81–90 of 223 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I'm trying to be as charitable as I possibly can be, but it looks like you're arguing that brutal prisoner torture is deserved if the victim is (portrayed as) heinous enough. Is this correct or was your argument something else? I can understand the impulse, but not the conscious arguing for it.
>The indictment said the soldiers assaulted the Palestinian prisoner and sodomized him with a knife, causing multiple injuries... When military police came to Sde Teiman in July to detain the soldiers suspected of abuse, they scuffled with protesters opposed to the arrests. How the fuck do people go out there protesting in support of the violent rape of prisoners? Sickening stuff.
That's average person for ya.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm trying to be as charitable as I possibly can be, but it looks like you're arguing that brutal prisoner torture is deserved if the victim is (portrayed as) heinous enough. Is this correct or was your argument something else? I can understand the impulse, but not the conscious arguing for it.
I am railing more against the totally one-sided reporting then against that this is not ok.
To explain, there was a study of partisan bias I once read, wherein a mixed audience is shown some factually neutral piece of media, then asked to rate the bias of the piece along with some other questions. Naturally, the strongest partisans felt it was the most biased against them (something we've seen replicated in dozens of studies), but the more interesting outcome was that they teased out why the partisans felt the media was so biased. The overwhelming argument from both sides was that the media in question lacked additional context that would specifically justify the actions of their own side, even though that was not the focus of the video.
My big take away from this is that if a person is demanding additional, one-directional contextualization, especially if said context seems like it stretches/moves the topic of conversation, I'm probably reading polemic disguised as truth seeking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am railing more against the totally one-sided reporting then against that this is not ok.
Recently, any time I see someone railing against about one-sided coverage, it sets off alarm bells for where the person themselves is coming from. To explain, there was a study of partisan bias I once read, wherein a mixed audience is shown some factually neutral piece of media, then asked to rate the bias of the piece along with some other questions. Naturally, the strongest partisans felt it was the most biased aga…
I think you'll be insisting on additional context and moving the topic of conversation away from child molesting and your involvement therein to, oh, perhaps "fake news".
The sad truth is that it's fundamentally true that the reality on the ground is not a compromise between both sides. There is an actual reality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even assuming that the points you present are all factual, your (more than) eye-for-eye position does not align with Western and democratic values. He is a murderer, so kill him for his crimes, and kill his familiy and friends, too, because they are all guilty, without trial, by association! That's what happened in Gaza and you seem to like that.
[flagged]
But that someone did something horrendous against my people does not make it right for my people to kill them, at an extend far, far greater than what Hamas has caused Israelis to suffer under. You cannot in a sane mind propose that genocide is ever justified. If you do, then you must also believe that all the Germans should have been killed after what they did to the jews. Do you propose that?
You are explicitly advocating for ignoring law and order. You prefer lawless lynching without order. My ethic values do not allow this and I find it stupid and disturbing.
The whole situation is so extreme it almost reads like sick parody. Last year there were riots in Israel when some IDF soldiers were arrested for raping prisoners. The riots were in defense of the rapists, and were attended not only by extremist Israeli civilians but also Israeli lawmakers, who stormed the military base where the rapists were being held. The leaker releases a video of some of the abuse and is then ac…
One of the rapists is now paraded as a hero on Israeli TV. Sick, sick society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I don't like or condone what Hamas did at all. Their crimes should not be ignored and I never said so. They should all be in prison and stay there. But that someone did something horrendous against my people does not make it right for my people to kill them, at an extend far, far greater than what Hamas has caused Israelis to suffer under. You cannot in a sane mind propose that genocide is ever justified. If you do,…
That is NOT a genocide, according to the human rights conventions. If having civilian victims at all is a war crime then every police officer in the world is a war criminal.
But what hamas did on Oct 7 2023, that satisfies without any doubt whatsoever every last requirement for genocide. They emptied 2 machine guns in a kindergarten classroom because the children "were Jews". There were no survivors. Oh and as it always goes in racist attacks: 2 of the dead children (the black ones) were not Jews.
Your position is to some extent defending war criminals. It is relevant to mention what these Palestinian "victims" did.