Pro-Israel Figures Threaten to Kill Greta Thunberg Over Gaza Aid Mission - Quds News Network (2025-06-02)
(qudsnen.co)
from technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com to world@lemmy.world on 02 Jun 13:55
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/45725215
from technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com to world@lemmy.world on 02 Jun 13:55
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/45725215
cross-posted from: hcommons.social/users/…/114611927184686873
Pro-Israel Figures Threaten to Kill Greta Thunberg Over Gaza Aid Mission - Quds News Network (2025-06-02)
https://qudsnen.co/pro-israel-figures-threaten-to-kill-greta-thunberg-over-gaza-aid-mission/
------>> … Greta Thunberg is facing a wave of violent threats by pro-genocide individuals after joining a Gaza-bound aid flotilla. Pro-Israel figures have called for her death or harm as she sails to challenge Israel’s siege on the devastated territory.
>> Republican Senator Lindsey Graham posted on X: “Hope Greta and her friends can swim!”…
#StopIsrael #StopGenocide #FreedomFlotilla
@palestine@lemmy.ml @palestine@a.gup.pe
#world
threaded - newest
Ah, yes, threatening to murder teenage girls - Clearly, the moral high ground
Pieces of shit
Small correction that does not take away from the point your making, but Greta is 22.
She’s done more than you ever will, so she’s got that going for her.
Threatening her life is very different than criticizing her ideals and unacceptable no matter how annoying you believe she is. Also, her credentials are growing by the day despite your personal opinions.
Serious question here, what has she been successful at doing? Has there been a bill passed because of her work?
No one should ever do anything to help anyone unless they PASS A BILL (even writing a bill is not good enough)based on the help they give.
The person I replied to spoke of her “growing credentials”. Im askng what she has achieved because last I checked she hasn’t actually achieved anything other than getting some fame.
What’s weirder is that all the people defending her cannot provide anything at all in response other than insults.
Do YOU have any examples to offer of something she actually achieved?
You could check the Wikipedia entry for her, there’s a few accomplishments in there. in any case, I’d say attempting to bring food to starving people under death threats and attempts for doing so makes any of her attempts at doing something, whether the goal is accomplished, far better than whatever you’ve got going on.
I appreciate the help, but this person’s intent was never to actually learn about her.
I don’t know for sure what the point was. Just more pessimist hand waiving I guess. Maybe underachievement guilt, maybe jealousy, maybe just plain old fashioned misogyny.
Hyperbole was enough for this transaction.
Edit: I also wanted to add that I did not insult my friend above. We just don’t agree. I thought some fun over exaggeration would point out the unproductive nature of that line of thinking.
I’m just poking the bear, they’re clearly either a Russian/neocon bot, or just an idiot. But I’m seeing if they’ll actually say something besides “asking questions”. I’m curious how far the goal posts are going to be moved without any actual acknowledgement since apparently 30 honors and awards, 17 speeches to governments, 7 publications, and more that I’m not really willing to trudge through to specifically call out, don’t count as accomplishments in their mind.
Is everyone here this fucking conspiratorial and this much of a follower? Im asking this because despite everyone claiming she is important Im not seeing anything to base that on other than social media fame. The only example of anything was yours and it is weak at best.
I am the guy you are speaking of. I in fact do want to know about her. All these people who keep insulting me cannot provide any examples except for 1 person so far. I can’t see why she gets praised when she hasn.’t gotten any clear results. .
You are not psychic and you are terrible at determining what Im thinking.
I did that’s why Im asking because she does not appear to be successful. Im hoping peopl can provide examples of things she has done rather than appearances she has made.
Ok, how about we turn this around since you have very high standards for what you consider an accomplishment. What have you succeeded at?
I was active in LGBT marriage in the states of MA, NJ and the nation as a whole. Right now we have LGBT+ marriage rights so I would suggest the leaders of these movements were successful.
I was active in removing CSAM and problematic porn subreddits from reddit. I left reddit because they refused to killa subreddit literally listing CSAM for sale so I don’t see this as being successful.
Alright, olive branch. I understand that it’s never good to put people on a pedestal, but this is a weird thing to pull from current events. What we have is a person, regardless of “credentials” joining a flotilla with the goal of bringing food through a blockade.
Fame or motive aside, it’s a good thing to want to help people, full stop. We shouldn’t crab brain things like this and pull people back into the bucket.
We also shouldn’t idolized them, understood.
BUT
You also shouldn’t be so fixated on whether people celebrate this person. Let’s just be happy that there are some folks on the front lines fighting injustice, and mad at people that want to stomp that out. It’s really easy.
Those that can help should help, and those that can’t, or won’t, should just move out of the way. Doesn’t have to be more complicated than that.
The point of activism is to get more people to talk about issues and to bring about change. There’s billions of us. A single person will never be credited with changing the public opinion on anything, that’s not how things work. It’s unfair to ask what she has accomplished because she’s not in a line of work where results are immediate and obvious. And she’s only 22. Millions of people are talking about climate change and other issues thanks to her. Can you name a more (positive)influential person?
Yes, she’s successful. How many activists can you name over the top of your head? I’m sure the list is short. And most of them don’t get as many headlines written nor do they gather the same amount of people.
Do you want someone to go around the world and ask each person who inspired them to be better humans? Do you want to ask politicians why they pass each bill and which protest forced them to finally take action? Or how do you propose we quantify her success if not by number of followers and articles written?
Should we use successes as a measure of effectiveness or renown? You are suggesting renown right now.
The fact is celebrities aren’t going to fix this problem good old fashioned organizing is and she isn’t doing that. Other people are organizing and she is contributing celebrity.
Ever heard of strength in numbers? You can’t organize shit without people. And these “celebrities” bring people. But sure, you go ahead and organize your friends and she’ll do what she thinks is best too. As long as Gaza gets help, doesn’t really matter who did the most.
Yes I have, what is the name of the organization she works for and/or started? Where can I find the network she created with others?
Im not going to wait for an answer because there isn’t one. The organization is being done by regular people and groups that already existed, not social media celebrities.
There isn’t one? Are you joking? What is This then? 1.2 million donated by the foundation as of 2022. Money from awards, prizes and donations. That’s nothing, right?
What about This one? Which claims “started in 2018, when 15-year old Greta Thunberg began a school strike for climate.” They gathered millions of people for strikes and they name her as inspiration. But that’s nothing as well, right?
Man, if only everyone in the world was as useless as Greta…
one of the organizations you list does not involve her and the other has her name and writes checks.
Do you know how organizing actually works or are you just looking to get angry at me because I want effective activism instead of more performative activism?
Oh, I’m sorry, I didn’t realize only activism in person works. My bad. Oh, wait… she does that too… anyway, I’m done with you, I suggest your seek help, it can’t possibly be healthy to need to put others down to feel better about yourself. And you think I’m the angry one, hahaha, funny.
I’m aware that different states have different laws but in no state does possession of a weapon magically obviate all claims of self defense against an unarmed person.because possession of a weapon in no way obviates the risk to you that you are attempting to ameliorate by killing the fucker.
EG if someone broke into your home to rape and murder you you aren’t going to jail for stabbing them with a kitchen knife. If you disagree pick a specific state where you think the law works like that and I’ll be happy to look at the relevant info.
She makes chuds like you cry.
