221

Egypt Has Betrayed Palestinians in Their Time of Greatest Need (truthout.org)

submitted 7 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

85 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 80 points 7 months ago

That headline could have been written any time throughout the last century. Egypt, and all other Arab nations for that matter have never given a flying fuck about the Palestinians.

[-] Atin@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago

This is the reason for Palestinian refugee camps still remaining in Lebanon, Jordan & Syria. They don't want them to integrate.

[-] Ross_audio@lemmy.world 17 points 7 months ago

Israel definitely want evacuated Palestinians to give up on returning home and integrate into other countries.

Forcing Palestinians to do this is one of the definitions of genocide.

If someone is suggesting that refugees become citizens of other countries of other countries automatically then that's actually enabling a genocide.

This is the problem with looking at solutions on the small scale when the problem is large scale.

Every individual in those refugee camps would likely have a better life if they "integrated" into another country. It's easy to say those people should get a better life.

But "integrating" into another country is also the language used to suggest the abandonment of culture and claim to their former home.

They are refugees because their homes have been under constant blockade or attack for decades. It's time to give them their homes back.

[-] hamsammy@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

Genuine response, I'm not trying to argue or be feisty, I'm honestly curious:

I was raised with Zionist views and so my background and knowledge leans very pro-Israelie Jews. I'm hearing your words and when I then follow the last sentence with "so then where do the Israelie Jews go who are being claimed to take the homes of the Palestinians?" I'm brought to a drop in the path as my knowledge says that the homes they're in (not literally but same location) are their original homes. So, the question is: if we give Palestinians their homes back in Jerusalem and throughout Israel, where do those now displaced people go? Russia, Germany, Poland, etc? Those aren't their original homes either, they were displaced to there earlier and then had to flee from there eventually as well.

I would really appreciate a continuation of your reasoning or solution-ing - not as a challenge but to understand what happens after the Palestinians get what they need/want. The immediate answer displaces Israelie Jews, yet again, and it's frustrating as no one comes out and says that straight up. I think that's where a lot of the frustration in conversations comes from as the silence on that followed question leads to it being perceived as anti-semetic rhetoric eventually being answered as "fuck them - they're from nowhere and have no claim or right to any land" which eventually leads to the jump of "they're not worth anyone's time" which leads to worse.

Please note: I'm not inviting name calling or rude comments, I'm purely looking for a civil discussion to broaden my views and am open to alternative viewpoints from my own.

[-] Ross_audio@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

It's a problem I recognise but in my opinion those who have grown up in illegal settlements have to be the ones to move.

I do blame their parents. Their parents have knowingly broken international law and it is essentially their fault their children are legally homeless.

This is where I have sympathy for those who will genuinely experience displacement when illegal settlements are handed back, but there was a choice made by those children's parents to put them in that situation.

Compare that with the families forcibly removed from the land in the first place with no agency or choice.

I can see that there are those who are the victim of the oppression and aggression of Zionists because they were forced to leave.

There are those who may end up facing trauma because they were forced to move there.

There are victims on both sides, the important thing is not allowing those who have perpetrated harm to continue to do so.

The illegal settlements must be returned, those who have invaded will have caused harm to their own community and will face the consequences for that.

I hope for some reciprocity from both sides like in Ireland where there is not a continuous seeking for justice and further consequences. But the initial acts of oppression and theft must be undone.

There was a war in 1967. The occupation since has been illegal.

The 1967 war itself was justified because of the actions of guerillas, not state actors. Israel was the aggressor and preemptively struck against other nations.

Israel defended itself against threats. That was justified.

But Israel then went on to punish ordinary people and civilians. It's a pattern of behaviour that has continued since 1967. Highlight the actions of terrorists, take from the civilians. Blockade the civilians, starve the civilians. Limit food, water, medicine, other supplies.

There have been times where Israel has allowed some normalcy in the 90s. But they've maintained a blockade and occupation. They've maintained an oppression.

All justified mostly by the actions of terrorists and external states. Not the people they've been persecuting.

Hamas are just the latest group. Israel cannot continue to punish civilians because of the actions of terrorists.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 18 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Saudi ruler Faisal cared in 1970s by shutting down oil supply and promptly received a bullet to the head

Egypt used to semi care until it has now become a full American puppet state with Sisi having attended American war College before staging a coup in 2013 and receiving 1 billion in arms a year to surpress his population with. (and multiple other billion dollar "loans").

Qatar Lebanon and Yemen still care though. And aside from the rulers the population of those other Arab countries do as well.

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 19 points 7 months ago

Being reported as a "low quality source", while they officially are categorized as "mixed credibility":

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/truth-out/

"Overall, we rate Truthout strongly Left Biased based on story selection and political positions that favor the left. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to publishing a false story and promoting anti-GMO propaganda. (5/15/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt 12/01/2022)"

That distinctly anti-science angle doesn't seem to apply here, so I'll allow it.

[-] jeffw@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago

Interesting. I’ve never seen their anti-science stiff

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago

Yeah, me either, but GMO stuff sets peoples hackles up so it doesn't surprise me.

[-] Zehzin@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Blanket Anti-GMO hysteria is bad of course but there are arguments to be made against things like terminator seeds being used as monopoly tools and pesticide resistant GMOs enabling overuse of them.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Or Monsanto seeds that spread and are billable:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_legal_cases

But that's different from the whole "GMO causes cancer!!!!" nonsense.

The folks who get all up in a bind don't realize that humans have been modifying crops since... well, since we invented crops. :)

Someone posted "maize" to lemmy as an example of what humans have done. Lemmy see if I can find it...

Edit Looks like it was removed for linking to FB, but here's a screenshot:

[-] Zehzin@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Having skimmed through the article mediafactcheckbias linked, it's kinda weird. At first glance it seems like it's raising legitimate concern, but it never specifies what.

It sounds like it's making a case that modified Bt toxins could cause unexpected problems in the ecosystem or for other crops on the long run by targeting more insect species than what it's designed to, a seemingly valid concern, but never actually reaches any conclusion, instead it uses handwaves like "unexpected toxicological properties " and "protecting public health and the environment" which make it look like they want you to think GMO are poisonous to people without actually saying it.

[-] mlg@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

I've mentioned this before, but there's actually a pop conspiracy theory that the intel Israel used during the 6 day war was actually given by Egypt's own generals which is why they also allegedly refused to allow C&C to alert their airfields of the huge first wave attack that Jordan had detected for them.

Supposedly they had already formed an agreement to allow Israel to do their thing so they could sack Nasser. The plan technically backfired since Nasser was popular with support so he had them arrested.

Didn't really help Egypt either way in the end because both sides were still just ill experienced military people with no real combat experience. Today the military still runs the country in the form of Sisi who is considered a joke by practically every foreign dignitary.

I guess they care about Palestine as much as the Pakistani army cares about Kashmir.

load more comments

this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2024

221 points (91.7% liked)

World News

39034 readers

1104 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.