Just a reminder! 🇵🇸
Free Palestine is NOT a debate! You either support saving innocent human lives or you agree with Israel's oppression. If you choose to stay silent and support the people and brands that back Israel, you side with the oppression and genocide. Israel vs Palestine is not a fight about your religion or nationality, it is a matter of humanity. You can be Jewish and support Palestine. You can be Israeli and support Palestine. There is no such thing as boycott exhaustion or frustration. Find other places to buy things, sign petitions, stop supporting shitty celebrities, and stop being brainwashed by brain-dead Zionist content creators on TikTok. If you spoke up about Ukraine you can speak up about Palestine.
"From the river to the sea, Palestine WILL be free"
572 notes
·
View notes
For the people who still think the colony of Israel has a right to defend itself:
They're not defending anything, they're just having fun killing:
Update 1 (17/10/2023) for the confused and sceptics :
Update 2 (10/22/2023): To add some context to this post following Reuters (direct link to article) attempt to verify the reality of the IDF Facebook post.
In fact, Reuters failed to verify anything: as the agency admitted in its article, its journalist "could not find the impostor's Facebook account or the publication on the platform social network".
They then contacted "a spokesperson for the IDF", who told them that " the Facebook post was not shared by one of its official accounts. He added there was only one official IDF Facebook page in Arabic that carries a verification tick "
A Reuters reporter also contacted"a representative for Meta, Facebook’s parent company, told Reuters the page was removed".
In this total absence of material evidence, and relying solely on the statements of these two sources which are the least reliable when it comes to commenting and sharing information and facts about the war against the Palestinians (the Israeli army is party to the conflict therefore It is biased and will protect its agents and soldiers- and Facebook has a history of censoring Palestinian content that could be used to document violence and help legally qualify zionist crimes).
Reuters came to this hasty conclusion:
Their main arguments are that
The Israeli occupation army never admitted to bombing the hospital and blamed Islamic Jihad, so it had no reason to celebrate.
Reuters journalists conveniently ignore the timeline. The IDF message welcoming the bombing of the Baptist hospital in Gaza was published immediately after the attack, while the controversy over the perpetrators of the attack began a few hours after its deletion.
Until the controversy, no one wondered who was behind the attack. The zionist army has always publicly assumed its crimes: it even ordered (according to the clerics who were in charge of the administration of the hospital) on several occasions the hospital to evacuate, knowing perfectly well that it was impossible. It was only when outrage became widespread that western media, including Reuters, began to question the origins of the strike. There's a post on Tumblr that pulls together the subtle changes in headlines to make it seem like Israel never took credit for the attack (even though it destroyed different 2 floors of the hospital a few days before the biggest attack).
There are other videos on Mohammed El Kurd's Twitter account showing the zionist army celebrating its strikes. There are videos on social media of zionist soldiers humiliating prisoners in their custody, so gloating on social media is not a new practice for them.
There is no reason why they should not celebrate what they consider a victory: their ministers have already publicly and clearly stated that civilians who do not leave northern Gaza, whatever their reasons, will be assimilated to Hamas fighters. So everything is consistent; in their minds, hitting innocent and defenseless civilians is legitimate and they are happy about it.
On its Twitter account, the Israeli military removed a video that purported to prove that Islamic Jihad carried out the attack, but ultimately did not prove its claims. So they also have a habit of deleting their own content when they realize that it exposes them more than it helps them.
Other journalists (Al Jazeera uses its own images: it is the only media that remained in Gaza and they filmed all the attacks, information from Channel 4) and independent experts on weapons of war and geolocation worked on the question of identifying the perpetrators of the bombing of the hospital. So far, their preliminary conclusion is that the Israeli military's claims do not match the facts and material evidence on the ground.
Full details of this debate are on the X/Twitter accounts of Lowkey and Mohammed El-Kurd (look for posts made on October 17).
2. I don't really know how Facebook/Meta works: I never had an account on it (I mean I never used it properly: I opened an account years ago, exclusively to follow the activity of a group that I was part of in life but closed it after a few weeks without interacting beyond a few likes), but on Twitter you can hide the checkmark.
