this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2024
671 points (95.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

5307 readers
1964 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 64 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (5 children)

Absolutely HATE the passive voice and I do think the title is terrible and avoids blame.

But the headline isn't TOTALLY without merit. The provided total of dead and injured weren't solely killed by Israeli military. Apparently many were killed or injured when the aid trucks decided to get the hell out of there and ran over a bunch of Palestinians to escape.

Still 100% Israel's fault, but it technically couldn't say "killed by Israeli gunfire".

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Update from AP:

Doctor says 80% of the patients they received at his hospital were not crowd crushed but were shot by israel

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Do you have evidence to back up this claim? From what I’ve read, many of those run over were also riddled with bullet holes.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

a Palestinian witness told the BBC that most of the people killed had been run over by trucks

From The Guardian citing AP and BBC

The hospital said it was treating more bullet wounds than truck, though. But that's survivors

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Were they dead before being run over by trucks?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago

The problem with war reporting is different sides giving different and bias viewpoints, try not to die first and report later, and no chance of rapid probe or investigation. So who knows, maybe they were already dead. Not too mention the bias in capitalist media. Hell, maybe the stone hearted CNN editor gives no shits about people's lives and just thought that "chaos" buzzword would grab more clicks. I don't know.

But when a Palestinian, who could have easily just said "IDF shot them all" to enhance their vilification, but instead says the truck killed people, my instinct is to take it as a possibility. If Israel alone claimed the trucks killed more, I'd be pure skepticism.

Or maybe in the scary as fuck situation, the witness made assumptions. Reporters can report on what they found and whoever does the analyzing will do what they do.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago

how about "massacre"

[–] [email protected] 27 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If the IDF starts firing into a crowd and mass killing people that will cause a panic.

Evidence of the IDF firing into the crowd:

NSFL (gore+death)

I'm not sure if there are truly any deaths from crowd crushing, but if there are then all those deaths would still be the IDF's fault.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

Yes to all this. The report of the truck behavior was from Palestinian witnesses.

[–] [email protected] 85 points 6 months ago (1 children)

“Killed in Israeli attack on aid trucks” would work.

If someone deliberately set fire to a theater and 10 people died from being trampled, you would still say they died in the arsonist’s attack, even though they didn’t die from the arsonist’s attack.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Yep, or "IDF causes muderous mayhem in unprovoked slaughter of more than 100 innocent civilians waiting for humanitarian aid." Even a bit of alliteration, news outlets love that.