The Israeli government is responding after celebrities including Billie Eilish and Mark Ruffalo sported red pins at the Oscars, which they believe symbolizes "bloodlust."
Based on your previous points in this very thread, you are invested in this article. Either way i have not addressed you really in my posts other than to tell you to choose your sources more carefully.
When one makes a claim that some group is secretly advocating for something immoral, as an argument to discredit their stated intention, the accuser has the burden of proof, not the group.
Even IF it was tied to pride for the murders in 2002 that doesn’t connect it advocating genocide. But you haven’t even got that far as you have to establish intent first.
And when comparing the pin to flying the confederate flag. There is no question as to its meaning. The confederacy was a secessionist movement whose reason for being was to specifically preserve the states rights to enforce slavery. That flag is their standard and its meaning was no secret when the confederacy used it as such.
Based on your previous points in this very thread, you are invested in this article. Either way i have not addressed you really in my posts other than to tell you to choose your sources more carefully.
This source is fine. We use conservative sources for our articles. You are free to cite a competing source for a liberal bias.
ven IF it was tied to pride for the murders in 2002 that doesn’t connect it advocating genocide.
It is tied to killing jews. That is genocide. That is the open goal of hamas.
There is no question as to its meaning.
Says you, I see as a flag of the Democrats. When I see the flag I know it represents racism because it is tied to the Democrats.
There is a difference between a good conservative source, and Fox News. Just because it is a conservative source does not mean it holds up to scrutiny, and Fox News consistently has trouble aligning with neutral fact. I wouldn’t source TYT or who ever makes left leaning rags to prove my points.
There was also not allot of counter left leaning articles on this because the Fox News article never established what it needed to in order to justify its claims. News articles report news, not squabble with unproven points of their rivals.
As for the meaning of the confederate flag, what i stated is fact about its meaning. And wile the circle encompassing democrats at the time and the confederacy are probably nearly eclipsed they do not fully encompass each other. There are those who were pro slavery who still considered succession a terrible idea, and so are not attributed to the confederacy. The difference between them is intent, which is clear.
Also bringing up the confederacy being tied to democrats seems to me like an attempted segway out of the current topic. One used often to attempt to delegitimize democrats as hypocrites or to secretly hate the very people they promote. No Democrat alive today was a participant in politics during the civil war. And it would be foolish to claim current democrats stand for the same things as the confederacy.
Just because it is a conservative source does not mean it holds up to scrutiny
It also means it does hold up as well.
Also bringing up the confederacy being tied to democrats seems to me like an attempted segway out of the current topic.
Not at all but is shows symbols mean different things. I wouldn’t fly the battle flag because 1. It’s not my thing. 2. It is the flag of the Democrats. 3. Even if it once was an anti-government meme, it’s now a symbol of hate.
No Democrat alive today was a participant in politics during the civil war.
But their politics are still the same racist politics as before.
It’s like the blood hand pin. What does it really mean, and should people be wearing it if it’s tied to the genocide of the Jews? I would say no.
You keep saying it’s the flag of the democrats. Yet those who proudly fly it now almost unanimously and proudly identify with the Republican Party. But it would be wrong to say that republicans advocate the ideals of the confederacy. You would need to give context as to why you think there is a connection with the confederate flag and current democrats. But again though, this has nothing to do with the topic and seems to be some sort of diversion.
As for the pin.
You have not established the connection of the pin to the 2002 murders, you have not established the 2002 murders to a genocide, you have not established that the participants of artist4ceasfire intended for the pin to have your prescribed meaning.
You have established that people, with a vested interest in perverting artists4ceasefire’s message for a cease fire, claim that they FEEL as though the pin was created to secretly signify approval for genocide. But facts don’t care about feelings. Its the burden of Fox News to establish this, and that the artists knew thats what the pin secretly means, because failing all of that, their call for cease fire is its only meaning.
Fox News states that there are Israelis that claim there is a connection, via a tweet from some dude on twitter with the intent to pervert the message from Artists4ceasfire to foster a cease fire. You linked the wiki article about the double murder from 2002. Which at no point connects the event with any symbols at all. I never claimed the murders didn’t happen, a actually assumed it did happen. Fox News as usual failed in its journalistic responsibility to establish any connection. They assume one because of bias and agenda would be my thoughts on why.
Ok first of all the top article if you read it states that there has been no connection to the symbol and the 2002 murders that they could establish.
And the second article is from the times of Israel. And explicitly stated that its covering what Israelites FEELS it means. It even ends with “i wonder” with the context that they wonder if artists4ceasefire knew, or cares that it makes them think of the 2002 murders. Then again any symbol used would have someone interpret in such a way to change the topic away from establishing a cease fire. More spin.
