led crowds in chants of “free, free Palestine” and “death, death to the IDF” [The BBC said:] “The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable … " [Starmer said:] “appalling hate speech.”
“Free Palestine” is not antisemitic. Criticism of a nation state’s armed forces is not antisemitic. Especially when those armed forces are objectively committing genocide.
Pfft…
Only the rational and reasonable buy into what you’re putting forth here…
Which completely and entirely excludes any/all MAGAts and other assorted fascist/authoritarian types that appear to be consuming gov’ts globally.
🤡 🖕 💩 💩
Also excludes pretty much every establishment Democrat
Of course, it is both sides, the Republicans and the Democrats, who are causing a problem in the UK government.
Also excludes quite a lot of Liberals - a lot of people who’ve been brainwashed over the last 3 decades with the fake “leftwing” idea that “it’s not Racism if your descriminiatory acts and judgements favor those of specific races rather than disfavor those of specific races”, are having trouble processing the situation were the self-proclaimed representatives of an ethnic group they’ve learned to see as “victims” and “good people” are actually committing an extreme Genocide along ethnic lines.
I mean, many have change to the Humanist position that “people should be judged and treated based solely on what they support and they do, independently of race”, by many if not most are still ridding the whole “the entire race are victims” idea and de facto supporting Genocide by attacking the critics of the depraved genocidal actions of the self-proclaimed representatives of the “victim race”.
This shit would have never reached this level if it was only the openly Fascist being Racist.
I think the issue is the other chant, now I’m not saying that is anti-Semitic at all as that’s insane.
For what it’s worth fuck the IDF, terrorist assholes.
I’m sure “death to the IDF” is what some people have issues with rather than “free Palestine”
chanting death for any group idendity en mass will always be controversial, even if it’s for Nazis
I guarantee you can find droves of zionists that say “free Palestine” implies the destruction of Israel and is therefore antisemitic.
Anyone who thinks those statements are one and the same is delusional and not even worth talking to.
If someone can prove to me they’re not a rational human they lose my interest
zionist
delusional
Correct.
When did IDF become a protected minority group? Is saying “Death to Nazis” not allowed in the UK?
I’ll get downvoted for this but what im about to say is an undeniable fact. Chanting death for anyone is inciting violence and murder, UK governments and police can’t be allowing that, especially as there is no death penalty.
Yes I know, the IDF incite violence and murder, but does that make it OK to do in UK?
Did they say “IDF” or “IDF members/staff”? IDF isn’t a person, so maybe it’s more of a metaphorical death, as in dismantle the IDF.
I dunno.
I’ve thought about this, a metaphorical death/end to the IDF chant is completely acceptable. I guess it’s all down to intent
the artist chose “death” because it rhymes with IDF. so I wonder if it’s just one of those things
What a shitty article. It’s so heavily biased in favor of genocide.
They are literally all doing this. There is more confected outrage about this than the actual slaughter of civilians by the IDF. I feel like I’m going mad.
There was a really interesting podcast on the AP style and its entrenched biases - but only available to subscribers:
https://www.canadaland.com/podcast/bonus-who-writes-the-rules-of-news/
An article on the same topic:
https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/how-the-ap-stylebook-warps-reality-to-serve-power
What did you want them to say? It’s not an opinion piece.
They should be more neutral in a non-opinion piece. They quote a lot more people saying pro-genocide things than they quote people saying anti-genocide things. They quoted pro-genocide politicians and pro-genocide BBC staff. They did not give the musicians any opportunity to respond to the article.
Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza has inflamed tensions around the world, triggering pro-Palestinian protests in many capitals and on college campuses. Israel and some supporters have described the protests as antisemitic, while critics say Israel uses such descriptions to silence opponents
Let’s consider the two positions mentioned in this paragraph:
-
Israel should stop committing genocide
-
Israel should continue committing genocide, and position 1 is antisemitic
The first position is described as “pro-Palestinian”, as if these protesters support the Palestinian military (Hamas) and want them to win. This is incorrect. These people mostly just want the genocide to end.
