Jews around the word are less safe because of Israel when they were promised the opposite. Their faith has been used as a cover for a land grab and they put your holy symbol on a flag they go to war, and worse, under. It’s no wonder so many Jews at least in the US are critical of Israel. It probably feels a lot like being a regular Muslim watching groups commit violence with their religious iconography and warped interpretations used to create ‘justification’.
Edit: good old Lemmy, where saying it’s bad to hate on people just because of where they’re born will get you downvoted to oblivion. You all need to step back and re-examine your views.
You can’t read. Those are facts and written in a passive voice. Condoning the behavior reads something like: “The state of Israel has sown seeds of ill will nurtured by lies and here comes harvest time” or “Yeah fuckers, get dunked on world stage” or something similar and in-between.
How on earth is that passive voice? Their whole reply is devoted to criticising Israel, and not a single word to the effect of “it isn’t OK to treat people badly because of where they are from”. This sounds an awful lot like victim-blaming to me.
Edit: let’s try a little experiment. Imagine me replying this to an article about a Palestinian being banned from a hotel simply for being Palestinian.
Palestinians around the word are less safe because of Hamas when they were promised the opposite. Their faith has been used as a cover for terrorism and they put your holy symbol on a flag they go to war, and worse, under. It’s no wonder so many Muslims in the middle east are critical of Palestinians. It probably feels a lot like being a regular Christian watching Republicans commit violence with their religious iconography and warped interpretations used to create ‘justification’.
Incredible bigotry and hypocrisy on display here. You know nothing about this “Alex” fellow. Maybe he’s been out in the streets protesting against Likud and calling for an end to the war.
If that were the case, “Alex” would understand what’s happening, instead of making it a national case.
If my country, with a democratically elected leader decides to go do an ethnic cleanse to illegally occupy the land of a fellow country while not giving a single fuck about human rights and international laws, I’d understand if someone wouldn’t want me in their business.
It doesn’t say they’re excluding all Jewish people, it says they’re excluding Israelis. You know, people from the country where they all serve in the military, except the most extreme religious extremists (for now anyway), the country actively violating international law in the West Bank and actively committing genocide.
There are plenty of non-Israeli Jewish people. Non-Zionist Jews are lovely people and should not be excluded.
This is the same as refusing to do business with apartheid South Africans.
This is some random dude, not Benjamin Netanyahu. Would you support that hotel banning all Palestinians because they are governed by an internationally-recognized terrorist organisation?
Sounds like this is someone with significant ties to the IDF. Although since they force everyone except religious extremists to serve, maybe that doesn’t mean much.
If they’re able to conclusively prove that, then sure, I’m on board with the ban. I would question how some hotel clerk in Japan was able to make that determination, though. It could easily be a case of “most Israelis serve in the IDF and you are Israeli therefore GTFO”
Not sure you’re seriously asking but the answer is 2006. Add to that the fact that the median age in Gaza is 18 years and it’s clear that Hamas doesn’t have a legitimate governance mandate. They’re a mob outfit.
Because every Israeli voted for the government they now have? It’s stupid to exclude a whole nationality of people from traveling because of their government.
Because every Israeli voted for the government they now have?
Innocent people are being murdered by a government. Telling people represented by that government that they are not welcome is perfectly acceptable. It is in their hands to change their government more than it is mine.
That’s bullshit. The USA kills innocent people, but I wouldn’t ever say all Americans are not welcome. I wouldn’t even say all Russians aren’t welcome. Many people oppose their government and yet can’t do anything about what it does.
Innocent people being killed is important enough to harm people by telling them they’re not welcome to holiday with you, because you disagree with what their government is doing. Yes, that is a form of collective punishment. No, it is not as bad as being killed because you happened to be born Palestinian.
This is the same as refusing to do business with apartheid South Africans.
Reminds me of some of the tourism sanctions on Russians as well. I don’t like when the net’s cast too wide, I know for a fact there are Israeli and Russian peoples who would stop these conflicts if they could and it sucks they’re caught up in this, but I can understand the premise of barring by nationality. I just also know in the case of Israel, it’s likely going to be taken to far or used as a point to embolden bigots who may try to use this to cover their beliefs about all Jews and make them appear easier for normal folk to tolerate. Really a double edge sword because I do think Israel needs a dose of responsibility, hell if the world had the balls American could use one too.
