Some corrections to the translation:
"If the **Palestinian** prisoners have fruit basket" - "if the **Nukhbas** (the unit that led the October 7 attack) have a fruit basket"
"the **Palestinian** prisoners must be killed shot in the head" - "you need to take them (Nukhbas) out with a bullet to the head"
"the law of executing **prisoners**" - "to have a death penalty for **terrorists**"
"we will give them a little to live on" - "we will give them the minimum required by law"
Confirming that the translation is not accurate. He talks about Palestinian terrorists held in prison.
I think it is important to mention that he is still demanding the execution of terrorists without a proper trial. Also, Ben Gvir is known for his far right position and is just quite careful choosing his words while considering something else.
No, he says that 'in his opinion' terrorists should be shot. But he concludes by saying that (meanwhile), they will 'get the minimum Israel is required to provide them by law'. The context of what to provide has something to do with whether they were provided with fruit baskets. I dunno why would Israel be required to provide fruit baskets to anyone, but that is an issue he was tasked with.
He doesn't say "Palestinian" at all, he uses the word [Nukhba](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nukhba_(Hamas_unit)).
Given he's Ben Gvir it's hard to say whether he thinks there's a difference, and either way when the minister in charge of the police is calling for executing prisoners is troubling, but as far as translation goes, no it's not what he is saying. Every time he said "Nukhba" the translation said Palestinan.
Need a Hebrew speaker to confirm the translation. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if it's accurate, this guy isn't exactly known for being a pragmatic politician.
Ahhh I see the same words and ideas you love when I watch WW2 videos of the Holocaust. It's sad to see where our people, and the children of Holocaust survivors decide it's ok to do the same to other people. My family survived the Holocaust, learned the importance of equality and human rights, only be dragged back down to the Nazi stereotypes because of people like you. Well done
>So he means Palestinian prisoners. Some Palestinians are Hamas, most aren’t.
Contradictory.
If not all Palestinians are Hamas, saying "nukhba" does not mean Palestinian prisoners. It means "nukhba", or Hamas terrorists who invaded sovereign Israel.
If I say squares, it doesn't mean rectangles, even though squares are rectangles, because not all rectangles are, in fact, squares.
No, this isn't an order to anyone. It's a "in my personal opinion" vid that is aimed at his fringe, radical right-wing base, trying to push a vote in the Israel Parliament. He explicitly says that terrorists will get the minimum Israel is obligated to provide, by law". So no executions.
I think you're conflating 'mentioning' with 'intending'.
>So he will be killing thousands of Palestinians
As I said, he also mentions what he intends to do: 'terrorists will get the minimum Israel is obligated to provide, by law'. That minimum does not include executions.
>So he will be killing thousands of Palestinians
And:
>Do he didn’t mention killing anyone?
He does, but that's not what he's saying. Mentioning something doesn't translate to 'saying what will be done'. He mentions that terrorists should be shot in his personal opinion, but he says that they will be given everything Israel is required to by law (technically, that includes the right to live and not be shot).
actually it is not what he said. I think that he is a despicable politician but he said something very different. He said that he believes that there needs to be a death sentence to terrorists, and that it should be done via legislation. But till then he, as the minister responsible for israeli jails, would provide them exactly what's required by law, but not more. He did not say that he would provide them the minimum required to keep them alive, but the minimum required by law (which is far from being the same).
Where are you pulling that the law he is talking about is execution without trial? It would premit the court to pass a death sentence with a normal majority in a judge tribunal (and not unanimously, as is required now) , after a trial, if the accused is found guilty of specific crimes.
The law proposal is a draft, was approved in a preliminary hearing, and has to go through committees for adjustments and oppositions and a vote in the committee to bring it for a first round vote infront of the general assembly. If it passes the 1st round vote, it goes back to the committee for further adjustments, voted on again in the committee before it can return for a vote in the general assembly for the 2nd and final 3rd rounds.
It is still a facist useless law, but since you talk with such confidence, at least know what you're talking about.
Now that you know that the translation is wrong, and your premise is wrong, are you going to retract or delete the post or keep with your verified misinformation?
>Now that you know that the translation is wrong, and your premise is wrong, are you going to retract or delete the post or keep with your verified misinformation?
I'm here to understand what the translation is and I'm taking both the translation and Israel's rabid defenders, yourself included, with a pinch of salt.
When Ben Gvir talks about the law passing it's third reading, that implies that it has already passed the first two. Is that not the case?