That’s something.
She also lost like 90% of public and media attention over speaking out against Israel. And she is putting her own life at great risk at this very moment.
She sparked Fridays For Future, the last German government got elected largely in the wake of their protests (among others) and achieved huge steps forward in transitioning our energy supply to renewables.
We are sadly now back to conservatives, but they won’t be able to reverse all that was achieved.
Thank you for being the first to actually provide an example of something she did.
Even without tangible achievements, boosting the climate movement on a global level like she did is not nothing.
Except she didn’t really do that. We already knew about climate change and we have not dine anything more about it as a result of her work.
Would you praise a player that misses every single shot they take? At some point do results matter?
I don’t know what to tell you man. The presence of the issue and the protests about it were far larger after her initial school strikes than before. Globally. And if you think that’s nothing, pray tell me what you have done that has had any global impact whatsoever.
And yes, I would praise a player that enabled their team (through motivation or else) to score 5 additional goals in a losing game, even if it meant they only lost 10:5 instead of 10:0.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greta_Thunberg
I read it. That’s why I asked. There isn’t much there
Sweden signed the agreement and is on track with the Paris climate agreement from what I can tell.
He organized a movement of millions that got results. This lack of organizing is why we haven’t seen the successes of the civil rights movement on most issues other than LGBT marriage.
Its sad that people are so into performative actions that they forget about results,
Greta is organizing more people than MLK did. The lack of results is not her fault, but the fault of the people whom we have elected to implement policy for us (for the most part).
Really, what is the name of her organization? Why haven’t they been able to organize millions like MLK did in a way that is effective and actually something that happened?
You can be a fanchild of her if you want but claiming she organized more people than MLK is simply not factually accurate.
What was the name of MLK’s organization?
She has organized millions.
You missed this part
MLK didn’t write laws, he didn’t sign bills, he didn’t judge the constitutionally of existing legislation, he mobilized people.
Go look at headlines and editorials from the civil rights era, because you are punching down on Greta trying to stand up for us the same way they punched down on MLK.
No, Im holding her up to those standards. The Civil Rights Movement actually mobilized people to the point where the state cracked down on it. She’s more like Occupy Wall St in that it is more performative and has less organization on the ground.
The answer is, she’s a serial protester and very successful at getting arrested.
There are innumerable people who are actually achieving things but no one cares.
For example, medicines sans frontiers has medical professionals in Gaza. I haven’t seen any posts about them on lemmy. Those people have been being heroes every day for many months.
I don wonder what her actual role is on the boat. I suspect she’s head person in charge of raising awareness.
And that’s kind of my point. She’s great at getting attention for her but isn’t getting things done. She’s a celebrity-activist
In some ways I think the “attention” is counter productive.
Everyone is aware of the debate around climate change or gaza. Getting views from lemmy users on YouTube videos doesn’t help anything.
Greta is incapable of reaching the people who need to be reached. A fresh faced gen z can’t guilt boomers into changing their behaviour.
I don’t dislike Greta specifically, but the obsession with her every utterance is ridiculous.
It’s like Occupy Wall St it is performative activism. It isn’t effective avtivism.
Good question! I hope he responds.
Also, guaranteed he talks about “females” on reg.
<img alt="" src="https://midwest.social/pictrs/image/101be7f8-50f6-4045-b6ae-bc911fbf1f36.jpeg">
Wow.... I didn't realize that got posted.
I wrote it out (mostly - I didn't finish it), but then thought better of it, but I didn't immediately delete it. Then later when I opened my screen, there it was, still. And I actuslly thought "Lucky I didn't butt-post that."
Apparently not.
Ah well...
Well, that was an absolutely garbage take. Good on you.
So what’s your opinion on Andrew Tate?
How exactly is she annoying?
She points out that things are preventably bad while also being a normal-looking young woman. How dare she.
Like you have cred.
How dare you?!
/S
More relevant, but less annoying than you are.
Allow me to translate.
The passage of time confuses and scares me
however very on brand
Serves them right if they’re… checks notes… feeding starving people. Yep.
She hasn’t been a teenager for a while. This idea has been perpetuated by Right Wingers since she came on the scene, and despite her turning 18 four years ago, people treat her as if she was an ignorant child. We need to all know this and stop propagating this.
I mean they’re well past threatening. They’ve been killing hundreds of actual children in Palestine for months.
Yeah but those aren’t worthy victims.
A rich white girl on the other hand… that’ll be newsworthy… for a couple of days.
Wow, that’s a pretty insane reaction, why would they say something like th- Oh, I see, they say shit like that all the time and almost no one calls them out on it? They’d kill her with impunity if she were even slightly darker-skinned, and will brook no interference with their ethnic cleansing? It’s a good thing that the ICC is at least reining them in befo- oh, they’ve also been largely impotent to stop the bloodbath from flying off the rails?
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/3199cf9c-f208-4ac7-8c9d-9affac2a085b.jpeg">
Lindsey Graham is a pus riddled sore. Why does cancer harm the innocent when there is righteous work to be done?
Maybe this is why Wayne Enterprises made the Cancer Ray
My introductory scene with Harley Quinn was her shooting a guard with the cancer raygun. The other guard blurts out, “He has kids!” - I was hooked.
I still haven’t seen it but I really need to
It will be well worth your time as the writing is sublime. The Joker’s foray into the middle-class lifestyle is wonderful as is Bane’s trip to Italy. And that’s amongst so many other fun story lines.
Man, if the holocaust happened today, turns out most people would actually be on team holocaust. Wait, that’s exactly whats happening…
I don’t think it’s most people. Opinions outside of Israel have largely shifted against it even in the US. Politicians often misrepresent their constituents on this one. At least that’s what it looks like in some polls I’ve seen.
They’re attempting to astroturf a Holocaust. People aren’t on board but the rich goombas are.
Emphasis on “rich” here. History has shown that genocide is always followed by claiming and then divvying up the resources once held by the displaced/dead. That’s always a rich-man’s game.
A line from Rage Against the Machine’s “Darkness”
So you’re saying the favor should be returned- reciprocated, even.
I like that idea.
Good thing Luigi’s mansion is common man’s game.
Like this
People who vote for nazis/murderers are complicit. Politicians are elected, so the “constituents” do not get to wash the blood from their hands. They are just as guilty.
Not in Congress. Not on Wall Street. No where the power congeals. We’re hitting the end-stage of the War on Terror. Western states are not going to be happy until the entire Muslim world is cowed or exterminated.
Of course, but the disconnect growing on this coincides with the disconnect on other important issues and things are eventually coming to a head.
Yeah, the debates seems to be mostly people questioning if it is war crimes or genocide, different experts and different organizations have different conclusions, although it seems more conclusions are shifting towards genocide.
“even the US” bro they have been feeding their people milk and cheese tobacco and lies for decades because it’s how you get rich, it’s literally a country where you can be a politician, decide to give you money, there’s nothing over there that has ever represented what actual people want for 50 years, they’re having a civil class war and the rich won long ago, megacorps decide what the people want
I see you’re also a Climate Town enjoyer. 😄
If there was only one person on earth I could choose to marry it would be that guy
The Israeli government doesn’t represent everyone who follows the Jewish faith. Jewish practitioners (especially abroad) shouldn’t be assumed to be complicit unless they claim or are shown to be.
