John Oliver is the host of the late-night talk-show “Last Week Tonight.” On May 12, after two days of fighting between Hamas and Israel — the war started with a volley of 140 rockets that Hamas, in Gaza, launched against Israel — Oliver delivered his thoughts on the conflict. He came down hard on Israel. Yuval Yoaz reports on Oliver’s palpable want of sympathy for the Jewish State here: “What John Oliver doesn’t get about the war in Gaza,” Times of Israel, May 21, 2021:
“There is a lot to unpack there,” John Oliver began his opening monologue of “Last Week Tonight” last Sunday, where he sharply criticized Israel for its crushing airstrikes on Gaza strip. “From the use of the phrase ‘tit for tat’ war in a conflict in which one side has suffered over 10 times the casualties, something that speaks to the severe power imbalance that played here.” Oliver’s conclusion: this”severe power imbalance“ often “gets obscured by how we choose to talk about it.”
Oliver is, of course, free to criticize Israel, and, although he himself attests to the great difficulty in judging “the latest chapter in a long story you haven’t read” regarding the conflict in the Middle East, he is also free to draw conclusions and formulate a moral position. But Oliver should do this with the same standard he sets for others. Specifically, he’d better avoid obscuring essential facts in the way he chooses to talk about them.
The prism through which Oliver observes the latest flare-up between Israel and Hamas is that of power disparity. Israel has a strong and sophisticated army, fighter jets, and missile defense systems; Hamas does not. This much is true — there are huge, undeniable gaps in military power between Israel and Hamas.
In fact, the common notion is that these gaps are the exact reason the State of Israel exists: had it not built from the ground up a stronger army force than those of its enemies in the region, it is likely that it would have been erased from the map long ago.
Is Israel to be vilified because it has built up a strong army, allowing it to win every war that has been forced upon it, including three wars – in 1948, 1967, and 1973 – fought for the state’s very survival? Had Israel not had a stronger army, it would not merely have lost bits of territory, but as the Palestinian (and other Arabs) made clear, would have ceased to exist altogether. Does Israel have some kind of obligation to make sure that its military does not become unacceptably stronger than the terror group Hamas? Who decides that Israel must not be so much stronger than Hamas because that would be….”unfair”? On what theory? Were the Americans wrong – was it “unfair” of them — to keep fighting Nazi Germany, destroying its cities, long after the German army had been left in tatters and the Hitler Youth had in desperation been pressed into service, in order to help defend the Fatherland? When the Japanese were clearly beaten, was it wrong for the Americans to drop two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing 140,000 in the first attack and 74,000 in the second? Was that “severe power imbalance” impermissible? Who decides? Is the side that is vastly stronger than its enemy therefore in the wrong for using that power? Should Israel have conducted half as many airstrikes on Hamas in order to correct that “severe imbalance” in power? John Oliver sounds as if that is what he believes.
But that’s not his main issue. Oliver’s primary failure stems from his complete disregard of three basic facts, without which it is impossible to even begin to understand the moral and legal significance of this round of fighting between Israel and Hamas.
- Oliver maintains the erroneous assumption that if there are civilian casualties in a combat situation, it necessarily means that a war crime has been committed;
- Oliver makes no distinction at all between the legitimacy of Hamas’ actions and those of Israel;
- And he makes no attempt to distinguish between what is happening in the Hamas-controlled Gaza strip, in territories controlled by the Palestinian Authority, and in East Jerusalem, which is under Israeli governance.
Going by Oliver’s logic, since innocent women and children were killed in the Israeli bombings, it is clear that Israel is committing war crimes. He therefore expresses anger at the forgiving attitude of the United States towards its “unwavering friend” Israel, instead of doing what Oliver expects a good friend to do — tell him that he is committing war crimes.
The assumptions embedded in Oliver’s argument can be seen, for example, in his critique of the demolition of high-rise buildings in Gaza: “For the record, destroying a civilian residence sure seems like a war crime, regardless of whether you sent a courtesy heads-up text.”
Well… that’s actually not true. It is unpleasant to say this, and it always sounds heartless, but in terms of international law, harming innocent people does not necessarily mean that war crimes were committed. Combat operations can be conducted while adhering to international law, even if the result is that, during the operations, innocent people are harmed.
