with Kim Jong Un's dictatorial regime. And if you want to run a UN agency in Gaza post Jun 2007, you will HAVE to collaborate with Hamas. So that's exactly what the UN has been doing in Gaza. In doing so, it has been collaborating with a genocidal, antisemitic, radical Islamist, terrorist organization. And as has allowed Israel to enter Gaza and gather evidence, we have more and more proof that the UN is complicit in Hamas' crimes. That is NOT something the UN wants the world to realize. So it's trying its best to stop Israel from fighting in Gaza, to prevent the gathering of further evidence, at the same time that the UN is doing its best to screw over Israel's credibility. If the UN can vilify the best witness against it, who will believe the evidence about its complicity anyway?

I hope that helps answer the question!

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

No surprise to anyone paying attention: a new report in The Telegraph today confirms the BBC’s blatant bias against Israel, with skewed coverage since October 7th.

People consume this news like it’s coming from an impartial source— clearly, it’s not. The real question is: how much longer will we tolerate biased reporting that fuels hate and distorts the truth?

Were you surprised? Let me know

Hen Mazzig

Israel and Palestine, History, Politics, Confirmation Bias and the Hypocritical Racist Saviourism of the Western Left

--------

Confirmation bias

"im doing a paper on antisemitism and it so difficult to find sources that aren't pro-isreal. They're all going on about how saying that Israel shouldn't exist is antisemitic. no how is thinking something should not exist if genocide is a part of its creation antisemitic? The Israeli state itself is antisemitic and has continuously failed to support its population of Holocaust victims.

any help on finding decent sources would be much appreciated."

When all of your references are telling you that your starting external point of reference is Antisemitic, that is because it is... You can't unpack your biases and unlearn them by searching for references that confirm your biases. Learn that your assumptions are likely bigoted and you need to learn what you don't know instead of seeking validation of what you believe.

To specifically address "saying that Israel shouldn't exist is Antisemitic", Israel DOES exist and more than 40% of all Jews live there, and no matter your opinion of its founding or the conduct of its government.... unless you intend to conquer Israel by force, and believe me it's been tried, it will not cease to exist by political pressure. So the expression that Israel shouldn't exist is tacit war mongering. There is more to be said on the topic, but that will come later.

More below the cut, very long

But Israel is an "Ethno-State" and that's bad! Isn't it?

First, at least this canard recognises Jews as an ethnic group, but the accusation of Israel as an "Ethno-State", is a deeply uncomfortable canard levelled against a Parliamentary Democracy where the third largest national political party is an Arab Party and 10 Arabs currently hold office in the Knesset. Arabs hold office, serve as judges, they Serve in the IDF as General's and Major's and make up 21% of Citizenship.

SAR-EL - Volunteers for Israel

Israel’s Highest Ranking Muslim Soldier Speaks Out - SAR-EL - Volunteers for Israel

Last week I was privileged to be at a Manchester  ((UK) Zionist Council meeting where two IDF Officers

Where Do Israeli Jews Come From, aren't they western colonisers?

No Israeli citizen and certainly not the vast majority of Jews around the world would want Jews to be a stateless people again. Particularly not the Majority of Israelis who are refugees from the Genocides, Pogroms and Expulsions against the Jewish people across the Middle East and North Africa, their children and grandchildren.

We are painfully aware that after the last century of genocides and expulsions in South West Asia Jews stand on the edge of extinction on the continent of our origin. My family had to flee the Libyan Pogroms and Partition in Pakistan under threat of forced conversion or death... Today there are no Jews in either country, you either fled or you died. Many Jewish communities and traditions that have endured for millennia would be extinct today if not for the safe haven provided by Israel.

the Guardian

The tragedy of the Yemeni Jews | Lyn Julius

Lyn Julius: The government has stood by and let jihadist gangs drive Jews out of Yemen. Now their community is on the brink of extinction

[The above article states that approximately 400 Yemenite Jews remain in Yemen, at time of writing only one remains as a Houthi prisoner.]

Importantly Jews can't colonise our own indigenous homeland, and comments on the skin colour of light skinned Jews is colourist and Antisemitic.

