Anonymous #3 1w

Mourn their loss not his death is what I mean

13

Anonymous #7 1w

First of all, its a genocide, not a war. Wars are between two opposing armed forces, the zionists are using an army and air force to exterminate a civilian population in a concentration camp

-1

Anonymous #7 1w

And second of all, not its not just about Palestine. Kirk has been spreading hate about immigrants, POC, and trans people his entire life. Trump said recently that he used to talk to Kirk all the time. That says everything, he was the chief ideologue for the trump regime

0

Anonymous #6 1w

Wait are you admitting to being a fascist?

3

Anonymous OP 1w

Okay I don’t think we’re gonna get anywhere with this conversation but I encourage you to find some unbiased (from either side) sources on the history of the conflict. I wasn’t trying to engage on that matter because it requires more time and preferably face to face interaction than is possible here. I merely was saying that there isn’t any post I can imagine a person making about anything at all that should condemn them to death

3

Anonymous OP 1w

Sure looks that way to me!

6

Anonymous #7 1w

Ahh, a zionist. That explains why you like this fascist. Birds of a feather, right?

-1

Anonymous OP 1w

Again, I agree he was a terrible person. Doesn’t mean he deserved to be assassinated.

3

Anonymous OP 1w

I never claimed to be a Zionist. But if you wanna discuss the matter further in good faith feel free to DM me. I’m happy to genuinely engage in a discussion.

3

Anonymous #7 1w

“If you wanna discuss the matter in good faith” For the last two years, an occupying colonial power has been bombing, starving, shooting a concentration camp full of people who don’t have a state, an army, an air force, missiles, or any real way to fight back or defend themselves.

0

Anonymous #7 1w

You call this a “war” rather than a genocide, and now you dare talk about “good faith”? Your behavior is ghoulish. You use nice language and pretend to be civilized while justifying some of the most horrific crimes against humanity.

-1

Anonymous OP 1w

Again, I truly am happy to discuss this in DMs if u genuinely want to have a discussion. You seem to be having a great time shadowboxing but I’ve yet to voice any opinion on the conflict and am really only interested in doing so with someone who genuinely wants to discuss the matter regardless of what side they may fall on.

6

Anonymous OP 1w

Literally haven’t given any opinion about the conflict at all. This is exactly the sort of performative activism I’m talking about. Do u really think the use of war vs genocide in one post is truly of significant moral weight? Is the defining terms of the conflict what’s most important to you? I suspect it’s not truly. I imagine it has more to do with the suffering of its victims. Which again, I’d be happy to discuss in DMs if you would like.

7

Anonymous #7 1w

After 2 years of planned famine, massacres, bombing hospitals, mass executions at point blank, anyone who insists on calling it a “conflict” or “war” is inherently acting in bad faith

0

Anonymous #7 1w

“regardless what side they fall on.” Its a genocide. Youre sick. You can’t debate whether human beings deserve to be slaughtered in death camps like its a high school debate class.

8

Anonymous OP 1w

Literally only you have been debating. I want you to seriously take a second. Before you draft ur rebuttal. Take a second and consider who ur arguing against here. Bc I literally haven’t given any take on the conflict at all. You’ve invented a position for me so u can essentially debate urself, but ur calling me sick for an opinion I haven’t even voiced.

2

Anonymous #7 1w

Having “a good faith debate” with a genocider only legitimizes the genocide. No, I’m not debating with you whether Palestinians deserve to be slaughtered like animals. Your opinions aren’t welcome in decent society

-1

Anonymous #7 1w

I’m not debating you because there’s nothing to debate. That you think there are two sides with valid ideas that can have a debate IS THE PROBLEM

0

Anonymous OP 1w

I didn’t even say I think there are two sides with valid ideas. I literally just said if u wanted to talk about our genuine feelings on the situation then I would. This is a very interesting case study of performative activism in social media. You have invented an argument to have so u can feel good about urself.

2

Anonymous #7 1w

That you think westerners have the right to “debate” whether Palestinians live or die is the problem. That you think we can just have a friendly conversation about whether mass murder is justified is the problem.

0

Anonymous OP 1w

How am I a genocider? I’ve literally given no opinion on any part of the conflict at all. I’ve not said anything about anyone deserving anything. How can you determine where my opinions are and aren’t welcome when I haven’t voiced any? I’m not trying to argue with u here I’m trying to get u to take a second, stop trying to win, and just think for a second about what we’re actually talking about here.

2

Anonymous OP 1w

When did I say I think westerners have the right to “debate” whether Palestinians live or die? If u can’t back up this claim than you have to admit you’re arguing with yourself here.

2

Anonymous #7 1w

By insisting on calling it a conflict or a war and not a genocide, you’ve already given it an opinion. and your reponse to my post was “a foreign war”, which minimizes it, because the US is the major power enabling the genocide. And yes, you did say there were two valid sides. Your words: “am interested in discussing only with someone who wants a good faith argument regardless which side they fall on”

1

Anonymous #7 1w

Your words do say there are “two valid sides”. Thats my point. No, there’s only one valid side.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Nothing about validity in mentioning that there are two commonly represented sides to the issue. I’m not insisting on anything at all. I’m just using the language that most neutrally addresses the situation without voicing any opinion because you’re obviously not interested in a genuine discussion about anything. It’s very interedting to me that you keep replying to me at all. Why do you think you are?