Of course it hurts the average person similar to the way sanctions against a country hurt the average person. One of the goals is to get the average person upset against their government.
A tourism issue like that is a pretty small annoyance in the grand scheme of things, but it’s one that sends a pretty clear message that’s hard for the individual to ignore.
Yup, as an American I will be voting for Biden this year and hoping for the best, but I won’t be surprised if my passport no longer has any staying power if Trump dismantles our democracy, and I won’t blame the countries that deny tourism from the US knowing what half the population will be like at that point
Im not the one who made the claim, but punishing people over things they have no control over are exactly what sanctions are. Its commonplace and often done simply to protect national interests against foreign ones, no matter who’s right or wrong.
Well, like you said USA has punished and still to this day punishes many peoples of the World far far far FAR more severely than forbidding them to go on vacation for doing far less or even nothing at all. All I’m saying is as an American it would be a nice thought experiment for you to consider why you are or should be an exception.
Sure. But that’s a different issue. That doesn’t require punishing some random citizen; One who has nothing to do with, and no control over what the US, or Israel governments do.
You don’t have a right to travel abroad. Am i being punished for not being allowed to fly to Russia, Iran or North Korea? I’m not Muslim nor do i work in ONG, so am i being punished for not being able to travel to Saudi Arabia? What about Cuba? South Africans had serious visa restrictions during Apartheid, which was absolutely justified when they were an openly racist regime.
I regret to inform you that according to Lemmy you are personally responsible for the actions of every other American, and are by extension a terrible human being who should never be allowed past the borders of your country.
I don’t want to be held responsible for the appalling actions of my government, but as a voter I understand why people in other countries would. I have more control over it than they do, so them influencing me influences my government.
Punishing unknown people for the actions of their government?
Yes, I agree, killing innocent people because of the country they are in is terrible.
So terrible that the act of limiting the leisure options of the people who support those actions becomes morally acceptable, because shaming bad behaviour is actually a good thing to do.
The issue is the death of innocent people. Inconveniencing people such that they become motivated to stop their government from doing that seems acceptable, to me.
Well the people who don’t agree with their government and the consequences of its decisions should get out and vote instead of letting right wing extremists get their guy in power.
Denial of hospitality is not the same as a punishment. Speak to US soldiers stationed on Okinawa and you’ll hear similar sentiments from the locals towards them
Saying “I don’t want to offer room and board to a IDF soldier who may have been in Gaza” isn’t a big leap for Japanese society, they’ve apologized for and reckoned with their imperialist past and brutal ethnic cleansing, and generally as a nation actively pushed for peace and cooperation globally. Israel hasn’t done the same, and doesn’t work towards the same goal.
You’re being down voted for espousing a false dichotomy, on par with “if you aren’t with us you’re against us”
That’s the boldest doublespeak I’ve seen in a long time. I’m not the one supporting a blanket ban of all citizens of an entire country. It doesn’t get much more “with us or against us” than that.
I think there’s a lot of nuance here, because “supporting Israel” can mean a lot of different things. Generally agreeing with the idea of being allies with a primarily Jewish state and wanting a good well-being for them is very different from endorsing Israel’s genocide against Gaza, but both could be considered as “supporting Israel”.
I notice similar things as well, in that my personal expirences with them, comapred to average US population, US Jews seem to be far more informed on whats happening and far more likely to have at least harsh critisizm for Isreal. Part of why I really hate people conflating the two in order to spread hate.
Not to rain on your experience, but aren’t a lot of Zionists in the illegal land settlements also Americans, and aren’t a lot of the Jewish people participating in “birthright trips” also American?
US Jewish populations are actually really polarized on this topic, they aren’t a monolith. There is definitely more of an age/generational divide regarding Zionism in Jewish communities than a nationality split.
I am very much in contact with the younger, far more left leaning crowd, so my experience is definitely skewed against basically anything modern Israel has done.
I do know a couple loud mouthed older generational Jewish folk who would like nothing more than for Israel to be the dominant power on the planet, and will have no issue telling you that you deserve torture and torment for literally infinite time (hell) for even vocally supporting Palestinians.
