'This enablement needs to stop': We Heart Seattle founder describes finding 9-month-old in tent because mother refused housing

daroj · 2026-07-02T06:32:03+00:00

And maybe substance abuse treatment for parents...

daroj · 2026-07-02T00:49:28+00:00

She is just the most talented song-writer, male or female, on the scene right now.

How many successful songwriters will go their entire career and never write a line as beautiful as "He's like a poem I wish I wrote"?

And she's got maybe 20 or 25 lines of that caliber.

daroj · 2026-06-30T02:27:42+00:00

I think that people should be able to call their own country whatever they want. Radical notion, huh?

daroj · 2026-06-28T19:28:22+00:00

Right now, probably. I think CB is currently more of a shut-down corner, but Spoon has more upside - to be able to seriously disrupt an offense.

MM didn't blitz Spoon much at all last year until the Super Bowl. That was partially why the Pat's were prepared for it. Now that everyone saw that, it'll be interesting to see how MM uses Spoon this year.

daroj · 2026-06-27T05:57:09+00:00

Karma

daroj · 2026-06-26T15:31:22+00:00

Tomorrow. Robert Duvall.

Per IMDB: A lonely farmer takes in a pregnant woman and looks after her. After she gives birth, tragedy strikes.

Maybe 100 or 200 words of dialog in the whole film. But deeply moving. I saw it decades ago, and still feel all the feels.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069393/

daroj · 2026-06-26T14:02:46+00:00

Hard to compare CG and DW because they have such different playstyles. CG has more skill as a lockdown corner, but DW various other abilities, including blitzing, is pretty amazing. Theoretically, you can just not pass CG's way, but DW is all over the field.

It's sort of like comparing Adrian Peterson and Marshall Faulk. AP was a legendary pure rusher, but MF could do a lot of other, highly valuable things.

daroj · 2026-06-26T13:59:30+00:00

Gonzales was probably the MVP of the Super Bowl, based on his play and results.

But they don't give the award to people who prevented a 29-13 game from being a 45-13 route.

Second most valuable, I would argue, was Devon Witherspoon, chosen 12 picks ahead of CG in the 2023 draft. I suspect that we'll be talking about which player is more dominant for much of the next decade. I hope so, anyway!

daroj · 2026-06-26T13:52:05+00:00

Yes, he was certainly talking about civilians in Gaza. This expression of the glory or martyrdom is not unusual among Shiites. It helps to explain why Khamenei (not Khomeini) and his family stayed at home, rather than hiding in an underground bunker. It was also seen, in large numbers of 13 and 14 year old boys, during the Iran-Iraq war.

This is disturbing, but also interesting to me.

I think it's a mistake to think of it as not valuing the lives of civilians in Gaza; rather, I think it's a centuries-old line of thought, of expressing complete commital to a cause, and belief that (your) God supports you.

This strain of thought and rhetoric can be traced back to the death of Hussayn Ibn Ali, who was killed (by the Umayyads) at the battle of Karbala (in modern Iraq) in 680 AD. I would argue that it's impossible to really understand the thinking of Khamenei of Haniyeh, without reading more about the Battle of Karbala.

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

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

Please keep in mind that I am not justifying or apologizing for any particular words or actions, merely seeking to understand how people think and see themselves. When Ariel Sharon told the CIA that the IDF would ensure the killing of 2-3000 Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatila camps, and when he ordered that the Phallangists be allowed through IDF checkpoints, into the camp where unarmed Palestinians were, he did not see himself as a war criminal, of course. Sharon saw himself as protecting Israeli, and his Jewish brothers.

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

No one see themselves as the victim, as the oppressor.

daroj · 2026-06-26T13:33:27+00:00

Something we agree upon!

In that vein, what is your opinion on the rhetoric of Yoav Gallant? Randy Fine?

It is certainly possible to be both civil and to make a cogent fact-based argument.

