Where is the outrage? Where have all the “humans” gone? Israel slaughtered over 300 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
Those 2 will surely mention Israhell has the right to defend itself.
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.
Did they mention that Israel is blatantly lying about its reason?
Did they mention that Israel has repeatedly violated the ceasefire?
Did they identify that Israel is committing genocide?
Did they avoid calling the government of Gaza “a terrorist organisation”
Did they avoid calling IDF soldiers taken as prisoners of war “hostages”?
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.
Hey, that one’s actually good, only issue being one instance of “Hostages” vs “detainees”
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.
A good editorial, not that it too talks about how bad the media has been.
I mean, they’re still extremely hesitant to actually call it what it is, instead resorting to qualified “some say” framing, while also giving equal consideration (or sometimes greater) to obvious lies from Israel. Don’t get me wrong, the guardian is way better than most, but that a relative statement.
Doesn’t Hamas also call them that? Or perhaps it’s just translated as such.
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(?)
Doesn’t even know the Palestinian Authority are fully controled by the genociders.
The Gaza health ministry is under Hamas jurisdiction.
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.
Would be news to me, and that kind of double standard in language has been used a lot (see “kidnapped from his tank”).
Yes? That’s exactly my point. Do they have articles who’s whole point is to report on what Palestine is saying? Yemen? Russia?
They choose their own headlines.
I don’t.
You going to read the rest of that sentence? The part that goes “…when thousands of Hamas-led gunmen attacked Israeli communities around the Gaza Strip, killing 1,200 people and abducting 251 hostages.”
It’s also objectively true that Israel is a fascist, genocidal ethnostate, you won’t see them saying that though.
That death count is the direct munitions deaths that the barely functionally health ministry has been able to confirm. It is the depths of willfully misleading to imply that thats the actual estimated total death count. And you can tell that it’s misleading, because it misled you.
Even that count is much higher than the number Guardian gave now, they’re using old numbers.
Actually no, that’s the statistic The Guardian is falsely claiming it is.
For a start, they should include that the estimates for total deaths had already passed the two hundred thousand mark half a year ago.
Any mention of this being going on since the nakba of 1947?
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?
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,
thanks hasbara person.
https://www.declassifieduk.org/battle-for-the-truth-pro-israel-bias-inside-uk-newsrooms-revealed/
Nothing. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/19/imagine-silent-terrible-evil-committed-gaza-inaction-censorship
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.
https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/david-cronin/how-guardian-told-me-steer-clear-palestine
You probably think Kid Starver or the US dems are in some way left too.