Who said that the government represent all jews? Governments set up country policies. When we say israel of course we mean israeli governments Israel since it’s creation policies was to oppress, steal land kill and rape palestinians.
The fact that you choose tocsay this bs comment instead of those activists risk to die from israel terrorism show how tou don’t care about those people and the activists
Said government says it, and jewish non-Israelis are barely heard disputing that. I don’t know if it’s them or the media not giving them equal voice, but one or the other is essentially promoting Netanyahu as spokesperson for everything jewish.
then educate yourself and stop speculating
Yeah, no shit.
No one implied otherwise here, and speaking of here, you’re rather preaching to the choir, don’t you think?
That may be; I know nothing. But somebody just posted something like “Jews of lemmy, how is your family on Israel / Gaza?” And most said their families were all very pro Israeli government / Zionist. It sounded a lot like most were complicit.
Here it is, and it is a bit better than when I saw it first, but still…
If you don’t think Israel’s propaganda campaign extends to lemmy I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
What? I’m not saying anything like that. But… if you’re offering, I wouldn’t mind checking out that bridge.
Impressive research effort!
Indeed, while Israel is indeed a Jewish country, it does not represent all Jews, nor do all Jews agree with the way the Israeli behave. Condemning Israel is justified, hating all Jews because of Israel is not.
That is completely true and also unlikely to matter.
I was born 3 decades after the end of WWII. By that point Germany and Austria had gone through great lengths to repudiate the policies of the Nazis. They had paid massive reparations. They had issued numerous official and unofficial apologies. The monuments of the Nazis were torn down in favor of memorials for their victims. That didn’t stop other kids from calling me a Nazi as soon as they found out I spoke German. To this day people are comfortable making Nazi jokes about random Germans (see Oliver Zeidler).
Similarly, we have evidence that the vast majority of sexual assaults are committed by a small number of repeat offenders. That doesn’t stop the repeated mantra of, “Not all men but always a man.”
Many people, particularly in Asia, are offended that the Nazis turned the Swastika into a symbol of hatred. Most people are aware that the Nazis stole the symbol but you really can’t wear one without risking a fight, even if you have the little dots in it.
It doesn’t matter if they should or shouldn’t be assumed to be complicit; they will. People around the world will see the Star of David as a symbol of death and destruction for generations.
I think the only bad thing about the Holocaust was that Germany did it. Germany threatened established colonial powers. They threatened international order. Therefore the Holocaust is a terrible thing and Germany had to be stopped.
When the good guys do a Holocaust it’s not bad anymore.
Edit: I mean as far as most people use it.
You actually think that? Please tell me it’s just poorly phrased.
I’m sure he only means it as “this is the shitty way the world actually works”. Not that he personally believes it himself.
If that were the case I’d hope they would try to be clearer.
The “@mhague@lemmy.world is a giant asshole” reading is much, much easier than the “@mhague@lemmy.world thinks the world sucks” reading, for me at least. The second reading takes some mental gymnastics for me.
Hoping you’re right, but not convinced. Also giving a lot of side-eye.
i don’t agree with the original comment bc it is pessimistic reductionism but i think you and the people dogging on it severely lack media literacy and critical thinking skills, as kindly as that can be stated.
in what way is the former reading more likely than the latter??
you need to make far more assumptions about the original comment and commenter to come to the conclusion that he made the comment out of some weird bigoted malice than to just accept the obvious reading of it being a commentary on global society’s attitudes towards various genocides.
jesus fucking christ i see this shit all over the internet and it is why our society is collapsing. just droves of people behaving and thinking in ways that would fucking abhor a literature teacher from even just a decade ago.
When someone says “I think the only bad thing about the Holocaust was that Germany did it” they need to do a fair amount of work to clarify that they do not mean that literally. Otherwise, I will be inclined to take them at their word.
of course he means it literally?
that’s why i think, as i said, his comment is reductionist. the key word is
he’s just trying to draw an edgy hyperbolic narrative that the world only cares about the Holocaust in particular not because it is a genocide but because it threatened the international status quo. he’s wrong, but he’s not a nazi, at least as far as i can tell from his singular comment. i won’t come up to bat for the original commenter, he very well could be a bigot or a nazi. i don’t have enough context to know as a reader. his use of leftist diction and the way he wields it is a pretty strong indicator that this was his intended thesis, on top of obvious contextual clues.
man fuck idek what else to say. your response here is purely reactionary, you aren’t even saying anything other than reaffirming things you’ve already said.
Hard agree. And many folk forget, English is not everyone’s first language.
It’s janky phrasing, but after a reread, it makes sense.
I’m personally scared for what the future holds, we are living in a post-Enlightenment society.
At the risk of sounding a little chud-y… we are tasked with the same challenge people like Newton or Spinoza dealt with in life; we need to rebuild meaning, reason, and thought from first principles in a way that is amicable to the modern order.
People, like those that we’re seeing in action here, probably think Modest Proposal is actually encouraging the audience to eat children. It’s a serious problem.
The fact that you’re stopping to read what the person said and form a charitable interpretation of it instead of just leaping down their throat while smashing your phone / keyboard with rage is commendable.
Ignoring the actual content / intended meaning of what they said the moment THIS right here disappears from Lenny is the moment it’s dead.
I mean, if they actually think the holocaust was hunky dory then fuck them, but I agree it’s probably just poorly phrased.
If you do a holocaust then you’re not one of the good guys. It’s pretty simple.
They’re clearly not speaking from their own perspective.
Yeah. People misunderstand your comment’s viewpoint, but it’s accurate.
The allies have retconned their WWII history as brave defenders of modern society and freedom when in reality they did not intervene for anyone’s sake but their own. Least of all the Jews’. Tons of advocates for eugenics and phrenology along vocal fascists like Henry Ford in the US, imperialist ambitions towards non-western countries, the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact…
It is a holocaust, essentially.
Not most people, most bots
Then why are all the governments collectively punishing people for speaking out? I’m sure there is some astroturfing, but I know a number of people who have some weird opinions on this bcz they get their news from conservative sources.
Most people in the west you mean. Most people in the world are very much against Israel and it’s genocide. I think we forget this.
If you live in the west you can feel alone in caring about the suffering. You just feel alone in the west.
Can you update this with a different source rather than Quds News? It’s banned on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and TikTok. Say what you will about those websites but it’s rare to see such unanimity.
QudsForce is part of the Iranian National Guard. Anyone who takes issues with Voice of America/Europe/Asia should have similar concerns for QudsNews
This is a different Quds.
Who do you think is financing it?
Uh... Ads and reader donations like almost every other news agency in existence? If you don't know, Quds is Arabic for Jerusalem, so it doesn't need a massive Iranian conspiracy to show up all over the place.
definitely not zionists
You don't see why a popular Palestinian news network dedicated to exposing and highlighting the realities of Israeli occupation would be banned by establishment media?
By that logic they’d all be banned, but they are not.
Are you sure about that? Are there Palestinian (or strongly pro-Palestinian) news agency actively antagonizing Israeli occupation with a following as big as QNN that aren't banned by centralized social media sites? The only one that comes to mind is Al-Jazeera, and they avoid the ban hammer by maintaining the same journalistic standards as agencies like AP and Reuters (for example you'll never see Al Jazeera call Zionists pro-genocide).
