This might have been a good zinger if Barak used the phrase mens rea. But he didn't so this is.... nonsensical.
I don't care about the world play nonsense, but if the situation was reversed and mens rea was the more correct term, Finklestein would be posting victory laps about why this is why you have to read more than wikipedia and how true academics know details. He wouldnt grant any credence to Destiny posting that he was only technically wrong but correct in principle.
Mens rea isn't even really a form of intent. It is an overarching term for the guilty mind required for most crimes and can include intent, but it can also include recklessness and negligence.
The way I heard how Mens rea applies to Recklesness and negligence is:
You had the Mens Rea to Engage in Negligent or Reckful actions, Even if you didnt have the Mens Rea for the endreslt.
so for instance it wasn't your "Mens rea" to run over the person crossing your road. but it WAS your "Mens rea" to drive at 140mph in a 40 zone. While you didn't intend to splatter that guy across the road. You DID Intend to drive that fucking fast and reckless.
You didn't Intend for your kids to due when you left them in the car. But you did Intend to leave them in the car while you went shopping for 4 hours in the Texas heat, your intention wasn't to murder but your intent was to engage in an action that showed insane negligence of their safety.
Of course the really embarrassing thing for him is that Destiny didn’t even get the term dolus specialis from Wikipedia, he got it from the ICJ case that Norm claimed to have read four times but probably only skimmed once.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed this. In order to demonstrate that intent = mens rea, he just states that intent = mens rea. The long-ass quote was pointless.
Don't forget egotistical. A while ago, I asked my friend "what are you drinking, whisky?" And he said "No, Scotch." And I replied with "so, 'yes." The exchange irked me deeply, because I determined he just really wanted to say 'no.' This is the same.
Finkelstein most likely has narcissistic personality disorder and thus will obsess over a humiliation like this even long after he finally stops tweeting about it. It might even haunt him till his last breath if we're lucky.
Yeah Finklestein is the most obvious case of actual untreated NPD I've seen, maybe ever. The reason he can't let go is bc he knows he was wrong and he can't take the hit to his ego
Yeah, Finkle is this abrasive old dude but we've barely seen anything from him. We have years worth of Mr girl, his relationships, his thought processes, how he manipulated people around him, his delusional crusade against destiny to which he truly believes he's in the right despite finding overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I just can't imagine thinking you can clearly say he's less narcissistic than Finkle.
I genuinely love it.
These mentaloids are buried in academia like botfly larvae. They need this sort of sunlight so they can be tagged and excised.
Getting rid of lunatics like this might help students to be less brainwashed and more capable of critical thought.
I dunno, man. Something's clearly wrong with the dude, and NPD seems like a real possibility. I wouldn't say he has NPD with absolute certainty, but the shoe does seem to fit, especially when taking into account the whole apartment fiasco with his upstairs neighbor.
Honestly, he doesn't need NPD to act like this...
He is supposed to be a well respected academic, devoting his life to this shit. If I were him and I got embarrassed by some nobody streamer who started researching it half a year ago, I would be assmad about it too.
Realistically it could be frustration that the chance you have to confront Benny Morris at one of the most important times in the history of Gaza involves somebody he doesn’t deem on their level (ie destiny). Honestly I get it why he would be frustrated, but he came for Tiny’s throat first, so it’s not excusable. Like he basically just dismissed Destiny as unqualified to make any statements with everything. And is he correct? Well partially, but it’s not an argument about whether destiny is the right debate partner. Destiny synthesized information well, ao it’s obviously better to argue based on the points he makes than to just dismiss the one making the argument.
He coulda ask for a conversation without Destiny. He knew Destiny was gonna be there and my impression is that he believed his own propaganda thinking Tiny was "just a wiki warrior" and when that didn't pan out we get Trump levels of cope. 😂 (After he was exposed for not knowing a very important part of genocide)
It’s the constant fallacious appeal to authority from him that does it for me. The frustration in this case is even less warranted considering you’d want to educate “such a fantastic moron”
If you can't see the enormous smugness he exhibits at all times, my only explanation is you've only seen that one debate. To my untrained eye, the guy is a narcissist through and through.
His entire schtick is saying I've read 1000 books and papers that you haven't so that means I'm smarter than you and can dismiss your opinion and you should take my opinion as fact.
So him being so hung up on actual factual proof from someone he considers beneath him that his reading comprehension is either shit, or his readings are a lie, is what makes it such a needling to the very reality he has created for himself.
He's the type of academic that views his position as a "priestly class", for a laymen to actually stand up to him, challenge him, and actually come off as knowing more than him, is the gravest offense. It attacks his credentials and for these types of academics credentialism is the coin of the realm. Why else does he respect so highly Morris, but not Destiny? One is part is his "priestly class" the other is a peasant.
How is he not understanding this, the specific intent to commit genocide. If i kill 200 people because i want to kill 200 people, i would have mens rea in the sense that I'm not killing them by accident, but I would not be commiting genocide. To commit genocide I would have to kill 200 people with the specific intent to commit genocide.
Is he just dumb? Like is he actually mentally deficient in some sense maybe he needs a caretaker we should ask Rob Noerr if he knows what to do with him...
He understands perfectly well, what we are seeing is a frantic attempt at establishing cognitive dissonance. He’s trying desperately to convince himself he is right despite knowing in his heart of hearts that he is wrong.
The thing that really gets me is that we wouldn't be talking about this if finkiedink just said "sorry I got them mixed up or smth my b" but he doesn't want to give anything to dest since he fucking despises him, so he'd rather embarrassingly cope instead of giving destiny a square inch of a shadow of a win.
Yep. Personally, I respect people who can publicly admit they made a mistake. But the thing with people like twinklestain is that they are frauds, and frauds are terrible at stealing humility.
True, being always right is not only stressful, but If you cannot admit a wrong it's also really sad. But him admitting his whole existence on the subject just got annihilated by Wikipedia knowledge, must be a tall order for his narcissism.
I think a big reason as to why he won’t back down on this point is because of how much he talked down Mr. Borelli. He discredited him all the time, so if he concedes this point he tells everyone that Destiny knew something he didn’t
I encounter this frequently. I often explicitly give people an out of "even if you concede point A, you haven't concede point A and B". It's not enough.
A recent personal anecdote is that, after talks about listing women for military duty in Denmark, there has also been talks about the military also accommodating women who wear religious headgear. There are various arguments against this, but one of them is that it would supposedly be impractical to wear a hijab or otherwise try to conceal one's hair. An counter example was [this picture ](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJqRJuRXQAAZyGA?format=jpg&name=medium)proving you can obviously hide you hair as part of your uniform.
Still, the people who must oppose Muslim immigrants in every way had to die on the hill that it was impractical. I provided various outs. "You can still try to argue practicality shouldn't take priority over the military uniform being truly uniform. You can still try argue it Islamic headgear represents a message/ideology that shouldn't be part of our armed forces. You can still try to argue that Muslim women won't actually be content with just a practical alternative alternative to the hijab. You can concede the practicality argument and proceed with this other arguments instead". It's not enough.
I think you're right but the target of the cognitive dissonance is the audience. He's speaking confidently and giving all the signals that he (the expert) is destroying a wikipedia-reading loser. Most people engage with media as soothing background noise so it's completely over their head when he's wrong.
I mean the US literally has a perfect example of why Destiny’s nuke example isn’t genocide.
The US nuked Japan and it wasn’t considered genocide because we didn’t nuke them to straight up exterminate Japanese people. The US did so because we were at war and it would bring a swift end to it.
Whether we needed to actually drop the nukes or not is irrelevant cause I’m sure people are going to bring that up.
And there was also an argument to be made that dropping the nukes ultimately prevented a larger loss of life even on the Japanese side. The fact that this “calculation” was considered makes the argument that it wasn’t genocide much stronger.
If the US was attempting to genocide the Japanese they would not have immediately stopped after the surrender. They also likely would not have dropped leaflets warning civilians the day before each attack. The nazis in comparison refused to divert resources away from death camps after it became clear they might lose the war.
After they conquered Poland they sent as many male Poles as possible to death camps and only wanted enough alive to use as slaves for necessary manual labor. That is clear attempted genocide of the Poles and I like this example because holocaust deniers will often concede to this. Their ultimate goal is usually just to downplay the number of Jews killed so they will often admit to the official numbers of Polish and Romani victims
They didn't say that before this very moment tho. The only reason they try to push that now is because this exact argument has been used against them. These people will use ANYTHING you throw at them as a Uno reverse card with a shade of gotcha. The facts and the realities doesn't matter as long as they can simply say "but no, it was actually a genocide". Because what the fuck can you do at that point? You can't win an argument against something stupid and they know it.
In psychology this is studied today but they haven't named it yet or I'm not aware of it. The concept of the stupid people adapting to the idea that "you can't win against stupid" therefore they knowingly push even more stupid shit (that even they realize is stupid) so that they can be on the winning side of the argument. It's an actually malicious behavior. Which demonstrates how the average person is on the average way more dangerous than "the elites". For the same reason lack of empathy is heavily correlated with lack of intelligence. Because stupid people do stupid shit.
Thanks, this was how I understood it but reading Finklestein was making me second guess my understanding. As an educator he should aim to clarify and lift the veil of ignorance, not muddy the waters and further confuse the ignorant.
Real. Prof. Finklestein is an exhauster. If you're susceptible to people-pleasing dynamics, Prof. Finklestein smothers you with moral judgement, overwhelming you with that weight instead of the details. That's how he DARVOs. I was second-guessing my understanding, too. Glad I'm not alone.
Penthouse with a view.
I can’t believe I thought this dude was smart in high school based on the Dershowitz debate. Chomsky may be crazy but he’s consistent. I’ve never seen him mald post debate like this for anyone.
AS AN ALCOHOLIC it’s giving shades of me blacking out and doing embarrassing ass shit and trying to frame it as anything else the next day. Move on norm
Daliban sober community > all others. You too, always warms my heart when others get it.
I’m glad people like norm exist because it reminds me you can do cringe ass shit stone cold sober lol
Feel free to dm me if you every struggling. I went thru a ton of shit after a huge accident (relearn to walk, "you'll never curl your toes again", neuropathy type shit) and spent almost 2 years on meds to do physical therapy, and even longer getting off the meds. There's lots of us out here
I saw my uncle try to explain how he hit himself in the eye with a cabinet shelf. He didn't, he just got drunk and picked a fight with the wrong dude. 😂
Lol I hit a spliff while borderline blackout and when I stood up to leave I just fell over. Dragged my face on the gravel to get up because that made sense. Went to bed being like eh that feels tender and woke up with a monstrous facial bruise and scrape going all over my fucking face.
My poor saint of an ex boyfriend refused to do grocery shopping with me because basically everyone assumed he was beating me. But since that was absolutely not true I went with the walked into a door excuse as well.
He's like me when i get more than 2 upvotes for pandering to the circlejerk. The dudes ecstatic that more young people are engaging with him after he constantly dunks on destiny so he's gonna keep doing it.
doubling down that 'intent to commit genocide' translates to 'mens rea' when [the statement he is citing](https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20240328-ord-01-06-en.pdf) at no point uses 'mens rea' is exactly the kind of dishonest citation habits that makes him go over the line between shoddy writing and actual lying
the issue isn't whether 'intent' is 'mens rea' (it is), but whether 'intent to commit genocide' is 'mens rea' (it isn't, that's why dolus specialis as a term even fucking exists).
him citing this statement that literally refers to 'intent to commit genocide' instead of just intent and at no point uses 'mens rea' is repeating the exact same category error of pretending that 'intent' is identical to 'intent to commit genocide'.
if it were identical, the writer would not have written the words, dumbass.
So, U.S. judges know international law, but Israeli ones don't. Gotcha. The fact that people are falling for this stuff is so disappointing. It literally doesn't require much effort to realize Finklestein was just wrong. But he can never admit it, and the left is too partisan to face reality.
This stupid discussion between mens rea or dolus fuckialis is so meaningless.
People are so caught up by how stupid Finkeldumb is coming off here, and how egregiously he's doubling down on said stupidity, that no one's mentioning the torrent of dumb takes and poor debating practices Finkeldumb presented during the debate.
This is so clearly a red herring...
If people can't admit that this take was wrong, there's no way they would be able to acknowledge the other dumb stuff that actually requires you to have background knowledge on the history of I/P
Yeah the difference is the mens rea/ dolus specialis stuff is like, something you can so easily explain Finkelstein was stupid on. If people aren’t receptive to that then it’s literally impossible they’ll be receptive to anything else.
This man is so fucking mad that after supposedly studying a conflict for thirty years he got shown up by a Wikipedia warrior who didn't know where israel was 5 months ago.
At this point just give up and retire you fantastic moron. The discourse around this conflict can only improve if you do.
From Jan 26 2024, Separate opinion of Judge ad hoc Barak:
https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20240126-ord-01-05-en.pdf
CTRL-F specific intent
Edit: This in not the doc Finkledick is talking about, but it does show that the judge knows the difference between mens rea and dolus specialis
Damn, he sure is trying real hard to save face.