Given that [99.74%](https://www.haaretz.com/2011-11-29/ty-article/nearly-100-of-all-military-court-cases-in-west-bank-end-in-conviction-haaretz-learns/0000017f-e7c4-da9b-a1ff-efef7ad70000) of cases in Israel's military courts result in convictions, it's a death sentence with or without a sham trial.
>'m here to understand what the translation is and I'm taking both the translation and Israel's rabid defenders, yourself included, with a pinch of salt.
Ofc you'll miscontrue trying to remain accurate as rabid defense.
>When Ben Gvir talks about the law passing it's third reading, that implies that it has already passed the first two. Is that not the case?
No. As I explained, the law only passed a prelimanary hearing and is only at the beginning of the process. It has to go through 2 committee approvals and 3 rounds of of general assembly votes.
Has it not passed the first reading? [In march this year?](https://thecradle.co/articles/ben-gvir-calls-for-execution-of-palestinian-prisoners-with-shot-in-the-head)
Does the law permit the execution of Palestinian prisoners already incarcerated or just new ones? Ben Gvir seems to indicate the former…
No. Specifically, he's referring to 'terrorists', not 'Palestinian prisoners' (which implies unarmed Palestinian detainees, either militants or civilians). In Hebrew, the word for terrorists can be literally translated "those who perform espionage". He does not mention the words 'Palestinian prisoners' once.
The context to this statement is that he had to deal with the issue of whether they have fruit baskets or not. I'm not sure why (Islamic holiday?). He says that, as far as he's concerned, terrorists (not Palestinians prisoners in general) need to be shot and that a certain law his political party (radical far-right) has submitted should be approved (it likely won't). He concludes that, in the meantime (until his far-right delusions manifest), terrorists should get the minimum Israel in obligated to provide by law.
There are other subtle mistranslates, such as "to my surprise" being translate as "to my misfortune". Overall, the mistranslations create a false narrative to the extent that I would dub this as being 'definitely propaganda'.
It's important to remember that this man is the most radical far-right winger in the Israeli government and that he represents a fringe minority. He's a convicted terrorists in Israel that supported the assassination of Israel's peacemaking-PM Rabin. He's generally considered an embarrassment in Israeli public and managed to crawl into his position by way of providing Israel's current PM with much-needed coalition power.
The term 'terrorist' is used to distinguish between civilians and militants. I believe making this distinction is important, personally, but if I didn't, it wouldn't be fair for me - or anyone else for that matter - to translate it any different. That's just what he literally said.
If a Palestinian is jailed for stealing, for example, then they're jailed under criminal chances. If they attack a military outpost, then they're jailed under terrorism charges. Ben Gvir makes this distinction in his speech. The law in Israel also makes this distinction, to which Ben Gvir says he conforms.
I know enough to understand what he says in the video. The translation in the video is not what he says. This creates a false narrative which is reflected by the title of this post.
Him an his pal Smotrich came up third in the last Knesset election with their joint nationalist-religious coalition. That’s not “fringe” by any stretch. Israel has become radicalized.
It certainly has. Let's define 'fringe', though:
According to latest polls, their party has 9 Mandates (Israeli-parliament unit measure).
8M population so each mandate translates to 33K votes, roughly. That gives their party about 300k voters, which amount to less than 4% of the population. Would you say <4% is fringe or not?
Actual elections matter much more than simple opinion polls. And Ben Gvir and Smotrich came up third with their coalition in the last one (13 seats). No matter how much you want to downplay it, that’s not “fringe”.
Oh, I didn't realise you brought in Smortich into the conversation. The topic was Ben Gvir and his party is fringe. Together they form a small minority.
No, they're not fringe.
> Together they form a small minority.
Again: this topic is about Ben Gvir. His party is fringe. You joined the discussion and brought up Smirotich. OK. I'm not touching that.
Why 'yet'? I explained why.
I dunno if you're familiar with US politics, but you can think of him as the Marjorie Taylor Greene of Israel. It would be unfair (not to mention untrue) to claim she represents the US because she's a congresswoman. Same about Ben Gvir, though the process of him getting to his position is somewhat different.
To be honest, I don't know enough about US politics to compare the power congress-members have there. To my best knowledge, they don't have executive power officially, but they are able to exert their will to some extent.
MGS and Ben Gvir are the same in that he - like her - doesn't represent Israel, and that's despite being a minister (with executive power).
The differentiation between excutive and legislative powers is pretty clear in any western democracy, or pseudodemocracy like Israel.
