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

[ReturningHawk]

Well the band kneecap, who are the subject of this thread, said “up Hamas” at a concert after they orchestrated that attack..

Kneecap is hardly the subject of this thread. Alex Pearce’s post can be interpreted on its own merits. Kneecap’s alleged views that they deny publicly have nothing to do with Alex.

If you reposted a something footy related from Tom Morris, it would be a bit of stretch to call you homophobic.

 

[ElectricG]

Kneecap is hardly the subject of this thread. Alex Pearce’s post can be interpreted on its own merits. Kneecap’s alleged views that they deny publicly have nothing to do with Alex.

If you reposted a something footy related from Tom Morris, it would be a bit of stretch to call you homophobic.

It’s not his post, it’s a repost of kneecap.

The messenger simply matters. If someone posts something in solidarity with the victims of October 7, then fine. But if it’s a repost of a known white supremacist who simply hates Muslims, it takes on a different tone despite an identical message.

If Alex Pearce didn’t know he was boosting someone who supports the massacre and rape of Jewish women and children then he should apologise for the error.

 

[ReturningHawk]

It’s not his post, it’s a repost of kneecap.

The messenger simply matters. If someone posts something in solidarity with the victims of October 7, then fine. But if it’s a repost of a known white supremacist who simply hates Muslims, it takes on a different tone despite an identical message.

If Alex Pearce didn’t know he was boosting someone who supports the massacre and rape of Jewish women and children then he should apologise for the error.

In the matter of an AFL player standing up against a continuing genocide, what you estimate that matters is that the source of the post has, in the past, allegedly shouted pro-hamas slogans at their gigs, a sentiment they deny publicly.

Meanwhile, most of us would agree that what matters is actually the genocide. You should probably realise as well that your graphic descriptions of violence just affirm the atrocities that Israel in committing at this very minute, and the importance of speaking out about it publicly.

 

[ElectricG]

You should probably realise as well that your graphic descriptions of violence just affirm the atrocities that Israel in committing at this very minute,

What does that even mean? What is this weird side-stepping or the fact that supporting terrorism is bad?

 

[ReturningHawk]

What does that even mean? What is this weird side-stepping or the fact that supporting terrorism is bad?

I don’t see why it needs side-stepping. In what way did Alex Pearce support terrorism? By “emboldening” those who state that they are opposed to terrorism?

 

[ElectricG]

I don’t see why it needs side-stepping. In what way did Alex Pearce support terrorism? By “emboldening” those who state that they are opposed to terrorism?

Emboldening those who state kill your mp and up Hamas up hezbollah. I don’t really care if they’ve backtracked after being called out a couple of times. We know what they’re about.

 

[ReturningHawk]

Emboldening those who state kill your mp and up Hamas up hezbollah. I don’t really care if they’ve backtracked after being called out a couple of times. We know what they’re about.

That’s good for you, but what remains is that Alex Pearce shared a non-violent post coming from a source whose public stance is one of non-violence. It’s beyond a stretch to consider Pearce’s post an act of harm because of Kneecap’s alleged views, which were not really connected with the words in Pearce’s post.

If Alex had shared a post about UK mps or about Hamas then this would be a different scenario. The refusal of Caro and others to engage with the words that Alex did post, and the attempt to somehow connect it with an act of terrorism only reinforces the pattern in Australian media: any public figure who speaks out against the war crimes of Israel will face immediate and widespread public accusations of antisemitism.

 

[Harlott]

It’s not his post, it’s a repost of kneecap.

The messenger simply matters. If someone posts something in solidarity with the victims of October 7, then fine. But if it’s a repost of a known white supremacist who simply hates Muslims, it takes on a different tone despite an identical message.

If Alex Pearce didn’t know he was boosting someone who supports the massacre and rape of Jewish women and children then he should apologise for the error.

So Kneecap is supporting “the rape and massacre of Jewish women and children “?

The Israeli government needs you.

 

[ElectricG]

That’s good for you, but what remains is that Alex Pearce shared a non-violent post coming from a source whose public stance is one of non-violence. It’s beyond a stretch to consider Pearce’s post an act of harm because of Kneecap’s alleged views, which were not really connected with the words in Pearce’s post.

If Alex had shared a post about UK mps or about Hamas then this would be a different scenario. The refusal of Caro and others to engage with the words that Alex did post, and the attempt to somehow connect it with an act of terrorism only reinforces the pattern in Australian media: any public figure who speaks out against the war crimes of Israel will face immediate and widespread public accusations of antisemitism.

“Public stance of non violence”. Again, we know enough about these people to see through their weasel words that they offer after the fact. Like Elon musk wouldn’t own up to the label “fascist” but does Nazi salutes on stage and is always amplifying noise coming from far-right internet subcultures. But he says all the right things when pressed in an interview so no harm done right!?

Look you’re just ignoring the fact that where the message is coming from is a significant part of the context. You can’t just start sharing posts from Tommy Robinson and avoid any heat because you’ve picked his posts which sound OK in isolation.

So Kneecap is supporting “the rape and massacre of Jewish women and children “?

The Israeli government needs you.

Given they praise the group which perpetrated the attack, yes.

 

[Carn The Berries]

“Public stance of non violence”. Again, we know enough about these people to see through their weasel words that they offer after the fact. Like Elon musk wouldn’t own up to the label “fascist” but does Nazi salutes on stage and is always amplifying noise coming from far-right internet subcultures. But he says all the right things when pressed in an interview so no harm done right!?

Look you’re just ignoring the fact that where the message is coming from is a significant part of the context. You can’t just start sharing posts from Tommy Robinson and avoid any heat because you’ve picked his posts which sound OK in isolation.

Given they praise the group which perpetrated the attack, yes.

