WaxedWookie @ WaxedWookie @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

1,078

Joined

2 yr. ago

The Japanese work culture is an absolute dumpster fire - the reason all their media is focused on highschoolers is that high school was the last time anyone had a shred of freedom.

But broadly, yeah - there's not much incentive to respect the norms of a system that's completely fucked you, then demands compliance.

Yes - the IDF need to provide the evidence, haven't, won't, and can't, but you defend them nonetheless.

What we have at present is evidence of a warcrime in the context of a genocide - it's encumbent on the IDF to prove this killing was justified.

A genocide isn't a single act - it's many acts like this one you're defending.

There we go. The fact that there's evidence of the murder of a group of apparent civilians and no evidence they were combatants or expectation of it is the problem. You don't get to go killing whoever you please, shrug your shoulders and say "eh - I dunno - Hamas I guess - who cares". This applies doubly in the context of the ongoing genocide - Israel have made it crystal clear they can't be trusted.

To look at a genocidal regime killing a bunch of people that gave no indication they're combatants, shrugging your shoulders and saying there's no evidence they're not guilty doesn't cut it. It excuses the commission of the genocide (which is just thousands of instances of this kind of thing with an imposed famine and displacement), and represents a total disregard for the rule of law.

It's enough to make you begin to wonder if accelerationism is a viable strategy - things don't seem set to meaningfully improve any time soon...

Evidence that these civilians are in fact combatants. I'll wait.

He's already been impeached for all the good it did.

The issue is that the GOP has power, and they've hitched their wagon to Trump, meaning that they'll move heaven and earth to protect him. Rules, norms, fairness, representation and integrity don't matter one bit - it's all self-interest.

Feel free to reach out if you'd like to take a break from defending warcrimes by a genocidal regime and provide any evidence.

Canva's UI is somehow more fiddly than Word for making edits, but they've always seemed like a pretty decent company to me.

...of course that only holds true until it doesn't - I'm looking at you, Google.

It's also the key to driving the hell out of your sales teams without having to pay them those pesky bonuses.

Here's mine.

Travelling interstate to put yourself in a position to shoot 3 people, killing two of them is incredibly stupid at best. Proceeding from that to a job for a transparently dishonest media org that has hired you primarily to celebrate your killings demonstrates a total lack of remorse, and incites similar politically motivated killings in what amounts to pretty clear-cut stochastic terrorism. If we take him at his word, he's done no research into the media company that hired him, and has been on stage at events where openly racist nonsense has been celebrated without him noticing - if this is true, he's deficient enough that he should be in assisted living. The reasonable conclusion is that he's some degree of comfortable with the racism.

So we have a remorseless killer, stochastic terrorist, propagandist (or useful idiot) that doesn't care about or actively embraces racism.

You and I. Do you struggle broadly with reading comprehension, or does your brain dribble out your ear only when talking about Israel and things like the rule of law?

I'm just taking your word on your positions - it seems you've made them pretty clear.

You're very empathetic - that's entirely unremarkable. One can empathise with Hitler - but only a mentally deficient or monstrous person would stop at empathy and be incapable of synthesising conclusions like he was a bad guy that did bad things. It's like reading without comprehending.

Why can't you advance past the insistence you empathise with Rittenhouse toward an opinion? Are you deficient or dodging?

Where's the evidence justifying the killing of these people? Or do we not care about the rule of law?

I guess in the context of the genocide Israel is committing there's not much room for that kind of thing.

You kill a bunch of people, you'd better be damn sure it's justifiable - you know - by looking at the evidence. Basic rule of law stuff.

Where's the evidence? We both know there isn't any - much like there's nothing that would justify Israel's broader genocide.

How do you think evidence works?

Literally zero evidence that this killing is justified in the context of a genocide that the Israeli government and IDF won't shut up about, where the majority of their targets are women and children.

Don't go pretending you know a thing about reason or that you've made any meaningful point whatsoever.

I empathize with people. (...) Anyone who paid to see him knew what they were getting.

You're empathising with the same thing the audience went to see - the extreme right's posterchild for killing your political opponents. The analysis is super-straightforward and backed by studies - this is simply ignorant hate, fear, and disgust stoked by the likes of TPUSA. The fact that you can't progress to synthesising straightforward conclusions is a massive red flag.

My mistake - I'll return to the question you haven't answered.

Do you consistently defend people that are clearly unqualified and incapable of doing their job as they fail woefully, or is this an edge case for you? I suppose that unlike most, the likes of Rittenhouse and Kirk aren't doing anything of value - it's not as though they're performing surgery, driving a bus, or flipping burgers.

The video shows 4 people in civilian clothes casually wandering along chatting while unarmed.

Putting aside the thousands upon thousands literal children Israel has slaughtered in the past few months while spewing genocidal rhetoric (because Hamas?), what evidence do you have that this isn't a warcrime and that they're combatants? The video contains absolutely nothing suggesting anything of the sort, and no evidence has been presented.

When people say they want to commit a genocide, then kill tens of thousands of civilians, I tend to believe them - why are you so incredulous?

Killing obvious civilians is a warcrime. While there are circumstances where this is ambiguous, this example isn't - Israel needs to overcome the very reasonable conclusion that these were civilians and prove that they were enemy combatants.

Understanding that 60-70% of the Palestinians Israel have killed are children, this will be a tall order.

Yep - right back around to confirming what you got butthurt about - your disregard of the rule of law, and genocide denial. Difference is that we know it's both rather than an either/or now.