Israel does not target purely “civilian residences.” It targets places where weapons are hid, where rocket launchers are placed, where senior commanders – fighters not civilians – may live, where intelligence offices and research-and-development offices are located. The much-discussed attack on the Jala tower took place not because Israel wanted to destroy the AP and Al Jazeera offices in that building, but because it was where Hamas weapons development and intelligence offices were located; the Israelis presented their proof of this to the Biden administration, that found their evidence convincing. And as is its consistent practice, the Israelis warned the residents of the Jala tower well in advance of the attack – in this case, an hour before — so as to prevent any civilian casualties.
The laws of war require that the purpose of military action be to strike a combat force. If Israel were to deliberately strike women and children (and all civilian populations not involved in hostilities in general), its actions would have been deemed a serious war crime.
But that is not what Israel is doing. The international law department in the IDF’s prosecution accompanies all combat operations in the Gaza Strip, in order to ensure not only that the targets of the operation are military hostiles, but that all necessary actions are taken to minimize the accompanying harm to civilians.
Israel never deliberately attacks civilians. It recognizes that there will unavoidably be civilian casualties in wartime, and especially when fighting Hamas, given that the terror group deliberately hides its weapons and rocket launchers among civilians, next to or inside private dwellings, office buildings, schools, hospitals, and mosques. Hamas, on the other hand, not only deliberately attacks Israeli civilians, but puts its own civilians in harm’s way, hoping to increase the number killed and wounded, in order to provide Hamas with a propaganda victory against those “war criminal” Israelis.
Israel’s modus operandi is to warn the inhabitants of the buildings it has targeted, giving them anywhere from 15 minutes to two hours of warning. The IAF calls residents or, when they can be located, the owners, of the buildings that are targeted, instructing them to warn others about the need to leave within the time limit given. The IAF also employs the “knock-on-the-roof” technique, its practice of dropping non-explosive or low-yield devices on the roofs of targeted buildings to warn inhabitants to leave.
Here, too — as in other cases — the rules of proportionality apply. The concomitant harm (it is hard to use such clinical words when talking about human life) should be proportionate to the primary military benefit of the concrete action.
One can argue about how Israel applies the rules of proportionality in this context. Is the IDF really making every possible effort to gather intelligence on the presence of “uninvolved” people in the houses and buildings where Hamas is located in the heart of Gaza? Are the guidelines to evacuate a building a few minutes before it is bombed really 100% effective? But it is not legitimate to argue that Israel commits war crimes simply by virtue of civilian casualties in the operations.
The IAF makes endless efforts to warn civilians to leave buildings about to be hit.. It is seldom a warning given just “a few minutes before [a building] is bombed”; for the largest structures, one or two hours warning may be given; in the case of the Jala building (which housed both Hamas intelligence offices and offices of the AP and Al Jazeera), an hour was given. The IAF realizes, of course, that these warnings will allow the Hamas fighters and other operatives to escape as well, but it’s a price Israel is willing to pay to minimize civilian casualties.
Given this extraordinary attention by the IAF to minimizing civilian casualties, is there evidence that Israeli has committed “war crimes”? War crimes were indeed committed in this 11-day war, but not by Israel. The “war crimes” of Hamas were committed against both Israelis and the civilian population in Gaza. For it was Hamas, violating the rules of war, that deliberately fired 4,350 rockets at civilian targets in Israel. That 90% of those rockets were intercepted by Israel, and abut 650 fell short and landed in Gaza, does not mitigate the charge against Hamas of “war crimes.” Hamas behaved in this Gaza war just as it had in its three previous wars with Israel, targeting Israeli civilians, and deliberately endangering its own population by placing weapons, and rocket launchers, in the midst of civilian areas and in civilian buildings. Both are war crimes.
Beyond the general, seemingly self-evident accusation that Israel commits war crimes, Oliver seems completely indifferent to the basic legal difference between Israel’s actions and those of Hamas. In Oliver’s words: “Both sides are firing rockets. But one side has one of the most advanced militaries in the world.”
Well, Israel is a sovereign state and — like any other sovereign state — is allowed to protect its civilian population. Israel is part of the “family of nations” and operates, at least [sic] explicitly, in accordance with the norms of international law.
Hamas, on the other hand, is a terrorist organization that has controlled the Gaza strip for 14 years.
In fact, each of the rockets launched by Hamas at Israel — every single one of them — is a war crime, whether they hit Israelis or land in open areas or are intercepted in the air by the “Iron Dome” system.
Hamas has no intention of harming military targets; it deliberately fires at the civilian population, with the aim of harming them. That is the very definition of a war crime.
