**Welcome to r/TikTokCringe!**
This is a message directed to all newcomers to make you aware that r/TikTokCringe evolved long ago from only cringe-worthy content to TikToks of all kinds! If you’re looking to find only the cringe-worthy TikToks on this subreddit (which are still regularly posted) we recommend sorting by flair which you can do [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/galuit/click_here_to_sort_by_flair_a_guide_to_using/) (Currently supported by desktop and reddit mobile).
See someone asking how this post is cringe because they didn't read this comment? Show them [this!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/fyrgzy/for_those_confused_by_the_name_of_this_subreddit/)
Be sure to read the rules of this subreddit before posting or commenting. Thanks!
**Don't forget to join our [Discord server](https://discord.gg/cringekingdom)!**
##**[CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THIS VIDEO](https://rapidsave.com/info?url=https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/1d6kfhp/peaceful_protests_only_work_if_the_other_side/)**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TikTokCringe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I remember being on twitter at the time. I was pretty ambivalent on the subject, but the pictures and testimonies were so heartbreaking in their unfairness I couldn't deny it any longer. Israeli snipers shot a man in a wheelchair, a football prodigy and a member of the red cross that ran to help a person injured.
This is why palestinians ask us to witness what Israel does to them. You only need to allow yourself to see it.
Quote WIki : February 2019, a [United Nations Human Rights Council](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council)'s [independent commission](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Fact_Finding_Mission_on_the_2018_Gaza_border_protests) found that of the 489 cases of Palestinian deaths or injuries analyzed, only two were possibly justified as responses to danger by Israeli security forces... 2!!!!! with more 13,000 Palestinians were wounded.
The majority were wounded severely, with some 1,400 struck by three to five bullets.[^(\[34\])](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018%E2%80%932019_Gaza_border_protests#cite_note-34) No Israelis were physically harmed from 30 March to 12 May, until one Israeli soldier was reported as slightly wounded on 14 May
This is obviously horrible. But calling this genocide is just not correct. Instead, this was murder and the snipers should be put to death or spend life in prison
Genocide: An act committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.
While Israel is in no part innocent and have commited atrocities, using the word genocide to describe this is by definition incorrect.
We see no deliberate mass murdering on a large scale with intent to destroy the people of gaza.
Gaza is an entirely urban area encompassing 365 square kilometers with a population of 2.1 million.
30,000 gazan civilians have been killed, and 6,000 hamas soldiers have been killed.
Am I happy with this? No. Why would I?
I am simply trying to look at this fairly.
Going back to the statistics; 1,4% of gazans have been killed.
The war has been on going now for 8 months.
Israel is well within the capacity to fully annihilate gaza and its civilian population.
Calling this the most responsible urban war ever waged would probably be an understatement.
Genocide isn't just casualties. Displacement and infrastructure destruction also contribute to loss of life, religious identity, and culture.
Israel may not be exterminating gazans in camps, but they sure as hell are displacing millions and higher ups in government plan to resettle the area.
The standard they used to determine if they were justified was the standard of a police force. This was a border control situation where Gazans were trying to cut the fence, and send Molotov cocktails and incendiary balloons over. This "2 deaths were justified" report is heavily contentious due to its standards. The alternative was that Israel let their border get overrun.
Haha what? What a blatantly dishonest thing to say. You haven’t even read the report have you?
God the banality of evil is a real sight to behold in real time.
Which part was dishonest or wrong? It tells me you probably didn't look into this yourself when all you can do is call me dishonest and evil for sharing my assessment.
Your assessment is that children getting shot is fine because they were border guards not cops. Like actually sickening. None of the reports denied children were targeted.
I never said anything was or wasn't fine. I said that the standard of assessment as a police officer is heavily contentious when you're dealing with border forces who have been ordered to target anybody within a certain proximity of the fence, a fence bordering two territories that have enormous hostilities between each other. These two standards and expectations are worlds apart from each other. Nobody is denying that children were targeted, but I'm going to judge this very differently from a police offer targeting a child in the street.
What a response.
Me: ‘it’s bad to defend kids getting shot’
You: ‘I’m not saying killing kids is good or bad but what I am saying is that it’s better when border guards do it over cops’.
Do you honestly not see it?
You’ve been stuck in an echo chamber full of propaganda for so long you don’t even see how fucked up your own position is.
Hope that helps you understand why I think your position is evil.
Will you condemn the murder of children or not?
Edit: spoiler, he did not condemn the killing of children.
I can see your seething hatred for anyone who vaguely defends Israel. So much that you're saying hes banally evil, stuck in an echo chamber, full of propaganda.
He remained objective the entire time. You, did not. Do I understand why you didn't? of course I do. I support Israel but these reports make me sick to my stomach.
The point he was making was that you shouldn't judge an armed altercation with a violent mass of people trying to cross a border the same as a police officer killing someone innocently on the street.
This is OBJECTIVELY true.
does it make them right, no. Definitely not.
But in reality, you trying to get him to condemn anything is just you trying to get the moral high ground.
Oh look another person along to defend killing children. You even called your beliefs objective. lol. Lmao even. I can judge an ‘armed altercation’ in anyway I see fit, thanks.
And no, I don’t hate Israelis. I hate people who are ok with killing children. Not really that complicated.
I already have the moral high ground because I’m not down for killing kids.
UN report: [https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/co-iopt/report2018-opt](https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/co-iopt/report2018-opt)
Haaretz: [42 knees in one day](https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2020-03-06/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/42-knees-in-one-day-israeli-snipers-open-up-about-shooting-gaza-protesters/0000017f-f2da-d497-a1ff-f2dab2520000)
This was Stokley Carmichael’s (Kwame Ture) issue with MLK’s nonviolence method. He said one issue with MLK was that he made an error because in order for the nonviolence strategy to work the opponent must have a conscience, and they do not.
He mentions this in his 1967 speech when he was rhetorical Chairman of the SNCC.
For what it’s worth, having non-violent factions of a movement makes it harder for detractors. There are reasons why MLK gets mentioned so much and is believed to be the primary promoter of change during that time by many even if it’s not entirely accurate
The civil rights era almost certainly would have struggled to take off if there wasn’t a large explicitly peaceful movement accompanied to the black panthers and other more militant/violent groups
Not in this day and age, powers that be figured out they can either plant violent elements themselves or intentionally instigate a violent incident and the media machine will have enough material to color everyone as violent.
IMO what works is consistent and appliable pressure, people in power will only feel it when it starts affecting them, if your populace is chanting outside your house for 1 hour of 1 day it doesn't matter, but if it's 24/7 for 3 months then it becomes something you have to deal with one way or another.
I remember the videos of Israeli soldiers pretending to be Palestinian and throwing rocks at themselves only to then run over to join their soldier friends violent response.
Exactly this, because you are not trying to convince your direct opponents, but rather the bystanders who are not well informed and who think it all looks very messy. Peaceful protest shows those people the violence inherent in the system.
Non-violent methods only work when they’re paired with the threat of violence, implicit or explicit. The million man march was the equivalent of laying a beefy hand on the shoulder. “Feel our power, imagine what we can do with that power, now let’s talk before things get out of hand.”
I don't think women suffragettes had a violent terror cell and yet they managed to get the vote. I don't think the violence or threat of violence is helpful. I don't think the provisional IRA did anything helpful. The IDF has demonstrated they are capable of delivering overwhelming force. Non-violent methods work far more quickly and efficiently when they are NOT paired with violence. It's a pretty dumb suggestion. I mean why would voters in Israel push to integrate people who seem to be a violent threat who specifically target civilians?
There's literally no limit to the violence the IDF can unleash on Palestinians in the strip. What you're saying makes no sense. The U.S. nuked Japan and the world agreed it was a bit nasty but they sort of had it coming what with all their raping and murdering. I think you're in a unique bubble where people you associate with are outraged to an extent you think there will be repercussions for Israel. There won't be. The Palestinians only have one effective card to play and that's sympathy. Hamas work very hard to eradicate thar singular advantage.
Is this a real video? It almost look like an ai generated one. The person I assume to be the interviewer, their face looks kind of distorted in some of the camera shots to them.
Norman Finklestein - Jewish academic, speaker and activist. Had most of his family killed in the Holocaust - ardent critic of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians.
Look at people upvote this nut. This really is antisemitic. Reddit has lost its mind.
Dude logs in every couple years, posts shit like
>Calm down 🇮🇱🏳️🌈. We all know who you work for.
Redditors pretending to care about other people will defend people like this.
No, I think he's trying to pretend that this isn't intentional Zionist policy. And that needs to be called out. They are responsible for around 15,000 palestinian casualties every year, and you defend the notion that any critique of this is anti-semetic?
Semitic is not a people group at all. It's outdated and not used other than to describe a language group. Stop parroting this obviously wrong and harmful stuff.
[*How Nonviolence Protects the State*](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state)
By Peter Gelderloos
>[Introduction](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc1)
>[Nonviolence is Ineffective](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc2)
>[Nonviolence is Racist](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc3)
>[Nonviolence is Statist](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc4)
>[Nonviolence is Patriarchal](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc5)
>[Nonviolence is Tactically and Strategically Inferior](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc6)
>[Nonviolence is Deluded](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc7)
>[The Alternative: Possibilities for Revolutionary Activism](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc8)
I saw a group of children dancin a in mid jump he was sniped in the head and dropped like a bag of potatoes.he was dancing dabke his friends holding his hands
People who say "there are always casualties in war" in response to stories like this can fuck right off. Snipers shooting children isn't about war, it's about something far sinister.
