Sativied
Well-Known Member
translation: religious radicals warn other religious radicals to act less radical or they will get more radical.
Haredi (“ultra-Orthodox”), Dati (“religious”), Masorti (“traditional”) and Hiloni (“secular”).
When people in Europe see American religious radicals with AR-15s, vote Trump into power, ban cartoons, many too conclude "America" is crazy but that rarely includes people who are aware of what painting with a broad brush means or have at least some idea about the differences between states, regions, tribe.
"Jonathan Schanzer wrote that in two years following the 2007 coup, the Gaza Strip had exhibited the characteristics of Talibanization. a process whereby the Hamas government had imposed strict rules on women [and girls... aka kids, but who mentioned that besides me across several threads], discouraged activities commonly associated with Western culture, oppressed non-Muslim minorities, imposed sharia law, and deployed religious police to enforce these laws"
When using such a broad brush and properties of members and subsets become properties of the set, it would be more consistent to suggest something like 'religious radicals (US) publish/post/respond to news about religious radicals (Iran) warning religious radicals (Israel) to react less radical against religious radicals (Palestinians), would it not?
Before this current mess started, 45% Gazans would vote Hamas again, (supposedly, not sure what good polls are there especially now...) almost 2/3rds expected there'd be a violent attack this year, about half of that supported it... and almost everyone knows from where the rockets are launched. That Mossad guy you also 'translated' (put words in his mouth) was not wrong saying it's not just Hamas [soldiers]. And did not refer to or imply any guilt of kids. Putting supporters of the enemy on buses or buying them train tickets is not uncommon expression and comes in many variations ("I'll buy the tickets!" will suffice nowadays). People said the same thing about supporters who cheered after 9/11, rightfully so. It's what you guys should be doing with certain republicans including a former potus, put them on a plane to Russia. It's tough guy rhetoric and I think... well, you said it:
Right. And yes, but that's at best just half of it. When not interpreted objectively and not processed into sequitur conclusions, but treated similar to how religious radicals do, facts get 'translated' and truths become (even more) subjective.I think you are jumping to a conclusion based upon rhetoric and not deeds. Facts matter and truth matters.
The both sides bad argument never works. It would work in a nonsensical hypothetical situation where we'd measure and compare the level of 'bad' accurately and based on that make decisions or decide not to act at all. Both sides bad is a thought-terminating cliché with only one practical purpose.