What do you mean Jews are indigenous people?

Jewish civilisation has conservatively at least 3000 years of archeological history in the city of Jerusalem alone, a people can't colonise their own indigenous homeland. That DOESN'T mean the people who came after us have to leave at all... Palestinian culture has been developing in the region for at least 1400 years. The promise of a Jewish state was the promise of self determination of Jews as Indigenous people displaced from our home by the colonising Roman Empire in the First century, arriving in Europe as slaves to build great works like the Coliseum and monuments to our own dispossession like the Arch of Titus.

After 2000 years confined to the ghetto, 2000 years of always waiting for the shoe to drop, we needed to come home.

The colonisation of the Jewish people and our homeland also isn't a one note affair. The Sassanians, and the Crusaders, the British Empire, The Ottoman Empire, The Mamluks, and pivotal to the current discussion The Arabs... Arab Colonisation of MENA/SWANA is uncontroversially the historical record... They are the majority population across MENA because of their centuries of privileged social and economic placement in society even among Muslims. Pan-Arabism is Arab Supremacism.

en.m.wikipedia.org

Early Muslim conquests - Wikipedia

Morrocco speaks Arabic because of Arab Colonisation, Ctesiphon was renamed Baghdad by Arab Colonisers, the subjugation of pre-colonial religion and culture such as Jews, Zoroastrians, Shabaks, Assyrians, the continuing collusion between ME states to deny the Kurdish people a state.

Recognising Arabs as colonisers doesn't mean demanding they be expelled, nor does it make anti-arab violence acceptable... But it is necessary if you intend to understand the historic social power dynamics of MENA social issues.

If Jews are indigenous and Arabs are colonisers... What does that make Palestinians?

People, it makes them human people who are seeking a state of their own and should have one post haste. Most people agree on this, I hope we agree on this..

Didn't Israel kill lots of people to be established?

People often have a habit of using their intuition rather than research to learn about current and historical circumstances. This leads to the exaggeration or minimisation of events by those who don't understand.

This isn't to say that violence wasn't present in the founding of the State of Israel, because it was, but in all of the wars Israel has ever been involved in, the combined death toll has never even come close to one million let alone the millions, even the Nakba which was a human tragedy worthy of recognition forever had a Death toll of 15,000...

It is worth remembering that the Nakba took place against the backdrop of invasion by the Arab league (including Palestinian Arabs) of the newly declared State of Israel within these borders as defined by the United Nations...

On the day of the expiry of the British mandate for Palestine the forces of the Arab League (Egypt, Trans-Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and the Palestinian Holy War Army) invaded, and the Israelis/IDF counter attacked... And somehow even without any allies were not only successful in defence but the victor. This was the second refusal to accept an Arab majority state, this time that rejection came as war.

But Palestinians still deserve a state!

Palestinians absolutely deserve a state, historical rejection of the peace option at one time or another by any party in a conflict is no reason not to establish peace now. This is something we can hopefully agree on, the endless cycle of violence and retribution is neither desirable nor sustainable... and to that end in 1994 the Palestinian National Authority was Established as a Part of the Oslo Accords, which is a multi stage state building project agreed between the Palestinian Liberation Organisation and the State of Israel, which immediately formalised the recognition internationally as an institution in principle of the Palestinian State as declared by The Palestinian Liberation Organisation in 1988.

The eventual state borders of the Palestinian State would be the Territories of the West Bank and Gaza which came under Israeli Administration during the 1967 6 Day War, and which the kingdom of Jordan and Egypt refused to accept return of due to the expense of security in the region.

