 All right, let's start with Klok, who's put up 50 bucks. Why is it not a single commentator ever claimed Ukraine or Russia are committing genocide? It is only when Jews don't allow themselves to be genocide dead that they are guilty of genocide. Is this not textbook Orwellian doublespeak? I don't know if it's doublespeak. I think it's definitely a double standard or inconsistent application of what genocide means. I looked at some of the other cases that on the docket of the International Court of Justice when that case came up in December, it doesn't come up that often, but it has come up. I mean, the most, and they talk about this in the debate, that one of the most significant genocide cases was in the Balkans in the 1990s. And I, so I think there is something to the question as point, which is how is it that Israel is being seen as genocidal? And this isn't coming up in another context. Why isn't Russia being accused of the same thing, right? Which is the way you would actually apply it. And I think it's just, I don't think people have, to connect it to the point you just made, I think a lot of what animates this is just an animosity to valuable countries, the Western oriented free societies, which Russia isn't. And as many of the sort of new rights would like to pretend it is, it's not. It's a, it's a retrogression to a kind of imperial power and it's about tribal Russian identity. So I think there is something to that for sure. Yeah. And I think that if the United States or Western Europe were involved in a war and a lot of civilians died, they would be easily accused of genocide. I, the double standard, you know, certainly everything's heightened when you talk about Jews because there is anti-Semitism out there and anti-Semitism drives a lot of this. But I think much more than anti-Semitism, it's anti again, anti-West. So the bad guys can do anything. They can kill anybody, they can do it in any way they want. And yeah, well, it's the bad guys and people don't, but if the good guys do something, then it's immediately labeled as genocide or it's immediately elevated to some kind of condemnation of everything that's good about the so-called good guys. So yeah, Israel's rich, advanced, strong. It's going to be associated with genocide. No matter, almost no matter what the Palestinians do, they'll never be accused of genocide. And this was another point that came out in the debate that Benny Mars and Destiny try to argue, but again, weekly that Hamas committed genocide or its intention was genocidal on October 7th. And Fikustin and Rini were having none of it. And again, I think did a fairly good job at kind of not bouncing those ideas away is deflecting them is the better word. Yeah, deflecting. I want to voice an unpopular opinion. Maybe we don't think any of my opinions are popular, but I haven't done enough reading on this, but I'm dubious about this idea of genocide. I mean, there is such a thing and we know in World War II the Nazis were about eliminating groups of people. So there's something out there to identify and conceptualize. But if you can point to a country defending itself and emasculate them and tie their hands by the threat or the reality of a threat or a court case that you're genocidal, how are you ever going to win any war? Yep. So it seems like it's a very dubious way of thinking. And first of all, it brings in the idea that, well, so suppose let's take an example of World War II. So why is it that retaliating against the Nazis was not genocidal? Yep. Well, some people claim it is now, right? So there is an argument. There is an argument out there. It says that what the US did to the Germans and what they did to the Japanese was genocidal. But it makes the concept mean nothing, right? Because clearly the Americans weren't trying to wipe out the German people. They weren't trying to wipe out the Japanese people. Germans were trying to wipe out the Jewish people. No question about that. And in Rwanda, I can't remember who it was. The Houdis, the Tutsis, the Houdis, but one of them was trying to wipe out the other one. No question about that. And that was, I think, a genocide. And you could argue that in the Balkans, the Serbs were trying to wipe out the Muslim population or at least certain parts of it. So maybe that's genocide. But you can't, you're not committing genocide by fighting self-defense and civilians dying, particularly when those civilians are held as human shields, purposefully. I mean, it's dishonest and absurd to make that argument. Again, it's how Urbini could say that and not, and the other side, you know, I wish it was a yelling match at that point. I wish they would have yelled him down and said that that's absurd. That's ridiculous. It's evil. That is the epitome of evil. To accuse the victim, to blame the victim for what is going on, to blame the victim for genocide.