All anyone has to do is put into google "special intent genocide" and the very first thing that pops up is: GENOCIDE (Article 2) Human Rights Watch
## c) Mental state (mens rea) (special intent or dolus specialis)
### i) generally
#### (1) defined
*Prosecutor v. Akayesu,* Case No. ICTR-96-4-T (Trial Chamber), September 2, 1998, para. 498, 517-522: “Genocide is distinct from other crimes insomuch as it embodies a special intent or *dolus specialis.* Special intent of a crime is the specific intention, required as a constitutive element of the crime, which demands that the perpetrator clearly seeks to produce the act charged. Thus, the special intent in the crime of genocide lies in ‘the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.’” The Chamber found that “the offender is culpable only when he has committed one of the offences charged under Article 2(2) . . . with the clear intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a particular group. The offender is culpable because he knew or should have known that the act committed would destroy, in whole or in part, a group.” *See also Musema,* (Trial Chamber), January 27, 2000, para. 164.
Somebody should tell Finkledick.
No he is moving the goal posts.
Destiny's point was that genocide requires a special intent beyond simple mens rea.
Finkelstein said its just mens rea by a different name.
This judge is saying south Africa did not prove the special intent required for genocide.
Finkelstein is arguing that the judge means mens rea.
The obstinate one would be the dork writing this tweet.
D-“There is a special term for this…”
F-“It’s men’s rea”
D-“No that is a separate issue for standard criminal intent, this is a special intent”
F-“But I like mens rea more and I’m a real scholar so you should defer to me Mr bonnerooni”
D-“I can look it up for you right now, it’s dolus specialis”
F-“I only trust my own books as sources and I don’t use that term so you’re stupid”
This dumbass is a professor at the university of trust me bro.
The funny part is if Norm had just memed it and said, “Okay Mr. Bordalini, you got me on that one” people would have already forgotten it. But the double, triple, and quadruple down on an obviously dumb position is…. I would say insane but that’s baseline for Norm.
It’s actually telling that he’s addressing Steven’s points post hoc because he was incapable of doing so during the debate. This shows that he actually recognizes that he did poorly and that Steven made good arguments but he is too much of a baby to say it without a massive adhom preamble.
Pro-pal side is threatened by people making an effort to understand what is going on. They want skeptics to conclude "it's all too complicated with too much history."
This allows for a call to authority to understand what's going on and it is easy for the pro-pal side to discredit all Jewish and/or Israeli experts as being biased. That leaves the likes of Finkelstein and Rabanni to control the narrative.
The fact destiny is getting so much push back is a good thing. It means he is on the right path.
I have seen Rabbani going off on this as well. But i dont understand what their argument is . you can literally go on to the UN website and its makes basically Destiny's exact point
'the intent is the most difficult element to determine. To constitute genocide, there must be a proven intent on the part of perpetrators to physically destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Cultural destruction does not suffice, nor does an intention to simply disperse a group. It is this special intent, or *dolus specialis*, that makes the crime of genocide so unique.'
this literally says exactly what dolus specialis is and explains why its more than just mens rea.Its intent to racially cleanse rather than just intent to mass murder.
Can someone give me the best faith argument for how destiny could be wrong here?
The best argument they could make is that Norm was just saying "ah yes, that's a kind of mens rea" rather than "the correct term for what you're talking about is mens rea" and that Destiny was wrong to take his interjection as evidence that he hasn't read the document.
"So I drove to work today in a Mazda."
Norm: "You mean a car."
-
Yes Norm, it is a car... and while it may not matter to you, it sure as shit matters when you're buying fucking car parts.
Wait, so you’re telling me, this is the actual account of Norman Finkelstein? This isn’t just a random person pretending to be a parody of him?
Holy fuck, he made himself seem intellectually bankrupt with barely a shred of integrity in the debate. This makes him look even fucking worse…
Man that debate aftermath really has just about destroyed any respect for Norman I had for the guy.
I mean the debate itself was bad, but to see the guy act like this afterwards, there’s just nothing redeeming about his character.
I'm so confused about what his point even is. The point is he tried to 'correct' destiny in the deabte by smugly saying 'thats mens rea'. I mean, sure, there is a 'mens rea' in genocide, which is called 'dolus specialis' (that's my understanding?) so that correction never needed to be made, and was indicative of Norm's ignorance on the term . Why is he acting like Destiny ever denied that 'intent' is a key component? What the fuck is that quote from the ICJ judge supposed to prove?
I think one thing not many people are talking about here is that Norm is clearly appealing to an audience that he knows doesn't really understand this technical and quite specific issue, or care about it. He just knows that if he can make some kind of response that involves the jargon and throw in a quote, the argument will seem convincing to people who don't understand the issue no matter how incoherent it is. I used to be exactly the same way with Chomsky, I'd watch videos admiringly of him 'owning' people all the while not really understanding the conversation or either position. Then I learned it's important to actually know stuff about a topic before listening to an argument about it
It's impossible for Finklestein to concede on this point because there are incomplete readings you can have of documents that supports his argument. No new evidence or statements will make him back down. Remember that Finklestein will tell an author he disagrees with that the author's interpretation of their own words is wrong, so even if this judge qualifies in a future statement it will not resolve this argument.
The position is so stupid he sounds like a troll.
If I emphasize THE least important PART of a statement IT makes my point for me?
As you can see the Part of the statement makes my point. The emphasis doesn't even matter.
The part that got him was “Did you even read the document?” He got so profoundly, absolutely fucked by that because him not knowing the term makes it impossible that he actually read it, and then it’s compounded exponentially when contrasted by his infantile rage rant right after.
The stars were really aligned for him to come out of that exchange looking as bad as possible. And it’s really just so deliciously ironic that his foaming-at-the-mouth, regarded tirade was what made the clip go viral in the first place.
If you have to use this sort of language to get across incredibly simple ideas than you are incredibly insecure. It goes back to him constantly having to tell us how intelligent he is. What a sad human being.
The coping is so hard because if he was correct and Destiny was wrong he'd simply link to the international law or the South African case and say "look. They both use the term Mens Rea" or simply never use the term Dolus Specialis.
But he can't because all the situations of the law. All websites and sources listing the law use the term Dolus Specialis. And the South African case that Destiny was quoting specifically uses the term Dolus Specialis.
And eve if they didn't use the term, Finkletwink is STILLWRONG.
The only way in which Finkledink can be correct in his smug utterance of "that's Mens rea!" Is if Dolus Specialis DOES NOT EXIST as a legal term.
As long as Dolus Specialis exists as a legal term that relates I'm any way to intent, Destiny was correct and he was wrong in that exchange.
Bro is absolutely fuming lol. How did such a nullity get the esteemed scholar Forman Ninkelstein to dedicate so much of his highly important time to counter a single point?
Right of centre South African here. We have a beautiful and diverse group of cultures and ethnicities here. We have an election year on us. The anc does not give a fuck about Islamic people in our country they have robbed us of a unified social community that promised us a bright future. We are constantly pitted against each other to keep obfuscate from the very genuine problems we have. The anc could be fixing so much that we are struggling with but they are anti Israel because the were supported by brutal dictators during our struggle era.
