Society/Culture Alex Pearce supports Palestine/promotes terrorism depending who you ask

[Harlott]

Hmm. "Humane". "Tactics".

I'm getting the impression, amongst all this talk of genocide (a fairly recent word) and wotnot, that the argument is perhaps a more specific reaction formed as a result of the scale of the response rather than to the nature of it.

If you haven't already, you should read "Ender's Game" and the subsequent novels.
Orson Scott Card spent a considerable amount of time exploring a few ideas in that series of novels, and the debate surrounding Israel's response to a threat in this instance is the living embodiment of one of those themes.


Everyone and anyone who thinks a hard line between the civilian populace and that armed body is so easy to see (less so in the modern world than it has ever been), and particularly those who go on to use that hard line as an argument for one side but not the other.
Which leads one to wonder if they actually understand their "own" point.

Example:

Do you see it?
Qualifying sentence.

That homophobe? Pass

I see an extremely hard line between the “armed body” and 20000 children.

 

[ReturningHawk]

Everyone and anyone who thinks a hard line between the civilian populace and that armed body is so easy to see (less so in the modern world than it has ever been), and particularly those who go on to use that hard line as an argument for one side but not the other.
Which leads one to wonder if they actually understand their "own" point.

From UNICEF: “After nearly 18 months of war, more than 15,000 children have reportedly been killed, over 34,000 reportedly injured, and nearly one million children repeatedly displaced and deprived of their right to basic services.”

At what point would you stop pretending that children are not civilians? At what number would you admit that this is indiscriminate killing? How long will you pretend that these children represent an armed body?

I suspect that you won’t pause to actually think about it. I suspect you’ll start combing through the UNicef article, to search for a rebuttal. You’ll search for another way to state that this is a “complex” situation, your way of saying that you just don’t care. Anyone with a shred of decency would see that the indiscriminate killing of children is a black and white issue, as is the denial of aid to civilians in order to weaken your enemy. Both also War crimes that have seen Netanyahu prosecuted by the international criminal court.

But sure, tell us again how all the lines are blurry and the situation is subtle and complicated, and feel better about yourself. Tell us again that we only object to “scale of the response rather than to the nature of it”. Despicable thing to say.

 

[Geary Is GOAT]

Ralph Horowitz is such an enormous campaigner. His attack on Marnie Vinall over this is so gross

 

[Episode IV]

That homophobe? Pass

Not an unexpected response.

Of course, it's a good thing a great many people didn't utterly reject that Jew-stereotyping Shakespeare on the strength of that alone, because then we'd have missed out on a fair amount of rather insightful literature.

... to which I'll add, somewhat tongue in cheek, that no one does read Shakespeare any more - although not for that particular reason.

 

[schneebly111]

Ralph Horowitz is such a enormous campaigner. His attack on Marnie Vinall over is so gross

FTFY

I had no idea who this Horowitz guy is. Turns out he runs a minuscule Twitter account with a few followers shouting into the air.

Over here in the West Longmuir had the perfect WA response to the East Coast journos who are trying to make this a thing. When asked if Pearce had been disciplined he was like “yeah, nah, whatevs”.

 

[Werewolf]

Since when are footy players not allowed to have opinions?

 

[Episode IV]

At what point would you stop pretending that children are not civilians?

Don't believe I have.

But I suppose there's no sense in arguing with you any further if you're going to pretend I did any such thing.
Or that shifting the conversation from civilians to children adds any credence to your response.

 

[Harlott]

Not an unexpected response.

Of course, it's a good thing a great many people didn't utterly reject that Jew-stereotyping Shakespeare on the strength of that alone, because then we'd have missed out on a fair amount of rather insightful literature.

... to which I'll add, somewhat tongue in cheek, that no one does read Shakespeare any more - although not for that particular reason.

Conveniently avoided the other part about the kids. You all play by the same book. No pun intended

 

[Episode IV]

Conveniently avoided the other part about the kids. You all play by the same book. No pun intended

Oh, don't worry. If there was a pun in there, I missed it anyway.

The part about the kids is in my response to the other one further down.
You've both gone from talking about civilians to talking about kids (in response to me) and frankly, it's just irritating.
If you don't understand what the hell I'm on about, then don't respond at all.

Changing the subject to conceal your lack of understanding only serves to highlight it.

 

[ReturningHawk]

Don't believe I have.

But I suppose there's no sense in arguing with you any further if you're going to pretend I did any such thing.
Or that shifting the conversation from civilians to children adds any credence to your response.

Answer the question. At what number of children killed would you admit that Isreal is killing indiscriminately?

You’re the one who said there is no “hard line” between “civilian populace and that armed body”. So tell us, how many children would have to be killed before we could say Israel’s targets do not represent an armed body? Your answer is, for some reason, higher than 15,000. It’s pretty appalling.

 

[schneebly111]

Since when are footy players not allowed to have opinions?

The AFL made Bachar Houli take down pro Palestine posts after he retired ???

 

[Harlott]

Oh, don't worry. If there was a pun in there, I missed it anyway.

The part about the kids is in my response to the other one further down.
You've both gone from talking about civilians to talking about kids (in response to me) and frankly, it's just irritating.
If you don't understand what the hell I'm on about, then don't respond at all.

Changing the subject to conceal your lack of understanding only serves to highlight it.

What’s there to understand? You want to make it about complexities. I pointed to something fairly straightforward. You avoid it at all costs and get irritated.
You’re either an apologist or a cheerleader of what’s going on.

