I suggest people to read this, this, and this.
How do you know that the disaster in Qana was not staged? How do you know, if it was?
Monday assorted links
1 tunti sitten
Tilaa:
Lähetä kommentteja (Atom)
Ajankohtainen kehitys- ja taloustiede
Helsingin politiikka
-
28 Asumispreferenssit8 tuntia sitten
-
Late summer vibes 20241 kuukausi sitten
-
Hello world!4 vuotta sitten
-
Maakunta-sote vaarantaisi peruspalvelut Helsingissä6 vuotta sitten
-
Näissä vaaleissa ratkaistaan Helsingin suunta7 vuotta sitten
-
Anna äänesi menestyvälle Vihreälle Helsingille7 vuotta sitten
-
Jarmo Nieminen, numero 689 Helsingissä7 vuotta sitten
-
Kontupiste, Mellari ja saamen kieli7 vuotta sitten
-
Presidentti Trump on reviiripuolustaja7 vuotta sitten
-
Ystäville muistoksi7 vuotta sitten
-
Politikern och yrket7 vuotta sitten
-
Hello world!8 vuotta sitten
-
-
Cara Menyembuhkan Wasir Secara Alami9 vuotta sitten
-
MITEN KINESTEETTINEN OPEKIN OPPII?11 vuotta sitten
-
Jatkan kaupunginvaltuustossa12 vuotta sitten
-
Vaaliteemoistani12 vuotta sitten
-
-
Blogi uudessa osoitteessa15 vuotta sitten
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4 kommenttia:
IF the Qana disaster was staged, then Israel would not admit doing a mistake.
http://www.hs.fi/teksti/uutiset/tuoreet/artikkeli/Israel+my%C3%B6nt%C3%A4%C3%A4+Qanan+pommituksen+olleen+virhe/1135220911262
That does not change the fact that Hezbollah uses civilians as human shields and, thus, are responsible for the fates of those civilians.
"That does not change the fact that Hezbollah uses civilians as human shields and, thus, are responsible for the fates of those civilians."
Israelis are definitely more responsible for those civilian deaths. The fact that some palestinians kill some Israelis doesn't mean that Israelis can attack innocent people.
Countries or peoples do not exist. Those are only abstract concepts in minds. Only individuals exist. Applying moral rules to abstract things is irrational.
"How do you know that the disaster in Qana was not staged? How do you know, if it was?"
At least, it's safe to say that the burden of proof lies with those who claim it was staged.
You are missing the point of my question, which is how do You know if such a thing happened or not? I'm not talking about one group of people proving something to others, but about how does one come to a conclusion about what happened, when all sources are very much unreliable and non-partial.
Mostly people seem to go the way of not believing whatever Israel government says and believing whatever Hezbollah says, or vice versa. None of them seem adequate, but what is?
I understood what you meant. I hadn't any reasonable answer to your question. IMHO, it's just better NOT to make any conclusions and trying to keep an open mind. It's so impossible to be aware of all the facts. That's the most important reason why I'm not very interested in debating about things like what has happened and where.
Being unknowledgeable about some specific issue is not a problem for me. I'm happy when I know what is moral and what isn't.
The world is such a mess nowadays that you can't trust any source of information about an event - especially when governments are involved somehow. Good journalism died gradually when governments grew bigger and more intrusive.
Lähetä kommentti