• @BossDj@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    64
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    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”.

    • @kibiz0r@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      844 months ago

      “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.

      • @catch22@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        33
        edit-2
        4 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.

    • @Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      274 months ago

      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.

      • @BossDj@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        74 months ago

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

    • @crusa187@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      94 months ago

      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.

          • @BossDj@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            74 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.

  • jan teli
    link
    fedilink
    English
    264 months ago

    The fella in the suit looks a bit like hitler (or is that the joke? Not sure if it’s that or the “chaotic incident” wording)

  • @bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    214 months ago

    Say what you will about the Holocaust, but it wasn’t particularly chaotic. Germany figured out how to turn genocide into a well-oiled machine.

    • @Wilzax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      94 months ago

      Yes but when they invaded foreign territories their military caused chaos, just as the IDF is causing chaos when they invade Palestine.

  • FauxPseudo
    link
    fedilink
    English
    134 months ago

    Real Upvote just for scene from Look Who’s Back. Phantom upvote for creative euphemism.

  • @Asnabel
    link
    English
    14 months ago

    What’s the movie title?

    • @zombaya01@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Es ist Wieder da or Look who’s back.

      I liked the movie very much, although it’s not for everyone, I imagine.

      • @oatscoop@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        It’s a great movie that’s often misunderstood.

        The writer wanted the audience to laugh with Hitler, to cheer him on, to emphasis with him, to see him as this likable, but ultimately harmless person. “Oh, his suggested causes of and solutions to problems are obviously ridiculous – but what do you expect? He’s a comedian … but he kind of has a point about real issues we’re facing.”

        People have forgotten that’s how Hitler was seen during his rise to power, and just like in the movie it’s only after it’s far too late that people realized what kind of person they’re enabling. The ending monologue even has Hitler straight out saying he’s happy to “play the clown” as a means to his ends.

        • @Donjuanme@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          44 months ago

          Commenting here and adding this to the list that never seems to get shorter, maybe some day I’ll have time to indulge in catching up on my watch list.

  • @Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -54 months ago

    They’re writing like this because they don’t want to commit to any interpretation of the events yet. And for a news site, I think it’s okay. I think of it like calling a perpetrator a “suspect” until proven guilty. Though not with a stringent of requirements for “conviction”.

    • @Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      114 months ago

      If only the IDF didn’t literally say they did it and claimed it was “self defense” and a starving crowd desperate for food…