296

62 Democrats Join 207 Republicans in Vote to Conceal Gaza Death Toll (theintercept.com)

submitted 4 months ago by Linkerbaan@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

62 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Democratic leaders did not tell members to vote against an amendment to block the State Department from citing the Gaza Health Ministry’s statistics.

The House of Representatives has voted to effectively conceal the death toll from Israel’s war on Gaza.

On Thursday, lawmakers voted 269-144 on an amendment to prohibit the State Department from citing statistics from the Gaza Health Ministry. The measure is part of the annual State Department appropriations bill. It was led by Democratic Reps. Jared Moskowitz, Fla., and Josh Gottheimer, N.J., and Republican Reps. Joe Wilson, S.C.; Mike Lawler, N.Y.; and Carol Miller, W.V.

Mohammed Khader, policy manager at the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights Action, told The Intercept that the amendment is part of a trend of anti-Palestinian sentiment in Congress since the start of Israel’s atrocities in Gaza. “By preventing any recognition of the number of Palestinians killed since October, this amendment is a clear example of genocide denial and is no different from what was done towards victims of genocides in Rwanda and Armenia.”

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 77 points 4 months ago

Fuck the genocide deniers. Block all the info you want. Those of us who are sane, and aren't bought by AIPAC money see through it all. All your attempts are transparent and ultimately futile. We know what Israel is doing, what info we do have clearly paints them as genocidal. Innocents dont murder journalists. Your reputation is shredded, Israel. Hopefully we can stay mad at this and AIPAC long enough to end lobbying. Destroying a lot of the incentive to be a complete piece of shit.

load more comments (21 replies)

[-] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 31 points 4 months ago

There are way too many evil people in power in this country.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

We just need to vote for the lesser of the two evils every time to get rid of them.

[-] Xero@infosec.pub 8 points 4 months ago

How is less evil better than no evil?

I vote guillotine.

[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Because truthfully, one allows you to live to fight them tomorrow and the other starts hanging bodies on the wall next January. Grow up.

[-] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

We are truly in a loop of insanity at this point. 40+ years loop of the same type of direction not working.

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 5 points 4 months ago

And the beatings will continue because money.

[-] crusa187@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 months ago

Surely this will work, eventually!

[-] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

What's the alternative?

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

At least it would help if you didn't oscillate between the two. Less evil, more evil, less evil, more evil. Pick less evil each time!

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Pick less evil each time!

Part of the problem is that people are sold on these guys as "Less Evil" every time. Clinton was the less-evil replacement for Bush. Bush Jr was the less-evil replacement for Clinton. Obama for Bush. Trump for Obama/Hillary. Biden for Trump. Maybe now Trump for Biden.

Evil is necessarily subjective, and a great deal of what we see as "evil" varies starkly based on where we're getting our news and our values. What do you tell to the people who are doggedly convinced a mob of hispanic/arabic/chinese fentanyl fueled rape gangs are charging across the border to steal American children and murder them for their adrenochrome? What do you say to the folks doggedly convinced that the wrong President will bring about a thermo-nuclear holocaust or a dozen new 9/11s? How do you reason with a person who believes Plan B is no different than strangling a baby to death with your own two hands?

So much of the conversation about "Lesser Evil" is justifying a new and more brutal police state as a defensive measure against some horrifying phantom menace - be it J6 Groypers coming to lynch everyone to the left of Mitt Romney or Chinese TikTok dancers tricking American teenagers into perpetuating a Uyghur genocide.

When you've got Israeli Genocide versus Palestinian Islamic Jihad as your baseline for debate, there's an endless capacity for evil even in the "Lesser" branch.

[-] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Absolutely. There are limits and gray zones in everything. But sometimes you just have lying demagoges on one side and reasonable (but far from perfect and oftentimes really shitty) people on the other side. I wish more people could tell the difference.

There is a difference between spin and lies. Truth and false. Garbage and near-garbage.

[-] Spazz@lemmynsfw.com 23 points 4 months ago

Once again proving that Dems are the lesser of two evils, still evil, but less so

[-] mojo_raisin@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

State is inherently evil. There is no non-evil way to dominate others.

[-] Glytch@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

I'll agree that there's no way to dominate others without being evil. My question is is there a way to form a state without domination?

[-] mojo_raisin@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

In my view, "state" is by definition domination. There can be organization, community, and cooperation though without domination.

[-] Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

Fucking registerwalls.

I came to posit that if the government doesn’t release the numbers we have a press to do that. Supposed to do that. Used to do that. Can’t tell if even this story tried to do that.

[-] simplejack@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

I wish the mods would make a rule to require users to provide an archive link as a back up.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 12 points 4 months ago

Are we the baddies?

[-] Etterra@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

Cool, so what were all of their names? That sounds like something concerned voters should know.

No I'm not signing up for the intercept to read "free" articles.

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Here's the Democrats that voted for censoring the Genocide statistics.

The Republican list is so long it's more relevant who isn't on that.

[-] Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 months ago

Remember to vote blue.

[-] pivot_root@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

If only the system wasn't designed to squash third parties. Blue gives very little fucks either, it seems.

load more comments (6 replies)

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 4 points 4 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

After reciting the death toll and other statistics about casualties, Tlaib said she intended to introduce the list of Palestinians killed in Gaza to the congressional record.

The Ministry of Health is the only official entity tracking the death toll in Gaza; its figures have been cited broadly, including by the U.S. and Israeli governments.

In December, the duo joined Republican Reps. Elise Stefanik and Steve Scalise to lead a resolution condemning university presidents and calling for their resignations for allegedly tolerating antisemitism on campus.

In November, the two Democrats joined 20 others in censuring Tlaib, for reasons that included posting a video calling for a ceasefire that contained the phrase “from the river to the sea.”

Along with Lawler, he headlined a call hosted by No Labels, in which he spoke with university trustees about how to push the FBI to take a bigger role in investigating campus protests.

The original article contains 655 words, the summary contains 186 words. Saved 72%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] Stovetop@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Paywall

[-] LodeMike@lemmy.today 2 points 4 months ago

Loginwall actually. Just put in a random email.

load more comments

this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2024

296 points (93.0% liked)

politics

19096 readers

2749 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. 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.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News