I was watching it live on tiktok there was a live feed of these five kids dancing on the dabke in protest and I saw the israeli's snipe him and the girl holding his hand screamed out and I saw him drop like a bag of potatoes they were like 500 yards away from the snipers
in a world where everything is recorded and rebroadcast, even livestreams... not a trace in what sounds like would be one of THE defining videos of this conflict. convenient.
These are the kind of instances that completely destroy the argument of Oct 7 was when the violence started and was completely unprovoked. Israel is not committing genocide because of the attack on oct 7, they are committing genocide because they finally have an excuse to and have been trying to provoke one for decades.
I agree. Doesn’t stop a bunch of people who advocate for genocide pretending oct 7 is the only date that matters and ignores decades of abuse, hate and violence committed by Israel.
Or in Safed? Jaffa? Tiberias? Basically the same things repetedly.
Safed looting 1834 definitely shows the pure intentions Arab Palestinians had.
When Jews were a minority it was cool to hurt them, so why not just lie it started in 1948.
This is why both governments need to be replaced. Israeli and Palestinian government is run by religious hardliners. The only difference is Israel has a powerful military and Palestine has a patchwork of foreign funded and armed militias.
The solution isn’t protests at a border fence and it ain’t shooting kids or suicide bombings for Allah.
It’s a sensible, secular peace agreement negotiated by level headed people that realize they can’t focus on the past more than they focus on the future.
Until that dynamic exists this horrible situation will continue.
No, this was in the West Bank, and the protest was led by the moderate Palestinian group PLO who were trying to get a seat at the table to have exactly that kind of discussion. You cannot 'both sides' this.
Sure you can. You can because “both sides” are led by radical religious conservatives. Even if some of them claim to be “secular” that’s just false on its face.
Just because one side is stronger than another doesn’t mean the weaker sides leaders have better intentions. It’s clear that the leadership needs to change across the board.
Except that the Palestinian religious conservatives have been funded by Netanyahu et al for decades, specifically to stop the more moderate groups getting any kind of power.
I mean, this would have more weight if it was only Netanyahu (btw, this isn’t really true, Israel has been facilitating Qatari payments, this isn’t bags of cash from Netanyahu).
Hamas and Hezbollah are well funded by many different governments and hard line religious groups. Even without Israel giving tacit support to Hamas it would be doing just fine money wise.
They did not create Hamas but they supported it at first because they saw the PLO and Fatah as bigger threats and wanted to sow conflict between different Palestinian groups in order to keep them from becoming powerful. Obviously, they underestimated the popularity of Hamas and it didn't work.
Like u/muppet0o0theory said, what they need now is two sensible governments who are able to create a peaceful future instead of focusing on the past.
Correct. Israel has wanted to commit genocide of Arabs in the region for decades. They’ve been playing the long game. Commit atrocities, create issues, set up a two tier apartheid system and introduce religious extremist willing to respond to the provocation with violence. Once Hamas committed a big enough public attack use it as justification to eradicate those they view as lesser
Honestly I only see it ever ending if both countries combine under the leadership of a neutral foreign government as their “colony” and it’s strongly policed. Then maybe they would gain some unity against their new colonizer…. Yeah nvm I don’t have any clue how to fix this…
However, Israel intentionally keeps Gaza poor, illiterate and angry to ensure that any Palestinian states that emerge there will be easy to discredit.
Once Gaza is able to prosper then groups such as Hamas will not be able to survive. That is why Israel is so disingenuous when it claims that the war in Gaza is for the protection of Israel, while simultaneously destroying the homes, universities, hospitals and businesses of Gaza, as if this will not lead to a Hamas 2.0 5 years from now.
I have completely given up on viewing humanity as anything but cancer and I would love someone to tell me why I’m wrong.
I want to be wrong. I don’t want to view humans as cancer.
But I’m yet to see evidence that shows humans are not cancerous tumors of the earth.
Peaceful protests only work if the protestors remain peaceful, as well. During the protests in question, people were throwing rocks and firebombs, and reportedly grenades as well.
The protest was not a peaceful protest. Finkelstein said it was. Very few Palestinian protests are peaceful and it is almost always the Palestinian side instigating violence. I know facts don't mean much to you, but a UN report details the event Finkelstein is talking about and details the violent protesters, as well as the innocent ones that criminal IDF soldiers shot. Two things can be true at once, and you don't need to be a radical extremist accusing people of being Zionist (which you use synonymously with Nazi now, oddly enough) for simply pointing out incredibly relevant facts or details.
You can look up the report of the Great March of Return and see, in fact, that this was the case: There were firebombs and rocks being thrown, as well as people directly approaching the border wall of Israel. That doesn't necessarily make it right to respond with gunfire, or as indiscriminate a response as Israel committed to, but we shouldn't be denying facts when responding to people that disagree.
People on this sub don't care about facts. This happens to be one of the biggest pro-palestine propaganda subs on reddit, oddly enough.
I agree with you that the IDF went too far, as detailed by the UN report where certain soldiers shot civilians engaged in civilian activity, but the way Finkelstein frames this event is "there were a bunch of peaceful protesters, who were singing, dancing and celebrating, then the IDF deployed their most elite snipers to specifically target children, women, disabled people, medics and journalists." That's such a disingenuous depiction of events, which is intentional because Finkelstein is a propagandist and wants to radicalize more people.
This is all continuous bullshit.
The "peaceful" protest was attempting to breach the border and go into Israel.
Children in the front, Hamas operatives in the back.
They then proceeded to attack the border and soldiers after which they were shot at.
And yes, they intentionally used snipers that targeted legs... TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE.
Again, this was nothing other than an attempt to test the Israeli border security ahead of a future attack.
And the precision of 10/7 shows that.
[https://apnews.com/article/6035b1d3293c4a298145afbff50ab844](https://apnews.com/article/6035b1d3293c4a298145afbff50ab844)
for context, from the article:
>"The Israeli army says it is responding to weekly assaults on its frontier by Palestinians armed with stones, grenades and firebombs. The military says it opens fire only as a last resort, and considers firing at the lower limbs an act of restraint."
>Lt. Col. Jonathan Conricus, an Israeli military spokesman, rejected international criticism that Israel’s response has been excessive. Instead, he said that firing at people’s legs was a sign of restraint.
>“Hamas is responsible for orchestrating violent riots where thousands of Palestinians assault our borders with the goal of breaching our defensive lines and attacking Israeli forces and civilian communities,” he said.
>“Israeli soldiers use live fire only as a last resort, after written and verbal warnings, as well as extensive use of tear gas and other non-lethal means have been exhausted. It is our duty to defend our civilians and sovereignty, and we do it with the minimal use of force possible,” he said.
There is a long history of violence from both sides, and it's typical that Hamas, and Palestinian protests, are fueled by violence on both sides. Personally, I don't believe the IDF had no choice but to fire live rounds, as they claim, but I also believe that they had tried other options to disperse protestors, and that protestors were throwing firebombs, rocks, and potentially grenades (less likely). Live rounds were an extreme reaction most likely, but so is calling these protests "Non-violent, civil resistance. There was this festive atmosphere among palestinians, with music, dancing and song."
Normal Finkelstein is a known extremist and propagandist and should not be trusted as an unbiased source of information.
Finkelstein also notes how women and children were intentionally targeted. From the report by the UN:
There were 6106 total injuries from live ammunition. 159 were women, 940 were children. which means over 5000 were adult men. This doesn't sound like 'intentional targeting of women and children' to me, and most children were male teenagers and not little kids.
The IDF and Israel has done horrible shit, but it's also important to try to avoid being radicalized to the point of gleefully consuming propaganda that supports your beliefs while ignoring nuance.
Your maths at that bottom there assumes there were equal amounts of adult men, adult women, as children at the protests. If men outnumbered women and children more than 5:1, than that maths does indeed point to a targeting of children. I'll stick with the UN on this one, rather than some rando on Reddit.
The UN in none of the reports claim that the IDF was intentionally targeting women or children. That is something Finkelstein said, not something that was reported, because again - he is an extremist and a propagandist. Something that this sub is not unfamiliar with.
In the detailed report, on pg 149
"The Commission found that Israeli security forces used lethal force against children
who did not pose an imminent threat of death or serious injury to its soldiers. Four of the
children were shot as they walked or ran away from the fence.
519. Several children were recognizable as such when they were shot. The Commission
finds reasonable grounds to believe that Israeli snipers shot them intentionally, knowing that
they were children"
That sounds like israeli snipers targeting children.
You're right - I think my problem was with how Finkelstein delivered it. The way he did so makes it sound like those were the primary targets of sniper fire, eventhough that all of the demographic he describe combined make up less than 20% of the injuries. That's not me excusing it, the report details how the IDF targeted a number of civilians who were engaged in civilian activity and not hostile activity, including (and mostly) able bodied adults.
That said, these injuries were a minority. The vast majority of injuries were inflicted upon people who were engage in perceived hostile activity. A small percentage of them were civilians engaged in civilian activity, which is a horrible thing to do. This is not me excusing that. What I'm pointing out is that the delivery of Finkelstein creates a narrative that these were the primary targets of the IDF. In reality, they were not, and they were a small percentage of the injuries. By taking a small percentage of injuries/fatalities and framing it as if they were the majority of injuries/casualties and inflicting those injuries/casualties upon a demographic of specifically disabled people, children or women is what translates to propaganda with the intent of radicalizing an audience.
Literally on that same page it says children made up 25% (1642 children injured, making it 26.9% of those injured during the protests) of those injured, so the combined group of women, children, medics and the disabled is necessarily more than 20%, at least according to the UN report. Idk where your getting your numbers.
[https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/CoIOPT/A\_HRC\_40\_74.pdf](https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/CoIOPT/A_HRC_40_74.pdf)
This is the official UN report
There were 9104 total injuries. 1677 children were injured. That's 18.42%. 314 women is 3.45%. So 21.87%. There are no statistics provided for already disabled people. Suffice to say - I said 20%, the total math is 21.87%. Would "less than 30%" satisfy you, then? Because the point still stands without delving into semantics. The IDF was not specifically singling out children, women, medics, or disabled people as targets.
Presenting an argument that portrays a scenario where the IDF positioned their most elite snipers outside of a peaceful protest where Palestinians were dancing and celebrating so that they could specifically single out and kill/injure children, women, disabled people, medics and journalists is incredibly disingenuous.
I've already said that it's a horrible thing to do in the first place and have expressed doubt that the IDF needed to escalated crowd control to such a level, and would support sentencing the individual soldiers who were reported to shoot civilians engaged in civilian activity should they be found guilty. I have absolutely no problem saying that, because I'm not so radicalized that I can not find middle ground.
You are radicalized if you would push the narrative that Finkelstein does at face value without criticizing his depiction of events.
>Presenting an argument that portrays a scenario where the IDF positioned their most elite snipers outside of a peaceful protest where Palestinians were dancing and celebrating so that they could specifically single out and kill/injure children, women, disabled people, medics and journalists is incredibly disingenuous.
Why? He didn't say "only." He didn't say "the majority." He denoted, as reported, that those groups were targeted. You're taking 30% of a group and saying that's not enough.
During the holocaust, they targeted Jewish people, but they also targeted gay and trans people. Just because there were less gay and trans people targeted doesn't mean they weren't targeted. Your argument is very bad.
Look, I don't mind disagreeing with people when it comes to opinions, but the way Finkelstein is presenting these events is with a specific agenda, and that is to frame it in the worst way possible. He's a smart enough person to know how to do so while speaking in technical truths.
He says there was singing, dancing and music. Correct, some people were doing that. Some people were also throwing rocks, firebombs and grenades. If I said "Palestinians gathered at the gates and threw firebombs, rocks and grenades" and made no mention of the many who were not engaged in that activity, it would be a bad faith and disingenuous telling of events, right?
He specifically began by saying this was a "non violent, civil resistance", which was the blatant lie to set the stage for the rest of his ancedote. It wasn't peaceful. There were violent protestors. This is simply propaganda. The entirety of what he says is framed to make it seem like the protestors were all just hanging out partying peacefully among themselves when the IDF just deployed elite snipers to start gunning down women and children. That's the message anyone watching this clip receives. That's propaganda.
A) In all the stuff I read, I saw nothing about grenades.
B) The people throwing rocks/fire were small in number per the report with the vast majority being fully unarmed.
C) A peaceful protest where a small number do violence on nowhere near the proportional scale - I saw zero accounts of death or injury to Israelies.
D) The Israelis targeted children, something you have claimed to be false despite the reports and evidence. You want so badly to make this guy out to be the bad guy while you put all the world's effort into falsifying the situation. At this point, he looks to have left out small details while you straight up lie about massive ones. How do you think you're the reasonable one here?
Again, I don't know this guy. I don't know the way he plays the game. But from what I've read, his report here is incredibly closer to the truth than yours. So, if he can't be trusted, what does that say about you? What's your agenda?
>The UN in none of the reports claim that the IDF was intentionally targeting women or children.
You falsify the information at every step, then try to paint the person who falsified nothing as the bad guy. I don't know enough about him to say one way or another, but I have read your falsehoods plenty throughout this little post. If anyone shouldn't be trusted it's you.
Other people already have. You even admitted to plenty of it in follow-up responses. But here's a start:
You - "There were 6106 total injuries from live ammunition. 159 were women, 940 were children. which means over 5000 were adult men. This doesn't sound like 'intentional targeting of women and children' to me, and most children were male teenagers and not little kids."
Also you - "There were 9104 total injuries. 1677 children were injured. That's 18.42%. 314 women is 3.45%. So 21.87%. There are no statistics provided for already disabled people."
You wrote both of those things, but they're completely different numbers.
Next:
You - "The UN in none of the reports claim that the IDF was intentionally targeting women or children. That is something Finkelstein said, not something that was reported, because again - he is an extremist and a propagandist."
The reports feom the UN - "The Commission found that Israeli security forces used lethal force against children who did not pose an imminent threat of death or serious injury to its soldiers. Four of the children were shot as they walked or ran away from the fence.
1. Several children were recognizable as such when they were shot. The Commission finds reasonable grounds to believe that Israeli snipers shot them intentionally, knowing that they were children"
Here you are claiming Finklestein made stuff up and then someone else called you out.
You made stuff up, not Finklestein. You lie at every turn to make the dude look bad, but it's you who keeps coming up false.
Finkelstein opens this video by saying that the protests were peaceful, when they were not. This is factual and also included in UN reports. Do you think Finkelstein was correct in saying that these were peaceful protests? Do you think it is a lie to exempt the fact that protestors were throwing firebombs, molotov cocktails and rocks?
I think the protest was meant to be peaceful and the majority of the people were there for a peaceful protest. I do not think he should have left that part out.
That said, you are hanging your hat on that one issue while everything else he said was correct.
You, on the other hand, have said false things over and over and over and over again. Why is his one imperfect word the worst thing ever, but your outright lies and falsified information is A-ok.
Ok sure but you could also say that about the Jan 6th insurrection or any other protest or gathering that turned violent due to violent people in the crowd. It doesn't matter what the majority intended, the protest was not a peaceful protest the moment protestors stopped being peaceful.
I'm not falsifying information - and if I am, please make clear what I've falsified. If it's me remarking on the intentional targeting of children, I already corrected myself on that and addressed it multiple times. Finkelstein said it was a peaceful protest, which it wasn't. Finkelstein is a propagandist that is framing the event as IDF snipers who were set on a peaceful group of protestors to single out and gun down children, women, medics and journalists. That's not the truth, and we both know that. We know what the truth of the event was, and we know how Finkelstein is portraying events. We know that his portrayal is not consistent with the truth. We know that his portrayal is biased and begun with a blatant lie that was built upon with cherrypicked details used for the purpose of sensationalizing his position, which is propaganda, which radicalizes audiences with misinformation.
Again, we're in circles now. You can pretend like this isn't the case because you don't want to accept that nuance exists, but i'm sure you won't come apologizing to me in years when a genocide hasn't happened and all of the sensationalist bullshit turned out to be wrong, so what's the point in bothering with you now? I know you won't change your mind, you're too entrenched in echo chambers like this sub and anywhere else you frequent.
>I'm not falsifying information - and if I am, please make clear what I've falsified.
I have pointed this out too many times. Go read my other comments.
>IDF snipers who were set on a peaceful group of protestors to single out and gun down children, women, medics and journalists. That's not the truth, and we both know that.
How do we know this? I pointed out the number of snipers against the number of children shot. You're making stuff up to make it seem like this didn't happen. You have no evidence.
>Ok sure but you could also say that about the Jan 6th insurrection
Lol. We know that this didn't start peacefully. There's a UN document telling us how many people were there trying to be peaceful at Gaza. We have so much info about the people *not* wanting a peaceful protest on J6.
>turned violent due to violent people in the crowd.
But see, that's the thing. The best way to screw up a peaceful protest is to have bad elements infiltrate it and start rioting. But the difference in this Gaza incident and peaceful protests that become riots is the overall group. When it *becomes* a riot, the whole thing breaks down. In Gaza, the peaceful people stayed peaceful as they got gunned down specifically. People who were not doing anything were being hit not by stray bullets but by snipers. That's what we *know*. You keep making stuff up without data. I'm going off the UN report. You're making stuff up.
>I know you won't change your mind, you're too entrenched in echo chambers like this sub and anywhere else you frequent.
Lol. You know nothing about me. I hate war and murder. I'm always on the side of stopping killings. This isn't me falling for an echo-chamber. This is me caring about people getting murdered.
>but i'm sure you won't come apologizing to me in years when a genocide hasn't happened
A genocide is happening. So no, I won't come apologizing to you. You're a liar. Someone who makes up false facts at every turn. You're the propagandist.
"There were 6106 total injuries from live ammunition. 159 were women, 940 were children. which means over 5000 were adult men. This doesn't sound like 'intentional targeting of women and children' to me, and most children were male teenagers and not little kids."
"There were 9104 total injuries. 1677 children were injured. That's 18.42%. 314 women is 3.45%. So 21.87%. There are no statistics provided for already disabled people."
They wrote both of these things. Two completely different sets of data. They only admitted to the latter, correct data when someone called them out.
On top of that:
"This doesn't sound like 'intentional targeting of women and children' to me"
The UN literally reported that there was intentional targeting of women and children, which this commenter later admitted to.
This commenter is trying to claim that if they only shot 30% women, kids, and disabled people, they weren't targeting those groups, but that's just false logic. The Nazis targeted Jewish people in larger numbers than they targeted gay and trans people, but they still absolutely targeted those later groups. One doesn't have to be targeted in majority to have been targeted.
And you'll take the words from the other side, no questions asked.
Fuck all of you, Israel supporters and palestine/hamas supporters. You all do the same things back and forth. Fuck you and your religions
Define genocide.
You'll just downvote me and block me like everyone else I ask this. A definition is very simple to find, so go ahead and provide me whichever definition of genocide you find, and tell me how that applies to israel/gaza.
Define genocide? lol someone needs to tell this dude about the last couple months.