PNN and WAFA come to mind, but I’m sure there are others. In any case I’m not sure why it falls upon me to prove a negative when you’re the one suggesting a grand conspiracy.
@cygnus @technocrit https://www.newarab.com/news/greta-thunberg-faces-threats-after-joining-gaza-bound-flotilla
and here's lindsey graham directly:
https://x.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1929266986455814415
Thanks - straight from the horse’s ass.
@cygnus @technocrit Quds News isn't banned on Twitter.
Maybe Elon let them back in. aljazeera.com/…/twitter-suspends-accounts-of-pale…
@cygnus The suspension was removed pre-Elon acquisition.
Ok
The last boat was destroyed. Everyone on this boat could die, too. Those people are insanely brave doing this. hopefully they all come out of this alive and are able to help those in need.
Bravest woman I every heard of in that generation. I hope she makes it safe. She would make excellent world leader someday. Fuck Lindsay Graham and rest of the ghouls.
BuT sHe’S a WoMaN!
I think it was missing an “/s”
Is alternating case not the standard format for unescaped sarcasm?
No, you’re right. I jumped the gun on that. My bad
No /s needed. Im at fault on this one.
What a silly thing to say.
I’m certain that pretty much every person in ukrain or gaza or a bunch if other places has more demonstrated bravery than Greta.
What makes you say that? She’s choosing to put her life in danger for others when she doesn’t have to. How is that less brave than simply being born in a certain place?
Wikipedia says there are 20,000 women in combat roles in Ukraine, who have chosen to put their life in danger for others when they don’t have to. Most of them don’t post videos about it.
Oh, damn. I didn’t know 20k out of 20 million is “most people”. That changes things.
I didn’t say that ?
I did however provide 20,000 examples of women braver than Greta.
"What a silly thing to say.
I’m certain that pretty much every person in ukrain or gaza or a bunch if other places has more demonstrated bravery than Greta. "
Are you claiming that there’s only 20k people in Ukraine? Cause otherwise, yeah, you did claim that.
Also, yes, they’re brave no question about that. But they’re protecting their own. Greta is helping others. I’d argue that that’s braver.
I didn’t say that 20k people is most people.
I said pretty much everyone I’m Ukraine or gaza is braver than Greta.
When challenged, I provided the 20k people that I thought were the most salient examples to juxtaposition against Greta, which does not imply that the remaining population is not braver, just less analogous.
The chances that Greta would be injured are infinitesimal, far less than any man woman or child in Gaza.
You can do sound with your definition of “bravery” if you wish, but ultimately Greta is an entitled influencer.
Haha. Jesus, the amount of people in these threads that NEED to believe that she’s useless and a bad person is insane. Whatever lets you sleep at night, I guess.
Why would I need to believe that?
Honestly I think it’s more remarkable that she has such a dedicated following despite not really being special.
Yesterday I watched an interview with an Australian doctor with Médecins Sans Frontières in a hospital in Gaza. She was talking about how they’ve run out supplies, simple things like crepe bandages, and how one of the most common injuries is infants and toddlers with missing limbs.
That’s what a real actual hero looks like. Meanwhile Greta is on a boat posting to her socials.
Edit: by the way, and I don’t mean this in a haughty “I’m cleverer than you” kind of way, you make quotes by starting a line with the right square-bracket:
> like this.Maybe I’m crazy or something but when I hear about a 22 year old that’s putting her life in danger(their boat was already attacked by drones and it wasn’t even near Gaza yet) or sleeping outside of some building or spending most of her time protesting for some cause or another, I don’t hear “spoiled” or “influencer” or anything of that sort. Because I happen to work in an industry where there’s tons of those people. And believe me, spoiled 22 year olds are having fun in clubs and in fancy hotels. Compare Greta’s Instagram with that of any other famous people. Or just search “Greta car” or “hotel” or “restaurant” or try to find any paparazzi pic of her doing anything fun, cause I couldn’t find any.
Maybe she’s not treating kids with lost limbs, but she’s only 22, where was this doctor when they were 22, do you think? Safe in school, I imagine… And Greta’s been doing this for 7 years already. I don’t understand how this doesn’t sound insane to you people. There’s 30 year olds out there with shorter resumes.
And in the end all that doesn’t even matter. What matters is that she’s trying to do something positive, right? And despite that, there’s always people complaining and moaning. Because it’s never enough for you people. And you always give other people as better examples. And it’s never another kid, is it? I’d like one of you to show me a 22 year old that has done more for the world. The closest I could find is Param Jaggi and his algae mobile…but 15 years later the thing seems to be stuck in the promising invention phase.
Dunno, feels like people are letting perfect get in the way of good. What’s the point of bringing down people doing good things? Do better or let them do their thing, doesn’t cost you anything to do the latter, does it?
My intention is not to criticise Greta, but the army of fools who seem to think she’s worthy of admiration. There are innumerable people more successful in addressing the issues Greta is vocal about, and more deserving of praise.
Sure Greta might be doing more than others her age, but we generally don’t praise people on that basis.
Sure we do. We even have a word for it… well, words, really. Positive reinforcement.
… but not for the innumerable other people doing more than Greta?
Why not? Praise is not a finite resource. One person getting praise doesn’t mean another is gonna get less. Sure, those doctors you’re talking about are getting less praise than her, but they’re also attracting less attention and fewer donations. Everyone has their role to play and getting bogged down on who’s doing more and who’s doing better only detracts from the work.
Sure. Ok mate. Please, by all means continue providing Greta all the positive reinforcement you like.
Or insanely stupid, it’s a thin line.
Trying to save people from a holocaust is not stupidity.
She’s not gonna save anyone, she’s gonna be shot down, or captured if lucky. Her martyrdom might do something, considering she’s a privileged white kid, but not enough that matters – she’ll be off the news in days and all the nazis will get is stern criticism.
I do hope i’m wrong.
If only some.countries was brave enough to bring security to those type of ships
Good. This means Greta is doing the right thing. Also, it’s about time she’s back in the spotlight, and not some minor footnote when talking about activism events.
She lost the spotlight when she connected capitalism to climate change.
Um, do you really believe they aren’t linked?
I think they're saying that's why she lost the spotlight.
That’s part though I believe the CO2 output of the USSR when it existed strongly suggests the issue is overconsumption and industrialization.
Which are two things capitalism thrives on.
The USSR stopped existing in 1991, by which point climate change wasn't taken nearly as seriously as it is today. Now that it is taken seriously, capitalism hinders or entirely prevents serious action from being taken because it puts power in the hands of the people who directly benefit from polluting the atmosphere. I mean how many times have you seen "oil lobby kills climate bill" in a headline?
The fact that it ended in 1991 is why I mention “while it existed”.
The fact remains a counter example of a non-capitalist economy that drove climate change on a massive scale exists so you cannot blame capitalism as easily as industrialization.
@NoneOfUrBusiness @palestine @technocrit @Tattorack @RowRowRowYourBot @HellsBelle RowRow you glowing goofball smh
No because industrialized economies that were not capitalistic have also significantly contributed to climate change in the past (The USSR primarily).
The real issue is overconsumption and industrialization and we would see climate change regardless of the ideology regulating the economy provided it was industrialized.
Don’t blame people for what capitalism has done all on its own.