Regions of Palestinian National Authority Civil and Military Administration were established in the West Bank during stage 1. (Areas the Palestinian National Authority were supposed to be expanded each decade assuming the continuing stability of the PA) During stage 2 in 2005 those areas were expanded and the Palestinian National Authority assumed Civil Administration over most of the remaining West Bank except for Israeli majority settlements. Also as Part of Stage 2 Israel forcibly repatriated all Israelis living in Gaza and passed Civil and Military Administration to the Palestinian National Authority.

en.m.wikipedia.org

West Bank areas in the Oslo II Accord - Wikipedia

Unfortunately 2 years later Hamas seceded Gaza in its entirety in a coup and suspended democracy to establish an Islamist Autocracy in opposition to the Fatah dominated Palestinian National Authority and all attempts at reintegration have failed stalling the Palestinian Nation Building project.

en.m.wikipedia.org

Battle of Gaza (2007) - Wikipedia

Throwing a wrench in the "is able to preserve stability and territorial integrity" thing.

Ok, that's interesting, but wasn't the country already Palestine before?

At no point in history until the establishment of the Palestinian National Authority has there been self government of Palestinians by Palestinians. Even the name "Filistin" was a colloquial one in the Ottoman period. Under Ottoman rule the area of Israel and Palestine was made up of many feudal estates with a non-palestinian aristocracy.

Once again, this doesn't mean that Palestinians shouldn't have a self governing state now, today. But Jews should also have self government because.... we are indigenous to the Region, and second we have seen ourselves be betrayed by our neighbours too many times to not hold our defence in our own hands. In Europe, Africa, and Asia we have seen the repeated attempts to destroy us completely.

If you deduct the population of Israel the combined Jewish population of all three continents is less than 2 million, because you killed us.

The territory people are referring to as historically Palestine right now is the British Mandate for Palestine, which included the area East of the Jordan River where the Kingdom of Jordan was established by British Partition.

What is being done to advance Palestinian National Liberation?

The Palestinian Liberation Organisation have made multiple attempts at political normalisation with Hamas, as have the Israeli government... In the hope of reuniting the Palestinian National Authority administered territories in the West Bank and Gaza. Unfortunately with both authorities, Hamas and their affiliates like Palestinian Islamic Jihad use talks as an opportunity to re-arm, regroup, and relocate personnel and equipment. The Palestinian Liberation Organisation were in the closing stages of political normalisation talks, and Israel were in the midst of a (permanent) ceasefire and disarmament discussions at the time of the Simchat Torah Pogrom (Oct 7)

---------

We are in the present day from here on.... Things get complicated and messy-er from here, say goodbye to neat sections.

The attack on October 7 was a betrayal of West Bank Palestinians as well, and attacks by Hamas affiliates like Palestinian Islamic Jihad in areas of the West Bank where Israel is treaty obligated to act as security guarantor has been spun by people in the west who don't understand the treaty arrangements as an invasion of Palestinian Territories.

timesofisrael.com

Palestinian, Arab officials urge Hamas to disarm before it is destroyed – report

Terror group said warned by various figures of influence that it will not survive the Israeli offensive, and should prevent further destruct

Continued in reblog

NOBODY TOUCH ME THOSE ARE GOLD ACCENTS ON HIS KEFTA

K.A. Applegate's letter to fans re: the ending the Animorphs series

Dear Animorphs Readers:

Quite a number of people seem to be annoyed by the final chapter in the Animorphs story. There are a lot of complaints that I let Rachel die. That I let Visser Three/One live. That Cassie and Jake broke up. That Tobias seems to have been reduced to unexpressed grief. That there was no grand, final fight-to-end-all-fights. That there was no happy celebration. And everyone is mad about the cliffhanger ending.

So I thought I’d respond.

Animorphs was always a war story. Wars don’t end happily. Not ever. Often relationships that were central during war, dissolve during peace. Some people who were brave and fearless in war are unable to handle peace, feel disconnected and confused. Other times people in war make the move to peace very easily. Always people die in wars. And always people are left shattered by the loss of loved ones.

That’s what happens, so that’s what I wrote. Jake and Cassie were in love during the war, and end up going their seperate ways afterward. Jake, who was so brave and capable during the war is adrift during the peace. Marco and Ax, on the other hand, move easily past the war and even manage to use their experience to good effect. Rachel dies, and Tobias will never get over it. That doesn’t by any means cover everything that happens in a war, but it’s a start.

