Pro-Palestinian protesters set up encampment on UCLA campus
Pro-Palestinian protesters set up encampment on UCLA campus
One day after more than 90 people were arrested following pro-Palestine protests at USC, a similar protest is being held at UCLA.
You're viewing a single thread.
Nothing wrong with protesting the murder of innocent civilians, is there?
Nope nothing at all. And you don't need permission to protest.
A protest with a permit is called a parade.
While true, I would like to state that the vast majority of these protests are actually in their Universities designated "free speech" or protest areas, which just makes it all the more ridiculous when they crack down.
They should be protesting Hamas then right... RIIGGHTTT???
Sure. They can. The issues are separate. And two things can be discretely discussed, or protested, simultaneously.
- Murder of civilians
- Renouncing Hamas
But I notice a common behavior among Israeli genocide defenders. When they speak of the conflict, the time between 1947 and 2023 is not to be mentioned, and suddenly 1 and 2 merge into a single issue, they focus on 2 as if their life depends on it. Any mention of 1, just play the antisemitism card.
They have to do that, play dumb, because 1 is not defensible on its own, but if I merge it with 2 I don't have to have hard thoughts. People just disagree because they hate Jews. Otherwise they'd stand by and let the Jews mass murder Muslims, right? If anyone mentions 1, I'll just mention 2 and ignore their words.
Anyway, It's a transparent and cowardly psychological defense mechanism. Sad to see that many are incapable of seeing Israel (and its allies) for the genocide sponsors that they are.
Is the US allied with Hamas and sending billions in weapons to Hamas? No one is sympathetic to Hamas and it is not a mainstream position to be sympathetic to Hamas.
Actually... The US and many other western nations send hundreds of millions of dollars to UNRWA, which Hamas is definitely benefiting from.
A claim like that requires evidence to be believed.
It's the second half of your claim you'd have to support with evidence. Of course we help fund them, but it's not so clear that they "benefit Hamas"".
If you read something like this article here, you'd note that of the 19 alleged ties to Hamas (of 34,000 workers btw) none have been found to be supported by evidence. Some of them are still going, and maybe they will show some kind of connection, but A) the time to believe that is when evidence is provided, not when the claim is made and B) I don't really think cutting funding for an agency that does legitimate help to people currently starving and dying is justified just because 0.05% of employees have ties to Hamas. Would you be Ok condemning and demanding we cut funding to the IDF if we found 0.05% of their personnel had ties to radical Zionist movements calling for the eradication of Palestinians? Something tells me you wouldn't.
That wasn't the part that requires evidence, but you knew that and are simply being obtuse.
I'll be more clear: what source do you have to support the idea of the UNRWA funding Hamas?
Added requirement: the source must not trace back to Israeli or American intelligence/defense agencies.
But what about cancer? Surely they must mention their stance on cancer too, or their whole protest is meaningless!
Strangely enough I have no control over who they protest.
Protesting, no. Disrupting, yes.
Protesting civilian casualties, no. Supporting Hamas, yes.
Supporting creation of Palestinian state - no. Supporting destruction of Israeli state (from the reaver to the sea) - yes.
Unfortunately these protests attracts all kind of people, including those with antisemitism tendencies. So, it is not simple yes/no answer.People alway complain about disruption without somehow noticing that France has 30 hour work weeks, gobs of vacation, free health care, and free school. That came by being disruptive. The people of the United States can’t pull their heads out of their rectums long enough to make it stop being an unlivable shithole.
Yeah, right, that’s because protests were disruptive, sure.
Yes. When all the farmers and workers block all the highways until the legislature listens, the people win. The US will never grow up enough to be able to do the people are too far spread out. It allows the police and other right-wing movers to crush things while people like you go "DURR look at them libruls".
This is not the only way and often it is less efficient way. Consider January 6, for example. Trump movement would be much better off it was just non-disruptive peaceful protest.
lol don’t do false equivalency. Demanding rights for the people is not the same as overthrowing a democracy
The goals are different, but the methods are the same as you advocate. I argue that one method is more acceptable than the other. Don't be a hypocrite by saying that it is OK to disturb if you support the goal.
You almost had an argument and then went to a personal attack
That was not a personal attack. But what you stated is hypocrisy.
Trump movement would be much better off if it were based in reality instead of delusions.
It is. I’m sure you want protests so peaceful that you would never even notice they’re happening, therefore you’d never understand their cause, therefore never happening, therefore changing nothing.
That’s what you want: No change. Ever. Especially if you’re ‘disruptive’ about it.
@MxM111
Yes, je t'invites à te renseigner
@SatansMaggotyCumFart @return2ozma @stolyWait, are these accounts all the same person?
@WeirdGoesPro
If you mean the one I mentionned no. I'm on pleroma and like mastodon, you have to tag someone so he/she can read the answer. In "big" thread like there are often on kbin/lemmy, the answer should be readable for everyone who participate in it, hence multiple tags. (I don't have the habit to remove them)no, it's unclear why we were mentioned here
Until proven otherwise, I choose to believe it is because you are all members of Bohemian Grove together.
I had to look that one up. Interesting reference.
That’s exactly what a member of the Bohemian Grove would say!
There’s a building on top of a hill in San Francisco with no name or signs. It’s a big building in an expensive area and it’s aged. Town cars pull up and suited individuals step out and enter. I’ve always wanted to see inside.
Are you against people’s right to protest?
Seems like no from his first sentence
No, I welcome it. Disruptive protesting I am against though.
I'm not against food, I'm just against edible food.
So, you think that there are no such things as non-disruptive protests? What’s your point? Your statement looks smart but there is nothing behind it.
Nondisruptive protest is basically an oxymoron. If a protest doesn't take up space and get in the way of things then it is on the level of hanging a sign on your personal property.
Most of the protests at White House and Capitol building are non-disruptive and follow the rules. But looks like you are supporting January 6 type of protests.
I wonder if I should be happy that lemmy has grown to be large enough for the IDF to consider it a legitimate target for propaganda, or just bummed out that nearly every single thread seems to be infected by this trash.