The second position is a shitty opinion, but also contains an overt falsehood. It’s an objective fact that it’s false, and that fact should be reported in the story, but it isn’t.
Also I think what is really shitty is that outlets report on a genocide in this matter. But this article was about the response to Bob Vylan. I think both of us are angry about how anything related to the genocide has to be reported as the Israel Palestine conflict unless you want to receive an extremely negative response to your reporting.
Hell if we want to be all intellectual we can brand this as another symptom of the global capitalist system. AP can’t afford to call this a genocide. No news/corporation is brave enough to stand up to the genocide because it’s gonna hurt their bottom line.
I agree that they didn’t use enough anti-genocide supporters, their sources were one sided.
But your second critique would require a complete rewrite and would change the article completely.
I agree that pro vs anti genocide is the better way to approach the conflict, however, for reporting purposes, it makes more sense to call it an Israel vs Palestine conflict. Calling it pro vs anti genocide means that you have taken the position of calling the conflict a genocide (which I agree with, it is genocide). But as the article states, Israel does not see this as a genocide and neither do a lot of governments.
AP describes the conflict as a war of Israel against Hamas. Not a war of Israel against Palestine. This could be interpreted as 1) diminishing the genocide and 2) reporting on one specific facet of the conflict ie Israel against Hamas forces, which it could be argued, is a different conflict than Israel against the Palestinian people. This also means that by the articles definitions, Palestinian supporters are different than Hamas supporters.
Their second position does not say one side is correct and one side is wrong. They say
Israel and some supporters have described the protests as antisemitic
Israel and their supporters, not the AP describe protests as antisemitic.
critics say Israel uses such descriptions to silence opponents.
Critics, not the AP, say Israel is incorrect in their antisemitic descriptions.
If the article did what you wanted, it would be an opinion piece about how we need to call the conflict a genocide, and all future reporting should reflect this.
I don’t think this article is very supportive of the Palestinian people’s struggles. I also don’t think it supports the Israelis. It is tip-toeing the very fragile line of (falsely accused) antisemitism that they write about. It isn’t perfect, but it’s unfair to call it pro Israel.
-
I was going to link their merch store so people can keep supporting them, but almost everything is already sold out lol
Death to the IDF.
https://bobvylan.myshopify.com/ is the link in case anyone wants it
Wait, I thought we hated Shopify? (Cause of the data breach.)
Not to mention that they were happily selling Kanye West’s Nazi clothing until the press and social media called them out for it.
I have no idea, I was just fixing the broken link
Thank you, fixed it in my post 🙏
Removed by mod
Calling for death of any group is not allowed.
The IDF, being an occupying army, under international law is absolutely a legitimate target for violent armed Palestinian resistance. Legitimate target of violent armed resistance. It’s the law.
Great, go to Gaza and sign up. Don’t advocate for violence HERE.
Removed by mod
Does this include the Russian military?
What about indirect stuff such as “The Ukrainians should crush the Russian invaders” ?
Indirect stuff I generally let slide, other mods may or may not. Plausible deniability and all that.
But yes, the videos some other communities allow showing drone attacks on Russian soldiers, cheering when people get killed? We’d remove those.
Of course a top level post would be removed because we don’t allow video posts, but as a comment, I’d remove those too.
Removed by mod
“From the river to the sea, Inshallah one day Palestine will be free!” Yeah what a vicious chant.
C.E.A.R.T.A. and Death Death to the IDF!
deleted by creator
Nooo poor Hitler :(
I am very interested in this pending response.
I would say it is slightly. But only because of the part where you would keep shooting after reloading.
Today on the menu we have pureed Hitler à la Inglorious basterds.
Israel will be remembered in the History books the same way Germany circa 1930’s is today.
Not if the fascists keep winning.
Removed by mod
No I’m sure that’s an absolutely wonderful use of their time. Maybe they can post about this on Twitter rather than the 3g of weed that they seized.
Nwo is the old governments.
