this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2024
8 points (100.0% liked)

World News

39096 readers
2471 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

It's astonishing many organizations in wealthy democracies are terrified of the slightest criticism of Israel's genocide.

[–] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Even the Israeli government pretends to be sad that journalists die covering wars. They’re more extreme than this?

[–] wurzelgummidge@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They are terrified of repercussions from the US.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 1 points 3 months ago (3 children)

If America were forced to choose between Australia and Israel, it won't be Israel.

Australia has more money.

[–] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

They don't have to choose, they have the power to make Aussie politicians bend the knee, and everyone knows it. That's what they're afraid of.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 1 points 3 months ago

Sure, but that's kind of the point, isn't it? That Australia is run by cowards.

[–] Aussieiuszko@aussie.zone 1 points 3 months ago

Hahaha, no American politician ever calls themselves an Australinist. They are fucking nuts, like fanatically end of the world supporting Israel.

[–] wurzelgummidge@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

No need to choose, Australia is easy to bully

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Because once that door swings open a little bit... who knows what might bear some scrutiny?

Who made the clothes you're wearing? Or your phone? Were they a slave? A child? Are they even still alive, or do they have cancer because of the factory where they worked? Do their parents miss them, if they're gone?

What happened to make the chicken sandwich you had at lunch? Are you complicit in slow torture unto death, just by existing in the modern world?

Better to keep the door shut tight, and attack the messenger if anyone has anything to say about it. We're just making music here. No torture, no killing, no profit from the destruction of lives. Just music! Trust me. Enjoy.

(I don't think most people are like this. I actually think most people in the West at this point are against the "war" in Gaza, to at least some tepidly inactive degree. But certainly, also, a lot of people aren't against it, q.v. this article.)

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

People talk regularly about those things and nobody gets cancelled over that. It's only the Israel lobby that made talking about Palestine equal to anti-Semitism, no matter how mild (like in this case).

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 1 points 3 months ago

Well... yeah, that's a fair point. The strength of Israel's lobby has a ton to do with it (and lobbies like China can accomplish the same types of things). It's 100% true.

[–] Ilandar@aussie.zone 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)
[–] Sir_Simon_Spamalot@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

it made "an error"

spineless cunts

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 3 months ago

Extremists always think that everyone agrees with them. They usually are unprepared for the scenario in which this is not the case.

[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Here's what they cancelled him for:

for piano

duration: 5'00"

2024

for Jayson Gillham

dedicated to the journalists of Gaza

I acknowledge the Wurundjeri Woi Wurrung people of the Kulin Nation, Traditional Custodians of the lands where I live, work, and create – lands on which First Nations communities have been creating and sharing music, art and culture for thousands of generations. I pay my respects to their Elders past and present, and I recognise the vital ongoing contributions First Nations communities continue to make on our music and arts scenes. This always was, and always will be, Aboriginal land.

I also acknowledge all Indigenous Peoples worldwide, their continued fight for freedom from settler-colonialism and occupation, and recognise the interconnectedness of these, all struggles for justice and work towards a world free from oppression for all everyone.

He didn't even dedicate it to journalists killed, just journalists. The headline is bullshit.

He never mentioned Israel.

EDIT: It just occurred to me that he wasn't canceled for dedicating it to the journalists of Gaza. He was cancelled for calling Aboriginal people victims of settler-colonialism in Australia, which is objectively true...

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago

The article quotes him saying more:

The five-minute piece is dedicated to the journalists of Gaza and was written for Gillham, according to D’Netto’s website. On Wednesday morning, Gillham’s team released the full transcript of what he said while introducing Witness.

“Over the last 10 months, Israel has killed more than one hundred Palestinian journalists,” Gillham told the crowd on Sunday.

“A number of these have been targeted assassinations of prominent journalists as they were travelling in marked press vehicles or wearing their press jackets. The killing of journalists is a war crime in international law, and it is done in an effort to prevent the documentation and broadcasting of war crimes to the world.

“In addition to the role of journalists who bear witness, the word Witness in Arabic is Shaheed, which also means Martyr.”

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

Truth is treason in the empire of lies

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Wow, magnificent self-own by the Orchestra manager. Dedicated to journalists killed in Gaza - not Palestinians or Israelis or Hamas or the Israeli far right or IDF, but journalists in the broadest sense of the term. Who fucking cancels a show over that?

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

People who don't want you to know that Israel is slaughtering everything in Gaza

Ain't it great to see US political leadership tuck their dicks for Israel after IDF slaughter US nationals in west bank or Gaza?

MoSt PoWERFuL CuNTrY

[–] xhrit@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

slaughtering everything in Gaza

Bro, the us killed more innocent people in 1 night of bombing in ww2 then israel has killed in it's entire 75 year existence.

The life expectancy in gaza is currently higher then in egypt, where Israel is not slaughtering anyone at all. At the current rate of death it will take Israel more then 1000 years to kill everyone in gaza.

[–] sandbox@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

So you’re saying that Israel’s genocide is fine because it hasn’t caused as much loss of life as a nuclear bomb?