Even if the checkmark cannot be hidden, there is nothing in the Reuters "report" to indicate that the Zionist army does not maintain multiple accounts - some with checkmarks and some without - and does not delete accounts that are not officials when it does not suit their interests.
They have a history of spreading fake news: from rumors about 40 beheaded babies, to accusing Palestinians of bombing themselves, to creating fake documents to accuse Hamas of planning attacks on primary schools while manipulating parents by buying YT ads shown during videos aimed at children to improve their image damaged by their violence with families, and to justify the harm they do to the children of Gaza.
I'm only making this long argument because Lowkey and Mohammed El-Kurd deleted the tweets I reposted and I think they shouldn't have done so. I understand why: it actually seems like an insignificant speck in an ocean of real crimes, but I personally consider it symbolic and indicative of the true and greater zionist project: genocide.
Genocide in international law is based on proof of intent to destroy a group, and the zionist army's mocking Facebook post establishes beyond doubt that nothing is accidental on the zionist side, everything is premeditated and based on their superiority complex over the Palestinian people.
289 notes
·
View notes
So.
Today marks 36 years since the beginning of the Anfal Genocide in Iraq where Saddam Hussein’s regime slaughtered hundreds and thousands of Kurds, Yazidis, Assyrians, Mandaeans and Shabaks.
Around 100,000 people at the least would be killed.
It would last from February to September of 1988. During the late stages of the Iran-Iraq war.
Largely consisting of mass killings, chemical attacks and forced displacement.
Many in Iraq sadly continue to deny it to this day. Predictably. As do Saddam Hussein’s many idiot apologists on the internet.
I’ll leave some sources from this year and the last few years here for additional information.
Some sources also focus on the Assyrian victims too.
Above: A monument dedicated to the memory of the Assyrian victims of the Anfal genocide in the village of Gonda Kosa.
Just to remind any idiots who think Saddam and his cronies were kind to the Assyrians. They were certainly not!
Feel free to reblog.
Reblog the shit out of this!
142 notes
·
View notes
The situation with Israel and Gaza reminds me so much of the United States right after the 9/11 attack in 2001. When every concern that the US should avoid killing civilians was met with, "Oh, so you don't support our troops and want the TERRORISTS to win??"
I was a young adult during 9/11 and I remember the fear and anger that roiled American. So I understand Israelis feeling those emotions. Anger is a natural emotion. But if you let it rule you, nothing good will come of it.
In 2001, I was as angry as any American and I thought we were right to go to war to Afghanistan, "to get the terrorists". (I was always against the Iraq war.) If I could travel back in time, I would tell younger-me, "It wasn't worth it." All that was accomplished was thousands of American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent Afghans died. When our soldiers finally caught up with Osama bin Ladin and killed him . . . I felt nothing. To kill this one bad man, we left an ocean of dead innocents. And for what? Bombs can't kill terrorism any more than they can kill grief.
Looking at Israel, I am disturbed to see the highest members of its government label any criticism of it "anti-semitism" and equating empathy with the Gazans--a civilian population trapped, cut off from clean water, from food, from fuel--as "supporting Hamas." Anti-semitism does exist, of course, and it is wrong. But critiquing the political actions of a political state is not automatically "anti-semitic." Saying Gazans don't deserve to be indiscriminately killed is not "supporting terrorism."
It's so bitterly funny that the US State Department had a big media blitz to convince everyone "Israel didn't bomb a hospital, dont' get it twisted! It was a Hamas missile gone astray! We repeat, Israel DID NOT bomb a hospital!", and then Israel attacked, like, three hospitals. Supposedly there are Hamas tunnels under them.
Even if those tunnels exist, attacking a hospital is not justified. Because it's a hospital. And it doesn't even make sense in context. If someone told me "There are terrorists hiding under that hospital, they are armed and dangerous and have taken hostages," my first thought would be "Holy shit, we've got to evacuate the patients and medical staff before the terrorists take them hostage too!"
I would not think "Well, let's surround the place and prevent medical supplies from entering so the patients slowly die, while the terrorists escape via the tunnels that I think exist."
It seems like this 'war' is mostly about destroying as many lives and as much infrastructure as possible.
169 notes
·
View notes