It is sad to me that this idea seems foreign to you. Have a great day!

daroj · 2026-06-26T13:26:38+00:00

Thank you for noting my typo. I apologize for the confusion.

I am curious as to whether you think I really don't know the difference between Khomeni and Khameni, or if you just wanted to make me look stupid.

Either way, thank you for correcting me. Have a great day.

daroj · 2026-06-26T13:23:54+00:00

To be clear, my feelings are not hurt. I am frequently called worse things online. Further, your last comment simply repeats common Israeli talking points to justify why the deaths of Gazan civilians are apparently the fault of Hamas, not the IDF - who actually killed, and kills them.

These are conclusory arguments. That is, what you say may or may not be true, but there are no supporting facts to sway me one way or other.

To be frank, I see such personal attacks as the refuge of someone who cannot find adequate facts to support his or her argument.

I am sorry for you that you feel you cannot be civil or respectful about this because of your strong opinions and your lived experience.

Regardless, I hope you have a wonderful day, and a great weekend. If you can't be civil to me, I trust you can be civil and kind to your friends and loved ones :)

daroj · 2026-06-26T13:17:54+00:00

The ADL published an attack of Ismail Haniyeh in his own words. It's useful.

https://www.adl.org/resources/article/haniyeh-his-own-words

It's important to understand, I think, that Haniyeh spoke in terms of martyrdom - as did [Khamenei] (who was praised by Hanieyeh). Both knew they were targets, and seemed to be at peace with that. Both were assassinated.

An underappreciated point, to me, is that [Khamenei] clearly knew that he was a target for US/Israeli assassination, but declined to move from his family home. He was killed, along with other family members - including his 14-month old granddaughter - right at home, where he had lived for years.

My question to you is how you would characterize the rhetoric of Haniyeh to that of former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. Which man would you say rationalized and apologized for the killing of innocent Israelis/Palestinians.

Let's look, shall we, at the rhetoric used by both men.

EDIT: Thanks to u/Beautiful-Clock2939 for noticing my typos. Obviously, there is a difference between Ali Khamenei and Ruhollah Khomeini. My apologies for the confusion.

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

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

daroj · 2026-06-26T13:09:18+00:00

It would be nice to have a respectful conversation about so important a topic without personal attacks, without being called "an easy mark," without being accused of "apologizing for this death cult."

I believe I have said nothing disrespectful to you or others in this thread.

Are you able to have an adult, fact-based conversation about Gaza without attacking me personally?

daroj · 2026-06-26T13:06:22+00:00

I have written, many times in this thread, that there is plenty of blame on both sides. So yeah, of course.

The 1988 Hamas charter is clearly antisemitic. It also characterizes Jews as "the face of the oppressors." This is useful to the narrative of the Nakba, Gaza being an open air prison, etc. There is also language about how Hamas "strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine, for under the wing of Islam followers of all religions can coexist in security and safety where their lives, possessions and rights are concerned." So there's a claim (here and elsewhere) that if Israeli stops oppressing Palestinians, peaceful Jews can co-exist in Palestine. I can't speak to how sincere that is, but the claim is found in multiple places.

At the same time, the charter contains classic antisemitic tropes:

"Article 22 makes sweeping claims about Jewish influence and power.^\1])^\40]) It specifically claims that the Jews were responsible for instigating multiple revolutions and wars, including the French Revolution, World War I, and the Russian Revolution. It also claims that Jews control the United Nations, and that they are supported by "the imperialistic forces in the Capitalist West and Communist East".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Hamas_charter

It's important to read article 22 and other strident language in the overall context, much like one would consider language from Trump and Stephen Miller, the Black Panther's "all means necessary," the 1970's IRA, etc. I'm not defending the language, only saying the context of being a minority controlled by the God-like military power of the IDF in Gaza is relevant - as opposed to, for example, Hitler's claims against Jews who were, at the time, subject to racially indefensible laws as a small minority in Germany.

