News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Neither i24 nor memri are unbiased sources, but if this is true, it certainly would account for a lot of the anti-Israel bias that has been coming out of human rights watch lately.
Yeah, it can't be the genocide.
It's them inappropriately defining this as genocide or whatever other buzzwords will generate outrage. This is clearly about defense for Israel and not eliminating an ethnic group.
Yes, those 5000+ children that Israel has killed were a real risk to Israeli security.
Is that tragic? Yes. Is it genocide? No. Words mean things.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
Sure sounds like what they're doing to Palestinians in Gaza to me. Or do you think they're going to let the innocent people they didn't murder come back now that they're occupying it?
You know, because Israel is famous for giving Palestinians their homes and their land back.
What is being done in Gaza is genocide.
The "genocide" debate here is activists trying to seize the high ground after Hamas's hideous acts. Their hope, after an assault of such barbarity, is to label the response "genocidal" and hope that people chase that shiny lure instead of remembering why this war happened at all.
So all the children they killed were part of Hamas?
Quite the strawman. People deploying the word "genocide" are either ignorant of what the word means or are intentionally misusing it for political purposes because they would otherwise be faced with having to discuss why this war began at all. Word play debates do little to alleviate people’s suffering. Denial of the other side’s humanity & dueling victimhood, eliminate empathy. We’ve had FEW cases of legal genocide since 1948, the question is how do these debates help long term?
You were the one who said they were doing it to stop Hamas. So were the 5000+ children part of Hamas or not?
Also, 'legal genocide' is weaseling out of this. Trump didn't 'legally' commit rape against E. Jean Carroll. He still raped her.
Again, you are forcing a strawman. This war began with the barbarity of October 7th. As with all wars, there are civilian causality.
I also wouldn't put too much faith in the numbers as they come from Hamas. Not only do they not differentiate between their own members and civilians, but have been known to fabricate for propaganda purposes as I explained.
The term genocide is a criminal charge and has a legal definition. Making up a definition is weaseleing out, not using a proper legal definition
Actually, the judge said he did commit rape.
How many wars kill 5000 children in less than 2 months? Amazing you find that acceptable.
Also- https://www.businessinsider.com/e-jean-carroll-verdict-why-no-rape-verdict-for-trump-2023-5?op=1
He was not legally found to have raped her. It was not legally rape. The judge said it was still rape because it was still rape despite what the law says.
Syria, Libya, Yemen, Ethiopia, Somalia, etc etc
Millions dead. Almost 40 million forcibly displaced.
When the judge says you're guilty, you're guilty.
The judge did not say he was legally guilty of rape. Read the article.
I'm really not interested in Trump's rape today. See ya
"You proved me wrong, but I can't admit it. Bye." Gotcha.
Hope you leaned something.
Yes, I learned that you can't admit you're wrong in the face of blatant evidence.
You certainly are full of yourself. Must be fun at parties.
Insulting me will not make you less wrong, sorry. Also, you lied when you said "I’m really not interested in Trump’s rape today. See ya" since you're still talking to me. I'm guessing you won't admit to that either.
Bwhahahahaha.
Yep. That's what I thought. Can't admit you're wrong, can't admit you lied.
FfS. You were completely right about Trump, which has nothing to do with the subject of this string. I was wrong about that minor ussue. You were wrong about the rest. Feel better now? Then get out of my sight.
That's one. Now are you going to admit you lied when you suggested you were done talking to me?
I've tried to say goodbye to you several times and you hang around like a psycho girlfriend. If that amuses you, perhaps some professional help is needed.
Similar to before, insulting me won't make you less of a liar.
Also, I don't have to stop talking to you just because you want me to. You, however, can stop replying any time you like. That you don't do it suggests that maybe you should think about what you just accused me of.
Israel is neither trying to destroy Arabs nor Muslims, What they are doing is defending themselves against a hostile nation that declared war on them by slaughtering their civilians. Sometimes keeping themselves safe means annexing land, and a genocide this does not make.
Israel's intent is not to destroy any group, if that were their intent, they would have done it by now. They certainly have the capability. Their intent is to keep themselves safe from people who are trying to kill them and refuse to surrender.
Palestinians are a specific ethnic group. Interesting that you aren't acknowledging that. And the majority of Palestinians that have been murdered were not part of Hamas.
As far as calling Gaza or Palestine a nation, that's laughable. When has Israel ever acknowledged their sovereignty?
No, Palestinians are Arabs.
Collateral damage is not genocide.
Look up the definition of nation, I'll wait. You seem to have it confused with statehood.
Nation:
When has Palestine been organized under a single independent government?
Also, 'Arab' is as much a single ethnic group as 'European.' Or even 'Jewish.'
Spain didn't expel, murder and forcibly convert the Ashkenazi Jews. Because there weren't any in Spain. It expelled, murdered and forcibly converted the Sephardic Jews. It was still genocide. I'm sure you'll find that most Jews would agree on that point.
