The magazine also said in its mail that while the organisation encourages free expression and constructive political debate, it has a zero tolerance policy towards hate speech.
The only source of that “beheaded a bunch of babies” claim seems to be a “news” site called I24… A site that is mostly truthful when not talking about Israel and Palestine, but has flat out invented stories that push their pro-Isreal narrative,
Every other mention of the story so far seems to point back to that one site.
Personally I would like it corroborated with bonafide evidence rather than word of mouth of a belligerent party. I’m skeptical, but only for the above. I imagine if there is truth to this that a human rights watch dog will seek the same proof.
But with that said, I didn’t need a report like that to condemn Hamas for this renewed conflict in the first place. This does absolutely nothing to help the Palestinians and absolutely everything to hurt them. Every way you slice this you just end up with senseless tragedy and loss of life on every side.
I just heard an interview with an Israeli who saw it firsthand, the interview was on CBS news. I think that’s a respectable enough organization to assume it’s true until proven otherwise by watchdogs.
At least they don’t tend to go around taking hostages and raping them. Honestly I was almost supportive of Hamas in this, before finding out that they’re behaving even worse than the animals they claim to be fighting. I think you loose all legitimacy when you go out of your way to cause unneeded harm
The beheading specifically are BS, it came from an Israeli-US propaganda channel where they repeated a lie from an IDF soldier. All the news outlets have used the same source, incredibly irresponsibly.
Maybe the hill you die on shouldn’t be murdering and executing innocent civilians there chief. Just a little tip for not being a complete piece of shit.
I mean you opened your mouth wide enough for your foot with that one. I don’t know what you expected to happen when commenting about a geopolitical situation that’s grown a gravity so large it’s collapsed in on itself to the point that because your comment doesn’t specify a side it can be validly used by someone on either side of the debate.
Unless you are going back to the war with the Romans, the Jews were not a persecuted minority in that region any more than any other minority, which would include the Arabs themselves seeing as they were controlled by the Ottomans for hundreds of years previous. The Jews were tolerated, and there was a very small religious community living in Jerusalem during the hundreds of years of Ottoman control that got along perfectly fine. The greater diaspora, especially in Eastern Europe through the 18th and 19th centuries was, however, constantly persecuted and were victims of numerous pogroms.
The Zionist movement was a reaction to the fact that European countries could not be trusted. It was a common cycle that the Jews would make a living for themselves, beginning to think that they could finally establish a home but then get attacked, scapegoated, and forced to flee. It was the Eastern European Jews fleeing such pogroms who would make up the majority of the first settlers of the Zionist mission in Palestine.
All this is simply to say that when people claim “oh they’ve been fighting there for thousands of years” and “the Jews were being persecuted there for so long” is not accurate. There really has not been a Jewish presence in the region since the Jewish revolt was put down by the Romans 2,000 years ago. While the current conflict is decades old, it is entirely related to the circumstances around the founding of Israel.
This is not entirely accurate. For most of history Jews were tolerated in the region, but even then they were systematically discriminated against through the legal system that would for instance not allow a Jew to testify against a Muslim in court or subject jews and other minorities to taxes not levied on Muslims.
By the late 19th and early 20th century the Muslim world began engaging in the same sort of anti-semitism and pogroms that had mostly been limited to Europe prior. This did largely have its roots in the European influence on Middle Eastern nations but nevertheless the rise in anti-semitism(for lack of a better word since most parties are semitic) in the middle east predated the formation of Isreal in 1948.
It is certainly true that this discrimination was less than they faced in Europe for most of the history of the middle east, but being better than that is a very low bar.
What they’re referring to deserves to be talked about and brought up as it is demonstrably intrinsic to a conversation concerning Israel-Palestine relations.
Had they brought up literally any other country it would be what-aboutism. You can’t just throw that term around every time someone issues a counterpoint that you don’t feel is valid.
And thus the circle is complete and peace unattainable.
