I used the word "supposed" because I see, over and over again, claims and insinuations of Israel's moral superiority. I didn't mean "supposed" in the imperative sense, but in the sense of "alleged." But great, we agree that there all terrible. I'm sure neither of us feel the need to engage in any excuse-making or whataboutism, right?

For example, we agree, without reservation, that the case you're describing here is disgusting, and we also agree, without reservation, that it's disgusting that Israel has been routinely sexually and physically abusing Palestinian detainees. In some cases, so badly that they died, right? We agree, I'm sure, that it's barbaric that many of those prisoners are held without charge or trial, sometimes for years. We are undoubtedly on the same page that it indicates a deep moral rot when, as news of these sexual assaults came to light, an Israeli mob formed and stormed the prison to demand the release of the rapists!

This is the kind of thing you're talking about, right? Otherwise, surely, you wouldn't waste both of out time telling me about human rights violations in Beirut as if Israel's house was in order. It's things like this that mistakenly give the impression that you're trying to claim moral superiority. But you wouldn't do that. You're just as comfortable condemning Israel here as I am condemning the Houthi for the actions you describe here.