solo

We must face the hard truth in Gaza: Israel has lost its moral authority - The Hill - 07/18/24

I reviewed thousands of incident reports and tens of thousands of individual data points from several dozen credible organizations, as well as the Israeli military itself, as a part of a nonpartisan task force analyzing Israel’s campaign in Gaza.

Our report, submitted to the Biden administration and briefed to Congress, establishes compelling and credible evidence of Israeli violations of international humanitarian law and U.S. military best practices, utilizing U.S.-provided munitions. It shows how the Israeli military has demonstrated a “systematic disregard for fundamental principles of international law, including recurrent attacks launched despite foreseeably disproportionate harm to civilians.”

It's the Zionists who are killing children, and what you say is totally antisemitic.

It seems to me you are missing the point.

This is a political suicide. I cannot say that I am for this approach but what I see is a form of protest (and maybe what I think about it is another topic). What is striking to me is that this US-backed Genocide is taking place for almost a year, and due to despair americans are even killing themselves as a form of protest.

And of course there are other forms of protesting. People try to influence politicians in so many ways so the US stops providing guns and arguments attempting to justify it.

Looks like the article was removed. I suppose this is a great reminder why it's important to archive a link before posting it, and share the archived link as well.

Just finished the first episode and I find it very interesting. Crossposting it to Podcasts.

Partially archived link of the article

This article does use more specific language than "southern hemisphere", so not too sure what you mean. It also includes several links for further reading in relation to this topic.

Thank you for pointing that out, this part really does not make any sense. Not to sure what I had in mind, so I thought of making an edit with a strikethrough so that the sentence does make sense.

To be honest, I don't know who's in the right here, ...

The way I see things, it's pretty clear. In the global south are the countries that suffer the most from the economic activities (to say the least) that come from the global north. Giving these badges to the global south NGOs is important as an effort to balance out how underrepresented these part of the world typically are, even tho they are most affected by actions of others ~~,namely the countries that got upset, or companies that come from there~~. Admittedly, I don't expect too much out of this specific climate conference due to the intense lobbying that takes place there. I'd love to be wrong on this one and be pleasantly surprised, for sure.

...but the article definitely feels like it’s taking a side, and the editorialized title makes that bias worse.

I believe it is important to accept that all media is biased, even if they try to portray themselves as neutral or objective (an easy example would be fox's fair and balanced sloggan). So I don't think that bias is a problem by itself, but performing impartiality totally is, and mainstream media do that for several reasons.

Still, I think a journalist or an outlet can be trustworthy, and this relies on their processes. They need to be honest and meticulous in their research (and perhaps something else that I didn't think of right now).

Edit: The strikethrough

Archived link of the article

Ok, tbh the understanding I got from rule 3 is that it was more flexible, in the sense that it says "may be removed", not "will be removed", but thank you for taking the time to clarify this.

I understand what you say about the difference of posts and comments.

Reported as a copy/paste of a Mondoweiss article

Not too sure I understand to which rule this report would be based on anyway. And btw Mondoweiss is mentioned at the very top of the article. It's the same author, different outlets. Not a secret.