https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in “what about…?”) is a pejorative for the strategy of responding to an accusation with a counter-accusation instead of a defense against the original accusation.

FTA:

Under U.S. law, foreign governments can be held liable, in some circumstances, for deaths or injuries caused by acts of terrorism or by providing material support or resources for them.

The 1976 statute cited in the lawsuit, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, is a frequent tool for American plaintiffs seeking to hold foreign governments accountable. In one example, a federal judge in Washington ordered North Korea in 2018 to pay $500 million in a wrongful death suit filed by the parents of Otto Warmbier, an American college student who died shortly after being released from that country.

People held as prisoners by Iran in the past have successfully sued Iran in U.S. federal court, seeking money earlier frozen by the U.S.

I didn’t say anything. You’d have to quote me, which you can’t :)

You have a problem with what Blinken and the resolution itself are saying, and they say Israel accepted the deal. Take it up with them. I’m done with you, this exact situation was discussed with you in a previous thread by another user. This is a bad faith effort to muddy the waters, and I reject this kind of discussion.

Goodbye.

Edit: since reading the original article is not a thing here:

Driving the news: Earlier this week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu walked back the proposal and told Israel’s Channel 14 that he is interested in a “partial deal” with Hamas that will free “some of the hostages” held in Gaza and allow Israel to continue fighting in the enclave.

A day later, under pressure from the U.S., Qatar and hostages families, Netanyahu corrected his comments and recommitted to the proposal.

But if it were up to the above user, this wouldn’t have been mentioned.

Political bluster does not negate what internal negotiations are resulting in. This does not at all disprove my sources. I’m sorry, Hamas is holding this one up. As stated, everyone was waiting for Hamas to sign. If your assertions about Israel hold any weight, Hamas really could have stuck it to them and signed the cease fire, forcing Israel to either back up it’s bluster or move forward. But they didn’t.

And these are the facts.

I guess I’ll post this again…

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj77j7ppj52o.amp

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has said that if a ceasefire plan backed by the US and UN does not progress, Hamas will be to blame.

Mr Blinken reiterated his call for Hamas to accept the plan as outlined by President Biden 11 days ago.

He said the onus was on “one guy” hiding “ten storeys underground in Gaza” to make the casting vote, referring to Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar.

Mr Blinken said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had “reaffirmed his commitment” to the proposal when they held talks in Jerusalem on Monday.

Mr Netanyahu has not publicly endorsed what Mr Biden outlined nor said whether it matches an Israeli proposal on which Mr Biden’s statement was based.

Mr Blinken described as a “hopeful sign” Hamas’s response to a resolution passed by the UN Security Council on Monday supporting what Mr Biden had announced.

The resolution noted that Israel had accepted what Mr Biden had presented and called on Hamas to do so as well.

Hamas issued a statement on Tuesday welcoming “what was included” in the resolution.

But Mr Blinken said Hamas’s response was not conclusive, adding that that “what counts” is what is said by the Hamas leadership in Gaza, “and that’s what we don’t have”.

If the proposal did not proceed then it was “on them”, he said.

And I’ll tack on, why had Hamas rejected in written form the proposal and responded with a counter proposal?

Additionally, your source says they signal support. No where did it say Israel rejected it. Even from your article:

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in Tel Aviv to meet Israeli officials, called this a “hopeful sign” but said it was not conclusive.

More important “is the word coming from Gaza and from the Hamas leadership in Gaza. That’s what counts, and that’s what we don’t have yet,” Blinken told reporters in Tel Aviv.

You are lying. Also, considering it was a cease fire, not negotiations, that was proposed, this seems like a feeble attempt to obfuscate the situation.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/01/05/hate-crimes-hit-record-levels-in-2023-why-2024-could-be-even-worse/72118808007/

The number of hate crimes reported to police in the nation’s 10 largest cities rose again in 2023, according to preliminary data released Friday from the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University.

The annual study found at least 2,184 hate crimes were reported across New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, and Austin last year, an increase of nearly 13% from 2022 driven in part by upticks in anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim attacks amid the ongoing Israel-Hamas war. A larger analysis of 25 American cities found hate crimes increased an average of 17% from 2022, according to the study.

“The top 10 cities generally match what’s going to happen nationally,” said Brian Levin, professor emeritus and founder of the Center for the Study of Hate & Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino.

…

New York and Los Angeles saw some of the largest increases in anti-Jewish hate crimes, rising 12.6% and 48% respectively, while Los Angeles and Chicago saw 40% and 300% increases in anti-Muslim hate crimes, according to the study.

“It just explodes after October 7,” Levin said, referencing the day Hamas-led militants killed 1,200 Israelis and took more than 240 hostages.

Levin said the data indicates national FBI hate crime data will also likely show a record number of anti-Jewish hate crimes when it is released later in the year. He said anti-Muslim hate crimes could also reach their highest levels since the last peak between 2015 and 2017.

Hmm my sources don’t seem to share that opinion.

I’m sorry your opinion doesn’t change what happened. Hamas rejected the cease fire. You can quibble about whether you think it was put forward by whatever party, whomever it was put forward by, it was rejected by Hamas.

I don’t see how anyone is making the point that “everything is rosy.” This post describes recent trends in changes in wages and inflation. Your link about purchasing power 2021-2022 (and the rest of your comment) does not negate anything mentioned in the article.

This seems less of an attempt to inform but rather maintaining that good news about wages must be accompanied by bad news somehow, as has been typical.

https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-june-25-2024/

MR MILLER: I think it confirms two things. Number one, as the IPC itself said, we need to get a ceasefire. And that is the best way – bar none – to alleviate the humanitarian situation on the ground and alleviate the very real, very tragic of the – situation of the Palestinian people. And that is why we are working every day to try to get a ceasefire. It’s why we were so disappointed that Hamas rejected the ceasefire proposal that was on the table that the United Nations Security Council and countries around the world endorsed.

…

QUESTION: Yeah. Also, do you have a written or public statement from Hamas stating that they don’t support the ceasefire, considering that according to you they were the ones who in previous months —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — proposed something similar?

MR MILLER: Yeah. They came back several weeks ago and rejected the proposal that was on the table in written – in written form. They gave us a written response that rejected the proposal that had been put forward by Israel, that the – that President Biden had outlined, that the United Nations Security Council and countries all around the world had endorsed. Obviously, we don’t make the text of that public, because these are very sensitive negotiations, but it was a written rejection and counter-proposal that came from Hamas.

Not that the original article wasn’t proof enough. Additionally:

https://www.axios.com/2024/06/12/blinken-hamas-gaza-hostage-ceasefire-proposal

What he’s saying: Speaking from Doha after meeting with the Prime Minister of Qatar, Blinken said: “Hamas proposed numerous changes to the proposal that was on the table. Some of the changes are workable and some are not.”

He argued the deal currently under discussion is almost identical to the one Hamas itself proposed on May 6. “It was a deal that Israel accepted and the world was behind. Hamas could have answered with a single word: ‘yes.’”

“Instead, they waited almost two weeks and then proposed more changes, a number of which go beyond positions it has previously presented and agreed to. As a result, the war will go on and more people will suffer,” Blinken said.

“It’s time for the haggling to stop and the ceasefire to start. Israel accepted the proposal as it is, Hamas didn’t. It is clear what needs to happen,” he said.

National security adviser Jake Sullivan said later Wednesday that “many of the proposed changes in Hamas’ response are minor and not unanticipated. Others differ more substantially from what was outlined in the UN security council resolution” endorsing the deal, which passed on Tuesday.

Mkay buddy

Edit: since for some reason it’s common etiquette here to baselessly spout misinformation without sources, and since somehow it’s incumbent on me to have to prove them wrong, putting all the effort on me instead of the original commenter making the claim, I’ll play ball.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minimum-wage-increase-january-1-2024-see-the-states/

Higher minimum wages will go into effect on January 1 across 22 states, giving an economic boost to almost 10 million workers, according to a recent estimate.

The higher baseline wages will deliver almost $7 billion in additional annual wages to about 9.9 million workers, the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute said in a research post on December 21. The increases will boost the baseline pay to at least $16 an hour in three states: California, New York and Washington.

On top of the state pay hikes, an additional 38 cities and counties will also increase their minimum wages, the group said.

https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2023/oct/budgets-for-salary-increases-rise-at-historic-rates.html

Budgets for employee salary increases have grown by an average of 4.4% in 2023, the highest increase in more than two decades, according to a long-running survey.

US Salary Increase Budgets, a survey conducted annually since 1985 by The Conference Board, also found that the 409 companies surveyed are forecasting another 4.1% increase in 2024. The 2023 increase is the largest since 2001.

https://www.hrdive.com/news/workers-received-fewer-smaller-raises-2023/702301/

Just over 40% of workers haven’t received a salary increase in the past 12 months, according to a survey of 1,500 full-time employees by BambooHR. For those who did get a raise, the average salary increase was 4.6%, compared to 6.2% in 2022.

Meaning, a minority of people didn’t get a raise according to this survey, not a vast majority.

If you have any source saying the vast majority of people haven’t gotten raises in years, that’d be news to me. Otherwise, this should be a lesson in not listening to down votes and not allowing unsourced low effort comments like this to remain up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)

The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi, shortened from Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat – the burden of proof lies with the one who speaks, not the one who denies) is the obligation on a party in a dispute to provide sufficient warrant for its position.

Edit: even after modifying your post nearly a day later, it is still misinformation. This is textbook bad faith. The original post involved only an unsourced claim about the vast majority not receiving a raise.

Mmk buddy.

A fraction of undecided voters may decide the next election, and they might be weighing whether they care more about Biden’s age or Trump’s lies. I think fact checking could matter to those people too. No one is swaying Trump voters.

If you care about facts, I think fact checking is important.

https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2023/who-fact-checks-the-fact-checkers-research/

“‘Fact-checking’ fact checkers: A data-driven approach,” a 22-page October research article from the Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, examined practices of U.S. fact-checking organizations Snopes, PolitiFact and Logically, along with The Australian Associated Press.

Sian Lee, Aiping Xiong, Harseung Seo and Dongwon Lee of Penn State University’s College of Information Sciences and Technology did the peer-reviewed research.

The Penn State researchers found U.S. fact-checking spikes during major news events. In recent years, that was during the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2020 presidential election. Further, the researchers said, misinformation’s spread can mislead and harm people and society.

The researchers examined 11,639 fact-checking articles from Snopes and 10,710 from PolitiFact from Jan. 1, 2016, to Aug. 31, 2022. They found Snopes checked more “real claims” — claims that rate true or mostly true — with 28.7% versus 11% for PolitiFact.

Looking widely, the researchers found high agreement when Snopes and PolitiFact probed the same information. Of 749 matching claims (examining the same information), 521 received identical ratings and 228 (30.4%) had diverging ratings. But, the researchers found nuances caused nearly all of these divergent verdicts — granularity of ratings (Snopes and PolitiFact scales differ slightly); differences in focus; differences in fact-checked information and the different timing of the fact-checks.

Adjusting for these systematic discrepancies, Penn State’s researchers found just one conflicting rating among the 749 matching claims.

Including the resolution text:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_2735

The Security Council,

Reaffirming the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,

Recalling all its relevant resolutions on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question,

Underscoring the importance of the ongoing diplomatic efforts by Egypt, Qatar, and the United States aimed at reaching a comprehensive ceasefire deal, consisting of three phases,

1. Welcomes the new ceasefire proposal announced on May 31, which Israel accepted, calls upon Hamas to also accept it, and urges both parties to fully implement its terms without delay and without condition;

2. Notes that the implementation of this proposal would enable the following outcomes to spread over three phases:

(a) Phase 1: an immediate, full, and complete ceasefire with the release of hostages including women, the elderly and the wounded, the return of the remains of some hostages who have been killed, the exchange of Palestinian prisoners, withdrawal of Israeli forces from the populated areas in Gaza, the return of Palestinian civilians to their homes and neighborhoods in all areas of Gaza, including in the north, as well as the safe and effective distribution of humanitarian assistance at scale throughout the Gaza Strip to all Palestinian civilians who need it, including housing units delivered by the international community;

(b) Phase 2: upon agreement of the parties, a permanent end to hostilities, in exchange for the release of all other hostages still in Gaza, and a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza; and

© Phase 3: the start of a major multi-year reconstruction plan for Gaza and the return of the remains of any deceased hostages still in Gaza to their families;

3. Underlines that the proposal says if the negotiations take longer than six weeks for phase one, the ceasefire will still continue as long as negotiations continue, and welcomes the readiness of the United States, Egypt, and Qatar to work to ensure negotiations keep going until all the agreements are reached and phase two is able to begin;

4. Stresses the importance of the parties adhering to the terms of this proposal once agreed and calls upon all Member States and the United Nations to support its implementation;

5. Rejects any attempt at demographic or territorial change in the Gaza Strip, including any actions that reduce the territory of Gaza;

6. Reiterates its unwavering commitment to the vision of the two-State solution where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders, consistent with international law and relevant UN resolutions, and in this regard stresses the importance of unifying the Gaza Strip with the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority;

7. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

All I see is you trying to garner understanding towards Hamas using civilians as shields. No history leads to this, Hamas is not forced to do this.

What Hamas is requesting changes to:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_2735

The Security Council,

Reaffirming the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,

Recalling all its relevant resolutions on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question,

Underscoring the importance of the ongoing diplomatic efforts by Egypt, Qatar, and the United States aimed at reaching a comprehensive ceasefire deal, consisting of three phases,

1. Welcomes the new ceasefire proposal announced on May 31, which Israel accepted, calls upon Hamas to also accept it, and urges both parties to fully implement its terms without delay and without condition;

2. Notes that the implementation of this proposal would enable the following outcomes to spread over three phases:

(a) Phase 1: an immediate, full, and complete ceasefire with the release of hostages including women, the elderly and the wounded, the return of the remains of some hostages who have been killed, the exchange of Palestinian prisoners, withdrawal of Israeli forces from the populated areas in Gaza, the return of Palestinian civilians to their homes and neighborhoods in all areas of Gaza, including in the north, as well as the safe and effective distribution of humanitarian assistance at scale throughout the Gaza Strip to all Palestinian civilians who need it, including housing units delivered by the international community;

(b) Phase 2: upon agreement of the parties, a permanent end to hostilities, in exchange for the release of all other hostages still in Gaza, and a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza; and

© Phase 3: the start of a major multi-year reconstruction plan for Gaza and the return of the remains of any deceased hostages still in Gaza to their families;

3. Underlines that the proposal says if the negotiations take longer than six weeks for phase one, the ceasefire will still continue as long as negotiations continue, and welcomes the readiness of the United States, Egypt, and Qatar to work to ensure negotiations keep going until all the agreements are reached and phase two is able to begin;

4. Stresses the importance of the parties adhering to the terms of this proposal once agreed and calls upon all Member States and the United Nations to support its implementation;

5. Rejects any attempt at demographic or territorial change in the Gaza Strip, including any actions that reduce the territory of Gaza;

6. Reiterates its unwavering commitment to the vision of the two-State solution where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders, consistent with international law and relevant UN resolutions, and in this regard stresses the importance of unifying the Gaza Strip with the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority;

7. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

No, I started a topic and you changed it. The article itself says there were hostages held in refugee camps. “Coming in swinging” is just… indicative. I’m ending this with you.

And there is NOTHING that excuses using civilians as shields. Stop trying to justify it.

I’m not wasting the time explaining this to you after the other user already did.