Israel kills five journalists in clearly marked press vehicle in Gaza
Israel kills five journalists in clearly marked press vehicle in Gaza
Al-Quds Today staff were targeted outside a hospital, as number of media workers killed by Israeli forces exceeds 200
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/24068509
Jadi had gone to al-Awda Hospital with his wife, who was giving birth to their first child.
According to the Wafa news agency, while waiting for his wife, he decided to check in on his colleagues who were outside the hospital in the vehicle.
His brother, photographer Omar al-Jadi, documented the moments after the Israeli strike hit the vehicle.
“Guys, Ayman is inside. Ayman, my brother, is martyred,” he shouted in the video as he helplessly filmed the burning van.
By Rayhan Uddin
Published date: 26 December 2024 10:50 GMT
You're viewing a single thread.
Apparently telling the truth is antisemitic.
As a Jewish (living in "Israel") person I have regularly been called antisemitic and even fascist for saying "hey maybe we shouldnt be killing children"
As a German born two generations later than our country's atrocities versus Jewish people and the world, I am absolutely and without a doubt firm in my support for the right of existence of the state of Israel (I just think they should have taken the land from the Germans, or offered the Palestinians part of Germany, after all, the Germans were the insane mass murdering fuckheads that caused this clusterfuck). That said, I also always sympathized with the plight of the Palestinian people.
Being fully aware of our historical responsibility to stand with the people of Israel, I can say with absolute certainty that the current regime of Israel is led by monsters who commit war crimes faster than we can count them, and that all those monsters should be dragged to the ICC in The Hague in chains, and hopefully put in prison for the rest of their lives. Netanyahu is and always has been first and foremost a career criminal who has sought nothing but his own gains, and when the Israeli judiciary goes after him, he finds ways to start wars to distract from his own corruption. Literally washing his hands in the blood of the Palestinian (and Lebanese) people.
The last time I saw real progress in the Israeli/Palestinian peace process, was under Yitzhak Rabin - and he was murdered by a rightwing extremist Jewish settler.
Having seen films of the aftermath of German atrocities, films that made me gag and shed tears in horror and in sympathy with the victims, I believe that "never again!" is inextricably linked to fighting Jewish extremism and Israeli atrocities against Palestinians, because both of them fuel antisemitism, and the misdirected anger of the families of victims will again lead to senseless slaughter, typically of innocent Israeli citizens.
You could say that zionism is anti-semitic at its core.
This horror has been a blood feud since the foundation of the state of Israel - and the only way out of this is to STOP THE %^#$% KILLING! No matter which side feels that it's current "their turn" to get revenge.
No Ethnostate has a right to exist. The right way to tackle the rampant antisemitism in Europe would have been (and still is) to enshrine protections that guarantee civil rights to Jewish people and not limit the amount of refugees seeking asylum.
Zionism is certainly anti-Semitic at it's core, it other-izes Jewish people, and justifies the violent settler colonialim of Israel as in the defense of all Jewish people, which only serves to further fuel genuine Antisemitism at the expense of Jewish people globally.
Zionism is, of course, inherently fascist. The ethnic cleansing of the native people of Palestine has always been fundamental to the ideology.
Even under Rabin, there was no interest in Palestinian statehood. Rabin was assassinated because even the extremely minor of a semblance of autonomy was too far for the right-wing of Israeli politics. Oslo was ultimately used to justify settlements in the West Bank while under a guise of legitimacy of 'working towards peace'.
Peace Process and Solution
Both Hamas and Fatah have agreed to a Two-State solution based on the 1967 borders for decades. Oslo and Camp David were used by Israel to continue settlements in the West Bank and maintain an Apartheid, while preventing any actual Two-State solution
Hamas proposed a full prisoner swap as early as Oct 8th, and agreed to the US proposed UN Permanent Ceasefire Resolution. Additionally, Hamas has already agreed to no longer govern the Gaza Strip, as long as Palestinians receive liberation and a unified government can take place.