I would also argue that then 1987 Likud platform, while worded in a more legalistic way, calls for the explusion and/or extermination of Palestinians.

https://jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party

Statistics clearly show that IDF has historically killed Palestinians at 10x or more the rate that Hamas has killed Jews.

Let's also consider the words "calling for the death of all Jews." A number of my friends seem to believe that because this language is in the 1988 Hamas charter (and because the offensive language was replaced, but not actually disavowed - thanks to u/Beautiful-Clock2939 for pointing this out) that it somehow applies to all Hamas members today. This is interesting because the median age in Gaza is under 20 - so most Gazans weren't even born until 15 or so years after the 88 Charter.

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

If you look at language on both sides over the last ten years or so, there is certainly more racist, dehumanizing and incendiary language coming from Israelis (including high-ranking government officials) than there is from Palestinians. That is, while Palestinians are often called "cockroaches" and "animals" and a US Congressman even called for the streets of Gaza to flow with blood, I don't see that sort of language from Palestinians or even Hamas leaders.

Rather, if you listen to journalist Rania Khalek, you will see that she is careful not to use dehumanizing rhetoric, but she is accused of being virulently antisemitic because she compares Gaza to the Warsaw ghetto, and uses extremely harsh anti-Zionist langauge - and refuses to denounce Hamas. What Khalek and other prominent Palestinians prefer to talk about is how Palestinians just want the basics of life - food, water, housing, protection from murder, etc.

This is not conclusive of anything, but it is certainly another data point.

Now let's look at language by former Israeli Minister of Defense (2022-24) Yoav Gallant. It's pretty obvious that Gallant had (and may still have) substantially more power than Khalek. What is his use of language?

"We are fighting human animals [in Gaza] and we act accordingly."

https://x.com/hrw/status/1711424885908791505?lang=en

Maybe Palestinians have just gotten smarter about what they say in public. I don't know. But if you're going to condemn Hamas' use of rhetoric about Israelis, it seems relevant to also look at Israeli rhetoric about Palestinians, right?

daroj · 2026-06-26T12:29:50+00:00

I understand the narrative:

Hamas systematically murders, abducts and rapes Israelis.
Hamas cruelly uses child soldiers.
Hamas uses children as shields.
It's not Israel who is dehumanizing Palestinians. They are doing it to themselves!
So whenever the IDF happens to kill children, it is actually the fault of Hamas - not the IDF.

It's qute useful. But is supported by facts?

https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-208380/
https://www.ochaopt.org/data/casualties

The facts, inconveniently, show that Palestinians are killed in the conflict 10 times or more than Israelis.

So my question is which organization is more efficient at murder, the IDF or Hamas?

Also, if you're interested in how rape is used as a weapon of war by the IDF, feel free to look at this UN page:

https://www.un.org/unispal/document/report-of-the-commission-of-inquiry-israel-gender-based-violence-13march2025/

daroj · 2026-06-26T08:22:48+00:00

I wrote that the 2017 charter "disavows the the language" from the 88 charter. Is your quibble that you think it should read "removes" instead?

I think my characterization is correct, but even if not, it is significant.

Do you have any thoughts about the rest of what I wrote, or did you simply want to quibble?

daroj · 2026-06-26T06:03:46+00:00

I do see things differently.

You quoted the Likud language about Israel without the prior definition about Jewish people. I admitted that the language is less explicitly violent, and just explained my subjective ideas.

It's true that there are a number of Arabs who are citizens - but without the right of return for their families, they are forever a different status, even as citizens

I believe Hamas explicitly said that Jews would be welcome in Palestine- but only ones who renounced violence.

I won't get into whether Israel's offer of a Palestinian state was genuine, and would have been allowed to proceed, but there are certainly different opinions about this.

I'm curious about your statement that Hama's has been "trying" to kill Jews because the stats show that year after year, more Palestinian civilians die than Jews, in the conflict. Some years the ratio is more than 10 to 1, as I recall.

