• vaguerant@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    109
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Is it not obvious that this is the first half of a sentence and has been selectively edited to mislead?

    I don’t have video of the Montana rally, but Sanders has talked about this issue repeatedly at the Fight Oligarchy rallies, and here is what he said in LA:

    “Israel has the right to defend itself against terrorism, but it does not have a right to go to war against the entire Palestinian people… to kill 50,000 people, injure over 100,000 and destroy the entire infrastructure.”

    “And as bad as that is, Trump wants to expel the 2.2 million people in Gaza in order to create a playground for his billionaire friends,” Sanders added, referring to Trump’s proposal to “take ownership” of the Gaza strip. “That is beyond insane, and we will never, never let that happen.”

    Certainly, there are many who disagree with this half of the sentence, and that’s fine, but it should at least be presented with context.

    • IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      32
      ·
      1 day ago

      It is about the Hasbara talking point “Israel had the right to defend itself.” Nothing else. Bernie needs to stop inserting Hasbara disclaimers to both sides a genocide.

      • deur@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        You’re so fucking insane with this talking point bullshit. What bernie said is a sentence that stands alone, not everyone is some loser slurping media 24/7 and declaring literal fucking plain english as some uniquely constructed sentence with an exact connotation.

          • Lumidaub@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            Person: “My opponent said ‘X’. Here’s why ‘X’ is wrong.”

            You: “You need to stop saying X, Person!”

            • IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              17
              ·
              1 day ago

              Person: ignores argument and tries to talk about something else

              You: “We need change the topic because you are right but this post is inconvenient to my narrative”

              • Lumidaub@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                I’m sorry, I actually can’t follow. Who ignored what argument? Where did I change the topic from what to what?

                  • ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    24 hours ago

                    The video is a selective edit of a whole sentence that has been manipulated to make a popular politician say something despicable. If you add in the second half of his sentence then we can have an honest discussion. Until then, you have selectively edited the truth to spread a lie.

                  • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    18 hours ago

                    Go watch the video I linked first.

                    Did you edit it to be that short before the sentence was complete creating the false narrative or did someone do that for you? If you did it yourself, can you explain why you edited it to be intentionally deceptive when Sanders was communicating the exact opposite idea from your claim?