You should perhaps remember that a few, very few, had a part in the terrorist attack and the terrorists have claimed to have done the crime for the exact same grievance in the other direction. If you pay attention you may discover that punishing those involved shall offend no one, where as blowing the fuck out of innocent People’s homes in no way helps and is assured to get lots of condemnation.
Peace was never the goal to begin with. Violence begets violence. If they really wanted peace they should have negotiated and used politics and all kinds of different ways than killing people.
Yes, Israel would have had they wanted peace and security. Hamas, as a terrorist organization, has no such ability even if there were will to do so. Powers that Be want this on both sides.
You know there were a lot of folks who happened to be in New York City on September 11th, 2001, who happened to get the business end of some retaliation for the shitty things our country did during the Cold War. More so, a lot of them (if not all of them) distinctly didn’t have any direct connection to the thing that was being retaliated for.
So do we get to take the innocent card from those folks who died that day? No? So curious as to the special circumstances that applies to the folks who are tired of Hamas’ shit in the Gaza Strip but can’t leave because Israel won’t let them and they can’t get rid of Hamas because they’ll just kill them. What’s the special case that means those people who are tired of this conflict don’t matter or aren’t worthy of being called oppressed?
Did she actually do so? From whats posted here she made a poor taste joke criticizing their filming. While perhaps bad judgment, that alone isn’t remotely supporting anything.
So solidarity with Israel is “cool” and “supporting the cause” but god forbid you actually say something for the oppressed. Fuck them
Removed by mod
The only source of that “beheaded a bunch of babies” claim seems to be a “news” site called I24… A site that is mostly truthful when not talking about Israel and Palestine, but has flat out invented stories that push their pro-Isreal narrative,
Every other mention of the story so far seems to point back to that one site.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Who confirmed it for those news organizations? All I’ve heard is that the IDF said “we swear it happened, bro, just trust us”
Removed by mod
Personally I would like it corroborated with bonafide evidence rather than word of mouth of a belligerent party. I’m skeptical, but only for the above. I imagine if there is truth to this that a human rights watch dog will seek the same proof.
But with that said, I didn’t need a report like that to condemn Hamas for this renewed conflict in the first place. This does absolutely nothing to help the Palestinians and absolutely everything to hurt them. Every way you slice this you just end up with senseless tragedy and loss of life on every side.
I just heard an interview with an Israeli who saw it firsthand, the interview was on CBS news. I think that’s a respectable enough organization to assume it’s true until proven otherwise by watchdogs.
deleted by creator
At least they don’t tend to go around taking hostages and raping them. Honestly I was almost supportive of Hamas in this, before finding out that they’re behaving even worse than the animals they claim to be fighting. I think you loose all legitimacy when you go out of your way to cause unneeded harm
The beheading specifically are BS, it came from an Israeli-US propaganda channel where they repeated a lie from an IDF soldier. All the news outlets have used the same source, incredibly irresponsibly.
Here’s CNN. Are they more reputable?
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Mate you’ve been duped by Israeli soldiers. Of course the horror of the deaths is deplorable. But they’ve embellished it, its atrocity-propaganda.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Maybe the hill you die on shouldn’t be murdering and executing innocent civilians there chief. Just a little tip for not being a complete piece of shit.
Over a million of Palestinians since the 1940s, including over 50 kids this year apparently means nothing.
Oh my bad. Then by all means start executing people in the streets and drag their naked bodies around to be paraded then 🙄
I mean you opened your mouth wide enough for your foot with that one. I don’t know what you expected to happen when commenting about a geopolitical situation that’s grown a gravity so large it’s collapsed in on itself to the point that because your comment doesn’t specify a side it can be validly used by someone on either side of the debate.
Fair enough
Starting the count from the 1940s seems pretty convenient. Jews have been a persecuted minority in the region for centuries previously.
Using history to justify atrocities will just end up in endless misery for everyone. Particularly in the middle east.
