28 Apr '24 22:27>
@athousandyoung saidExtreme religious fundamentalism is as powerful as desperation or insanity.
It requires desperation not insanity.
@athousandyoung saidExtreme religious fundamentalism is as powerful as desperation or insanity.
It requires desperation not insanity.
@kevcvs57 saidIs your remedy that everyone that was ever ethnically cleansed any number of generations ago has the right to go back to their ancestral homes?
lol so because Palestine and the people that lived were the eternal victim of imperil geopolitics and strategic map making they didn’t exist when they weren’t ethnically cleansed and displaced byUS supported and armed European jewss
Uh ok.
@wildgrass saidThe kids who are marching are probably just doing it because it's the cool and in thing to do.
Do you really think these folks are anti semites? They're kids, born in 2007, looking at the 30:1 kill ratio in this war and wondering why Israel needs to use US-purchased weapons on unarmed civilians.
They obviously don't understand the nuance of the situation, the long history of the conflict, the extreme terrorism along a Palestinian minority.
But they are not anti ...[text shortened]... ffredojeremy/status/1783651274975523285
https://twitter.com/thrasherxy/status/1783594696733762016
@mott-the-hoople saidI hope you're right. But I don't know. Decades of wokist support of the idea that any successful group is an exploiter of the underprivileged may have created a class of people who really think the reasons their societies suck is that Jews have stolen their money and jobs, and a class of liberal rich whites who find it convenient to scapegoat the Jews.
what you are seeing for the most part is george soros funded agitators.
@kevcvs57 said===Are you saying European Jews did not colonise Palestine?===
“ The far right's canards about Jewish influence and media corrupting the western world is far less malignant than the far left's screeches that Jews are genocidal colonialists.”
Probably seems more malignant because a rational person might see some merit in the 2nd claim whereas only a diehard antisemitic lunatic would base their opinion of the Jewish people on the Ist cl ...[text shortened]... if the idf has to kill 2 million gazans in order to destroy Hamas? Can we talk about genocide then?
@shavixmir saidThough this was not true historically, today, the far left is a far greater threat to Jews than the far right. And it's not very close.
Oh the irony… the extreme right worried about Jews.
@wildgrass saidThank you. I appreciate the conciliatory tone.
sh76 - That was my awkward attempt at sarcasm. The thread topic is hypocrisy. Sorry for the offense. These are the same politicians that called it peaceful after protests where someone was shot to death. "Good people on both sides" after someone was purposefully run over by a car. What's worse: afraid to go to class, or being dead?
The right wing politicians call for fre ...[text shortened]... ul even if there is lethal violence employed, just because they support the cause of the protestors.
@wildgrass saidFree speech? Are you serious?
Now they want the National Guard to disperse peaceful protestors?
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/22/columbia-new-york-troops-00153651
HYPOCRITES!
Come on, have some conviction guys. Support the speech you hate, or stop pretending to be a defender of free speech.
@spruce112358 saidJust for kicks and hypotheticals, will you unequivocally condemn the intentional use the rape of civilians as a weapon of war EVEN in defense?
Not really. Self-defense is not bad, so we, as liberals, are not condemning that.
When someone INITIATES a violation of your rights, you can respond as needed to compel them to stop.
@spruce112358 saidThat's not what I asked. In fact, it's something quite different.
I'll go ahead and condemn any organization that INITIATES a violation of the rights of others.
@spruce112358 said===Pointing a gun at someone. The other person is 'at risk' because he doesn't know if it is loaded or what you intend.===
We don't have the right to place others at risk without their consent.
Examples:
Drunk driving. Let's say you manage to drive home without killing anyone. It is still wrong because you put everyone on the road at risk.
Pointing a gun at someone. The other person is 'at risk' because he doesn't know if it is loaded or what you intend.
Producing anthrax in your b ...[text shortened]... s beside the point. Putting others at risk without consent is wrong and a violation of their rights.
@spruce112358 saidJust for kicks, go ahead and condemn any organization that intentionally uses the rape of civilians as a weapon of war...
There. We've condemned everything bad you can think of including pedophila, misogyny, putting trash in the recycle bin, and cruising in the passing lane.
So you can't use that one anymore, AverageJoe!
@zahlanzi saidOf course it is. It may not always be a good defense or a smart defense, but it's definitely a defense (if the intent is defensive, of course).
the same way was pointing a gun at everyone you meet before they attack you isn't defense