155

News (hexbear.net)

submitted 7 months ago by RNAi@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] edge@hexbear.net 13 points 7 months ago

Shouldn't it be forwards?

[-] neidu2@feddit.nl 9 points 7 months ago

I interpreted that as the kid being shot in the back

[-] aldalire@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 7 months ago

Not if the child was facing west

[-] edge@hexbear.net 6 points 7 months ago

But it's relative to the bullet. The child is moving towards it, so forwards.

[-] aldalire@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

No but if the shooter is east of the child and the child is facing west, the earth’s rotation will carry the bullet to the Palestinian child’s head backwards, with the bullet in stationary orbit around the earth. Rest in peace.

[-] edge@hexbear.net 3 points 7 months ago

The bullet isn't moving, it's a fixed point in space.

[-] D0ctorPhi1@hexbear.net 5 points 7 months ago

I had the same thought then interpreted it as shot from behind.

[-] invalidusernamelol@hexbear.net 4 points 7 months ago

That's what they're going for

[-] AmarkuntheGatherer@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 7 months ago

Depends on how you define forward. If, forgetting that the innocent IOF bullet isn't moving, you assume it's got a direction, it'd be forward. But if forward is the child's front-facing side, then the child, in an act of manipulative self-injurious behaviour, as part of asymmetric warfare waged against the totally indigenous people of the region, moved backwards.

I think I'm going to throw up now.