5 ms·
The fact based claim is that the Israel government haven’t provided evidence to their claims and therefore the claims are unsubstantiated. Any discussion of con
by SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
The fact based claim is that the Israel government haven’t provided evidence to their claims and therefore the claims are unsubstantiated. Any discussion of conspiracy can be put to rest with some proof.
- pythonlion 5y agobut since when governments need to provide evidence and to whom? the world government? Can I go to random governments around the world and ask them to show evidence about their security issues to my organization?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- ashtonkem 5y agoYes, and you should. And for those governments who can’t or won’t provide evidence, you should disregard their assertions as baseless and suspect. I mean, why wouldn’t you demand proof? Governments have a long and nasty history of conflating their political interests with security interests, just trusting their assertions seems extremely foolhardy.
- LegitShady 5y agobecause it would compromise means and methods
- ashtonkem 5y agoTough. The logical consequence of “we can’t show you the proof” is “okay, I don’t believe that you have any”. After all, you would not believe my assertions about fantastical achievements without evidence, and the consequences of that hypothetical are much lower than the state saying it should be able to kill people in the name of “counter terrorism”. More succinctly; “it would compromise means and methods” is a phenomenal way to cover up shaky or non-existent evidence.
- LegitShady 5y agoflipside of tough - you're demanding a foreign nation compromise its security so that you can feel better. You and your demands are nobody and nothing to a foreign state. So no. tough.
- ashtonkem 5y agoNo, I’m demanding they support their allegations before killing people. Giving the state unfettered access to kill and jail god knows who based on unsupported allegations of terrorism is very dangerous territory, and any right thinking person should be wary of handing out that kind of power. Saying this is about making me “feel better” is pushing the limits of good faith discussion, don’t do that.
- LegitShady 5y agoIt's not your state, and this did go to court, you just weren't privy to the evidence because you're not a party involved in the investigation or the case, and have no security clearance in this foreign state to know the details.
- starik36 5y agoAll the evidence of Russian collusion and hacking is almost always presented without any evidence whatsoever. Yet no one in the mainstream media thinks to question it.
- ashtonkem 5y ago[flagged]
- LegitShady 5y agoIt's not what aboutism, it's the introduction of reality to your 'logic'. You are asking why you don't have access to the evidence into an investigation into a designated terrorist group, and being told 'tough', and now demanding standards of evidence in other countries meet your needs. Again, no country in the world cares about your wish to have access to terror investigation evidence. None. Zero.
- Quanttek 5y agoAny state abiding by the rule of law, human rights, and democracy needs to provide evidence proving such allegations beyond a reasonable doubt and enabling the victims to challenge such administrative decisions in court. If Israel wants to drop the pretense of democracy, so be it. But human rights and the rule of law are universal obligations under international law.
- pythonlion 5y agothis is biased for countries which are not under conflict and don't get accused by the other side every other week
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]