Anonymous wrote:If anyone else is outraged by images on CNN of children stripped near naked and blindfolded by the IDF, know that this is standard Israeli practice, for years they have unlawfully detained and mistreated Palestinian children.
"Ramallah, 10 July – Palestinian children in the Israel military detention system face physical and emotional abuse, with four out of five (86%) of them being beaten, and 69% strip-searched, according to new research by Save the Children. Nearly half (42%) are injured at the point of arrest, including gunshot wounds and broken bones. Some report violence of a sexual nature and some are transferred to court or between detention centres in small cages, the child rights organisation said. "
Anonymous wrote:Did everyone else notice the increasing number of posts here that are just calling out for jihad? I think it's important to see them, not erase them.
I've moved beyond thinking it's horrible and into thinking it's a viral marketing campaign. Which is horrifying... And why I'm noting this and taking screenshots.
Oh, you sweet summer child. Who is going to erase them, Jeff? He of "she was wearing underwear, so gimme better proof of rape"?
But to your point, the tenor of pro-Hamas posts in this thread is... low-grade commercial. Timing and frequency patterns would probably support this hypothesis, if anyone cared enough to pay close attention. I don't.
As I've said multiple times, I don't think you can fight this crap by rising above it.
Anonymous wrote:Daily reminder that Jews already have their own autonomous place in the world, so this nonsense that Jews have a right to their own state is moot.
The issue is not that they have right to a state, the issue is they have a state. Why do we need to be motivated to dissolve a country that exists? If you want to do that, go try it, but don't tell us we have to play along.
Anonymous wrote:The victim mentality is really beyond what I even imagined.
Literally murdering thousands of kids and still screaming “everyone hates us for no reason!!”
It’s certifiable
It is certifiable that so many people hate Israelis and Jews, no?
It that every Jew is responsible for what Israeli policy is. Must mean every Muslim is pro Hamas / pro terrorist.
This is a good point. "If you don't support Hamas and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an Islamophobe who wants to genocide all Muslims" makes as much sense as "If you don't support Israel and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an antisemite who wants to genocide all Jews."
I suspect the previous poster(s) understands this, but they're backed into a corner and can only spew a smokescreen of insults. Which is a very dishonest practice.
DP
Everyone here is 100.00% anti-Hamas. What about that fact don't you get? Stop trying to gin up a defense for what Israel is doing by arguing that those opposed to those actions are supportive of Hamas. It's pathetic. Even you can do better.
Perhaps my post wasn't sufficiently clear? Of course everyone here is anti-Hamas and, more specifically, opposes its actions on 10/7. I was making a comparison between absurd conclusions. Nobody believes that opposing Hamas means you're a genocidal Islamophobe who hates Muslims. Similarly, nobody believes that opposing Israel means you're a genocidal antisemite who hates Jews. Well, almost nobody in both cases. Some people are deliberately obtuse or deceitful or too fanatical to think straight, and my post was aimed at these folk. I don't support either statement, which is ... kind of why I put them both in quotes.
That's objectively false. Can't be anti-Hamas and yet be their direct mouthpiece repeating their false claims and conspiracy theories.
Which I have done ... where, exactly? Another straw man. Sorry, but this is getting very boring.
Don't know if it was you or who, as posts are anonymous, but I'm definitely not the only one here who keeps seeing Hamas propaganda and false talking points popping up over and over again.
Which makes your role here what...? A confused person who doesn't know what's going on? Someone who is naive and lacks critical thinking skills? Clearly not, since you are also hyperfocused on rhetorical devices, like "ad hominem" and "strawman" which tells me you are here specifically to argue. Yet if that's the case, then why are you ignoring the instances where Hamas talking points are being used? Perhaps you overestimate the notion of plausible deniability?
The PP keeps throwing around the terms “ad hominem” and “strawman” as an attempt to discredit the detailed NYT reporting. She’s using those terms (incorrectly but whatever) to distract from the objectively horrific and meticulously detailed description of the vicious sexual torture used by Hamas on 10/7. If she can get people to mentally associate that detailed reporting with cheap rhetorical devices, it helps her cause. It’s a classic propagandist move, albeit an easily identifiable one. She’s a propagandist, just not a very skilled one.
DP
The NY Times account is horrifying. It would be impossible to look into the eyes of those parents and not feel tremendous sadness for them (and for the world, frankly, since what happened to their daughter is just horrific for our shared sense of humanity).
I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense. I don't think I have ever come across reporting related to severe trauma (and this reported trauma is probably as severe as one can imagine) where the eyewitness accounts are even 10% as vivid and detailed as the ones featured in the Times. I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.
You just did call everyone involved a liar.
I look forward to watching you say the same thing about the NYT’s meticulous reporting about the child deaths in Gaza and how those babies were killed and what their parents said they saw when their kids died in front of them. Are those parents, with their horrific details of watching their children bleed out and die in front them, also lying? Please do go on and tell me how the Palestinian parents who watched their children die in front of them are also lying.
DP. There is a mix of lies and truths. Yes, some Palestinian children have died, but there are also lies about how many died (such as the grossly exaggerated death count from Baptist Hospital). There are also lies about whose hands they died at. Yes, IDF killed some, but Hamas is also killing Palestinians, like when Hamas was trying to steal humanitarian aid for themselves rather than distribute it and they shot and killed hungry Palestinians who complained about it. Or when Hamas was trying to stop people from trying to evacuate. Or when civilians died because they were placed in harm's way by Hamas as human shields, or were killed because their home or shelter collapsed into Hamas tunnels when Hamas complexes were bombed.
Sure, but that’s not the point. The PP who is saying that the detailed eyewitness accounts of sexual torture must be lies because the shock and trauma should have prevented the creation of vivid and detailed memories of that torture needs to also then come out and say that the Palestinian parents who described watching their child bleed out in front of them in vivid detail are also lying because that level of shock and trauma should have prevented those parents from forming those memories. If she’s taking the position that the stories of sexual torture can’t be true because of “shock and trauma” then she needs to be consistent in how that theory is applied. Unless, of course, she’s taking the position that only Jewish women have this peculiar inability to remember unspeakable horrors, which is what I suspect she’s really getting at.
In any case, I look forward to reading her statements that the Palestinian parents who described the horrific and slow deaths of their dying children in front of their own eyes are also lying when they describe those deaths in excruciating and awful detail.
Exactly how mental are you???
The person used these exact words “I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense.“ and “ I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.”
And from those two statements you walked away with an argument that the accounts “must be lies”? Must be lies? Are you literally deranged?
Right on. Carefully qualified statements from one poster. Complete misrepresentation of her position from the other.
Repeated misrepresentation. Brazenly going so far as to quote the actual words multiple times and, what, I guess hope that their shitty Jedi mind trick would prevent people from actually reading the goddamned words? The words couldn’t be more clear in establishing that the poster was NOT stating that the reporting MUST be based on lies, but I’m sure we’ll now hear from the “word salad” specialist and the “I’ll tell you what you REALLY mean!” thought crime experts to straighten all of this out. The “what do you want to do about your feelings?” poster from Ukraine or Poland or wherever is already on duty.
This is insane. The pro-Zionism part of this equation is absolutely, clinically deranged. And it should be lost on no one that this is an outcome that is perfectly acceptable to them. Show your deranged true colors, get people to throw their hands up and give up, and get the desired result of stopping the exchange of ideas that threatens to topple the status quo.
Absolutely disgusting human beings. And yes, I mean every last person who lies like these lunatics in furtherance of their desperate defense of Zionism. Still love anyone else Jewish or otherwise who recognizes the toxic insanity of Zionism.
you can present your ideas over and over, but people can still say "well, no thanks" over and over. Some might be ok with status quo. You are frustrating yourself by making changing the status quo a good or evil thing.
Feeling person, we get it.
I want a cessation of violence on both sides, consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence, and a good faith plan to establish a two-state plan that guarantees the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace, which will require compromise from both sides. And I want any further aid to the region conditioned upon the successful achievement of these goals. As far as I’m concerned, if Israel and the Palestinians can get across the finish lines, I’m supportive of INCREASING aid to both groups for a certain timeframe to position both states for long term success. I’d love to see them both flourish without the constant conflict, which both sides have earnestly contributed to.
That’s what I want. Is that clear enough for you?
Do you want Hamas gone? Because you didn’t mention that.
Yeah, of course Hamas being dismantled and being brought to justice is a necessity.
That’s why “consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence” was the second aim. Hamas is one such party, but there are also others. Other militant groups on the Palestinian side, the militant settlers and certain Likud officials on the Israeli side, and any IDF personnel who have engaged in conduct that violates the law of armed conflict.
All of the above should be brought to swift and unrelenting justice as part of that second aim.
If you want every wrong thing in the world addressed, what about goings on in Saudi Arabia? Syria? Belarus? South Africa? Indonesia? Why are you soooo focused on Israel?
Anonymous wrote:The victim mentality is really beyond what I even imagined.
Literally murdering thousands of kids and still screaming “everyone hates us for no reason!!”
It’s certifiable
It is certifiable that so many people hate Israelis and Jews, no?
It that every Jew is responsible for what Israeli policy is. Must mean every Muslim is pro Hamas / pro terrorist.
This is a good point. "If you don't support Hamas and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an Islamophobe who wants to genocide all Muslims" makes as much sense as "If you don't support Israel and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an antisemite who wants to genocide all Jews."
I suspect the previous poster(s) understands this, but they're backed into a corner and can only spew a smokescreen of insults. Which is a very dishonest practice.
DP
Everyone here is 100.00% anti-Hamas. What about that fact don't you get? Stop trying to gin up a defense for what Israel is doing by arguing that those opposed to those actions are supportive of Hamas. It's pathetic. Even you can do better.
Perhaps my post wasn't sufficiently clear? Of course everyone here is anti-Hamas and, more specifically, opposes its actions on 10/7. I was making a comparison between absurd conclusions. Nobody believes that opposing Hamas means you're a genocidal Islamophobe who hates Muslims. Similarly, nobody believes that opposing Israel means you're a genocidal antisemite who hates Jews. Well, almost nobody in both cases. Some people are deliberately obtuse or deceitful or too fanatical to think straight, and my post was aimed at these folk. I don't support either statement, which is ... kind of why I put them both in quotes.
That's objectively false. Can't be anti-Hamas and yet be their direct mouthpiece repeating their false claims and conspiracy theories.
Which I have done ... where, exactly? Another straw man. Sorry, but this is getting very boring.
Don't know if it was you or who, as posts are anonymous, but I'm definitely not the only one here who keeps seeing Hamas propaganda and false talking points popping up over and over again.