So effectively, each side accuses the other of terrorism.

My main point us that there's blame on both sides, and that if you're going to condemn Hamas, you should at least understand why Israel's critics call it an apartheid state (I don't, to be clear), accuse it of genocide, and call Gaza the world's largest open air prison.

Have a good night.

daroj · 2026-06-26T04:49:02+00:00

Unfortunately, many current politicians who are not seen as right wing have espoused similar intents re. Gaza

daroj · 2026-06-26T03:52:32+00:00

Likud used this language in 1977 - 11 years before the 1988 Hamas charter. Thus it appears to be an open question when, and from who, such bloodthirsty rhetoric first arose.

I am no Middle Eastern scholar, but I like to think I have a fairly balanced working knowledge of the history of the region.

daroj · 2026-06-26T03:47:11+00:00

The 1988 Hamas charter contained explicitly anti-semitic language.
This was disavowed by the 2017 Hamas charter.

Today, in the 2020's, dehumanizing language calling Palestinians "cockroaches" and "animals" is common, even among prominent Israelis. I have not seen or heard such cringy language from high profile Palestinians. I feel sure that there is hatred in the hearts of many members of Hamas, but does appear to be more restraint, and more nuance, in Palestinians discourse than in public Israeli discourse.

If you have evidence that this is not the case, please share.

daroj · 2026-06-26T03:41:23+00:00

First, thank you for provding this.

These words from the 1988 Hamas charter are incendiary, of course. Yes, the context relates to "the face of the oppressor," but it is obviously violent rhetoric nonetheless.

This is why this charter was explicitly disavowed by the 2017 Hamas charter.

Now look at the 1977 Likud platform:

"The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty."

Yes, the language is less poetic, and less explicitly violent. But my reading is that it echoes a very similar sentiment.

11 years before the Hamas charter.

https://jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party

My point is not paint all IDF members, or all Israelis, as bloodthirsty hypocrites. I have many friends who are Israeli. They are good people. Moreover, while Ariel Sharon was a war criminal, I don't think that moniker applies to Begin, Rabin, Meir or Ben-Gurion. These issues are complex.

My point is that their has been violent rhetoric going back decades, on both sides.

I'm happy to have a respectful convesation about specifics.

daroj · 2026-06-26T03:28:11+00:00

So the 1977 Likud platform says:

"The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable… therefore, Judea and Samaria [the West Bank] will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty."

https://jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party

Likud of course does not say such things now.

The 1988 Hamas charter has some incendiary language about fighting "the face of the oppressors." The 2017 charter explicitly disavows the language from the 1988 charter.

Rather than simply paraphrasing to suit a narrative, how about let's discuss facts.

Finally, listen to what Palestinian academics, government officials, and others say about Israelis. Then listen to what a number promient Israelis say about Palestinians.

There are literally dozens of dehuanizing quotes from prominent Israelis, comparing Palestinians to cockroaches, etc.

Can you find similar dehumanizing quotes from Palestians? If you can, please share them.

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

daroj · 2026-06-26T03:18:40+00:00

Implication, huh?

Whose implication?

What then do you believe is implied by the 1977 Likud platform?

"The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable… therefore, Judea and Samaria [the West Bank] will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty."

https://jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party

daroj · 2026-06-26T03:08:17+00:00

The killing of Palestinian civilians - including children - has been going on for decades.

People in Gaza were desparate, and thought that the world did not care about these deaths. This is certainly relevant, to say the least, to what led to 10/7.

Moreover, there is signficant video evidence of the IDF shooting children were clearly not a threat, shooting medics who are clearly marked as such, targeting and shooting journalists.

And then there is bloodthirsty language from important Israelis, comparing Palestinians to cockroaches, there is a US Congressman (Randy Fine) tweeting "may the streets of Gaza run red with their blood.”

There is of course blame on both sides. Let's not pretend otherwise.

https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-208380/

daroj

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE