• nonailsleft
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It was my ‘implication’?

    This is a message board format - it’s easy to go back and see what I wrote

    • Squizzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well if you casually leave out that part it becomes a lie by omission. And there’s a reason you have to use this lie both to yourself and to others. It has a whole different ring to it when you say "IDF regularly shoot teenagers throwing molotov cocktails in protest" instead of “routinely murdering children”.

      This is exactly what you said, poorly worded as it was.

      The implication is that my assertion is wrong because the reality is those being killed are actually dangerous teenagers throwing bombs.

      So I reply back with a two year old (notable for not being a teenager) who was shot in the head as the IDF botched an ambush in a civilian area without any care for those around them.

      I also gave you two more who happened to not be teenagers throwing bombs who were killed in an airstrike on a civilian area.

      Please shut the fuck up now we know you are a supporter of the apartheid regime but you’re not intelligent enough to defend it effectively.

      This is my last reply because you are an idiot. Grow some heart and recognise those children that scroller past are dead because of the IDF and Israel and no one else.

      • nonailsleft
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Well you tried to twist me saying “in a lot of cases” into “only”. Sorry for pointing that out

        Please shut the fuck up now we know you are a supporter of the apartheid regime but you’re not intelligent enough to defend it effectively.

        This is my last reply because you are an idiot.

        You sound really hinged buddy, hang in there. Maybe refrain from commenting on such complex issues for a while