Which makes your role here what...? A confused person who doesn't know what's going on? Someone who is naive and lacks critical thinking skills? Clearly not, since you are also hyperfocused on rhetorical devices, like "ad hominem" and "strawman" which tells me you are here specifically to argue. Yet if that's the case, then why are you ignoring the instances where Hamas talking points are being used? Perhaps you overestimate the notion of plausible deniability?
The PP keeps throwing around the terms “ad hominem” and “strawman” as an attempt to discredit the detailed NYT reporting. She’s using those terms (incorrectly but whatever) to distract from the objectively horrific and meticulously detailed description of the vicious sexual torture used by Hamas on 10/7. If she can get people to mentally associate that detailed reporting with cheap rhetorical devices, it helps her cause. It’s a classic propagandist move, albeit an easily identifiable one. She’s a propagandist, just not a very skilled one.
DP
The NY Times account is horrifying. It would be impossible to look into the eyes of those parents and not feel tremendous sadness for them (and for the world, frankly, since what happened to their daughter is just horrific for our shared sense of humanity).
I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense. I don't think I have ever come across reporting related to severe trauma (and this reported trauma is probably as severe as one can imagine) where the eyewitness accounts are even 10% as vivid and detailed as the ones featured in the Times. I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.
You just did call everyone involved a liar.
I look forward to watching you say the same thing about the NYT’s meticulous reporting about the child deaths in Gaza and how those babies were killed and what their parents said they saw when their kids died in front of them. Are those parents, with their horrific details of watching their children bleed out and die in front them, also lying? Please do go on and tell me how the Palestinian parents who watched their children die in front of them are also lying.
DP. There is a mix of lies and truths. Yes, some Palestinian children have died, but there are also lies about how many died (such as the grossly exaggerated death count from Baptist Hospital). There are also lies about whose hands they died at. Yes, IDF killed some, but Hamas is also killing Palestinians, like when Hamas was trying to steal humanitarian aid for themselves rather than distribute it and they shot and killed hungry Palestinians who complained about it. Or when Hamas was trying to stop people from trying to evacuate. Or when civilians died because they were placed in harm's way by Hamas as human shields, or were killed because their home or shelter collapsed into Hamas tunnels when Hamas complexes were bombed.
Sure, but that’s not the point. The PP who is saying that the detailed eyewitness accounts of sexual torture must be lies because the shock and trauma should have prevented the creation of vivid and detailed memories of that torture needs to also then come out and say that the Palestinian parents who described watching their child bleed out in front of them in vivid detail are also lying because that level of shock and trauma should have prevented those parents from forming those memories. If she’s taking the position that the stories of sexual torture can’t be true because of “shock and trauma” then she needs to be consistent in how that theory is applied. Unless, of course, she’s taking the position that only Jewish women have this peculiar inability to remember unspeakable horrors, which is what I suspect she’s really getting at.
In any case, I look forward to reading her statements that the Palestinian parents who described the horrific and slow deaths of their dying children in front of their own eyes are also lying when they describe those deaths in excruciating and awful detail.
Exactly how mental are you???
The person used these exact words “I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense.“ and “ I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.”
And from those two statements you walked away with an argument that the accounts “must be lies”? Must be lies? Are you literally deranged?
Right on. Carefully qualified statements from one poster. Complete misrepresentation of her position from the other.
Repeated misrepresentation. Brazenly going so far as to quote the actual words multiple times and, what, I guess hope that their shitty Jedi mind trick would prevent people from actually reading the goddamned words? The words couldn’t be more clear in establishing that the poster was NOT stating that the reporting MUST be based on lies, but I’m sure we’ll now hear from the “word salad” specialist and the “I’ll tell you what you REALLY mean!” thought crime experts to straighten all of this out. The “what do you want to do about your feelings?” poster from Ukraine or Poland or wherever is already on duty.
This is insane. The pro-Zionism part of this equation is absolutely, clinically deranged. And it should be lost on no one that this is an outcome that is perfectly acceptable to them. Show your deranged true colors, get people to throw their hands up and give up, and get the desired result of stopping the exchange of ideas that threatens to topple the status quo.
Absolutely disgusting human beings. And yes, I mean every last person who lies like these lunatics in furtherance of their desperate defense of Zionism. Still love anyone else Jewish or otherwise who recognizes the toxic insanity of Zionism.
you can present your ideas over and over, but people can still say "well, no thanks" over and over. Some might be ok with status quo. You are frustrating yourself by making changing the status quo a good or evil thing.
Feeling person, we get it.
I want a cessation of violence on both sides, consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence, and a good faith plan to establish a two-state plan that guarantees the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace, which will require compromise from both sides. And I want any further aid to the region conditioned upon the successful achievement of these goals. As far as I’m concerned, if Israel and the Palestinians can get across the finish lines, I’m supportive of INCREASING aid to both groups for a certain timeframe to position both states for long term success. I’d love to see them both flourish without the constant conflict, which both sides have earnestly contributed to.
That’s what I want. Is that clear enough for you?
Do you want Hamas gone? Because you didn’t mention that.
Yeah, of course Hamas being dismantled and being brought to justice is a necessity.
That’s why “consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence” was the second aim. Hamas is one such party, but there are also others. Other militant groups on the Palestinian side, the militant settlers and certain Likud officials on the Israeli side, and any IDF personnel who have engaged in conduct that violates the law of armed conflict.
All of the above should be brought to swift and unrelenting justice as part of that second aim.
I did ask for a better brand of troll in another thread and here's the one floating the balloon that "both sides" "need swift and unrelenting justice."
What could go wrong?
These arguments aren't grounded in the real world. They're grounded in slogans and fantasies and that's really quite dangerous.
Anonymous wrote:If anyone else is outraged by images on CNN of children stripped near naked and blindfolded by the IDF, know that this is standard Israeli practice, for years they have unlawfully detained and mistreated Palestinian children.
"Ramallah, 10 July – Palestinian children in the Israel military detention system face physical and emotional abuse, with four out of five (86%) of them being beaten, and 69% strip-searched, according to new research by Save the Children. Nearly half (42%) are injured at the point of arrest, including gunshot wounds and broken bones. Some report violence of a sexual nature and some are transferred to court or between detention centres in small cages, the child rights organisation said. "
Anonymous wrote:The victim mentality is really beyond what I even imagined.
Literally murdering thousands of kids and still screaming “everyone hates us for no reason!!”
It’s certifiable
It is certifiable that so many people hate Israelis and Jews, no?
It that every Jew is responsible for what Israeli policy is. Must mean every Muslim is pro Hamas / pro terrorist.
This is a good point. "If you don't support Hamas and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an Islamophobe who wants to genocide all Muslims" makes as much sense as "If you don't support Israel and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an antisemite who wants to genocide all Jews."
I suspect the previous poster(s) understands this, but they're backed into a corner and can only spew a smokescreen of insults. Which is a very dishonest practice.
DP
Everyone here is 100.00% anti-Hamas. What about that fact don't you get? Stop trying to gin up a defense for what Israel is doing by arguing that those opposed to those actions are supportive of Hamas. It's pathetic. Even you can do better.
Perhaps my post wasn't sufficiently clear? Of course everyone here is anti-Hamas and, more specifically, opposes its actions on 10/7. I was making a comparison between absurd conclusions. Nobody believes that opposing Hamas means you're a genocidal Islamophobe who hates Muslims. Similarly, nobody believes that opposing Israel means you're a genocidal antisemite who hates Jews. Well, almost nobody in both cases. Some people are deliberately obtuse or deceitful or too fanatical to think straight, and my post was aimed at these folk. I don't support either statement, which is ... kind of why I put them both in quotes.
That's objectively false. Can't be anti-Hamas and yet be their direct mouthpiece repeating their false claims and conspiracy theories.
Which I have done ... where, exactly? Another straw man. Sorry, but this is getting very boring.
Don't know if it was you or who, as posts are anonymous, but I'm definitely not the only one here who keeps seeing Hamas propaganda and false talking points popping up over and over again.
Which makes your role here what...? A confused person who doesn't know what's going on? Someone who is naive and lacks critical thinking skills? Clearly not, since you are also hyperfocused on rhetorical devices, like "ad hominem" and "strawman" which tells me you are here specifically to argue. Yet if that's the case, then why are you ignoring the instances where Hamas talking points are being used? Perhaps you overestimate the notion of plausible deniability?
The PP keeps throwing around the terms “ad hominem” and “strawman” as an attempt to discredit the detailed NYT reporting. She’s using those terms (incorrectly but whatever) to distract from the objectively horrific and meticulously detailed description of the vicious sexual torture used by Hamas on 10/7. If she can get people to mentally associate that detailed reporting with cheap rhetorical devices, it helps her cause. It’s a classic propagandist move, albeit an easily identifiable one. She’s a propagandist, just not a very skilled one.
DP
The NY Times account is horrifying. It would be impossible to look into the eyes of those parents and not feel tremendous sadness for them (and for the world, frankly, since what happened to their daughter is just horrific for our shared sense of humanity).
I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense. I don't think I have ever come across reporting related to severe trauma (and this reported trauma is probably as severe as one can imagine) where the eyewitness accounts are even 10% as vivid and detailed as the ones featured in the Times. I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.
You just did call everyone involved a liar.
I look forward to watching you say the same thing about the NYT’s meticulous reporting about the child deaths in Gaza and how those babies were killed and what their parents said they saw when their kids died in front of them. Are those parents, with their horrific details of watching their children bleed out and die in front them, also lying? Please do go on and tell me how the Palestinian parents who watched their children die in front of them are also lying.
DP. There is a mix of lies and truths. Yes, some Palestinian children have died, but there are also lies about how many died (such as the grossly exaggerated death count from Baptist Hospital). There are also lies about whose hands they died at. Yes, IDF killed some, but Hamas is also killing Palestinians, like when Hamas was trying to steal humanitarian aid for themselves rather than distribute it and they shot and killed hungry Palestinians who complained about it. Or when Hamas was trying to stop people from trying to evacuate. Or when civilians died because they were placed in harm's way by Hamas as human shields, or were killed because their home or shelter collapsed into Hamas tunnels when Hamas complexes were bombed.
Sure, but that’s not the point. The PP who is saying that the detailed eyewitness accounts of sexual torture must be lies because the shock and trauma should have prevented the creation of vivid and detailed memories of that torture needs to also then come out and say that the Palestinian parents who described watching their child bleed out in front of them in vivid detail are also lying because that level of shock and trauma should have prevented those parents from forming those memories. If she’s taking the position that the stories of sexual torture can’t be true because of “shock and trauma” then she needs to be consistent in how that theory is applied. Unless, of course, she’s taking the position that only Jewish women have this peculiar inability to remember unspeakable horrors, which is what I suspect she’s really getting at.
