- cross-posted to:
- israelicrimes@lemm.ee
- cross-posted to:
- israelicrimes@lemm.ee
Israel could kill everyone left in Northern Gaza if its assault on the enclave continues, a United Nations relief official warned on Saturday
“Hospitals have been hit, and health workers have been detained. Shelters have been emptied and burned down. First responders have been prevented from saving people from under the rubble. Families have been separated, and men and boys are being taken away by the truckload,”
Msuya estimated that Israel’s actions in the north had killed hundreds and displaced tens of thousands. According to Al Jazeera, an Israeli siege on the north that began earlier in October has killed around 640.
“The Biden-Harris administration must stop the flow of U.S. weapons to Israel which constitutes a necessary step to halting Israel’s ongoing war crimes,” IMEU wrote on social media Saturday. “It’s time for an arms embargo now.”
You must log in or register to comment.
That is what “genocide” means.
And no political consequences.
In fact it’s anti-Semitic to investigate or charge these war crimes.
I would not be surprised if they did that - and then continued their way south. Israel is clearly out to exterminate the Palestinian people by any means possible, from outright shooting and bombing them to starving them and killing them by witholding medical services.
Both interpretations of the word “may” are applicable here.
If Israel actually completes its mission and kills every man, woman, and child in Palestine, would that make the western powers any more inclined to call it genocide?
They’ll move those goalposts. “We killed everyone in Gaza by having them starve to death but we spared West Bank!”
“We didn’t massacre the Arabs who have Israeli citizenship!”
“We just deported every Arab from Israel and all territory we control, but we didn’t kill them!”
This is so disgusting. I never wanted to visit Israel even if it was for $free, but now I have even less respect for those Zionist assholes, and I had low respect for them before.
Most probably suspect it’s genocide and know they, by not speaking out, at least support it passively. But it just doesn’t matter for their immediate or the near future, so nothing will happen. Thoughts and prayers…
I see two main culprits that enable Israel to eradicate the Palestinian people and their livelihood in manner and speed we see now. The US and germany. Many other western political elites seem far more divided on the topic but probably fear the backlash of speaking out.
70% of the weapons come from the US and they will never stop to supply their FOB. Democrats or republicans will veto everything and make it as hard as possible to even reach a clear global verdict on what happened and how to classify it.
Most of the remaining 30% come from germany.
Here the key argument is that Israel is worthy of unwavering support due to the historical fact of the holocaust and the inhumane acts inflicted on the Jewish population.
Scholz said recently that the security of Israel is a National interest of germany. As a german I feel this too, although for me the state of Israel and the global jewish population we did unspeakable crimes to are not necessarily the same. There are lines that can be crossed that limit my willingness of support. It’s not unconditional and they crossed them. Israel crossed them, not the jews.
I also feel past and present crimes the jewish people had to endure can be used to understand why Israel is acting the way it does but it can’t be a justification of their barbaric way of waging this war against Hamas.
In short, nothing will change. Sorry for the long reply, this shit really grinds my gears.
US, Germany, UK, Canada, Ireland, Italy, Spain, and many more you have to dig a bit to find the details sometimes
Edit: Here info about Ireland:
I found out the other day from an interview with Irish advocate but here some info about it:
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/economy/arid-41404601.html
Huh? Ireland? How?
I found out the other day from an interview with Irish advocate but here some info about it:
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/economy/arid-41404601.html
I thought the Irish were the champions of the Palestinian cause in Europe so this is… disappointing, to say the least.
Most of those make sense to me as lesser culprits.
Ireland does not. Could you explain?
I added it the comments above.
I found out the other day from an interview with Irish advocate but here some info about it:
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/economy/arid-41404601.html
Thank you for posting the links. Have a good one!
Should have given them a part of Germany then, instead of having the Palestinians pay for your nation’s crimes
It was not ours to decide after the war but its an interesting thought. I’d like to see the outcome of that alternative timeline.
