AlexL

Israel has yet to learn how to perform a genocide: less then 2% of dead after 6 month of intense bombardments of the most densely populated region on Earth is such a pathetic performance !

Taking positions about a war always amounts to supporting the killing of someone. "Free Palestine!" is not taking positions about a war, because: "Free Palestine!" means suppressing an occupation, The current war is the one between Gaza government and Israel. During this war no occupation took place. Therefore "Free Palestine!" does not mean taking positions about a war. Your comment tries to whitewash SpookyKitty's "Free Palestine!" call, which is a call for murder, a call for genocide, more precisely. There exist, however, also a legitimate call "Free Palestine!".

So, you are incapable of justifying any of your claims; in other words, you know nothing about the subject. Furthermore, you deny that it is your duty to justify your claims. I will report you—again!—to the moderators for not abiding by the rules of rational debate. Additionally, I will ask them to take a stance towards your "Free Palestine!" statement, which I consider a call for murder. @Pokyt @Eiuol @William O

You mean the 2022 Amnesty International report? Yes, you are correct, I did not address this and I regret it. I focused on your denial of the principle/rule that, in a rational debate one has the obligation to justify one's claims, if asked. I looked back on your older comments in this thread and I found out that now is not the first time that you deny the legitimacy of this rule. OK, now about your argumentation with this report. I asked you to provide facts justifying your claims/conclusions. But instead of facts, you pointed me to a source claiming those same conclusions. Yes, I guess that that 280 pages report does list some facts in support of its conclusion, but the problem is : if I disagree with the truth o those facts and/or conclusions, to whom I address my objections? Therefore: take your claims one by one and justify them. (Besides, by unreservedly recommending the AI report, you will also have to justify/prove every one of its claims, if asked. This is how it works!) Here is a free😁advice for you: Only by researching a subject yourself can you justify your claims; merely reproducing the conclusions of others risks embarrassment.

After 4 months I am still waiting...

😁 Don't be insolent: it is not about "educating" me, but about justifying your claims. This is your moral obligation in a rational debate, especially on this forum.

🤣🤣🤣 I suppose you can justify each of your claims with - sourced - facts; otherwise, you wouldn't be expressing them on this forum, would you? Then please do.

Boydstun is not smearing you. The problem is in your head. Urgently go out and seek psychiatric help.

Why does nobody care about a massive terrorist threat to the United States and against my own life? Follow your mother's advice. Use your intelligence: you have nothing to lose. She certainly wishes you the best. She is not participating in the conspiracy. Neither am I or @Boydstun

There is only essentially one. Which is...?

What is it, that advice?

... there "advice " is complete nonsense There is no reason for them ALL to wish you harm. Follow their advice. Especially if all of them have the same advice.

You did not explain why your friends and family won't help you. Or you simply don't want to follow their advice?

I've contacted all those people myself, and nobody will respond. My point was precisely for you to let the police determine which is the appropriate organism you should contact for help, and not for you to decide this. How do they explain this refusal?

I thought I was clear: I did not recommend that you contact the police to solve the problem, but to direct you the the appropriate competent authorities/organisms.

The "help facility" needed is the protection of the federal government. Then call them, see to what help facility they direct you, and keep me posted. TIA

Call the police. They will direct you to the appropriate help facility

Would see? Certainly not, maybe only suspect... And nothing, of course, about the fact that it was you who unsolicitedly brought the 'off topic' subject😁 of a poll, a subject that you called "arbitrary claptrap" when I followed up. Not to mention other evasions...

The more was arbitrary claptrap as there will be no election , as ordered by Z. 1. Missing are your apologies for putting words in my mouth - about what I was allegedly implying. 2. My "arbitrary claptrap" was a comment to your claims about poll results in case of - purely hypothetical - elections. 3. It was not Zelensky who ordered "no-elections". But you have no means of knowing it, because facts ("intricacies") are not your thing. This explains that. This does not make it so. Even Putin repeating it incessantly doesn't make it so.

I wasn't implying that you were implying this. Besides, there was a lot more in my comment...

Thank you for the Wiki link. My numbers are from a popularity/trust poll by the KIIS Institute "conducted during the period of Zaluzhnyi’s dismissal saga: from Feb. 5 to 10". Quote: "for the period of Feb. 5-10, 64% trusted Mr. Zelenskyy, but at the end of this period, the figure was 60%" [these were the numbers of which I said they are more than twice as big as yours (23.7%)] OTOH, the poll you are quoting, by SOCIS, conducted between February 22 to March 1, is a quite different one - it is a much broader one, including for (simulated) presidential elections. Your number - 23.7% - measures the distribution of votes for the first round of presidential elections with 10+ candidates. No, there is no way to hold any kind of elections during war/martial law. For details see Martial law in Ukraine. Besides, the respective legislation was adopted long before Zelensky became president.😁 The SOCIS poll shows that about 66% are against holding presidential elections during this war. According to the KIIS poll, "only 15% of respondents believe a presidential election should go forward".

This does not follow. Yes, this does follow. Can you please post the link? And verify the Wiki's references for this number? I found recent poll numbers which are more than double of yours. I found your number - 23.7% - in these somewhat peculiar publications : Sputnik Afrique, TASS, Iran Front Page, RT International. Off topic.

A wikipedia entry shows a current poll with ... I am still waiting for a response to my second question - "what does follow from the poll?"

Yes, how is he and what follows from it?