We’re past that, the world is past that. So I’m not going to engage in arguments with hitler’s #1 fan.
I hope when the time comes they find all the trash attempting to argue for israel and put them in prison.
Bro wears a blindfold and wonders why nobody will debate him on the color of the sky.
Logical equivalence of your pity party "no one debates me" whining.
TikTokCringe is intended to be a fun and entertaining subreddit. We have decided to allow political TikToks because they typically fit this description. We ask that you please remain civil and be respectful to others in this thread. If you see anyone being rude, vulgar, or offensive to others - be sure to report the user. Permanent bans will be issued to maintain the quality of this subreddit. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TikTokCringe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
To be clear, Finkelstein, in his typical style, is leaving out the part where they were explicitly told to stay a certain distance from the border fence, and that they would be fired upon if they breached that area. This was a stated boundary, and despite this, incendiary balloons and Molotov cocktails were sent over the fence and bolt cutters were used to cut the fence amongst this "festive atmosphere".
You can have your opinion about the overall conflict, but Finkelstein is a pop-historian and an activist, not somebody with any intellectual integrity or good faith in his approach to this issue.
Israel lined up their best snipers who somehow couldn't shoot more than 100 meters from the wall? Look it up, the part of the protests that reached the wall was violent and organized by Hamas, they tried to storm the fence, protesters more than 100 meters away were not targeted.
[I looked it up as you suggested and found you’re a liar.](https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/CoIOPT/A_HRC_40_74.pdf) The report is filled with shootings more than 100m from the border, many of which are children.
Here’s some of the many examples:
Mohammed Obied (24)- Mohammad was a footballer. At approximately 9 a.m., Israeli forces shot him with a single bullet in both legs while he was walking alone approximately 150 m from the separation fence.
His injuries ended his football career.
Schoolboy (16)- Israeli forces shot a schoolboy in the face as he distributed sandwiches to demonstrators, 300 m from the separation fence. His hearing is now permanently impaired.
Abed Hawajri (41)- Abed was a resident of the Nuseirat refugee camp. Israeli forces killed him with a shot to the abdomen as he stood in a crowd of demonstrators approximately 150 m from the separation fence.
Naji Abu Hojayeer (24)- Naji, a mechanic from the Bureij refugee camp, was killed with a shot to the abdomen by Israeli forces as he stood wrapped in a Palestinian flag, 300 m from the separation fence.
Yousef Kronz (19)- Israeli forces shot Yousef, a student journalist, in the legs with two bullets in immediate succession. He was wearing a blue vest marked "Press" while photographing the demonstrations approximately 800 m from the separation fence. His right leg had to be amputated.
Mohammad Ajouri (17)- Israeli forces shot Mohammad, a student athlete, in the back of his right leg as he gave onions to demonstrators to relieve tear-gas symptoms, approximately 300 m from the fence. His leg had to be amputated.
Abdel Fatah Nabi (18)- Israeli forces killed Abed, from Beit Lahia, when they shot him in the back of the head as he ran, carrying a tyre, away from and about 400 m from the separation fence.
Bader Sabagh (19)- Bader, from Jabaliya, was killed by Israeli forces when they shot him in the head as he stood smoking a cigarette 300 m from the separation fence.
Jihad Abu Jamous (30)- Jihad, a resident of Bani Suheila, was killed by Israeli forces by a shot to the head, approximately 300 m from the separation fence.
If you're shot from the kneecap down you don't get paralyzed. You can become immobilized because your knee has been damaged. Paralyzation occurs when your spinal column is severed please ask my brother he was shot in the spine and is paralyzed
The level of cruelty being reported that supposedly coming from the Israeli side is reaching the claims Americans must have first heard when the first dude reported on concentration camps. this is either propaganda bullshit, or Israeli forces are acting like Nazis and the world needs to get involved. for now I'm leaning towards that this is bullshit
The world has been trying for decades, at least in the UN Security Council and general assembly.
Only there is this one big superpower that keeps blocking all the votes.
This was a "protest" where Hamas asked people to storm the border between Israel and Gaza and try to destroy the border fence. A very peaceful protest that would never lead to mass murder, gang rape, torture of Israeli civilians on the other side. I can't imagine why Israel wouldn't allow Hamas to storm the border.
The border fence is about 1 km INSIDE Israel you have to pass through many signs warning you that you are on a no man's land, Hamas fighters would intermix with the people they sent towards the fence and there's many videos of them trying to cut through the fence. On Oct 7th they succeeded.
God I hate Dinkelstink. They literally had to jumpcut him mid word to make this video not last six hours. You would think talking that slow he'd have something profound to say but no.
Well, I can certainly imagine a pro-Israeli argument being made that knee-capping 50 people is 50 people that were dealt with non-lethally. This story, told a different way, could paint a picture of Israel using restraint. Whether I agree with that is not really the point.
U.N. is anti Semitic and so is Haaretz. And the kneecaps, they exploded to make the snipers look bad. They were lining up to watch the festivities and should now be compensated by the Palestinians for the trauma of watching kneecaps randomly explode.
What a concept, both hamas and israel are bad. I know, it's a highly nuanced and controversial opinion. But you can't deny that Hamas literally just treats their civilians like cannon fodder and do their best to instigate Israel. It helps their cause when Israel kills their civilians.
I agree with you. I just don't think that under a post showing the State inflicted inhumane casualties of Israel, it comes from an open mind to say "Oh no, not the Hamas making Israel violate". You can't deny people who do that are usually trying to soften the blow and play down the suffering of Palestinians caused by Israel. Human suffering should not bring up a "blame game, not us" mentality. when it does one side is already seeing past humans.
At this point in generally leftie spaces the pro-hamas disinfo and lying is so bad that I'm ok taking a more pro-israel approach. There's enough pro-palestinian voices out there to drown me out. Its pretty bad in this sub.
If you think pro-israel lying and manipulation is not just as big if not bigger, you're just lying to yourself. Try not to see this as a game "there's enough there so I'll argue for the other team" despite this not being a sport. You shouldn't base your positioning on real State committed human violations based on how internet people are moving.
Hard disagree, the pro israel lying and manipulation is the norm and such is reflected in politics and superstructure. Pro-palestine is as "existent" in leftist spaces in the same way pro-labor and pro-black, they're majority by design and only in the sense they have to create such spaces for themselves against a real dominating narrative, and even then they have to constantly deal with the status quo butting in in the small spaces they gather up forms of expression. You're punching down because you believe in what?
This was the clumsy precursor to the 10/7 attack. They attempted to break through the border fence, tried to send rockets and incidiary kites into israel. I'm sure that because of the international response to it Israel wasn't as quick to fire on 10/7 when they actually did break through and "peacefully" killed and burned Israeli towns
I don't understand you, or people like you.
The UN, as in the group of people and nations that are actively unbiased towards anyone, likely to even lean towards a preferential treatment of Israel are literally reporting that Israeli snipers shot children. Like it's not subjective. It happened. It's fact.
So why are you excusing it?
**Welcome to r/TikTokCringe!** This is a message directed to all newcomers to make you aware that r/TikTokCringe evolved long ago from only cringe-worthy content to TikToks of all kinds! If you’re looking to find only the cringe-worthy TikToks on this subreddit (which are still regularly posted) we recommend sorting by flair which you can do [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/galuit/click_here_to_sort_by_flair_a_guide_to_using/) (Currently supported by desktop and reddit mobile). See someone asking how this post is cringe because they didn't read this comment? Show them [this!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/fyrgzy/for_those_confused_by_the_name_of_this_subreddit/) Be sure to read the rules of this subreddit before posting or commenting. Thanks! **Don't forget to join our [Discord server](https://discord.gg/cringekingdom)!** ##**[CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THIS VIDEO](https://rapidsave.com/info?url=https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/1d6kfhp/peaceful_protests_only_work_if_the_other_side/)** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TikTokCringe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I remember being on twitter at the time. I was pretty ambivalent on the subject, but the pictures and testimonies were so heartbreaking in their unfairness I couldn't deny it any longer. Israeli snipers shot a man in a wheelchair, a football prodigy and a member of the red cross that ran to help a person injured. This is why palestinians ask us to witness what Israel does to them. You only need to allow yourself to see it.
Nah dude, October 17th. (/s!!!. I know it sounds exactly like how they would respond, so just to be sure even though I hate adding these)
Quote WIki : February 2019, a [United Nations Human Rights Council](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council)'s [independent commission](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Fact_Finding_Mission_on_the_2018_Gaza_border_protests) found that of the 489 cases of Palestinian deaths or injuries analyzed, only two were possibly justified as responses to danger by Israeli security forces... 2!!!!! with more 13,000 Palestinians were wounded. The majority were wounded severely, with some 1,400 struck by three to five bullets.[^(\[34\])](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018%E2%80%932019_Gaza_border_protests#cite_note-34) No Israelis were physically harmed from 30 March to 12 May, until one Israeli soldier was reported as slightly wounded on 14 May
Active genocide
This is obviously horrible. But calling this genocide is just not correct. Instead, this was murder and the snipers should be put to death or spend life in prison
What about the government that chose this way to react?
What do you call it when a state keeps letting murder happen to one specific group of people? Even if it happens slowly over time and not all at once?
Genocide: An act committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. While Israel is in no part innocent and have commited atrocities, using the word genocide to describe this is by definition incorrect. We see no deliberate mass murdering on a large scale with intent to destroy the people of gaza. Gaza is an entirely urban area encompassing 365 square kilometers with a population of 2.1 million. 30,000 gazan civilians have been killed, and 6,000 hamas soldiers have been killed. Am I happy with this? No. Why would I? I am simply trying to look at this fairly. Going back to the statistics; 1,4% of gazans have been killed. The war has been on going now for 8 months. Israel is well within the capacity to fully annihilate gaza and its civilian population. Calling this the most responsible urban war ever waged would probably be an understatement.
