But it never says that, it just asks you wich one is greater and the text ends there, wich leads you to thinking that one indeed has greater value then the other, and that the one with the greater value is the answear
I... I don't even have words for the nonsense I've just witnessed, really. Recently, Israel was added a UN sexual violence in war zones blacklist. And just, look at this. Listen to this video.
.... WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU DON'T NEED TO DO ANY VERIFICATION???? EXCUSE ME???
"The information is verified with a very robust methodology of verification and documentation. I am a recipient. I compile that information and I present it to the Secretary-General... [viewing the direct evidence] is not my job." (x)
^that is the audio from that twitter screenshot. God forbid a UN agent trust their own agency's verification process, especially since the report discusses the sexual violence in Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Libya, Mali, Myanmar, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, and Ukraine. So no, Israel was not uniquely targeted.
Do you believe it is normal to ask the person who compiles UN findings to doubt UN findings? To spend their time doing all the work other agents have already done? When the report verified 9,788 cases of conflict-related sexual violence during 2025?? (x)
If you wanted to review the evidence you wouldn't be screenshotting a tweet to complain about the unique ~antisemitism~ of a report that features the infamous Sde Teiman rape (caught on camera and widely distributed alongside the "right to rape" protests that followed and the Israeli government dropping the charges against the rapists). If you want to review UN methodology you can view that here, with the 2009 Gaza Conflict Commission used as a relevant example (this guide was published in 2015).
In fact, let's go over their methodology together:
Information-gathering methods of the United Nations Fact-finding
Mission on the Gaza Conflict (2009)
(a) The review of reports of international organizations, including the United Nations; reports and other documentation, including affidavits, produced by non-governmental and civil society organizations (Palestinian, Israeli and international); media reports; and writings of academics and analysts on the conflict;
(b) interviews with victims, witnesses and other persons having relevant information in keeping with established human rights methodology and in order to ensure both the safety and privacy of the interviewees and the integrity of the information provided, such interviews were conducted in private. The Mission decided not
to interview children. The Mission conducted 188 individual interviews. Most interviews were conducted in person. if the Mission was unable to meet the relevant persons, interviews were conducted by telephone. Also in keeping with normal practice for this type of report and to continue to protect their safety and privacy, the names of the victims, witnesses and other sources are generally not explicitly referred to in the report and codes are used instead. The names of individuals who publicly testified at the hearings held by the Mission or who have explicitly agreed to be named are, however, identified;
(c) Site visits to specific locations in Gaza where incidents had occurred. The Mission investigated 36 incidents in Gaza;
(d) The analysis of video and photographic images, including satellite imagery provided by UNOSAT, and expert analysis of such images;
(e) The review of medical reports about injuries to victims;
(f) The forensic analysis of weapons and ammunition remnants collected at incident sites;
(g) Meetings with a variety of interlocutors, including members of the diplomatic community, representatives of the parties concerned, NGOs, professional associations, military analysts, medical doctors, legal experts, scientists, United Nations staff;
(h) invitations, through notes verbales, to United Nations Members States and United Nations agencies, departments and bodies to provide information relating to the Mission’s investigation requirements;
(i) The wide circulation of a public call for written submissions from NGOs and other organizations and individuals interested in bringing information to the attention of the Mission. As a result, it received numerous submissions from organizations and individuals from israel, the Occupied Palestinian Territory and elsewhere in the world;
(j) Public hearings in Gaza and in Geneva to hear: (i) victims and witnesses of violations; and (ii) individuals with specialized knowledge and expertise on the context and impact of the hostilities.
I genuinely don't know what other criteria they might have missed for these investigations. Despite how Special Representative Pramila Patten says she would never herself visit a torture camp, the UN specifically calls for site visits and yet "Israel continues to deny visas for OHCHR international staff (x).
UN Human Rights High Commissioner Michelle Bachelet has deplored Israel’s refusal to grant visas for her staff in the occupied Palestinian t
^this article was published 2022.