Here’s what doesn’t happen in war: there are no wondrous, climactic battles that leave the good guys standing tall and the bad guys lying in the dirt. Life isn’t a World Wrestling Federation Smackdown. Even the people who win a war, who survive and come out the other side with the conviction that they have done something brave and necessary, don’t do a lot of celebrating. There’s very little chanting of ‘we’re number one’ among people who’ve personally experienced war.

I’m just a writer, and my main goal was always to entertain. But I’ve never let Animorphs turn into just another painless video game version of war, and I wasn’t going to do it at the end. I’ve spent 60 books telling a strange, fanciful war story, sometimes very seriously, sometimes more tongue-in-cheek. I’ve written a lot of action and a lot of humor and a lot of sheer nonsense. But I have also, again and again, challenged readers to think about what they were reading. To think about the right and wrong, not just the who-beat-who. And to tell you the truth I’m a little shocked that so many readers seemed to believe I’d wrap it all up with a lot of high-fiving and backslapping. Wars very often end, sad to say, just as ours did: with a nearly seamless transition to another war.

So, you don’t like the way our little fictional war came out? You don’t like Rachel dead and Tobias shattered and Jake guilt-ridden? You don’t like that one war simply led to another? Fine. Pretty soon you’ll all be of voting age, and of draft age. So when someone proposes a war, remember that even the most necessary wars, even the rare wars where the lines of good and evil are clear and clean, end with a lot of people dead, a lot of people crippled, and a lot of orphans, widows and grieving parents.

If you’re mad at me because that’s what you have to take away from Animorphs, too bad. I couldn’t have written it any other way and remained true to the respect I have always felt for Animorphs readers.

K.A. Applegate

A kid’s book series that didn’t coddle it’s readers just because they were children? How awesome is that? I think this series did an even better job than Harry Potter at showing how horrible and horrifying war is. Harry Potter still gave us that happy “everyone is married and has a family” epilogue, and we rarely (if ever) saw the characters truly dealing with nightmares or PTSD like symptoms from what they’d experienced. Animorphs showed readers how horrifying war is from the start - book 1 has Jake suffering through nightmares because of what he’d seen. Animorphs doesn’t give readers the easy “all of x group are evil” way out. The series starts off allowing readers to think Andalites = good and Yeerks = bad, but then goes on to fully pull the rug out from underneath us when we learn how Andalites treat disabled members of their society, and how horrible it is for Yeerks when they don’t have a host. Nothing about the war is comfortable for either the readers or the main characters.

This series ran from 1996-2001, and the characters are 13 when the war starts, and 16 when it ends. Each book is between 150 and 200 pages long, and even though there are a butt ton of books, I think everyone who enjoys YA/childrens lit should give them a shot. Though if you do, beware extreme 90s-ness. Many plot lines and jokes are extremely reliant on the time in which the books take place, so the sooner you get “if they’d had a cell phone, this wouldn’t even be a thing” out of your head, the better. Like, one of the books’ plot is that the CEO of the AOL equivalent is being targeted, and that would allow the alien invading force to control the entire internet. So yea, it’s very of it’s era. But still excellent!

“This was not a debate. It was Trump using a technique that actually has a formal name, the Gish gallop, although I suspect he comes by it naturally. It’s a rhetorical technique in which someone throws out a fast string of lies, non-sequiturs, and specious arguments, so many that it is impossible to fact-check or rebut them in the amount of time it took to say them. Trying to figure out how to respond makes the opponent look confused, because they don’t know where to start grappling with the flood that has just hit them. It is a form of gaslighting, and it is especially effective on someone with a stutter, as Biden has. It is similar to what Trump did to Biden during a debate in 2020. In that case, though, the lack of muting on the mics left Biden simply saying: “Will you shut up, man?” a comment that resonated with the audience. Giving Biden the enforced space to answer by killing the mic of the person not speaking tonight actually made the technique more effective. There are ways to combat the Gish gallop—by calling it out for what it is, among other ways—but Biden retreated to trying to give the three pieces of evidence that established his own credentials on the point at hand. His command of those points was notable, but the difference between how he sounded at the debate and how he sounded on stage at a rally in Raleigh, North Carolina, just an hour afterward suggested that the technique worked on him. That’s not ideal, but as Monique Pressley put it, “The proof of Biden’s ability to run the country is the fact that he is running it. Successfully. Not a debate performance against a pathological lying sociopath.””