There’s a very logical filter at play here: if you didn’t think seeking beef with Arabs and participating in a colonialist project in the 50s/60s/70s was a good idea, you would have stayed in the US, and otherwise, you would have moved to Israel. This made it so that Jews in the US lean liberal and Jews in Israel lean ethno-nationalistic, in very broad terms.
The Star of David is not a Jewish holy symbol, having that would be sacrilege anyway, similar to idolatry. It’s not even the Star of David, to be honest.
At some point Jewish secularists in Europe wanted some symbol for the Jewish identity. They picked one very commonly used in the Middle East, by all peoples and religions.
By the way, crescent is not a Muslim holy symbol, too, and with the same implication of idolatry. Though they have in practice accepted it, just like Jews. It’s the symbol of Constantinople, which Ottomans used in line with their pretense to be heirs of Rome (I mean, if Germans can do that, why not them).
Many of the Jews around the world have a very idealized idea of Israel and simply can’t believe it’s bad. See, when you are a member of a demonized (even today) minority, but somewhere is a strong and successful state of your nation that has restored its presence in its cradle 2000 years after being partially wiped out, partially expelled from there, you tend to be irrational.
Also separation of religion and nation is a Western thing, Jewish religion is about a nation, and, by the way, Muslim religion too states that all Muslims are one nation.
EDIT: OK, why the downvotes here? Everything here is factual. And if that’s the paragraph about 2000 years triggering people - that’s a right, yes. The state of Israel sucks, but not the general idea. Same as Sebastia, Malatia, Sis, Sasun, Mush, Van are Armenian till the end of days in my book.
At least the Germans had the Holy Roman Empire. The Ottomans knocked over the Byzantines who actually were the old Eastern Roman Empire. The Ottomans had about as much claim to one of the crowns of Rome as the Netherlands has to the HRE crown.
No, they didn’t get any side eyes. Only maybe from western Europeans who considered themselves that. Even calling them Byzantines is anachronistic, they were called Romans.
Greeks literally mainly called themselves Romans since then till Kingdom of Greece became a thing, and they kinda still do.
Interesting. I never knew that. I still don’t think the Ottomans get to be the Romans any more than modern Italy or Germany but I’ll concede they conquered people who considered themselves Roman still.
Being Armenian, I don’t think they in any way get to be Roman, even less than Russians, but it’s a fact that they called themselves that officially.
Italy speaks Romance languages, except for the parts of its population which speak Greek and Albanian, so of course. And both Italy and Germany are (historically during formation of those nations) Christian.
Americans have strong feelings about creeping fascism and like to bitch on social media but that’s about the extent of it. They’re too downtrodden and distracted to do much else. In France if they raise tuition 2% the whole country takes to the streets, riots ensue, cars are burnt. In the US, jaw dropping acts of fascism, cronyism, and corruption happen daily and beyond rage posting it’s mostly crickets. At least there is protesting at the RNC.
I only get two weeks paid leave a year. Can’t afford to miss work because I need my house more. Live in a reddest of red states where my votes never mean anything. Legitimately I have never voted for anyone that has won.
Mostly because I’m trying to survive and get to the next day. I do not have the financial or social safety net required to do so. Really it’s the latter that is the problem. The Montgomery bus boycott lasted a year. It wasn’t a quick one and done kind of thing. As a society we are much less socially connected than we were in the past and we don’t really have other people to rely on.
I agree with what you are saying, by not marching in the streets I am part of the problem. I don’t know man, shit is fucked. I’m doing what I can but it’s not much.
I wouldn’t be surprised if I end up like one of the White Rose. It hasn’t even been a century since then, smh.
One day is still better than 0 days. What you are saying is: we tried nothing and nothing worked.
Right now they are thinking that people dont care. A massive protest would say to them that you are paying attention, and you dont like it. Also, would embolden the democrats into taking action.
I don’t have any idea whether this dude is guilty or innocent, but I definitely do not share the opinion that the judge can be fair and impartial. Good call.