In any case, I look forward to reading her statements that the Palestinian parents who described the horrific and slow deaths of their dying children in front of their own eyes are also lying when they describe those deaths in excruciating and awful detail.
Exactly how mental are you???
The person used these exact words “I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense.“ and “ I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.”
And from those two statements you walked away with an argument that the accounts “must be lies”? Must be lies? Are you literally deranged?
Right on. Carefully qualified statements from one poster. Complete misrepresentation of her position from the other.
Repeated misrepresentation. Brazenly going so far as to quote the actual words multiple times and, what, I guess hope that their shitty Jedi mind trick would prevent people from actually reading the goddamned words? The words couldn’t be more clear in establishing that the poster was NOT stating that the reporting MUST be based on lies, but I’m sure we’ll now hear from the “word salad” specialist and the “I’ll tell you what you REALLY mean!” thought crime experts to straighten all of this out. The “what do you want to do about your feelings?” poster from Ukraine or Poland or wherever is already on duty.
This is insane. The pro-Zionism part of this equation is absolutely, clinically deranged. And it should be lost on no one that this is an outcome that is perfectly acceptable to them. Show your deranged true colors, get people to throw their hands up and give up, and get the desired result of stopping the exchange of ideas that threatens to topple the status quo.
Absolutely disgusting human beings. And yes, I mean every last person who lies like these lunatics in furtherance of their desperate defense of Zionism. Still love anyone else Jewish or otherwise who recognizes the toxic insanity of Zionism.
you can present your ideas over and over, but people can still say "well, no thanks" over and over. Some might be ok with status quo. You are frustrating yourself by making changing the status quo a good or evil thing.
Feeling person, we get it.
I want a cessation of violence on both sides, consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence, and a good faith plan to establish a two-state plan that guarantees the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace, which will require compromise from both sides. And I want any further aid to the region conditioned upon the successful achievement of these goals. As far as I’m concerned, if Israel and the Palestinians can get across the finish lines, I’m supportive of INCREASING aid to both groups for a certain timeframe to position both states for long term success. I’d love to see them both flourish without the constant conflict, which both sides have earnestly contributed to.
That’s what I want. Is that clear enough for you?
Ok. None of that works for me. Palestinians can learn to live in peace where they are. Why does the United States need to give them a country and finance a country for them? Also, why would any one agree to this AFTER a terrorist attack. Terrorize, then follow my demands? Change status quo, because of my terrorism? Nope.
Your wants are based on a both-sidesism approach that we don't have to accept as pretext. Palestinians have not accepted offers, have lost wars, etc over the years, so there is not reason now to just give them what they want. Why? Because you want it and Palestinians want it is not a reason that makes it a requirement.
If Palestinians want all of this, they will only get it by going to war.
Agree. The US doesn't owe Palestinians anything. The Palestinians need to lose Hamas and drop their notions about violent extremism, and to integrate with peaceful society.
I don't know about that. It was the US and the UK that initially displaced the Palestinians that were living on that land before WW2. The UK pushed those people around like chess pieces because Europe did not want the surviving European Jews to remain in Europe. Why, because most of the European Jews homes had been confiscated by their former neighbors and friends and Europe wanted to push their crimes on to others to deal with.
And why is it that the UK and allies got in that position? It is because Palestine fought on the wrong side of the war in WWI and lost. Seems Palestinian Arabs have a long long history of continually getting into fights and being on the wrong side, then losing, and then still acting like they are the righteous who were wrongly aggrieved, despite having already lost that debate over and over and over again.
Really, that's what you have. It seems that the European Jewish population should have been provided with lands in Germany, Ukraine, Poland and Austria where they had lived for one-hundred plus years. And Palestine was a part of the British monarchy and many Palestinians like other British colonialist fought on behalf of GB in WW2. As a thank you, the Brits told them what they thought of their service, I mean servitude.
The Palestinian Arabs could have gone back to Arabia, where they lived for hundreds of years before coming to Palestine. So what's your point?
What? Palestinians have always been in that land. I also admit that so has people of the Jewish faith. My issue, with the partition of Palestine by the Brits is tantamount to me coming to your house and telling you to get the 'ef out or I will forcefully remove you and put someone else in your home. I guess PP you can go live in the house you lived in 30 years ago, but you gotta get the heck out of the current house because I'm (UK) moving in somebody else
All of the Greeks left Turkey, should they go back now?
I mean my husband and I are building our boat now to invade Orkney.
Good idea! I have a little Sioux blood from way back when, so I'm taking over Montana.
Anonymous wrote:The victim mentality is really beyond what I even imagined.
Literally murdering thousands of kids and still screaming “everyone hates us for no reason!!”
It’s certifiable
It is certifiable that so many people hate Israelis and Jews, no?
It that every Jew is responsible for what Israeli policy is. Must mean every Muslim is pro Hamas / pro terrorist.
This is a good point. "If you don't support Hamas and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an Islamophobe who wants to genocide all Muslims" makes as much sense as "If you don't support Israel and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an antisemite who wants to genocide all Jews."
I suspect the previous poster(s) understands this, but they're backed into a corner and can only spew a smokescreen of insults. Which is a very dishonest practice.
DP
Everyone here is 100.00% anti-Hamas. What about that fact don't you get? Stop trying to gin up a defense for what Israel is doing by arguing that those opposed to those actions are supportive of Hamas. It's pathetic. Even you can do better.
Perhaps my post wasn't sufficiently clear? Of course everyone here is anti-Hamas and, more specifically, opposes its actions on 10/7. I was making a comparison between absurd conclusions. Nobody believes that opposing Hamas means you're a genocidal Islamophobe who hates Muslims. Similarly, nobody believes that opposing Israel means you're a genocidal antisemite who hates Jews. Well, almost nobody in both cases. Some people are deliberately obtuse or deceitful or too fanatical to think straight, and my post was aimed at these folk. I don't support either statement, which is ... kind of why I put them both in quotes.
That's objectively false. Can't be anti-Hamas and yet be their direct mouthpiece repeating their false claims and conspiracy theories.
Which I have done ... where, exactly? Another straw man. Sorry, but this is getting very boring.
Don't know if it was you or who, as posts are anonymous, but I'm definitely not the only one here who keeps seeing Hamas propaganda and false talking points popping up over and over again.
Which makes your role here what...? A confused person who doesn't know what's going on? Someone who is naive and lacks critical thinking skills? Clearly not, since you are also hyperfocused on rhetorical devices, like "ad hominem" and "strawman" which tells me you are here specifically to argue. Yet if that's the case, then why are you ignoring the instances where Hamas talking points are being used? Perhaps you overestimate the notion of plausible deniability?
The PP keeps throwing around the terms “ad hominem” and “strawman” as an attempt to discredit the detailed NYT reporting. She’s using those terms (incorrectly but whatever) to distract from the objectively horrific and meticulously detailed description of the vicious sexual torture used by Hamas on 10/7. If she can get people to mentally associate that detailed reporting with cheap rhetorical devices, it helps her cause. It’s a classic propagandist move, albeit an easily identifiable one. She’s a propagandist, just not a very skilled one.
DP
The NY Times account is horrifying. It would be impossible to look into the eyes of those parents and not feel tremendous sadness for them (and for the world, frankly, since what happened to their daughter is just horrific for our shared sense of humanity).
I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense. I don't think I have ever come across reporting related to severe trauma (and this reported trauma is probably as severe as one can imagine) where the eyewitness accounts are even 10% as vivid and detailed as the ones featured in the Times. I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.
You just did call everyone involved a liar.
I look forward to watching you say the same thing about the NYT’s meticulous reporting about the child deaths in Gaza and how those babies were killed and what their parents said they saw when their kids died in front of them. Are those parents, with their horrific details of watching their children bleed out and die in front them, also lying? Please do go on and tell me how the Palestinian parents who watched their children die in front of them are also lying.
DP. There is a mix of lies and truths. Yes, some Palestinian children have died, but there are also lies about how many died (such as the grossly exaggerated death count from Baptist Hospital). There are also lies about whose hands they died at. Yes, IDF killed some, but Hamas is also killing Palestinians, like when Hamas was trying to steal humanitarian aid for themselves rather than distribute it and they shot and killed hungry Palestinians who complained about it. Or when Hamas was trying to stop people from trying to evacuate. Or when civilians died because they were placed in harm's way by Hamas as human shields, or were killed because their home or shelter collapsed into Hamas tunnels when Hamas complexes were bombed.
Sure, but that’s not the point. The PP who is saying that the detailed eyewitness accounts of sexual torture must be lies because the shock and trauma should have prevented the creation of vivid and detailed memories of that torture needs to also then come out and say that the Palestinian parents who described watching their child bleed out in front of them in vivid detail are also lying because that level of shock and trauma should have prevented those parents from forming those memories. If she’s taking the position that the stories of sexual torture can’t be true because of “shock and trauma” then she needs to be consistent in how that theory is applied. Unless, of course, she’s taking the position that only Jewish women have this peculiar inability to remember unspeakable horrors, which is what I suspect she’s really getting at.
In any case, I look forward to reading her statements that the Palestinian parents who described the horrific and slow deaths of their dying children in front of their own eyes are also lying when they describe those deaths in excruciating and awful detail.
Exactly how mental are you???
The person used these exact words “I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense.“ and “ I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.”
And from those two statements you walked away with an argument that the accounts “must be lies”? Must be lies? Are you literally deranged?
Right on. Carefully qualified statements from one poster. Complete misrepresentation of her position from the other.
Repeated misrepresentation. Brazenly going so far as to quote the actual words multiple times and, what, I guess hope that their shitty Jedi mind trick would prevent people from actually reading the goddamned words? The words couldn’t be more clear in establishing that the poster was NOT stating that the reporting MUST be based on lies, but I’m sure we’ll now hear from the “word salad” specialist and the “I’ll tell you what you REALLY mean!” thought crime experts to straighten all of this out. The “what do you want to do about your feelings?” poster from Ukraine or Poland or wherever is already on duty.
This is insane. The pro-Zionism part of this equation is absolutely, clinically deranged. And it should be lost on no one that this is an outcome that is perfectly acceptable to them. Show your deranged true colors, get people to throw their hands up and give up, and get the desired result of stopping the exchange of ideas that threatens to topple the status quo.