Unless you are going back to the war with the Romans, the Jews were not a persecuted minority in that region any more than any other minority, which would include the Arabs themselves seeing as they were controlled by the Ottomans for hundreds of years previous. The Jews were tolerated, and there was a very small religious community living in Jerusalem during the hundreds of years of Ottoman control that got along perfectly fine. The greater diaspora, especially in Eastern Europe through the 18th and 19th centuries was, however, constantly persecuted and were victims of numerous pogroms.
The Zionist movement was a reaction to the fact that European countries could not be trusted. It was a common cycle that the Jews would make a living for themselves, beginning to think that they could finally establish a home but then get attacked, scapegoated, and forced to flee. It was the Eastern European Jews fleeing such pogroms who would make up the majority of the first settlers of the Zionist mission in Palestine.
All this is simply to say that when people claim “oh they’ve been fighting there for thousands of years” and “the Jews were being persecuted there for so long” is not accurate. There really has not been a Jewish presence in the region since the Jewish revolt was put down by the Romans 2,000 years ago. While the current conflict is decades old, it is entirely related to the circumstances around the founding of Israel.
This is not entirely accurate. For most of history Jews were tolerated in the region, but even then they were systematically discriminated against through the legal system that would for instance not allow a Jew to testify against a Muslim in court or subject jews and other minorities to taxes not levied on Muslims.
By the late 19th and early 20th century the Muslim world began engaging in the same sort of anti-semitism and pogroms that had mostly been limited to Europe prior. This did largely have its roots in the European influence on Middle Eastern nations but nevertheless the rise in anti-semitism(for lack of a better word since most parties are semitic) in the middle east predated the formation of Isreal in 1948.
It is certainly true that this discrimination was less than they faced in Europe for most of the history of the middle east, but being better than that is a very low bar.
Zionism is anti-semidic.
Next.
But what about ism?
Senseless killing does not justify more senseless killing.
That’s not what-aboutism.
What they’re referring to deserves to be talked about and brought up as it is demonstrably intrinsic to a conversation concerning Israel-Palestine relations.
Had they brought up literally any other country it would be what-aboutism. You can’t just throw that term around every time someone issues a counterpoint that you don’t feel is valid.
You lose your oppressed card when you murder concert goers and kidnap children.
And thus the circle is complete and peace unattainable.
You should perhaps remember that a few, very few, had a part in the terrorist attack and the terrorists have claimed to have done the crime for the exact same grievance in the other direction. If you pay attention you may discover that punishing those involved shall offend no one, where as blowing the fuck out of innocent People’s homes in no way helps and is assured to get lots of condemnation.
Peace was never the goal to begin with. Violence begets violence. If they really wanted peace they should have negotiated and used politics and all kinds of different ways than killing people.
Yes, Israel would have had they wanted peace and security. Hamas, as a terrorist organization, has no such ability even if there were will to do so. Powers that Be want this on both sides.
For context, Israel never wanted a Palestinian state to appear. So the Mossad and Netanyahu helped weaken the left secular PLO and funded Hamas.
What Israel faced is funnily enough, their own 911. Its blowback, literally their own fault.
You know there were a lot of folks who happened to be in New York City on September 11th, 2001, who happened to get the business end of some retaliation for the shitty things our country did during the Cold War. More so, a lot of them (if not all of them) distinctly didn’t have any direct connection to the thing that was being retaliated for.
So do we get to take the innocent card from those folks who died that day? No? So curious as to the special circumstances that applies to the folks who are tired of Hamas’ shit in the Gaza Strip but can’t leave because Israel won’t let them and they can’t get rid of Hamas because they’ll just kill them. What’s the special case that means those people who are tired of this conflict don’t matter or aren’t worthy of being called oppressed?
What does that have to do with her explicitly stating her approval of the execution and murder videos?
Did she actually do so? From whats posted here she made a poor taste joke criticizing their filming. While perhaps bad judgment, that alone isn’t remotely supporting anything.