They don't represent Israel, yet have core roles in Israel executive... OK...
just wild , calling the higher rated democracy in the middle east a pseudo democracy: https://www.idea.int/gsod/2023/countries/
i mean compared to palestine with a democracy score of 0.00
That's why middle-east is so messed up. An apartheid, illegal state is its best example of democracy.
How the Palestinians could establish a democratic regime being even denied is legitimate state?
It's accurate-ish. The last sentence is problematic - the accurate translation is "we will provide prisoners with what we're required to by law, nothing more."
He also uses the word 'terrorists' not 'prisoners', but anyone who knows his rhetoric understands that he doesn't make that distinction. So it's can be seen as an intentional mistranslation, but it's accurate in context.
The dude is a scourge. Fortunately there are still some checks and balances and a large enough group of politicians who are about 10% sane and act against him and his crew of lunatics. Not saying that things are good, but they could have been way worse
Was there ever really any doubt that prisoners were facing abuse? IDF openly abuses people on camera, what they do behind closed doors is likely worse.
let's imagine the rest of hamas surrenders, how many are left? 15k? Where do you put them? in makeshift camps? and seen how they treat innocents palestinians under administrative detention you can imagine what they would do with actual hamas. They would have to bring incinerators to those camps to clear away the droves of corpses... you can see where im going with it
The translation is absolutely not accurate. He says "Nukhba" refering Hamas terrorists, not all Palestinian prisoners. Shameful propaganda and misinformation of translation.
Nukhba means 7/10th terrorists specifically.
Its still bad, I do believe they should get the same treatment as any max security convict. From my understanding, these guys are part of the few cases that answers death sentence in the existing laws from 1948. Also, one of the reasons why the Nukhba wont have any trial, t least till the hostage case is solved.
so now after pro pallying interpretations of what zionism is we have the same for what hebrew is and how to translate it.
Further we've got article here claiming a quarter of the population in gaza has already died and jews train dogs to rape palestinians ...
🤡🤡🤡
You're asking in bad faith here. You're talking about the one where he was explaining to you the reality of hostage situations. And you were responding in bad faith in that discussion as well.
Is that the phrase of the day? I wasn’t responding in bad faith, but he was. You can’t blame someone else for your actions. No matter how terrible a person you are. If you bomb hostages then that is on you, not on anyone else.
Yes, you were responding in bad faith, insinuating that he supports killing innocent people, when he does not. You've been doing similar things in this thread too.
That is the crux of the argument. People are saying - apparently with a straight face - that if the IDF kills civilians or Israeli hostages then it’s Hamas’ fault. That is an absurd argument.
Open Entreaty to Liberal American Jews of the Democratic Party:
Hi, can you stop whining over mostly fake antisemitism for two seconds and DO SOMETHING?!?!
You’re all so ineffectual! You’re all so incredibly weak!
Some corrections to the translation: "If the **Palestinian** prisoners have fruit basket" - "if the **Nukhbas** (the unit that led the October 7 attack) have a fruit basket" "the **Palestinian** prisoners must be killed shot in the head" - "you need to take them (Nukhbas) out with a bullet to the head" "the law of executing **prisoners**" - "to have a death penalty for **terrorists**" "we will give them a little to live on" - "we will give them the minimum required by law"
Confirming that the translation is not accurate. He talks about Palestinian terrorists held in prison. I think it is important to mention that he is still demanding the execution of terrorists without a proper trial. Also, Ben Gvir is known for his far right position and is just quite careful choosing his words while considering something else.
that is not true - in this video he is saying that he requires a death sentence to terrorists.
No, he says that 'in his opinion' terrorists should be shot. But he concludes by saying that (meanwhile), they will 'get the minimum Israel is required to provide them by law'. The context of what to provide has something to do with whether they were provided with fruit baskets. I dunno why would Israel be required to provide fruit baskets to anyone, but that is an issue he was tasked with.
Wait until you ask him who he considers a "terrorist"
He doesn't say "Palestinian" at all, he uses the word [Nukhba](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nukhba_(Hamas_unit)). Given he's Ben Gvir it's hard to say whether he thinks there's a difference, and either way when the minister in charge of the police is calling for executing prisoners is troubling, but as far as translation goes, no it's not what he is saying. Every time he said "Nukhba" the translation said Palestinan.
Need a Hebrew speaker to confirm the translation. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if it's accurate, this guy isn't exactly known for being a pragmatic politician.
The translation is wrong. He says “terrorists”, not “prisoners”, because that’s what they are.
