Israeli forces shoot unarmed protesters from across Gaza security fence, killing at least 15

[rylah]

I really do not see that as an issue even if they did...

Oh boy the kid who calls everyone a lier doesn't have a problem with Palestinian lies.

PRICELESS.

 

[rylah]

Collective punishment, embargos, blockades, sanctions...

Collective Punishment
Collective punishment is a form of retaliation whereby a suspected perpetrator's family members, friends, acquaintances, sect, neighbors or entire ethnic group is targeted. The punished group may often have no direct association with the other individuals or groups, or direct control over their actions. In times of war and armed conflict, collective punishment has resulted in atrocities, and is a violation of the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions.[1] Historically, occupying powers have used collective punishment to retaliate against and deter attacks on their forces by Resistance movements (such as destroying entire towns and villages which were believed to have harboured or aided such resistance movements).

Looking at this definition, actions that Israel has engaged in, such as destroying the homes of the families of terrorists IS collective punishment.

But there is a lack of moral clarity in the use of embargos, blockades, seiges and sanctions. Are they collective punishment?

When do they become collective punishment?

Blockades and sanctions represent a form of "soft" pressure on a state to change some form of behavior. That's better than bombing them. So at some point collective punishment seems to be "ok" - western countries are using it on NK, it was used on Saddam's Iraq, pre-civil war Syria...and it HAS had some positive results - bringing people to the negotiating table for example.

At what point do blockades become morally unacceptable?

At the point of peace, or when the whole point is to cause death of non-militants.

 

[rylah]

Next time try a real source.

Gazans leaving Gaza
Gazans in Egypt.
Gazans in Berlin

I still don't see the law that obligates a country to give entrance to subjects of an enemy state.

I wonder why the Egyptians so tightly control travel into and out of Gaza.


Are they working with the Jews?

Egypt has it's own security interests.
In one word- ARMS TRAFFICKING PREVENTION:



Egypt also fights the Islamic state in Sinai, while their militants infiltrate Gaza.
Just two weeks ago they jammed all their communication to spot the Islamists from Sinai in Gaza.

Not to mention that Egypt doesn't look all to well at Gaza becoming an Iranian proxy.
It's a serious problem in the neighborhood.

Seems strange because Egypt and Hamas are fighting against the same people.

That is true.


It seems that despite that unifying enemy, that the people of Gaza are such that the Egyptians don't trust them to behave in a civilized fashion, if allowed to travel into, or even though their nation.

Do you think the couple billion dollars a year that the US has given to Egypt since the peace agreement has anything to do with that?

Or Hamas affiliation with Muslim Brotherhood?

 

[rylah]

They can leave and they do abroad. Gaza has no port, Hamas refused it time and time again.
Better tell me which law obligates any country to give entrance to a subject of an enemy state?

You're a fuckin' liar!

[Israel] "...does not permit Palestinian, Israeli and foreign staff of human rights organizations to enter or leave Gaza. Israel controls Gaza’s airspace and territorial waters and has prevented the operation of an airport or seaport for the past two decades..."

"Israel’s restrictions on access to and from Gaza go far beyond what is permitted by international humanitarian law and human rights law. Because Israel continues to exercise control over significant aspects of life in Gaza, it continues to have obligations under the law of occupation in the areas in which it continues to exercise control..."​

Israel also shoots unarmed protesters.

Fuckers like you, act as though the Palestinians don't have the right to have rights. Fuckers like you are cowards. You never talk about the evil you bring to the table.

Next time try a real source.

Gazans leaving Gaza
Gazans in Egypt.
Gazans in Berlin

I still don't see the law that obligates a country to give entrance to subjects of an enemy state.

I wonder why the Egyptians so tightly control travel into and out of Gaza.


Are they working with the Jews?

Egypt has it's own security interests.
In one word- ARMS TRAFFICKING PREVENTION:



Egypt also fights the Islamic state in Sinai, while their militants infiltrate Gaza.
Just two weeks ago they jammed all their communication to spot the Islamists from Sinai in Gaza.

Not to mention that Egypt doesn't look all to well at Gaza becoming an Iranian proxy.
It's a serious problem in the neighborhood.

Seems strange because Egypt and Hamas are fighting against the same people.