Many of the administrative positions were still filled with former Nazis. Most germans in denial of what happened. Also the winning powers seemed far more interested in the spoils of war compared to a just but self-limiting gesture of goodwill.
Sketchy ground for such huge undertaking that would have made german willingness and acceptance paramount.
Also the first thing that comes to my mind is that this decision would jave encaged the victims with the perpetrators. Tough deal to sell to the world.
The real reason is that Zionists and Western powers wanted to use Israel to colonize and subjugate the region and also solve Europe’s “Jewish problem”, a new iteration of the Crusader states.
“We should there form a portion of a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism. We should as a neutral State remain in contact with all Europe, which would have to guarantee our existence.” – Theodor Herzl
Quote source: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/quot-the-jewish-state-quot-theodor-herzl
The colonization power couldn’t say the word ceasefire. I don’t think the can say the word genocide.
They would start to “seriously consider the possibility that perhaps something was not right”
“We will have to think about scheduling a call to plan a meeting to start having talks about perhaps organising a committee which would make a recommendation as to how we should go about getting ready to write a sternly worded press release (in which we won’t criticise Israel too much).”
It took us a 100 years to officially recognize the Armenian Genocide.
They would still call it Hamas
Of course not, because they are complicit
Probably not for a few decades at least. It’s only when today’s college aged people take power that it’ll get labeled as such. And even then, it’s not a guarantee.
Long enough they can make sad movies about it.
Just think of the profit potential!
Heh. The fact we live in a world where terrible tragedies become profitable media in a few generations is a mixed bag. It’s good that people know about it, but it’s sad that it is something to profit from.
Victors may get to write history, but younger generations get to have the last word on it.
That’s been the point the entire time
The entire population of North Gaza is at risk of dying.
Terrifying, but also completely obvious, and somehow most politicians don’t seem to be upset at the vast loss of innocent life by state terrorism.
Because to them, no lives matter. Except their own of course.
The blood of their own people is also on their hands… because the IDF and the Netanyahu government uses them as human shields; it’s a fact that they play fast and lose with Israeli lives. Remember that they had intelligence an attack was highly likely around the month of Oct… they still let that music festival continue and didn’t attempt to evacuate or even warn the kibbutz near the walls surrounding Gaza. They wanted any kind of attack to be at least marginally successful so they could justify bulldozing and occupying Gaza so that settlements could commence there.
They wanted any kind of attack to be at least marginally successful so they could justify bulldozing and occupying Gaza so that settlements could commence there.
Yes. You’re replying to someone saying Because to them, no lives matter. Except their own of course. And ‘no lives matter’ doesn’t distinguish based on nationality as listed on e.g. a passport.
It’s because their families aren’t the ones getting bombed…
“But you see, it’s not me, it’s not my, family, in your head, in your head, they are fighting, with their tanks, and their bombs, and their bombs, and their guns, in your head, they are crying.”
deleted by creator
Water is wet, UN Official Warns.
This one of the cases where I think TruthOut misrepresented the statement, here it’s in full:
Statement on North Gaza by Joyce Msuya, Acting Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator
What Israeli forces are doing in besieged North Gaza cannot be allowed to continue.
Hospitals have been hit and health workers have been detained. Shelters have been emptied and burned down. First responders have been prevented from saving people from under the rubble. Families have been separated and men and boys are being taken away by the truckload.
Hundreds of Palestinians have reportedly been killed. Tens of thousands have been forced to flee yet again.
The entire population of North Gaza is at risk of dying.
Such blatant disregard for basic humanity and for the laws of war must stop.
That’s being charitable. They’ve completely fabricated a statement and attributed it to Msuya. No wonder their “fact check” score is so low.
I don’t get it. MBFC is not credible so their opinion doesn’t matter.