— (1) June 27, 2024 - by Heather Cox Richardson

Actually autistic ppl: pls refer to us as “autistic people”

NTs: people with autism

Autistic person: no

NTs: people suffering with the condition of autism

Autistic person: still no

NTs:

The last Jews of Bukhara, Uzbekistan, 2019, photographed by Bruno Zanzottera

Located along the Silk Roads and the edges of several former empires, the city of Bukhara has been home to a big and unique Jewish community for over two millennia - one of the most ancient ethnic groups in all of Central Asia. Historically they spoke Bukhori a Judeo-Tajik dialect. In the 1970s, Jews began to leave the Soviet Union, including Uzbekistan, and the synagogues as well as other Jewish institutions were closed by the Communist government. In Bukhara, the community has declined significantly: if in the past it consisted of 46,000 people, now there are just over 100 Jews. Those remaining want to make sure that their history, language and traditions do not get lost.

To the Nonnie who sent me the four anti-Israel Twitter users with blue checks, with claims to being "journalists" or similar titles... You're very right. I looked into them, and they are Assad apologists. They're literally ignoring the murder of hundreds of thousands of people by Assad's regime, including countless Palestinians who were living in Syria, while supposedly being against genocide and for Palestinians.

I didn't see something about Andrew Tate, but I didn't dig too far back, and I do believe that women who can post the following would side with a man charged with rape and human trafficking:

IDK if they're being quoted here, on Tumblr? If they are, I haven't seen that. At least not since Oct 7.

I guess the bigger issue is that when people on Tumblr see a post meant to trigger righteous rage, they don't check the source. Especially if they think they already know who the side in the wrong is, based on popular Tumblr opinion. So people automatically reblog and help spread these hateful, antisemitic massacre apologists.

Then again, the whole world is reporting Hamas' numbers on how many people have died in Gaza, how many of them were civilians, how many kids... Don't get me wrong, many people died in Gaza, and when Hamas uses civilians as human shields, many of the victims would be civilians indeed, kids included. But:

Hamas is motivated to inflate the number of fatalities

Hamas is motivated to inflate the number of civilians killed

Hamas is motivated to inflate the number of kids killed

And of course Hamas doesn't allow into Gaza any organization that can verify its stated numbers. Hamas has a complete monopoly on access to the areas affected in Gaza, and therefore on the "truth" that you get from there

Hamas has not reported a single terrorists from among the victims, they're all reported together, as if they're all civilians

Over 10% of rockets fired from Gaza at Israel are known to fail, fall inside Gaza and kill Palestinians, but Hamas doesn't report how many of the fatalities were people killed by Palestinian rockets, they're all reported together as if they were all killed by Israel

Terror tunnels built by Hamas have been well documented (there are reportedly over 1,300 such tunnels in Gaza), some sink holes that killed Palestinians are clearly the result of Hamas deliberately building those tunnels under civilian residential areas, but Hamas won't report its culpability for those deaths

There's new footage emerging from Gaza, showing people who tried to evacuate from the north, and who had been slaughtered by Hamas. You can be sure that these fatalities aren't being reported by Hamas either, so the world will be led to believe that these people were killed by Israel, too

(I'm not sharing the footage, because... it's graphic. And just like the Israelis murdered by Hamas deserve their dignity, so do the Palestinians killed by Hamas, but here you can listen to a subtitled conversation, where a Gazan says Hamas is shooting people who are trying to evacuate)

While we're on the subject of Hamas and its lack of reliability, today Hamas used a humanitarian window provided by the IDF to attack. Please remember this when Israelis point out that Hamas has broken every ceasefire ever. Including the one that existed on Oct 6.

If respectable journalists were more vocal about questioning Hamas and the numbers it reports (not to mentions their breakdown), then maybe people online would be a bit more critical, too.

I hope you're taking care of yourself, and you're not drowning in the biased material of these hate driven people! xoxox

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)