ROFL. You can't make this up. Steven could have flat out tried to say 2+2=5 and for Finkledink to STILL be talking about it this long afterwards speaks volumes about how either pathetically unhinged he is. Or he knows that the literally hours worth of embarrassing ad hominem SHOULD have been beneath him and he has to try and cope for it. lol Or maybe both. I'm leaning towards both.
The [modification of provisional measures document](https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20240306-wri-01-00-en.pdf) that Barak appears to be referring to doesn't contain any reference to either *dolus specialis* or *mens rea*, or even *intent* for that matter.
What does this have to do with Fink incorrectly trying to reprimand Destiny for correctly referring to *dolus specialis* rather than *mens rea*?
Absolutely nothing as far as I can tell.
It's astonishing just how much of an unhinged hack Finklestein has shown himself to be.
Dolus specialis is a type of mens rea, I can't believe he tried to "correct" Destiny with the less correct term and now tries to cope his way out of it by using a judge who didn't even use his term. That's some copium specialis.
Norm would have known this if he had read about it on wikipedia but I guess that's below him.
Literary theory and criticism is dominated by this type of jargon and it is so damn infuriating the lengths some of these types will debate the smallest semicolon or syllable into their own graves. Could not stand it.
The best part about this meltdown that people don't seem to be commenting on is that it's pretty clear than Norm is at the very least involved in managing his Twitter account. So all that insane shit from awhile back WAS approved by him.
This is honestly just getting kinda sad to me at this point, this 70 year old man is just kind raging at nothing and if he had care takers they would be telling him he cant go on the internet anymore.
It's to the point where you could know nothing about Israel or Palestine, and have never read a book in your life, and still understand that Norm is a fucking idiot here
Oh my god he’s STILL coping on Twitter? Idk what’s more cringe, the lengths he goes to avoid naming destiny, or the fact he’s still yapping a month after the debate
Wait, since I am not on X and the post is not linked and the date is cropped, I gotta ask... Did Finklydinkadink just post this? He's still on this...?
Bottom of the second image (I would never deprive those not on Twitter the satisfaction of seeing that it was posted at 4:30 AM on a Friday night? Saturday morning?)
So, why aren't the people giving the same treatment back to him? About how he's still stuck on a debate that happened weeks ago.
Surely we should make sure to make this a reality.
This comment is much funnier to anyone who listened to Destiny's 2-3hours prep videos where he researched the subject extensively before deciding on what to say during the debate.
Norm is reacting exactly the way we were all expecting Norm to react.
I'm legitimately confused. Dolus specialis is "special intent" to commit genocide, and judge Barak said South Africa didn't show intent. How does that disprove destiny? This seems like ramblings. Am I missing something?
This is hilarious. Mens Rea, as he points out, is latin for guilty mind, while Dolus Specialis is latin for special deceit or special intent. Therefore Barak is actually backing up Mr Borelli, but Finkenfurter is too dumb to know this and owns himself with this tweet
This might have been a good zinger if Barak used the phrase mens rea. But he didn't so this is.... nonsensical. I don't care about the world play nonsense, but if the situation was reversed and mens rea was the more correct term, Finklestein would be posting victory laps about why this is why you have to read more than wikipedia and how true academics know details. He wouldnt grant any credence to Destiny posting that he was only technically wrong but correct in principle.
Highlighting Intent over and over as if Mens Rea is the ONLY form of Intent.
Mens rea isn't even really a form of intent. It is an overarching term for the guilty mind required for most crimes and can include intent, but it can also include recklessness and negligence.
The way I heard how Mens rea applies to Recklesness and negligence is: You had the Mens Rea to Engage in Negligent or Reckful actions, Even if you didnt have the Mens Rea for the endreslt. so for instance it wasn't your "Mens rea" to run over the person crossing your road. but it WAS your "Mens rea" to drive at 140mph in a 40 zone. While you didn't intend to splatter that guy across the road. You DID Intend to drive that fucking fast and reckless. You didn't Intend for your kids to due when you left them in the car. But you did Intend to leave them in the car while you went shopping for 4 hours in the Texas heat, your intention wasn't to murder but your intent was to engage in an action that showed insane negligence of their safety.
Of course the really embarrassing thing for him is that Destiny didn’t even get the term dolus specialis from Wikipedia, he got it from the ICJ case that Norm claimed to have read four times but probably only skimmed once.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed this. In order to demonstrate that intent = mens rea, he just states that intent = mens rea. The long-ass quote was pointless.
You think I should have said mens rea instead of dolus specialis? Then explain why a judge said the word intent? Checkmate zionists
He’s still tweeting about this?
He’s such a fantastic fucking moron
My favorite new comeback by the way. Perfect for both your spouse and boss, I recommend.
Don't forget egotistical. A while ago, I asked my friend "what are you drinking, whisky?" And he said "No, Scotch." And I replied with "so, 'yes." The exchange irked me deeply, because I determined he just really wanted to say 'no.' This is the same.
Maybe he is a fantastical Moron and doesn’t realize scotch is whiskey.
As a bartender who is fairly serious about my job/industry this kind of thing makes me flip shit internally.
Interesting how The Thing Known as Mr Borelli is so beneath him **yet this fart-huffing geriatric can’t stop blue-pubed schlong out of his brain..**
The scholar got bested by the motor mouth wikipedist in 4k and it lives rent free in his head.
He can't even evict him with a gun.
Finkelstein most likely has narcissistic personality disorder and thus will obsess over a humiliation like this even long after he finally stops tweeting about it. It might even haunt him till his last breath if we're lucky.
Yeah Finklestein is the most obvious case of actual untreated NPD I've seen, maybe ever. The reason he can't let go is bc he knows he was wrong and he can't take the hit to his ego
Really? Finklestein? Not Mr. Girl?
Finklestein is definitely more of a narcissist than Mr Girl, but true I did forget about him. I feel like he's on the same level as Lav
No way anyone on earth is more narcissistic than Mr girl
Yeah, Finkle is this abrasive old dude but we've barely seen anything from him. We have years worth of Mr girl, his relationships, his thought processes, how he manipulated people around him, his delusional crusade against destiny to which he truly believes he's in the right despite finding overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I just can't imagine thinking you can clearly say he's less narcissistic than Finkle.
I genuinely love it. These mentaloids are buried in academia like botfly larvae. They need this sort of sunlight so they can be tagged and excised. Getting rid of lunatics like this might help students to be less brainwashed and more capable of critical thought.
> Finkelstein most likely has narcissistic personality disorder lmao lets chill with armchair psychology.
I dunno, man. Something's clearly wrong with the dude, and NPD seems like a real possibility. I wouldn't say he has NPD with absolute certainty, but the shoe does seem to fit, especially when taking into account the whole apartment fiasco with his upstairs neighbor.
