Comment by aaomidi
2 years ago
All he’s done is point out that Gaza civilians are being decimated and you’re appalled by those tweets?
Kinda telling on yourself there tbh.
2 years ago
All he’s done is point out that Gaza civilians are being decimated and you’re appalled by those tweets?
Kinda telling on yourself there tbh.
Please don't cross into attacking someone else on HN. This topic is extremely inflammatory, so you can be sure that the other person will feel your comment as many times more aggressive than you intended it.
Needless to say this goes equally for both sides of the argument.
Dan I wish you would address such remarks to the person who makes the first move rather than people who react to it. Alleging that pg was 'trashing his rep' (without saying why) is the epitome of flamebait, but you have a long-standing pattern of chiding people for taking the bait rather than the person throwing it out. This rewards baitposting.
You put this way better than I ever could. It’s a sentiment I’ve felt has been true for a long time at HN and I’ve never been able to properly put it into words.
Dang has actively called me out on doing what I did today before - which is react to what amounts to racist and xenophobic posts that are allowed on HN.
I am not baitposting or flamebaiting, nor do I think it's fair to say I am the one that made the "first move". To be clear:
1. Paul has, all on his own, decided to wade into an extremely controversial political topic.
2. Many Jewish people (not including myself, until now) have publicly called him out on how they perceive his tweets.
3. Paul has now publicly accused, on a tweet with 1.3M views, the reactions to his tweets as manufactured "astroturfing", leading to someone else posting it here.
4. The person that I responded to said that it's important to know that "someone is trashing his reputation" and the title to this thread says he was "targeted by IDF".
My point was solely that Paul is, on his own volition, saying things that are organically hurting and upsetting the Jewish community. I use myself as an example: someone who is hurt by his tweets, because I read them and respected Paul, not because the IDF instructed me to.
I'm sure you disagree with my take on his tweets - and I highly doubt debating the specifics of it will get us anywhere productive - but it's not flame bait to point out that he chose to speak, and that real Jewish people found the way he speaks to be hurtful, not because of some grand coordinated IDF-directed conspiracy. In other words, he is "trashing his reputation" with the Jewish community by his words, not as a result of an astroturfed reaction. You can debate whether the Jewish community is over-reacting and misreading him if you want, but my point was narrowly directed to the fact that he is the one causing that reaction.
1 reply →
Paul’s tweets have a tone and subtext that speak louder than the literal text.
As an imperfect analogy, see “all lives matter” or similarly controversial statements that, taken literally, appear harmless.
Except that it should be uncontroversial to say that nobody should kill children. But people have lost jobs for saying that Israel needs to stop killing Palestinian children.