The Felony Murder Rule exists for a reason, and every death in Gaza is blood on Hamas's hand for the same reason.
No, those are completely different reasons. The Felony murder rule exists to make conviction easier, and to discourage criminals from getting more violent. It's not a moral rule, it's a legal rule. Different ruleset.
In contrast, morally, you are responsible for what your actions do. Israel is responsible for what Israel does, Hamas is responsible for what Hamas does.
When Hamas forces people to stay in a place that is getting bombed, they are responsible. When Israel hits a place and there wasn't enough time for civilians to escape, Israel is responsible.
Now the question comes is the action morally
bad? This is a separate thing from who's responsible. Hamas' actions are obvious morally bad. Israel is trying to stop attacks, and aren't any more morally bad than the war itself (which isn't morally bad).
Israel is only responsible for the safety of it's citizens, and tried to go hands off on Gaza for decades, and look what it got them.
You again are using the English language to mix different meanings of words (here, two types of 'responsible', governmental and moral responsibility). If Israel unprovoked nuked the US, Israel would be
morally responsible for the people it killed, even though those killed weren't its citizens, so it is not
governmentally responsible for their well being. So no, your statement is clearly wrong.
One could say that "Israel's
governmental responsibility is only the safety of its own civilians." You could also argue that "Israel has no
moral responsibility to protect Gazans, but if it actively harms them, it does bear
moral responsibility." But you can't say that when Israel kills civilians that weren't being used as human shields (and there are many times this happens), that they are not morally responsible for the harm it does. This isn't an argument, you just don't seem to understand what I'm saying.
You seem to also be under the mistaken belief that I'm saying Israel is bad because they are responsible for civilian deaths. This is also not true. Judging the morality of actions is separate from determining who is at fault for them.
The Felony Murder Rule being applied to Hamas as an organization is completely and utterly justified, and Israel is not responsible for Hamas deciding to use human shields.
The Felony Murder rule is no more applicable to Hamas than saying that Israel's Iron Dome is committing a goal tending violation like in basketball. It's completely nonsensical as it's been pulled out of its context. The Felony Murder rule is not a moral thing. It simply exists as it serves a societal useful purpose.
People belive that antisemitic mean only jew hatred - so what?
Arabs are still semites.When you have arab-jewish conflict,you must be antisemite no matter who would you support.
Well,unless there are russian jews,they are no semites,but chazars.
You think Jews eat people. You should probably shut up about what antisemitism means, because you
absolutely hate Jews:
What else do you expected ? for orthodox jews all no-jews are goim,which literally mean cattle.It strange,that he do not eat any catholics there.
2.Orthodox jews belive that all others are goim,which mean cattle.If i belive so,i would eat goim.That is all.Cattle is for being eaten.If i belive that other people are cattle,i would eat them.
AND JEWS HAD RIGHT TO BELIVE WHATEVER THEY LIKE,AND EAT WHAT THEY WANT.aS LONG AS IT IS LEGAL.
I am sure,that they could legally eat people from time to time.
They had right to belive that i am cattle,and - if law abide so - to eat me.
Also, maybe you should also shut up about how language works, given your demonstration of how little you understand about it.