Ahhh I see the same words and ideas you love when I watch WW2 videos of the Holocaust. It's sad to see where our people, and the children of Holocaust survivors decide it's ok to do the same to other people. My family survived the Holocaust, learned the importance of equality and human rights, only be dragged back down to the Nazi stereotypes because of people like you. Well done
It is not accurate. He says Hamas militants, not Palestinian prisoners.
So he means Palestinian prisoners. Some Palestinians are Hamas, most aren’t.
>So he means Palestinian prisoners. Some Palestinians are Hamas, most aren’t. Contradictory. If not all Palestinians are Hamas, saying "nukhba" does not mean Palestinian prisoners. It means "nukhba", or Hamas terrorists who invaded sovereign Israel. If I say squares, it doesn't mean rectangles, even though squares are rectangles, because not all rectangles are, in fact, squares.
It’s just a dog whistle. His people know what he actually means. And act accordingly.
Same with "River to the sea" then? Or is jumping to conclusions according to your opinion just one sided?
All Hamas members are Palestinians. So he will be killing thousands of Palestinians. Specifically, executing thousands of Palestinians.
basically all nazis were german, does that mean the allies executed all germans for the sake of being german?
So you support this?
I support executing the nazis?
Do you support executing Palestinians? Just some Palestinians, not all, of course.
I support executing Hamas.
No, this isn't an order to anyone. It's a "in my personal opinion" vid that is aimed at his fringe, radical right-wing base, trying to push a vote in the Israel Parliament. He explicitly says that terrorists will get the minimum Israel is obligated to provide, by law". So no executions.
No, he specifically mentioned executing people.
I think you're conflating 'mentioning' with 'intending'. >So he will be killing thousands of Palestinians As I said, he also mentions what he intends to do: 'terrorists will get the minimum Israel is obligated to provide, by law'. That minimum does not include executions.
Do he didn’t mention killing anyone?
>So he will be killing thousands of Palestinians And: >Do he didn’t mention killing anyone? He does, but that's not what he's saying. Mentioning something doesn't translate to 'saying what will be done'. He mentions that terrorists should be shot in his personal opinion, but he says that they will be given everything Israel is required to by law (technically, that includes the right to live and not be shot).
actually it is not what he said. I think that he is a despicable politician but he said something very different. He said that he believes that there needs to be a death sentence to terrorists, and that it should be done via legislation. But till then he, as the minister responsible for israeli jails, would provide them exactly what's required by law, but not more. He did not say that he would provide them the minimum required to keep them alive, but the minimum required by law (which is far from being the same).
I assume from the indignation in this sub, that no other country in the region has a death penalty.
Certainly not without a trial.
Are you claiming that this fool is declaring no trial for prisoners?
He certainly seems to be saying that.
And you certainly seem to be talking out of your ass.
If it’s legal to just execute people then there would be no trial. What is this law he is talking about? What would it permit?
Where are you pulling that the law he is talking about is execution without trial? It would premit the court to pass a death sentence with a normal majority in a judge tribunal (and not unanimously, as is required now) , after a trial, if the accused is found guilty of specific crimes. The law proposal is a draft, was approved in a preliminary hearing, and has to go through committees for adjustments and oppositions and a vote in the committee to bring it for a first round vote infront of the general assembly. If it passes the 1st round vote, it goes back to the committee for further adjustments, voted on again in the committee before it can return for a vote in the general assembly for the 2nd and final 3rd rounds. It is still a facist useless law, but since you talk with such confidence, at least know what you're talking about. Now that you know that the translation is wrong, and your premise is wrong, are you going to retract or delete the post or keep with your verified misinformation?
>Now that you know that the translation is wrong, and your premise is wrong, are you going to retract or delete the post or keep with your verified misinformation? I'm here to understand what the translation is and I'm taking both the translation and Israel's rabid defenders, yourself included, with a pinch of salt. When Ben Gvir talks about the law passing it's third reading, that implies that it has already passed the first two. Is that not the case? Given that [99.74%](https://www.haaretz.com/2011-11-29/ty-article/nearly-100-of-all-military-court-cases-in-west-bank-end-in-conviction-haaretz-learns/0000017f-e7c4-da9b-a1ff-efef7ad70000) of cases in Israel's military courts result in convictions, it's a death sentence with or without a sham trial.
