Pro-Israel Figures Threaten to Kill Greta Thunberg Over Gaza Aid Mission - Quds News Network (2025-06-02)

The blockade is illegal

Sure, I'll agree with that

the raid was illegal

No, it's factually not, even the UN agreed.

activists has the right to self defense against the occupying force

They did not have the right to deny the IDF access to the ship. The UN Panel agreed.

https://ihh.org.tr/en/mavi-marmara

Why would you quote the event organizers as if they are a valid or unbiased source?

EDIT: Since you're following me around I'll just direct you to my final response to you

The flotilla was intercepted by Israeli naval forces in international waters in the Mediterranean Sea, approximately 70–80 nautical miles from the Gaza coast, and well outside Israel’s territorial waters

The blockade is illegal, the raid was illegal, activists has the right to self defense against the occupying force

https://ihh.org.tr/en/mavi-marmara

I would argue that nothing I said is misinformation. My post said that the basis for much of the Freedom Flotilla Coalitions argument is based on the Freedom of Movement clause of the UN Law of the Sea Convention as they state in #1 on their own post. Their purpose for doing the blockade run **is** about the violation of international law for Collective Punishment, but the basis for which they believe they can challenge the the blockade is the UN Law of the Sea.

As I stated in my original post, they are smuggling goods inside of the Economic Exclusion Zone of Israel. When told to stop and yield to inspection they are claiming they don't have to because of the UN Law of the Sea which is incorrect in this instance.

Since you referenced the UN Forum to investigate the 2010 flotilla incident, the UN panel in their report noted that

"It is clear to the Panel that preparations were made by some of the passengers on the Mavi Marmara well in advance to violently resist any boarding attempt. The description given in the Israeli report is consistent with passenger testimonies to the Turkish investigation that describe cutting iron bars from the guard rails of the ship, opening fire hoses, donning life or bullet proof vests and gas masks, and assuming pre-agreed positions in anticipation of an attack. Witness reports also describe doctors and medical personnel coordinating before the boarding in anticipation of casualties. Furthermore, video footage shows passengers wearing gas masks, life or bullet proof vests, and carrying metal bars, slingshots, chains and staves. That information supports the accounts of violence given by IDF personnel to the Israeli investigation"

"The Panel accepts, therefore, that soldiers landing from the first helicopter faced significant, organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers when they descended onto the Mavi Marmara. Material before the Panel confirms that this group was armed with iron bars, staves, chains, and slingshots, and there is some indication that they also used knives. Firearms were taken from IDF personnel and passengers disabled at least one by removing the ammunition from it. Two soldiers received gunshot wounds. There is some reason to believe that they may have been shot by passengers, although the Panel is not able to conclusively establish how the gunshot wounds were caused. Nevertheless, seven other soldiers were wounded by passengers, some seriously."

So, the Flotilla asserts that they have the right to freedom of movement by the Law of the Sea Convention, which they didn't, and when the IDF boarded the ship they were violently attacked by "non-violent" activists.

Yes, people were smuggling goods through the internationally recognized waters administered by Israel. When the IDF boarded the ship to stop the smuggling they were attacked by a group of the passengers. While unfortunate, it was legal to defend themselves. I will say that the IDF should have done more to prevent the escalation to the point that people didn't get killed, but that would likely have required an even larger show of force.

Justifying murder very cool. The law say to only use enough force necessary. Murdering with live ammunition is not

The loss of life and injuries resulting from the use of force by Israeli forces\

during the take-over of the Mavi Marmara was unacceptable. Nine passengers were\

killed and many others seriously wounded by Israeli forces. No satisfactory\

explanation has been provided to the Panel by Israel for any of the nine deaths.\

Forensic evidence showing that most of the deceased were shot multiple times,\

including in the back, or at close range has not been adequately accounted for in the\

material presented by Israel.

https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/720841?ln=en&v=pdf

https://news.un.org/en/story/2010/09/352342

You made a lot of statements and a lot of questions at once, so I'll try to split them up.

The occupation is illegal

Agreed

stop justifying the unjustifiable

Disagree?

there is a difference between occupied land and internationally recognized land administrated by a country

Agreed, the coastal waters off the coast of Israel are different than the dry land in Gaza

I don’t want to hear about it being surprising or not

I'm sorry?

I want to know if you think the death of the 9 activists was respecting international law

Yes, people were smuggling goods through the internationally recognized waters administered by Israel. When the IDF boarded the ship to stop the smuggling they were attacked by a group of the passengers. While unfortunate, it was legal to defend themselves. I will say that the IDF should have done more to prevent the escalation to the point that people didn't get killed, but that would likely have required an even larger show of force.

This document expose all Israeli lies and you covering from them

This is an article by Amnesty International? I'll take the UN Panel's report which stated "“The fundamental principle of the freedom of navigation on the high seas is subject to only certain limited exceptions under international law. Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.”"

Everybody is Hamas according to Israel

Not really a good answer. Interestingly the Palmer report does say specifically where in the Israeli report they document the connection to Hamas, but for the life of me I cannot find the actual report. If anyone finds it I'd be curious to read it.

You can phrase it how you want, but at the end of the day they are smuggling goods in an area internationally recognized as being under the control and jurisdiction of a country. Part of nonviolent civil disobedience is that you are breaking the law. I don’t think it’s good that activists get hurt, but it’s definitely not surprising.

