cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/17363648
“The horror unfolding in Gaza is unquestionably a genocide, and the full extent of that horror won’t be truly known until it comes to an end,” said one political analyst.
I think they have been pushed into this corner for 75 years. So, yes, I think they were willing to risk annihilation for a chance at freedom. But, that’s just my opinion.
And also the freedom to change their charter:
While the 1988 Hamas Charterhad been widely criticized for its antisemitism, the 2017 document stated that Hamas’ fight was not with Jews as such because of their religion but with the Zionistproject.
Absolutely agree, October 7 wasn’t the start of this. I think no one could have thought that the world would back the Israelis like this in their genocide. Like, western countries always had their back and the west has done horrible things e.g. in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan & Iraq.
Nevertheless I think it’s shocking to see that there are absolutely no red lines when it comes to Western geopolitical interests. You would think that there’d be at least some kind of basic sense of humanity, anything, but it simply doesn’t exist.
How does Israel keep getting away with this?
So the Hamas health ministry numbers are not reliable after all.
I can’t believe they are doing a genocide after explicitly saying for months they’d do a genocide after years of doing a genocide.
We should give them another 20 billion worth of bombs.
I look forward to watching the Hasbara trolls try to discredit one of the world’s leading STEM research journals.
You should always be critical of what you read.
The Lancet is the journal that published Andrew Wakefield’s fraudulent MMR paper.
Also the journal that had one of the biggest retractions in modern history of a paper on Hydroxychloroquine.
Are you unfamiliar with the process of peer review? This is science working as intended. Blame psychopaths like Wakefield for spreading dangerous lies, not the process that was used to determine they were lies in the first place.
Peer review isn’t perfect, but it’s supposed to filter out papers with obvious and major flaws.
And usually scientific journals which are more highly regarded, are supposed to be more strict in their peer review process than others. Which is how they become highly regarded in the first place.
The hydroxychloroquine paper for example had major flaws in the design of the analysis. There wasn’t even a need for an expert in order to discover that, and you’re supposed to have experts doing the peer review process in such a highly regarded journal.