Again both articles fail to establish the connection. But at the least these two are open with that fact, though the last one is framing it in a way to not have to talk about artists4ceasefire message at all. Fox News assumed it to be true without doing their due diligence, either due to incompetence or to further an agenda.
Based on your previous points in this very thread, you are invested in this article. Either way i have not addressed you really in my posts other than to tell you to choose your sources more carefully.
When one makes a claim that some group is secretly advocating for something immoral, as an argument to discredit their stated intention, the accuser has the burden of proof, not the group.
Even IF it was tied to pride for the murders in 2002 that doesn’t connect it advocating genocide. But you haven’t even got that far as you have to establish intent first.
And when comparing the pin to flying the confederate flag. There is no question as to its meaning. The confederacy was a secessionist movement whose reason for being was to specifically preserve the states rights to enforce slavery. That flag is their standard and its meaning was no secret when the confederacy used it as such.
There is no comparison
This source is fine. We use conservative sources for our articles. You are free to cite a competing source for a liberal bias.
Says you, I see as a flag of the Democrats. When I see the flag I know it represents racism because it is tied to the Democrats.
There is a difference between a good conservative source, and Fox News. Just because it is a conservative source does not mean it holds up to scrutiny, and Fox News consistently has trouble aligning with neutral fact. I wouldn’t source TYT or who ever makes left leaning rags to prove my points.
There was also not allot of counter left leaning articles on this because the Fox News article never established what it needed to in order to justify its claims. News articles report news, not squabble with unproven points of their rivals.
As for the meaning of the confederate flag, what i stated is fact about its meaning. And wile the circle encompassing democrats at the time and the confederacy are probably nearly eclipsed they do not fully encompass each other. There are those who were pro slavery who still considered succession a terrible idea, and so are not attributed to the confederacy. The difference between them is intent, which is clear.
Also bringing up the confederacy being tied to democrats seems to me like an attempted segway out of the current topic. One used often to attempt to delegitimize democrats as hypocrites or to secretly hate the very people they promote. No Democrat alive today was a participant in politics during the civil war. And it would be foolish to claim current democrats stand for the same things as the confederacy.
And just so you know, i am not a democrat.
Not at all but is shows symbols mean different things. I wouldn’t fly the battle flag because 1. It’s not my thing. 2. It is the flag of the Democrats. 3. Even if it once was an anti-government meme, it’s now a symbol of hate.
It’s like the blood hand pin. What does it really mean, and should people be wearing it if it’s tied to the genocide of the Jews? I would say no.
You keep saying it’s the flag of the democrats. Yet those who proudly fly it now almost unanimously and proudly identify with the Republican Party. But it would be wrong to say that republicans advocate the ideals of the confederacy. You would need to give context as to why you think there is a connection with the confederate flag and current democrats. But again though, this has nothing to do with the topic and seems to be some sort of diversion.
As for the pin. You have not established the connection of the pin to the 2002 murders, you have not established the 2002 murders to a genocide, you have not established that the participants of artist4ceasfire intended for the pin to have your prescribed meaning.
You have established that people, with a vested interest in perverting artists4ceasefire’s message for a cease fire, claim that they FEEL as though the pin was created to secretly signify approval for genocide. But facts don’t care about feelings. Its the burden of Fox News to establish this, and that the artists knew thats what the pin secretly means, because failing all of that, their call for cease fire is its only meaning.
The article does. It is a symbol from the second intifada.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Ramallah_lynching
Here is a photo of the exact symbol.
No, the article does not.
Fox News states that there are Israelis that claim there is a connection, via a tweet from some dude on twitter with the intent to pervert the message from Artists4ceasfire to foster a cease fire. You linked the wiki article about the double murder from 2002. Which at no point connects the event with any symbols at all. I never claimed the murders didn’t happen, a actually assumed it did happen. Fox News as usual failed in its journalistic responsibility to establish any connection. They assume one because of bias and agenda would be my thoughts on why.
See the blood hands photo. That’s where it comes from.
https://forward.com/culture/592190/ceasefire-pin-oscars-ramallah-lynching/?amp=1
https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/what-the-red-hands-on-the-ceasefire-pins-mean-to-many-of-us-who-love-israel/
Ok first of all the top article if you read it states that there has been no connection to the symbol and the 2002 murders that they could establish.
And the second article is from the times of Israel. And explicitly stated that its covering what Israelites FEELS it means. It even ends with “i wonder” with the context that they wonder if artists4ceasefire knew, or cares that it makes them think of the 2002 murders. Then again any symbol used would have someone interpret in such a way to change the topic away from establishing a cease fire. More spin.
Again both articles fail to establish the connection. But at the least these two are open with that fact, though the last one is framing it in a way to not have to talk about artists4ceasefire message at all. Fox News assumed it to be true without doing their due diligence, either due to incompetence or to further an agenda.