Why did you ignore the first paragraph entirely as that’s kind of the point of my post? The USSR was the second largest contributor to climate change after the USA when it existed.
Because Russia is a capitalist nation, with a healthy mix of Putin’s dictatorship thrown in for good measure.
To deny that, simply because Russia says they operate under socialist gov’t, is to be blind to the truth.
THE USSR IS NOT RUSSIA.
THE USSR WAS A HUGE CONTRIBUTOR TO CLIMATE CHANGE.
IT IS NOT CAPITALISM THAT IS THE PROBLEM BECAUSE AN OVERCONSUMING COMMUNIST NATION WOULD HAVE THE SAME RESULTS
Russia never stopped being capitalist. They had a communist party for a period, but actual communism was never achieved.
The USSR is not Russia
And yet people from the USSR are the ones leading Russia.
Which is irrelevant to the USSR being an example of a non-capitalist nation that was a major driver in climate change
They weren’t none-capitalist. They never implemented their system.
And yet emissions got worse, and capitalism is making advertisements to over consume everything. One is not isolated from the other.
Also, kinda weird to suggest that industrialised economies were not capitalistic…
Do you have a source that isn’t Iranian propaganda? Im not doubt this is possible Im just not giving Quds any credibility
How about posting yourself one?
Uh... Why would a network founded, owned and run by Palestinian volunteers be Iranian propaganda?
Because he’s a racist.
If Mossad had been given orders to kill her, she wouldn’t have made it to the boat. (It’d have been a “hit-and-run accident”, or a previously undiagnosed allergy or something. The people speculating that Mossad assassinated her would be dismissed as cranks, and would be right entirely by coincidence.)
You’re over-estimating the Mossad. ALL the previous assassinations were carried out in a primitive way and got linked back to them in a short time.
That’s availability bias. Do you know how many they carried out that weren’t discovered as such?
No I don’t, do you?
You could use this logic on anything and it gets ridiculous rather quickly.
Should I assume also that Mozambique intelligence carried out a gazillion sophisticated stealth assassinations that none of us has discovered yet? we don’t have the count too, right?
(I can list some much more ridiculous examples, this logic doesn’t work, here’s the alternative: 0 evidence so far of any of that happened -> it’s safe to assume it never did until proven wrong)
No, but if you claimed that they never carried out a single one specifically with the argument that none was ever discovered you’d be falling for the same logical fallacy.
Also, compared to Mozambique, you know that Israel has far higher technological capabilities, a certain international backing and is in semi constant war alternating between cold and hot with most of it’s neghbour states, which makes one more likely to have both the need and the means to have successfully carried out secret killings than the other.
Especially since x (too lazy to research right now) assassinations by Mossad were discovered and linked to them, so you know they do kill people. And from there you basically claim they get discovered 100% of the time. Which is ridiculous.
That’s a very weird logic. If I claim I have super powers and there are 0 documented cases of me doing anything super natural, you have to be the one to prove I don’t have such super powers??
You see how ridiculous this sounds? I am saying it gets ridiculous really quick.
Is it somehow hard for you to understand that there literally cannot be documented cases of Mossad killing someone and not being linked to it, because as soon as they were documented cases, they would be linked to it?
What theoretical evidence would you even need to believe in them being able to kill someone in secret?
Furthermore, your comparison doesn’t hold water because you’re turning the logic on it’s head. You are the one claiming Clark Kent does not have superpowers because there are lots of documented cases of him taking the bus instead of super-flying to where he wants to be.
Mozambique intelligence carried out way more sophisticated super secret stealth assassinations in collaboration with aliens and you cannot prove they didn’t happen.
Lol, people should stop thinking that intelligence agencies are all powerful. They fumble and fuck up stuff all the time.
That said, the current Israeli government under the current political situation might very well arrange this basically as a public execution, knowing that western media will present it in the right light for them.
Well, we all know who the actual terrorists are.
Spectator: The sinister transformation of Greta Thunberg
JNS Daily: Danish police arrest Greta Thunberg during pro-Hamas protest
NYPost: Greta Thunberg goes full in on Jew-hate because left politics is all one big blob
Conservatives have been gunning (quite literally) for Greta for nearly a decade. Israelis are going to 100% try and kill her. She’s going to be martyred if she’s not protected.
Yes, I’m afraid she probably will.
I’m sure she’s aware
as much as us random unqualified internet commenters? pshh
The Jews? America? All of them? I don’t know what you’re insinuating.
‘Pro-Israel figures’ as the headline says are the terrorists they are probably referring to, the ones threatening to kill people on a humanitarian aid mission.
aka zionists
He’s refering to Taiwan obviously.
Well,
we all knowsome people claim, that they know who the actual terrorists are./Ftfy.
It’s the people slaying the other people including civilians in their homes. In all cases.
I really don’t know how you find that difficult to grasp. Do you have a home? Would you like if they killed everyone you know and you? It’s not the hardest empath challenge, you can do it if you try, I believe in you
To your surprise, i can’t agree more! You should never omit the fact: questioning whether the civilians were the target or gruesome collateral victims (or “martyrs”).
This fact is what tells the difference in our views, unfortunately. This hurts me as bad, as you, i guess.
Where did you get my view from?
Qudsnen.co: “Quds News Network (QNN) is the largest independent and comprehensive Palestinian youth electronic news network.”
I wish people would provide at least this brief information on the “sources” they link to. This really helps to assess the credibility and objectivity.
Honestly, my generation (80s) does not deserve Ms. Thunberg.
having seen humanity, she’s not the person we deserve, but the one we need
Autists saving the world. But Neurotypicals know of our power so they created a society and social rules that work against us
the biggest disability that comes with autism is dealing with neurotypicals.
Especially once that are stupid and dont work on ANY logical reasoning
At least they’re consistent in how they want to resolve conflict.
Sen. Lindsay Graham among the threats
Yeah I feel like years ago someone would have had to step down from their position and quit politics in shame for such a dishonorable statement.
Hoping someone shoots missiles and sinks civilians trying to feed the poor. What a terrible soul.
Death threats are not 1A-protected free speech. So terrorism charges against those making the threats, yes?
/we all know the answer to that question
Terrorism charges don’t really mean much anymore. You can call anything terrorism at this point. They will need something less generic.
you know, except a white, right wing, man, who commits mass murder, for ideological reasons
Those are lone wolves, and tragically mentally ill, of course
All those lone wolves seem to have a lot in common. Hmmm
:/
nope, still A Bad Idea
One of the dumbest things I read today
You are the prime example of a true bigot.
don’t let them coerce that term.
because:
congrats, you are one.
and a stupid one at that.
do you think AIPAC represents American jews? it’s literally in the name, it’s a foreign lobbying firm. it represents 0% of the American population.
Maybe other Jews in your community see you for an antisemite and avoid you.
my synagogue always includes a prayer for gaza.
there are even explicit antizionist synagogues popping up, Finkelstein, Chomsky, JVP…
Does Europe contols the US government? given that most politicians are white?
or you only use that logic on Jews because you are a bigot waiting to coax a crisis to spread your vitriol?
looks like you’re too dumb to even read the 5 letter your typed.
do you see a “J” in there? if that a lobbying group for a foreign nation or for American Jews?
Are we taking the classical definition of anti-Semite or the newer, politically-convienent definition?