There's bigger and more serious threats for the countries in the neighborhood, I tried to bring this up to You but You seem to miss the extent of how this choice by Hamas has a negative impact on all Gazans, due to what happens in the Arab world:

Egypt was worried that Hamas control over Gaza would increase Iranian influence.

Dude You don't even realize how suicidal it is...just imagine what happens at the crucial moment when the Arab world decides to confront Iran. Believe me, although Gazans are my enemies - I don't wish for them what I see is coming.

 

[Shusha]

Here's Murtaja using a drone during the march.

Good post, thanks.

Where it the violent riot that Israeli propaganda bullshit is always talking about?

In the rifles, molotovs, granades , IED's , calls for violence and attempt to breach the fence to act upon those calls by Hamas.
All of that has already been presented in many ways throughout the thread, I suggest You go back and read the thread - there's plenty of undeniable evidence to violent intent and action.

The question about why there's no footage of that in the Palestinian propaganda is ridiculous and naive -the same as asking why doesn't the criminal provide evidence to his crime.

The video in itself - contradicts the lies about the drone spread by Gazans for days.
Lack of evidence, in the form of the bullet, footage of the incident itself, or a concrete proof by Hamas that he was killed by an Israeli - IS TELLING.
And even rise bigger questions about the possibility of direct Hamas involvement in his death, for propaganda purposes.

I'm yet rule this out with the way this case goes.

Here are some odd things about this incident.

One of the ones I noticed is the lack of blood in the photos but witnesses say there was blood in the ground.

No matter how I look at this one something doesn't fit.

 

[Coyote]

Here's Murtaja using a drone during the march.

Good post, thanks.

Where it the violent riot that Israeli propaganda bullshit is always talking about?

In the rifles, molotovs, granades , IED's , calls for violence and attempt to breach the fence to act upon those calls by Hamas.
All of that has already been presented in many ways throughout the thread, I suggest You go back and read the thread - there's plenty of undeniable evidence to violent intent and action.

The question about why there's no footage of that in the Palestinian propaganda is ridiculous and naive -the same as asking why doesn't the criminal provide evidence to his crime.

The video in itself - contradicts the lies about the drone spread by Gazans for days.
Lack of evidence, in the form of the bullet, footage of the incident itself, or a concrete proof by Hamas that he was killed by an Israeli - IS TELLING.
And even rise bigger questions about the possibility of direct Hamas involvement in his death, for propaganda purposes.

I'm yet rule this out with the way this case goes.

Not really imo - Israel isn't denying they shot him, and they are spending energy shredding his reputation.

 

[Coyote]

Collective punishment, embargos, blockades, sanctions...

Collective Punishment
Collective punishment is a form of retaliation whereby a suspected perpetrator's family members, friends, acquaintances, sect, neighbors or entire ethnic group is targeted. The punished group may often have no direct association with the other individuals or groups, or direct control over their actions. In times of war and armed conflict, collective punishment has resulted in atrocities, and is a violation of the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions.[1] Historically, occupying powers have used collective punishment to retaliate against and deter attacks on their forces by Resistance movements (such as destroying entire towns and villages which were believed to have harboured or aided such resistance movements).

Looking at this definition, actions that Israel has engaged in, such as destroying the homes of the families of terrorists IS collective punishment.

But there is a lack of moral clarity in the use of embargos, blockades, seiges and sanctions. Are they collective punishment?

When do they become collective punishment?

Blockades and sanctions represent a form of "soft" pressure on a state to change some form of behavior. That's better than bombing them. So at some point collective punishment seems to be "ok" - western countries are using it on NK, it was used on Saddam's Iraq, pre-civil war Syria...and it HAS had some positive results - bringing people to the negotiating table for example.

At what point do blockades become morally unacceptable?

At the point of peace, or when the whole point is to cause death of non-militants.

But what if it IS causing the death of non-militants? Even if that is not the point - it is the result?

 

[Andylusion]

Collective punishment, embargos, blockades, sanctions...

Collective Punishment
Collective punishment is a form of retaliation whereby a suspected perpetrator's family members, friends, acquaintances, sect, neighbors or entire ethnic group is targeted. The punished group may often have no direct association with the other individuals or groups, or direct control over their actions. In times of war and armed conflict, collective punishment has resulted in atrocities, and is a violation of the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions.[1] Historically, occupying powers have used collective punishment to retaliate against and deter attacks on their forces by Resistance movements (such as destroying entire towns and villages which were believed to have harboured or aided such resistance movements).