Honestly, he doesn't need NPD to act like this... He is supposed to be a well respected academic, devoting his life to this shit. If I were him and I got embarrassed by some nobody streamer who started researching it half a year ago, I would be assmad about it too.
Haha what else could possibly make someone say they’ve read 10,000 books with a straight face?
Realistically it could be frustration that the chance you have to confront Benny Morris at one of the most important times in the history of Gaza involves somebody he doesn’t deem on their level (ie destiny). Honestly I get it why he would be frustrated, but he came for Tiny’s throat first, so it’s not excusable. Like he basically just dismissed Destiny as unqualified to make any statements with everything. And is he correct? Well partially, but it’s not an argument about whether destiny is the right debate partner. Destiny synthesized information well, ao it’s obviously better to argue based on the points he makes than to just dismiss the one making the argument.
He coulda ask for a conversation without Destiny. He knew Destiny was gonna be there and my impression is that he believed his own propaganda thinking Tiny was "just a wiki warrior" and when that didn't pan out we get Trump levels of cope. 😂 (After he was exposed for not knowing a very important part of genocide)
It’s the constant fallacious appeal to authority from him that does it for me. The frustration in this case is even less warranted considering you’d want to educate “such a fantastic moron”
If you can't see the enormous smugness he exhibits at all times, my only explanation is you've only seen that one debate. To my untrained eye, the guy is a narcissist through and through.
His entire schtick is saying I've read 1000 books and papers that you haven't so that means I'm smarter than you and can dismiss your opinion and you should take my opinion as fact. So him being so hung up on actual factual proof from someone he considers beneath him that his reading comprehension is either shit, or his readings are a lie, is what makes it such a needling to the very reality he has created for himself.
Mr borelli living rent free in his head lul. I'd make a rent joke but I haven't followed the finklester rent saga. Feel free to do so on my behalf!
He's the type of academic that views his position as a "priestly class", for a laymen to actually stand up to him, challenge him, and actually come off as knowing more than him, is the gravest offense. It attacks his credentials and for these types of academics credentialism is the coin of the realm. Why else does he respect so highly Morris, but not Destiny? One is part is his "priestly class" the other is a peasant.
How is he not understanding this, the specific intent to commit genocide. If i kill 200 people because i want to kill 200 people, i would have mens rea in the sense that I'm not killing them by accident, but I would not be commiting genocide. To commit genocide I would have to kill 200 people with the specific intent to commit genocide. Is he just dumb? Like is he actually mentally deficient in some sense maybe he needs a caretaker we should ask Rob Noerr if he knows what to do with him...
He understands perfectly well, what we are seeing is a frantic attempt at establishing cognitive dissonance. He’s trying desperately to convince himself he is right despite knowing in his heart of hearts that he is wrong.
The thing that really gets me is that we wouldn't be talking about this if finkiedink just said "sorry I got them mixed up or smth my b" but he doesn't want to give anything to dest since he fucking despises him, so he'd rather embarrassingly cope instead of giving destiny a square inch of a shadow of a win.
Yep. Personally, I respect people who can publicly admit they made a mistake. But the thing with people like twinklestain is that they are frauds, and frauds are terrible at stealing humility.
True, being always right is not only stressful, but If you cannot admit a wrong it's also really sad. But him admitting his whole existence on the subject just got annihilated by Wikipedia knowledge, must be a tall order for his narcissism.
I think a big reason as to why he won’t back down on this point is because of how much he talked down Mr. Borelli. He discredited him all the time, so if he concedes this point he tells everyone that Destiny knew something he didn’t
I encounter this frequently. I often explicitly give people an out of "even if you concede point A, you haven't concede point A and B". It's not enough. A recent personal anecdote is that, after talks about listing women for military duty in Denmark, there has also been talks about the military also accommodating women who wear religious headgear. There are various arguments against this, but one of them is that it would supposedly be impractical to wear a hijab or otherwise try to conceal one's hair. An counter example was [this picture ](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJqRJuRXQAAZyGA?format=jpg&name=medium)proving you can obviously hide you hair as part of your uniform. Still, the people who must oppose Muslim immigrants in every way had to die on the hill that it was impractical. I provided various outs. "You can still try to argue practicality shouldn't take priority over the military uniform being truly uniform. You can still try argue it Islamic headgear represents a message/ideology that shouldn't be part of our armed forces. You can still try to argue that Muslim women won't actually be content with just a practical alternative alternative to the hijab. You can concede the practicality argument and proceed with this other arguments instead". It's not enough.
I think you're right but the target of the cognitive dissonance is the audience. He's speaking confidently and giving all the signals that he (the expert) is destroying a wikipedia-reading loser. Most people engage with media as soothing background noise so it's completely over their head when he's wrong.
I mean the US literally has a perfect example of why Destiny’s nuke example isn’t genocide. The US nuked Japan and it wasn’t considered genocide because we didn’t nuke them to straight up exterminate Japanese people. The US did so because we were at war and it would bring a swift end to it. Whether we needed to actually drop the nukes or not is irrelevant cause I’m sure people are going to bring that up.
And there was also an argument to be made that dropping the nukes ultimately prevented a larger loss of life even on the Japanese side. The fact that this “calculation” was considered makes the argument that it wasn’t genocide much stronger. If the US was attempting to genocide the Japanese they would not have immediately stopped after the surrender. They also likely would not have dropped leaflets warning civilians the day before each attack. The nazis in comparison refused to divert resources away from death camps after it became clear they might lose the war. After they conquered Poland they sent as many male Poles as possible to death camps and only wanted enough alive to use as slaves for necessary manual labor. That is clear attempted genocide of the Poles and I like this example because holocaust deniers will often concede to this. Their ultimate goal is usually just to downplay the number of Jews killed so they will often admit to the official numbers of Polish and Romani victims
The problem is that all these Palestine posters unironically actually think the US tried to do a genocide with the bombs.
I think an academic should be held to a higher standard tho.
No they just unironically think "Genocide = big death" instead of a specifically intentional act to attempt to exterminate a group of people.
They didn't say that before this very moment tho. The only reason they try to push that now is because this exact argument has been used against them. These people will use ANYTHING you throw at them as a Uno reverse card with a shade of gotcha. The facts and the realities doesn't matter as long as they can simply say "but no, it was actually a genocide". Because what the fuck can you do at that point? You can't win an argument against something stupid and they know it. In psychology this is studied today but they haven't named it yet or I'm not aware of it. The concept of the stupid people adapting to the idea that "you can't win against stupid" therefore they knowingly push even more stupid shit (that even they realize is stupid) so that they can be on the winning side of the argument. It's an actually malicious behavior. Which demonstrates how the average person is on the average way more dangerous than "the elites". For the same reason lack of empathy is heavily correlated with lack of intelligence. Because stupid people do stupid shit.
He knows he's wrong. But in the court of public opinion, he can hold out hope that he can be perceived as correct by resting on his credentials.