Can they even cap that? That’s a state tax, I feel like that’s one that you would need to deal directly with your state to resolve. As someone who lives in one of the highest property tax states, I also wish this could happen…
Be careful what you wish for. California capped property tax increase since 1978 with prop 13 and most experts say this is a major factor in their insanely expensive housing market. Most people are heavily incentivized to never move to keep their low property tax rate, but this in turn prevents most new development and upzoning while simultaneously leading to the worst sprawl in the nation.
It also starves the state of tax revenue requiring them to levy the tax further for new buyers and seek other income streams like heightened income and sales tax. Policies like this somewhat unintuitively only benefit those who are already well off. Renters and younger people gain no benefit and ultimately pay higher property taxes than those who already are financially established enough to own a property.
A healthy property tax disincentivizes housing as a speculative investment, improving the overall market for people who actually live there. There should certainly be breaks for poverty and financial distress but capping or cutting rates broadly encourages speculation. For a basic human need such high degree of speculation benefits nobody.
Isn’t that due to the reassessment of property tax when a new owner purchases the property? And wouldn’t that be solved if the cap persists regardless of ownership change?
That’s how it’s done in Oregon and we also have high housing costs. The housing costs are more likely tied to the massive demand of people moving to the coasts and lack of housing than property tax rates. The above argument doesn’t even make sense to me as someone who moves within California is still only going to own one house so how does that make housing cheaper and more available whether they move or not? It only works if they move out of state and if that’s the case, they aren’t going to be affected by the property tax increase on a new purchase anyway.
Did those “experts” note that the rest of the country, that people want to live in, have the same insane high prices and yet don’t have that cap? No, don’t bother I already know the answer and so do you.
Economics isn’t a science, it is playtime daydreaming. Which is fine, I enjoy my weekly D&D session. The thing is I know I am not a lvl 12 mountain dwarf fighter.
I agree that’s the problem. Property taxes go up, rent has to go up to cover it. If property taxes go up by X amount but you can’t raise rent the appropriate amount then there’s a problem.
You could just make slightly less money. It is allowed. It isn’t like chemical reaction balance thing. It isn’t even that they are losing money, they are just making less than they want.
I am sure with all the lawyers and accountants that work in Washington DC they can easily structure it to deal with a few edge cases. I am pretty sure my dumbass could figure it out. Maybe a tiered system looking at the last few years, ones that are on there verge of failure have more control compared to ones doing well.
Is the property tax rate that’s increasing or your home’s appraised value? My home has doubled in appraised value since we bought it in 2016, so our taxes have doubled as well.
No, property tax is basically the only direct motivation in place for home owners to vote for politicians and policies that will keep housing affordable for future generations and people who don’t already own a home. Otherwise why wouldn’t home owners want to see housing prices skyrocket in value if there’s no financial downside for them (and a giant payout when they do sell)? As mentioned in other comments, some states have tried property tax caps, and the result is creating a system of haves and have nots based entirely around who was lucky enough to buy into the market before it shot to the moon.
Just in case anyone else is wondering: allegedly a police officer confronted the shooter before the shots and when the shooter pointed the gun at him he retreated down the ladder instead of firing at the shooter.
Yeah, and that wouldn’t have helped the situation. Maybe the snipers would have taken him out after shooting the cop, instead of taking him out after shooting at Trump?
The real big issue is about how apparently someone reported the guy like 30 minutes prior to the actual shooting, and apparently nobody cared.
2-3 minutes on the roof with a gun. He was spotted with a backpack long before that, and he was also spotted using a rangefinder from the ground long before that.
That’s part of the reason the cop was looking for him in the first place. That’s also why there is a cellphone picture of him on the ground taken before he climbed to the roof, which was taken by an officer that saw him using the rangefinder.
I once got sucked into a copaganda thing in Vegas. (I thought they had Tommy guns). The whole point was to put you on the officer’s shoes to make snap decisions to show why we need to be less critical of police when they kill civilians. I argued with her that this was why we need to increase training and job requirements. The guide did not like that.
… what in the fresh 7 hells? how does putting a civilian in life or death simulations compare at all to a TRAINED “professional” doing what they literally signed up for? lmfao.
Fun fact, they hate it when a combat veteran comes through and uses military de-escalation ROE. It generally completely exposes them as forcing the scenario.
