Comment by x3ro
3 hours ago
My point is that the Israeli government has been claiming, in every way imaginable, that their actions are „targeted“, when the evidence clearly shows that they are not. So when someone like Gvir says „targeted assassinations“, what he means (based on previous evidence) is „let’s kill some Palestinians“. What people say needs to be put in context of how they have behaved in the past.
We might as well just ignore completely what he said, and just say "look at him and his previous actions!" then. I agree this guy is an racist scum, I just don't think it justifies saying something like "Itamar Ben-Gvir, just recently, stated that he wants to kill 30-40 Palestinians every night. He said so, publicly."
Hitler was terrible too but I don't go around telling people "He said kill all Jews on national television!!!" even if that's pretty clearly what he believed in.
So if eg Trump said “evil Spain, we will never trade with them again, as they are terrorist-lovers” your only option is to just repeat that verbatim?
Or would you have the ability to say “in response to Spain denying US access to military bases and air space for Iran war, Trump retaliates with economic sanctions”?
If I think this is exactly what Ben Gvir is saying, and if I can make a sound argument to back that up, why would I not claim that he said exactly that? Is piercing through veiled bullshit that politicians say now frowned upon?