The entire population in northern Gaza is at risk of dying according to a UN official. They are at risk of dying because Israel is besieging the north of Gaza, denying food and medical supplies, is bombing them in their shelters and hospitals, is arresting medical staff and killing civilians in all sorts of other cruel ways. That is, if they don’t starve to death or die while giving birth or from curable diseases or minor injuries.
They are dying because of Israel’s genocide. If you die in a genocide it’s because you’re being killed. So yeah the entire population of Gaza is at risk of being killed by Israel.
Using the premise that Israel is committing genocide you can see that it’s very easy to show that the two statements are equivalent.
Thank you for saying this.
How? The title is not in quotes. The quoted statement is equivalent to the title, it simply highlights that it is Israel doing the killing. The only difference is passive vs active voice.
“The entire population of North Gaza is at risk of dying,” Msuya said. “Such blatant disregard for basic humanity and for the laws of war must stop."
OP, your post was great, and this comment was great. Thank you.
The entire population of North Gaza is at risk of dying.
Quibbling over this not being a damning enough statement is ridiculous.
That isn’t how journalism works. If you say someone said something, they had better have really said that thing. You can’t twist and rephrase it willy-nilly. For example, I could twist your reply to say:
“Caring about factual reporting is ridiculous”
— SamvegaThe entire population of North Gaza is at risk of dying.
Quibbling over this not being a damning enough statement is ridiculous. Fuck anyone who pretends this isn’t so bad.
Histrionics and distorting the truth doesn’t help the cause at all. The other side can and will point to this as manipulation of the facts and use it to discredit the actual truth.
Histrionics and distorting the truth doesn’t help the cause at all.
It’s not a distortion of the truth to read “The entire population of North Gaza is at risk of dying” and write a headline of “Israel May Kill Every Palestinian Left in North Gaza, UN Official Warns”. Especially when the context of ‘at risk’ is “What Israeli forces are doing…”.
If I say your whole family is ‘at risk of’ being poisoned due to contaminants in the food in your house, a headline of “whole household may be poisoned” is completely accurate.
Unless you think ‘What Israeli forces are doing… at risk of dying’ means something else?
It’s not a distortion of the truth to read “The entire population of North Gaza is at risk of dying” and write a headline of “Israel May Kill Every Palestinian Left in North Gaza, UN Official Warns”.
Of course it is, when you’re claiming that somebody else actually said those words. If somebody tells you “XYZ” and you write that the person said “WXY” you don’t get to put their name on it and attribute those words to them.
Absolute lowest quality journalism allowed on this website. Of course, people are happy to post it repeatedly as long as it conforms with their worldview.
Given what I’ve seen you moderate in news on Lemmy.world, I wouldn’t be so quick to accuse others of letting their biases impact how they treat things that go against their world view.
Yeah but they totally don’t let their bias influence their decisions to make it that way…the teams for it
Statement on North Gaza by Joyce Msuya, Acting Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator
What Israeli forces are doing in besieged North Gaza cannot be allowed to continue.
Hospitals have been hit and health workers have been detained. Shelters have been emptied and burned down. First responders have been prevented from saving people from under the rubble. Families have been separated and men and boys are being taken away by the truckload.
Hundreds of Palestinians have reportedly been killed. Tens of thousands have been forced to flee yet again.
The entire population of North Gaza is at risk of dying.
Such blatant disregard for basic humanity and for the laws of war must stop.
Please explain how this does not warrant the headline of Israel May Kill Every Palestinian Left in North Gaza, UN Official Warns.
Truth Out is notoriously low quality journalism that routinely, distorts the facts, or misrepresents them. This article is yet another example.
Did the UN official not make that statement? Is there another way to interpret it? What distortion do you allege here?
Or are you just killing the messenger?
Thanks for your attempt at an explanation! I grade it 2/10.
How so? The original quote says the same thing, only in the passive voice.
If the defense of a new source is, “but they barely distorted the facts,” do you really need further clarification?
Truth-Out notorious for this kind of thing.
