I mean, sure? If someone goes to prison you probably don’t want them making a full time wage, while having everything else paid for. Its meant to be worse than living out.
Different discussions can and should be held if they are being forced to work, for profit prisons, or options to work and gain skills or experience in trades, or to fund study. But at a surface level it sounds fair.
How is calling out violence protests supporting genocide?
She’s not pushing down Palestine or pushing Israel up.
A logical, respectful arguement that got downvoted because it wasn’t “cop bad”.
Ah, they brought boeing with boeings own money. That makes more sense.
deleted by creator
Isn’t that backwards?
TLDR: Mcdonall-Douglas.
Sorry, that was weekly. Weekend can fuck off if you’re on schedule.
If you’re ignoring all the risk factors, got no contingency plans or measurements against projected time and budget you have delivered everything on time and budget by luck.
If you already have those, those meetings should absolutely be a 30 min weekend meeting to check on status and what else you may need to keep delivering.
I mean, it ticks every box and doesn’t mention aircraft
AJ confirms these people were found, and Palestine blames Israel.
It doesn’t confirm who did it or who they were, and saying investigation is needed.
God, Middle East Eye is worse - they actively provide a biased arguement and have provided 0 Israel viewpoint and refuse to discuss who owns it. Their reviews discuss how they use manipulative language to push viewpoints and pass over any information counter to their agenda.
Had a look at the clip (well, first minute). Does this sound like a balanced view point to you.
YouTuber
listed outrage and disgusted before showing the clip i.e told you how to react
mentioned issues with screen recording from BBC (nothing to do with the the clip, just there so you already question them)
was already at an rally with this viewpoint before the information came up.
completely loaded with emotive words and reactions
Vs BBC clip
names, places
fact (visited, rally, support, Hamas designated terrorist organization)
clear, non emotive language.
the only issue is calling it pro Hamas, which is an understandable conclusion as Hamas is the Palestine government. Who is responsiblefor the welfare of Palestine citizens - their government. Its no different than calling supporting American military ops pro-Biden.
If you go up to my eairler comment MEE is horrific fir accuracy and bias
Looking forward to it
(Shit that sounds morbid out of content)
Nope - accurate reporting does. Like I wouldn’t trust hamas to comment on Israel - its the point of independent journalism to give both sides, not take sides.
The thing I’ve learned most over this conflict is how much of a godsend BBC is - ban emotive language, report both sides, only send out evidence that is backed.
Thanks for the update as well. I’m trying to not take sides but can only do it when information is out there.
Can I ask you to update your original comment saying this video was made before this article came out, related to a different event at an unknown time, and has been edited?
I don’t know the name of the logical mistake, but saying they don’t report Israel lies is a falicy. They don’t need to state this is true, they need to factually state this is the viewpoint of the Israeli government, this is their response to this attack. Its not their job to tell us who is right and not, its their job to state both sides of the arguements and report on facts.
I disagree with point 2, or maybe it needs to be clarified?
A disproportionate response is a war crime (not genocide) but deaths each side isn’t the measure of proportionality - neither is strength, tech, economic strength.
Proportionality is using only as much force as necessary to eliminate the threat and minimize civilian casualties. I haven’t seen the intel reports of the attacks on civilian structures that hamas are using, but proportional response does need to be called into question.
UN definition
The key difference being we are seeing incidents of killing of civilians - either in conflict (expected) or execution (not expectedin conflict). What we aren’t seeing is a focused attempt at destroying the entire group - 10 here, mostly men, building destroyed there - or clear instructions to destroy the group. Quality reporting is showing individual incidents, mass propaganda and biased articles are calling it genocide.
No sorry, I cant comment on the difference as that wasn’t my area of study - mine was surface level Syria, Ukraine, Rwanda and War crime definitions, causes and responses. Id be limited to what the other poster said - one spoke German.
Care to elaborate? Because what I’m seeing is that you want those imprisoned, who are deliberately separated from society and deprived them of rights like personal freedom, to have the same rights and access to advancement?
Make no mistake, im not saying deprive them of basic human right - the prison system is bad enough. But they are meant to be deprived of freedom.