Absolutely disgusting human beings. And yes, I mean every last person who lies like these lunatics in furtherance of their desperate defense of Zionism. Still love anyone else Jewish or otherwise who recognizes the toxic insanity of Zionism.
you can present your ideas over and over, but people can still say "well, no thanks" over and over. Some might be ok with status quo. You are frustrating yourself by making changing the status quo a good or evil thing.
Feeling person, we get it.
I want a cessation of violence on both sides, consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence, and a good faith plan to establish a two-state plan that guarantees the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace, which will require compromise from both sides. And I want any further aid to the region conditioned upon the successful achievement of these goals. As far as I’m concerned, if Israel and the Palestinians can get across the finish lines, I’m supportive of INCREASING aid to both groups for a certain timeframe to position both states for long term success. I’d love to see them both flourish without the constant conflict, which both sides have earnestly contributed to.
That’s what I want. Is that clear enough for you?
Ok. None of that works for me. Palestinians can learn to live in peace where they are. Why does the United States need to give them a country and finance a country for them? Also, why would any one agree to this AFTER a terrorist attack. Terrorize, then follow my demands? Change status quo, because of my terrorism? Nope.
Your wants are based on a both-sidesism approach that we don't have to accept as pretext. Palestinians have not accepted offers, have lost wars, etc over the years, so there is not reason now to just give them what they want. Why? Because you want it and Palestinians want it is not a reason that makes it a requirement.
If Palestinians want all of this, they will only get it by going to war.
Agree. The US doesn't owe Palestinians anything. The Palestinians need to lose Hamas and drop their notions about violent extremism, and to integrate with peaceful society.
I don't know about that. It was the US and the UK that initially displaced the Palestinians that were living on that land before WW2. The UK pushed those people around like chess pieces because Europe did not want the surviving European Jews to remain in Europe. Why, because most of the European Jews homes had been confiscated by their former neighbors and friends and Europe wanted to push their crimes on to others to deal with.
And why is it that the UK and allies got in that position? It is because Palestine fought on the wrong side of the war in WWI and lost. Seems Palestinian Arabs have a long long history of continually getting into fights and being on the wrong side, then losing, and then still acting like they are the righteous who were wrongly aggrieved, despite having already lost that debate over and over and over again.
Really, that's what you have. It seems that the European Jewish population should have been provided with lands in Germany, Ukraine, Poland and Austria where they had lived for one-hundred plus years. And Palestine was a part of the British monarchy and many Palestinians like other British colonialist fought on behalf of GB in WW2. As a thank you, the Brits told them what they thought of their service, I mean servitude.
The Palestinian Arabs could have gone back to Arabia, where they lived for hundreds of years before coming to Palestine. So what's your point?
What? Palestinians have always been in that land. I also admit that so has people of the Jewish faith. My issue, with the partition of Palestine by the Brits is tantamount to me coming to your house and telling you to get the 'ef out or I will forcefully remove you and put someone else in your home. I guess PP you can go live in the house you lived in 30 years ago, but you gotta get the heck out of the current house because I'm (UK) moving in somebody else
All of the Greeks left Turkey, should they go back now?
I mean my husband and I are building our boat now to invade Orkney.
Good idea! I have a little Sioux blood from way back when, so I'm taking over Montana.
I think Montana would actually like some DC money to move in. Go for it!
Anonymous wrote:If anyone else is outraged by images on CNN of children stripped near naked and blindfolded by the IDF, know that this is standard Israeli practice, for years they have unlawfully detained and mistreated Palestinian children.
"Ramallah, 10 July – Palestinian children in the Israel military detention system face physical and emotional abuse, with four out of five (86%) of them being beaten, and 69% strip-searched, according to new research by Save the Children. Nearly half (42%) are injured at the point of arrest, including gunshot wounds and broken bones. Some report violence of a sexual nature and some are transferred to court or between detention centres in small cages, the child rights organisation said. "
Anonymous wrote:The victim mentality is really beyond what I even imagined.
Literally murdering thousands of kids and still screaming “everyone hates us for no reason!!”
It’s certifiable
It is certifiable that so many people hate Israelis and Jews, no?
It that every Jew is responsible for what Israeli policy is. Must mean every Muslim is pro Hamas / pro terrorist.
This is a good point. "If you don't support Hamas and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an Islamophobe who wants to genocide all Muslims" makes as much sense as "If you don't support Israel and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an antisemite who wants to genocide all Jews."
I suspect the previous poster(s) understands this, but they're backed into a corner and can only spew a smokescreen of insults. Which is a very dishonest practice.
DP
Everyone here is 100.00% anti-Hamas. What about that fact don't you get? Stop trying to gin up a defense for what Israel is doing by arguing that those opposed to those actions are supportive of Hamas. It's pathetic. Even you can do better.
Perhaps my post wasn't sufficiently clear? Of course everyone here is anti-Hamas and, more specifically, opposes its actions on 10/7. I was making a comparison between absurd conclusions. Nobody believes that opposing Hamas means you're a genocidal Islamophobe who hates Muslims. Similarly, nobody believes that opposing Israel means you're a genocidal antisemite who hates Jews. Well, almost nobody in both cases. Some people are deliberately obtuse or deceitful or too fanatical to think straight, and my post was aimed at these folk. I don't support either statement, which is ... kind of why I put them both in quotes.
That's objectively false. Can't be anti-Hamas and yet be their direct mouthpiece repeating their false claims and conspiracy theories.
Which I have done ... where, exactly? Another straw man. Sorry, but this is getting very boring.
Don't know if it was you or who, as posts are anonymous, but I'm definitely not the only one here who keeps seeing Hamas propaganda and false talking points popping up over and over again.
Which makes your role here what...? A confused person who doesn't know what's going on? Someone who is naive and lacks critical thinking skills? Clearly not, since you are also hyperfocused on rhetorical devices, like "ad hominem" and "strawman" which tells me you are here specifically to argue. Yet if that's the case, then why are you ignoring the instances where Hamas talking points are being used? Perhaps you overestimate the notion of plausible deniability?
The PP keeps throwing around the terms “ad hominem” and “strawman” as an attempt to discredit the detailed NYT reporting. She’s using those terms (incorrectly but whatever) to distract from the objectively horrific and meticulously detailed description of the vicious sexual torture used by Hamas on 10/7. If she can get people to mentally associate that detailed reporting with cheap rhetorical devices, it helps her cause. It’s a classic propagandist move, albeit an easily identifiable one. She’s a propagandist, just not a very skilled one.
DP
The NY Times account is horrifying. It would be impossible to look into the eyes of those parents and not feel tremendous sadness for them (and for the world, frankly, since what happened to their daughter is just horrific for our shared sense of humanity).
I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense. I don't think I have ever come across reporting related to severe trauma (and this reported trauma is probably as severe as one can imagine) where the eyewitness accounts are even 10% as vivid and detailed as the ones featured in the Times. I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.
You just did call everyone involved a liar.
I look forward to watching you say the same thing about the NYT’s meticulous reporting about the child deaths in Gaza and how those babies were killed and what their parents said they saw when their kids died in front of them. Are those parents, with their horrific details of watching their children bleed out and die in front them, also lying? Please do go on and tell me how the Palestinian parents who watched their children die in front of them are also lying.
DP. There is a mix of lies and truths. Yes, some Palestinian children have died, but there are also lies about how many died (such as the grossly exaggerated death count from Baptist Hospital). There are also lies about whose hands they died at. Yes, IDF killed some, but Hamas is also killing Palestinians, like when Hamas was trying to steal humanitarian aid for themselves rather than distribute it and they shot and killed hungry Palestinians who complained about it. Or when Hamas was trying to stop people from trying to evacuate. Or when civilians died because they were placed in harm's way by Hamas as human shields, or were killed because their home or shelter collapsed into Hamas tunnels when Hamas complexes were bombed.
Sure, but that’s not the point. The PP who is saying that the detailed eyewitness accounts of sexual torture must be lies because the shock and trauma should have prevented the creation of vivid and detailed memories of that torture needs to also then come out and say that the Palestinian parents who described watching their child bleed out in front of them in vivid detail are also lying because that level of shock and trauma should have prevented those parents from forming those memories. If she’s taking the position that the stories of sexual torture can’t be true because of “shock and trauma” then she needs to be consistent in how that theory is applied. Unless, of course, she’s taking the position that only Jewish women have this peculiar inability to remember unspeakable horrors, which is what I suspect she’s really getting at.
In any case, I look forward to reading her statements that the Palestinian parents who described the horrific and slow deaths of their dying children in front of their own eyes are also lying when they describe those deaths in excruciating and awful detail.
Exactly how mental are you???
The person used these exact words “I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense.“ and “ I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.”
And from those two statements you walked away with an argument that the accounts “must be lies”? Must be lies? Are you literally deranged?
Right on. Carefully qualified statements from one poster. Complete misrepresentation of her position from the other.
Repeated misrepresentation. Brazenly going so far as to quote the actual words multiple times and, what, I guess hope that their shitty Jedi mind trick would prevent people from actually reading the goddamned words? The words couldn’t be more clear in establishing that the poster was NOT stating that the reporting MUST be based on lies, but I’m sure we’ll now hear from the “word salad” specialist and the “I’ll tell you what you REALLY mean!” thought crime experts to straighten all of this out. The “what do you want to do about your feelings?” poster from Ukraine or Poland or wherever is already on duty.
This is insane. The pro-Zionism part of this equation is absolutely, clinically deranged. And it should be lost on no one that this is an outcome that is perfectly acceptable to them. Show your deranged true colors, get people to throw their hands up and give up, and get the desired result of stopping the exchange of ideas that threatens to topple the status quo.
Absolutely disgusting human beings. And yes, I mean every last person who lies like these lunatics in furtherance of their desperate defense of Zionism. Still love anyone else Jewish or otherwise who recognizes the toxic insanity of Zionism.
you can present your ideas over and over, but people can still say "well, no thanks" over and over. Some might be ok with status quo. You are frustrating yourself by making changing the status quo a good or evil thing.
Feeling person, we get it.
I want a cessation of violence on both sides, consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence, and a good faith plan to establish a two-state plan that guarantees the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace, which will require compromise from both sides. And I want any further aid to the region conditioned upon the successful achievement of these goals. As far as I’m concerned, if Israel and the Palestinians can get across the finish lines, I’m supportive of INCREASING aid to both groups for a certain timeframe to position both states for long term success. I’d love to see them both flourish without the constant conflict, which both sides have earnestly contributed to.
That’s what I want. Is that clear enough for you?