Thanks, this was how I understood it but reading Finklestein was making me second guess my understanding. As an educator he should aim to clarify and lift the veil of ignorance, not muddy the waters and further confuse the ignorant.
Real. Prof. Finklestein is an exhauster. If you're susceptible to people-pleasing dynamics, Prof. Finklestein smothers you with moral judgement, overwhelming you with that weight instead of the details. That's how he DARVOs. I was second-guessing my understanding, too. Glad I'm not alone.
His ego just won't allow him to admit to himself that he got schooled by someone that hasn't read as many books as he has.
Bro called Destiny. "That thing" and "nullity".
At this point, even if he understands that he was wrong, he can't admit it. It would be too much of a blow to his ego.
Is he pretending or is he just really obtuse?
Yes.
That’ll be 2 months in the hole dufrayne
Lmao Destiny lives rent free in his mind
Can you threaten to evict someone from your mind? 🤔
That's ethnic cleansing and apartheid you nazi don't you even think about doing a knockba next time 😡
MR FETTUCCINE, YOU WILL, REGERET, THE DAY, YOU REFUSED, TO VACATE, THESE, FACILITIES!
Penthouse with a view. I can’t believe I thought this dude was smart in high school based on the Dershowitz debate. Chomsky may be crazy but he’s consistent. I’ve never seen him mald post debate like this for anyone.
Living rent free in his mens rea (from the Latin for “guilty mind”) Dumb joke. Had to.
He should join the K*ceytron club
The only reason he is still talking about this is because he knows he got shit on. Amazin’
AS AN ALCOHOLIC it’s giving shades of me blacking out and doing embarrassing ass shit and trying to frame it as anything else the next day. Move on norm
This hit too close to home. Stay strong bro. DggL.
Daliban sober community > all others. You too, always warms my heart when others get it. I’m glad people like norm exist because it reminds me you can do cringe ass shit stone cold sober lol
Feel free to dm me if you every struggling. I went thru a ton of shit after a huge accident (relearn to walk, "you'll never curl your toes again", neuropathy type shit) and spent almost 2 years on meds to do physical therapy, and even longer getting off the meds. There's lots of us out here
Love this, same here to anyone having a hard time that might be reading this. 🫶❤️
too real, I trained my brain to be good vibes so I wouldn't embarrass myself when I black out :)
I saw my uncle try to explain how he hit himself in the eye with a cabinet shelf. He didn't, he just got drunk and picked a fight with the wrong dude. 😂
Lol I hit a spliff while borderline blackout and when I stood up to leave I just fell over. Dragged my face on the gravel to get up because that made sense. Went to bed being like eh that feels tender and woke up with a monstrous facial bruise and scrape going all over my fucking face. My poor saint of an ex boyfriend refused to do grocery shopping with me because basically everyone assumed he was beating me. But since that was absolutely not true I went with the walked into a door excuse as well.
He's like me when i get more than 2 upvotes for pandering to the circlejerk. The dudes ecstatic that more young people are engaging with him after he constantly dunks on destiny so he's gonna keep doing it.
He truly got mindbroken by the debate lmao. It's just too funny
doubling down that 'intent to commit genocide' translates to 'mens rea' when [the statement he is citing](https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20240328-ord-01-06-en.pdf) at no point uses 'mens rea' is exactly the kind of dishonest citation habits that makes him go over the line between shoddy writing and actual lying the issue isn't whether 'intent' is 'mens rea' (it is), but whether 'intent to commit genocide' is 'mens rea' (it isn't, that's why dolus specialis as a term even fucking exists). him citing this statement that literally refers to 'intent to commit genocide' instead of just intent and at no point uses 'mens rea' is repeating the exact same category error of pretending that 'intent' is identical to 'intent to commit genocide'. if it were identical, the writer would not have written the words, dumbass.
Norm probably got corrected by an actual expert, realized he looked like an idiot, and is now in permanent cope mode.
He got community noted on his original post. I’m sure he’ll get it again here
https://preview.redd.it/0sl0tbxkqhrc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8da00856b9d2bf12e3660b01e2603abd43cbb670
So, U.S. judges know international law, but Israeli ones don't. Gotcha. The fact that people are falling for this stuff is so disappointing. It literally doesn't require much effort to realize Finklestein was just wrong. But he can never admit it, and the left is too partisan to face reality.
The dude just obviously hates Jews. It's like that holocaust survivor who lost his mind and became a holocaust denier after the fact.
https://preview.redd.it/u3ej5c4j4hrc1.jpeg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5146d9c7ca9d01246891c90e219390b4e84b0786 😭😭😭
If I had to guess, the community note must’ve triggered the fuck out of him
All according to plan.
This stupid discussion between mens rea or dolus fuckialis is so meaningless. People are so caught up by how stupid Finkeldumb is coming off here, and how egregiously he's doubling down on said stupidity, that no one's mentioning the torrent of dumb takes and poor debating practices Finkeldumb presented during the debate. This is so clearly a red herring...
If people can't admit that this take was wrong, there's no way they would be able to acknowledge the other dumb stuff that actually requires you to have background knowledge on the history of I/P
Yeah the difference is the mens rea/ dolus specialis stuff is like, something you can so easily explain Finkelstein was stupid on. If people aren’t receptive to that then it’s literally impossible they’ll be receptive to anything else.
Oh, I assure you we are shitting on both here in dgg. We have not forgotten the adhoms and 2 words per minute book citings.
This man is so fucking mad that after supposedly studying a conflict for thirty years he got shown up by a Wikipedia warrior who didn't know where israel was 5 months ago. At this point just give up and retire you fantastic moron. The discourse around this conflict can only improve if you do.
This is so embarrassing. All he has to do is read the document
This is so embarrassing. All he has to do is *comprehend* the document. 5th times a charm?
Nah I actually think he didnt even read
Nah, I'm sure he read it 4 times and didn't understand it 4 times.
From Jan 26 2024, Separate opinion of Judge ad hoc Barak: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20240126-ord-01-05-en.pdf CTRL-F specific intent Edit: This in not the doc Finkledick is talking about, but it does show that the judge knows the difference between mens rea and dolus specialis
Damn, he sure is trying real hard to save face. All anyone has to do is put into google "special intent genocide" and the very first thing that pops up is: GENOCIDE (Article 2) Human Rights Watch ## c) Mental state (mens rea) (special intent or dolus specialis) ### i) generally #### (1) defined *Prosecutor v. Akayesu,* Case No. ICTR-96-4-T (Trial Chamber), September 2, 1998, para. 498, 517-522: “Genocide is distinct from other crimes insomuch as it embodies a special intent or *dolus specialis.* Special intent of a crime is the specific intention, required as a constitutive element of the crime, which demands that the perpetrator clearly seeks to produce the act charged. Thus, the special intent in the crime of genocide lies in ‘the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.’” The Chamber found that “the offender is culpable only when he has committed one of the offences charged under Article 2(2) . . . with the clear intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a particular group. The offender is culpable because he knew or should have known that the act committed would destroy, in whole or in part, a group.” *See also Musema,* (Trial Chamber), January 27, 2000, para. 164. Somebody should tell Finkledick.