Hamas fired 4,350 rockets toward Israeli cities during this latest Gaza war. And while some of those rockets hit civilian targets – leaving gaping holes in houses and apartment buildings — not a single military target, save for one soldier, was hit during the 11 days of fighting. Hamas was more interested in “striking terror” in the hearts of Israel’s civilian population with volleys of rockets fired into cities than in trying to hit the hardened targets of Israel’s military.
Israel is doing everything in its power to minimize the harm not just to its own people, but to civilians in Gaza, as part of its war against a terrorist organization that has placed its weapons and fighters within civilian areas. Meanwhile, Hamas is doing everything in its power to increase the number of casualties among Israeli civilians and its own people.
True, looking at the region from across the Atlantic sometimes makes it difficult to discern nuances. The distance between East Jerusalem and Ramallah and between Ramallah and Gaza is really small, even when you don’t look from afar.
But in terms of international law, there is a complicated system of agreements backed by international norms between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, which controls the West Bank, and it bears no resemblance to the constant state of combat between Israel and Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip. And that is even before we discuss the immeasurably complex legal regime in East Jerusalem.
Mixing all of these may give the impression that Israel controls all Palestinians in all territories that were part of historic Palestine — Gaza, Ramallah, Sheikh Jarrah, they are all the same for the popular HBO host. But they are not the same.
Since 2005, not a single Israeli has been left in Gaza, and following the 2006 elections, the Strip has been ruled despotically by the terror group Hamas. It is absurd to talk about Gaza as “occupied territory” or to claim that Israel “controls Gaza,” as John Oliver seems to think. If the IDF truly “controlled Gaza” there wouldn’t have been 14,000 Hamas rockets stockpiled and ready to rain down death on Israel (4,350 of then have now been used), nor would Hamas have been able to build that vast underground network of tunnels, 250 miles long, used to move weapons and fighters throughout the Strip.
Ramallah is the capital of the PA, headed by the colossally corrupt Mahmoud Abbas, an archenemy of Hamas who is now in the sixteenth-year of his four-year term. The PA is not controlled by Israel; rather, the PA controls the lives of the Palestinians who live in Areas A and B of the West Bank; only Area C remains fully under Israeli control. The PA differs from the terror group Hamas in matters of timing and tactics, but shares the same goal of the ultimate elimination of the Jewish state. While Hamas wishes to expel or kill every Jewish Israeli, the PA is prudently silent on what it would do to the Jews in case of a (highly unlikely) defeat of Israel by Palestinians and its allies such as Iran; it is possible it would allow Israeli Jews to remain as part of a “one-state solution”; those Jews could continue to live in “Palestine” so long as they benefited the Palestinians through their greater industry, inventiveness, and technological prowess. What those Jews living in a future state of “Palestine” — the “one-state solution” that a growing number of Palestinians now favor — could offer the Arabs would no doubt be understood as well-deserved Jizyah.
The conflict over some properties in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah, John Oliver fails to realize, is not part of some Israeli government scheme to “Judaize” East Jerusalem. 209,000 Palestinians live in East Jerusalem; since 1967, they have lived there, without any Israeli attempt to “displace” them. The Sheikh Jarrah dispute has nothing to do with the Israeli government; it is a private property dispute. Jews claiming to be the owners of properties in which four Arab families now live, have presented their evidence of ownership, which has been recognized as valid, not just by Israeli courts, but also by the very Arabs living in those properties. In 1982, and in 2020, Arabs living in the properties admitted that they were owned by the Jewish claimants. But for decades, they have continued to refuse to pay any rent, and they will not move. They no doubt are hoping that a large outcry – including violent riots by Palestinians in East Jerusalem, and howls of protest from the many Israel-haters abroad – everyone from Jeremy Corbyn and Roger Waters to Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib – will prevent the Israeli government from enforcing the law by expelling the Palestinian squatters and putting the true owners back into possession of their properties. John Oliver apparently knows nothing about this property dispute; for him it is just one more example of Israeli aggression and determination to push Arabs out of Jerusalem.
John Oliver is an extremely talented and funny comedian and TV personality. Quite often, he also holds commendable moral grounds. And he’s right: a friend should be told when he’s being an idiot.
Neither you nor I is a friend of John Oliver. But we’d nonetheless like to join in, and add our voices to the chorus of those who want to tell him that when it comes to Israel and Hamas, John Oliver, “you are certainly being an idiot.”