Looking at this definition, actions that Israel has engaged in, such as destroying the homes of the families of terrorists IS collective punishment.

But there is a lack of moral clarity in the use of embargos, blockades, seiges and sanctions. Are they collective punishment?

When do they become collective punishment?

Blockades and sanctions represent a form of "soft" pressure on a state to change some form of behavior. That's better than bombing them. So at some point collective punishment seems to be "ok" - western countries are using it on NK, it was used on Saddam's Iraq, pre-civil war Syria...and it HAS had some positive results - bringing people to the negotiating table for example.

At what point do blockades become morally unacceptable?

At the point of peace, or when the whole point is to cause death of non-militants.

If you throw a rock at a soldier, you should be shot. You are a militant.

Honestly, if you are stupid enough to even taunt a member of the military who is armed with a firearm, and trained to kill people.... then honestly you should but shot just as a public service. You are clearly holding society back with that level of stupidity.

 

[Coyote]

Here's Murtaja using a drone during the march.

Good post, thanks.

Where it the violent riot that Israeli propaganda bullshit is always talking about?

In the rifles, molotovs, granades , IED's , calls for violence and attempt to breach the fence to act upon those calls by Hamas.
All of that has already been presented in many ways throughout the thread, I suggest You go back and read the thread - there's plenty of undeniable evidence to violent intent and action.

The question about why there's no footage of that in the Palestinian propaganda is ridiculous and naive -the same as asking why doesn't the criminal provide evidence to his crime.

The video in itself - contradicts the lies about the drone spread by Gazans for days.
Lack of evidence, in the form of the bullet, footage of the incident itself, or a concrete proof by Hamas that he was killed by an Israeli - IS TELLING.
And even rise bigger questions about the possibility of direct Hamas involvement in his death, for propaganda purposes.

I'm yet rule this out with the way this case goes.

Here are some odd things about this incident.

One of the ones I noticed is the lack of blood in the photos but witnesses say there was blood in the ground.

No matter how I look at this one something doesn't fit.

You can't tell anything from the pictures period - none of them, that I can find, show him where he was shot - they show him on some sort of wood plank or stretcher. Unless you found one that shows him lying where he was shot?

On the other hand...pictures can offer insight into personality.

 

[rylah]

Here's Murtaja using a drone during the march.

Good post, thanks.

Where it the violent riot that Israeli propaganda bullshit is always talking about?

In the rifles, molotovs, granades , IED's , calls for violence and attempt to breach the fence to act upon those calls by Hamas.
All of that has already been presented in many ways throughout the thread, I suggest You go back and read the thread - there's plenty of undeniable evidence to violent intent and action.

The question about why there's no footage of that in the Palestinian propaganda is ridiculous and naive -the same as asking why doesn't the criminal provide evidence to his crime.

The video in itself - contradicts the lies about the drone spread by Gazans for days.
Lack of evidence, in the form of the bullet, footage of the incident itself, or a concrete proof by Hamas that he was killed by an Israeli - IS TELLING.
And even rise bigger questions about the possibility of direct Hamas involvement in his death, for propaganda purposes.

I'm yet rule this out with the way this case goes.

Here are some odd things about this incident.

One of the ones I noticed is the lack of blood in the photos but witnesses say there was blood in the ground.

No matter how I look at this one something doesn't fit.

I've noticed people bringing this up about the photos, however the video show a bit, and one can see a hole.
The lack of evidence look like in the story of Tamimi head injury - so much cameras, even Israeli leftists on the site - but no video of the incident.

I always try to leave the benefit of a doubt for a period of time, but c'mon we know what we are dealing with - they clearly lied. If it passes another week without concrete evidence (bullet, body, footage) to the contrary I call fake...or Hamas.

Just too much indication leading that way, too much cameras on site and too little evidence.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Collective punishment, embargos, blockades, sanctions...

Collective Punishment
Collective punishment is a form of retaliation whereby a suspected perpetrator's family members, friends, acquaintances, sect, neighbors or entire ethnic group is targeted. The punished group may often have no direct association with the other individuals or groups, or direct control over their actions. In times of war and armed conflict, collective punishment has resulted in atrocities, and is a violation of the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions.[1] Historically, occupying powers have used collective punishment to retaliate against and deter attacks on their forces by Resistance movements (such as destroying entire towns and villages which were believed to have harboured or aided such resistance movements).

