Sydney police plan to use ‘extraordinary’ powers to search pro-Palestinian protesters and demand ID
Sydney police plan to use ‘extraordinary’ powers to search pro-Palestinian protesters and demand ID
NSW police could ‘lock city down’ for Hyde Park rally but commissioner says force won’t go that far
You're viewing part of a thread.
Palestinian people's struggles are real and have been continually acknowledged for decades. But so are the struggles of Israeli people.
The problems start when people excuse these terrorist attacks as being a natural reaction to Israel's oppression, or even worse, directly blame it on Israel (as per the Harvard letter). And this is something that has been repeated ad-nauseum in certain circles over the last week.
Nothing justifies behaviour like beheading a bunch of babies.
The beheading of babies is fake news, though. And use of fake news is signature tactics of far right public opinion manipulation.
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/12/middleeast/israel-hamas-beheading-claims-intl/index.html https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/how-a-shocking-report-on-40-babies-in-israel-was-deemed-disinformation-before-then-being-verified/ar-AA1hZUff https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-pictures-terrorists-beheading-children-white-house-2023-10?op=1
Shit is complex, friend. :/
Permanently Deleted
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Sources for confirmation are the IDF and IDF provided pictures. https://news.sky.com/story/its-important-to-separate-the-facts-from-speculation-what-we-actually-know-about-the-viral-report-of-beheaded-babies-in-israel-12982329
There's also reports that there are ai generated pictures trying to support these claims: https://www.samaa.tv/208732623-fact-check-ai-generated-burnt-baby-image-shared-amid-israel-hamas-war
Wars do include a lot of misinformation, and everything is just so quick. We have to dismiss first, and try to find the extraordinary evidence. I couldn't. You can't prove something doesn't exist, or something didn't happen.
Unfortunately nobody got time to read everything in detail. We skim through everything and try to come up with some sense out of it according to our world views.
I'll mention again that your own source (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/how-a-shocking-report-on-40-babies-in-israel-was-deemed-disinformation-before-then-being-verified/ar-AA1hZUff) concluded the report as true.
Some other sources such as Snopes say the reports of babies being specifically beheaded is unverified, but they do confirm that babies have been killed and adults have been beheaded. So if we want to take that on face value, we're still back to the pointless and absurd discussion about how many civilians of any age can be killed, and in what manner, before such killings go from being a justifiable to unjustifiable response to Israeli oppression.
Yes. One of my sources state that. You see I'm not cherry picking. I'm taking a variety of sources to try to make some sense of this shit show.
So. Fair. Beheading is particularly graphic violence. Is killing by bombing acceptable, then, because it's not a human killing another with their own hands, because there's indirection in between, through fighter planes and the explosives?
It should all be unacceptable, I believe we agree. I acknowledge the violence of this week's attack, but I also acknowledge the Israeli violence before and after this week's attack.
What's the objective way to look at this? Maybe is the onion's. https://www.theonion.com/the-onion-stands-with-israel-because-it-seems-like-yo-1850922505
I think the onions take is fair and can't really argue with it. After so much bad blood on both sides over so many decades I've got no clue what the solution is. However, I think another objective way to look at the situation is to consider what the outcome would be if the relative military strength of the two sides were switched. I think it's pretty clear that in such a case the state of Israel would have been erased in the late 1940s.
It would, but it's not really objective since it was also established through military force. Either way, it's allowing for one of peoples to use military strength and not another.