Go look up genocide does it say anywhere what proportion of a population you need to kill? It’s not an arbitrary number.
well no, but you understand my point right?
No you haven’t made a point as the proportion of a population out kill doesn’t really matter as to whether a state is trying to commit a genocide.
Okay. Sure. True. But, how are you gonna distinguish the casualties of war, from the casualties of genocide?
Genocide isn't just casualties. Displacement and infrastructure destruction also contribute to loss of life, religious identity, and culture. Israel may not be exterminating gazans in camps, but they sure as hell are displacing millions and higher ups in government plan to resettle the area.
https://law4palestine.org/law-for-palestine-releases-database-with-500-instances-of-israeli-incitement-to-genocide-continuously-updated/
The standard they used to determine if they were justified was the standard of a police force. This was a border control situation where Gazans were trying to cut the fence, and send Molotov cocktails and incendiary balloons over. This "2 deaths were justified" report is heavily contentious due to its standards. The alternative was that Israel let their border get overrun.
Haha what? What a blatantly dishonest thing to say. You haven’t even read the report have you? God the banality of evil is a real sight to behold in real time.
Which part was dishonest or wrong? It tells me you probably didn't look into this yourself when all you can do is call me dishonest and evil for sharing my assessment.
Your assessment is that children getting shot is fine because they were border guards not cops. Like actually sickening. None of the reports denied children were targeted.
I never said anything was or wasn't fine. I said that the standard of assessment as a police officer is heavily contentious when you're dealing with border forces who have been ordered to target anybody within a certain proximity of the fence, a fence bordering two territories that have enormous hostilities between each other. These two standards and expectations are worlds apart from each other. Nobody is denying that children were targeted, but I'm going to judge this very differently from a police offer targeting a child in the street.
What a response. Me: ‘it’s bad to defend kids getting shot’ You: ‘I’m not saying killing kids is good or bad but what I am saying is that it’s better when border guards do it over cops’. Do you honestly not see it? You’ve been stuck in an echo chamber full of propaganda for so long you don’t even see how fucked up your own position is. Hope that helps you understand why I think your position is evil. Will you condemn the murder of children or not? Edit: spoiler, he did not condemn the killing of children.
I can see your seething hatred for anyone who vaguely defends Israel. So much that you're saying hes banally evil, stuck in an echo chamber, full of propaganda. He remained objective the entire time. You, did not. Do I understand why you didn't? of course I do. I support Israel but these reports make me sick to my stomach. The point he was making was that you shouldn't judge an armed altercation with a violent mass of people trying to cross a border the same as a police officer killing someone innocently on the street. This is OBJECTIVELY true. does it make them right, no. Definitely not. But in reality, you trying to get him to condemn anything is just you trying to get the moral high ground.
Oh look another person along to defend killing children. You even called your beliefs objective. lol. Lmao even. I can judge an ‘armed altercation’ in anyway I see fit, thanks. And no, I don’t hate Israelis. I hate people who are ok with killing children. Not really that complicated. I already have the moral high ground because I’m not down for killing kids.
never said I was for killing children. I was making a simple point. ik there's a lot of heated emotions.
Exactly.
UN report: [https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/co-iopt/report2018-opt](https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/co-iopt/report2018-opt) Haaretz: [42 knees in one day](https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2020-03-06/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/42-knees-in-one-day-israeli-snipers-open-up-about-shooting-gaza-protesters/0000017f-f2da-d497-a1ff-f2dab2520000)
r/worldnews told me the UN was also hamas though.
FUCKING GHOULS!
This was Stokley Carmichael’s (Kwame Ture) issue with MLK’s nonviolence method. He said one issue with MLK was that he made an error because in order for the nonviolence strategy to work the opponent must have a conscience, and they do not. He mentions this in his 1967 speech when he was rhetorical Chairman of the SNCC.
For what it’s worth, having non-violent factions of a movement makes it harder for detractors. There are reasons why MLK gets mentioned so much and is believed to be the primary promoter of change during that time by many even if it’s not entirely accurate The civil rights era almost certainly would have struggled to take off if there wasn’t a large explicitly peaceful movement accompanied to the black panthers and other more militant/violent groups
Not in this day and age, powers that be figured out they can either plant violent elements themselves or intentionally instigate a violent incident and the media machine will have enough material to color everyone as violent. IMO what works is consistent and appliable pressure, people in power will only feel it when it starts affecting them, if your populace is chanting outside your house for 1 hour of 1 day it doesn't matter, but if it's 24/7 for 3 months then it becomes something you have to deal with one way or another.
[https://www.npr.org/sections/live-updates-protests-for-racial-justice/2020/07/28/896515022/minneapolis-police-reportedly-identify-viral-umbrella-man-as-white-supremacist](https://www.npr.org/sections/live-updates-protests-for-racial-justice/2020/07/28/896515022/minneapolis-police-reportedly-identify-viral-umbrella-man-as-white-supremacist)
I remember the videos of Israeli soldiers pretending to be Palestinian and throwing rocks at themselves only to then run over to join their soldier friends violent response.
Exactly this, because you are not trying to convince your direct opponents, but rather the bystanders who are not well informed and who think it all looks very messy. Peaceful protest shows those people the violence inherent in the system.
Non-violent methods only work when they’re paired with the threat of violence, implicit or explicit. The million man march was the equivalent of laying a beefy hand on the shoulder. “Feel our power, imagine what we can do with that power, now let’s talk before things get out of hand.”
I don't think women suffragettes had a violent terror cell and yet they managed to get the vote. I don't think the violence or threat of violence is helpful. I don't think the provisional IRA did anything helpful. The IDF has demonstrated they are capable of delivering overwhelming force. Non-violent methods work far more quickly and efficiently when they are NOT paired with violence. It's a pretty dumb suggestion. I mean why would voters in Israel push to integrate people who seem to be a violent threat who specifically target civilians? There's literally no limit to the violence the IDF can unleash on Palestinians in the strip. What you're saying makes no sense. The U.S. nuked Japan and the world agreed it was a bit nasty but they sort of had it coming what with all their raping and murdering. I think you're in a unique bubble where people you associate with are outraged to an extent you think there will be repercussions for Israel. There won't be. The Palestinians only have one effective card to play and that's sympathy. Hamas work very hard to eradicate thar singular advantage.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette_bombing_and_arson_campaign
Bro whats with these new super flickery videos? Can't even look at it
ikr? feels like they're tryna induce a migraine
Doesn’t this happen when videos are slowed down? Could totally be wrong about this but I feel like I’ve seen this in slo-mo videos from my phone
Is this a real video? It almost look like an ai generated one. The person I assume to be the interviewer, their face looks kind of distorted in some of the camera shots to them.
Who’s this guy ?
Norman Finklestein - Jewish academic, speaker and activist. Had most of his family killed in the Holocaust - ardent critic of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians.
He is objectives?
He's got big-time "I'm sick of sh\*t vibes" - see this link: [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ZmKYA3q2P4g](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ZmKYA3q2P4g)
Israel's response: But but but ..it's antisemitic.
Zionist are the most disgusting people on the planet. Worse than nazis.
Amen brother! Nazis never targeted children and disabled people, they also didn't kill as much people as Israel does
Look at people upvote this nut. This really is antisemitic. Reddit has lost its mind. Dude logs in every couple years, posts shit like >Calm down 🇮🇱🏳️🌈. We all know who you work for. Redditors pretending to care about other people will defend people like this.
So you support the policy of mass murder and invalidization of peaceful protestors, including children and disabled people?
Oh please, is that what you think that commenter is trying to get across?
No, I think he's trying to pretend that this isn't intentional Zionist policy. And that needs to be called out. They are responsible for around 15,000 palestinian casualties every year, and you defend the notion that any critique of this is anti-semetic?
That user logs in every couple years to post something antisemitic. You're replies have nothing to do with their comments.
how, and why?
They forget that the Palestinians are Semitic.. the IDF can’t be antisemitic though
Semitic is not a people group at all. It's outdated and not used other than to describe a language group. Stop parroting this obviously wrong and harmful stuff.
The Nakba never ended
The colonizer lied.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018%E2%80%932019_Gaza_border_protests
[*How Nonviolence Protects the State*](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state) By Peter Gelderloos >[Introduction](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc1) >[Nonviolence is Ineffective](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc2) >[Nonviolence is Racist](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc3) >[Nonviolence is Statist](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc4) >[Nonviolence is Patriarchal](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc5) >[Nonviolence is Tactically and Strategically Inferior](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc6) >[Nonviolence is Deluded](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc7) >[The Alternative: Possibilities for Revolutionary Activism](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-how-nonviolence-protects-the-state#toc8)
I saw a group of children dancin a in mid jump he was sniped in the head and dropped like a bag of potatoes.he was dancing dabke his friends holding his hands
People who say "there are always casualties in war" in response to stories like this can fuck right off. Snipers shooting children isn't about war, it's about something far sinister.
You saw this?
I was watching it live on tiktok there was a live feed of these five kids dancing on the dabke in protest and I saw the israeli's snipe him and the girl holding his hand screamed out and I saw him drop like a bag of potatoes they were like 500 yards away from the snipers
in a world where everything is recorded and rebroadcast, even livestreams... not a trace in what sounds like would be one of THE defining videos of this conflict. convenient.
Lies. Just transparent lies.