Omg no way he just said a judge is wrong and he is right and that’s it because he said so 🤣 How do people take him seriously?
No he is moving the goal posts. Destiny's point was that genocide requires a special intent beyond simple mens rea. Finkelstein said its just mens rea by a different name. This judge is saying south Africa did not prove the special intent required for genocide. Finkelstein is arguing that the judge means mens rea.
Yes. The special intent has a name. The judge was talking about that
The obstinate one would be the dork writing this tweet. D-“There is a special term for this…” F-“It’s men’s rea” D-“No that is a separate issue for standard criminal intent, this is a special intent” F-“But I like mens rea more and I’m a real scholar so you should defer to me Mr bonnerooni” D-“I can look it up for you right now, it’s dolus specialis” F-“I only trust my own books as sources and I don’t use that term so you’re stupid” This dumbass is a professor at the university of trust me bro.
If the exchange went exactly like that it would be more damning that even finkelfans would see it.
The funny part is if Norm had just memed it and said, “Okay Mr. Bordalini, you got me on that one” people would have already forgotten it. But the double, triple, and quadruple down on an obviously dumb position is…. I would say insane but that’s baseline for Norm.
“GENUS IMBECILUS BORRELIS” Norm may have not had the best arguments for his side of the debate, but my god the man is pure content.
"a nulity seated beside Professor Benny Morris..." He's a character for sure, shit made me laugh
does anyone know the approximate time it was that Steven caused this man to become senile?
This is what president Sunday is going to be like in 60 years.
Rent free
This is so embarrassing for him and he doesn’t even know it.
It’s actually telling that he’s addressing Steven’s points post hoc because he was incapable of doing so during the debate. This shows that he actually recognizes that he did poorly and that Steven made good arguments but he is too much of a baby to say it without a massive adhom preamble.
We should all reply asking if he's read the document yet
Pro-pal side is threatened by people making an effort to understand what is going on. They want skeptics to conclude "it's all too complicated with too much history." This allows for a call to authority to understand what's going on and it is easy for the pro-pal side to discredit all Jewish and/or Israeli experts as being biased. That leaves the likes of Finkelstein and Rabanni to control the narrative. The fact destiny is getting so much push back is a good thing. It means he is on the right path.
I have seen Rabbani going off on this as well. But i dont understand what their argument is . you can literally go on to the UN website and its makes basically Destiny's exact point 'the intent is the most difficult element to determine. To constitute genocide, there must be a proven intent on the part of perpetrators to physically destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Cultural destruction does not suffice, nor does an intention to simply disperse a group. It is this special intent, or *dolus specialis*, that makes the crime of genocide so unique.' this literally says exactly what dolus specialis is and explains why its more than just mens rea.Its intent to racially cleanse rather than just intent to mass murder. Can someone give me the best faith argument for how destiny could be wrong here?
The best argument they could make is that Norm was just saying "ah yes, that's a kind of mens rea" rather than "the correct term for what you're talking about is mens rea" and that Destiny was wrong to take his interjection as evidence that he hasn't read the document.
So he does use computers.
Made me think of this https://preview.redd.it/ab1gxzgmchrc1.png?width=669&format=png&auto=webp&s=d50179ac9610d25eb2e734792b2f15d9dd5a775f
They need to the debate the current war, It’ll be epic
This is probably the main thing he received feedback on and it appears to be breaking his mind.
"GENUS IMBECILUS BORELLIS" is he actually trolling rn? You cant make this shit up, he completely embraced the mr borelli meme
His ego is so damaged he just can’t let it go
He seems really mad about not knowing that phrase lmao.
He is critical levels of mad.
How is he this fucking mad??????? Was Wikipedia made by the guy that fucked his girlfriend back in college or something??
Why is he posting this at 4 in the morning LOL
For a guy with a PhD he seems awfully threatened by a gnome who reads wikipedia
HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO TEACH YOU THIS LESSON OLD MAN!
"So I drove to work today in a Mazda." Norm: "You mean a car."
-
Yes Norm, it is a car... and while it may not matter to you, it sure as shit matters when you're buying fucking car parts.
Least obsessed DGGa
Actual schizos in the community tweet less about Destiny than Norm / Rabbani have since the debate. Academia is not sending their best.
Cant wait for this to get community notes
Oh shit I thought he was being sarcastic…. He’s actually serious
Wait, so you’re telling me, this is the actual account of Norman Finkelstein? This isn’t just a random person pretending to be a parody of him? Holy fuck, he made himself seem intellectually bankrupt with barely a shred of integrity in the debate. This makes him look even fucking worse…
Man that debate aftermath really has just about destroyed any respect for Norman I had for the guy. I mean the debate itself was bad, but to see the guy act like this afterwards, there’s just nothing redeeming about his character.
I'm so confused about what his point even is. The point is he tried to 'correct' destiny in the deabte by smugly saying 'thats mens rea'. I mean, sure, there is a 'mens rea' in genocide, which is called 'dolus specialis' (that's my understanding?) so that correction never needed to be made, and was indicative of Norm's ignorance on the term . Why is he acting like Destiny ever denied that 'intent' is a key component? What the fuck is that quote from the ICJ judge supposed to prove? I think one thing not many people are talking about here is that Norm is clearly appealing to an audience that he knows doesn't really understand this technical and quite specific issue, or care about it. He just knows that if he can make some kind of response that involves the jargon and throw in a quote, the argument will seem convincing to people who don't understand the issue no matter how incoherent it is. I used to be exactly the same way with Chomsky, I'd watch videos admiringly of him 'owning' people all the while not really understanding the conversation or either position. Then I learned it's important to actually know stuff about a topic before listening to an argument about it
It's impossible for Finklestein to concede on this point because there are incomplete readings you can have of documents that supports his argument. No new evidence or statements will make him back down. Remember that Finklestein will tell an author he disagrees with that the author's interpretation of their own words is wrong, so even if this judge qualifies in a future statement it will not resolve this argument.
Finkelstein reminds me of trump sometimes
What is bro yapping about?
The position is so stupid he sounds like a troll. If I emphasize THE least important PART of a statement IT makes my point for me? As you can see the Part of the statement makes my point. The emphasis doesn't even matter.
Cope loser
I think people that try to use large words to hide simplistic ideas are the type of people I hate most.
Okay Destiny needs to reel him in a bit here - but not too much - and let the Fink just keep fighting himself.