Do you want Hamas gone? Because you didn’t mention that.
Yeah, of course Hamas being dismantled and being brought to justice is a necessity.
That’s why “consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence” was the second aim. Hamas is one such party, but there are also others. Other militant groups on the Palestinian side, the militant settlers and certain Likud officials on the Israeli side, and any IDF personnel who have engaged in conduct that violates the law of armed conflict.
All of the above should be brought to swift and unrelenting justice as part of that second aim.
If you want every wrong thing in the world addressed, what about goings on in Saudi Arabia? Syria? Belarus? South Africa? Indonesia? Why are you soooo focused on Israel?
Because the only 75+ year refugee group involved in any of those countries is in Israel. Because the U.S. provides more financial aid and U.N. interference for Israel than any of those countries. And because there is no end in sight to this conflict.
Why are you soooo focused on ensuring the status quo on Israel?
Anonymous wrote:The victim mentality is really beyond what I even imagined.
Literally murdering thousands of kids and still screaming “everyone hates us for no reason!!”
It’s certifiable
It is certifiable that so many people hate Israelis and Jews, no?
It that every Jew is responsible for what Israeli policy is. Must mean every Muslim is pro Hamas / pro terrorist.
This is a good point. "If you don't support Hamas and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an Islamophobe who wants to genocide all Muslims" makes as much sense as "If you don't support Israel and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an antisemite who wants to genocide all Jews."
I suspect the previous poster(s) understands this, but they're backed into a corner and can only spew a smokescreen of insults. Which is a very dishonest practice.
DP
Everyone here is 100.00% anti-Hamas. What about that fact don't you get? Stop trying to gin up a defense for what Israel is doing by arguing that those opposed to those actions are supportive of Hamas. It's pathetic. Even you can do better.
Perhaps my post wasn't sufficiently clear? Of course everyone here is anti-Hamas and, more specifically, opposes its actions on 10/7. I was making a comparison between absurd conclusions. Nobody believes that opposing Hamas means you're a genocidal Islamophobe who hates Muslims. Similarly, nobody believes that opposing Israel means you're a genocidal antisemite who hates Jews. Well, almost nobody in both cases. Some people are deliberately obtuse or deceitful or too fanatical to think straight, and my post was aimed at these folk. I don't support either statement, which is ... kind of why I put them both in quotes.
That's objectively false. Can't be anti-Hamas and yet be their direct mouthpiece repeating their false claims and conspiracy theories.
Which I have done ... where, exactly? Another straw man. Sorry, but this is getting very boring.
Don't know if it was you or who, as posts are anonymous, but I'm definitely not the only one here who keeps seeing Hamas propaganda and false talking points popping up over and over again.
Which makes your role here what...? A confused person who doesn't know what's going on? Someone who is naive and lacks critical thinking skills? Clearly not, since you are also hyperfocused on rhetorical devices, like "ad hominem" and "strawman" which tells me you are here specifically to argue. Yet if that's the case, then why are you ignoring the instances where Hamas talking points are being used? Perhaps you overestimate the notion of plausible deniability?
The PP keeps throwing around the terms “ad hominem” and “strawman” as an attempt to discredit the detailed NYT reporting. She’s using those terms (incorrectly but whatever) to distract from the objectively horrific and meticulously detailed description of the vicious sexual torture used by Hamas on 10/7. If she can get people to mentally associate that detailed reporting with cheap rhetorical devices, it helps her cause. It’s a classic propagandist move, albeit an easily identifiable one. She’s a propagandist, just not a very skilled one.
DP
The NY Times account is horrifying. It would be impossible to look into the eyes of those parents and not feel tremendous sadness for them (and for the world, frankly, since what happened to their daughter is just horrific for our shared sense of humanity).
I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense. I don't think I have ever come across reporting related to severe trauma (and this reported trauma is probably as severe as one can imagine) where the eyewitness accounts are even 10% as vivid and detailed as the ones featured in the Times. I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.
You just did call everyone involved a liar.
I look forward to watching you say the same thing about the NYT’s meticulous reporting about the child deaths in Gaza and how those babies were killed and what their parents said they saw when their kids died in front of them. Are those parents, with their horrific details of watching their children bleed out and die in front them, also lying? Please do go on and tell me how the Palestinian parents who watched their children die in front of them are also lying.
DP. There is a mix of lies and truths. Yes, some Palestinian children have died, but there are also lies about how many died (such as the grossly exaggerated death count from Baptist Hospital). There are also lies about whose hands they died at. Yes, IDF killed some, but Hamas is also killing Palestinians, like when Hamas was trying to steal humanitarian aid for themselves rather than distribute it and they shot and killed hungry Palestinians who complained about it. Or when Hamas was trying to stop people from trying to evacuate. Or when civilians died because they were placed in harm's way by Hamas as human shields, or were killed because their home or shelter collapsed into Hamas tunnels when Hamas complexes were bombed.
Sure, but that’s not the point. The PP who is saying that the detailed eyewitness accounts of sexual torture must be lies because the shock and trauma should have prevented the creation of vivid and detailed memories of that torture needs to also then come out and say that the Palestinian parents who described watching their child bleed out in front of them in vivid detail are also lying because that level of shock and trauma should have prevented those parents from forming those memories. If she’s taking the position that the stories of sexual torture can’t be true because of “shock and trauma” then she needs to be consistent in how that theory is applied. Unless, of course, she’s taking the position that only Jewish women have this peculiar inability to remember unspeakable horrors, which is what I suspect she’s really getting at.
In any case, I look forward to reading her statements that the Palestinian parents who described the horrific and slow deaths of their dying children in front of their own eyes are also lying when they describe those deaths in excruciating and awful detail.
Exactly how mental are you???
The person used these exact words “I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense.“ and “ I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.”
And from those two statements you walked away with an argument that the accounts “must be lies”? Must be lies? Are you literally deranged?
Right on. Carefully qualified statements from one poster. Complete misrepresentation of her position from the other.
Repeated misrepresentation. Brazenly going so far as to quote the actual words multiple times and, what, I guess hope that their shitty Jedi mind trick would prevent people from actually reading the goddamned words? The words couldn’t be more clear in establishing that the poster was NOT stating that the reporting MUST be based on lies, but I’m sure we’ll now hear from the “word salad” specialist and the “I’ll tell you what you REALLY mean!” thought crime experts to straighten all of this out. The “what do you want to do about your feelings?” poster from Ukraine or Poland or wherever is already on duty.
This is insane. The pro-Zionism part of this equation is absolutely, clinically deranged. And it should be lost on no one that this is an outcome that is perfectly acceptable to them. Show your deranged true colors, get people to throw their hands up and give up, and get the desired result of stopping the exchange of ideas that threatens to topple the status quo.
Absolutely disgusting human beings. And yes, I mean every last person who lies like these lunatics in furtherance of their desperate defense of Zionism. Still love anyone else Jewish or otherwise who recognizes the toxic insanity of Zionism.
you can present your ideas over and over, but people can still say "well, no thanks" over and over. Some might be ok with status quo. You are frustrating yourself by making changing the status quo a good or evil thing.
Feeling person, we get it.
I want a cessation of violence on both sides, consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence, and a good faith plan to establish a two-state plan that guarantees the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace, which will require compromise from both sides. And I want any further aid to the region conditioned upon the successful achievement of these goals. As far as I’m concerned, if Israel and the Palestinians can get across the finish lines, I’m supportive of INCREASING aid to both groups for a certain timeframe to position both states for long term success. I’d love to see them both flourish without the constant conflict, which both sides have earnestly contributed to.
That’s what I want. Is that clear enough for you?
Ok. None of that works for me. Palestinians can learn to live in peace where they are. Why does the United States need to give them a country and finance a country for them? Also, why would any one agree to this AFTER a terrorist attack. Terrorize, then follow my demands? Change status quo, because of my terrorism? Nope.
Your wants are based on a both-sidesism approach that we don't have to accept as pretext. Palestinians have not accepted offers, have lost wars, etc over the years, so there is not reason now to just give them what they want. Why? Because you want it and Palestinians want it is not a reason that makes it a requirement.
If Palestinians want all of this, they will only get it by going to war.
Agree. The US doesn't owe Palestinians anything. The Palestinians need to lose Hamas and drop their notions about violent extremism, and to integrate with peaceful society.
I don't know about that. It was the US and the UK that initially displaced the Palestinians that were living on that land before WW2. The UK pushed those people around like chess pieces because Europe did not want the surviving European Jews to remain in Europe. Why, because most of the European Jews homes had been confiscated by their former neighbors and friends and Europe wanted to push their crimes on to others to deal with.
And why is it that the UK and allies got in that position? It is because Palestine fought on the wrong side of the war in WWI and lost. Seems Palestinian Arabs have a long long history of continually getting into fights and being on the wrong side, then losing, and then still acting like they are the righteous who were wrongly aggrieved, despite having already lost that debate over and over and over again.
Really, that's what you have. It seems that the European Jewish population should have been provided with lands in Germany, Ukraine, Poland and Austria where they had lived for one-hundred plus years. And Palestine was a part of the British monarchy and many Palestinians like other British colonialist fought on behalf of GB in WW2. As a thank you, the Brits told them what they thought of their service, I mean servitude.
The Palestinian Arabs could have gone back to Arabia, where they lived for hundreds of years before coming to Palestine. So what's your point?
What? Palestinians have always been in that land. I also admit that so has people of the Jewish faith. My issue, with the partition of Palestine by the Brits is tantamount to me coming to your house and telling you to get the 'ef out or I will forcefully remove you and put someone else in your home. I guess PP you can go live in the house you lived in 30 years ago, but you gotta get the heck out of the current house because I'm (UK) moving in somebody else
All of the Greeks left Turkey, should they go back now?
I mean my husband and I are building our boat now to invade Orkney.
Good idea! I have a little Sioux blood from way back when, so I'm taking over Montana.
All modern humans are descended from Mitochondrial Eve, who probably lived in what is now Ethiopia. We're all owed land in Ethiopia, folks.
Anonymous wrote:The victim mentality is really beyond what I even imagined.
Literally murdering thousands of kids and still screaming “everyone hates us for no reason!!”
It’s certifiable
It is certifiable that so many people hate Israelis and Jews, no?
It that every Jew is responsible for what Israeli policy is. Must mean every Muslim is pro Hamas / pro terrorist.
This is a good point. "If you don't support Hamas and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an Islamophobe who wants to genocide all Muslims" makes as much sense as "If you don't support Israel and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an antisemite who wants to genocide all Jews."