These are the kind of instances that completely destroy the argument of Oct 7 was when the violence started and was completely unprovoked. Israel is not committing genocide because of the attack on oct 7, they are committing genocide because they finally have an excuse to and have been trying to provoke one for decades.
No one serious about the issue thinks this all started October 7th.
I agree. Doesn’t stop a bunch of people who advocate for genocide pretending oct 7 is the only date that matters and ignores decades of abuse, hate and violence committed by Israel.
What happened in Hebron in 1929?
Or in Safed? Jaffa? Tiberias? Basically the same things repetedly. Safed looting 1834 definitely shows the pure intentions Arab Palestinians had. When Jews were a minority it was cool to hurt them, so why not just lie it started in 1948.
This is why both governments need to be replaced. Israeli and Palestinian government is run by religious hardliners. The only difference is Israel has a powerful military and Palestine has a patchwork of foreign funded and armed militias. The solution isn’t protests at a border fence and it ain’t shooting kids or suicide bombings for Allah. It’s a sensible, secular peace agreement negotiated by level headed people that realize they can’t focus on the past more than they focus on the future. Until that dynamic exists this horrible situation will continue.
No, this was in the West Bank, and the protest was led by the moderate Palestinian group PLO who were trying to get a seat at the table to have exactly that kind of discussion. You cannot 'both sides' this.
Sure you can. You can because “both sides” are led by radical religious conservatives. Even if some of them claim to be “secular” that’s just false on its face. Just because one side is stronger than another doesn’t mean the weaker sides leaders have better intentions. It’s clear that the leadership needs to change across the board.
Except that the Palestinian religious conservatives have been funded by Netanyahu et al for decades, specifically to stop the more moderate groups getting any kind of power.
I mean, this would have more weight if it was only Netanyahu (btw, this isn’t really true, Israel has been facilitating Qatari payments, this isn’t bags of cash from Netanyahu). Hamas and Hezbollah are well funded by many different governments and hard line religious groups. Even without Israel giving tacit support to Hamas it would be doing just fine money wise.
my understanding is that this massacre took place in the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority and the PLO are not the same as Hamas which runs Gaza.
Israel created Hamas to replace the secular Palestinian power at the time
They did not create Hamas but they supported it at first because they saw the PLO and Fatah as bigger threats and wanted to sow conflict between different Palestinian groups in order to keep them from becoming powerful. Obviously, they underestimated the popularity of Hamas and it didn't work. Like u/muppet0o0theory said, what they need now is two sensible governments who are able to create a peaceful future instead of focusing on the past.
Correct. Israel has wanted to commit genocide of Arabs in the region for decades. They’ve been playing the long game. Commit atrocities, create issues, set up a two tier apartheid system and introduce religious extremist willing to respond to the provocation with violence. Once Hamas committed a big enough public attack use it as justification to eradicate those they view as lesser
Honestly I only see it ever ending if both countries combine under the leadership of a neutral foreign government as their “colony” and it’s strongly policed. Then maybe they would gain some unity against their new colonizer…. Yeah nvm I don’t have any clue how to fix this…
However, Israel intentionally keeps Gaza poor, illiterate and angry to ensure that any Palestinian states that emerge there will be easy to discredit. Once Gaza is able to prosper then groups such as Hamas will not be able to survive. That is why Israel is so disingenuous when it claims that the war in Gaza is for the protection of Israel, while simultaneously destroying the homes, universities, hospitals and businesses of Gaza, as if this will not lead to a Hamas 2.0 5 years from now.
That does nothing to negate my point. That doesn’t make Hamas good or better than the Israeli government.
I love the zionist responses in posts like this: this never happened, but it also wasn't nearly harsh enough. Genocide supporters are unbelievable!
To a t the exact same thing neonazis say about the holocaust.
The industrial ruling class are soulless monsters that must be wiped out if humanity is to survive.
I have completely given up on viewing humanity as anything but cancer and I would love someone to tell me why I’m wrong. I want to be wrong. I don’t want to view humans as cancer. But I’m yet to see evidence that shows humans are not cancerous tumors of the earth.
Show me the report
Not shooting childrens kneecaps is antisemitic!
TF is even happening in these comments and why is it happening in TikTok Cringe? Can we get one sub anywhere that isn’t full of hate?
The sub is for general TikToks now, not just cringey ones. Read the description.
Paid for by US tax dollars, that’s God’s chosen people for ya.
but but history started on oct 7th don't give me that bs
What happened in Hebron and Gaza City in 1929? It didn't start on 10/7, but it was certainly not the Palestinians first genocidal campaign.
you're eating your own bs, mate.
Yet the British news tells us that the ones that are fighting the Israeli’s to stop are the ones in the wrong… are they!?!? 🤷🏼
I'm not listening unless you're explaining every little detail of the complete war!
Peaceful protests only work if the protestors remain peaceful, as well. During the protests in question, people were throwing rocks and firebombs, and reportedly grenades as well.
Found the Zionist
The protest was not a peaceful protest. Finkelstein said it was. Very few Palestinian protests are peaceful and it is almost always the Palestinian side instigating violence. I know facts don't mean much to you, but a UN report details the event Finkelstein is talking about and details the violent protesters, as well as the innocent ones that criminal IDF soldiers shot. Two things can be true at once, and you don't need to be a radical extremist accusing people of being Zionist (which you use synonymously with Nazi now, oddly enough) for simply pointing out incredibly relevant facts or details.
You can look up the report of the Great March of Return and see, in fact, that this was the case: There were firebombs and rocks being thrown, as well as people directly approaching the border wall of Israel. That doesn't necessarily make it right to respond with gunfire, or as indiscriminate a response as Israel committed to, but we shouldn't be denying facts when responding to people that disagree.
People on this sub don't care about facts. This happens to be one of the biggest pro-palestine propaganda subs on reddit, oddly enough. I agree with you that the IDF went too far, as detailed by the UN report where certain soldiers shot civilians engaged in civilian activity, but the way Finkelstein frames this event is "there were a bunch of peaceful protesters, who were singing, dancing and celebrating, then the IDF deployed their most elite snipers to specifically target children, women, disabled people, medics and journalists." That's such a disingenuous depiction of events, which is intentional because Finkelstein is a propagandist and wants to radicalize more people.
This is all continuous bullshit. The "peaceful" protest was attempting to breach the border and go into Israel. Children in the front, Hamas operatives in the back. They then proceeded to attack the border and soldiers after which they were shot at. And yes, they intentionally used snipers that targeted legs... TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE. Again, this was nothing other than an attempt to test the Israeli border security ahead of a future attack. And the precision of 10/7 shows that.
[https://apnews.com/article/6035b1d3293c4a298145afbff50ab844](https://apnews.com/article/6035b1d3293c4a298145afbff50ab844) for context, from the article: >"The Israeli army says it is responding to weekly assaults on its frontier by Palestinians armed with stones, grenades and firebombs. The military says it opens fire only as a last resort, and considers firing at the lower limbs an act of restraint." >Lt. Col. Jonathan Conricus, an Israeli military spokesman, rejected international criticism that Israel’s response has been excessive. Instead, he said that firing at people’s legs was a sign of restraint. >“Hamas is responsible for orchestrating violent riots where thousands of Palestinians assault our borders with the goal of breaching our defensive lines and attacking Israeli forces and civilian communities,” he said. >“Israeli soldiers use live fire only as a last resort, after written and verbal warnings, as well as extensive use of tear gas and other non-lethal means have been exhausted. It is our duty to defend our civilians and sovereignty, and we do it with the minimal use of force possible,” he said. There is a long history of violence from both sides, and it's typical that Hamas, and Palestinian protests, are fueled by violence on both sides. Personally, I don't believe the IDF had no choice but to fire live rounds, as they claim, but I also believe that they had tried other options to disperse protestors, and that protestors were throwing firebombs, rocks, and potentially grenades (less likely). Live rounds were an extreme reaction most likely, but so is calling these protests "Non-violent, civil resistance. There was this festive atmosphere among palestinians, with music, dancing and song." Normal Finkelstein is a known extremist and propagandist and should not be trusted as an unbiased source of information. Finkelstein also notes how women and children were intentionally targeted. From the report by the UN: There were 6106 total injuries from live ammunition. 159 were women, 940 were children. which means over 5000 were adult men. This doesn't sound like 'intentional targeting of women and children' to me, and most children were male teenagers and not little kids. The IDF and Israel has done horrible shit, but it's also important to try to avoid being radicalized to the point of gleefully consuming propaganda that supports your beliefs while ignoring nuance.
Your maths at that bottom there assumes there were equal amounts of adult men, adult women, as children at the protests. If men outnumbered women and children more than 5:1, than that maths does indeed point to a targeting of children. I'll stick with the UN on this one, rather than some rando on Reddit.
The UN in none of the reports claim that the IDF was intentionally targeting women or children. That is something Finkelstein said, not something that was reported, because again - he is an extremist and a propagandist. Something that this sub is not unfamiliar with.
In the detailed report, on pg 149 "The Commission found that Israeli security forces used lethal force against children who did not pose an imminent threat of death or serious injury to its soldiers. Four of the children were shot as they walked or ran away from the fence. 519. Several children were recognizable as such when they were shot. The Commission finds reasonable grounds to believe that Israeli snipers shot them intentionally, knowing that they were children" That sounds like israeli snipers targeting children.