 

[ReturningHawk]

What’s there to understand? You want to make it about complexities. I pointed to something fairly straightforward. You avoid it at all costs and get irritated.
You’re either an apologist or a cheerleader of what’s going on.

He sure does find those dead children very irritating, they can really undermine a line of argument. If only we’d keep wallowing in all the complexity and definitions of genocide.

 

[Episode IV]

What’s there to understand? You want to make it about complexities. I pointed to something fairly straightforward. You avoid it at all costs and get irritated.
You’re either an apologist or a cheerleader of what’s going on.

I did make it about complexities, yes.

If you can't keep up, then don't reply. I think you misunderstand the source of my irritation.

 

[Episode IV]

Answer the question. At what number of children killed would you admit that Isreal is killing indiscriminately?

You’re the one who said there is no “hard line” between “civilian populace and that armed body”. So tell us, how many children would have to be killed before we could say Israel’s targets do not represent an armed body? Your answer is, for some reason, higher than 15,000. It’s pretty appalling.

Killing indiscriminately... hmm.

I really don't know. How many apples in a basket are green apples?
Form groups and talk amongst yourselves for a while.

 

[ReturningHawk]

Killing indiscriminately... hmm.

I really don't know. How many apples in a basket are green apples?
Form groups and talk amongst yourselves for a while.

That’s not an answer to the question. Why wade into a conversation about murdered Palestinians if you don’t care about them?

 

[Episode IV]

That’s not an answer to the question. Why wade into a conversation about murdered Palestinians if you don’t care about them?

I think that answer is quite appropriate.

I waded into a conversation about Alex Pearce, wrote what I thought about that, and commented on one or two other things along the way.

To whit:
The "conversation" about "murdered Palestinians" is somewhere else. Off you go now.

 

[ReturningHawk]

I think that answer is quite appropriate.

I waded into a conversation about Alex Pearce, wrote what I thought about that, and commented on one or two other things along the way.

To whit:
The "conversation" about "murdered Palestinians" is somewhere else. Off you go now.

No, the conversation is about Alex Pearce who wrote about murdered civilians. You wrote that it was difficult to tell between civilians and an armed body. Two posters have asked you whether you think the 15,000 Palestinian children who have been killed in the conflict are part of an armed body. Shall we assume that you don’t want to answer that question?

 

[Harlott]

I did make it about complexities, yes.

If you can't keep up, then don't reply. I think you misunderstand the source of my irritation.

It’s pretty clear what your irritated about.

 

[Episode IV]

It’s pretty clear what your irritated about.

It should be, considering I told you.

 

[Harlott]

It should be, considering I told you.

I get it. There’s a mass slaughter going on. A huge percentage being children. Unlike Alex, you continue to find it hard to see a hard line between them and the armed body (Hamas). You’re irritated that you get pressed on it. Like that irritated lot that were offended by his tweets.

 

[Episode IV]

No, the conversation is about Alex Pearce who wrote about murdered civilians.

Last time it was "Why wade into a conversation about murdered Palestinians if you don’t care about them?"

There was a game we used to play as kids called "Chinese Whispers". Everyone sat in a circle, the first person whispered something into the ear of the next, and round and round we'd go in the circle until the last person had to say out loud what the first person whispered.
What that last person thought the first had said was often bloody hilarious.

It's one of those games that was supposed to teach kids to listen carefully to what was being said, and to demonstrate the results of them not doing so. Sort of an early childhood lesson in critical thinking.

Engaging with people like you feels a little like playing that old game, albeit with a couple of differences.
One of those being that saying something like E=MC squared results in a bunch of yapping pups attempting to nail you to a wall demanding you explain why you think squares are easy.

 

[Episode IV]

I get it. There’s a mass slaughter going on. A huge percentage being children. Unlike Alex, you continue to find it hard to see a hard line between them and the armed body (Hamas). You’re irritated that you get pressed on it. Like that irritated lot that were offended by his tweets.

And then they demand to know what you've got against squares anyway. Haven't I seen Revenge of the Nerds?
Squares are people too, you know.

There's an art to pressing, Harlott. Done correctly, it can result in fine wine. Substitute something unsavoury in place of the grapes, and.. well, it won't.
No matter how much stomping you do.

 

[ReturningHawk]

Last time it was "Why wade into a conversation about murdered Palestinians if you don’t care about them?"

There was a game we used to play as kids called "Chinese Whispers". Everyone sat in a circle, the first person whispered something into the ear of the next, and round and round we'd go in the circle until the last person had to say out loud what the first person whispered.
What that last person thought the first had said was often bloody hilarious.

It's one of those games that was supposed to teach kids to listen carefully to what was being said, and to demonstrate the results of them not doing so. Sort of an early childhood lesson in critical thinking.

Engaging with people like you feels a little like playing that old game, albeit with a couple of differences.
One of those being that saying something like E=MC squared results in a bunch of yapping pups attempting to nail you to a wall demanding you explain why you think squares are easy.

You’re at Kevin Sheedy levels of avoiding the question. Are the 15,000 murdered Palestinian children part of the civilian populace or the armed body? Or is it too difficult to tell?

 

[Episode IV]

You’re at Kevin Sheedy levels of avoiding the question. Are the 15,000 murdered Palestinian children part of the civilian populace or the armed body? Or is it too difficult to tell?

... and what the hell do I mean when I say "easy", anyway? Am I calling squares Harlots?


I've searched high, I've searched low.
Answer the question, Hawk -
Where did it go?