Amazing how the west has built up this whole narrative of liberal western societies being the champions of human rights in the world, and Israel just demolished it all in three weeks. All of a sudden every one can see that the west doesn’t give a shit about human rights, civilians being killed, and an actual genocide unfolding. The west stands firmly on the side of genocide and US is now willing to turn this conflict into a regional war if any country attempts to intervene to stop the genocide. The masks have finally fell off.
I wouldn’t be so confident. This will never stick in people’s memories; the talking points will change and everyone will be back to being good patriots. Iraq, Vietnam, etc should have been clear enough (for Americans at least), but it’s all long forgotten.
That’s true in the west, but I think this sort of stuff is convincing the rest of the world that the west has no moral authority over them. It’s no longer going to be possible for western diplomats to go around the world and talk about supposed human rights abuses in China as an argument for why countries need to align with the western camp. We’re already seeing this happening, as one western diplomat admitted recently:
At the end of the day, the west is just a small part of humanity, and the golden billion enjoyed having disproportionate sway over the rest of the world. Those days are finally coming to an end.
People complain about the UN doing nothing, but it’s also important to remember it was literally designed to not be able to do anything if one of the security council nations – USA, UK, France, Russia, or China – vetoes it. And USA always vetoes anything against the Israeli government.
Considering the UN’s hands are tied, I’m very glad they’re at least using their figurative microphone and international influence to call attention to how fucked up the treatment of Palestinians is.
I don’t know for others, but growing up American, Israel and its friends in Washington had done a terrific job of conflating any criticism of Israel with anti-semitism. What finally got me to re-evaluate my stance on the Israeli government a few years back was when well-known, respectable organizations like the Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International started using the word “apartheid” to describe the situation of Palestinians.
Hearing sources like the UN Office for Human Rights, the UN Secretary General, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International calling out the Israeli government’s actions in strong, unequivocal terms like “war crime” and “apartheid” is a start. I wish they could do more, and I sure as heck am angry with US foreign policy in this, but I’m just glad the UN has the balls to actually call this a war crime.
Aren’t they the leading political “party” if you will in Gaza? Weren’t they elected like over a decade ago? (Before they got rid of elections.) Or maybe I’m not remembering correctly.
No what’s worse is they used the attack as an excuse to go to war. I’d argue that 9/11 was just incompetence but this is too nefarious. They had a warning multiple times including by Hamas. Israel is a terrorist state and will always be one after these events.
Israel has the military might to solve this issue right now with no risk to their soldiers, and had this capability for the better part of this 70 year old conflict, but you know why it doesn’t use that military might to spare its own people?
Because we’re not fucking terrorists! We care about human lives, even those who fucking vowed to kill us and elected a terrorist organization as their government to accomplish this task for them
That’s how you imagine yourself as. Realistically it just feels like a mask has slipped of your face and a lot of people in the world realised you aren’t the oppressed anymore.
That’s a disingenuous statement designed to manipulate people, you never in your life sincerely thought Israel is oppressed and you’re trying to make it seem like you did.
It’s hard to imagine one self in Israel’s shoes, but I can say with high certainty you never tried.
Israel is one unending war crime, they don’t give a shit what anyone says. Neither do the owner/operators of most nations, which support them no matter what they do.
I think it's mainly the US that supports them unconditionally, often with UK and sometimes Canada. The rest of the world just don't want to be in a trade war (or worse) with the US.
Like so many other people on the internet you seem to have very little information about what you’re talking about, but that doesn’t stops you from expressing your opinion.
You’re right a 30 minute YouTube video by travelingisrael.com completely addressed all of my concerns, damn, thank you so much. I fucking love Zionism now, let’s go kill some brown babies my dude
Like so many other people on the internet you seem to have very little information about what you’re talking about, but that doesn’t stops you from expressing your opinion.
The guy in your link like so many people on the internet seems to have very little information about what they’re talking about, but that hasn’t stopped them from expressing their opinion. Here’s someone who does actually have a lot of information on what they’re talking about who has a response to their video:
So is slaughtering hundreds of people at a music festival. Did the UN warn Hamas about that…? Oh sorry I mean the freedom fighters of palestine.
