Comments by "Jason Dashney" (@jasondashney) on "'So Baby Killing Is Okay?': Matthew Miller Clashes With Reporter Over Israeli Retaliatory Strikes" video.

This wasn't a journalist, this was an activist, who kept talking over the person. They asked a question to like a petulant child. It saddens me that people think this is OK. If you don't think both sides are trying to push an agenda then I don't know what to tell ya.
3
@lilaoliva793 "You'd also beg for people to "see both sides" relating to slavery, the genocide of Native Americans, the naz¡ Hollocaust, the genocide of Namibians, the Apartheid in South Africa, the Jim Crow in the US of A, etc, wouldn't you?/s" 100% I would. I literally always want to know both sides of every story. Anything else makes you and ideologue. The only reason people don't want to hear the other side is because they're afraid the other side might have some valid points. You should always try to put yourself in someone else's shoes before coming up with concrete opinions about them. IDGAF what the subject is, you should always try to learn all perspectives on it.
2
I had to google matthew miller. Seems he's a state department spokesperson. That would make him the literal opposite of me. He'd be a narrative driven person by the very nature of his job. I crave the exact antithesis of that. @Mhdrhsn
1
What is my ideology? Please be specific. @Mhdrhsn
1
I prefer logic and reason to being a petulant child. You won't help your child by ranting and raving. @nasersiddiquee7253
1
@paulstrife I love how I'm the only objective one here because I'm seeing both sides, have a narrative or an agenda and everyone's attacking me for being the ideologue. I'm the only one here who isn't. Petulant behaviors, petulant behavior. I don't care if I agree or disagree with the person. I'm not a hypocrite.
1
@lilaoliva793 What's interesting to me is I've never given any hint whatsoever as to my position. I have literally said nothing about my opinion on anything other than always wanting to learn as much as I can about a situation before coming to a conclusion (which you actually chastised me for, which I find exceedingly bizarre and frightening. You're literally insulting me for wanting to educate myself). My only other opinion was that petulant behaviours petulant behavior. I said right at the top I don't give a damn what the subject is or whether I agree or disagree. I don't like petulant behaviour out of someone who's purporting to be a journalist. Everybody responding to me are definitely ideologues because you guys are attacking me without knowing what my position is either way.
1
@lilaoliva793 The ends don't justify the means. That's the basis for all extreme ideologies. The further we stray from objectivity the more dire the potential consequences, and it almost always leads to hypocrisy.
1
@lilaoliva793 So you're still criticizing the very act of trying to learn as much as you can about a subject before making a definitive proclamation?
1
@lilaoliva793 "Who strayed from objectivity?" Are you very aware of the position of the person asking the questions? Would you bet your life savings you know exactly where he stands? Then that's not objectivity by definition. Back in the day it was considered abhorent for a media personality to reveal their own thoughts about news. They believed their job was to ascertain as much information as they could so the viewer could decide for themselves the truth. Anyone not doing an identified opinion piece tried to hide their personal bias in the name of good journalism. What I'm saying is both sides loooove when their side gets belligerent, but loses their minds when the other side does it. I think it's hypocritical and gross and I really hope we go back to the media just conveying information instead of trying to lead us in what to think.
1
@thebard6961 being petulant has nothing to do with whether or not your point is correct. Petulant is a type of behaviour. Also, that literally couldn't have less to do with the meaning of "Kafkaesque". I think you need to study up the definitions of things before commenting on them.
1
Your argument goes both ways.
1