A few days ago I shared some news that the Eurovision song from Israel would be named “Your land is mine now” to later realize it was from an onion kind of website, lol.

I hope I’m not alone in this kind of f’up.

  • bramblepatchmystery@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    You are using plausible to mean likely, i’m just wondering if the ICJ’s quotes are using the word in the same way you are.

    A problem I am having is whenever I ask for actual quotes and their context, i am either ghosted or bullied.

    • Count042@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Do your own research. That was literally the point of the court hearing.

      It’s why they ordered Israel to preserve evidence.

      Seriously, watch all three presentations. It’s worth doing. Unless you don’t want your obvious world view destroyed.

      If you don’t want to be `bullied’ (although, I can’t for the life of me understand why you’d use that word for people defending themselves from your accusations of antisemitism due to them pointing out a genocide), then don’t attack people with the bad faith accusation of antisemitism.

      You still haven’t answered the question.

      Come on, I answered yours. It’s your turn.

      What would it take for you to admit that recognizing a genocide isn’t antisemitism?

      • bramblepatchmystery@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        If the ICJ stated genocide is likely happening, those quotes exist and would be used by you to bolster their case.

        I think.you are essentially just makinf your argument on the vibe of your reading of the international.courts, and not what is documented. Am i correct?

        • Count042@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          I think you are refusing to do any research on something you aren’t willing to change your mind about. I think nothing would change your mind, so you didn’t even bother watching any of the three parts of the hearing because you already knew what you would believe.

          Your method of doing that is to never state a clear opinion, not engage in any logic, and respond to everything with questions.

          I’ll follow suit. What do you think the purpose of that hearing was, and what do you think the conclusion was for the hearing?

          But, as per my previous paragraph, I’d bet you didn’t even watch it.

          • bramblepatchmystery@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I’m sorry you don’t like the fact that I’m asking you questions regarding your claims instead of just arguing at you or outright accepting them without question. I imagine I can be frustrating when you are wanting one of those two options and I won’t provide it.

            But you are bringing forth accusations, millenia old accusations, and they should be examined.

            As for what I think the conclusion of the hearings was, we have not concluded the proceedings whatsoever and anybody claiming determinations have been released is being dishonest.

            I’m giving you every opportunity to discuss this without hyperbolism.

        • Count042@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          I got bored: https://www.npr.org/2024/01/27/1227397107/icj-finds-genocide-case-against-israel-plausible-orders-it-to-stop-violations

          That is literally the first hit from google. I know you won’t read it, but you should.

          You should also really watch South Africa’s presentation: https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k11/k11gf661b3

          And the courts findings yourself, and get your news from a primary source: https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1uwq4cxuv