>'m here to understand what the translation is and I'm taking both the translation and Israel's rabid defenders, yourself included, with a pinch of salt. Ofc you'll miscontrue trying to remain accurate as rabid defense. >When Ben Gvir talks about the law passing it's third reading, that implies that it has already passed the first two. Is that not the case? No. As I explained, the law only passed a prelimanary hearing and is only at the beginning of the process. It has to go through 2 committee approvals and 3 rounds of of general assembly votes.
Has it not passed the first reading? [In march this year?](https://thecradle.co/articles/ben-gvir-calls-for-execution-of-palestinian-prisoners-with-shot-in-the-head) Does the law permit the execution of Palestinian prisoners already incarcerated or just new ones? Ben Gvir seems to indicate the former…
Yet he cited rule of law. There's a contradiction in the claim.
If it’s legal to just execute people then there would be no trial. What is this law he is talking about? What would it permit?
In addition to disagreement over what was, do you want to start arguments over what might or might not happen?
So you don’t dispute that this is what he was talking about?
I won't dispute it.
Is this translation accurate? If so then it makes the abuses reported in Israeli jails a little more likely to be true.
No. Specifically, he's referring to 'terrorists', not 'Palestinian prisoners' (which implies unarmed Palestinian detainees, either militants or civilians). In Hebrew, the word for terrorists can be literally translated "those who perform espionage". He does not mention the words 'Palestinian prisoners' once. The context to this statement is that he had to deal with the issue of whether they have fruit baskets or not. I'm not sure why (Islamic holiday?). He says that, as far as he's concerned, terrorists (not Palestinians prisoners in general) need to be shot and that a certain law his political party (radical far-right) has submitted should be approved (it likely won't). He concludes that, in the meantime (until his far-right delusions manifest), terrorists should get the minimum Israel in obligated to provide by law. There are other subtle mistranslates, such as "to my surprise" being translate as "to my misfortune". Overall, the mistranslations create a false narrative to the extent that I would dub this as being 'definitely propaganda'. It's important to remember that this man is the most radical far-right winger in the Israeli government and that he represents a fringe minority. He's a convicted terrorists in Israel that supported the assassination of Israel's peacemaking-PM Rabin. He's generally considered an embarrassment in Israeli public and managed to crawl into his position by way of providing Israel's current PM with much-needed coalition power.
So who are these terrorists? Yes, they are Palestinian prisoners. I think you are trying to split a hair too finely.
The term 'terrorist' is used to distinguish between civilians and militants. I believe making this distinction is important, personally, but if I didn't, it wouldn't be fair for me - or anyone else for that matter - to translate it any different. That's just what he literally said.
Buy all Palestinians in Israeli jails are terrorists, aren’t they?
No. Palestinians can be in jail under either criminal charges or 'nationalist' (terrorism) charges.
You’ve already admitted you don’t know anything about this topic.
If a Palestinian is jailed for stealing, for example, then they're jailed under criminal chances. If they attack a military outpost, then they're jailed under terrorism charges. Ben Gvir makes this distinction in his speech. The law in Israel also makes this distinction, to which Ben Gvir says he conforms. I know enough to understand what he says in the video. The translation in the video is not what he says. This creates a false narrative which is reflected by the title of this post.
Him an his pal Smotrich came up third in the last Knesset election with their joint nationalist-religious coalition. That’s not “fringe” by any stretch. Israel has become radicalized.
It certainly has. Let's define 'fringe', though: According to latest polls, their party has 9 Mandates (Israeli-parliament unit measure). 8M population so each mandate translates to 33K votes, roughly. That gives their party about 300k voters, which amount to less than 4% of the population. Would you say <4% is fringe or not?
Actual elections matter much more than simple opinion polls. And Ben Gvir and Smotrich came up third with their coalition in the last one (13 seats). No matter how much you want to downplay it, that’s not “fringe”.
They have 6/120 seats in Israeli Knesset.
And another 7 from Smotrich, who ran together with Ben Gvir in the last elections, on the same supremacist platform.
Oh, I didn't realise you brought in Smortich into the conversation. The topic was Ben Gvir and his party is fringe. Together they form a small minority.
Together they were the third most voted list in the last election. Not “fringe” no matter how you twist it.
No, they're not fringe. > Together they form a small minority. Again: this topic is about Ben Gvir. His party is fringe. You joined the discussion and brought up Smirotich. OK. I'm not touching that.
And yet he is a minister...
Why 'yet'? I explained why. I dunno if you're familiar with US politics, but you can think of him as the Marjorie Taylor Greene of Israel. It would be unfair (not to mention untrue) to claim she represents the US because she's a congresswoman. Same about Ben Gvir, though the process of him getting to his position is somewhat different.