It’s a fucking wonder to me how you believe that the fucking life expectancy data is going to be anywhere near up to date or verifiable, considering that Israel have killed like three years worth of the yearly death rate in 9 months.

[–] xhrit@lemmy.world -3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

There were multiple conventional non-nuclear bombings during world war 2 that caused more deaths in one night then in the entire 75 year conflict. For example, the bombing of Tokyo which used conventional weapons.

[–] sandbox@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I’m not sure what your point is, here. If the bombing was worse, you’d be happy to consider it genocide? How many people does it take for a bombing campaign to pass your “genocide” barrier? Is that in whole numbers, or as a percentage of population?

I would also consider those acts of bombing to be absolutely unjustified, evil, crimes against humanity and wholly deplorable. I’ve even spoken out against the bombings of civilians on this very account.

[–] xhrit@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

In order to consider it genocide I would say there has to be a risk of actually finishing genocide.

Do you consider palestine's attack against civilians on oct 7th genocide?

If the attack against the music festival was worse, you’d be happy to consider it genocide? How many people does it take for a murder campaign to pass your “genocide” barrier? Is that in whole numbers, or as a percentage of population?

[–] sandbox@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Uh, sorry, I didn’t realise we could just come up with our own “considerations” of words with meanings which are widely acknowledged under international law.

Here’s the basic criteria: State killing, maiming, attempted reduction of the birth rate, forcibly transferring children, or inflicting conditions calculated to bring about the destruction of, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, in whole or in part.

For the October 7 attacks to be acknowledged as a genocide, firstly, the State of Palestine would need to be acknowledged as a bona-fide state and Hamas recognised as the government of that country. Then we could discuss what the potential intent of the attacks were, but I don’t think that it would be a stretch to consider Hamas a genocidal organisation, or to consider the October 7 attacks genocidal in that case. These attacks, no matter how deplorable, do not justify genocide as a response.

Are you willing to acknowledge Israel as genocidal under the same framework?

[–] xhrit@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

the State of Palestine would need to be acknowledged as a bona-fide state and Hamas recognised as the government of that country.

The State of Palestine is acknowledged as a bona-fide state and Hamas recognised as the government of that country, by 145 states - more nations recognize Palestine then Taiwan.

If October 7 was indeed a genocidal attack (as it clearly was under international law) then the israel's actions are not genocide, they are a response to genocide, as the intent of the Israel-Hamas war is not the destruction of palestine but the destruction of the genocidal organisation Hamas.

[–] sandbox@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Look, it’s obvious that you either can’t, or don’t want to, have a good-faith open discussion about Israel’s genocide. Either way, you’re wasting my time.

None of what you’ve said changes anything. If a French guy committed genocide, that wouldn’t justify a genocide against all French people.

Likewise, as I already established with my first comment, Israel definitely has demonstrated genocidal intent, very very clearly. There are a number of Israeli politicians who have openly stated in public that they want to push all Arabs out of the region. They’re taking pretty much every genocidal action categorised.

You are behaving as though you are literally incapable of considering whether you could be wrong.

[–] JimSamtanko@lemm.ee 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Unpopular opinion time:

People pay to see and enjoy listening to a symphony, not listen to political opinion. And while I’m entirely on the side of the protestors, and stand firmly against the atrocities committed by Israel, I’d be against this at a symphony as well.

I know it’s impossible to comprehend, but sometimes, people need a bread from the negativity in the world. We don’t go to political rallies to hear how our congressmen and women enjoy listening to Taylor Swift for a reason…

You may now begin your downvotes.

[–] sandbox@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It is widely acknowledged that external international pressure was one of the major factors in ending the apartheid regime. Therefore, it’s worth considering the impact of raising awareness among international audiences, even those not politically engaged, to put pressure on Israel to end their genocide.

On one hand, you have the discomfort felt by attendees to a live symphony performance in Melbourne, Australia having to listen to the pianist spend 30 seconds introducing the song:

Over the last 10 months, Israel has killed more than one hundred Palestinian journalists. A number of these have been targeted assassinations of prominent journalists as they were travelling in marked press vehicles or wearing their press jackets. The killing of journalists is a war crime in international law, and it is done in an effort to prevent the documentation and broadcasting of war crimes to the world.

In addition to the role of journalists who bear witness, the word Witness in Arabic is **Shaheed, which also means Martyr.

On the other hand, you have the discomfort felt by the victims of war crimes and genocide perpetuated by Israel.

Personally, I don’t think it’s that hard to judge where the cost/benefit analysis goes on that, but of course it’s a personal value judgment. Perhaps you don’t hold the same values I do, or not to the same degree, but for me, it’s obvious that using your platform to raise awareness and to put pressure on Israel is the right thing to do.

[–] xhrit@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Anytime someone says they believe in the genocide in gaza I have to wonder what other antisemitic conspiracy theories they believe.

Do you believe ex-KGB agent and neo soviet klepto-fascist President of Russia, Vladimer Putin, when he claims zionist Ukraine is committing genocide against Russians in the Donbas?

Do you believe republican state representative, KKK grand wizard, and christian fascist David Duke when he says zionists are committing genocide against white Americans?

