Americans Show Heightened Concern About Antisemitism
fukhueson @ fukhueson @lemmy.world Posts 268Comments 485Joined 2 yr. ago
fukhueson @ fukhueson @lemmy.world
Posts
268
Comments
485
Joined
2 yr. ago
Hmm my sources don't seem to share that opinion.
I'm sorry your opinion doesn't change what happened. Hamas rejected the cease fire. You can quibble about whether you think it was put forward by whatever party, whomever it was put forward by, it was rejected by Hamas.
I don't see how anyone is making the point that "everything is rosy." This post describes recent trends in changes in wages and inflation. Your link about purchasing power 2021-2022 (and the rest of your comment) does not negate anything mentioned in the article.
This seems less of an attempt to inform but rather maintaining that good news about wages must be accompanied by bad news somehow, as has been typical.
https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-june-25-2024/
MR MILLER: I think it confirms two things. Number one, as the IPC itself said, we need to get a ceasefire. And that is the best way – bar none – to alleviate the humanitarian situation on the ground and alleviate the very real, very tragic of the – situation of the Palestinian people. And that is why we are working every day to try to get a ceasefire. It’s why we were so disappointed that Hamas rejected the ceasefire proposal that was on the table that the United Nations Security Council and countries around the world endorsed.
...
QUESTION: Yeah. Also, do you have a written or public statement from Hamas stating that they don’t support the ceasefire, considering that according to you they were the ones who in previous months —
MR MILLER: Yeah.
QUESTION: — proposed something similar?
MR MILLER: Yeah. They came back several weeks ago and rejected the proposal that was on the table in written – in written form. They gave us a written response that rejected the proposal that had been put forward by Israel, that the – that President Biden had outlined, that the United Nations Security Council and countries all around the world had endorsed. Obviously, we don’t make the text of that public, because these are very sensitive negotiations, but it was a written rejection and counter-proposal that came from Hamas.
Not that the original article wasn't proof enough. Additionally:
https://www.axios.com/2024/06/12/blinken-hamas-gaza-hostage-ceasefire-proposal
What he's saying: Speaking from Doha after meeting with the Prime Minister of Qatar, Blinken said: "Hamas proposed numerous changes to the proposal that was on the table. Some of the changes are workable and some are not."
He argued the deal currently under discussion is almost identical to the one Hamas itself proposed on May 6. "It was a deal that Israel accepted and the world was behind. Hamas could have answered with a single word: 'yes.'"
"Instead, they waited almost two weeks and then proposed more changes, a number of which go beyond positions it has previously presented and agreed to. As a result, the war will go on and more people will suffer," Blinken said.
"It's time for the haggling to stop and the ceasefire to start. Israel accepted the proposal as it is, Hamas didn't. It is clear what needs to happen," he said.
National security adviser Jake Sullivan said later Wednesday that "many of the proposed changes in Hamas' response are minor and not unanticipated. Others differ more substantially from what was outlined in the UN security council resolution" endorsing the deal, which passed on Tuesday.
Mkay buddy
Edit: since for some reason it's common etiquette here to baselessly spout misinformation without sources, and since somehow it's incumbent on me to have to prove them wrong, putting all the effort on me instead of the original commenter making the claim, I'll play ball.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minimum-wage-increase-january-1-2024-see-the-states/
Higher minimum wages will go into effect on January 1 across 22 states, giving an economic boost to almost 10 million workers, according to a recent estimate.
The higher baseline wages will deliver almost $7 billion in additional annual wages to about 9.9 million workers, the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute said in a research post on December 21. The increases will boost the baseline pay to at least $16 an hour in three states: California, New York and Washington.
On top of the state pay hikes, an additional 38 cities and counties will also increase their minimum wages, the group said.
Budgets for employee salary increases have grown by an average of 4.4% in 2023, the highest increase in more than two decades, according to a long-running survey.
US Salary Increase Budgets, a survey conducted annually since 1985 by The Conference Board, also found that the 409 companies surveyed are forecasting another 4.1% increase in 2024. The 2023 increase is the largest since 2001.
https://www.hrdive.com/news/workers-received-fewer-smaller-raises-2023/702301/
Just over 40% of workers haven’t received a salary increase in the past 12 months, according to a survey of 1,500 full-time employees by BambooHR. For those who did get a raise, the average salary increase was 4.6%, compared to 6.2% in 2022.
Meaning, a minority of people didn't get a raise according to this survey, not a vast majority.