Let's recap. You professionally misunderstood what Patten was saying and spread a lie that insinuated there was no fact-checking towards the sexual violence Palestinians experience. That is, full fucking stop, rape denial. And you did it to further the idea that the UN was unfairly "picking on" the Jewish State due to antisemitism, an extremely fucking annoying statement considering how stupidly easy it is to fact-check the original tweet. Hell, you don't even have to do that. You can just correctly understand "it's not the responsibility of my office to do any verification" implies a different office verifies the information.
You lied about antisemitism to protect Israel from criticism. Please stop fucking doing that.
I didn't lie about antisemitism. If the person compiling the information does not take it upon themselves to review that information, and in fact openly announces they would not even go to one of these facilities even if offered, how exactly does that not prove bias?
You've got a whole wall of text here trying to argue that we should trust information the person presenting that information to the secretary general and ARGUING THAT THEY SHOULD BE ON THE BLACKLIST did not even bother to review themselves. And frankly, I don't give a fuck about any of it. Cuz she should fucking review the information, not openly announce she wouldn't review it to check that it's factual even if she was offered the chance to go to an Israeli detention center and verify it in person.
Oh, and your tags? No one said "compassion for rape victims is antisemitic." What we said is that not even trying to verify that a rape actually happened before presenting it in an argument that Israel should be blacklisted for using sexual violence is what's antisemitic.
The information. Was verified. Asking her to doubt the verification process of the UN, her own agency, is stupid. Like you are either incredibly stupid or deliberately and maliciously creating this argument knowing it's stupid but wanting to discredit the UN anyways.
Yes I think it's unreasonable for this woman to personally verify 9,788 cases of sexual violence. As any sane person would agree.
Was it? And we should trust that it was actually verified... Why, exactly? And especially when in charge of compiling the information did not bother to lay eyes on it?
And I don't need to discredit the UN, they do that themselves. 🤣 I mean, 1500 of their unrwa workers are suspected of having Hamas ties. Not to mention the long history of their workers soliciting sex from women in the areas they're supposed to be helping.
And actually, it's pretty fucking reasonable to expect someone whose entire job is compiling information to actually review said information. Especially when trying to blacklist a country for claims of sexual violence, AND ESPECIALLY when the claims about that violence are SO BULLSHIT there are people claiming they were raped by DOGS.
Oh she reviewed the information! Just not the direct evidence. Do you need me to explain the difference?
A US probe into Hamas "ties" of people living in Gaza, where Hamas is the fucking government, is stupid. Ohhh links to the government as an aid organization? You don't say.
Tbh "they're saying they're raped by dogs obviously that's fake" as if Israel doesn't have a long history of using dogs to abuse Palestinians? As if a man with fucking down syndrome wasn't murdered by a fucking IDF dog (and I don't mean the soldier)
Muhammed Bhar's family wants the Israeli military to investigate his death in Gaza City this month.
I think "Man with down syndrome murdered by army police dog" is gorish enough to believe rapists use animals for sexual violence. Maybe you have different standards
1) someone who doesn't review the evidence is not someone who should be arguing to put Israel on the blacklist.
2) Hamas is also a designated terrorist organization. Being the government is irrelevant. If you, as an aid worker, have ties to terrorists that is a big fucking deal. Especially when they're currently doing what Hamas has been doing.
3) did you see the part of that incident where the dog attack was accidental and the soldiers only "left him to die" because they were currently under fire and chose to protect idf soldiers over one man? I'm suspecting you didn't. That or you dismissed that part as propaganda.
I also fail to see how this incident lends any credibility to the idea the idf is using dogs to rape people. Nevermind how impossible it is to actually train a dog to do that. Dogs are notoriously hard to train to breed with each other on command, and it's really not physically possible for a dog to penetrate a human without help, their genitalia is not built like ours. It's designed for a willing recipient (in whatever sense that means for dogs), meaning very little resistance to penetration. Which means it's not really built to penetrate either human "hole."
4) you calling me a Nazi in the tags is just the cherry on top to all this. 🤣
Do. Do you think Pramila Patten as an individual is the one who decides what goes on this report. Are you that dense.