1

Anonymous #7 1w

You’re doing that tactic that Charlie Kirk and white supremacists love to do. Act like there are “two sides” on something like slavery, and when someone refuses to argue, you insist “I just want to have a good faith argument” No.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Where?

1

Anonymous #7 1w

I’m replying for one reason only: Your racist bullshit is good at fooling people who have never heard it before, and I want whoever reads this to be prepared next time they hear it

1

Anonymous OP 1w

I mean objectively there are at least two sides. You might agree with only one but factually there are at least two frequently represented opinions. This has nothing to do with politics or opinions this is just logic. Tell me again the opinion I’ve voiced that you have a problem with. You feel so strongly it should be easy. Screenshot please.

1

Anonymous #7 1w

“I’m only interested in being neutral” Between the people who are being exterminated and the people who are doing the exterminating? How noble of you! (that was sarcasm)

0

Anonymous OP 1w

Oh wow thanks for clarifying the sarcasm, I wouldn’t have understood it otherwise given how friendly and rational you’ve been so far. And I’m referring to this specific conversation. Isn’t it interesting to you that weve been going back and forth for so long and I’ve literally not said anything about what I think of the situation? I’m still waiting on your proof that I said there were two valid sides. Or do you admit you made that up?

2

Anonymous #7 1w

See my comment that starts with “By insisting on…” I already explained how your rhetoric strongly implies “both sides” are valid and that westerners have the right to “debate” genocide.

0

Anonymous OP 1w

No u quoted me. So show proof of this quote or admit you made it up.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Literally haven’t voiced any opinion on any group of people at all. Explain to me exactly what I’ve said that’s racist using screenshots for proof please.

1

Anonymous #7 1w

By saying “I discuss with someone who is willing to have a good faith argument regardless of what side the other person is on”. That doesnt work for a genocide. Two sides of a genocide can’t have a good faith argument.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

*I only want to discuss

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Nope. Still not proof of what you presented as a quote. Try again or admit you made it up.

1

Anonymous #7 1w

Thats my point. Saying you can have a good faith discussion across two sides of a genocide implies both sides have a certain validity.

1

Anonymous #7 1w

Can a pro-slavery and anti-slavery person have a good faith discussion? How about a nazi and an anti-fascist? Is it acceptable for people to debate whether other groups should be killed?

4

Anonymous OP 1w

No it actually doesn’t. But more importantly you put it in quotes which is not implying anything, it’s claiming a statement was made. So do you have proof of the statement or did you make it up

1

Anonymous #7 1w

Yes, it does. No, we cannot have a “good faith discussion” about whether Palestinians deserve to be murdered like animals.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

These are all questions we could discuss if you were actually interested in a real discussion at which point you are free to DM me. But we both know you aren’t interested in discussing anything at all. So why pretend. Now give me ur proof of all the claims you’ve been making about me. Surely a principled person such as yourself would not strongly condemn someone for an opinion without proof of that opinion

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Only you have offered that as a discussion topic, not me. So ur arguing with urself again. This is getting boring. Show me the proof. You said I said a specific phrase. You even put it in quotes. So prove it.

2

Anonymous #7 1w

I’ve explained this twice already. This will be the last time: By saying you just want a discussion partner who can have a good faith argument of the Palestinian Genocide with “either side”, it implies that support for the genocide is a valid position to have. It legitimizes genocide.

1

Anonymous #7 1w

Its like saying “I would like to have a good faith discussion about whether trans people should be murdered”

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Do you understand what quotes mean? You quoted me. Prove it or else I’ll have no choice but to accept you trade in misinformation

1

Anonymous #7 1w

Lmao you fascists always speak so strangely. “I’ll have no choice but to accept you trade in misinformation” lmaoo

1

Anonymous OP 1w

I actually think we might disagree on whether such a discussion is possible (though we’d likely agree on position since I’m trans) but more importantly this isn’t relevant bc I never specified any specific topic for a discussion nor my opinion on any topic. Anyway proof now please

1

Anonymous OP 1w

So you’ve run out of real arguments now it’s suddenly about belittling someone for the way they speak. I guess u think that sort of things okay then. Anyway prove ur claims or admit u can’t

1

Anonymous #7 1w

“If you want to discuss the matter [such clean words to describe a genocide!] feel free to dm me” That was one of your first replies

0

Anonymous #7 1w

Great. Being trans does not give you the right to debate whether Palestinians have the right to live. Hope this helps

1

Anonymous OP 1w

And u extrapolated that into a specific topic. You took “the matter” to be what you wanted to argue about. Not proof of me claiming anything. Try again

1

Anonymous OP 1w

I’ve not brought that up as a debate topic at all. But you’ve done it multiple times now. Why is that something you’re so eager to debate?

3

Anonymous #7 1w

Because thats how this conversation got started??

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Nah actually I was trying to engage you with the idea of whether there was any conceivable social media post that would make someone’s life forfeit (without other crimes obviously). But you just wanted to shadowbox

3

Anonymous OP 1w

Anyway it’s dinner time for me. Have a nice night!

5

Anonymous OP 1w

The war would end tomorrow if Hamas release the hostages.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

You support people who would happily wipe every Jew of the face of the earth.

1