steventhedev @ steventhedev @lemmy.world

Posts

48

Comments

494

Joined

2 yr. ago

A threat to steer voters to either not vote at all, or for a third party which under the current FPTP system is equivalent to not voting.

That's how I interpret it. How do you interpret it?

EDIT: I rewatched it just in case - I missed the part with the explicit threat to Biden/Democratic Party:

Biden, support a ceasefire now

Or don't count on us in 2024

The actual censure document: https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20231106/Tlaib%20Censure%20McCormick.pdf

The sources for each of her actions according to that censure:

• October 8th statement
• October 18th speech - I didn't find any explicit evidence of what she was accused of here - only one offhand comment about bombing a hospital. It's possible she gave additional statements that day, but I didn't find any that contained the words "al-Ahli"
• October 23rd statement - at least she acknowledged that it was disputed a few days later
• November 3rd tweet - this one is particularly damning - not only the "from the river to the sea" chant, but also using footage from al-Ahli hospital and a veiled threat to President Biden that "we will remember in 2024".
• November 4th tweet

EDIT: After rewatching, the threat was not veiled - it was explicit:

Biden, support a ceasefire now

Or don't count on us in 2024

That's a good point, but from what I understood it was primarily used as a source of potable water to supplement locally treated water.

As for using it to tunnel, I would imagine it's easier and simpler to just use a compressor powered by the tunnel power grid rather than deal with piping and water distribution down to the deep tunnel depths (>50m).

But this wasn't the justification provided - none was. Which is part of the problem - it leads to people speculating the reasons. It also makes it possible for someone to automatically assume the worst reason possible.

Be civil.

The vast majority of coverage is local sources, with a single line in a Reuters daily report. Says so in your article.

Your source may have a good ranking on MBFC but it is not a mainstream source in terms of readership. Looks like its somewhere in the 500-1000 range of US news sources.

Not to denigrate the tragedy. There are eight dead from inside a pediatric oncology department.

Any civilian is not a valid military target, whether they are men, women, children, or the elderly. But if they pick up arms, they become a valid military target, even if they're 13 years old. It's tragic, but it's also the reality - a 16 year old was killed yesterday because he stabbed two police officers with a knife before he was shot.

Turning off the water at the start was horrible - it was purely motivated by vengeance and spite rather than any legitimate military or political objective. The Likud are a party that have been subverted by a huckster who converted it into a cult of personality - but Israel is not a two-party system, there are legislators who were elected from a wide range of political parties. But my personal thoughts on the flaws of internal Israeli politics are not relevant at the moment. The IDF for sure is releasing propaganda, and you'd be stupid to take their statements on face. But when it's been corroborated or is extremely clear - like the drone footage of armed men climbing out of a tunnel under the Indonesian Hospital then I'm inclined to believe exactly the parts that have been confirmed.

On the whole, the war is being conducted in a manner to maximize the chances of mission success - the complete destruction of Hamas and rescuing the hostages - while minimizing Israeli casualties. Minimizing civilian casualties is a distant third and only prioritized over the other two if it were to jeopardize the mission. Most militaries will follow the same decision calculus.

If I wrote in a comment that it belongs to me, that would certainly be a strong signal that it is, right?

The numbers on the right side don't add up.

• Families with multiple fatalities = 1050
• 444+136+192 = 772 families with 2 or more fatalities
• 6120 out of 10022 fatalities were from 825 families

Is there an official definition of "family"? I ask because I'm curious if they count multiple generations living in separate housing units in the same building a single family or if they only consider nuclear families (spouses + immediate children, maybe cohabiting parents or siblings?)

EDIT: I tracked down the last report where the numbers were close to adding up - it seems they are tracking three things:

1. the number of families with multiple fatalities (1050 on Nov 6)
2. the number of fatalities from the chosen 825 families (no clue why those 825 families, or if it's just the top 825 on the list), seemingly not updated for a few days now
3. a very coarse bucketing of families by number of fatalities that hasn't been updated since Oct 26.

The refugee camp you're referring to is Jabiliya Camp, established in 1948. It is high density multi-unit residential.