If you have any source saying the vast majority of people haven't gotten raises in years, that'd be news to me. Otherwise, this should be a lesson in not listening to down votes and not allowing unsourced low effort comments like this to remain up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_%28philosophy%29
The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi, shortened from Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat – the burden of proof lies with the one who speaks, not the one who denies) is the obligation on a party in a dispute to provide sufficient warrant for its position.
Edit: even after modifying your post nearly a day later, it is still misinformation. This is textbook bad faith. The original post involved only an unsourced claim about the vast majority not receiving a raise.
A fraction of undecided voters may decide the next election, and they might be weighing whether they care more about Biden's age or Trump's lies. I think fact checking could matter to those people too. No one is swaying Trump voters.
If you care about facts, I think fact checking is important.
https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2023/who-fact-checks-the-fact-checkers-research/
“‘Fact-checking’ fact checkers: A data-driven approach,” a 22-page October research article from the Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, examined practices of U.S. fact-checking organizations Snopes, PolitiFact and Logically, along with The Australian Associated Press.
Sian Lee, Aiping Xiong, Harseung Seo and Dongwon Lee of Penn State University’s College of Information Sciences and Technology did the peer-reviewed research.
The Penn State researchers found U.S. fact-checking spikes during major news events. In recent years, that was during the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2020 presidential election. Further, the researchers said, misinformation’s spread can mislead and harm people and society.
The researchers examined 11,639 fact-checking articles from Snopes and 10,710 from PolitiFact from Jan. 1, 2016, to Aug. 31, 2022. They found Snopes checked more “real claims” — claims that rate true or mostly true — with 28.7% versus 11% for PolitiFact.
Looking widely, the researchers found high agreement when Snopes and PolitiFact probed the same information. Of 749 matching claims (examining the same information), 521 received identical ratings and 228 (30.4%) had diverging ratings. But, the researchers found nuances caused nearly all of these divergent verdicts — granularity of ratings (Snopes and PolitiFact scales differ slightly); differences in focus; differences in fact-checked information and the different timing of the fact-checks.
Adjusting for these systematic discrepancies, Penn State’s researchers found just one conflicting rating among the 749 matching claims.
Including the resolution text:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_2735
The Security Council,
Reaffirming the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
Recalling all its relevant resolutions on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question,
Underscoring the importance of the ongoing diplomatic efforts by Egypt, Qatar, and the United States aimed at reaching a comprehensive ceasefire deal, consisting of three phases,
- Welcomes the new ceasefire proposal announced on May 31, which Israel accepted, calls upon Hamas to also accept it, and urges both parties to fully implement its terms without delay and without condition;
- Notes that the implementation of this proposal would enable the following outcomes to spread over three phases:
(a) Phase 1: an immediate, full, and complete ceasefire with the release of hostages including women, the elderly and the wounded, the return of the remains of some hostages who have been killed, the exchange of Palestinian prisoners, withdrawal of Israeli forces from the populated areas in Gaza, the return of Palestinian civilians to their homes and neighborhoods in all areas of Gaza, including in the north, as well as the safe and effective distribution of humanitarian assistance at scale throughout the Gaza Strip to all Palestinian civilians who need it, including housing units delivered by the international community;
(b) Phase 2: upon agreement of the parties, a permanent end to hostilities, in exchange for the release of all other hostages still in Gaza, and a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza; and
(c) Phase 3: the start of a major multi-year reconstruction plan for Gaza and the return of the remains of any deceased hostages still in Gaza to their families;
- Underlines that the proposal says if the negotiations take longer than six weeks for phase one, the ceasefire will still continue as long as negotiations continue, and welcomes the readiness of the United States, Egypt, and Qatar to work to ensure negotiations keep going until all the agreements are reached and phase two is able to begin;
- Stresses the importance of the parties adhering to the terms of this proposal once agreed and calls upon all Member States and the United Nations to support its implementation;
- Rejects any attempt at demographic or territorial change in the Gaza Strip, including any actions that reduce the territory of Gaza;
- Reiterates its unwavering commitment to the vision of the two-State solution where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders, consistent with international law and relevant UN resolutions, and in this regard stresses the importance of unifying the Gaza Strip with the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority;
- Decides to remain seized of the matter.
All I see is you trying to garner understanding towards Hamas using civilians as shields. No history leads to this, Hamas is not forced to do this.
