GHF proves IDF did not shoot at innocent Gazans at aid distribution sites

IBDaMann said:
FTFY.

The correct answer is that Israel should suck it up and cry like babies, or they should invade Iran and deliver retribution, ensuring it never happens again.

The incorrect answer is that Israel should pick the closest Arabs to slaughter, even though those Arabs never attacked Israel.
Click to expand...
Civilians die in war, especially urban warfare and especially when your own government wants to get you killed.
 
Tobytone said:
I have to run right now so I'll have to address this later, but I'll give you a hint. I addressed how reliable your eyewitnesses are.
Click to expand...
OK, I can certainly respect your desire to scrutinize the veracity of anyone's account. After all, it's why I am disregarding all media sources and all politically conflicted organizations. As for your initial scrutiny of eyewitnesses to the IDF opening fire, I can think of several reasons why I might do exactly as you did initially. My issue then becomes how you are not applying the exact same standards to Israel, i.e. you are committing a special pleading fallacy. You haven't responded to volsrock's OP in the exact same way, i.e. declaring that we shouldn't just be taking Israel's front organization (GFH) on their word, especially when they are obviously lying. Neither you nor I doubted the eyewitnesses (who we did not know) of the 2020 election stealing, who presented sworn affidavits, and here we have eyewitnesses for whom we have no reason to doubt (we don't know them either) ... and yet you imply that I should somehow immediately dismiss that eyewitness testimony and allow myself to be manipulated by Israel. Could you elaborate on why I should do that?

Tobytone said:
It reminds me of the idiots on CNN asking people on the streets of Iraq if they wanted America there and CNN acted like the poor bastards couldn't be honest if they enjoyed breathing.
Click to expand...
I totally get it. You are in the right to scrutinize to whatever extent you see fit. The problem comes when you simply reject eyewitness testimony for which you presently have no reason to doubt (you do not know Mohammed Abu Teaima) and automatically embrace the word of lying terrorists in mid-genocide.

That is my issue here. I do not question your right to doubt and to question. It's the double standard that is immedately problematic, and is what I am trying to ameliorate by focusing on eyewitnesses.

Why don't we discuss what the eyewitnesses say, and then discuss why we shouldn't believe them. I, for one, want to know if the reason I shouldn't trust eyewitnesses that are Arabs is because they are Arabs.
 
moon said:
Liar
Click to expand...
Fucking get off it. He has no socks. You're being a moron as a diversion from your inability to realize that Gaza's administrators have never had any money nor any military. If you would, just once, admit that you have no idea about what you are babbling, you might understand why you never make any sense.
 
moon said:
However, the GA does have the power to overrule the SC. That should assist with your confusion.
Click to expand...
Too funny! No. The UN General Assembly has no power to overrule the UN Security Council. I still wonder why you feel compelled to comment on this topic.
 
gfm7175 said:
Would that be me by any chance? Dutch sure loves to project his own issues onto others, including his issue of making use of sock accounts.

I am neither IBD nor ITN. They live on the East and West Coast, respectively; I live in the Midwest.
Click to expand...
Love that cheese, too. We have Tillamook, but it's nothing compared to Wisconsin cheese.
 
IBDaMann said:
FTFY.

The correct answer is that Israel should suck it up and cry like babies, or they should invade Iran and deliver retribution, ensuring it never happens again.

The incorrect answer is that Israel should pick the closest Arabs to slaughter, even though those Arabs never attacked Israel.
Click to expand...
Hamas attacked Israel, IBD.
 
Into the Night said:
HAMAS is a terror and propaganda organization funded by Iran.
Click to expand...
Says the guy who doesn't know the difference between an Iranian terrorist proxy organization (Al Qassam) and Gazan administrators who never attacked anyone. To you, they are all indistinguishable ... because they are all Arabs.

This is where you say "Some of my best friends are fucking Arabs."
 
IBDaMann said:
Too funny! No. The UN General Assembly has no power to overrule the UN Security Council. I still wonder why you feel compelled to comment on this topic.
Click to expand...
How about I provide the proof , then you apologize, admit you lied and then fuck off.
 
IBDaMann said:
Fucking get off it. He has no socks. You're being a moron as a diversion from your inability to realize that Gaza's administrators have never had any money nor any military. If you would, just once, admit that you have no idea about what you are babbling, you might understand why you never make any sense.
Click to expand...
You are still locked in these paradoxes, IBD.
 
IBDaMann said:
Says the guy who doesn't know the difference between an Iranian terrorist proxy organization (Al Qassam) and Gazan administrators who never attacked anyone. To you, they are all indistinguishable ... because they are all Arabs.

This is where you say "Some of my best friends are fucking Arabs."
Click to expand...
Mantra 30a. Lame.
 
IBDaMann said:
OK, I can certainly respect your desire to scrutinize the veracity of anyone's account. After all, it's why I am disregarding all media sources and all politically conflicted organizations. As for your initial scrutiny of eyewitnesses to the IDF opening fire, I can think of several reasons why I might do exactly as you did initially. My issue then becomes how you are not applying the exact same standards to Israel, i.e. you are committing a special pleading fallacy. You haven't responded to volsrock's OP in the exact same way, i.e. declaring that we shouldn't just be taking Israel's front organization (GFH) on their word, especially when they are obviously lying. Neither you nor I doubted the eyewitnesses (who we did not know) of the 2020 election stealing, who presented sworn affidavits, and here we have eyewitnesses for whom we have no reason to doubt (we don't know them either) ... and yet you imply that I should somehow immediately dismiss that eyewitness testimony and allow myself to be manipulated by Israel. Could you elaborate on why I should do that?


I totally get it. You are in the right to scrutinize to whatever extent you see fit. The problem comes when you simply reject eyewitness testimony for which you presently have no reason to doubt (you do not know Mohammed Abu Teaima) and automatically embrace the word of lying terrorists in mid-genocide.

That is my issue here. I do not question your right to doubt and to question. It's the double standard that is immedately problematic, and is what I am trying to ameliorate by focusing on eyewitnesses.

Why don't we discuss what the eyewitnesses say, and then discuss why we shouldn't believe them. I, for one, want to know if the reason I shouldn't trust eyewitnesses that are Arabs is because they are Arabs.
Click to expand...
Propaganda is not 'eyewitness testimony', IBD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top