If not, then I don't know why you believe ex-KGB agent and islamo-fascist president of Palestine Mohammad Abbas when he says zionists are committing genocide against Palestine.

[–] IAmNotACat@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Let’s be real, a lot of people are saying it’s genocide. I’d say, if Israel stopped shooting journalists, even more people would be saying it.

[–] xhrit@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

Maybe the billionaire islamo-fascists dictators who rule palestine with an iron fists have incentive to lie about genocide. Do you also believe former Republican state representative and grand wizard of the KKK David Duke when he says that zionists are committing genocide against white people in the Americas? Do you believe Putin when he claims zionist ukraine is committing genocide against russians in teh Donbas?

[–] sandbox@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

First of all, let’s not conflate criticism of Israel with anti-semitism. I am an ardent opponent of anti-semitism, and while criticism of Israel may well be used as a dog-whistle among anti-semites, that doesn’t mean that all criticism of Israel is inherently anti-semitic. Indeed, I am very happy to know that there are many Jewish people who oppose Israel’s genocide who I can stand with.

As for your question - I don’t believe any individual person’s claims of genocide, but rather consider the evidence. These are the facts as I know them:

  1. Israeli politicians have gone on-record, several times, all the way back to David Ben-Gurion, about their intent to, at the very least, displace, the arab population in and around Israel. In more modern times, the rhetoric is far stronger and very dehumanising.
  2. Israel has continually treated Arab Israelis as, at best, second class citizens, denying them citizenship and property rights, displacing them, causing them to flee in conflict and refusing them the right to return to their homes.
  3. Israel built a wall around Gaza, tightly controlling the flow of people, food, water, medicine and other forms of aid into Gaza. The West bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem have been illegally occupied by Israel since 1971.
  4. A series of conflicts have seen Israeli employing overwhelming and disproportionate military force against Arabs indiscriminately, bombing schools, hospitals, residences, and destroying vital infrastructure, as well as maiming, killing or imprisoning journalists, human rights monitors, aid workers, and so on.

I could go on, but honestly, that’s enough for me to call it like I see it. Israel’s grand ambitions extend at least as far as driving all Arabs out of the territory immediately surrounding Israel, from the banks of the River Jordan to the Mediterranean sea, and possibly further. They are willing to go to any lengths to achieve that goal, including war crimes, crimes against humanity, extrajudicial killings, mass murder, bombing civilians, destroying schools, hospitals, mosques, regardless of who is inside, they’re willing to illegally push people out of their homes, bulldoze Palestinian settlements, steal, kill, and lie about it the whole time they’re doing it.

[–] xhrit@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Israel’s grand ambitions extend at least as far as driving all Arabs out of the territory

This is just projection. The only side who's goal is to drive people from the land are the people chanting "from the river to the sea palestine will be arab".

[–] sandbox@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Just ignored all of my comment to get upset about a rhyming chant, did we?

You have the projection backwards. It’s the genociders who project into that chant.

[–] IAmNotACat@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

He even had to change the ending of the rhyme to make it fit his worldview.

[–] xhrit@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The original chant In Arabic is “Min al-mayyeh li-mayyeh, Filastin arabiyyeh” which means "from the water to the water palestine is arab".

Here are protestors at Columbia University chanting "Filastin arabiyyeh" while waving palestinain flags.

https://x.com/ShaiDavidai/status/1755728329339007011

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The article goes into depth with the artists remarks. Its nowhere close to something like: "This next piece is dedicated to the journalists killed in Gaza" which is what I would have assumed.

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

He provided context as to why that piece would be performed. I don't think he went over the top at all.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Can I ask would you hold the same position that his statements should have been allowed if it was in strong support of the violence against the people in Gaza? Do you support the use of this platform because you agree with the position or because you believe he should be able to voice whatever position he wants? Would you be in support if his opinions were on White nationalism?

edit: Calm down people, I don't support Israel nor white nationalism. I'm probing where @T00l_shed@lemmy.world 's limits are for what they a believe is acceptable. I'm not advocating for any political position with my questions.

[–] takenaps@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The main point here is being against the violence, of which israel is largely responsible. Your questions detract from that & minimize the problems to a matter of personal opinion

[–] xhrit@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

The main point here is being against the violence, of which israel is largely responsible.

The violence began before israel even existed. Israel is not responsible for violence against jews.

[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Violence has existed for all of human history. Doesn’t excuse Israel’s bombing of journalists.

[–] xhrit@lemmy.world -3 points 3 months ago

Hamas issues press passes to its military spotters. The transmission of military intel makes people valid targets under the laws of war. That is a valid excuse for bombing journalists.

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] Numberone@startrek.website -1 points 3 months ago

Oh, the IOF said it? Must be true 😂. The only thing they say concretely and sourced in the article is that he worked at a "pro Hamas" media outlet (can't speak to this claim, but remember all the other things the IOF has claimed are Hamas), and that he wrote a piece for Al Jazeera.

Disregarding all that. Assuming that this guy was a journalist who was also a gun carrying member of Hamas and held actual hostages in his house, does that say anything about the record number of journalists that have been assasinated by the IOF?

I think it pretty clearly doesn't.