I suspect the previous poster(s) understands this, but they're backed into a corner and can only spew a smokescreen of insults. Which is a very dishonest practice.
DP
Everyone here is 100.00% anti-Hamas. What about that fact don't you get? Stop trying to gin up a defense for what Israel is doing by arguing that those opposed to those actions are supportive of Hamas. It's pathetic. Even you can do better.
Perhaps my post wasn't sufficiently clear? Of course everyone here is anti-Hamas and, more specifically, opposes its actions on 10/7. I was making a comparison between absurd conclusions. Nobody believes that opposing Hamas means you're a genocidal Islamophobe who hates Muslims. Similarly, nobody believes that opposing Israel means you're a genocidal antisemite who hates Jews. Well, almost nobody in both cases. Some people are deliberately obtuse or deceitful or too fanatical to think straight, and my post was aimed at these folk. I don't support either statement, which is ... kind of why I put them both in quotes.
That's objectively false. Can't be anti-Hamas and yet be their direct mouthpiece repeating their false claims and conspiracy theories.
Which I have done ... where, exactly? Another straw man. Sorry, but this is getting very boring.
Don't know if it was you or who, as posts are anonymous, but I'm definitely not the only one here who keeps seeing Hamas propaganda and false talking points popping up over and over again.
Which makes your role here what...? A confused person who doesn't know what's going on? Someone who is naive and lacks critical thinking skills? Clearly not, since you are also hyperfocused on rhetorical devices, like "ad hominem" and "strawman" which tells me you are here specifically to argue. Yet if that's the case, then why are you ignoring the instances where Hamas talking points are being used? Perhaps you overestimate the notion of plausible deniability?
The PP keeps throwing around the terms “ad hominem” and “strawman” as an attempt to discredit the detailed NYT reporting. She’s using those terms (incorrectly but whatever) to distract from the objectively horrific and meticulously detailed description of the vicious sexual torture used by Hamas on 10/7. If she can get people to mentally associate that detailed reporting with cheap rhetorical devices, it helps her cause. It’s a classic propagandist move, albeit an easily identifiable one. She’s a propagandist, just not a very skilled one.
DP
The NY Times account is horrifying. It would be impossible to look into the eyes of those parents and not feel tremendous sadness for them (and for the world, frankly, since what happened to their daughter is just horrific for our shared sense of humanity).
I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense. I don't think I have ever come across reporting related to severe trauma (and this reported trauma is probably as severe as one can imagine) where the eyewitness accounts are even 10% as vivid and detailed as the ones featured in the Times. I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.
You just did call everyone involved a liar.
I look forward to watching you say the same thing about the NYT’s meticulous reporting about the child deaths in Gaza and how those babies were killed and what their parents said they saw when their kids died in front of them. Are those parents, with their horrific details of watching their children bleed out and die in front them, also lying? Please do go on and tell me how the Palestinian parents who watched their children die in front of them are also lying.
DP. There is a mix of lies and truths. Yes, some Palestinian children have died, but there are also lies about how many died (such as the grossly exaggerated death count from Baptist Hospital). There are also lies about whose hands they died at. Yes, IDF killed some, but Hamas is also killing Palestinians, like when Hamas was trying to steal humanitarian aid for themselves rather than distribute it and they shot and killed hungry Palestinians who complained about it. Or when Hamas was trying to stop people from trying to evacuate. Or when civilians died because they were placed in harm's way by Hamas as human shields, or were killed because their home or shelter collapsed into Hamas tunnels when Hamas complexes were bombed.
Sure, but that’s not the point. The PP who is saying that the detailed eyewitness accounts of sexual torture must be lies because the shock and trauma should have prevented the creation of vivid and detailed memories of that torture needs to also then come out and say that the Palestinian parents who described watching their child bleed out in front of them in vivid detail are also lying because that level of shock and trauma should have prevented those parents from forming those memories. If she’s taking the position that the stories of sexual torture can’t be true because of “shock and trauma” then she needs to be consistent in how that theory is applied. Unless, of course, she’s taking the position that only Jewish women have this peculiar inability to remember unspeakable horrors, which is what I suspect she’s really getting at.
In any case, I look forward to reading her statements that the Palestinian parents who described the horrific and slow deaths of their dying children in front of their own eyes are also lying when they describe those deaths in excruciating and awful detail.
Exactly how mental are you???
The person used these exact words “I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense.“ and “ I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.”
And from those two statements you walked away with an argument that the accounts “must be lies”? Must be lies? Are you literally deranged?
Right on. Carefully qualified statements from one poster. Complete misrepresentation of her position from the other.
Repeated misrepresentation. Brazenly going so far as to quote the actual words multiple times and, what, I guess hope that their shitty Jedi mind trick would prevent people from actually reading the goddamned words? The words couldn’t be more clear in establishing that the poster was NOT stating that the reporting MUST be based on lies, but I’m sure we’ll now hear from the “word salad” specialist and the “I’ll tell you what you REALLY mean!” thought crime experts to straighten all of this out. The “what do you want to do about your feelings?” poster from Ukraine or Poland or wherever is already on duty.
This is insane. The pro-Zionism part of this equation is absolutely, clinically deranged. And it should be lost on no one that this is an outcome that is perfectly acceptable to them. Show your deranged true colors, get people to throw their hands up and give up, and get the desired result of stopping the exchange of ideas that threatens to topple the status quo.
Absolutely disgusting human beings. And yes, I mean every last person who lies like these lunatics in furtherance of their desperate defense of Zionism. Still love anyone else Jewish or otherwise who recognizes the toxic insanity of Zionism.
you can present your ideas over and over, but people can still say "well, no thanks" over and over. Some might be ok with status quo. You are frustrating yourself by making changing the status quo a good or evil thing.
Feeling person, we get it.
I want a cessation of violence on both sides, consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence, and a good faith plan to establish a two-state plan that guarantees the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace, which will require compromise from both sides. And I want any further aid to the region conditioned upon the successful achievement of these goals. As far as I’m concerned, if Israel and the Palestinians can get across the finish lines, I’m supportive of INCREASING aid to both groups for a certain timeframe to position both states for long term success. I’d love to see them both flourish without the constant conflict, which both sides have earnestly contributed to.
That’s what I want. Is that clear enough for you?
Do you want Hamas gone? Because you didn’t mention that.
Yeah, of course Hamas being dismantled and being brought to justice is a necessity.
That’s why “consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence” was the second aim. Hamas is one such party, but there are also others. Other militant groups on the Palestinian side, the militant settlers and certain Likud officials on the Israeli side, and any IDF personnel who have engaged in conduct that violates the law of armed conflict.
All of the above should be brought to swift and unrelenting justice as part of that second aim.
I did ask for a better brand of troll in another thread and here's the one floating the balloon that "both sides" "need swift and unrelenting justice."
What could go wrong?
These arguments aren't grounded in the real world. They're grounded in slogans and fantasies and that's really quite dangerous.
Is it only one side that has parties requiring swift and unrelenting justice?
Anonymous wrote:The victim mentality is really beyond what I even imagined.
Literally murdering thousands of kids and still screaming “everyone hates us for no reason!!”
It’s certifiable
It is certifiable that so many people hate Israelis and Jews, no?
It that every Jew is responsible for what Israeli policy is. Must mean every Muslim is pro Hamas / pro terrorist.
This is a good point. "If you don't support Hamas and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an Islamophobe who wants to genocide all Muslims" makes as much sense as "If you don't support Israel and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an antisemite who wants to genocide all Jews."
I suspect the previous poster(s) understands this, but they're backed into a corner and can only spew a smokescreen of insults. Which is a very dishonest practice.
DP
Everyone here is 100.00% anti-Hamas. What about that fact don't you get? Stop trying to gin up a defense for what Israel is doing by arguing that those opposed to those actions are supportive of Hamas. It's pathetic. Even you can do better.
Perhaps my post wasn't sufficiently clear? Of course everyone here is anti-Hamas and, more specifically, opposes its actions on 10/7. I was making a comparison between absurd conclusions. Nobody believes that opposing Hamas means you're a genocidal Islamophobe who hates Muslims. Similarly, nobody believes that opposing Israel means you're a genocidal antisemite who hates Jews. Well, almost nobody in both cases. Some people are deliberately obtuse or deceitful or too fanatical to think straight, and my post was aimed at these folk. I don't support either statement, which is ... kind of why I put them both in quotes.
That's objectively false. Can't be anti-Hamas and yet be their direct mouthpiece repeating their false claims and conspiracy theories.
Which I have done ... where, exactly? Another straw man. Sorry, but this is getting very boring.
Don't know if it was you or who, as posts are anonymous, but I'm definitely not the only one here who keeps seeing Hamas propaganda and false talking points popping up over and over again.
Which makes your role here what...? A confused person who doesn't know what's going on? Someone who is naive and lacks critical thinking skills? Clearly not, since you are also hyperfocused on rhetorical devices, like "ad hominem" and "strawman" which tells me you are here specifically to argue. Yet if that's the case, then why are you ignoring the instances where Hamas talking points are being used? Perhaps you overestimate the notion of plausible deniability?
The PP keeps throwing around the terms “ad hominem” and “strawman” as an attempt to discredit the detailed NYT reporting. She’s using those terms (incorrectly but whatever) to distract from the objectively horrific and meticulously detailed description of the vicious sexual torture used by Hamas on 10/7. If she can get people to mentally associate that detailed reporting with cheap rhetorical devices, it helps her cause. It’s a classic propagandist move, albeit an easily identifiable one. She’s a propagandist, just not a very skilled one.
DP
The NY Times account is horrifying. It would be impossible to look into the eyes of those parents and not feel tremendous sadness for them (and for the world, frankly, since what happened to their daughter is just horrific for our shared sense of humanity).
I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense. I don't think I have ever come across reporting related to severe trauma (and this reported trauma is probably as severe as one can imagine) where the eyewitness accounts are even 10% as vivid and detailed as the ones featured in the Times. I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.
You just did call everyone involved a liar.
I look forward to watching you say the same thing about the NYT’s meticulous reporting about the child deaths in Gaza and how those babies were killed and what their parents said they saw when their kids died in front of them. Are those parents, with their horrific details of watching their children bleed out and die in front them, also lying? Please do go on and tell me how the Palestinian parents who watched their children die in front of them are also lying.