Hamas is only a designated terror organization if you're a white bitch. There's nothing "official" about Hamas' designation, it's literally western and western-aligned countries that designate them as such. The UN does not designate them a terrorist org. Probably because they're resisting people objectively worse than anything they could do. Any time you cling to Hamas as an "official designated terrorist org" you're just kinda doing western/American imperialism for them. How many genocides does the US have under its belt again? And I'm supposed to recognize its authority here? Lol.
I'm sorry that's INSANE spin of that story. Soldiers use dogs to physically threaten people -> dog attacks people. Soldiers: 😢 we had no idea that would happen.
You are a fucking nazi. You're an ethnosupremacist rape-denying nazi.
She doesn't need to "decide what goes on it" she just needs to fucking read it. To review the evidence. So it doesn't fucking matter if she's the one who "decides what goes on it" or not. She is the one presenting the information as a reason Israel should be on the blacklist. If she's not willing to review it first to fact-check it, why should we trust her?
"if you're a white bitch." I myself am Latina, I know several black people, other latinos, ethnic Jews and countless others who aren't white who fully believe them to be terrorists. So no, you're full of shit. 🤣
"resisting people objectively worse" is provably untrue, but also targetting civilians for murder, rape and kidnapping is not resistance. There is no law that permits any of those acts against civilians in the name of any cause, let alone "armed resistance."
The fact you are trying to argue Hamas are not terrorists is all anyone needs to see to know how fucking retarded you are.
And buddy, this specific case was an accident. This is literally a proven fact.
And I'm not a Nazi, nor an ethno-supremacist and I have seen no solid evidence whatsoever these rapes occurred, let alone ones committed by fucking dogs. Hearsay is not proof. "Activists" from the flotilla who claimed to have collapsed lungs yet were talking days after this supposed injury with no sign of any injury on their body is not proof of rape either. Especially when they were CAUGHT ON CAMERA faking being in a hospital bed in Turkey (after leaving on camera in Israel looking fine, all fist pumps and peace signs) then 12 hours later in Spain were looking fine and dandy.
Find me solid proof of a rape occuring, and I'd be the first to condemn the rapists. But so far, I have seen nothing solid at all.
Being detained and deported for attempting illegal entry to aid a terrorist organization is not kidnapping. Little material aid is carried by these flotillas, they could easy get it through via proper channels, and breaking the blockade aids Hamas weapon smuggling.
I've seen interviews by the flotilla members claiming they were beaten so bad they lost hearing, have broken ribs, a collapsed lung...
Yet their faces weren't bruised nor were they weren't bedridden in the hospital on a ventilator. And it had only been a few days, so it's not possible those injuries just healed.
That combined with their narrative about being "kidnapped" should be enough to tell literally everyone these people are lying grifters, and yet they still have a massive cult following.
People have been getting a bit parasocial so I think I need to say this:
I am your friend. I know you. You know me. This blog represents my whole complete true self. We are best friends. I love you. I want you carnally, as a friend. Thank you. You mean so much to me as an individual. You aren't a number. Send me money
I was pulled over by a cop a once. He told me I'd failed to come to a complete stop at an intersection and that I was suspected of criminal activity (because of the area I was in). He had me turn off the engine and put the keys on the dash, which I did. He also told me he wasn't looking to get me into trouble, so if I'd just explain myself he'd let me be on my way. Yeah, right. I told him I had nothing to say.
So he had me step out of the vehicle and told me he was detaining me. He searched me, cuffed me, and put me in the back of his police car. Other cops showed up. They milled around, talked to one another, and two or three times one of them opened the door of the car to ask me if I wanted to cooperate and answer their questions (while telling me I didn't have to, but if I didn't cooperate then I could be arrested, my car seized and towed, and I'd go to jail).
I repeatedly told them I chose to stand on my right to remain silent. One of them even pointed out his bodycam, saying he'd turned it off so it wasn't recording audio (he said nothing about video, I noticed), as if the car wasn't wired for sound too, or that he wouldn't testify to anything I said that could be used against me. I declined again.
I did not enjoy sitting in the back of a police car. I did not enjoy being in handcuffs (they got very uncomfortable very quickly). I did not enjoy the idea of being arrested and the rest of it. This was more and closer contact with the cops than I'd ever had in my life.