State police said body camera video and other information tied to the case is not immediately being released to “protect the integrity of the legal process”
The worst part about this news is knowing the probiotic non-digestable.carbohydrates they used to increase the protective bacteria strains and reduce signs of food addiction are currently sold as cat laxative for $15 a bottle now but they will be $1000 a dose when this is proven effective in humans.
Why in our news cycle do we need to rage before there is any significant information about a story, then wait for the information, then either rage some more… or possibly never hear anything again. I absolutely get it. You call the cops, you get shot, that is highly unexpected- to say the least. Maybe.
Perhaps the officer had her dead-to-rights and decided to pull the trigger. Perhaps she jumped out from behind a corner saying, “OH THANK GO…!”. Perhaps she thought the cop was the intruder and came after him with a bat, etc., etc., etc. The point is WE DON’T KNOW anything from this article.
Yet, we are all supposed to sit in the edge of our seats waiting for such information. I HATE it.
This article has no information other than,“Something really unexpected happened, more at 11!”
So, why aren’t we allowed to wait until there is actual information before we pick up news? Or before we post it to lemmy to upvote, invent narratives, and rage away while we wait for important details?
you would see I would like to wait until there is actual information about the shooting
They never release information.
They keep shooting people.
You keep calling everyone else a ‘stupid mother fucker’ while their family cries.
Your life adds up to being someone who defended systems of human authorities over human lives. This is not something anyone misses.
So many of these stories are months or even years after the fact because unless the media gets on it, the incident gets buried immediately, and by the time the media gets ahold of it any investigation is challenging because it’s either so long after the fact or police “lost” evidence.
It being reported immediately starts the accountability and makes it much more likely that there will be an investigation in the first place. Either you are too young to remember or just weren’t noticing, but reports of police killing unarmed minorities was exceptionally rare a few decades ago. Cops got away with anything and everything. That’s where Black Lives Matter came from, getting the mainstream media (and the justice department) to care when a black person gets killed.
She was shot in the head. There is a fair chance it was through a window because cops don’t aim for the head unless it is the only thing visible.
While there is still a lot of info to come out, there is also a fair chance the cop didn’t know who he was shooting at and murdered the victim by mistake … because cops are trained to shoot first and ask forgiveness later.
That she was shot in the head is in the article btw.
Well, because you’re going to hear about it one way or another, and the people making these decisions (about releasing information) have no right answer. Somehow, the information will get out; if the pigs say nothing, they’ll be accused of covering it up. So they try to get in front of the news and control what they can.
I don’t know why we’re this way, why the news organizations compete to be first to report on something, even with almost no information.
However: unless it turns out that the cops showed up and she started blasting at them, there’s no justification for you to be murdered just because you called for help. Whether or not you jump-scared a cop; whether or not you have dementia and a kitchen knife, or a baseball bat. Heck even if she had a gun. Pigs have training, backup, bullet-proof vests; these victims have fear, adrenalin, often mental health issues, and an expectation that the people they call for help aren’t going to show up and murder them.
I don’t know why we’re this way, why the news organizations compete to be first to report on something, even with almost no information.
I mean, I’m mostly okay with them posting to let the community know they are digging into it. To let other outlets know. This is all on the up and up. I think what I get pissed at is how people (just look around these posts) take that very limited information and invent their own narrative. That becomes their reality no matter what future reporting shows. It’s sickening how fickle and susceptible people are to nudging towards a belief, and an entire belief system, based on very little actual facts.
Are there shit bag cops out there? YES. Are there systemic issues with the way we police? YES.
But, FUCK. Let’s at least wait until there are actual facts about a story to pull out pitch forks. Buncha fucking rage junkies.
Well you highlighted there is a chance police dindu nuffin since people who control info didnt release it. These people also release such info when pig is in the clear, delay generally means they are working up a cover up based on prior precedent.
You trust these clowns yourself, clearly gen pop over "trust me bro"
Because everyone of you jumped on this article exactly as I explained. With rage. If you knew anything about psychology, you would know that is an entirely expected outcome to hearing what you don’t want to in that moment.
Frankly, I don’t give a shit, but I knew the same people who would jump to conclusions about what harkened in that house before any actual facts have been reported, would do EXACTLY the same with my post.
