this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2026
644 points (98.5% liked)
Crazy Fucking Videos
8635 readers
5 users here now
Dive into the World of Insane Videos!
Rules
- No hate speech of any kind.
- Content warnings are required in post titles where applicable. Example: [CW: Injury]
- Use your best judgement and mark NSFW posts as such.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nice way to justify murdering journalists.
Oh, did he get murdered?
You must be very disappointed he was not
What the fuck are you talking about, answer the question
You've justified the murder of journalists, whether this one was murdered or not. It was attempted murder, which carries all of the intent of a successful murder. And we're seeing the video precisely because of survivorship bias. The 300 or so other journalists the IDF have murdered in the last 2 years were not so lucky.
Give your head a wobble mate, you're literally out here justifying the murder of press in war zones.
They won't get it, the good-vs-bad is so rooted so deeply in their thought process that they don't even realize it. At this point it's just cheering for every death of a "bad guy". It was bad when it started with celebrating the deaths of "terrorists", then collateral damages started to be fine as well, as long as the target died too, and somehow we ended up here, where full on war crimes and genocides against civilians are okay, as long as they are the so-called bad guys or in the way of a mission against them.
It's honestly sickening. They are all human beings, and we all bleed all the same. Just because someone's been born in a Hezbollah-controlled shithole, or is working for an irrelevant Russian TV outlet, they don't deserve to die, and it doesn't make their death acceptable.
How incredibly disheartening that was to read
So no.
And no, I'm not justifying anything.
I could ask you to point to where you think I justify killing but what a waste of time it would be, asking questions to people so fucking deep in the political delirium.
Your first comment.
You don't care he was bombed because he's "the mouthpiece of a terrorist state".
Comes out with a spicy take, then tries to walk it back when it shows an ass of themselves.
I hate lemmy, I swear I really do.
Read the first comment you damn illiterate. I swear you fucks are so blinded by hatred that you interpret shit however you like...
"A terrorist state bombing the mouthpiece of another terrorist state.
Can't say I'm overwhelmed with emotion" - murvel
You said that, that's your own words. How is one supposed to interpret that exactly other than being okay with just the attempted murder of a member of the media who is covering genocide?
That I don't care would be the sane interpretation, but then again I am talking with fucking lunatics
Says the insane man.
I doubt anyone is convinced that I'm hateful or illiterate.
Seems like a pretty fair paraphrasing of
Or is there some hidden meaning you think should be obvious?
Is that the exact quote? No!? Oh because that's your dumb shit interpretation.
I doubt anyone is convinced that I'm a dumb shit.
Seems like a pretty fair paraphrasing of
Or is there some hidden meaning you think should be obvious?
So you think that when a propagandists from one terrorist state gets killed by another terrorist state, that it's not ok? Because dude has a press badge?
I understood their post just fine.
Yes, I think that is not ok. Do you think it's ok? To kill an unarmed video team using a guided bomb?
Where do you get that moral code from? You're surely not claiming to be religious or rational?
By the way, most states are engaged in terrorism in one way or another. The US most certainly is a terrorist state. So you're saying anyone should be able to bomb journalists from any country? Which countries are exempt?
They stated that they were bombing that bridge. Mouthpiece went over to the area they knew Israel was targeting...this isn't about moral code. If that was a bullshit Fox news "journalist" doing this to Iran would you cry foul?
Any journalist worth their salt, isn't going to areas that have been stated will be bombed. They don't because they're not idiots.
Yes, I absolutely would. I don't wish Fox news journalists dead, as disgraceful as they are. Though I doubt any of them would have the courage to report from a war zone.
That's not how it works in the Geneva conventions, though. The reason it doesn't work like that is because then any aggressor state can simply designate an area for bombing if they want to keep the press away from it, then they can commit any and all kinds of crimes against humanity there with zero civil oversight. Also, let's say Mugabe had killed journalists in an area because he had warned he was going to attack there, we all would've cried foul. So that's not the rule.
The rule is really simple and clear: don't target noncombatants.
Edit: another thing, can you show me any evidence that this journalist knows the bridge was about to be bombed? I find that incredibly difficult to believe, so I can't just take that on faith sorry.
That's impressive, considering that war doesn't work that way.
Not how that works at all. A journalist is a civilian, targeted attacks on civilians is against the convention, not attacks on infrastructure (unless it's a hospital or school), bridges are %100 allowed to be attacked. Even the USA let's civilians know they're going to be doing massive bombings usually as a courtesy to the country they're attacking.(Dunno if they still do since the orange turnip took power though).
They didn't target non-combatants they targeted a bridge. This is the same shit a lot of insane dictators do, stuff a bunch of military shit in heavily populated civilian areas, then cry foul when civilians get killed. What you're doing is saying, if you strap civilians to your planes then they're no longer weapons or infrastructure of war. You don't get to bend the rules and cry foul.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67327079
Israel does this a lot, they also do roof knocking. This in no way defends the terrorist state of Israel. It's just pointing out facts.
Also in this thread people have already called out that the munitions used are not shrapnel bombs like this journalist suggested, it's a standard high yield explosive designed to destroy infrastructure, not kill people. If it was a shrapnel bomb it would have gone off above the ground, just like the HIMARs rounds that Ukraine uses to inflicte mass casualties to russian forces when they're all clumped together.
Nonsense. If your munition's lethality radius includes a civilian, you are targeting that civilian.
Your link is from 2023, so it cannot be evidence that this journalist knew the area was about to be bombed.
Look, I think at this point you're just a shill for Zionists, and that means it's not worth talking to you any more. So I'm not going to go point by point because it's a waste of my time.
You've abandoned reason before you came to discuss anything, and I can only explain things to you, I cannot understand them on your behalf.
Bye
Lol provided evidence, said Israel is shit all over this thread, and still I'm called a Zionist shill lol
War sucks, but you're being willfully naive or ignorant.
Are murder attempts okay if they fail?
Is your ego so fragile that you cannot simply answer the question?
That's because they don't know the RT is a russian mouthpiece....that and there are a fuck ton of tankies here who think russia can do no wrong.
Thank you, some sanity in this thread, finally!