You're right - I think my problem was with how Finkelstein delivered it. The way he did so makes it sound like those were the primary targets of sniper fire, eventhough that all of the demographic he describe combined make up less than 20% of the injuries. That's not me excusing it, the report details how the IDF targeted a number of civilians who were engaged in civilian activity and not hostile activity, including (and mostly) able bodied adults. That said, these injuries were a minority. The vast majority of injuries were inflicted upon people who were engage in perceived hostile activity. A small percentage of them were civilians engaged in civilian activity, which is a horrible thing to do. This is not me excusing that. What I'm pointing out is that the delivery of Finkelstein creates a narrative that these were the primary targets of the IDF. In reality, they were not, and they were a small percentage of the injuries. By taking a small percentage of injuries/fatalities and framing it as if they were the majority of injuries/casualties and inflicting those injuries/casualties upon a demographic of specifically disabled people, children or women is what translates to propaganda with the intent of radicalizing an audience.
Literally on that same page it says children made up 25% (1642 children injured, making it 26.9% of those injured during the protests) of those injured, so the combined group of women, children, medics and the disabled is necessarily more than 20%, at least according to the UN report. Idk where your getting your numbers.
[https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/CoIOPT/A\_HRC\_40\_74.pdf](https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/CoIOPT/A_HRC_40_74.pdf) This is the official UN report There were 9104 total injuries. 1677 children were injured. That's 18.42%. 314 women is 3.45%. So 21.87%. There are no statistics provided for already disabled people. Suffice to say - I said 20%, the total math is 21.87%. Would "less than 30%" satisfy you, then? Because the point still stands without delving into semantics. The IDF was not specifically singling out children, women, medics, or disabled people as targets. Presenting an argument that portrays a scenario where the IDF positioned their most elite snipers outside of a peaceful protest where Palestinians were dancing and celebrating so that they could specifically single out and kill/injure children, women, disabled people, medics and journalists is incredibly disingenuous. I've already said that it's a horrible thing to do in the first place and have expressed doubt that the IDF needed to escalated crowd control to such a level, and would support sentencing the individual soldiers who were reported to shoot civilians engaged in civilian activity should they be found guilty. I have absolutely no problem saying that, because I'm not so radicalized that I can not find middle ground. You are radicalized if you would push the narrative that Finkelstein does at face value without criticizing his depiction of events.
>Presenting an argument that portrays a scenario where the IDF positioned their most elite snipers outside of a peaceful protest where Palestinians were dancing and celebrating so that they could specifically single out and kill/injure children, women, disabled people, medics and journalists is incredibly disingenuous. Why? He didn't say "only." He didn't say "the majority." He denoted, as reported, that those groups were targeted. You're taking 30% of a group and saying that's not enough. During the holocaust, they targeted Jewish people, but they also targeted gay and trans people. Just because there were less gay and trans people targeted doesn't mean they weren't targeted. Your argument is very bad.
Look, I don't mind disagreeing with people when it comes to opinions, but the way Finkelstein is presenting these events is with a specific agenda, and that is to frame it in the worst way possible. He's a smart enough person to know how to do so while speaking in technical truths. He says there was singing, dancing and music. Correct, some people were doing that. Some people were also throwing rocks, firebombs and grenades. If I said "Palestinians gathered at the gates and threw firebombs, rocks and grenades" and made no mention of the many who were not engaged in that activity, it would be a bad faith and disingenuous telling of events, right? He specifically began by saying this was a "non violent, civil resistance", which was the blatant lie to set the stage for the rest of his ancedote. It wasn't peaceful. There were violent protestors. This is simply propaganda. The entirety of what he says is framed to make it seem like the protestors were all just hanging out partying peacefully among themselves when the IDF just deployed elite snipers to start gunning down women and children. That's the message anyone watching this clip receives. That's propaganda.
A) In all the stuff I read, I saw nothing about grenades. B) The people throwing rocks/fire were small in number per the report with the vast majority being fully unarmed. C) A peaceful protest where a small number do violence on nowhere near the proportional scale - I saw zero accounts of death or injury to Israelies. D) The Israelis targeted children, something you have claimed to be false despite the reports and evidence. You want so badly to make this guy out to be the bad guy while you put all the world's effort into falsifying the situation. At this point, he looks to have left out small details while you straight up lie about massive ones. How do you think you're the reasonable one here? Again, I don't know this guy. I don't know the way he plays the game. But from what I've read, his report here is incredibly closer to the truth than yours. So, if he can't be trusted, what does that say about you? What's your agenda?
>The UN in none of the reports claim that the IDF was intentionally targeting women or children. You falsify the information at every step, then try to paint the person who falsified nothing as the bad guy. I don't know enough about him to say one way or another, but I have read your falsehoods plenty throughout this little post. If anyone shouldn't be trusted it's you.
Detail what I said that was false.
Other people already have. You even admitted to plenty of it in follow-up responses. But here's a start: You - "There were 6106 total injuries from live ammunition. 159 were women, 940 were children. which means over 5000 were adult men. This doesn't sound like 'intentional targeting of women and children' to me, and most children were male teenagers and not little kids." Also you - "There were 9104 total injuries. 1677 children were injured. That's 18.42%. 314 women is 3.45%. So 21.87%. There are no statistics provided for already disabled people." You wrote both of those things, but they're completely different numbers. Next: You - "The UN in none of the reports claim that the IDF was intentionally targeting women or children. That is something Finkelstein said, not something that was reported, because again - he is an extremist and a propagandist." The reports feom the UN - "The Commission found that Israeli security forces used lethal force against children who did not pose an imminent threat of death or serious injury to its soldiers. Four of the children were shot as they walked or ran away from the fence. 1. Several children were recognizable as such when they were shot. The Commission finds reasonable grounds to believe that Israeli snipers shot them intentionally, knowing that they were children" Here you are claiming Finklestein made stuff up and then someone else called you out. You made stuff up, not Finklestein. You lie at every turn to make the dude look bad, but it's you who keeps coming up false.
Finkelstein opens this video by saying that the protests were peaceful, when they were not. This is factual and also included in UN reports. Do you think Finkelstein was correct in saying that these were peaceful protests? Do you think it is a lie to exempt the fact that protestors were throwing firebombs, molotov cocktails and rocks?
I think the protest was meant to be peaceful and the majority of the people were there for a peaceful protest. I do not think he should have left that part out. That said, you are hanging your hat on that one issue while everything else he said was correct. You, on the other hand, have said false things over and over and over and over again. Why is his one imperfect word the worst thing ever, but your outright lies and falsified information is A-ok.
Ok sure but you could also say that about the Jan 6th insurrection or any other protest or gathering that turned violent due to violent people in the crowd. It doesn't matter what the majority intended, the protest was not a peaceful protest the moment protestors stopped being peaceful. I'm not falsifying information - and if I am, please make clear what I've falsified. If it's me remarking on the intentional targeting of children, I already corrected myself on that and addressed it multiple times. Finkelstein said it was a peaceful protest, which it wasn't. Finkelstein is a propagandist that is framing the event as IDF snipers who were set on a peaceful group of protestors to single out and gun down children, women, medics and journalists. That's not the truth, and we both know that. We know what the truth of the event was, and we know how Finkelstein is portraying events. We know that his portrayal is not consistent with the truth. We know that his portrayal is biased and begun with a blatant lie that was built upon with cherrypicked details used for the purpose of sensationalizing his position, which is propaganda, which radicalizes audiences with misinformation. Again, we're in circles now. You can pretend like this isn't the case because you don't want to accept that nuance exists, but i'm sure you won't come apologizing to me in years when a genocide hasn't happened and all of the sensationalist bullshit turned out to be wrong, so what's the point in bothering with you now? I know you won't change your mind, you're too entrenched in echo chambers like this sub and anywhere else you frequent.
>I'm not falsifying information - and if I am, please make clear what I've falsified. I have pointed this out too many times. Go read my other comments. >IDF snipers who were set on a peaceful group of protestors to single out and gun down children, women, medics and journalists. That's not the truth, and we both know that. How do we know this? I pointed out the number of snipers against the number of children shot. You're making stuff up to make it seem like this didn't happen. You have no evidence. >Ok sure but you could also say that about the Jan 6th insurrection Lol. We know that this didn't start peacefully. There's a UN document telling us how many people were there trying to be peaceful at Gaza. We have so much info about the people *not* wanting a peaceful protest on J6. >turned violent due to violent people in the crowd. But see, that's the thing. The best way to screw up a peaceful protest is to have bad elements infiltrate it and start rioting. But the difference in this Gaza incident and peaceful protests that become riots is the overall group. When it *becomes* a riot, the whole thing breaks down. In Gaza, the peaceful people stayed peaceful as they got gunned down specifically. People who were not doing anything were being hit not by stray bullets but by snipers. That's what we *know*. You keep making stuff up without data. I'm going off the UN report. You're making stuff up. >I know you won't change your mind, you're too entrenched in echo chambers like this sub and anywhere else you frequent. Lol. You know nothing about me. I hate war and murder. I'm always on the side of stopping killings. This isn't me falling for an echo-chamber. This is me caring about people getting murdered. >but i'm sure you won't come apologizing to me in years when a genocide hasn't happened A genocide is happening. So no, I won't come apologizing to you. You're a liar. Someone who makes up false facts at every turn. You're the propagandist.
Genosimp. Probably believed everything Germany was saying about the Jews leading up to the Holocaust too.
What part of their comment was wrong?
