Israel’s military has said it was highly likely its troops fired the shot that killed Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi, the American-Turkish woman killed at a protest in the occupied West Bank.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said her death was unintentional and expressed deep regret.
The statement came as Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, called the killing of the 26-year-old last week “unprovoked and unjustified”.
Speaking on a diplomatic visit to London, Blinken told journalists that Eygi’s death showed the Israeli security forces needed to make fundamental changes to their rules of engagement.
First of all its ghoulishly disingenuous for you to conflate providing arms. Which is wrong I’m not justifying that. To actually killing people. That’s straight up empty virtue signaling and not solving or convincing anyone of anything.
I asked who stands a chance. And you quoted it without even answering it. Useless. Right now the only viable option other than R or D in the presidential campaign is a widespread general uprising. Which I’m all for. If you got one let’s go kiddo. But I got news for you. If you don’t. What you’re doing is empty virtue signaling that only helps the worst people around. And makes enemies of possible allies. Which is how I know your words are empty.
You do know that if you provide a weapon with the knowledge that the person will use it to kill someone, you can get convicted for being an accessory to that murder, which entails the same criminal punishment?
So for normal crime it is absolutely considered to be on the same level
Yes but accessory to murder is different. That’s why it’s called accessory to murder. IBM and Dow Chemical supplied Nazi Germany knowing full well exactly what Germany was going to use their products for. They weren’t charged with murder. Unfortunately they weren’t even charged with accessory to murder. They should have been charged with something.
They’re actually are legitimate reasons to send arms to israel. The problem is that while those legitimate reasons do exist. The fact that the current leadership especially. But pretty much all leadership of Israel has been bigoted and genocidal it conflicts heavily. But again it isn’t some black and white situation as people want to make it out to be. I wish it were.
The people who collect the most corporate PAC money, obviously. So these are the only people it is reasonable to support.
False. PAC money can’t overcome first past the post and the Electoral college. Even if we gave a third party candidate 100% of the pack money. They wouldn’t win. Because of how the system works.
Parties have changed in the past. It’s not impossible. We used to have a Whig party, for example.
But there have always largely been two main parties. The system of the Electoral College and first pass the post have always seen to that. The names change. But the internals look a lot more I like them people would like to admit.