When you are running through the streets of a European city hunting for “fascist murderers,” who of course can be identified by wearing yarmulkes, black hats, or the wrong soccer jersey, do you prefer to use clubs or knives to legitimately criticize their government policies?
So in other words, they didn’t see who shot them or how, they simply claim to have seen wounds and magically known they were “directly targeted by Israeli troops.” Are these the same doctors who provided the lauhgably fake “CT scans” of rounds that managed to penetrate directly to the center of a patient’s brain and stop there without any damage to either the skull or the round? (Rhetorical question, I know they are from when Pallywood originally floated this story.)
I prefer to use words, personally.
Unlike the IOF butchers you all love so much.
Do you Zionist chucklefucks think just because I point out that Maccabi fans started the shit in Amsterdam, that means I’m actually in favour of how they were responded to? Despite not a word of that from me?
You’re the unquestioning fans of fascist bully boys (when they’re on your side), not me. ESH.
…this is, of course, lies.
The New York Times even published a rebuttal, quoted here for your reference:
The important quote here is: “Any implication that its images are fabricated is simply false.”
I don’t know where you are getting your talking points from, but they aren’t going to work on me. You better step up your game.
You certainly were arguing in favor of the Jew Hunt quite enthusiastically, including by brazen lying about the circumstances of the pre-arranged targeting of Jews by Arab Muslims (e.g. calling it “Maccabi fans starting shit”). I guess you just don’t have the courage of your convictions - you clearly want to help encourage racial violence against Jews, but you’re too scared to participate in it yourself despite claiming how righteous and justified it is. Another Internet tough guy.
They’re happily ignoring the retractions about the lies about the identity of the Amsterdam offenders, or the myths of beheaded babies - ignoring the post-lie fact checking is their standard modus operandi.
Oh OK, if the people publishing the laughably false images assure us they “verified them” and they can’t possibly be false, I guess that’s case closed. Just like all the casualty numbers from Hamas spokesmen drawn out of the air become accurate if we pretend the “Gaza health ministry” is somehow distinct from Hamas or has any actual method of counting civilian casualites.
Actual quotes or it didn’t happen Imma abuse the charge of Blood Libel too.
…yep.
More lies.
You remember when you made a claim about it being “the least deadly bombing campaign in history in terms of civilian to target death ratio?”
Where do you think they got the numbers for that?
That’s right, the IDF are using the Hamas numbers. As are the US State Department and everybody else. Because everyone agrees that the numbers are broadly accurate, and most likely to be an undercount.
Nobody is making this claim.
As distinct from Israel, who we know are literally making it up.
Naah. Nice try. What I did was cite the facts.
Like eyewitness reports and videos of Maccabi fans starting shit.
I don’t see how my conviction of “don’t support fascist murderers” requires me to beat anyone up. You’re the side with the bloodlust, chaver.
I’ll stick with just supporting BDS and lobbying my local pols, thanks. And since it’s my country that’s already leading the efforts at the ICJ, they don’t need more approval from me on that.
Yeah, that charge only sounds more and more desperate the more it gets repeated.
But go ahead, Zionist chucklefucks, undermine your own history with the weaponization of anisemitism accusations. I’m sure that wolf will be real. Any day now.
Oooh, big scary fascists. I quiver…
You think chickenshit canal-diving soccer hooligans could be scarier to me than the armed Apartheid-era police and military?
Been confronting fascists for all my life, fool. Scared? Not even a little.
Meanwhile, you’re happy to let the IOF do the killing for you - and even the IOF prefers sniping, drones and bombs. That’s when they aren’t torturing and brutalizing naked starvelings in prisons. Real tough guys, your heroes.
I got absolutely wailed on for using that word on this message board. Funny how there are different rules.
Yes, location, location, location context, context, context.
NPR has also interviewed doctors who claim they’ve seen kids who were targeted. Maybe those doctor are all Hamas. After all, they usually work for a suspect organization like doctors without borders.
I am a Jew. I don’t hate Jews. And i doubt there’s an official Israeli policy to take out little kids. But i think there is a significant minority of Israelis who are happy to do that. And the evidence suggests that the army isn’t restraining them, but is enabling them.
Hell yes.
I’m going to be partially responsible for Trump’s atrocities. But I’m not responsible for Israel’s. Well, not more than any other American.
Are we done discussing what the definition of a pogrom is? As for whether whatever happened in Amsterdam was a pogrom, personally, i feel like there are too many basic facts of the incident in dispute to certain for broadest definition of pogrom, but it seemed less deadly and less targeted at “people living in a place” than my working definition of the word.
Thanks. I accepted that risk when i started the OP in the pit.
No offense, but I’m glad you stayed home in this election. I’m kind of over South Africans who come to the United States and fuck up our elections.
That’s kind of the point. Do you understand, or would spelling it out be helpful?
Oh…I am clear about it. I sure went through the wringer on that one.
If you are clear on that, then you understand that there are no different rules. If you think this illustrates different rules, you’re super confused.
If I were able to vote in the USA, I’d probably have voted a straight Democrat ticket in every non-local election, just FYI. I may be far left but I’m also practical.
Huh??