So which ones are the weasel words? You're adamant that when they say one thing that we need to take them at their word... Yet when they post an unequivocal condemnation of acts of violence they're not to be believed?

There was no deflection or obfuscation (as you have pointed out with Musk) it was an absolute, outright, 100% condemnation.

One might think that your commitment to trying to pin something on Alex Pearce, which has a tenuous link, at best to Hamas, could be seen as support for the genocide that is currently being perpetrated.

**I am using this as an example of how someone's intentions can be completely bent out of shape, I'm not suggesting you actually support genocide.

 

[Harlott]

Given they praise the group which perpetrated the attack, yes.

“They praise”. Where else have they “praised” Hamas besides one particular gig where they may have clumsily said “up Hamas” but more importantly speaking up against Israel’s killing of innocent kids? And now you want to see Pearce apologise for retweeting on such a flimsy connection.

 

[ElectricG]

So which ones are the weasel words? You're adamant that when they say one thing that we need to take them at their word... Yet when they post an unequivocal condemnation of acts of violence they're not to be believed?

Come on man. They’ve offered up two positions:

• kill your MP, up Hamas
• we condemn violence

It’s just so obviously a case of them having their sanitised views and their actual views. Which of those two is them “saying the quiet part loud”?

If somebody said “Islamic terrorism is bad” publicly, but also said “the Christchurch massacre was a good thing” to a smaller audience, which of those would you judge them on?

 

[Carn The Berries]

Come on man. They’ve offered up two positions:

• kill your MP, up Hamas
• we condemn violence

It’s just so obviously a case of them having their sanitised views and their actual views. Which of those two is them “saying the quiet part loud”?

If somebody said “Islamic terrorism is bad” publicly, but also said “the Christchurch massacre was a good thing” to a smaller audience, which of those would you judge them on?

Care to comment on the point I made about your comments in this thread?

 

[ElectricG]

Care to comment on the point I made about your comments in this thread?

What do you mean

 

[Carn The Berries]

What do you mean

So which ones are the weasel words? You're adamant that when they say one thing that we need to take them at their word... Yet when they post an unequivocal condemnation of acts of violence they're not to be believed?

There was no deflection or obfuscation (as you have pointed out with Musk) it was an absolute, outright, 100% condemnation.

One might think that your commitment to trying to pin something on Alex Pearce, which has a tenuous link, at best to Hamas, could be seen as support for the genocide that is currently being perpetrated.

**I am using this as an example of how someone's intentions can be completely bent out of shape, I'm not suggesting you actually support genocide.

This is what I mean.

 

[ElectricG]

This is what I mean.

I don’t really know how to respond to it. It doesn’t make any sense.

 

[Carn The Berries]

I don’t really know how to respond to it. It doesn’t make any sense.

It's a direct comparison. Alex Pearce posted something that was innocuous on its own. Some people have tried to link that to other things that he didn't say.

You've objected to what he did. On its own that seems innocuous, but if we want to extrapolate you could drawn the conclusion that because you object to Pearce having a stance you are supporting the state of Israel and giving tacit support to their ongoing attempt at ethnic cleansing.

Clearer now?

 

[ElectricG]

It's a direct comparison. Alex Pearce posted something that was innocuous on its own. Some people have tried to link that to other things that he didn't say.

You've objected to what he did. On its own that seems innocuous, but if we want to extrapolate you could drawn the conclusion that because you object to Pearce having a stance you are supporting the state of Israel and giving tacit support to their ongoing attempt at ethnic cleansing.

Clearer now?

That’s stupid.

“I think it’s bad to repost people who support terrorism”

“You support genocide!”

 

[Carn The Berries]

That’s stupid.

“I think it’s bad to repost people who support terrorism”

“You support genocide!”

Both are missing nuance... Which is kinda the point.

 

[ReturningHawk]

“Public stance of non violence”. Again, we know enough about these people to see through their weasel words that they offer after the fact. Like Elon musk wouldn’t own up to the label “fascist” but does Nazi salutes on stage and is always amplifying noise coming from far-right internet subcultures. But he says all the right things when pressed in an interview so no harm done right!?

Look you’re just ignoring the fact that where the message is coming from is a significant part of the context. You can’t just start sharing posts from Tommy Robinson and avoid any heat because you’ve picked his posts which sound OK in isolation.

If Alex Pearce had reposted a spacex tweet from Elon Musk, we wouldn’t be saying he supported fascism, would we?

Where the message came from is only relevant if the source gives insight into Alex Pearce’s intentions.

 

[ElectricG]

If Alex Pearce had reposted a spacex tweet from Elon Musk, we wouldn’t be saying he supported fascism, would we?

Where the message came from is only relevant if the source gives insight into Alex Pearce’s intentions.

If he reposted something about space, no. If he reposted something about politics, probably.

 

[ReturningHawk]

If he reposted something about space, no. If he reposted something about politics, probably.

Because talking about genocide is Palestine is, in your mind, connected with supporting terrorism.

 

[barreness]

Another Israel genocide thread after they got booted from the actual thread because they lost the argument, similar thing in the crime forum

 

[jannissary]

there's a bit of irony behind trying to censor and punish alex pearce

25

Alex Pearce

Age

30

Ht

201cm

Wt

98kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.6

3star

K

5.2

2star

HB

5.4

4star

M

3.4

3star

T

1.8

4star

MG

106.3

2star

No current season stats available

D

11.0

3star

K

5.0

2star

HB

6.0

4star

M

4.4

4star

T

0.8

3star

MG

103.2

2star

, a proud palawa player.

 

[Saint]

there's a bit of irony behind trying to censor and punish alex pearce, a proud palawa player.

Uppity is the word they're thinking but not allowed to say out loud any more.