Failing to call a genocide a genocide, or a Holocaust a Holocaust, is very suburban denialist person living near to a death camp circa the 1940's, and I like to think I'd never be that.
I've always regarded failing to acknowledge mass murder and persecution a really serious social faux pas. Rather below accepted standards of conduct and politeness.
A gentleman acknowledges atrocity.
🇳🇱
Thats wonderful! I agree.
Shall I take this to mean you are calling out the murder of civilians (terrorism) as well as mass murder of both sides, the Israeli and Palestinian and condemning them both? Short of condeming **both** you are not living up to that ideal. If you do, then you are.
@freemo ...and as an insistence, a gentleman must reject it, serving as it does, such collective and retrogressive lack of objective fluidity, a product of low wit, unworthy doctrine, and a dubious frame-setting for the false equivocation in both degree and duration of crimes against humanity.
This gentleman will therefore not serve others expectations in condemnation.
Let the genocidal provide their own excuses to the Hague, and not look to me for absolution.
At no point did I say they were **equivelant**.. only that both sides met the criteria you set forward and insist we condemn people on. The fact that one side is more guilty in that than the other doesnt change the fact both sides are guilty of heinous crimes.