Roland says
It’s pretty revolting how shameless most liberal-left British journalists and media personalities are, especially when they screech about Israel and Jews. They have no moral or professional stsndards.
mortimer says
John Oliver admits he hasn’t read the history of the conflict (and he probably won’t because he’s intellectually uncurious and lazy), but that doesn’t stop him from repeating the latest Lefty party line.
John Oliver couldn’t be bothered to investigate the facts independently and he couldn’t be bothered to hear what the Israeli intelligence might tell him about the facts of the conflict. His thoughts are spoon-fed to him by the Leftist cabal in the manner of bees buzzing and dancing together.
John Oliver wouldn’t open a book like ‘The Case for Israel’ by Alan Dershowitz (himself a Lefty) nor ‘The Palestinian Delusion’ by Robert Spencer … too much mental effort.
John Oliver is a typical, shallow Lefty … he lets the party apparatchiks think for him.
gregbeetham says
If John Oliver is deliberately ignorant about the facts of the conflict then he is just another loudmouth with no credibility.
gravenimage says
+1
Christopher Watson says
Strange how when these lefty idiots cannot make it in Britain they go to America where they are welcomed with open arms. The lefties seem to imagine that the Hamas terrorists think like normal people. They don’t. If the Israelis give an inch they will be slaughtered. Hamas have no honour. The word is foreign to them. They slaughter women and children. They are disgusting animals.
mortimer says
Agree totally with CW: the snarling dogs of Hamas are werewolves whose lust for killing Jews is animalistic. Hamas are so vicious, most predatory animals cannot equal them in cruelty. They merely want to kill any Jew who is still moving. That’s called genocide.
gravenimage says
I also noticed that until just recently that while many were intent on considering Fatah “partners for peace” for Israel that they at least realized that Hamas were evil terrorists. Now even that distinction appears to have gone by the wayside–accepting the genocidal Hamas seems to have gone mainstream in many quarters.
mortimer says
Anyone who has not been trained as a seaman, soldier or airman cannot understand that there are rules of engagement hammered into the brains of every military member.
Military officers, especially have no excuse if they violent the RoE, because they get the SPECIAL HIGH-INSENSITY TRAINING to know the legal basis of war.
Simplistic and lazy Lefties, like John Oliver SPONTANEOUSLY assume that our people just pick up a weapon and let go at anything that moves. Nothing could be further from the truth. Modern military forces are very disciplined and controlled in their targeted use of force and one could even say they are MICRO-MANAGED in their use of force.
The reverse is true of JIHADISTS. For the jihadists, dead kafirs are what they are hoping to achieve and any kafir will do.
That’s what lazybones Oliver doesn’t get. The jihadists are the ones who don’t care who they hit.
While the Israeli forces specifically target terrorists, Hamas GENERALLY targets Jews. By killing and terrorizing Jews generally, Hamas achieves its goal.
Muslim Brigadier S.K. Malik wrote: “Only a strategy that aims at STRIKING TERROR INTO THE HEARTS OF THE ENEMIES from the preparation stage can produce direct results and turn (the) dream (of the Islamic theory of terroristic warfare) into a reality.” – Pakistani Brig. S.K. Malik, “Quranic Concept of War”.
Wellington says
+1
gravenimage says
Yes–Hamas *targets* civilians. Israel goes out of her way to avoid any civilian casualties, even though Hamas deliberately hides among the civilian population.
David says
Over 10x more Germans died in World War II than Britain.
Does anyone think that was unfair?
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/research-starters-worldwide-deaths-world-war
Partly because Hitler didn’t care about German lives – a bit like Hamas and Arab lives
mortimer says
Correct, it is fair to compare Hamas with Nazism, because both are fascist conspiracies using the power of the state against the interests of the people while doing so in the name of the people. As a result most of the Pallies have moved to stable, prosperous Western countries and the population of the Pally areas is actually VERY SMALL, and the Pallies don’t dare to admit it.
Donovan Nuera says
The Allies were not charged with any ‘war crimes’ during the invasion of Normandy when there were French civilians who were unfortunately killed by accident during the naval bombardment and Air Force bombardment of German army targets at Caen, St. Lo, and Cherbourg. The US Army had to fight block by block when taking the latter 2 cities. It was never on purpose and was the natural consequence of war. Same thing applies to Gaza.
Also, the Hamas fighters are as suicidal fanatics as the Shintoist Japanese as their holy books command them to do so. Hard for liberals to realize that long-established fact about islam.
gravenimage says
Actually–insanely–some revisionists these days *are* claiming that this was unfair.