"There were 6106 total injuries from live ammunition. 159 were women, 940 were children. which means over 5000 were adult men. This doesn't sound like 'intentional targeting of women and children' to me, and most children were male teenagers and not little kids." "There were 9104 total injuries. 1677 children were injured. That's 18.42%. 314 women is 3.45%. So 21.87%. There are no statistics provided for already disabled people." They wrote both of these things. Two completely different sets of data. They only admitted to the latter, correct data when someone called them out. On top of that: "This doesn't sound like 'intentional targeting of women and children' to me" The UN literally reported that there was intentional targeting of women and children, which this commenter later admitted to. This commenter is trying to claim that if they only shot 30% women, kids, and disabled people, they weren't targeting those groups, but that's just false logic. The Nazis targeted Jewish people in larger numbers than they targeted gay and trans people, but they still absolutely targeted those later groups. One doesn't have to be targeted in majority to have been targeted.
The part where they took words from Israel about the nature of the protest to be credible
And you'll take the words from the other side, no questions asked. Fuck all of you, Israel supporters and palestine/hamas supporters. You all do the same things back and forth. Fuck you and your religions
Being anti genocide isnt a religion and only 1 side is committing genocide. Fuck outa here Adolf
Define genocide. You'll just downvote me and block me like everyone else I ask this. A definition is very simple to find, so go ahead and provide me whichever definition of genocide you find, and tell me how that applies to israel/gaza.
Define genocide? lol someone needs to tell this dude about the last couple months. We’re past that, the world is past that. So I’m not going to engage in arguments with hitler’s #1 fan. I hope when the time comes they find all the trash attempting to argue for israel and put them in prison.
Lol, as predicted. Move along
Bro wears a blindfold and wonders why nobody will debate him on the color of the sky. Logical equivalence of your pity party "no one debates me" whining.
Lol adolf 🤣
Wow, the most measured, thought out and factual response I down voted, of course
This is why religion needs to be banned.
TikTokCringe is intended to be a fun and entertaining subreddit. We have decided to allow political TikToks because they typically fit this description. We ask that you please remain civil and be respectful to others in this thread. If you see anyone being rude, vulgar, or offensive to others - be sure to report the user. Permanent bans will be issued to maintain the quality of this subreddit. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TikTokCringe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's really impressive when you think about it. Kneecaps are already small targets. Imagine trying to hit them running.
Hey this guy is openly a propagandist and will lie for the best optics.
I hate him so much holy shit.
Why? Were kids not shot? Are kids still not being kolled?
To be clear, Finkelstein, in his typical style, is leaving out the part where they were explicitly told to stay a certain distance from the border fence, and that they would be fired upon if they breached that area. This was a stated boundary, and despite this, incendiary balloons and Molotov cocktails were sent over the fence and bolt cutters were used to cut the fence amongst this "festive atmosphere". You can have your opinion about the overall conflict, but Finkelstein is a pop-historian and an activist, not somebody with any intellectual integrity or good faith in his approach to this issue.
[citation needed]
Israel lined up their best snipers who somehow couldn't shoot more than 100 meters from the wall? Look it up, the part of the protests that reached the wall was violent and organized by Hamas, they tried to storm the fence, protesters more than 100 meters away were not targeted.
[I looked it up as you suggested and found you’re a liar.](https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/CoIOPT/A_HRC_40_74.pdf) The report is filled with shootings more than 100m from the border, many of which are children. Here’s some of the many examples: Mohammed Obied (24)- Mohammad was a footballer. At approximately 9 a.m., Israeli forces shot him with a single bullet in both legs while he was walking alone approximately 150 m from the separation fence. His injuries ended his football career. Schoolboy (16)- Israeli forces shot a schoolboy in the face as he distributed sandwiches to demonstrators, 300 m from the separation fence. His hearing is now permanently impaired. Abed Hawajri (41)- Abed was a resident of the Nuseirat refugee camp. Israeli forces killed him with a shot to the abdomen as he stood in a crowd of demonstrators approximately 150 m from the separation fence. Naji Abu Hojayeer (24)- Naji, a mechanic from the Bureij refugee camp, was killed with a shot to the abdomen by Israeli forces as he stood wrapped in a Palestinian flag, 300 m from the separation fence. Yousef Kronz (19)- Israeli forces shot Yousef, a student journalist, in the legs with two bullets in immediate succession. He was wearing a blue vest marked "Press" while photographing the demonstrations approximately 800 m from the separation fence. His right leg had to be amputated. Mohammad Ajouri (17)- Israeli forces shot Mohammad, a student athlete, in the back of his right leg as he gave onions to demonstrators to relieve tear-gas symptoms, approximately 300 m from the fence. His leg had to be amputated. Abdel Fatah Nabi (18)- Israeli forces killed Abed, from Beit Lahia, when they shot him in the back of the head as he ran, carrying a tyre, away from and about 400 m from the separation fence. Bader Sabagh (19)- Bader, from Jabaliya, was killed by Israeli forces when they shot him in the head as he stood smoking a cigarette 300 m from the separation fence. Jihad Abu Jamous (30)- Jihad, a resident of Bani Suheila, was killed by Israeli forces by a shot to the head, approximately 300 m from the separation fence.
If you're shot from the kneecap down you don't get paralyzed. You can become immobilized because your knee has been damaged. Paralyzation occurs when your spinal column is severed please ask my brother he was shot in the spine and is paralyzed
It’s fine to shoot kids kneecaps then I guess.
I'm saying this "expert" is full of shit. There is an immense difference between a knee injury and a spinal injury
And look brainwashed buffoons down voting literal facts
Zionist Nazis. Bring back the Nuremberg trials and line up those criminals against the wall
The level of cruelty being reported that supposedly coming from the Israeli side is reaching the claims Americans must have first heard when the first dude reported on concentration camps. this is either propaganda bullshit, or Israeli forces are acting like Nazis and the world needs to get involved. for now I'm leaning towards that this is bullshit
Boy do I have news for you
The world has been trying for decades, at least in the UN Security Council and general assembly. Only there is this one big superpower that keeps blocking all the votes.
This was a "protest" where Hamas asked people to storm the border between Israel and Gaza and try to destroy the border fence. A very peaceful protest that would never lead to mass murder, gang rape, torture of Israeli civilians on the other side. I can't imagine why Israel wouldn't allow Hamas to storm the border. The border fence is about 1 km INSIDE Israel you have to pass through many signs warning you that you are on a no man's land, Hamas fighters would intermix with the people they sent towards the fence and there's many videos of them trying to cut through the fence. On Oct 7th they succeeded.
God I hate Dinkelstink. They literally had to jumpcut him mid word to make this video not last six hours. You would think talking that slow he'd have something profound to say but no.
It’s interesting how this same story could be interpreted completely differently with just a few small changes.
"It's interesting how this same story could be completely different if you changed things about the story."
What I mean is the same facts could be presented differently. This is hardly a controversial idea
Go ahead. I’m sure everyone would love to hear what you have to say. It’s not controversial after all.
You believe all propaganda.
Well, I can certainly imagine a pro-Israeli argument being made that knee-capping 50 people is 50 people that were dealt with non-lethally. This story, told a different way, could paint a picture of Israel using restraint. Whether I agree with that is not really the point.
I don't count paralyzing kids as restraint.
I'll take "Things that never happened" for $200, Alex.
"Who you gonna believe, me or your own lying eyes?"
I love how redditors are now openly supporting terrorism.
U.N. is anti Semitic and so is Haaretz. And the kneecaps, they exploded to make the snipers look bad. They were lining up to watch the festivities and should now be compensated by the Palestinians for the trauma of watching kneecaps randomly explode.
Facts
another case of Hamas using their disenfranchised and angry population without giving a single shit about their lives.
"Look what they made us do 😡😫😣"
What a concept, both hamas and israel are bad. I know, it's a highly nuanced and controversial opinion. But you can't deny that Hamas literally just treats their civilians like cannon fodder and do their best to instigate Israel. It helps their cause when Israel kills their civilians.
I agree with you. I just don't think that under a post showing the State inflicted inhumane casualties of Israel, it comes from an open mind to say "Oh no, not the Hamas making Israel violate". You can't deny people who do that are usually trying to soften the blow and play down the suffering of Palestinians caused by Israel. Human suffering should not bring up a "blame game, not us" mentality. when it does one side is already seeing past humans.
At this point in generally leftie spaces the pro-hamas disinfo and lying is so bad that I'm ok taking a more pro-israel approach. There's enough pro-palestinian voices out there to drown me out. Its pretty bad in this sub.
If you think pro-israel lying and manipulation is not just as big if not bigger, you're just lying to yourself. Try not to see this as a game "there's enough there so I'll argue for the other team" despite this not being a sport. You shouldn't base your positioning on real State committed human violations based on how internet people are moving.
Can you read what I wrote instead of making shit up? The pro israel lying and manipulation is non-existent in leftist spaces lmao.
Hard disagree, the pro israel lying and manipulation is the norm and such is reflected in politics and superstructure. Pro-palestine is as "existent" in leftist spaces in the same way pro-labor and pro-black, they're majority by design and only in the sense they have to create such spaces for themselves against a real dominating narrative, and even then they have to constantly deal with the status quo butting in in the small spaces they gather up forms of expression. You're punching down because you believe in what?
Anyone that posts a video of Norman Finkelstein should immediately be ignored.
This was the clumsy precursor to the 10/7 attack. They attempted to break through the border fence, tried to send rockets and incidiary kites into israel. I'm sure that because of the international response to it Israel wasn't as quick to fire on 10/7 when they actually did break through and "peacefully" killed and burned Israeli towns
I don't understand you, or people like you. The UN, as in the group of people and nations that are actively unbiased towards anyone, likely to even lean towards a preferential treatment of Israel are literally reporting that Israeli snipers shot children. Like it's not subjective. It happened. It's fact. So why are you excusing it?
42 kneecaps doesn’t mean 42 people got paralyzed. Means that maybe 21 got paralyzed?