DP. There is a mix of lies and truths. Yes, some Palestinian children have died, but there are also lies about how many died (such as the grossly exaggerated death count from Baptist Hospital). There are also lies about whose hands they died at. Yes, IDF killed some, but Hamas is also killing Palestinians, like when Hamas was trying to steal humanitarian aid for themselves rather than distribute it and they shot and killed hungry Palestinians who complained about it. Or when Hamas was trying to stop people from trying to evacuate. Or when civilians died because they were placed in harm's way by Hamas as human shields, or were killed because their home or shelter collapsed into Hamas tunnels when Hamas complexes were bombed.
Sure, but that’s not the point. The PP who is saying that the detailed eyewitness accounts of sexual torture must be lies because the shock and trauma should have prevented the creation of vivid and detailed memories of that torture needs to also then come out and say that the Palestinian parents who described watching their child bleed out in front of them in vivid detail are also lying because that level of shock and trauma should have prevented those parents from forming those memories. If she’s taking the position that the stories of sexual torture can’t be true because of “shock and trauma” then she needs to be consistent in how that theory is applied. Unless, of course, she’s taking the position that only Jewish women have this peculiar inability to remember unspeakable horrors, which is what I suspect she’s really getting at.
In any case, I look forward to reading her statements that the Palestinian parents who described the horrific and slow deaths of their dying children in front of their own eyes are also lying when they describe those deaths in excruciating and awful detail.
Exactly how mental are you???
The person used these exact words “I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense.“ and “ I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.”
And from those two statements you walked away with an argument that the accounts “must be lies”? Must be lies? Are you literally deranged?
Right on. Carefully qualified statements from one poster. Complete misrepresentation of her position from the other.
Repeated misrepresentation. Brazenly going so far as to quote the actual words multiple times and, what, I guess hope that their shitty Jedi mind trick would prevent people from actually reading the goddamned words? The words couldn’t be more clear in establishing that the poster was NOT stating that the reporting MUST be based on lies, but I’m sure we’ll now hear from the “word salad” specialist and the “I’ll tell you what you REALLY mean!” thought crime experts to straighten all of this out. The “what do you want to do about your feelings?” poster from Ukraine or Poland or wherever is already on duty.
This is insane. The pro-Zionism part of this equation is absolutely, clinically deranged. And it should be lost on no one that this is an outcome that is perfectly acceptable to them. Show your deranged true colors, get people to throw their hands up and give up, and get the desired result of stopping the exchange of ideas that threatens to topple the status quo.
Absolutely disgusting human beings. And yes, I mean every last person who lies like these lunatics in furtherance of their desperate defense of Zionism. Still love anyone else Jewish or otherwise who recognizes the toxic insanity of Zionism.
you can present your ideas over and over, but people can still say "well, no thanks" over and over. Some might be ok with status quo. You are frustrating yourself by making changing the status quo a good or evil thing.
Feeling person, we get it.
I want a cessation of violence on both sides, consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence, and a good faith plan to establish a two-state plan that guarantees the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace, which will require compromise from both sides. And I want any further aid to the region conditioned upon the successful achievement of these goals. As far as I’m concerned, if Israel and the Palestinians can get across the finish lines, I’m supportive of INCREASING aid to both groups for a certain timeframe to position both states for long term success. I’d love to see them both flourish without the constant conflict, which both sides have earnestly contributed to.
That’s what I want. Is that clear enough for you?
Ok. None of that works for me. Palestinians can learn to live in peace where they are. Why does the United States need to give them a country and finance a country for them? Also, why would any one agree to this AFTER a terrorist attack. Terrorize, then follow my demands? Change status quo, because of my terrorism? Nope.
Your wants are based on a both-sidesism approach that we don't have to accept as pretext. Palestinians have not accepted offers, have lost wars, etc over the years, so there is not reason now to just give them what they want. Why? Because you want it and Palestinians want it is not a reason that makes it a requirement.
If Palestinians want all of this, they will only get it by going to war.
Agree. The US doesn't owe Palestinians anything. The Palestinians need to lose Hamas and drop their notions about violent extremism, and to integrate with peaceful society.
I don't know about that. It was the US and the UK that initially displaced the Palestinians that were living on that land before WW2. The UK pushed those people around like chess pieces because Europe did not want the surviving European Jews to remain in Europe. Why, because most of the European Jews homes had been confiscated by their former neighbors and friends and Europe wanted to push their crimes on to others to deal with.
And why is it that the UK and allies got in that position? It is because Palestine fought on the wrong side of the war in WWI and lost. Seems Palestinian Arabs have a long long history of continually getting into fights and being on the wrong side, then losing, and then still acting like they are the righteous who were wrongly aggrieved, despite having already lost that debate over and over and over again.
Really, that's what you have. It seems that the European Jewish population should have been provided with lands in Germany, Ukraine, Poland and Austria where they had lived for one-hundred plus years. And Palestine was a part of the British monarchy and many Palestinians like other British colonialist fought on behalf of GB in WW2. As a thank you, the Brits told them what they thought of their service, I mean servitude.
The Palestinian Arabs could have gone back to Arabia, where they lived for hundreds of years before coming to Palestine. So what's your point?
What? Palestinians have always been in that land. I also admit that so has people of the Jewish faith. My issue, with the partition of Palestine by the Brits is tantamount to me coming to your house and telling you to get the 'ef out or I will forcefully remove you and put someone else in your home. I guess PP you can go live in the house you lived in 30 years ago, but you gotta get the heck out of the current house because I'm (UK) moving in somebody else
All of the Greeks left Turkey, should they go back now?
I mean my husband and I are building our boat now to invade Orkney.
Good idea! I have a little Sioux blood from way back when, so I'm taking over Montana.
I think Montana would actually like some DC money to move in. Go for it!
Montana citizens are actually quite pissed that so much techbro money has settled there already.
Anonymous wrote:The victim mentality is really beyond what I even imagined.
Literally murdering thousands of kids and still screaming “everyone hates us for no reason!!”
It’s certifiable
It is certifiable that so many people hate Israelis and Jews, no?
It that every Jew is responsible for what Israeli policy is. Must mean every Muslim is pro Hamas / pro terrorist.
This is a good point. "If you don't support Hamas and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an Islamophobe who wants to genocide all Muslims" makes as much sense as "If you don't support Israel and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an antisemite who wants to genocide all Jews."
I suspect the previous poster(s) understands this, but they're backed into a corner and can only spew a smokescreen of insults. Which is a very dishonest practice.
DP
Everyone here is 100.00% anti-Hamas. What about that fact don't you get? Stop trying to gin up a defense for what Israel is doing by arguing that those opposed to those actions are supportive of Hamas. It's pathetic. Even you can do better.
Perhaps my post wasn't sufficiently clear? Of course everyone here is anti-Hamas and, more specifically, opposes its actions on 10/7. I was making a comparison between absurd conclusions. Nobody believes that opposing Hamas means you're a genocidal Islamophobe who hates Muslims. Similarly, nobody believes that opposing Israel means you're a genocidal antisemite who hates Jews. Well, almost nobody in both cases. Some people are deliberately obtuse or deceitful or too fanatical to think straight, and my post was aimed at these folk. I don't support either statement, which is ... kind of why I put them both in quotes.
That's objectively false. Can't be anti-Hamas and yet be their direct mouthpiece repeating their false claims and conspiracy theories.
Which I have done ... where, exactly? Another straw man. Sorry, but this is getting very boring.
Don't know if it was you or who, as posts are anonymous, but I'm definitely not the only one here who keeps seeing Hamas propaganda and false talking points popping up over and over again.
Which makes your role here what...? A confused person who doesn't know what's going on? Someone who is naive and lacks critical thinking skills? Clearly not, since you are also hyperfocused on rhetorical devices, like "ad hominem" and "strawman" which tells me you are here specifically to argue. Yet if that's the case, then why are you ignoring the instances where Hamas talking points are being used? Perhaps you overestimate the notion of plausible deniability?
The PP keeps throwing around the terms “ad hominem” and “strawman” as an attempt to discredit the detailed NYT reporting. She’s using those terms (incorrectly but whatever) to distract from the objectively horrific and meticulously detailed description of the vicious sexual torture used by Hamas on 10/7. If she can get people to mentally associate that detailed reporting with cheap rhetorical devices, it helps her cause. It’s a classic propagandist move, albeit an easily identifiable one. She’s a propagandist, just not a very skilled one.
DP
The NY Times account is horrifying. It would be impossible to look into the eyes of those parents and not feel tremendous sadness for them (and for the world, frankly, since what happened to their daughter is just horrific for our shared sense of humanity).
I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense. I don't think I have ever come across reporting related to severe trauma (and this reported trauma is probably as severe as one can imagine) where the eyewitness accounts are even 10% as vivid and detailed as the ones featured in the Times. I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.
You just did call everyone involved a liar.
I look forward to watching you say the same thing about the NYT’s meticulous reporting about the child deaths in Gaza and how those babies were killed and what their parents said they saw when their kids died in front of them. Are those parents, with their horrific details of watching their children bleed out and die in front them, also lying? Please do go on and tell me how the Palestinian parents who watched their children die in front of them are also lying.
DP. There is a mix of lies and truths. Yes, some Palestinian children have died, but there are also lies about how many died (such as the grossly exaggerated death count from Baptist Hospital). There are also lies about whose hands they died at. Yes, IDF killed some, but Hamas is also killing Palestinians, like when Hamas was trying to steal humanitarian aid for themselves rather than distribute it and they shot and killed hungry Palestinians who complained about it. Or when Hamas was trying to stop people from trying to evacuate. Or when civilians died because they were placed in harm's way by Hamas as human shields, or were killed because their home or shelter collapsed into Hamas tunnels when Hamas complexes were bombed.
Sure, but that’s not the point. The PP who is saying that the detailed eyewitness accounts of sexual torture must be lies because the shock and trauma should have prevented the creation of vivid and detailed memories of that torture needs to also then come out and say that the Palestinian parents who described watching their child bleed out in front of them in vivid detail are also lying because that level of shock and trauma should have prevented those parents from forming those memories. If she’s taking the position that the stories of sexual torture can’t be true because of “shock and trauma” then she needs to be consistent in how that theory is applied. Unless, of course, she’s taking the position that only Jewish women have this peculiar inability to remember unspeakable horrors, which is what I suspect she’s really getting at.
In any case, I look forward to reading her statements that the Palestinian parents who described the horrific and slow deaths of their dying children in front of their own eyes are also lying when they describe those deaths in excruciating and awful detail.
Exactly how mental are you???
The person used these exact words “I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense.“ and “ I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.”
And from those two statements you walked away with an argument that the accounts “must be lies”? Must be lies? Are you literally deranged?
Right on. Carefully qualified statements from one poster. Complete misrepresentation of her position from the other.
Repeated misrepresentation. Brazenly going so far as to quote the actual words multiple times and, what, I guess hope that their shitty Jedi mind trick would prevent people from actually reading the goddamned words? The words couldn’t be more clear in establishing that the poster was NOT stating that the reporting MUST be based on lies, but I’m sure we’ll now hear from the “word salad” specialist and the “I’ll tell you what you REALLY mean!” thought crime experts to straighten all of this out. The “what do you want to do about your feelings?” poster from Ukraine or Poland or wherever is already on duty.
This is insane. The pro-Zionism part of this equation is absolutely, clinically deranged. And it should be lost on no one that this is an outcome that is perfectly acceptable to them. Show your deranged true colors, get people to throw their hands up and give up, and get the desired result of stopping the exchange of ideas that threatens to topple the status quo.
Absolutely disgusting human beings. And yes, I mean every last person who lies like these lunatics in furtherance of their desperate defense of Zionism. Still love anyone else Jewish or otherwise who recognizes the toxic insanity of Zionism.
you can present your ideas over and over, but people can still say "well, no thanks" over and over. Some might be ok with status quo. You are frustrating yourself by making changing the status quo a good or evil thing.
Feeling person, we get it.
I want a cessation of violence on both sides, consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence, and a good faith plan to establish a two-state plan that guarantees the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace, which will require compromise from both sides. And I want any further aid to the region conditioned upon the successful achievement of these goals. As far as I’m concerned, if Israel and the Palestinians can get across the finish lines, I’m supportive of INCREASING aid to both groups for a certain timeframe to position both states for long term success. I’d love to see them both flourish without the constant conflict, which both sides have earnestly contributed to.
That’s what I want. Is that clear enough for you?
Do you want Hamas gone? Because you didn’t mention that.
Yeah, of course Hamas being dismantled and being brought to justice is a necessity.
That’s why “consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence” was the second aim. Hamas is one such party, but there are also others. Other militant groups on the Palestinian side, the militant settlers and certain Likud officials on the Israeli side, and any IDF personnel who have engaged in conduct that violates the law of armed conflict.
All of the above should be brought to swift and unrelenting justice as part of that second aim.
I did ask for a better brand of troll in another thread and here's the one floating the balloon that "both sides" "need swift and unrelenting justice."
What could go wrong?
These arguments aren't grounded in the real world. They're grounded in slogans and fantasies and that's really quite dangerous.
Is it only one side that has parties requiring swift and unrelenting justice?
I think you just like saying that phrase. I bet you say it when you're playing Elden Ring all the time.
Anonymous wrote:The victim mentality is really beyond what I even imagined.
Literally murdering thousands of kids and still screaming “everyone hates us for no reason!!”
It’s certifiable
It is certifiable that so many people hate Israelis and Jews, no?
It that every Jew is responsible for what Israeli policy is. Must mean every Muslim is pro Hamas / pro terrorist.
This is a good point. "If you don't support Hamas and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an Islamophobe who wants to genocide all Muslims" makes as much sense as "If you don't support Israel and believe everything it says unconditionally, you must be an antisemite who wants to genocide all Jews."
I suspect the previous poster(s) understands this, but they're backed into a corner and can only spew a smokescreen of insults. Which is a very dishonest practice.
DP
Everyone here is 100.00% anti-Hamas. What about that fact don't you get? Stop trying to gin up a defense for what Israel is doing by arguing that those opposed to those actions are supportive of Hamas. It's pathetic. Even you can do better.
Perhaps my post wasn't sufficiently clear? Of course everyone here is anti-Hamas and, more specifically, opposes its actions on 10/7. I was making a comparison between absurd conclusions. Nobody believes that opposing Hamas means you're a genocidal Islamophobe who hates Muslims. Similarly, nobody believes that opposing Israel means you're a genocidal antisemite who hates Jews. Well, almost nobody in both cases. Some people are deliberately obtuse or deceitful or too fanatical to think straight, and my post was aimed at these folk. I don't support either statement, which is ... kind of why I put them both in quotes.
That's objectively false. Can't be anti-Hamas and yet be their direct mouthpiece repeating their false claims and conspiracy theories.
Which I have done ... where, exactly? Another straw man. Sorry, but this is getting very boring.
Don't know if it was you or who, as posts are anonymous, but I'm definitely not the only one here who keeps seeing Hamas propaganda and false talking points popping up over and over again.
Which makes your role here what...? A confused person who doesn't know what's going on? Someone who is naive and lacks critical thinking skills? Clearly not, since you are also hyperfocused on rhetorical devices, like "ad hominem" and "strawman" which tells me you are here specifically to argue. Yet if that's the case, then why are you ignoring the instances where Hamas talking points are being used? Perhaps you overestimate the notion of plausible deniability?
The PP keeps throwing around the terms “ad hominem” and “strawman” as an attempt to discredit the detailed NYT reporting. She’s using those terms (incorrectly but whatever) to distract from the objectively horrific and meticulously detailed description of the vicious sexual torture used by Hamas on 10/7. If she can get people to mentally associate that detailed reporting with cheap rhetorical devices, it helps her cause. It’s a classic propagandist move, albeit an easily identifiable one. She’s a propagandist, just not a very skilled one.
DP
The NY Times account is horrifying. It would be impossible to look into the eyes of those parents and not feel tremendous sadness for them (and for the world, frankly, since what happened to their daughter is just horrific for our shared sense of humanity).
I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense. I don't think I have ever come across reporting related to severe trauma (and this reported trauma is probably as severe as one can imagine) where the eyewitness accounts are even 10% as vivid and detailed as the ones featured in the Times. I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.
You just did call everyone involved a liar.
I look forward to watching you say the same thing about the NYT’s meticulous reporting about the child deaths in Gaza and how those babies were killed and what their parents said they saw when their kids died in front of them. Are those parents, with their horrific details of watching their children bleed out and die in front them, also lying? Please do go on and tell me how the Palestinian parents who watched their children die in front of them are also lying.
DP. There is a mix of lies and truths. Yes, some Palestinian children have died, but there are also lies about how many died (such as the grossly exaggerated death count from Baptist Hospital). There are also lies about whose hands they died at. Yes, IDF killed some, but Hamas is also killing Palestinians, like when Hamas was trying to steal humanitarian aid for themselves rather than distribute it and they shot and killed hungry Palestinians who complained about it. Or when Hamas was trying to stop people from trying to evacuate. Or when civilians died because they were placed in harm's way by Hamas as human shields, or were killed because their home or shelter collapsed into Hamas tunnels when Hamas complexes were bombed.
Sure, but that’s not the point. The PP who is saying that the detailed eyewitness accounts of sexual torture must be lies because the shock and trauma should have prevented the creation of vivid and detailed memories of that torture needs to also then come out and say that the Palestinian parents who described watching their child bleed out in front of them in vivid detail are also lying because that level of shock and trauma should have prevented those parents from forming those memories. If she’s taking the position that the stories of sexual torture can’t be true because of “shock and trauma” then she needs to be consistent in how that theory is applied. Unless, of course, she’s taking the position that only Jewish women have this peculiar inability to remember unspeakable horrors, which is what I suspect she’s really getting at.
In any case, I look forward to reading her statements that the Palestinian parents who described the horrific and slow deaths of their dying children in front of their own eyes are also lying when they describe those deaths in excruciating and awful detail.
Exactly how mental are you???
The person used these exact words “I can't take the position that I'm sure the reporting is not true, but there is something about this reporting that doesn't seem to make much sense.“ and “ I'm not prepared to call anyone involved a liar, but I would just gently point out that shock and trauma, at least in my experience, just does not lend itself to a very vivid and detailed memory of the events in question - for most people, anyway.”
And from those two statements you walked away with an argument that the accounts “must be lies”? Must be lies? Are you literally deranged?
Right on. Carefully qualified statements from one poster. Complete misrepresentation of her position from the other.
Repeated misrepresentation. Brazenly going so far as to quote the actual words multiple times and, what, I guess hope that their shitty Jedi mind trick would prevent people from actually reading the goddamned words? The words couldn’t be more clear in establishing that the poster was NOT stating that the reporting MUST be based on lies, but I’m sure we’ll now hear from the “word salad” specialist and the “I’ll tell you what you REALLY mean!” thought crime experts to straighten all of this out. The “what do you want to do about your feelings?” poster from Ukraine or Poland or wherever is already on duty.
This is insane. The pro-Zionism part of this equation is absolutely, clinically deranged. And it should be lost on no one that this is an outcome that is perfectly acceptable to them. Show your deranged true colors, get people to throw their hands up and give up, and get the desired result of stopping the exchange of ideas that threatens to topple the status quo.
Absolutely disgusting human beings. And yes, I mean every last person who lies like these lunatics in furtherance of their desperate defense of Zionism. Still love anyone else Jewish or otherwise who recognizes the toxic insanity of Zionism.
you can present your ideas over and over, but people can still say "well, no thanks" over and over. Some might be ok with status quo. You are frustrating yourself by making changing the status quo a good or evil thing.
Feeling person, we get it.
I want a cessation of violence on both sides, consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence, and a good faith plan to establish a two-state plan that guarantees the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace, which will require compromise from both sides. And I want any further aid to the region conditioned upon the successful achievement of these goals. As far as I’m concerned, if Israel and the Palestinians can get across the finish lines, I’m supportive of INCREASING aid to both groups for a certain timeframe to position both states for long term success. I’d love to see them both flourish without the constant conflict, which both sides have earnestly contributed to.
That’s what I want. Is that clear enough for you?
Do you want Hamas gone? Because you didn’t mention that.
Yeah, of course Hamas being dismantled and being brought to justice is a necessity.
That’s why “consequences for parties that have previously engaged in violence” was the second aim. Hamas is one such party, but there are also others. Other militant groups on the Palestinian side, the militant settlers and certain Likud officials on the Israeli side, and any IDF personnel who have engaged in conduct that violates the law of armed conflict.
All of the above should be brought to swift and unrelenting justice as part of that second aim.
I did ask for a better brand of troll in another thread and here's the one floating the balloon that "both sides" "need swift and unrelenting justice."
What could go wrong?
These arguments aren't grounded in the real world. They're grounded in slogans and fantasies and that's really quite dangerous.
Is it only one side that has parties requiring swift and unrelenting justice?
I think you just like saying that phrase. I bet you say it when you're playing Elden Ring all the time.
I think you are a low energy, racist waste of protoplasm, a troll unworthy of being taken seriously by even those unfortunate to have landed in your diseased family tree.
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}