What Hamas is requesting changes to:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_2735
The Security Council,
Reaffirming the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
Recalling all its relevant resolutions on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question,
Underscoring the importance of the ongoing diplomatic efforts by Egypt, Qatar, and the United States aimed at reaching a comprehensive ceasefire deal, consisting of three phases,
- Welcomes the new ceasefire proposal announced on May 31, which Israel accepted, calls upon Hamas to also accept it, and urges both parties to fully implement its terms without delay and without condition;
- Notes that the implementation of this proposal would enable the following outcomes to spread over three phases:
(a) Phase 1: an immediate, full, and complete ceasefire with the release of hostages including women, the elderly and the wounded, the return of the remains of some hostages who have been killed, the exchange of Palestinian prisoners, withdrawal of Israeli forces from the populated areas in Gaza, the return of Palestinian civilians to their homes and neighborhoods in all areas of Gaza, including in the north, as well as the safe and effective distribution of humanitarian assistance at scale throughout the Gaza Strip to all Palestinian civilians who need it, including housing units delivered by the international community;
(b) Phase 2: upon agreement of the parties, a permanent end to hostilities, in exchange for the release of all other hostages still in Gaza, and a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza; and
(c) Phase 3: the start of a major multi-year reconstruction plan for Gaza and the return of the remains of any deceased hostages still in Gaza to their families;
- Underlines that the proposal says if the negotiations take longer than six weeks for phase one, the ceasefire will still continue as long as negotiations continue, and welcomes the readiness of the United States, Egypt, and Qatar to work to ensure negotiations keep going until all the agreements are reached and phase two is able to begin;
- Stresses the importance of the parties adhering to the terms of this proposal once agreed and calls upon all Member States and the United Nations to support its implementation;
- Rejects any attempt at demographic or territorial change in the Gaza Strip, including any actions that reduce the territory of Gaza;
- Reiterates its unwavering commitment to the vision of the two-State solution where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders, consistent with international law and relevant UN resolutions, and in this regard stresses the importance of unifying the Gaza Strip with the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority;
- Decides to remain seized of the matter.
No, I started a topic and you changed it. The article itself says there were hostages held in refugee camps. "Coming in swinging" is just... indicative. I'm ending this with you.
And there is NOTHING that excuses using civilians as shields. Stop trying to justify it.
I'm not wasting the time explaining this to you after the other user already did.
Sounds like the history is that Hamas held hostages in a refugee camp and that's dangerous for them. No other history involving anyone else legitimizes Hamas doing this.
And to address your accusation of whataboutism, I'll refer you to my original comment at the top of the chain and ask you what I started to discuss and who changed the topic. "So you would hold Israel to the same standards?" Is textbook whataboutism.
Edit: and I think using civilians as shields is worse. Much worse. End of debate.
If Israel rejects the ceasefire its… Hamas’ fault?
Where does it say that?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj77j7ppj52o.amp
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has said that if a ceasefire plan backed by the US and UN does not progress, Hamas will be to blame.
Mr Blinken reiterated his call for Hamas to accept the plan as outlined by President Biden 11 days ago.
He said the onus was on "one guy" hiding "ten storeys underground in Gaza" to make the casting vote, referring to Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar.
Mr Blinken said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had "reaffirmed his commitment" to the proposal when they held talks in Jerusalem on Monday.
Mr Netanyahu has not publicly endorsed what Mr Biden outlined nor said whether it matches an Israeli proposal on which Mr Biden's statement was based.
Mr Blinken described as a "hopeful sign" Hamas's response to a resolution passed by the UN Security Council on Monday supporting what Mr Biden had announced.
The resolution noted that Israel had accepted what Mr Biden had presented and called on Hamas to do so as well.
Hamas issued a statement on Tuesday welcoming "what was included" in the resolution.
But Mr Blinken said Hamas's response was not conclusive, adding that that "what counts" is what is said by the Hamas leadership in Gaza, "and that's what we don't have".
If the proposal did not proceed then it was “on them”, he said.
Yes, and this is all clear whataboutism. And lazy at that. So that means we both think Hamas should stop using civilians as human shields right? Sweet, tell me when they stop. And I'm gonna just ignore your attempt to equate Hamas charter with 11 points, that's just silly on its face :)
Got a source saying there's literally nowhere else for Hamas to go? I don't believe that at all.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/01/05/hate-crimes-hit-record-levels-in-2023-why-2024-could-be-even-worse/72118808007/
...