Where is the outrage? Where have all the “humans” gone? Israel slaughtered over 400 innocent civilians in Gaza last night. Most of them women and children.

None of those with #Ukraine, #Canada, #Mexico and #EU flags on their profile raising their voice condemning this outrageous crime.

-----------
The sheikh wandered around the city with a lamp

I’m tired of all the devils and the death, and seeking one human

They said it cannot be found, we have searched, As we said before

That which cannot be found I desire

Rumi
دی شیخ با چراغ همی‌ گشت گرد شهر
کز دیو و دد ملولم و انسانم آرزوست

گفتند یافت می‌ نشود جسته‌ ایم ما گفت
آن که یافت می‌ نشود آنم آرزوست
#poetry #Rumi #Gaza #Inhumanity #Death #politics #Israel #Genocide #WarCrime
@palestine@lemmy.ml @palestine@a.gup.pe @israel @iran

  • Bloomcole@lemmy.mlBanned
    153·
    9 months ago

    Those 2 will surely mention Israhell has the right to defend itself.

    • 𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠@programming.dev
      79·
      9 months ago

      They both cited Israel’s given reason for the attack, the response from Hamas, the critique and condemnation from the UN, human rights organizations and several world leaders, as well as an expert opinion explaining that this could mean the end of the ceasefire.

      Both were factual and neutral in their reporting.

        • 𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠@programming.dev
          114·
          9 months ago

          Here’s the Guardian article on the condemnation of the attacks: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/18/un-human-rights-chief-voices-horror-at-israel-new-gaza-strikes

          It does include that Israel is accused of genocide by multiple parties and explicitly includes Turkey’s response, which also directly accuses Israel of genocide. The French response calls out the Israeli justification, saying there’s no identifiable military objective.

          They do name Hamas, but not as a terrorist organization.

          Here’s a slightly more recent article that focuses on Israel’s justification and Netanyahu’s comments: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/18/israel-gaza-strikes-deaths-latest-update

          It contains the justification that Israel provided, but also additional context (e.g. the actual terms of the ceasefire) that show a stark contrast between the ceasefire agreement and what Israel is doing now. The article also highlights the human suffering this has caused. It also concludes by showing the disproportionate death toll that Israel has inflicted on Gaza.

          Here’s an opinion article published today from one of the main columnists that is very explicit about the genocide in Gaza: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/19/imagine-silent-terrible-evil-committed-gaza-inaction-censorship

          So maybe let’s not attack media outlets that do actually show what is going on and that are willing to call it what it is?

          I won’t bother with the Dutch state broadcaster because I doubt you speak the language, but with them it’s mostly the same story, though they don’t have opinion articles and the liveblog posts are a bit more concise. But they too have reported on ceasefire violations by Israel and the ICC case for genocide against Israel, and they often have expert opinions that also call out the disproportionate violence from the Israeli side.

            • 𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠@programming.dev
              42·
              9 months ago

              Hey, that one’s actually good, only issue being one instance of “Hostages” vs “detainees”

              Doesn’t Hamas also call them that? Or perhaps it’s just translated as such.

              This one is pretty damn bad though, spending a disproportionate amount of time uncritically repeating the lies and rhetoric of Israel, it also repeats the lie of Hamas starting the fighting by “attacking Israel” as well as not differentiating between civilian and military casualties on October 7th, before immediately giving a comedicly low death count for Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

              The entire point of that article is to report on what Israel is saying. So I’m not sure how that can be disproportionate if it exclusively talks about what it says in the headline. I think it makes sense for a media outlet to also report what Israel says, even if it can be disproven (and the Guardian does add that context). The Guardian here objectively reports on what Israel says, which I think is an important function of a news outlet. The Guardian also mentions that the “eruption of violence” started on October 7th, and I’m pretty sure that’s objectively true as well. Before that there was a very uneasy “peace” with plenty of violence to go around, but nothing to the scale of what we saw on Octobee 7th and beyond. Note how the language used doesn’t explicitly blame Hamas for the entire conflict.

              The “comedically low death count” is the count as reported by the Gaza health ministry. Of course more people have indirectly died as a result of the war, but that’s a different statistic. Not sure what you want the Guardian to do here, unless you think Hamas is also fudging the numbers or something(?)

              • Bloomcole@lemmy.mlBanned
                62·
                9 months ago

                The “comedically low death count” is the count as reported by the Gaza health ministry.

                Doesn’t even know the Palestinian Authority are fully controled by the genociders.

                  • Bloomcole@lemmy.mlBanned
                    32·
                    9 months ago

                    That is true, the Ministry of Health however isn’t.
                    They could’ve provided the low numbers.
                    The article says “Palestinian health authorities” which could mean either or some other ‘officials’ and I suspect it’s deliberately kept vague to not reveal an israeli (controlled) source.
                    “Gaza health ministry” isn’t even mentioned once in this article?
                    You naming that specifically is pretty suspicious and sneaky.
                    Hasbara sneaky even.

        • Bloomcole@lemmy.mlBanned
          84·
          9 months ago

          There was no war in israel before oct 7.
          Like there was no war in ukraine before 2022.
          Who needs in-depth background when it’s inconvenient?

          • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
            5·
            9 months ago

            Step 1. Pick the start date of history.
            Step 2. Enemy can only hate freedom for unprovoked attack, because history never existed before step 1,

        • 𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠@programming.dev
          43·
          9 months ago

          "But can the Guardian categorically say it stood up as a genocide unfolded and did everything in its power to report accurately? Certainly not. If Haaretz, a newspaper in a country with military censorship of the media, can have editorials openly using words like ethnic cleansing, what’s stopping the Guardian?”

          Nothing. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/19/imagine-silent-terrible-evil-committed-gaza-inaction-censorship

          Israel’s genocide was only on pause: for Palestinians woken on Monday night by a vicious wave of airstrikes, the resumption was no less shocking. More than 400 people – many of them children – were slaughtered in a matter of hours, in an assault that reportedly received the “green light” from Donald Trump. This mayhem was swiftly followed by evacuation orders – that is, forced displacement – raising the possibility of renewed ground operations. Israel’s excuse? A confected claim that Hamas hasn’t observed the terms of January’s so-called ceasefire agreement – the terms of which Israel itself has broken over and over again.

          I read the Guardian enough to know that it tries to do two things:

          A) Provide a neutral, unbiased presentation of facts and statements from all parties. This does include statements from Israeli officials that are false, but they are usually also provided with the context that shows they are false. It also includes reporting on investigations into the genocide, as well as statements from parties that accuse Israel of genocide.

          B) Provide opinion pieces that explain what they think about the war, which in my experience is definitely negative towards Israel (which makes sense), see the linked piece that directly accuses Israel of genocide as an example.

          I don’t think moving goalposts to reframe a media outlet that is clearly very critical of Israel as having a pro-Israeli bias is a productive use of time and energy.