Anti-Zion brother. Not every Jew supports Israel.
How about stfu. Palestine doesn’t need antisemitic “friends” like this.
And spewing antisemitic vomit helps what exactly? Hating random Jewish people living in the US, Canada, France, Greece, wherever helps what exactly?
I will tell you what it helps. Antisemitism helps the Jewish Agency for Israel make the case that Jews cannot be safe unless they go colonize Palestine. Do you want to help Palestine? Protect the Jews in the country you live in. Every Jew that feels safe and happy in the diaspora is one less potential colonist in Palestine. Every thriving Jewish diaspora community is one more place that entices Israeli Jews away from the nightmare that is the Israeli apartheid.
Antisemitism is the enemy of Palestinian liberation. And is gross regardless. Period.
Ah, so now we’ve moved from antisemitism to full-on religious bigotry. Great.
I’m an atheist too. Demanding that Jews stop being Jews because some weaponize religion? That’s not liberation it’s bigotry. The problem isn’t religion. It’s how power uses it. Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Shintoists: all have texts that have been twisted to justify violence. That doesn’t make faith itself the enemy.
Palestinians need solidarity, not purity tests. Antisemitism, religious or otherwise, only strengthens Zionism. Want to help? Fight oppression, don’t become its mirror.
Power says “God” when it wants a gun cleaned. Blaming religion is just lazy analysis with a side of bigotry.
Don’t quote Ryan George in the same paragraph as this filth. Every religious text is violent. Not every religion is, but all have violent members. For most of history, Jewish people have been rather peaceful. They didn’t have a single crusade. If the religion was entirely peaceful for thousands of years, and its members are just now (comparatively, 80 years) having a genocide, then I’m pretty sure that its certainly not the fault of religion, that’s just the given excuse from the Israeli government.
You mean in the book that neither of us believe in?
Antisemitism is morally wrong no matter what the reason. Actually the occupation create more antisemitism and make jews unsafe everywhere not vice versa
I’ll stop you right there
This is doing so much harm to the climate cause it’s crazy
Fun fact
That’s not fun at all.
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/28979624-be58-4bbc-8a27-72b934f5f994.png">
Holy shit, I think I stumbled upon an archaeological internet site!
You know what would hurt the climate cause? Not caring about a genocide
It’s not like her international protesting license is limited to only climate change. You can dedicate 3 months out of a year to other forms without having to pay for the dual pretest license.
Time to get a flamethrower
Haha do it. Kill and stream it. Show everyone even clearer what is in your heart
…then what… probably nothing
I’m pretty sure that our government would issue a strongly worded statement.
They’re being lobbied to pursue charges against a children show host for expressing sympathy for starving children.
Precedent shows they follow the instructions of the lobbyists with the biggest and/or most recent check.
So it’d be a strongly worded statement of support for the extrajudicial slaying of a human rights activist, because that’s already the norm.
May a million Greta’s protect our. Greta on this mission for pace.
Can we all agree. A certain percentage of Zionists people. Are blood thirsty monsters? And they should be taken out before they can harm other people. Preferably put in prison.
While I agree, why so much punctuation?
It might be voice to text. It sometimes gets carried away.
I’m a terrible writer.
But a great panda.
Is that percentage 100%? Because any desire to take land without any respect for the ones living there for thousands of years has a certain… Lebensraum ambience attached to it
That “certain percentage” is 100%.
I would say the same thing about the J word. But you get banned if you say the J word. So Zionist it is.
You don’t get banned for saying “Jews”. You WILL get banned for saying the Jews should be exterminated, or that “100% of Jews…”
We do not tolerate hate speech, no matter who it’s directed at.
It sure feels like any disagreement with a certain group. Gets you banned.
You’re welcome to disagree, just don’t make hateful statements.
It’s more that pretending certain groups are a monolith, or really pretending anything is something it’s not, to justify hate speech is banned. Sure, it’s easy to pretend that all Jews are Zionists (ergo all Jews are pro-genocide) but it’s demonstrably untrue and just lazy thinking.
Most Jewish people are pro Israel and amongst those who are most religious or Orthodox most rises to an overwhelming majority.
This isn’t pretending an ethic group has negative characteristics from a stereotype this is acknowledging an actual view most in a group have.
Most Americans are pro Christianity. Even if you view Christianity negatively it’s ok to say Americans are infatuated with the trappings if not the actual virtues of Christianity because it’s true even if this isn’t true of every single one of us.
Right, but “most” is not “monolith.” There’s around 16 million jews worldwide, so even if 90% of jews are pro-zionist that’s still over a million non-zionist jews. List of Jewish anti-Zionist organizations. Generalizations about groups of people are harmful even if they’re true, because it’s unfair to the those who don’t fit the generalization.
Religions aren’t political ideologies, idiot. You get the difference yes?
To my understanding Jew is not perjorative but could be in context eg if offense is obviously intended or if mention of ethnicity or religion is otherwise irrelevant.
Correct, there’s nothing perjorative about “Jews”, but the overall context can be concerning.
People get all hot and bothered and start conflating “Jews” with “Israelis” and “Zionists”.
You can be a non-Israeli Jew. You can be a non-Jewish Zionist, they don’t all mean the same thing.
“A certain percentage of rhombuses have four equal sides.”
“I think that percentage is 100.”
“I would say the same about rectangles, but you get banned if you say rectangles. So rhombuses it is.”
Not all rectangles are rhombuses. And not all rhombuses are rectangles. Don’t be racist and you won’t get banned.
Fuck off Nazi, anyone with sense knows the difference between Zionism and Jews.
anti-zionist jews are some of the loudest voices and most crucial organizers of resistance against the zionist occupation of palestine. fuck right off you antisemitic piece of shit.
I’m not an anti-Semite. I’m from a similar tribe as Jewish people. I just have family who lived through their own genocide and I have no patience for people perpetrating genocide in the this modern era. If I can’t be objective against this group for what I have anecdotally experienced. Then what do you call that? Because that’s not free speech. I don’t call people names or call them slurs.
A: what exactly is a “similar tribe as Jewish people”? Like, Arabic? Cause that doesn’t exactly preclude being racist against Jews…
B: my man, you literally just said that all Jews are blood thirsty monsters, and they should be taken out before they can harm other people. You can’t seriously think you can somehow flip that around as some sort of enlightened anti-genocide platform.
I am not who you replied to, but my guesses:
A: Romani B: The post they were replying “100%” to specified zionists.
While I do not agree 100% of zionists are bloodthirsty monsters I do believe any people who claim some holy right to a land are inevitably going to commit atrocities to take or defend their magic dirt.
I’m gonna attach a screenshot so you can see that yes, the post they were replying to did indeed say Zionists, and they made it about all Jews. Not sure what exactly you’re trying to say with point B.
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/73955528-4de7-46f3-b413-5d0097276872.png">
Armenian. Our genetics show up as Jewish on 23 and me because we are similar tribes from wayyyyyyyyyy back. I also had my entire male side of my family killed in the Armenian genocide. And my aunts turned into slave sex workers for the Turks.
Friendly reminder that even being Jewish doesn’t preclude being racist against Jews.
To be clear, you’re saying that you would say that 100% of Jews should be “taken out,” except that this would get you banned?