Oslo was used as a land grab while continuing to deny Palestinians human rights
(Oslo Accord Sources: MEE, NYT, Haaretz, AJ).
How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution
‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe
Yeah, before my test of insanity was to say "Palestinians deserve human rights"
Nothing about.that statement is controversial, but you spot the bigot if someone disagrees
Can you please not do that? All you're doing is using Israel's definition of antisemitism and so whenever real antisemitism comes up, people can hide behind saying things like "antisemitism has lost its meaning now."
Honestly, I've given up and just started calling people being antisemitic "bigots," but you're still not helping by using Israel's terminology, even in a sarcastic way. Because you're still helping to normalize it in a way that it can be dismissed.
(I expect to get heavily downvoted for this, but I don't care.)
I understand your concern. The current Israeli cabinet uses that word to anything that opposes the government's actions and it makes the word lose its real meaning.
However, I think that mocking the way Israel labels everything opposing the war as "antisemitic" does not undermine its real meaning but undermines the reputation of Israel using it inappropriately.
- Personal view, may be wrong.
It normalizes the concept. Which is what Israel wants. They want 'antisemitism' and 'Israel criticism' associated with it.
But more importantly, I have literally seen that sort of sarcastic comment about things that are actually bigoted now because people think that all they have to do is say, "I guess X is antisemitism now..." and suddenly it shifts to how Israel is co-opting the term- by co-opting the term.
Does that make sense? It's an "any publicity is good publicity" situation.
Why do you require your own special word that's exclusive to one particular religion? Why not just use bigot like every other situation?
Literally one post before this I said:
Honestly, I’ve given up and just started calling people being antisemitic “bigots,”
Right, you gave up. Implying that you did hold the opinion that there should be a special word for anti-jewish, and likely still do hold that position, but the meaning of the word has changed from your desired definition. I'm asking why you did, and maybe still do, believe anti-jewish should have its own unique word in the first place.
ETA: I'm asking legitimately. I've never understood why anti-jewish hate is so much more special than anti-muslim, anti-black, or any other sort of bigotry. I understand the persecution of Jews throughout history, but I also understand the persecution of Muslims, black people, etc. throughout history.
It's not "more special", it's different. Context matters, and there are centuries of context. Anti Muslim slurs point to different stereotypes and belittle people in different ways than anti Jewish slurs. Why not have different words for the sake of accuracy? Most other categories of things have this linguistic construction, so why not bigotry?
I don't really give a shit whether or not there is a unique word, but since there is a unique word, why let Israel get to define it and why let bigots get to agree with them?
If you don't like the word, the solution is to stop using it and get others to also stop using it, not to use it sarcastically or ironically.
Pretty sure most people I know would see an obvious sarcastic like this as actively de-legitimising Israel's attempt to broaden the term. Maybe that's because I generally hang out with people who are fairly well educated, but I think most people are smart enough to understand the intention here. Do you have any evidence/logic to back your claim that it legitimises?
Of course, sarcasm is difficult to convey with text, so there's a risk that people will read it as intended unironically.. But I don't think that's happened here.
Do I have evidence other than my seeing it here on Lemmy and having it said to my face? No. And I'm not really going to take the time to search through god knows how many Lemmy comments to prove it to you if you don't want to believe me.
I think your point about sarcastic use of a statement to make fun of it being the same as saying it genuinely is nonsense.
The comment clearly makes fun of Israel's misuse of the term, which is basically in agreement with your point that it should be differentiated from real antisemitism.
Your comment basically means the famous onion headline published about mass shootings contributes to people ignoring gun violence because they say there's nothing you can do about it. which is completely false. that goes against the entire concept of sarcasm and satire.
Others are making sarcastic use of the same statement to make bigoted comments. That's a big difference from the Onion headline.
Thanks for this comment. I'm not sure where I stand on the topic, but it's a good point and worth considering.