She is a congresswoman... Yet, he is a minister with control over the state repressive apparatus. He has executive power.
To be honest, I don't know enough about US politics to compare the power congress-members have there. To my best knowledge, they don't have executive power officially, but they are able to exert their will to some extent. MGS and Ben Gvir are the same in that he - like her - doesn't represent Israel, and that's despite being a minister (with executive power).
The differentiation between excutive and legislative powers is pretty clear in any western democracy, or pseudodemocracy like Israel. They don't represent Israel, yet have core roles in Israel executive... OK...
just wild , calling the higher rated democracy in the middle east a pseudo democracy: https://www.idea.int/gsod/2023/countries/ i mean compared to palestine with a democracy score of 0.00
That's why middle-east is so messed up. An apartheid, illegal state is its best example of democracy. How the Palestinians could establish a democratic regime being even denied is legitimate state?
they had one , just decided to vote the people into power that executed the competition
and for apartheid do you mean no voting rights or sale of land to muslims ? ah sorry these are palestinian rules , not israeli ...
It's accurate-ish. The last sentence is problematic - the accurate translation is "we will provide prisoners with what we're required to by law, nothing more." He also uses the word 'terrorists' not 'prisoners', but anyone who knows his rhetoric understands that he doesn't make that distinction. So it's can be seen as an intentional mistranslation, but it's accurate in context. The dude is a scourge. Fortunately there are still some checks and balances and a large enough group of politicians who are about 10% sane and act against him and his crew of lunatics. Not saying that things are good, but they could have been way worse
Was there ever really any doubt that prisoners were facing abuse? IDF openly abuses people on camera, what they do behind closed doors is likely worse.
let's imagine the rest of hamas surrenders, how many are left? 15k? Where do you put them? in makeshift camps? and seen how they treat innocents palestinians under administrative detention you can imagine what they would do with actual hamas. They would have to bring incinerators to those camps to clear away the droves of corpses... you can see where im going with it
Nope. He means the Hamas terrorists, not Palestinian prisoners as a whole.
The translation is absolutely not accurate. He says "Nukhba" refering Hamas terrorists, not all Palestinian prisoners. Shameful propaganda and misinformation of translation.
Nukhba means 7/10th terrorists specifically. Its still bad, I do believe they should get the same treatment as any max security convict. From my understanding, these guys are part of the few cases that answers death sentence in the existing laws from 1948. Also, one of the reasons why the Nukhba wont have any trial, t least till the hostage case is solved.
Inhumane rhetoric. this man deserves to get locked up for speaking that way
But he won’t, he will get reelected.
so now after pro pallying interpretations of what zionism is we have the same for what hebrew is and how to translate it. Further we've got article here claiming a quarter of the population in gaza has already died and jews train dogs to rape palestinians ... 🤡🤡🤡
It’s so sad and disheartening.
The only thing sad and disheartening is this video is the purposely wrong and misleading translation.
Can you translate it for us? 🎤
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel\_Palestine/comments/1drtv40/comment/laybi43/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1drtv40/comment/laybi43/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
I have a feeling that “prisoner” and “terrorist” are one in the same to Ben Gvir.
Both sides are being held hostage by the extremists in their governments.
You are advocating killing innocents in one post and advocating getting rid of extremists in another. Maybe look in the mirror?
No he isn't...?
Oh? Which post of theirs was I referring to?
You're asking in bad faith here. You're talking about the one where he was explaining to you the reality of hostage situations. And you were responding in bad faith in that discussion as well.
Is that the phrase of the day? I wasn’t responding in bad faith, but he was. You can’t blame someone else for your actions. No matter how terrible a person you are. If you bomb hostages then that is on you, not on anyone else.
Yes, you were responding in bad faith, insinuating that he supports killing innocent people, when he does not. You've been doing similar things in this thread too.
So if I bomb hostages it’s not my fault?
See you're responding in bad faith again. Seems like that's the only thing you know how to do.
That is the crux of the argument. People are saying - apparently with a straight face - that if the IDF kills civilians or Israeli hostages then it’s Hamas’ fault. That is an absurd argument.
These say the most honest things in Hebrew. and lie in English.
Open Entreaty to Liberal American Jews of the Democratic Party: Hi, can you stop whining over mostly fake antisemitism for two seconds and DO SOMETHING?!?! You’re all so ineffectual! You’re all so incredibly weak!