If you mean this: “(Prime minister, deputy head of parliament/head of dominant party, defense minister, ‘heritage minister’ whatever that is)” then yeah I saw that, but didn’t really think out of them there were the sort of outright genocidal comments from top decision makers other than maybe deputy speaker. For “heritage minister”, I don’t know how influential role that is and it was a smaller part so maybe?
So unless I’m mistaken I did respond to them all. I didn’t respond to the lower level comments (soldiers, a journalist, so on) because I didn’t think that’s what you meant anyway. This sort of confusion is why I was hoping you’d quote what was said and then write who said it. It’s a bit of effort but would make it a lot clearer and make sure we’re talking about the same thing.
By defending and denying their genocide, in the face of overwhelming evidence, after moving hoal posts, you are a part of it.
I just don’t think it fits the mentioned definition, that’s all. That’s not defending the action at all. I don’t know about overwhelming evidence, I might’ve missed something crucial but what I did interact with didn’t seem convincing in the way I was hoping. As for goalposts, they’ve stayed the same. You helped set up some of those goalposts, so it’s strange you’d think they’ve moved.
How the fuck can you live with yourself? Like, how do you wake up, think any of the awful shit that how’s through your head, and not immediately rush to a gun store and blow your brains out? I want to see down this abyss. If you have enough self awareness to shed any light on it.
You wrote that. Not only is it not talking about the actual topic, I’m also pretty sure it’s straight up against the sub and instance rules. Then again, you also wrote
If Theres ever a genocide against a group I know includes you,I’m going to laugh at it so hard.
Yeah I’m not gonna look totally cracked and it’s gonna be all your fault, I hope it occurs to you to feel bad about making me laugh at such an inappropriate time while you’re starving to death, because it was not a nice thing to do.
If you don’t have any actual arguments or wish to discuss, it’s easier to just say so.
I listed the officials cited. At least five cabinet level or high up parliament ghouls.vthere were more but I stopped when I reached five.
By defending and denying their genocide, in the face of overwhelming evidence, after moving hoal posts, you are a part of it.
If you mean this: “(Prime minister, deputy head of parliament/head of dominant party, defense minister, ‘heritage minister’ whatever that is)” then yeah I saw that, but didn’t really think out of them there were the sort of outright genocidal comments from top decision makers other than maybe deputy speaker. For “heritage minister”, I don’t know how influential role that is and it was a smaller part so maybe?
So unless I’m mistaken I did respond to them all. I didn’t respond to the lower level comments (soldiers, a journalist, so on) because I didn’t think that’s what you meant anyway. This sort of confusion is why I was hoping you’d quote what was said and then write who said it. It’s a bit of effort but would make it a lot clearer and make sure we’re talking about the same thing.
I just don’t think it fits the mentioned definition, that’s all. That’s not defending the action at all. I don’t know about overwhelming evidence, I might’ve missed something crucial but what I did interact with didn’t seem convincing in the way I was hoping. As for goalposts, they’ve stayed the same. You helped set up some of those goalposts, so it’s strange you’d think they’ve moved.
Removed by mod
Don’t tell people to self-harm.
Okay yeah that wasn’t my finest statement.
I’m guessing that’s your eloquent way of saying that you are done discussing the actual topic.
You never started dear. And I’m going to assume that’s a no on the self awareness.
You wrote that. Not only is it not talking about the actual topic, I’m also pretty sure it’s straight up against the sub and instance rules. Then again, you also wrote
If you don’t have any actual arguments or wish to discuss, it’s easier to just say so.
Dude youre literally a genocide denier.
Of an ongoing genocide. Not just ignorant; a denier. Any rules that would defend you disgust me enough to fuck off anyway.
Also, great job taking shit out of context.
I didn’t see your edit earlier. Taking what shit out of context?
Go away genocide denier.
We’re discussing if the actions of Israel fit the definition.
We were discussing nothing.