I pointed out the dishonest outright lies a post was making and rustled some jimmies.

Any day I rustle the jimmies of tankies is a good day.

The rest of the modlog was pretty entertaining too.

Edit: No the comment below my ban in this screenshot is not my comment. I guess that was confusing some people.

Full context: someone had posted a picture of the Obamas in a wine cellar and everyone was deriding them for being so bourgeois as to own a wine cellar (all the usual high level discourse such as “MichelleSoUgly lmaolol”)

I pointed out that this was them at a private event at a restaurant that has a wine cellar and not their own personal wine cellar. Everyone then freaked out that I was “defending the Obamas” and I got banned for Liberalism.

  • Zagorath@aussie.zoneEnglish
    1·
    16 days ago

    Bro you posted in a community I’m subscribed to. Don’t post if you don’t want people to see your post and comment on it.

    But anyway, several problems here:

    1. A tanky is a leftist who supports pro-authoritarian violence. If you saw my history interacting with actual tankies, you’ll see that this is not me. I oppose the Chinese, North Korean, and Russian governments in the strongest terms, and support South Korea, Taiwan, and Ukraine (two of which I have very good friends and relatives from).
    2. I never once moved goalposts. I stated in very clear terms why you were wrong and what the bare minimum of evidence would be for me to even begin considering your claims of genocide denial. I then later restated the terms in more specificity, since you seemed unhappy with how vague the first statement was. You failed to even attempt to do that.
    3. Not stalking. You posted where something would appear in my feed. And then decided to have a whinge about it.

    If you don’t want to be called out, don’t defend or deny genocide. End of story.

    • peregrin5@lemm.eeOPEnglish
      01·
      16 days ago

      You stated that “EVERY reputable expert” says Israel is committing genocide literally using a source that was TITLED “experts deeply divided on whether or not Israel is committing genocide”.

      Then you said that you would only accept experts as “reputable” if they didn’t support Israel in the conflict. Lol.

      I deny a genocide when there literally isn’t a genocide bruh. Using it for every conflict waters down the term to basically mean nothing.

      I couldn’t respond to you anyway (not that I was going to) since I got banned for breaking the cardinal lemmy rule that you have to hate Jews to post here.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zoneEnglish
        1·
        16 days ago

        No, I said they could not be reputable if they were Israeli or had strong ties to Israel. Which…should be obvious? The bias is far too strong otherwise. It would be like asking someone living in Nazi Germany if Germany was committing genocide.

        • peregrin5@lemm.eeOPEnglish
          01·
          16 days ago

          The fact that someone supports Israel in this conflict is likely what you’ll use as evidence that someone has “strong ties to Israel”.

          Most claims of genocide come from people who have strong ties to Palestine or people linked to Palestine. Why does the same bar of evidence not apply to you?

          https://time.com/6334409/is-whats-happening-gaza-genocide-experts/

          There are several people referenced in this article not Israeli or tied to Israel that claim Israel’s actions don’t meet the criteria of genocide. As I recall your request was that I provide just one. Now I’ll wait as you claim that these experts are actually just Israel shills and they should thus be disregarded.