According to the IDF, the ground forces who were hunting down that single commander came under small arms and RPG fire from the building and called in air support. The bomb that was dropped on the building killed everyone inside, but apparently either dropped directly into the tunnels underneath, or caused secondary explosions from munitions being stored in those tunnels. The result was that seven other buildings not adjacent to the building that was bombed collapsed as well. The ground forces operating there confirmed their target was dead and left the camp. This is why Israel asked all civilians to evacuate Gaza City a month ago - they can't control which buildings collapse when the tunnels blow up.

Mind you, the US has been conducting drone flights over Gaza, watching all of these incidents. The fact the US didn't immediately condemn Israel for bombing the building should give you a hint that they saw what happened and think it was justified.

They were walking right next to a tank that is literally there to protect them from Hamas.

Take your prejudice elsewhere.

Glad we agree there are racists on both sides.

But I think you underestimate the amount of racism on the Palestinian side, and overestimate the racism on the Israeli side.

Where did you see that it isn't her account? I saw screencaps of her coauthor tagging this account. I saw that the account has been active on Instagram for several years (wayback machine captured it first in 2019). I have yet to see a single answer as to her real account - even the previous one she supposedly stopped using last year.

I did verify my sources. I think you saw something that said what you wanted to think.

Even if you throw out this report because of who wrote it, rather than looking at the content, there has been plenty of coverage of hate speech in Palestinian educational curriculums for many years. Even the UNHRC included references to it in their 2019 and 2023 reports. The EU was threatening to pull funding because of it.

Don't teach kids to hate.

JPost is heavily biased, but they linked primary sources that upon review do indeed check out.

Where did you read she was executed? That would be an extreme escalation.

Dude wat

The first is literal satire - it's the Israeli equivalent of SNL. Perhaps you'd prefer their take on the BBC

The second is a religious school and is clearly not a regular part of the curriculum - whereas there are plenty of examples of Palestinian hate speech in textbooks.

There is no “complicated political situation”. There are only facts. 70 years ago, an invading army took over Palestinian land with the help of the UN and UK and most superpowers. Now there are those in Palestine who fight it and are being exterminated, and those who accept it and are still being exterminated, because Israel’s intent has always been to seize control of the region and drive darker skinned people out, and this has been a selling point for the terrorist state of Israel to be established ever since day one, which is proven by letters from the 1940s between zionists and their supporters.

Your copypasta is old - it's been 75 years since 1948.

Crazy that they provided proof that it was her account. I guess her coauthor tagged a random account in her name with a widely available picture.

If you're so certain it wasn't hers - what was her instagram username before she closed it?

As an individual person yes. Geopolitics work differently.

It's a big thing to show off your military. Dances, parades, war games, training exercises, and stuff like this. In some cases, you can even attack and it won't be considered a declaration of war - if you attack an empty post, it sends a signal that you don't want to escalate, but that you need to "respond" to satisfy some internal pressure or to save face.

Using a nuke on an empty spot would be a bit extreme though. Let's hope no one is crazy enough to actually do that or worse.

I invoked October 7th as the rationale for the war. Not the occupation. Don't twist words. It's unbecoming.

I remember 9/11 quite well. Bin Laden took too long to hunt down, in no small part because of the Iraqi distraction. Afghanistan needed to happen though. It's never been a stable country (Dr Watson's character has been an Afghanistan vet for how many centuries?), but at the time the Taliban were basically a breeding ground for terrorism, just like Gaza is today.

The propaganda on both sides is pretty heavy which is why you need to read into things - like the US running drone flights over Gaza. My assumption is they're using it to corroborate intelligence passed to them by Israel. For example, evidence that Hamas are using hospitals as military barracks, or rocket launchers in youth centers. Even if it isn't made public, the implication from the US not lifting a finger to stop them is that most of what they are saying is true enough that the US is willing to allow it.

But if your personal philosophy is that the US wants Gaza to burn then I don't think we have any common ground for discussion.

Legally and morally yes in amongst every country. Including Israel.

Did you perhaps mean "almost"? I thought you were taking the absolutist stance that the age of majority is always 18.

Ed: I should say according to the talmud no one is adult until 18.

How does a citation from Shulchan Arukh suddenly become "according to the Talmud"? It's literally not part of it.

I think you missed the point - there can be no long term peace when either side views the other with a level of hatred that they justify killing innocent civilians and cheer that on.

This is happening on both sides, but this specific incident is a Palestinian woman who has been fed hate speech her entire life, while others around her learned it in UNRWA funded schools and turned around to murder civilians in terror attacks.