Looking at this definition, actions that Israel has engaged in, such as destroying the homes of the families of terrorists IS collective punishment.

But there is a lack of moral clarity in the use of embargos, blockades, seiges and sanctions. Are they collective punishment?

When do they become collective punishment?

Blockades and sanctions represent a form of "soft" pressure on a state to change some form of behavior. That's better than bombing them. So at some point collective punishment seems to be "ok" - western countries are using it on NK, it was used on Saddam's Iraq, pre-civil war Syria...and it HAS had some positive results - bringing people to the negotiating table for example.

At what point do blockades become morally unacceptable?

You have FAILED to answer my question. How else does Israel contain the rampant weapons shipments that are used to attack her?

Weapons is just Israeli propaganda bullshit. For example the flotillas was inspected by the governments where loaded. Everyone was invited to inspect the cargo before departure. The flotilla offered to allow any international body to inspect while at sea.

Everybody knew there were no weapons. Israel attacked and killed people anyway.

And if it was allowed to pass, then the blockade would become an illegal blockade.


And the weapons would flow.

It always was. What is your point.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Collective punishment, embargos, blockades, sanctions...

Collective Punishment
Collective punishment is a form of retaliation whereby a suspected perpetrator's family members, friends, acquaintances, sect, neighbors or entire ethnic group is targeted. The punished group may often have no direct association with the other individuals or groups, or direct control over their actions. In times of war and armed conflict, collective punishment has resulted in atrocities, and is a violation of the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions.[1] Historically, occupying powers have used collective punishment to retaliate against and deter attacks on their forces by Resistance movements (such as destroying entire towns and villages which were believed to have harboured or aided such resistance movements).

Looking at this definition, actions that Israel has engaged in, such as destroying the homes of the families of terrorists IS collective punishment.

But there is a lack of moral clarity in the use of embargos, blockades, seiges and sanctions. Are they collective punishment?

When do they become collective punishment?

Blockades and sanctions represent a form of "soft" pressure on a state to change some form of behavior. That's better than bombing them. So at some point collective punishment seems to be "ok" - western countries are using it on NK, it was used on Saddam's Iraq, pre-civil war Syria...and it HAS had some positive results - bringing people to the negotiating table for example.

At what point do blockades become morally unacceptable?

You have FAILED to answer my question. How else does Israel contain the rampant weapons shipments that are used to attack her?

What does a farmer exporting strawberries have to do with weapons? Or a student going to college in the US or Europe have to do with weapons?

Can one turn a fertilizer into fuel, or an explosive?

Deflection.

What does that have to do with exports?

 

[Correll]

Collective punishment, embargos, blockades, sanctions...

Collective Punishment
Collective punishment is a form of retaliation whereby a suspected perpetrator's family members, friends, acquaintances, sect, neighbors or entire ethnic group is targeted. The punished group may often have no direct association with the other individuals or groups, or direct control over their actions. In times of war and armed conflict, collective punishment has resulted in atrocities, and is a violation of the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions.[1] Historically, occupying powers have used collective punishment to retaliate against and deter attacks on their forces by Resistance movements (such as destroying entire towns and villages which were believed to have harboured or aided such resistance movements).

Looking at this definition, actions that Israel has engaged in, such as destroying the homes of the families of terrorists IS collective punishment.

But there is a lack of moral clarity in the use of embargos, blockades, seiges and sanctions. Are they collective punishment?

When do they become collective punishment?

Blockades and sanctions represent a form of "soft" pressure on a state to change some form of behavior. That's better than bombing them. So at some point collective punishment seems to be "ok" - western countries are using it on NK, it was used on Saddam's Iraq, pre-civil war Syria...and it HAS had some positive results - bringing people to the negotiating table for example.

At what point do blockades become morally unacceptable?

You have FAILED to answer my question. How else does Israel contain the rampant weapons shipments that are used to attack her?

Weapons is just Israeli propaganda bullshit. For example the flotillas was inspected by the governments where loaded. Everyone was invited to inspect the cargo before departure. The flotilla offered to allow any international body to inspect while at sea.