Will Tyson says
Well virtually all of those lives were ended by the Soviets anyways (aside from bombing raids of course)
Mr X says
Britain is long gone now.
Ecosse1314 says
Just checked a map. Seems that Britain is still there.
Wellington says
Fine dry humor, Ecosse 1314. (Please excuse the American spelling of “humor” without the “u”.)
Ecosse1314 says
Not to worry about the spelling. Yor only a yong contry. Just joking
gravenimage says
🙂
will says
So you are saying that if a muslim attacks me I dare not defend myself or I will be called a homophobe and charged with a war crime. But at Least I will be alive, and hnot the guy shooting at me.
Donovan Nuera says
It’s infuriating that all these NYC-based “celebs” all must suffer from the same amnesia that they cannot remember the certain sunny and pleasant day when the City was under attack and 2600 fellow New Yorkers were murdered in the most brutal and public ways imaginable by a group of people who look and sound and acted like the very same people that they now have “solidarity” with. No outcry that hordes of similar looking yutes driving and marching on 5th Avenue are screaming allahu Akbar and clearly wanting to continue the Holocaust just like Mohammad Atta and friends. I guess they FORGOT!
gravenimage says
I’ve never heard John Oliver mention 9/11–except for his bizarre claim that Biden’s election consituted a “reverse 9/11”.
Rob says
‘Proportionality’ is of INTENT not OUTCOME.
Tony Naim says
If radical Islamic ideology, represented through “any” radical Islamic organization, is allowed to take hold in any part of the Middle East, no one will be able to predict the extent of vicious violent savagery that may potentially spread to any location worldwide. The horror and terror of Savage violence is specific, peculiar only to political Islam and political islam alone. That twisted ideology represented by the fusion of violence and spirituality is only the unique anomaly of Islamic Sharia. Hamas has proven not to give a damn about their own civilian population, much less to concerned about civilians anywhere else, less so if they are Dhimmis.
The Istanbulian says
John Oliver’s a white man. We don’t listen them anymore.
gravenimage says
It’s OK, since he’s a generally anti-American Brit. Plus, he makes fun of himself for being white pretty often.
Wellington says
Criticizing Israel for being much more proficient at war than Hamas—and by extension more proficient at war than all Arab nations—is rather like criticizing Western Civilization for being far more proficient at imperialism than all other civilizations which engaged in imperialism.
It’s phony. It’s stupid. It’s hypocritical. And it is so John Oliver like.
gregbeetham says
John Oliver you need to check the facts about the Israeli conflict with the terrorist outfit Hamas.
One side deliberately tries to kill civilians and one side doesn’t, do you know which is which?
One side puts their rocket launchers in or near hospitals, schools and mosques and one side doesn’t, guess which one does what?
One side deliberately puts its civilian population in harm’s way in the hope of obtaining marketable casualties for propaganda purposes and one side doesn’t, do you know which of the two does what?
One side begins hostilities on every single occasion and one side doesn’t, which one is that?
One side could lay down their arms and say there will never be another attack and that side would live happily ever after with the blessing and help from the other side. And the other side could lay down their arms instead and declare they will not defend themselves anymore and that side would experience another holocaust conducted by the cult of Satan that surrounds it, guess which is which?
gravenimage says
John Oliver and Israel’s ‘War Crimes’
“There is a lot to unpack there,” John Oliver began his opening monologue of “Last Week Tonight” last Sunday, where he sharply criticized Israel for its crushing airstrikes on Gaza strip. “From the use of the phrase ‘tit for tat’ war in a conflict in which one side has suffered over 10 times the casualties, something that speaks to the severe power imbalance that played here.”
………………..
That would be like saying that the police arresting purse snatchers reveals a power imbalance, and that authorities only have the ‘tit for tat’ right to impound the crook’s purse (if any).
Actually, you likely will see such arguments in today’s insane climate…
Hamas attacked Israeli civilians without provocation–but this is apparently fine with John Oliver. How *dare* Israel have the ability to defend herself?
Wellington says
Oliver is just another fool in the entertainment industry, which is now suffused with fools. Didn’t used to be in the days of Johnny Carson, Don Rickles, Maureen O’Hara, Gary Cooper, Charlton Heston, Claudette Colbert, Sammy Davis Jr., Clark Gable, Marlene Dietrich, Bob Hope, Bette Davis, et al., but most definitely at present a huge majority in the entertainment industry are now dopes or even worse.
