This is going to be unpopular, but how do we know they’re non-combatants? Just because they’re unarmed at the moment the video is filmed, doesn’t make the non-combatants,AFAIK.
We’re basing this on the opinion of a a biased reporter, who wached the video and described what they saw?
Disclaimer, required around here:
Fuck Israeli Government.
Fuck Hamas.
If Israel brought out video evidence of these specific guys doing stuff before then I’d agree. But with their track record the burden is definitely on them to prove these guys were combatants they just happened to catch unaware.
If you’ve ever seen a Hamas video they sneak through the opnenings in the sides of buildings. They certainly don’t walk around in the open like this without worries.
The burden of evidence lies on israel, and just like that time they drone striked an ambulance, no evidence will be presented.
For someone who is constantly getting their shit removed and banned for misinformation, you sure seem confident that this video is evidence of anything.
Unless you were there, or capable of identifying the people in this video- you can only admit that you know absolutely NOTHING about it.
Anything less is misinformation and/or opinion and should be dismissed as such.
The context is the HD video footage of the IDF drone striking obvious unarmed civilians.
Where’s the context showing these people were enemy combatants deserving a death sentence by drone strike? Do you always take the “guilty until proven innocent” line, or is this a race thing?
By all means, tell me what their position is. Failing that, what’s the charitable assumption to make here?
As far as I can see, the likely options are:
They support the genocide
They don’t care about the rule of law
The former is more common in this context, but it’s both weird and worthless of you to insert yourself into the conversation to defend someone’s positions that (unless you can confidently answer this question) you don’t understand. Just like that, you’ve derailed the conversation into this irrelevant shit - what was your complaint again?Oh…
This is going to be unpopular, but how do we know they’re non-combatants? Just because they’re unarmed at the moment the video is filmed, doesn’t make the non-combatants, AFAIK.
We’re basing this on the opinion of a a biased reporter, who wached the video and described what they saw?
Disclaimer, required around here:
Fuck Israeli Government.
Fuck Hamas.
If Israel brought out video evidence of these specific guys doing stuff before then I’d agree. But with their track record the burden is definitely on them to prove these guys were combatants they just happened to catch unaware.
I’m sure the Israeli government has a lot of their hands right now to comment on every twitter video posted by a person who’s location is set to Gaza.
If this is actually a war crime, I hope the culprits are punished accordingly.
Other than that, I’m going to treat this as yet another twitter video, without context, cut to fit an agenda, with some blood-boiling comment.
They’re welcome to send that proof to the NYT.
If you’ve ever seen a Hamas video they sneak through the opnenings in the sides of buildings. They certainly don’t walk around in the open like this without worries.
The burden of evidence lies on israel, and just like that time they drone striked an ambulance, no evidence will be presented.
We can’t deduce shit from a video like this, especially when it’s just posted on “X” by a strongly biased source.
I’ll wait for a credible source to report on this, twitter bullshit can stay in twitter.
That’s an interesting way to deny video evidence.
For someone who is constantly getting their shit removed and banned for misinformation, you sure seem confident that this video is evidence of anything.
Unless you were there, or capable of identifying the people in this video- you can only admit that you know absolutely NOTHING about it.
Anything less is misinformation and/or opinion and should be dismissed as such.
Lmao, you have no idea what those words mean.
Yep, there is no context for this and heavy framing in the article. I agree with both of your Disclamers, but this is just propaganda.
The context is the HD video footage of the IDF drone striking obvious unarmed civilians.
Where’s the context showing these people were enemy combatants deserving a death sentence by drone strike? Do you always take the “guilty until proven innocent” line, or is this a race thing?
And this is how you turn a conversation into a pile of shit.
By pointing to evidence to back my claim and asking for consistent standards and something vaguely resembling the rule of law?
How do you propose we make the conversation better?
You’re implying racism when there might be none in order to bolster your weak argument.
By all means, tell me what their position is. Failing that, what’s the charitable assumption to make here?
As far as I can see, the likely options are:
They support the genocide
They don’t care about the rule of law
The former is more common in this context, but it’s both weird and worthless of you to insert yourself into the conversation to defend someone’s positions that (unless you can confidently answer this question) you don’t understand. Just like that, you’ve derailed the conversation into this irrelevant shit - what was your complaint again? Oh…
You can’t see very far then.
I don’t agree with your position, so you’re probably racist. Good day.
You forgot that alternative explanation you insist exists, champ.