Everybody knew there were no weapons. Israel attacked and killed people anyway.

And if it was allowed to pass, then the blockade would become an illegal blockade.


And the weapons would flow.

It always was. What is your point.

Not according to any international law I have ever read.


The humanitarian blockade was an attempt to force the blockade, using PR as it's weapon.


So that Israeli critics would be correct, in calling it illegal.

 

[Shusha]

... when does something go from sanctions/etc to collective punishment?

Imo, restrictions of weapons and dual use items are a fair and reasonable blockade because they limit the need then for boots on the ground war. This is better and safer for civilians than an all out war. It's actually a limiting action by Israel.

Restrictions on things like electricity or water in which there is an obligation to pay for those services are also fair if the recipient does not pay. However that has to be balanced with some level of humanitarian aid in more serious circumstances. Although Israel should not be obligated to provide free water or other services to neighbouring countries.

Sanctions of comfort items, imo, might be considered a collective punishment. (Though not a harmful one).

That's mjust my opinion in a nutshell.

 

[Coyote]

And a bit more about the journalist who was killed: Yasser Murtaja becomes hero for journalists under fire

Watch this documentary and it quickly becomes obvious why Murtaja’s funeral was attended by hundreds of residents from all over Gaza, from the most senior political officials to the many children who loved to follow him around. The documentary showcases his skill as a videographer for Ain (“Eye”) Media. He risked entering Shujayea along with paramedics following the Israeli massacre in July 2014, despite their inability to obtain a permit from the invading army to enter the community. Eight-year-old Bisan Daher was trapped in the rubble of her home along with two other family members (five others already had died) and Murtaja documented the daring rescue. His close-in shots foreshadowed the courage he showed by photographing Palestinian protesters near the Israeli border (reportedly about 300 meters away).

It is rare to see coverage, on the Palestinians who get killed, that shows them as real people - beyond numbers.

The article also states this, which might explain the lack of a lot of blood:
According to the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR), Murtaja was recording the events—while wearing a blue vest prominently labeled “press”—when he was hit in the abdomen by a sniper’s bullet, rupturing the main artery feeding his intestines; he was declared dead after 12 hours of severe internal bleeding.

I wonder if he could have been saved if he had been gotten to a proper hospital quickly?

 

[Coyote]

... when does something go from sanctions/etc to collective punishment?

Imo, restrictions of weapons and dual use items are a fair and reasonable blockade because they limit the need then for boots on the ground war. This is better and safer for civilians than an all out war. It's actually a limiting action by Israel.

Restrictions on things like electricity or water in which there is an obligation to pay for those services are also fair if the recipient does not pay. However that has to be balanced with some level of humanitarian aid in more serious circumstances. Although Israel should not be obligated to provide free water or other services to neighbouring countries.

Sanctions of comfort items, imo, might be considered a collective punishment. (Though not a harmful one).

That's mjust my opinion in a nutshell.

Thanks - and I actually agree with what you are saying. Israel did also withold tax revenues - that could have paid for water and electricity could it not?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Collective punishment, embargos, blockades, sanctions...

Collective Punishment
Collective punishment is a form of retaliation whereby a suspected perpetrator's family members, friends, acquaintances, sect, neighbors or entire ethnic group is targeted. The punished group may often have no direct association with the other individuals or groups, or direct control over their actions. In times of war and armed conflict, collective punishment has resulted in atrocities, and is a violation of the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions.[1] Historically, occupying powers have used collective punishment to retaliate against and deter attacks on their forces by Resistance movements (such as destroying entire towns and villages which were believed to have harboured or aided such resistance movements).

Looking at this definition, actions that Israel has engaged in, such as destroying the homes of the families of terrorists IS collective punishment.

But there is a lack of moral clarity in the use of embargos, blockades, seiges and sanctions. Are they collective punishment?

When do they become collective punishment?

Blockades and sanctions represent a form of "soft" pressure on a state to change some form of behavior. That's better than bombing them. So at some point collective punishment seems to be "ok" - western countries are using it on NK, it was used on Saddam's Iraq, pre-civil war Syria...and it HAS had some positive results - bringing people to the negotiating table for example.

At what point do blockades become morally unacceptable?

You have FAILED to answer my question. How else does Israel contain the rampant weapons shipments that are used to attack her?

