03-16-2024, 11:57 AM
(03-15-2024, 09:25 PM)Dill Wrote: Non answers--in the sense you just continue to assume what you've been asked to demonstrate.
On the hand, you claim that "acknowledging them both as existing is not an issue,"
but on the other, when it happens, you call any such acknowledgement "equating" Israel with Hamas and "making excuses" for the latter.
Thus making it an "issue."
It is exactly as I have said--you begin with the assumption that 1) Israelis/the IDF don't lie or commit war crimes,
and 2) that's ALL Hamas does. And your posts demand TRUST of IDF accounts of the war and DISTRUST of independent
observers, whose reporting is simply dismissed in advance as "Hamas propaganda." (E.g., see your response to Dino's post # 166.)
Yes, I give the IDF the benefit of the doubt and I do not give Hamas the benefit of the doubt. That's because one is a terrorist organization that records itself gleefully slaughtering and raping civilians and then kidnapping infants and toddlers. Yes, I will do that and I will continue to do that.
Quote:Anything which controverts this simple rule for judging before vetting becomes "plenty of evidence" for "excuse making" and "supporting terrorism. "
Nope, it's the actual excuse making that gets labeled supporting terrorism. GM, for all his faults, does not engage in the same tactics as you. You richly deserve the label, hence my using it.
Quote:Again, no one has attempted to "equate" Israel and Hamas. You just hyperbolically claim it is occurring on a mass scale.
You saying this in a thread in which anyone can read you doing exactly that is awesome. Truly.
Quote:By your refusal to actually define what constitutes "equation," and your continual framing of accurate reporting as "mitigation" and "supporting terrorism,"
you implicitly define that accurate reporting as "repeating Hamas talking points." Your real beef is with accurate reporting and consistent definition, they kind you can't simply apply according to how you feel.
When defining equation I'll stick with the dictionary definition. Also, by accurate reporting do you mean the time the IDF bombed a hospital? That kind of accurate reporting?
Quote:Can you actually bring together in one post an example of what you are calling the "exact type of propaganda Hamas spews"--preferably from Hamas itself--and then a statement from this forum which is "a repetition" of that "exact type"? And do it in a way that escapes your circular definition?
My claim that Hamas mirrors the Israeli right won't do. It's not a Hamas talking point. And it's a perfectly valid comparison based on the alignment of religious views and goals. Your best bet is to find where Hamas has adopted language (e.g., "settler state") from other sources, then invert the order and claim the source is "spewing Hamas Talking points." If my reference to the many instances of Israeli use of civilian human shields is "supporting terrorism" is an example, then that demonstrates exactly the flaw in your de facto definition--accurate reporting is in itself "Hamas propaganda" and "supporting terrorism." The only way to avoid your charges is to stop accurate reporting--on the IDF anyway.
Yes, claiming Israel is an equally bad actor is a Hamas talking point. It validates their actions and responses, which is a Hamas talking point. It paints them as valiant freedom fighters, which is how we know you view them as you can't even call them terrorists.
Quote:Waste of time, since "the issue" is not whether Israel is a terrorist organization and no one is disputing that "Hamas wants to destroy Israel."
The issue is whether acknowledging Israeli war crimes is, itself, "support for terrorism."
But I can use these questions to clarify some further points, so here goes.
1. I'll state "unequivocally" that Hamas meets the U.S./EU definition of a terrorist organization. But because the U.S. doesn't apply the label consistently to all who merit it, I regard its application as generally political rather than descriptive. The job of propagandists is to get people to accept and apply such labels without thinking; I won't go along.
See, you can't even call Hamas a terrorist organization. But you sure can vomit up post after post criticizing Israel.
Quote:2. I cannot acknowledge that a state which dispossessed Palestine of 800,000 indigenous inhabits and illegally holds a large remainder in occupied territories, flouting international law and UN resolutions, and now kills THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN in vengeance, is not a "bad actor." But Israel, as a nation state, differs from the non-state actor, political organization/party Hamas, in that it includes a once strong but now weakened LEFT PROGRESSIVE element and a shrinking moderate center which strive to hold it accountable its fanatical, genocide-preaching right wing--but with less and less success over the last three decades. So no, that nation state, as a whole, does not "equate" to Hamas. I've already said this. But you still hear "equate."
Except you do equate them in your very next paragraph.
Quote:3. And no, I won't agree that civilian casualties are "equally" the result of Hamas "deliberately embedding themselves within their own civilian populace," if by that you mean Israel is doing its best to avoid civilian casualties but there are a bunch of Hamas fighters looking for groups of civilians to run and hide in. In the past, Hamas embedment has not constrained the IDF to strap children to vehicles or to hold civilians in front of them when going into combat, and now it is not constraining them to mow down civilians carrying white flags (not to mention their own hostages) or indiscriminately bombing civilians, like they had no other choice.
See? Everyone else does. BTW anecdotal evidence is not proof. You've told me so yourself.
Quote:4. I'll acknowledge that Hamas has made statements in the past about destroying the state of Israel--that's another element that mirrors the Israeli Right--but I don't think their behavior and goals can be fixed by the 1988 statements everyone quotes. E.g., the 2017 Document of Principles & Policies distinguishes between Jews and Zionism, and would in principle recognize a Palestinian state within the '67 boundaries. https://irp.fas.org/world/para/docs/hamas-2017.pdf.
Another example of you equating Israel and Hamas. But you never do that, right?
Quote:I am more concerned that, since international law obliges countries to act where "genocidal intent" is determined, and ignoring the power imbalance which makes genocide of Israel impossible and the utter destruction of Gaza now a fact, the '88 document will give Israel even greater license ignore IHL.
You think attacking Israel is impossible? Iran is doing is damndest to accomplish that.