Oxford dictionary:
Arab is a specific ethnic group that contains a lot of diversity/tribes. Jewish is a collection of several ethnic groups, and European is a region, not an ethnicity.
I honestly don't know enough about this part of history to weigh in. Was there intent to destroy Sephardic Jews, or was Spain under attack by them and defending itself?
I notice you have absolutely nothing to say about what I said about ethnic groups. Is it maybe because that would mean that systematic murder and displacement of the Palestinian people would be a genocide just the same as the expulsion of Sephardic Jews from Spain?
If you're going to murder thousands of civilians just be a monoethnicity, that way they can't retaliate with without being genocidal! Modern nations hate this one trick.
Why are Sephardic Jews an ethnicity but Palestinians not an ethnicity?
That's how they're categorized on Wikipedia.
I presumed that the various Jewish ethnicities had more genetic drift than Arabs due to the diaspora, but upon further reading I'm not sure that's the case:
It's a good question. I suspect this ethnic classification is how they classify themselves.
Oh, well, if Wikipedia says so...
On what basis are you making your claim that Palestinians are a distinct ethnic group? Even pro-Palestinian organizations refer to them as Arabs. As far as I'm aware, Palestinians only began existing as a group when local Arab nationalists emerged as a regional group opposing Jews in the levant.
I think calling Palestine a nation and not an ethnicity is more accurate, but I will correct my language if you can provide me a source.
Yes, and Sephardic Jews refer to themselves as Jews. They're still a distinct ethnic group. The difference according to you is, apparently, 'Wikipedia says so.'
Looking forward to you providing me with better sources than Wikipedia then...
https://www.stats.govt.nz/tools/2018-census-ethnic-group-summaries/palestinian
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S014717670900056X
https://forward.com/tag/palestinian/
https://www.michigannewssource.com/2023/11/confused-about-the-terms-you-hear-connected-to-the-israel-hamas-war-this-will-help/
https://www.ncesc.com/from-whom-are-the-modern-palestinians-descended/
https://spa.sdsu.edu/documents/Flanigan2015_Article_CommunityServiceProvisionByPol.pdf
I'm guessing you won't consider those "better sources" than a page anyone with an agenda can edit. But I'll keep going if you want.
Summarizing:
NZ considers "Palestinian" an ethnic group in its census.
The Abu-Rayya family refers to Palestinian ethnicity in their study regarding personal identification as Israeli or Palestinian.
A link to list of every article on forward.com that contains the tag, "Palestinian," (why did you post this?)
A student article in Ann Arbor's student newspaper refers to Palestinians as, "an ethnic group."
An article full of videos disproving Palestinians are descended from Philistines, in which several of the videos seem to totally contradict your position. Did you watch them?:
A paper that refers to Palestinians as an ethnic group in a paper about service organizations for middle east minorities
While I appreciate that you bothered to present sources, these seem to just be google hits for "Palestinian ethnicity" rather than articles specifically chosen from credible sources because they support your case. Did you read them?
If you want to keep going please provide sources that are making this specific claim with evidence and not just articles that mention the words ethnic and Palestinian together in an unrelated context.
It seems to me that Palestinian is better classified as a national, not ethnic, identity. They consider themselves Arabs and were referred to collectively as such until Mandatory Palestine ended.
Given than this hasn't happened yet, it feels a little premature to go tossing around words like genocide.
How long do we have to wait for them not to let Palestinians back into Gaza before we can call it genocide?
Seems like the people who say it's too early to talk about gun legislation in America every time there's a mass shooting.
It not being a literal active war zone is probably a good first step, I'd say. That, and "back into Gaza" implies they've been forced out of Gaza, which isn't true.
If Israel were truly attempting to eliminate the Palestinians as a people, it would take a few hours. It's not like they lack the firepower. I'll readily concede that they've been much less careful about preventing civilian casualties, and they absolutely should be criticized for that, but that's a significant and meaningfully different thing from deliberately targeting and killing civilians.
They absolutely have been forced out of Gaza.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/israel-calls-humanitarian-corridor-fleeing-palestinians-s-forced-displ-rcna125376
My apologies, I was referring to the Gaza Strip as a whole, not specifically the city.
If you see Jewish settlers being sent to Gaza after this mess, I'll eagerly join you in being outraged, just as I find the West Bank settlements a disgrace. But I don't think it's useful to get angry over things that haven't happened yet, especially when there are plenty of events that have already happened that are more worthy of anger.
It seems like most people claiming Israel wants to reoccupy Gaza genuinely don't realize that Israel voluntarily disengaged in 2005, closed the existing settlements, and withdrew all military. Or that part of the reason that Hamas was able to execute the deadliest terrorist attack in Israel's history was due to Israel's willingness to ease border restrictions.
Religious rhetoric always sounds borderline insane to me so maybe they are secretly peaceful, but the Israeli government is using some pretty violent biblical examples if what they want is peace. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/11/benjamin-netanyahu-amalek-israel-palestine-gaza-saul-samuel-old-testament