Weapons is just Israeli propaganda bullshit. For example the flotillas was inspected by the governments where loaded. Everyone was invited to inspect the cargo before departure. The flotilla offered to allow any international body to inspect while at sea.

Everybody knew there were no weapons. Israel attacked and killed people anyway.

And if it was allowed to pass, then the blockade would become an illegal blockade.


And the weapons would flow.

It always was. What is your point.

Not according to any international law I have ever read.


The humanitarian blockade was an attempt to force the blockade, using PR as it's weapon.


So that Israeli critics would be correct, in calling it illegal.

Not according to any international law I have ever read.

 

[Shusha]

Coyote

Forgot to add to my last post:

But if you are going to ask Israel not to use collective punishment in the form of sanctions, BDS has to go as well, don't you think?

 

[rylah]

Here's Murtaja using a drone during the march.

Good post, thanks.

Where it the violent riot that Israeli propaganda bullshit is always talking about?

In the rifles, molotovs, granades , IED's , calls for violence and attempt to breach the fence to act upon those calls by Hamas.
All of that has already been presented in many ways throughout the thread, I suggest You go back and read the thread - there's plenty of undeniable evidence to violent intent and action.

The question about why there's no footage of that in the Palestinian propaganda is ridiculous and naive -the same as asking why doesn't the criminal provide evidence to his crime.

The video in itself - contradicts the lies about the drone spread by Gazans for days.
Lack of evidence, in the form of the bullet, footage of the incident itself, or a concrete proof by Hamas that he was killed by an Israeli - IS TELLING.
And even rise bigger questions about the possibility of direct Hamas involvement in his death, for propaganda purposes.

I'm yet rule this out with the way this case goes.

Here are some odd things about this incident.

One of the ones I noticed is the lack of blood in the photos but witnesses say there was blood in the ground.

No matter how I look at this one something doesn't fit.

You can't tell anything from the pictures period - none of them, that I can find, show him where he was shot - they show him on some sort of wood plank or stretcher. Unless you found one that shows him lying where he was shot?

On the other hand...pictures can offer insight into personality.

I'm with You on the personality - I see his eyes.

However we live in a real world of experience. We know the fabrications, we know the facts that we discussed about his conduct, self-identification and the quality of reports about his conduct, and we know the well organized propaganda.

I'm sorry Coyote if it saddens You, but many detective stories lead to pretty criminals.
And since I've seen the drone footage, and seen how they try to focus all the march on him to deflect from the violence - I just cannot leave it like that when so much leads to an unexpected direction. This is just unfair to our soldiers who protect us right now laying on that sand sweaty, tired and miles from home.

Especially when they show an amount of restrain and professionalism that they do.
The easiest thing here is to automatically blame our boys - that's not fair.

As an Israeli I can't leave this story like that - if I didn't see the video, maybe, but not since.

 

[rylah]

Here's Murtaja using a drone during the march.

Good post, thanks.

Where it the violent riot that Israeli propaganda bullshit is always talking about?

In the rifles, molotovs, granades , IED's , calls for violence and attempt to breach the fence to act upon those calls by Hamas.
All of that has already been presented in many ways throughout the thread, I suggest You go back and read the thread - there's plenty of undeniable evidence to violent intent and action.

The question about why there's no footage of that in the Palestinian propaganda is ridiculous and naive -the same as asking why doesn't the criminal provide evidence to his crime.

The video in itself - contradicts the lies about the drone spread by Gazans for days.
Lack of evidence, in the form of the bullet, footage of the incident itself, or a concrete proof by Hamas that he was killed by an Israeli - IS TELLING.
And even rise bigger questions about the possibility of direct Hamas involvement in his death, for propaganda purposes.

I'm yet rule this out with the way this case goes.

Not really imo - Israel isn't denying they shot him, and they are spending energy shredding his reputation.

Israel is neither confirming.
Frankly aside form undocumented claims about his salary or degree in Hamas - I haven't seen anything that was non-factual.

Again until yesterday I could see all that as slander - not anymore. I'm not concluding yet, I'm just investigating - the least fair thing we can do.

And I think it's a healthy situation that You take his side and we can actually discuss rather than blame. This way we can reach clearer conclusions, and check if both our arguments stand the test. That's fair at least