I don’t care for either side, nor do I care for UN bias. If they’re going to stand for anything, they should stand for everyone, unfortunately it falls very far short of that ideal.
To their credit, the g20 video they streamed alongside their false commentary is enough to discredit their interpretation of events.
All journalism should be subject to verification, especially news from capitalist or authoritarian regimes. It should be noted that the BBC did not say they were wrong that Israel struck the Al-Ahli Hospital, only that they were wrong to report that Israel struck the Al-Ahli Hospital.
Responsible journalism holds itself to particular standards, such as having reliable sources, or multiple independent indications of evidence. The BBC journalist was speaking live on air, off the cuff, and had no way to reliably verify the source of the explosion besides his gut instincts. Meanwhile Al Jazeera has done significantly more work reporting on this issue, including digital forensics and interviews with military specialists. They won’t retract their statement because it holds up to the highest of journalistic standards. While Jon Donnison was wrong to report what he did, his intuitions appear to have been ultimately correct.
It should be noted that Israel’s internal reporting does not appear to follow these journalism norms. Arab and Muslim reporters are outraged by the lack of journalistic standards behind some of the reports that have been widely spread to incite public outrage in against Palestinians, when their reporting is held to comparatively impossible standards.
While Al Jazeera Arabic and the state of Qatar have a justifiably bad reputation, Al Jazeera English is staffed with veteran reporters from Britain, America, and Australia who have distinguished themselves in their field. They consistently outperform the BBC on most metrics of journalism when reporting on anything besides internal Qatari affairs. This is not to say they are flawless or do not make mistakes, only as you continue to hold them accountable, consider the context in which they are reporting and the norms they should be held to.
To their credit, the g20 video they streamed alongside their false commentary is enough to discredit their interpretation of events.
It isn’t “to their credit”. They slipped up by including the visual evidence which proves their reporter lied. The reporter was on site, not in a studio.
The hospital was not hit by a missile. The car park was. There was no way 500 people were sleeping there. The footage was available the same day.
In addition, AJ streamed live footage of missiles from Gaza including the one which turned around and (presumably) hit the hospital.
Meanwhile zero images of the hospital being hit have been released to this day.
I doubt Israeli newspapers are any better but AJ messed up big time.
I’m disappointed that you’re replicating the flawed asymmetric standards of Israel in this conversation. I’ve linked to sources for my statements, but you’ve made controversial claims while putting the burden on me to find what sources you’re using to bolster your confidence. If your goal is to signify your ‘team,’ this conversation is over. If you would like to try and build a shared reality where we can agree on facts, your lack of respect for me is harming that goal.
You are the one treating this like football teams with your whataboutism re the Israeli newspaper.
Nevertheless I responded by saying I doubt Israeli newspapers are better but you ignore that part.
And you characterised the g20 report slip-up as commendable because in your mind they deliberately planted the truth as an Easter Egg for internet sleuths.
I doubt I am in a discussion with someone who is impartial here. Blocked. No need to aggravate each other further.
“Texas authorities argue that it was in defense of a migrant, that the injured person wanted to harm a migrant, and that’s why he fired into the air and then at the person,” said AMLO
The US government doesn’t believe that international laws apply to them - and they’re kinda correct, nobody has a big enough military to really stand up to them.
If(and it’s a big if) this is an accurate statement, then defending a presumably innocent person from harm should take higher priority than complying with jurisdictional boundaries.
In this case, it isn’t quite “defending”. With the distance involved, the chance of hitting your target and the risk of hitting someone else, it really is not something you should be doing.
im just wondering what the fuck Texas, a state, is doing with its personnel regulating an international border. US states have no rights to regulate borders with other US states, much less the international one
No idea what really happened, but whether the story as presented in this article is true or not. The fact remains that even IF a US National Guardsmen really was “defending” a migrant, he shouldn’t hav. That isn’t how national relations work, and even if he were Jesus and 100% morally correct (he wasn’t) he STILL shouldn’t have done that. As long as borders exist, your morality can’t extend beyond your country unless you are willing to accept the consequences of the most bad faith interpretations and outcomes.
telesurenglish.net
Active