No, but we also don’t bulldoze random houses in foreign territory and send our own settlers there to harass the locals until their children are radicalised.
I had a really good laugh when everyone had to confront the fact that half of Oklahoma is supposed to be owned by Native Americans. And for a second it looked like SCOTUS was going to enforce that treaty.
If they had any evidence of a crime then they would have been charged with a crime, imprisoning a criminal civilian simply because the law enforcers are lazy or too busy is just as bad as imprisoning innocents, there is no need for distinction.
I’m not sure but I think the reason is because they are under a foreign government (Hamas) and have a different legal system. Israel as far as I can tell are acting to protect their citizens by arresting perpetrators but then being unable to process them through their legal system. I can see this could be abused but I don’t believe it would be in every case
Well yes but under those circumstances it would be technically impossible for a Palestinian to commit a crime, and I know most people here think all Palestinians are saints it’s simply not true no matter how much you want to ignore the honour killings, throwing gays off buildings and treating woman like second class citizens. Also for the record the Israelis have done some shit too. Just like people in every country
I can assure you I’m critical of both sides. I just have a problem with all this one sidedness in a conflict where both appear to have done wrong. I do appreciate that in something so complex with so much desperation it would be difficult to act every time in the correct way, if there even is one but that shouldn’t absolve either side of any wrong they have committed. Sure it should weigh into it but it’s not straight up justification for the crimes against innocent people on both sides, none of it is.
That’s great, but objective looks into the Israeli justice system aren’t pretty. So trying to give them the benefit of the doubt doesn’t read like your critical of both sides.
I don’t think I’m really giving the benefit of the doubt, I feel like I’m just not giving the Palestinians the benefit of the doubt either. As in when it’s highly likely crimes are being committed because of high tension, it’s reasonable to assume that at least some crimes were committed. Like I said I think anyone who is innocent and treated as guilty is not worth the blanket guilty verdict to ensure those who are guilty are charged. It’s important to have fair trials when the ability exists. I’m simply pointing out that a lot of the Palestinians (we already know there are crimes committed by Israel) are guilty and it’s not fair to their victims to treat them as saints. If that sounds complicated it’s probably because it clearly is.
If you really want a reality check keep in mind if your daughter or you mother walked through Gaza how they walk through the street in your home town, they would likely be spit on and assaulted for dressing provocatively. And if you your son or your brother was gay they may well throw them off a building. If you haven’t factored this into your arguments please do, understand when you are picking a side you are defending not only their right to land (which I believe they should have) but also their way of life and beliefs (which I don’t). And if not agreeing with killing gay people and treating women like property is islamaphobic (I don’t believe it is) I guess I’m islamaphobic.
So teenagers slingshoting stones at poliecmen heads or throwing 10 pound cinder blocks at cars windshield get slaps on the wrist in your countries?
No, but we also don’t bulldoze random houses in foreign territory and send our own settlers there to harass the locals until their children are radicalised.
Well…
Not anymore. Most of the time.
Actually we still do tbh, but there’s just so few of them left now the majority just don’t give a fuck.
I had a really good laugh when everyone had to confront the fact that half of Oklahoma is supposed to be owned by Native Americans. And for a second it looked like SCOTUS was going to enforce that treaty.
AFAIK the thousands being held are being held by “administrative detention” which inherently does not have or require charges to be made.
But not necessarily meaning no crime was committed. Downvote my critical thinking please
If they had any evidence of a crime then they would have been charged with a crime, imprisoning a criminal civilian simply because the law enforcers are lazy or too busy is just as bad as imprisoning innocents, there is no need for distinction.
I’m not sure but I think the reason is because they are under a foreign government (Hamas) and have a different legal system. Israel as far as I can tell are acting to protect their citizens by arresting perpetrators but then being unable to process them through their legal system. I can see this could be abused but I don’t believe it would be in every case
No they have no problem putting Palestinians through their justice system. They just use military courts with a 99% conviction rate instead.
That does sound shit, it’s impossible for know but I would like to know the true number of guilty out of that 99%
Done.
Thanks sparlock. Enjoy your day
I guess innocent until proven guilty isn’t an Israeli concept?
Well yes but under those circumstances it would be technically impossible for a Palestinian to commit a crime, and I know most people here think all Palestinians are saints it’s simply not true no matter how much you want to ignore the honour killings, throwing gays off buildings and treating woman like second class citizens. Also for the record the Israelis have done some shit too. Just like people in every country
There’s a critical something there but not thinking.
I can assure you I’m critical of both sides. I just have a problem with all this one sidedness in a conflict where both appear to have done wrong. I do appreciate that in something so complex with so much desperation it would be difficult to act every time in the correct way, if there even is one but that shouldn’t absolve either side of any wrong they have committed. Sure it should weigh into it but it’s not straight up justification for the crimes against innocent people on both sides, none of it is.
That’s great, but objective looks into the Israeli justice system aren’t pretty. So trying to give them the benefit of the doubt doesn’t read like your critical of both sides.
I don’t think I’m really giving the benefit of the doubt, I feel like I’m just not giving the Palestinians the benefit of the doubt either. As in when it’s highly likely crimes are being committed because of high tension, it’s reasonable to assume that at least some crimes were committed. Like I said I think anyone who is innocent and treated as guilty is not worth the blanket guilty verdict to ensure those who are guilty are charged. It’s important to have fair trials when the ability exists. I’m simply pointing out that a lot of the Palestinians (we already know there are crimes committed by Israel) are guilty and it’s not fair to their victims to treat them as saints. If that sounds complicated it’s probably because it clearly is.
If you really want a reality check keep in mind if your daughter or you mother walked through Gaza how they walk through the street in your home town, they would likely be spit on and assaulted for dressing provocatively. And if you your son or your brother was gay they may well throw them off a building. If you haven’t factored this into your arguments please do, understand when you are picking a side you are defending not only their right to land (which I believe they should have) but also their way of life and beliefs (which I don’t). And if not agreeing with killing gay people and treating women like property is islamaphobic (I don’t believe it is) I guess I’m islamaphobic.
Oh yes. Totally unbiased. As you roll in a pit of islamophobic propaganda.
Am I? Are those two examples untrue? Honestly I want to know because I would prefer not being ignorant