You didn’t say ‘world’ or ‘power’ or ‘restrict’ or ‘consequences’ or ‘actions’ either, yet I used those words.
I was making a statement about why I don’t agree with you. If you want people who reply to you to only use vocabulary that you have, please state so in your comment.
My point was this: if we cannot judge without ‘enough’ information, we rely on those who control information to allow the possibility of judgement. They can simply restrict information, and you would say ‘well, we can’t judge’.
The army could start killing poor people in major cities, and official channels could present no information. Word-of-mouth could be present as scurrilous. Social media about the situation could be dissuaded (through murder of those observing) and account posting it banned. “Of course,” you would say, “we don’t have the information to hand. Maybe nobody at all has died?”
This is not acceptable. I do not accept it. I do not accept the consequences of your statement. I repudiate your statement. I disagree with you. The act of the police killing the person who called them is very rarely going to be acceptable, and I do not need the police to explain their reasoning (which they may never do with any semblance of evidence) before I am upset about it.
Being autistic, you might find it hard to police my emotions, in a very general sense. Feel free to try!
I have been blocking so many people lately. I probably have more blocks (individuals and communities) than posts I’ve read. It’s one thing to disagree, that doesn’t get a block, but to just have zero empathy and then double down on your stupidity, that gets a block.
I don’t care if this woman pulled a Eustace and went “Ooga Booga Booga,” mask and all. A officer’s default reaction should not be “shoot in the head.” And they’re not releasing the footage, which they would happily do of they believed it was in their favor.
Even if she came out with a bat/knife, they didn’t try to hit anything else? Leg, arm, shoulder, nothing? Neither officer had injuries, so who was shooting at them? Clearly it wasn’t this woman, but the article says they reported shots fired. Did they even get the intruder? I’m not going to say that every case is the same, but I’ve seen plenty of standoff videos where cops plead with people to drop the weapon, give multiple warnings, etc., and STILL don’t shoot to kill.
There have been many, many cases of officers shooting first and asking questions later. And they usually just get a paid vacation. We will continue to rage until they understand that this is not okay, and that being an officer doesn’t give you carte blanche to shoot people when you get startled. If you can’t handle that, you shouldn’t be a officer
Signed, Someone who shouldn’t be an officer because I also startle easy
Even if she came out with a bat/knife, they didn’t try to hit anything else? Leg, arm, shoulder, nothing?
Aiming for center of mass is a pretty universal bit of firearm training. Doesn’t excuse their reaction, but it is what you should be doing if you’re gonna fire on someone. Going for legs or arms or a headshot means you’re more likely to miss.
Even civilian concealed carry training has some hands-on courses to teach why it is trained this way. You’re also taught, “only draw your weapon if you have intent to kill,” which is sobering in and of itself.
This leads to the bigger question: why does US cop training paint every scenario as “time to pull out the hammer, I see a nail!”? That’s fundamentally wrong at its very core. “Oh, shit, an acorn! blam! blam! blam!”
It seems the very antithesis of the US legal tenet “innocent until proven guilty” as one can’t be innocent nor proven guilty if they’re already dead.
Yeah, the issue isn’t that the cops didn’t shoot an arm or a leg, but that they shot at all. There’s the whole “Be sure of your target and what’s behind it” that they didn’t seem to learn.
Aiming for center of mass is a pretty universal bit of firearm training. Doesn’t excuse their reaction, but it is what you should be doing if you’re gonna fire on someone. Going for legs or arms or a headshot means you’re more likely to miss.
Since Sonya Massey was shot in the head, that implies three things:
There was an exchange of gun fire and Sonya was caught in the crossfire.
The police showed up and started shooting randomly, killing Sonya.
Perhaps the officer had her dead-to-rights and decided to pull the trigger. Perhaps she jumped out from behind a corner saying, “OH THANK GO…!”. Perhaps she thought the cop was the intruder and came after him with a bat, etc., etc., etc
None of these scenarios should end with a bullet in her head, are you crazy?
The first two no. Which is exactly why I added them. Are you crazy? The last, who knows. Very likely not. But have you ever been hit in the head with a bat, or do you just like to sit on the couch and pretend what you would do if you were?
In any event, actual news about this event has since been reported. You can stop pretending you knew what happened and rage at what did happen.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.