Absolutely not. I would say zionists need to be stopped judiciously. Through the human rights courts and other organizations. This is all their making. We need to stop them before they start a nuclear war.
Basically we need to stop being captain america and lean towards being the punisher.
A certain percentage of all people are bloodthirsty monsters, especially when it comes to people unlike themselves.
And anyone who thinks this problem is caused by no one trying to use a bomb, gun, or flamethrower to solve it is the biggest idiot in planet earth.
Same with other side right?
A certain percentage of all humans with personal causes are blood thirsty monsters.
Yes, but most bloodthirsty monsters don’t get to use advanced military weapons and don’t receive billions in aide to seek blood
Just put little silver skulls on the front of your hats already.
they probably really want to
Oh please.
That’s what the conspiracy theory about her was when she was just Climate Greta.
That’s depressing.
So far she’s advocated for causes involving justice, what’s wrong with that?
Nothing wrong with it. Didn’t mean to come across that way.
when she was younger she definitely was. not going to hold it against her as she was a literal child, however, it is obviously she learned she was being coerced into becoming a grifter and she broke off then.
she could have very easily have become a lib grifter and make kunmbaya world tours.
I didn’t mean to come across as holding it against her. It’s sad.
the opposite.
she overcame it, it’s a mark of her character.
to the mods that removed FreakinSteve@lemmy.world bs.
good job 👍
Looks like the fatwa’s on the other foot.
Bad headline. They are advocating for killing her. They are not threatening to kill her because most of the people mentioned do not have the power to do so. I could threaten to arrest Netenyahu but it would not be a credible threat because that’s not within my power at all. But I can post online in favour of the idea.
If they didn’t sign the law why could they claim their EEZ?
Quit finding excuses to genociders
The blockade is illegal. Stop justifying the terrorist state actions
Can you provide anything to support that assertion?
imeu.org/…/fact-sheet-legal-status-of-israels-sie…
ohchr.org/…/how-can-israels-blockade-gaza-be-lega…
Hey thanks for providing this, it actually answers the question. For those who didn’t read through this, the main International Laws Israel is accused of violating are:
Human Rights violations - Israel is a member state of the UN and as such the UN asserts that Israel must follow the laws set forth. In reality Israel has been a signatory on 9/18 human rights treaties. (EDIT: Specifically Collective Punishment.)
Invading a UN recognized State - Palestine was recognized in 1988 and is considered part of the UN. Israel occupying Palestine is tantamount to a violation of International Law.
I started this post and then had to step away and by the time I got back I had a bunch of responses, but you were the first.
Do you have any source of the legality of murdering many activists on that ship?
You can phrase it how you want, but at the end of the day they are smuggling goods in an area internationally recognized as being under the control and jurisdiction of a country. Part of nonviolent civil disobedience is that you are breaking the law. I don’t think it’s good that activists get hurt, but it’s definitely not surprising.
In the incident a UN Panel found that the IDF boarded the Mavi Marmara and were met with resistance from ~40 of the passengers where were said to be armed with iron bars and knives.
The panel had this to state about the actions of the flotilla:
“However, the Panel seriously questions the true nature and objectives of the flotilla organizers, a coalition of non-governmental organizations. The leading group involved in the planning of the flotilla was the Turkish NGO “İnsan Hak ve Hürriyetleri Vakfı” (IHH), a humanitarian organization. It owned two of the ships; the Mavi Marmara and the Gazze I. There is some suggestion that it has provided support to Hamas, although the Panel does not have sufficient information to assess that allegation. IHH has special consultative status with ECOSOC, a status which in the Panel’s view raises a certain expectation with respect to the way in which it should conduct its activities.”
“Other elements also raise questions concerning the objectives of the flotilla organizers. If the flotilla had been a purely humanitarian mission it is hard to see why so many passengers were embarked and with what purpose. Furthermore, the quality and value of many of the humanitarian goods on board the vessels is questionable. There were large quantities of humanitarian and construction supplies on board the Gazze 1, Eleftheri Mesogeio and Defne-Y. There were some foodstuffs and medical goods on board the Mavi Marmara, although it seems that these were intended for the voyage itself. Any “humanitarian supplies” were limited to foodstuffs and toys carried in passengers’ personal baggage. The same situation appears to be the case for two other of the vessels: the Sfendoni, and the Challenger I. There was little need to organize a flotilla of six ships to deliver humanitarian assistance if only three were required to carry the available humanitarian supplies. The number of journalists embarked on the ships gives further power to the conclusion that the flotilla’s primary purpose was to generate publicity.”
“It should be noted that flotilla passengers specifically committed not to bring weapons on the journey. Neverthless, it is alleged that the IHH participants on board the Mavi Marmara included a “hardcore group” of approximately 40 activists, who had effective control over the vessel during the journey and were not subjected to security screening when they boarded the Mavi Marmara in Istanbul. The Turkish report refers to 42 volunteers who acted as “cleaning and maintenance personnel” who boarded the Mavi Marmara in Istanbul and asserts that these individuals were subject to security screening. The Panel notes in this regard that all participants agreed to follow the decisions of the IHH organizers during the voyage and that at least one witness described himself as working for IHH ‘like a security guard.’”
“Although people are entitled to express their political views, the flotilla acted recklessly in attempting to breach the naval blockade. The majority of the flotilla participants had no violent intentions, but there exist serious questions about the conduct, true nature and objectives of the flotilla organizers, particularly IHH. The actions of the flotilla needlessly carried the potential for escalation.”
So the event organizers had alleged ties to Hamas, there were 10 tonnes of supplies provided by the organizers but the only supplies intended for the Gazans was that which was brought by individual volunteers, and a core group of armed volunteers tried to resist the IDF when they boarded. These were the UN’s findings.
The occupation is illegal stop justifying the unjustifiable , there is a difference between occupied land and internationally recognized land administrated by a country. I don’t want to hear about it being surprising or not. I want to know if you think the death of the 9 activists was respecting international law
This document expose all Israeli lies and you covering from them . You ain’t fooling anybody pretending to be unbiased www.amnesty.org/en/…/mde150132011en.pdf
You made a lot of statements and a lot of questions at once, so I’ll try to split them up.
Agreed
Disagree?
Agreed, the coastal waters off the coast of Israel are different than the dry land in Gaza
I’m sorry?
Yes, people were smuggling goods through the internationally recognized waters administered by Israel. When the IDF boarded the ship to stop the smuggling they were attacked by a group of the passengers. While unfortunate, it was legal to defend themselves. I will say that the IDF should have done more to prevent the escalation to the point that people didn’t get killed, but that would likely have required an even larger show of force.
This is an article by Amnesty International? I’ll take the UN Panel’s report which stated ““The fundamental principle of the freedom of navigation on the high seas is subject to only certain limited exceptions under international law. Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.””
Not really a good answer. Interestingly the Palmer report does say specifically where in the Israeli report they document the connection to Hamas, but for the life of me I cannot find the actual report. If anyone finds it I’d be curious to read it.
Justifying murder very cool. The law say to only use enough force necessary. Murdering with live ammunition is not
The loss of life and injuries resulting from the use of force by Israeli forces
during the take-over of the Mavi Marmara was unacceptable. Nine passengers were
killed and many others seriously wounded by Israeli forces. No satisfactory
explanation has been provided to the Panel by Israel for any of the nine deaths.
