Pickahu surprise gif
1 Like
A US Admiral just said the US is going to start air dropping humanitarian aid into Gaza. It wasnât clear to me what Israel thinks of this.
https://twitter.com/MazMHussain/status/1763703856846794768?t=JDTWBj33jmONHMIsl_ripA&s=19
https://twitter.com/MazMHussain/status/1763704383676531169?t=RIPYy7HuCHGaFBzGSLhFxg&s=19
This is where Iâd place my bets as well
1 Like
I got called a racist for this so watch out. Amazing that otherwise smart people fall for this shit over and over again despite the track record. Less Wrong âLeftistâ guy also said that atrocities donât matter anyway.
Can someone help me do the maths. My assumption is that an airdrop is probably worth 0.0000001% of the food and aid requiredâŚ
I.e. itâs nice, but itâs tokenism.
1 Like
It would be nice if Gaza had an airport, but the Israelis demolished that years ago.
The reports Iâve seen suggest that three planes dropped 38k MREs, which have enough calories to satisfy daily requirements. Certainly not enough to feed everyone in Gaza, but a small multiple of that on a daily basis would make a significant dent, if they could do that much.
Probably be a nice snack for the settlers.
So no rapes, no child beheadings. All Israel does is lie and dumb little piggies lap it up. Cool!
5 Likes
and if they could access the aid without being murdered in the process.
This whole things feels super gross.
Like. They are air dropping aid to a group of people being blockaded by their ally⌠Who they are supporting.
4 Likes
Im late here but yeah this piece was insane and i recommend people read the whole thing. Internet points to @suzzer99 who was pretty much calling bullshit on this NYT piece from day one. Schwartz appears to be a complete airhead and the onus is totally on the NYT for using her as a vehicle for atrocity propaganda.
I know times are tough as a journalist and whatever but how can you not demand the resignation of the editor-in-chief over this? NYTs podcast division pulled an episode on this because they could not substantiate the claims, but they havenât retracted the piece, so which is it? Does this piece meet NYT standards or does it not? Seems like there should be a straightforward answer to this question and that it should be the editor-in-chiefs job to tell us what that answer is.
6 Likes
Seems dumb to take the opposite route.
This is the UN report published today -
In the context of the coordinated attack by Hamas and others of 7 October, the UN mission team found that there are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred in multiple locations, including rape and gang rape in at least three locations in southern Israel.
The team also found a pattern of victims, mostly women, found fully or partially naked, bound and shot across multiple locations which âmay be indicative of some forms of sexual violenceâ.
direct link to the report itself -
1 Like
Seems a little disingenuous to rely on this forumâs user tendencies to read only what they want from CNN/etc headlines and nothing else to also not mention this little tidbit from the direct report:
Which is basically what the intercept article said. There has been no confirmation from supposed victims.
Please donât accuse me of being anti semitic @skydiver8.
well, the supposed victims were murdered. Those seem to keep quiet. Not entirely sure how you get to the point where you need a new account to combat âreasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred in multiple locations, including rape and gang rape in at least three locations in southern Israelâ from a UN report as disingenuous, but godspeed.
1 Like