74
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by bedrooms@kbin.social to c/news@beehaw.org

I used to like The Economist, but this is Nazis propaganda right on their page.

Israel, by contrast, does not meet the test of genocide. There is little evidence that Israel, like Hamas, “intends” to destroy an ethnic group—the Palestinians. Israel does want to destroy Hamas, a militant group, and is prepared to kill many civilians in doing so. While some Israeli extremists might want to eradicate the Palestinians, that is not a government policy.

This is not okay. This is Nazi logic. Nazi, fascist logic, from The Economist.

Even Nazi Germany did not make killing the official "intention" or government policy in my understanding. At least not always. It was announced as a safety guarantee, for example.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] 0x815@feddit.de 20 points 11 months ago

We even used to be subscribers of the Economist for a long time, but they have made a complete u-turn over the years. In the meantime they appear to just echo mostly pro-establishment opinions with weak research and an often weird approach of interpreting data and issues. So this does not come as a surprise unfortunately.

South Africa levels accusations of ‘genocidal conduct’ against Israel at world court are different as we know.

[-] kick_out_the_jams@kbin.social 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

By the UN definition, Hamas is a genocidal organisation. Its founding charter, published in 1988, explicitly commits it to obliterating Israel. Article 7 states that “The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them”. Article 13 rejects any compromise, or peace, until Israel is destroyed. Hamas fighters who burst into Israel on October 7th and killed almost 1,200 Israelis (and other nationalities) were carrying out the letter of their genocidal law.

This doesn't seem like it would take a lot of research but it might be the first time I've heard about this charter.

[-] ram@bookwormstory.social 10 points 11 months ago

By the UN definition, Hamas is a genocidal organisation

The UN does not define "genocidal organisation", but instead defines genocide. Does an organization who intends to commit genocide meet the definition of a genocidal organization, or would it be an organization who has both the will and the means to, or would it be an organization who is committing genocide? That's not defined by the UN and the nuance of that is very important to the claim.

Its founding charter, published in 1988, explicitly commits it to obliterating Israel. Article 7 states that “The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them”. Article 13 rejects any compromise, or peace, until Israel is destroyed.

Here's the charter. In the preamble it states "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it". The particular translation I'm using of this document has it written as "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees." I don't speak arabic and as such cannot comment if perhaps it's simply that the term they use for "fight" is also one that explicitly means to kill as well, or what, but the second part does make clear that the intent is to eventually oppress the Jewish people and send them into hiding.

I'd recommend reading through the entire document if you have time.

[-] 0x815@feddit.de 5 points 11 months ago

@kick_out_the_jams

[...] Hamas is a genocidal organisation [...]

Who disputed the claim of Hamas being a genocidal organisation? They are. But this has nothing to do with the linked article and the fact that Israel is committing genocide on the Palestinian people as well.

Is this the international law in the 21st century? An eye for eye? (The answer is: no, it isn't, because an eye for an eye makes the world go blind.)

I'm wondering whether you and others here will be tired of this whataboutism.

[-] kick_out_the_jams@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's a quote from the OP article.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 2 points 11 months ago

The Economist was founded as a bag carrier for neoliberalism (back then it was just called liberalism). They've become more shrill and less confident as their views have been shown to be utter bullshit.

this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2024
74 points (100.0% liked)

World News

22097 readers
269 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS