Simple, just asking

[Erik Alberto]

Respectfully, I will continue to use the terms I prefer, in the way I prefer, without being offensive.

Ok, I hear you.

And I will try not to be a dick.

Cheers.

 

[Umai]

 

[Akar]

the Israeli guy, full speech

his actions :

if this isn't about religion I guess ,it's about sport.

This video explains well my PoV:

-G

 

[meowzician]

And why does this bully think he’s one of the chosen few, when he perpetuates the very actions he criticizes in others?...,

Especially since he’s actually doing the very things he accuses others of....

Is this a double standard ?

DOUBLE STANDARD? Let's talk about double standards. Someone is certainly committing the very acts they accuse the other of. Let's see who it is.

First, I want to make it clear that the death of even one innocent person tears me up. The number of civilians deaths in Gaza (and we don't really know how many because Hamas would not divide terrorist deaths from civilian deaths, but even if it is just half of Hamas' number...) was deeply disturbing to me. I felt this terrible desperation--Isn't there SOMETHING they can do to decrease the civilian deaths?

And I think there WAS something that would have lowered civilian deaths--boots on the ground. Fighting door to door rather than dropping bombs. And I know that the reason Israel chose not to go that route is that it would have dramatically increased Israeli deaths. I fully understand the dilemma. But I would have chosen differently.

Now let's talk about the specific charge against Israel of genocide.

Killing a bunch of people in a war is NOT the same thing as genocide. To qualify for the label of genocide, there has to be an INTENT to wipe out a people. It has always been Israel's mission to defeat Hamas. It has never been its intent to exterminate Palestinians. The civilians so regretfully killed have been collateral damage, never, never the target.

Indeed, Israel routinely drops leaflets from the air to warn civilians of impending bombing so that these civilians can get to safety. What other nation in the world does that? This act alone proves an intent to preserve civilian lives, not take them. IOW, this is NOT genocide. It literally CAN'T be accurately labeled genocide.

The people who are throwing around the word genocide do so in order to distract from the absence of a valid defense by introducing emotionally laden words. Everyone hates genocide. Just say genocide, and everyone's horror will rise up. It wont matter that the label doesn't fit.

Do people even know what a real genocide looks like? 75% of the Tutsis were murdered during the Rwandan genocide. Turks murdered 75% of the Armenian population. 66% of the Jews of Europe were killed by the Nazis. THAT is what real genocide looks like. Do you know what percent of Gazans were killed? 2%. Horrible? Yes! It breaks my heart. Genocide? NO.

Now let's examine a group that DOES have the intent to annihilate.

The Hour will not be established until the Muslims fight the Jews, and the Muslims will kill them, until the Jew hides behind a stone or a tree, and the stone or tree will say: 'O Muslim, O servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him.'

That hadith passage is quoted in the Hamas' original Charter. When Hamas speaks to the western press, it states that it wants to kill Zionists. But when speaking to other Muslims in Arabic, it is Jews they say they want to kill. They have made statements that there will continue to be more 10/7's until Israel is gone. So let's look at what that means. What happened on 10/7?

We have PLENTY of documentation what the intent of 10/7 was. We have Hamas' operational orders and planning documents recovered by Israeli forces, Hamas's own public statements, and contemporaneous documentation of the attack. The civilian deaths were not collateral damage. The civilians WERE the target. These documents SPECIFY entering civilian communities and killing AS MANY AS POSSIBLE.

After 10/7, the leaders of Hamas literally defended the targeting of civilians, and stated that they would do this again and again.

We KNOW what happened on 10/7 because Hamas filmed everything. They used go-pro cameras and cellphones to stream their actions to relatives of their victims in order to increase the suffering. In addition to hundreds of photos and hundreds of witnesses, there is literally 1800 hours of video footage. 1800 hours.

I am going to share just one instance so that I don't overwhelm you. Terrorists tied up a husband and wife and spent HOURS slowly mutilating them in front of each other so that the suffering would include the agony of seeing a loved one harmed. An eye. A breast. Hours. And then the last thing the terrorists did before killing the couple was this: they took the baby and put it in the oven and turned it on so that the last thing the parents could hear was their baby screaming as it slowly baked to death.

That is not collateral damage. That is sadism.

These were not men who deviated from the plan in the heat of battle. This WAS the plan. Remember, we have the documents.

This specific form of genocide is called kinocide--the specific intent to attack the bonds of family. 1800 hours of film footage of this sort of thing. 1800 hours. "Kill as many as possible." THAT is genocide.

@Erik Alberto @Asa @Wyote

 

[meowzician]

The silence of this UN "expert" is utterly stupefying. You want to talk double standards? You want to talk about who accuses the other of the very violations they themselves are doing? Her silence speaks more than a thousand volumes.

@Erik Alberto @Asa @Wyote

 

[meowzician]

OP is framed disingenuously.
Say what you mean.
Calling yourself goyim is cringe.
Do better.

The whole throwing around of the word "goy" (goyim is the plural) by white racists is truly one of the stupidest new tropes I've encountered. The word "goy" simply means nation. It does not mean cattle. I realize that Candace thinks if she repeats cattle enough times it will magically become reality, but no.

Here is a very well know verse which uses the word goy:
Nation (goy) shall not lift up sword against nation (goy), neither shall they learn war any more. Isaiah 2:4

Although Israel is usually contrasted with "the nations," there are times when even Israel is referred to as a goy, such as when God speaks to Jacob (renamed Israel) in Genesis 35 and says, "I am God Almighty; be fruitful and increase in number. A nation [goy] and a community of nations [goyim] will come from you, and kings will be among your descendants."

Over time, "goy" has become the Hebrew slang word for any non-Jew. It is not derogatory. Saying, "He is a goy," is no different than saying "He is not a Jew" or "He is a Gentile."

Now, certainly if someone says goy with a snide tone of voice it THEN becomes derogatory.. The same is true of "Jew." I'm a Jew. There is nothing derogatory about saying I am a Jew. UNLESS of course they have that snide tone of voice. THEN Jew becomes derogatory.

@Erik Alberto @Asa @Wyote

 

[meowzician]

I want to say one more thing, and then I'm leaving the discussion. Why? Because I no longer try to fix antisemitism. All my naive thinking that reasoning and education could end antisemitism died a year ago at Bondi Beach. So here is my parting shot.

When you demonize the only Jewish state in the world, when you claim that it is uniquely evil, and this is a state supported by the vast majority of Jews, YOU ARE MAKING A STATEMENT ABOUT JEWS.

@Erik Alberto @Asa @Wyote

 

[Akar]

DOUBLE STANDARD? Let's talk about double standards. Someone is certainly committing the very acts they accuse the other of. Let's see who it is.

First, I want to make it clear that the death of even one innocent person tears me up. The number of civilians deaths in Gaza (and we don't really know how many because Hamas would not divide terrorist deaths from civilian deaths, but even if it is just half of Hamas' number...) was deeply disturbing to me. I felt this terrible desperation--Isn't there SOMETHING they can do to decrease the civilian deaths?

And I think there WAS something that would have lowered civilian deaths--boots on the ground. Fighting door to door rather than dropping bombs. And I know that the reason Israel chose not to go that route is that it would have dramatically increased Israeli deaths. I fully understand the dilemma. But I would have chosen differently.

Now let's talk about the specific charge against Israel of genocide.

Killing a bunch of people in a war is NOT the same thing as genocide. To qualify for the label of genocide, there has to be an INTENT to wipe out a people. It has always been Israel's mission to defeat Hamas. It has never been its intent to exterminate Palestinians. The civilians so regretfully killed have been collateral damage, never, never the target.

Indeed, Israel routinely drops leaflets from the air to warn civilians of impending bombing so that these civilians can get to safety. What other nation in the world does that? This act alone proves an intent to preserve civilian lives, not take them. IOW, this is NOT genocide. It literally CAN'T be accurately labeled genocide.

The people who are throwing around the word genocide do so in order to distract from the absence of a valid defense by introducing emotionally laden words. Everyone hates genocide. Just say genocide, and everyone's horror will rise up. It wont matter that the label doesn't fit.

Do people even know what a real genocide looks like? 75% of the Tutsis were murdered during the Rwandan genocide. Turks murdered 75% of the Armenian population. 66% of the Jews of Europe were killed by the Nazis. THAT is what real genocide looks like. Do you know what percent of Gazans were killed? 2%. Horrible? Yes! It breaks my heart. Genocide? NO.

Now let's examine a group that DOES have the intent to annihilate.

The Hour will not be established until the Muslims fight the Jews, and the Muslims will kill them, until the Jew hides behind a stone or a tree, and the stone or tree will say: 'O Muslim, O servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him.'

That hadith passage is quoted in the Hamas' original Charter. When Hamas speaks to the western press, it states that it wants to kill Zionists. But when speaking to other Muslims in Arabic, it is Jews they say they want to kill. They have made statements that there will continue to be more 10/7's until Israel is gone. So let's look at what that means. What happened on 10/7?

We have PLENTY of documentation what the intent of 10/7 was. We have Hamas' operational orders and planning documents recovered by Israeli forces, Hamas's own public statements, and contemporaneous documentation of the attack. The civilian deaths were not collateral damage. The civilians WERE the target. These documents SPECIFY entering civilian communities and killing AS MANY AS POSSIBLE.

After 10/7, the leaders of Hamas literally defended the targeting of civilians, and stated that they would do this again and again.

We KNOW what happened on 10/7 because Hamas filmed everything. They used go-pro cameras and cellphones to stream their actions to relatives of their victims in order to increase the suffering. In addition to hundreds of photos and hundreds of witnesses, there is literally 1800 hours of video footage. 1800 hours.

I am going to share just one instance so that I don't overwhelm you. Terrorists tied up a husband and wife and spent HOURS slowly mutilating them in front of each other so that the suffering would include the agony of seeing a loved one harmed. An eye. A breast. Hours. And then the last thing the terrorists did before killing the couple was this: they took the baby and put it in the oven and turned it on so that the last thing the parents could hear was their baby screaming as it slowly baked to death.

That is not collateral damage. That is sadism.

These were not men who deviated from the plan in the heat of battle. This WAS the plan. Remember, we have the documents.

This specific form of genocide is called kinocide--the specific intent to attack the bonds of family. 1800 hours of film footage of this sort of thing. 1800 hours. "Kill as many as possible." THAT is genocide.

@Erik Alberto @Asa @Wyote

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2015/06/un-gaza-inquiry-finds-credible-allegations-war-crimes-committed-2014-both

https://www.un.org/unispal/document/two-years-on-people-injured-and-traumatized-during-the-great-march-of-return-are-still-struggling/

Double Standard

-G

 

[Erik Alberto]

@meowzician—

Your contribution here feels to me, as valuable and important. I’m glad you decided to share your perspective.

Regards.

 

[Misty]

Killing a bunch of people in a war is NOT the same thing as genocide. To qualify for the label of genocide, there has to be an INTENT to wipe out a people.

 

[Erik Alberto]

wtf.

 

[Misty]

wtf.

The selfies though.. .

 

[Erik Alberto]

The selfies though.. .

Im sorry, Misty, I’m unsure what you mean—

 

[Misty]

Im sorry, Misty, I’m unsure what you mean—

Oh in the second video they showed people taking selfies and smiling in front of a place with telescopes- a looking station where people can look at the famine & war in Gaza, live.

DOUBLE STANDARD? Let's talk about double standards. Someone is certainly committing the very acts they accuse the other of. Let's see who it is.

First, I want to make it clear that the death of even one innocent person tears me up. The number of civilians deaths in Gaza (and we don't really know how many because Hamas would not divide terrorist deaths from civilian deaths, but even if it is just half of Hamas' number...) was deeply disturbing to me. I felt this terrible desperation--Isn't there SOMETHING they can do to decrease the civilian deaths?

And I think there WAS something that would have lowered civilian deaths--boots on the ground. Fighting door to door rather than dropping bombs. And I know that the reason Israel chose not to go that route is that it would have dramatically increased Israeli deaths. I fully understand the dilemma. But I would have chosen differently.

Now let's talk about the specific charge against Israel of genocide.

Killing a bunch of people in a war is NOT the same thing as genocide. To qualify for the label of genocide, there has to be an INTENT to wipe out a people. It has always been Israel's mission to defeat Hamas. It has never been its intent to exterminate Palestinians. The civilians so regretfully killed have been collateral damage, never, never the target.

Indeed, Israel routinely drops leaflets from the air to warn civilians of impending bombing so that these civilians can get to safety. What other nation in the world does that? This act alone proves an intent to preserve civilian lives, not take them. IOW, this is NOT genocide. It literally CAN'T be accurately labeled genocide.

The people who are throwing around the word genocide do so in order to distract from the absence of a valid defense by introducing emotionally laden words. Everyone hates genocide. Just say genocide, and everyone's horror will rise up. It wont matter that the label doesn't fit.

Do people even know what a real genocide looks like? 75% of the Tutsis were murdered during the Rwandan genocide. Turks murdered 75% of the Armenian population. 66% of the Jews of Europe were killed by the Nazis. THAT is what real genocide looks like. Do you know what percent of Gazans were killed? 2%. Horrible? Yes! It breaks my heart. Genocide? NO.

Now let's examine a group that DOES have the intent to annihilate.

The Hour will not be established until the Muslims fight the Jews, and the Muslims will kill them, until the Jew hides behind a stone or a tree, and the stone or tree will say: 'O Muslim, O servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him.'

That hadith passage is quoted in the Hamas' original Charter. When Hamas speaks to the western press, it states that it wants to kill Zionists. But when speaking to other Muslims in Arabic, it is Jews they say they want to kill. They have made statements that there will continue to be more 10/7's until Israel is gone. So let's look at what that means. What happened on 10/7?

We have PLENTY of documentation what the intent of 10/7 was. We have Hamas' operational orders and planning documents recovered by Israeli forces, Hamas's own public statements, and contemporaneous documentation of the attack. The civilian deaths were not collateral damage. The civilians WERE the target. These documents SPECIFY entering civilian communities and killing AS MANY AS POSSIBLE.

After 10/7, the leaders of Hamas literally defended the targeting of civilians, and stated that they would do this again and again.

We KNOW what happened on 10/7 because Hamas filmed everything. They used go-pro cameras and cellphones to stream their actions to relatives of their victims in order to increase the suffering. In addition to hundreds of photos and hundreds of witnesses, there is literally 1800 hours of video footage. 1800 hours.

I am going to share just one instance so that I don't overwhelm you. Terrorists tied up a husband and wife and spent HOURS slowly mutilating them in front of each other so that the suffering would include the agony of seeing a loved one harmed. An eye. A breast. Hours. And then the last thing the terrorists did before killing the couple was this: they took the baby and put it in the oven and turned it on so that the last thing the parents could hear was their baby screaming as it slowly baked to death.

That is not collateral damage. That is sadism.

These were not men who deviated from the plan in the heat of battle. This WAS the plan. Remember, we have the documents.

This specific form of genocide is called kinocide--the specific intent to attack the bonds of family. 1800 hours of film footage of this sort of thing. 1800 hours. "Kill as many as possible." THAT is genocide.

@Erik Alberto @Asa @Wyote

The story told about the family makes me actually sick in my stomach. It is harrowing, heartbreaking, and unacceptable. When I saw the attack on the 7th I cried watching the vids that were emerging, knowing that even the worst of the atrocities were too graphic and traumatic for me to see or ever ever want to…

But it has to induce the same emotion when families and innocent children are starved, killed, and yes even sexually assaulted by those wish to from the Israeli side, as well.

To cry over one and ignore the other is wrong. That’s the entire problem.

 

[Erik Alberto]

Oh in the second video they showed people taking selfies and smiling in front of a place with telescopes- a looking station where people can look at the famine & war in Gaza, live.

I watched the first one in its entirety. It was a lot. Then I wanted be sure that I had an understanding of what the second one was about and if it ran parallel to the first in content.
That explains it—I didn’t get that far.
Damn, that’s a chilling image

 

[Misty]

I watched the first one in its entirety. It was a lot. Then I wanted be sure that I had an understanding of what the second one was about and if it ran parallel to the first in content.
That explains it—I didn’t get that far.
Damn, that’s a chilling image

I understand.

It is a heartbreaking image, in the vid they show it. Three girls smiling and hugging for the selfie as though they are at the Empire State Building or something.

Imagine people having the audacity to do such a vulgar and disgusting thing whilst touring a Holocaust location, God forbid a gas chamber. Unnatural.

Sadly I can imagine both happen.

 

[Misty]

I watched the first one in its entirety. It was a lot. Then I wanted be sure that I had an understanding of what the second one was about and if it ran parallel to the first in content.
That explains it—I didn’t get that far.
Damn, that’s a chilling image

In this regard you can see that religion is of no matter here. Human life, is.

 

[Erik Alberto]

I looked up the men in those videos. Former Royal Marines commando David McIntosh has my attention. Former U.S. Army Special Forces/Green Beret Anthony Aguilar (the 2nd one), it is worth noting, apparently claimed to see a boy killed who was later found alive. His former employer also made allegations about his credibility, which he denies. That was the other reason I didn’t watch all of the second video.

 

[Misty]

I looked up the men in those videos. Former Royal Marines commando David McIntosh has my attention. Former U.S. Army Special Forces/Green Beret Anthony Aguilar (the 2nd one), it is worth noting, apparently claimed to see a boy killed who was later found alive. His former employer also made allegations about his credibility, which he denies. That was the other reason I didn’t watch all of the second video.

Ah, he only talks a few clips in the first 22 seconds. The remainder of the vid is not him at all.

This one I also found eye opening and is of note that she does a great deal of fact checking, when delving into topics, from what I have seen anyway.

But of course, free will and all that it entails, applies. Watch it if that is your desire. I simply think there’s far too many testimonies to ignore, including footage - which is hard to deny, for me at least, that this has gone awry.

 

[Erik Alberto]

On establishing credibility (a reminder to myself):

When evidence is contested, neither conviction nor credibility should be inherited from the source. Articles, videos, interviews, testimony, institutions, experts, and political leaders all deserve the same fundamental questions: What is actually known? How do we know it? What is observation, and what is interpretation? What evidence would challenge the claim? And has the strongest contrary evidence been honestly confronted?

Expertise, position, firsthand experience, and eloquence can all add context and weight, but none makes a claim immune to scrutiny. A compelling presentation is not the same thing as compelling evidence, just as a flawed source does not necessarily make every claim within it false. Intellectual integrity requires applying these questions not only to evidence that confirms our conclusions, but especially to evidence that threatens them.