184

Two Israeli embassy staffers shot dead in Washington (www.presstv.ir)

submitted 3 weeks ago by geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

108 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The shooting took place late Wednesday outside the Capital Jewish Museum, which was hosting an American Jewish Committee event at the time of the incident.

US Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem announced the deaths in an X post, saying, “We are actively investigating and working to get more information to share.”

The suspect, identified as 30-year-old Elias Rodriquez of Chicago, Illinois, "chanted 'Free, free Palestine,’ while in custody," she added.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 81 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

The man who got shot had an active Twitter account. Very stand-up guy. Such a shame he got killed.

[-] Turbonics@lemmy.sdf.org 24 points 3 weeks ago

Ohnoanyways.gif

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 21 points 3 weeks ago

Won't find me weeping for an active defender of genocide being put in the cemetary.

[-] nun@lemm.ee 6 points 3 weeks ago

I mean he’s still a civilian and it it’s still murder but yeah hard to feel sad about it

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 41 points 3 weeks ago

He served in the IDF for three years before his current role. Now he worked diplomatically for the Apartheid to aid in ethnically cleansing all Palestinians.

It is truly terrible that this person who dedicated his life to dispossessing and murdering Palestinians was killed.

[-] nun@lemm.ee 2 points 3 weeks ago

Literally the opposite of what I said. How do you go from ‘hard to feel sad about it’ to ‘ it’s truly terrible’?

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 20 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Well he was but a simple innocent civilian enthousiastically participating in the genocide of all Palestinians. Killing such an innocent person is inexcusable.

[-] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 3 weeks ago

"You don't understand, the people working on the Death Star just had a job to do and to follow its orders. It's not any one of their fault that it blew up planets. RIP the brave workers on the Death Star I and Death Star II."

[-] gobbles_turkey@lemm.ee 6 points 3 weeks ago

Good point, and a perfect centrist take (not that I'm accusing you of being centrist). They should have a centrist viewing and commentary of the whole star wars series. Like mystery science theatre 3000.

[-] nun@lemm.ee 2 points 3 weeks ago

? Who said he was innocent

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 14 points 3 weeks ago

Was he a civilian who was murdered or was he an active participant in a brutal mass murder of Palestinian women children and men, covered by countries which are participants in the genocide?

Anyways, the second amendment exists to combat tyranny.

[-] stickly@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Anyways, the second amendment exists to combat tyranny.

Just want to step in here and say that no interpretation of the second would cover a civilian killing a foreign diplomat, no matter how tyrannical 😂

[-] AreaSIX@lemm.ee 3 points 3 weeks ago

Being employed by an embassy doesn't magically make you a diplomat my guy. Not saying that the 2nd would cover it in any case, but still.

[-] nun@lemm.ee 1 points 3 weeks ago

He is by definition a civilian that was murdered. Legal definitions do not care about our political opinions. It appears to be very likely he was a civilian who deserved to be murdered but that does not change the definition

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 weeks ago

civilian /sĭ-vĭl′yən/

noun

A person who is not an active member of the military, the police, or a belligerent group in a conflict.

A person who is not an employee of the government.

[-] nun@lemm.ee 1 points 3 weeks ago

This is not the legal definition of civilian.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

International law is a myth that imperialsists use to murder indigenous resistance fighters, it's not a real legal regime that actually applies universally.

There is no legal definition because there is no law, I think that's pretty clear at this point.

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 weeks ago

It is according to DuckDuckGo

But the definition changes based on who you ask. What is more relevant is whether they are part of a beligirent force akin to ISIS but worse.

[-] nun@lemm.ee 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

This is a dictionary definition. Non-combatant ISIS members are also civilians. Whether they deserve to die or not has no legal bearing. Im unsure why that is considered controversial.

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 weeks ago

Because this is a "rule" which is never applied to any signature to the Geneva Convention. It is solely brought up to virtue signal in favor of the empire.

These days Israel is publicly bombing Hamas government officials for the crime of being in their finance ministry and nobody bats an eye. They are bombing journalists inside of hospitals for doing journalism and it is a-ok.

This is what my username is a reference to.

[-] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago

Last I checked, the western world had made it very clear that international law does not consider killing civilians murder.

[-] gobbles_turkey@lemm.ee 3 points 3 weeks ago

excellent point, killing innocent civilians is very wrong. As is starving them and abusing them for 80 years. All those things, just plain wrong, no matter the reasoning.