Nonetheless I stood on my right not to speak. Because I knew that if the cops thought they had reason to arrest me there was nothing--NOTHING--I could say that would change their minds. I knew that anything I said in my defense, true or not, could not be used in court in my defense. Any attempt to have the cop testify to what I said would be dismissed as hearsay, while anything even potentially incriminating could be used to convict me. I knew that the best defense possible begins by NOT TALKING TO THE COPS. So I didn't.
After a few more minutes, they opened the door again and told me to get out. They removed the cuffs and told me I was free to go. And boy were they pissed about it. They were certain of my guilt and didn't hesitate to show it, and promised that when/if they found evidence of it, they'd come arrest me at work or in my home, in front of my co-workers or family. I still said nothing, refusing to respond to their comments, observations and insinuations. I just collected my things and got the hell out of Dodge.
It was a frightening experience. But it confirmed that they didn't have evidence of any crimes. They were fishing, hoping I'd say something stupid that would give them reason to arrest me. Saying nothing was the best thing I could do.
I got pulled over by a Pennsylvania state trooper on I-80 because I was going 82 in a 65 zone. He saw I had an out of state license and asked where I was going. I told him I was going to a wrestling show in Ohio and said "Oh! Is that like the WWF?" and I told him it was but they don't call it WWF anymore, and he told me he used to watch all the time when he was younger and named a few of his favorite wrestlers and asked me about mine. It was a very short conversation and I still got the ticket, but he marked that I was only going 71 which lowered the amount I had to pay and kept me from getting points on my license. It's never a bad idea to be polite to the cops.
alright i've never actually had a police interaction before that wasn't like a school event or something (maybe because i don't drive), but is it just me or does that video look real weird?
like i have nothing concrete, but just the way the clump of protesters is standing in the background, not a single person moving an inch the whole video is very off-putting.
Not just on to something. This is the profile that posted that video.
I’d say the most obvious giveaway is the sheer unreadability of the signs.
But there’s also the way her hair moves, the 0 inflection in her voice, the one ICE agent’s arms moving like they’re made of jello as he just… holds his hands behind her back??
Oh yeah and how tf does her saying “ma’am don’t” and “she’s hitting him” make any sense.
Those caveats being a bailout from the state and not funding a ballooning pension debt. He did the government equivalent of getting mommy and daddy to pay some of his bills while he just refuses to pay others. There is nothing balanced about that and they're on track to have even bigger problems over the next few years as a result. Don't pat him on the back for it.
Imagine you had a friend who was about to file for bankruptcy and in danger of being evicted, and three days later, they tell you all their bills are paid off and they just booked a cruise vacation ... and not even stopping to ask where or how they suddenly came into that much money. Mamdani fans gotta be the most gullible people on Earth to buy this story.
Here’s a fun fact and reminder that I am not gonna stop posting about as long as I keep seeing this bullshit:
Dear Americans, identifying as a communist is just as offensive as being a literal nazi in a very big part of the world. The hammer and sickle is an offensive symbol that is banned in many countries, just like the swastika. Likely more people died under communist oppression than nazism, and there are people still alive who can tell you about it.
And no, don’t come at me with all this “but the core ideology was good!!” or especially “here we do not have this connotation so it’s not offensive!”. Your media, culture and standards are forced on the entirety of the rest of the world, and whatever you post in english is understandable for everyone else, if I am decent enough to care about issues like blackface (that literally have zero history in eg. my entire country which was never a colonizing nation), you should be decent enough and not make a hip cool internet trend about an oppressive ideology whose victims still remember the horrors and still suffer the consequences :)
Thanks and don’t be surprised if you see this reposted by me again, chances are I saw another fucking idiot who thinks communism is cool uwu it was just never done right, Lenin was a bae uwu glitter rainbow hammer and sickle :3
my grandmother fled with her 4 year old and a fistful of jewelry because the communist regime in hungary was literally that bad
“ohhhh but communism is about EVERYONE being able to go to fancy restaurants!” they actually shot a bunch of peaceful student protesters in front of the capital’s university over the living conditions but sure
The Russian communist party took the entirety of my ethnicity, forced them out of their homes at gunpoint, locked them in unheated train cars in the middle of winter, and forced them to “””resettle””” in Kazakhstan. Between the trip and first few years of starvation and disease, roughly one hundred thousand died, about half of which were children.