But I know you know this, gravenimage, though I felt compelled to state it anyway. As for the “insane climate” you mentioned, it is very real as opposed to the non-scientific man-made climate change scam. Yes indeed, some “climate matters” are real and others are not—and the “real” here is not considered real by the ever fallacious elites of our era while the scam posing as real is considered “authentic” by way too many people who should know better.
Time for a beer or maybe two—helps relieve the realization that we do live in very weird and absurd times. As usual, your comment was accurate and on point—such consistency is most certainly admirable.
gravenimage says
Thank you, Wellington. Agree on all points.
livingengine says
Here is a video version – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPUrbBzJeT4
gravenimage says
Thanks for that link.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
How is “war crime” defined? Is embezzlement ever a war crime?
tim gallagher says
This Oliver character seems like a complete fuckwit. Does he only sit there and pontificate to camera, spreading his crap, his anti-Israel propaganda, uninterrupted (that would be convenient) or does he sometimes go up against other people in debate? I imagine that he would be demolished by so many far more knowledgeable people. It would be like the emperor being exposed as having no clothes on. But I guess this fool tells the left wingers and the Muslim mob exactly what they want to hear, so he would have plenty of fans. People who are given jobs where they get to prattle on with a load of crap on a TV program should be required to know a lot more about the subject that they are pontificating on than this ignoramus does.
James Lincoln says
tim gallagher says,
“does he sometimes go up against other people in debate? I imagine that he would be demolished by so many far more knowledgeable people.”
Can you imagine this Oliver character trying to debate Israel’s “War Crimes” with Robert Spencer?
Any guess on how long he would last?
tim gallagher says
James, I was thinking along the same lines when I wrote my comment about Oliver. I was thinking how he would go against Robert Spencer. Talk about Oliver being exposed as a know nothing fool, an emperor with no clothes on. But then again, probably left wing viewers and Muslims would believe what Oliver said in the debate, because it would be the bullshit that they would want to believe, and would decide that Robert Spencer was lying. The truth can’t get through to some people. On the “Outsiders” TV program,( which I have mentioned before) last Sunday, they actually had a very short clip of Oliver (the first I ever heard of Oliver) bullshitting on about Israel and one of the presenters said what an appalling lying fool Oliver is. They seem to gather information and clips from everywhere and, as Rowan Dean, one of the presenters says at the beginning of the program, they are to woke culture and left wing madness what rat poison is to rodents. He has a different metaphor (far cleverer and funnier than my rat poison reference) each week for what they do to the left wingers and all the woke madness.
gravenimage says
This is the standard format of Oliver’s shows. He doesn’t debate people–he rarely even has guests.
tim gallagher says
Yeah, I thought it might be like that, gravenimage. The ignoramus probably knows that he lives in a glass house. If he did go up against anyone, he might have to actually go and study and learn a bit about what he is pontificating about.
gravenimage says
Yep.
somehistory says
Way back, in the Garden of Eden, after the fallen angel known as satan the devil…slanderer and liar, serpent dragon, “father of the lie,” seduced Even into sin,
God told the demon that there would be “enmity” or hatred, between those who follow His Laws and orders and those who follow satan and his demonic lies.
This “hatred” was clearly evident from when Cain murdered his brother, Abel, and on down through the years when the Nation of Israel, or “Kingdom” of Israel was always having to fight her enemies…Philistines, Assyrians, Babylon, Egypt, etc.. in order to not be enslaved and destroyed as a people.
This was due to the fact that Israel was chosen by God to observe the Law and lead people to Christ. These were the enemies of satan and his “children.”
Israel has never been declared by satan and his children to be on their side in this conflict, so they continue to be fought against in a never-ending attempt to wipe them out.
Everyone chooses a side. This guy has shown on whose side he is.
OLD GUY says
Oliver another left wing idiot.
Andrew Blackadder says
I dont watch any of these Late Night Shows anymore as they are ALL Hosted by Far Left morons that have zero idea of the World, let alone the USA.
This wee Limey prick couldnt make Tea back in the UK, and only got the USA gig because so many Americans think that some dude that speaks as if he has a broomstick stuck up his arse must know of what he speaks.. Im a Scot, left the UK in 1970, aged 21, and trust me people, just because some wanker speaks with a British accent does NOT make him a person with knowledge because of it.
How this guy has the show he has is beyond me..
Americans are becoming dumber and dumber by the generation.
Gawd bless the USA.