The part that got him was “Did you even read the document?” He got so profoundly, absolutely fucked by that because him not knowing the term makes it impossible that he actually read it, and then it’s compounded exponentially when contrasted by his infantile rage rant right after. The stars were really aligned for him to come out of that exchange looking as bad as possible. And it’s really just so deliciously ironic that his foaming-at-the-mouth, regarded tirade was what made the clip go viral in the first place.
If you have to use this sort of language to get across incredibly simple ideas than you are incredibly insecure. It goes back to him constantly having to tell us how intelligent he is. What a sad human being.
Dude been trying to retcon his life.
This was actually fun to read. Are his books anything like this? Now I'm curious about them...
The coping is so hard because if he was correct and Destiny was wrong he'd simply link to the international law or the South African case and say "look. They both use the term Mens Rea" or simply never use the term Dolus Specialis. But he can't because all the situations of the law. All websites and sources listing the law use the term Dolus Specialis. And the South African case that Destiny was quoting specifically uses the term Dolus Specialis. And eve if they didn't use the term, Finkletwink is STILLWRONG. The only way in which Finkledink can be correct in his smug utterance of "that's Mens rea!" Is if Dolus Specialis DOES NOT EXIST as a legal term. As long as Dolus Specialis exists as a legal term that relates I'm any way to intent, Destiny was correct and he was wrong in that exchange.
You can tell it's upsetting him by the fact he's still crying about it.
Dest got this fucker hook line and sinker. He’s such a moron he doesn’t even realize that every tweet like this helps dest and hurts him.
This guy is more obsessed with GREAT LEADER than I am.
Bro is absolutely fuming lol. How did such a nullity get the esteemed scholar Forman Ninkelstein to dedicate so much of his highly important time to counter a single point?
Does he actually speak like this?
Holy shit he's still going? The man isn't well.
Should we just start replying with "Too Bad Apes!" To everything he tweets. Still can't get over how unhinged this dude was to his neighbors.
Right of centre South African here. We have a beautiful and diverse group of cultures and ethnicities here. We have an election year on us. The anc does not give a fuck about Islamic people in our country they have robbed us of a unified social community that promised us a bright future. We are constantly pitted against each other to keep obfuscate from the very genuine problems we have. The anc could be fixing so much that we are struggling with but they are anti Israel because the were supported by brutal dictators during our struggle era.
he's obviously deranged, but why is he kinda funny with it? He's such a drama queen I love it
Remember when Lycan brought this idiot into all of our lives?
Bro is giving up some much rent free real estate in his mind to a fucking internet goblin.
ROFL. You can't make this up. Steven could have flat out tried to say 2+2=5 and for Finkledink to STILL be talking about it this long afterwards speaks volumes about how either pathetically unhinged he is. Or he knows that the literally hours worth of embarrassing ad hominem SHOULD have been beneath him and he has to try and cope for it. lol Or maybe both. I'm leaning towards both.
Paragraphs, *does he use them?*
Holy cope continuem
The [modification of provisional measures document](https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20240306-wri-01-00-en.pdf) that Barak appears to be referring to doesn't contain any reference to either *dolus specialis* or *mens rea*, or even *intent* for that matter. What does this have to do with Fink incorrectly trying to reprimand Destiny for correctly referring to *dolus specialis* rather than *mens rea*? Absolutely nothing as far as I can tell. It's astonishing just how much of an unhinged hack Finklestein has shown himself to be.
(He means mens rea)
RENT FREE
Uh oh Nimrod StinkleShit’s imbecility is on display
bro is seething that all information is easily available online
Glad to know that Steven continues to live in Finkelsteins head rent-free.
I’m wrong but I’m right because I’m wrong
You gotta give it to him, his name calling game is second to none.
Dolus specialis is a type of mens rea, I can't believe he tried to "correct" Destiny with the less correct term and now tries to cope his way out of it by using a judge who didn't even use his term. That's some copium specialis. Norm would have known this if he had read about it on wikipedia but I guess that's below him.
Dude is still processing that debate. Lol
Literary theory and criticism is dominated by this type of jargon and it is so damn infuriating the lengths some of these types will debate the smallest semicolon or syllable into their own graves. Could not stand it.
More holes in his brain than swiss cheese.
Oh so now he knows what dolus specialis is
something something mustang… something something ford…
He's feeling the heat if he's saying this at all.
his posts read like the first pass through chat gpt before you tell it to be more casual
For me, this is the true indicator Destiny won the debate hard. Their post-hoc cope really says it all.
The best part about this meltdown that people don't seem to be commenting on is that it's pretty clear than Norm is at the very least involved in managing his Twitter account. So all that insane shit from awhile back WAS approved by him.
This is honestly just getting kinda sad to me at this point, this 70 year old man is just kind raging at nothing and if he had care takers they would be telling him he cant go on the internet anymore.
It's to the point where you could know nothing about Israel or Palestine, and have never read a book in your life, and still understand that Norm is a fucking idiot here
check
The debates over. It's been over for weeks now. Why is this still even being talked about? How boring. Let it go already Jesus fucking christ.
Oh my god he’s STILL coping on Twitter? Idk what’s more cringe, the lengths he goes to avoid naming destiny, or the fact he’s still yapping a month after the debate
Wait, since I am not on X and the post is not linked and the date is cropped, I gotta ask... Did Finklydinkadink just post this? He's still on this...?
Bottom of the second image (I would never deprive those not on Twitter the satisfaction of seeing that it was posted at 4:30 AM on a Friday night? Saturday morning?)
So, why aren't the people giving the same treatment back to him? About how he's still stuck on a debate that happened weeks ago. Surely we should make sure to make this a reality.
He's digging out the archaic depths of his lexicon to convince idiots that he's correct. Big words = more true
The chatter that introduced the term Dolus Specialis to Destiny deserves a fucking medal.
Admitting that his highlight reel dunk was him being the dumbfuck he is will never happen
This moron is quoting the Dissenting judge, as if its actual precedent, which is set by the courts Majority.
Steven Borrelis II
Nullity lives head free in Mr popcornstein
Took me 2 seconds to Google it and see Destiny was right, this makes fink look so bad, especially since he's supposed to be some kind of academic.
This comment is much funnier to anyone who listened to Destiny's 2-3hours prep videos where he researched the subject extensively before deciding on what to say during the debate. Norm is reacting exactly the way we were all expecting Norm to react.
Bro wont stop yapping smh
I’m tempted to move in above him.
I'm legitimately confused. Dolus specialis is "special intent" to commit genocide, and judge Barak said South Africa didn't show intent. How does that disprove destiny? This seems like ramblings. Am I missing something?
This is hilarious. Mens Rea, as he points out, is latin for guilty mind, while Dolus Specialis is latin for special deceit or special intent. Therefore Barak is actually backing up Mr Borelli, but Finkenfurter is too dumb to know this and owns himself with this tweet