this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2024
1341 points (97.8% liked)

World News

32372 readers
956 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Rumblestiltskin@lemmy.ml
AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml
jackmarxist@lemmy.ml
zephyreks@lemmy.ml
OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
1341
US Soldier Sets Himself on Fire outside Israeli Embassy in Washington to Protest Gaza War (www.news18.com)
submitted 9 months ago by Alsephina@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
260 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

“I will no longer be complicit in genocide [in Gaza]. I am about to engage in an extreme act of protest,” the man apparently said before setting himself alight and repeatedly shouting “Free Palestine!”

Archive link

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

But they know possibilities right?

If I say "guy in a store with a gun" - he could be a robber, he could be a murderer, he could have hostages, etc.

This guy was down, engulfed in flames, and not screaming when they drew. So what possibilities come up when I say "guy on the ground, on fire, past the ability to communicate or travel under his own power" that is a problem a gun could solve?

In any case this:

They don’t know what they’re walking into. We know after the fact what they had.

Is just a more palatable (to you) way to say this, which is what I wrote in the first comment of mine you replied to:

this was an example (once again) that “try to kill anything you don’t immediately understand” is the default condition of our law enforcement.

See, we agree!

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

They are security staff. They approach anything and secure it. Everything else is subjective

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Why even bother to reply if that's the only thing you are capable of saying? We both know there isn't a reasonable answer to the question I keep asking.

Fuckers threatening a service-member with deadly force for compliance while he burns to death, and lots of folks jumping up to defend it. At the very least I refuse to accept these empty platitudes.

Edit - clarification of wording

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee -1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I mean, same to you?

You don't like the behavior of security staff who have one very cold, very unfriendly goal: keep the embassy safe. I doubt they have specific training on self immolation so obviously they used standard procedure.

They don't give a fuck about public perception, the feelings of the involved individuals, etc.

Everyone keeps asking " why weren't they this or that or the other thing". There's one root answer weather folks like it or not.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I mean, same to you?

I guess I kept hoping for an actual answer to the question I kept asking, as one might expect during an honest discussion. Don't worry, I've given up now.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago

The actual answer is truly that these professional security types don't care. They go guns ready for anything that is remotely threatening to the embassy. A dude on fire on the perimeter apparently counts, no matter what we think of that.