Forensic evidence showing that most of the deceased were shot multiple times,
including in the back, or at close range has not been adequately accounted for in the
material presented by Israel.
digitallibrary.un.org/record/720841?ln=en&v=pdf
news.un.org/en/story/2010/09/352342
It’s interesting you used that quote because I also used it in another response. The difference is that you failed to note that the report activists took the weapons of the IDF and shot 2 of the soldiers and 7 other soldiers were injured. In case you want to read it yourself, that would be item 124 on page 57.
Interestingly I have found this report by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center which includes very detailed accounts of the attack including photos and soldier statements. I’m not going to reference or use anything from here because I assume most people will disregard it because it comes from an Israeli source. Either way, you should still check it out.
You failed to note that it was unacceptable for the idf to murder activists you can stop someone with one bullet, but decided shot pwople multiple time
Wow you are also using meir amit an israeli organization funded by israel terrorist government. You are exposing yourself here
No I didn’t? Why would I need to note it again when you literally just said it and then I said I had used the same quote? That is by definition noting it.
You never said that the panel said that Israel response was unacceptable. You are disingenuous
Here it is if you don’t believe me.. I referenced the quote 2 hours ago and in my post to you said I referenced it. You’re being obtuse.
You really are a caricature aren’t you?
It’s not simply an israeli source. It’s a shady source financed by the terrorist state of israel
So because it is funded by the Israeli government it can’t be used? Did you actually look at the report? It includes pictures of the “activists” beating the soldiers as the rappel onto the ship, photos from Turkish Journalist Sefik Dinç, youtube videos uploaded by the “activists”, and pictures from the “activists” of the soldiers bleeding from their heads while the “activists” smile and hold them in place.
I mean, I’m all for calling out propaganda and looking at where information is coming from (that’s like 90% of what I do here), but when one side has pictures and videos that the other side provided I’m a bit inclined to believe them. I put a lot of skepticism in the interviews included in the report, but when the IDF says they were attacked by the “activists”, they provide pictures and videos taken by the “activists” attacking the soldiers, the Turkish government says that the “activists” attacked the soldiers, and the UN Panel that investigated it says that the “activists” attacked the soldiers… I don’t know, maybe it’s true and not just IDF propaganda?
Yes, no army and government ever lied more than the idf and israeli governments
Ok, I’m done with you. You’re either deliberately stupid or actually so. You seem to have no ability to engage in rationale debate and your ability to source and cite information is on a high school level. Go back to your echo chamber and enjoy the sound of your own voice.
imeu.org/…/fact-sheet-legal-status-of-israels-sie…
Collective punishment contravenes the Hague Conventions on the laws of war, as well as Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which states: “No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed.”
Also in 2010, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, condemned the blockade, stating: “I have consistently reported to member states that the blockade is illegal and must be lifted.”
In 2011, after Israel’s attack on a flotilla of civilian ships taking aid to Gaza killed nine human rights activists, including an American citizen, the UN released a report by a panel of five independent rights experts who concluded Israel’s blockade is in “flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law.”
In 2012, 50 international aid agencies, including the World Health Organization, UNICEF, and Oxfam, released a statement calling on Israel to lift its siege and blockade, declaring: “For over five years in Gaza, more than 1.6 million people have been under blockade in violation of international law. More than half of these people are children. We the undersigned say with one voice: ‘end the blockade now.’”
In a 2016 report, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967 condemned Israel’s blockade as illegal, stating: “As a form of collective punishment imposed upon an entire population, the blockade is contrary to international law.”
This is a good response to my earlier question. Please note that my first post was about the assertion of the Freedom Flotilla Coalition that they had the right to run the blockade. When someone said that the blockade itself was illegal I asked for a source which you and they have provided.
You could make the argument that since the blockade is illegal then the right to defend it would be ceded, but I don’t think it works that way. Much like how if a cop illegally arrests you you still don’t have the right to resist arrest.
The UN Panel that investigated the 2010 incident said both that the loss of passenger lives on the IDFs fault was unacceptable (especially including shooting some of the dead multiple times or in the back) and that the treatment of the passengers was unacceptable.
That same panel also stated, “The fundamental principle of the freedom of navigation on the high seas is subject to only certain limited exceptions under international law. Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.”
Removed for misinformation.
web.archive.org/…/0000017f-f617-ddde-abff-fe779a5…
“An earlier fact-finding mission named by the same UN forum to investigate the flotilla incident also found in a report last September that the blockade violated international law. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) says the blockade violates the Geneva Conventions.
Israel says its Gaza blockade is a precaution against arms reaching Hamas and other Palestinian guerrillas by sea.
The four-man panel headed by former New Zealand Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer found Israel had used unreasonable force in dealing with what it called “organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers.””
I would argue that nothing I said is misinformation. My post said that the basis for much of the Freedom Flotilla Coalitions argument is based on the Freedom of Movement clause of the UN Law of the Sea Convention as they state in #1 on their own post. Their purpose for doing the blockade run is about the violation of international law for Collective Punishment, but the basis for which they believe they can challenge the the blockade is the UN Law of the Sea.
As I stated in my original post, they are smuggling goods inside of the Economic Exclusion Zone of Israel. When told to stop and yield to inspection they are claiming they don’t have to because of the UN Law of the Sea which is incorrect in this instance.
Since you referenced the UN Forum to investigate the 2010 flotilla incident, the UN panel in their report noted that
“It is clear to the Panel that preparations were made by some of the passengers on the Mavi Marmara well in advance to violently resist any boarding attempt. The description given in the Israeli report is consistent with passenger testimonies to the Turkish investigation that describe cutting iron bars from the guard rails of the ship, opening fire hoses, donning life or bullet proof vests and gas masks, and assuming pre-agreed positions in anticipation of an attack. Witness reports also describe doctors and medical personnel coordinating before the boarding in anticipation of casualties. Furthermore, video footage shows passengers wearing gas masks, life or bullet proof vests, and carrying metal bars, slingshots, chains and staves. That information supports the accounts of violence given by IDF personnel to the Israeli investigation”
“The Panel accepts, therefore, that soldiers landing from the first helicopter faced significant, organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers when they descended onto the Mavi Marmara. Material before the Panel confirms that this group was armed with iron bars, staves, chains, and slingshots, and there is some indication that they also used knives. Firearms were taken from IDF personnel and passengers disabled at least one by removing the ammunition from it. Two soldiers received gunshot wounds. There is some reason to believe that they may have been shot by passengers, although the Panel is not able to conclusively establish how the gunshot wounds were caused. Nevertheless, seven other soldiers were wounded by passengers, some seriously.”
So, the Flotilla asserts that they have the right to freedom of movement by the Law of the Sea Convention, which they didn’t, and when the IDF boarded the ship they were violently attacked by “non-violent” activists.
The blockade is illegal, the raid was illegal, activists has the right to self defense against the occupying force
ihh.org.tr/en/mavi-marmara
Sure, I’ll agree with that
No, it’s factually not, even the UN agreed.
They did not have the right to deny the IDF access to the ship. The UN Panel agreed.
Why would you quote the event organizers as if they are a valid or unbiased source?
EDIT: Since you’re following me around I’ll just direct you to my final response to you
Way too many folks that enjoy genocide these days.
I’m gonna be so devastated when she dies…