We turn to Kamala Harris’s position on Israel’s war on Gaza, which many are calling a genocide. After she was asked about calls to condition U.S. arms shipments to Israel by CNN reporter Dana Bash, Harris refused to consider halting the flow of weapons and instead affirmed her support of Israel. This position violates both federal and international law, argues Palestinian American political analyst Yousef Munayyer, and, coupled with her campaign’s denial of a requested Palestinian American speaking spot from “uncommitted” voters at the DNC, he warns that “Harris could be worse than Biden” when it comes to U.S. support for Israel.
Not nearly as liberal as centrists have been for the past months with the “you don’t support genocide so you must be voting for trump” accusation. Which you don’t have a problem with.
Wow the amount of assumptions and speculation there. You’re not interested in an honest conversation huh?
I find it interesting that people like you, who are “anti-genocide” can’t help themselves from telling others how they think and feel. Might be a hint that your stance is dishonest.
Wow the amount of assumptions and speculation there. You’re not interested in an honest conversation huh?
Well, if you have a problem with the anti-genocide=trumper accusation, you’re certainly not raising that concern with those who are making it.
Might be a hint that your stance is dishonest.
If you have so much difficulty imagining having objections to genocide that you assume dishonesty, I don’t know what to tell you, and it’s not like you would believe it anyway since it comes from someone who has voiced opposition to genocide without immediately following it with “but.”
Well, if you have a problem with the anti-genocide=trumper accusation, you’re certainly not raising that concern with those who are making it.
Ok, so in the absence of you knowing my stance you feel comfortable making assumptions. Seems like a logical path to truth. Ffs…
If you have so much difficulty imagining having objections to genocide that you assume dishonesty
You toss all nuance out the window to build this straw man. Genocide isn’t the only thing in the world happening. And like I said in my last comment the “but” is because context exists. We could enslave them all and that would fix the genocide. I can only assume you’re in favor of that because it would stop genocide, no buts.
Ok, so in the absence of you knowing my stance you feel comfortable making assumptions.
You are comfortable saying that I called Harris pro-genocide, which I did not do. I said that centrists on lemmy are pro-genocide, which you took to mean that Harris is pro-genocide.
Genocide isn’t the only thing in the world happening
Both the article and the thread are about genocide.
And like I said in my last comment the “but” is because context exists. We could enslave them all and that would fix the genocide. I can only assume you’re in favor of that because it would stop genocide, no buts.
Wouldn’t be the only thing you’ve assumed about me that wasn’t true.
I feel like people are being very liberal with this “pro-genocide” term.
Not nearly as liberal as centrists have been for the past months with the “you don’t support genocide so you must be voting for trump” accusation. Which you don’t have a problem with.
Wow the amount of assumptions and speculation there. You’re not interested in an honest conversation huh?
I find it interesting that people like you, who are “anti-genocide” can’t help themselves from telling others how they think and feel. Might be a hint that your stance is dishonest.
Well, if you have a problem with the anti-genocide=trumper accusation, you’re certainly not raising that concern with those who are making it.
If you have so much difficulty imagining having objections to genocide that you assume dishonesty, I don’t know what to tell you, and it’s not like you would believe it anyway since it comes from someone who has voiced opposition to genocide without immediately following it with “but.”
Ok, so in the absence of you knowing my stance you feel comfortable making assumptions. Seems like a logical path to truth. Ffs…
You toss all nuance out the window to build this straw man. Genocide isn’t the only thing in the world happening. And like I said in my last comment the “but” is because context exists. We could enslave them all and that would fix the genocide. I can only assume you’re in favor of that because it would stop genocide, no buts.
You are comfortable saying that I called Harris pro-genocide, which I did not do. I said that centrists on lemmy are pro-genocide, which you took to mean that Harris is pro-genocide.
Both the article and the thread are about genocide.
Wouldn’t be the only thing you’ve assumed about me that wasn’t true.