They then let us return to our homeland 12 years later….
and treated us like second class citizens; they took our land, our generational wealth, our culture, our freedom, our families, and future economic and educational opportunities.
At JSC, Yeltsin visited mission control and a mock-up of a space station. According to Houston Chronicle reporter Stefanie Asin, it wasn't all the screens, dials, and wonder at NASA that blew up his skirt, it was the unscheduled trip inside a nearby Randall's location.
Yeltsin, then 58, "roamed the aisles of Randall's nodding his head in amazement," wrote Asin. He told his fellow Russians in his entourage that if their people, who often must wait in line for most goods, saw the conditions of U.S. supermarkets, "there would be a revolution."
"Even the Politburo doesn't have this choice. Not even Mr. Gorbachev," he said. When he was told through his interpreter that there were thousands of items in the store for sale he didn't believe it. He had even thought that the store was staged, a show for him. Little did he know there countless stores just like it all over the country, some with even more things than the Randall's he visited.
The fact that stores like these were on nearly every street corner in America amazed him. They even offered him free cheese samples.
In Yeltsin's own autobiography, he wrote about the experience at Randall's, which shattered his view of communism, according to pundits. Two years later, he left the Communist Party and began making reforms to turn the economic tide in Russia.
"When I saw those shelves crammed with hundreds, thousands of cans, cartons and goods of every possible sort, for the first time I felt quite frankly sick with despair for the Soviet people," Yeltsin wrote. "That such a potentially super-rich country as ours has been brought to a state of such poverty! It is terrible to think of it."
________________________________________________
How many nails in the coffin of the soviet union is a stop at a regular grocery store responsible for.
This Yeltsin story always reminds me of the story about my great grandmother and her first day in the USA. On the drive home from the airport they stopped at a supermarket to see all of the choices. She bought a box of Tide and was so very proud and pleased to have that privilege she made my grandpa take her picture before they even got in the house.
The staunchly "liberal" folks I know, I just can't understand their takes on the world anymore, as they all seem absurdly, painfully trivial, and ignoring all the most pressing issues of the day, which they furiously pretend aren't even a thing, or if they are a thing, they are only a thing for evil people, who we don't want to be thought of as tolerating, so it's unthinkable anyone would choose to mention them. Only a monster would want to fix the problems that make our everyday world a dystopian nightmare.
This is exactly how Communists think about the world, you know.
That there is a big Solve Problems switch and all they have to do is decide to press it, and everyone in power is evilly refusing to press it
They say exactly the same thing as the first screenshot. Like exactly. They merely think the simple and obvious solution is "Communism" and that people are pretending not to know what is going on due to false consciousness.
You should always strive to be as little like Communists as possible. When you find yourself repeating what they say with a couple nouns swapped, that's the sign to stop yourself, sit down, and ask where you went wrong.
I think your heuristic is far too broad, high-level summaries are short enough that with a few nouns swapped out they be made to superficially resemble different things. For example, if police arrest burglars, this is good and right and should happen, and swapping nouns to produce "how would you like it if burglars arrested police, huh?" is not a serious objection.
One difference here is that Communists imagined a Solve Problems switch which rested on untested theories of economics, incentives, property, power, human relations, et cetera, and then they failed when put to the test, whereas the El Salvador Solve Problems switch is the extensively-tested "Throw criminals in jail" and it's working.
(Disregard babelites who respond to this by gaming the definition of "criminals", there is no communicating with them.)
Improvement can also be had by firing communists who are obfuscating, lying, and making a field worse. At some point, improving society involves disempowering people who are making it worse, otherwise those people will eat the improvements. This must be done with good judgment and reality checks and feedback loops and observations as to whether the process is working as planned, but one should not hold back for fear of sounding vaguely like Communist propaganda if one disregards all the specifics.