The occupation is illegal stop justifying the unjustifiable , there is a difference between occupied land and internationally recognized land administrated by a country. I don't want to

hear about it being surprising or not. I want to know if you think the death of the 9 activists was respecting international law

This document expose all Israeli lies and you covering from them . You ain't fooling anybody pretending to be unbiased

https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/mde150132011en.pdf

> the event organizers had alleged ties to Hamas

Everybody is Hamas according to Israel

You can phrase it how you want, but at the end of the day they are smuggling goods in an area internationally recognized as being under the control and jurisdiction of a country. Part of nonviolent civil disobedience is that you are breaking the law. I don't think it's good that activists get hurt, but it's definitely not surprising.

In the incident a UN Panel found that the IDF boarded the Mavi Marmara and were met with resistance from ~40 of the passengers where were said to be armed with iron bars and knives.

The panel had this to state about the actions of the flotilla:

"However, the Panel seriously questions the true nature and objectives of the flotilla organizers, a coalition of non-governmental organizations. The leading group involved in the planning of the flotilla was the Turkish NGO “İnsan Hak ve Hürriyetleri Vakfı” (IHH), a humanitarian organization. It owned two of the ships; the Mavi Marmara and the Gazze I. There is some suggestion that it has provided support to Hamas, although the Panel does not have sufficient information to assess that allegation. IHH has special consultative status with ECOSOC, a status which in the Panel’s view raises a certain expectation with respect to the way in which it should conduct its activities."

"Other elements also raise questions concerning the objectives of the flotilla organizers. If the flotilla had been a purely humanitarian mission it is hard to see why so many passengers were embarked and with what purpose. Furthermore, the quality and value of many of the humanitarian goods on board the vessels is questionable. There

were large quantities of humanitarian and construction supplies on board the Gazze 1, Eleftheri Mesogeio and Defne-Y. There were some foodstuffs and medical goods on board the Mavi Marmara, although it seems that these were intended for the voyage itself. Any “humanitarian supplies” were limited to foodstuffs and toys carried in passengers’ personal baggage. The same situation appears to be the case for two other of the vessels: the Sfendoni, and the Challenger I. There was little need to organize a flotilla of six ships to deliver humanitarian assistance if only three were required to carry the available humanitarian supplies. The number of journalists embarked on the ships gives further power to the conclusion that the flotilla’s primary purpose was to generate publicity."

"It should be noted that flotilla passengers specifically committed not to bring weapons on the journey. Neverthless, it is alleged that the IHH participants on board the Mavi Marmara included a “hardcore group” of approximately 40 activists, who had effective control over the vessel during the journey and were not subjected to security screening when they boarded the Mavi Marmara in Istanbul. The Turkish report refers to 42 volunteers who acted as “cleaning and maintenance personnel” who boarded the Mavi Marmara in Istanbul and asserts that these individuals were subject to security screening. The Panel notes in this regard that all participants agreed to follow the decisions of the IHH organizers during the voyage and that at least one witness described himself as working for IHH 'like a security guard.'"

"Although people are entitled to express their political views, the flotilla acted recklessly in attempting to breach the naval blockade. The majority of the flotilla participants had no violent intentions, but there exist serious questions about the conduct, true nature and objectives of the flotilla organizers, particularly IHH. The actions of the flotilla needlessly carried the potential for escalation."

So the event organizers had alleged ties to Hamas, there were 10 tonnes of supplies provided by the organizers but the only supplies intended for the Gazans was that which was brought by individual volunteers, and a core group of armed volunteers tried to resist the IDF when they boarded. These were the UN's findings.

Hey thanks for providing this, it actually answers the question. For those who didn't read through this, the main International Laws Israel is accused of violating are:

• Human Rights violations - Israel is a member state of the UN and as such the UN asserts that Israel must follow the laws set forth. In reality Israel has been a signatory on 9/18 human rights treaties. (EDIT: Specifically Collective Punishment.)

• Invading a UN recognized State - Palestine was recognized in 1988 and is considered part of the UN. Israel occupying Palestine is tantamount to a violation of International Law.

I started this post and then had to step away and by the time I got back I had a bunch of responses, but you were the first.

This is a good response to my earlier question. Please note that my first post was about the assertion of the Freedom Flotilla Coalition that they had the right to run the blockade. When someone said that the blockade itself was illegal I asked for a source which you and they have provided.

You could make the argument that since the blockade is illegal then the right to defend it would be ceded, but I don't think it works that way. Much like how if a cop illegally arrests you you still don't have the right to resist arrest.

The UN Panel that investigated the 2010 incident said both that the loss of passenger lives on the IDFs fault was unacceptable (especially including shooting some of the dead multiple times or in the back) and that the treatment of the passengers was unacceptable.

That same panel also stated, "The fundamental principle of the freedom of navigation on the high seas is subject to only certain limited exceptions under international law. Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law."

https://imeu.org/article/fact-sheet-legal-status-of-israels-siege-blockade-of-gaza

Collective punishment contravenes the Hague Conventions on the laws of war, as well as Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which states: “No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed.”

Also in 2010, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, condemned the blockade, stating: "I have consistently reported to member states that the blockade is illegal and must be lifted."

In 2011, after Israel’s attack on a flotilla of civilian ships taking aid to Gaza killed nine human rights activists, including an American citizen, the UN released a report by a panel of five independent rights experts who concluded Israel's blockade is in "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law."

In 2012, 50 international aid agencies, including the World Health Organization, UNICEF, and Oxfam, released a statement calling on Israel to lift its siege and blockade, declaring: “For over five years in Gaza, more than 1.6 million people have been under blockade in violation of international law. More than half of these people are children. We the undersigned say with one voice: ‘end the blockade now.’”

In a 2016 report, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967 condemned Israel’s blockade as illegal, stating: “As a form of collective punishment imposed upon an entire population, the blockade is contrary to international law.” 

Going back to the 2010 flotilla, it was 70 miles off the coast of Israel (well within the EEZ). Israel told them to to submit to inspection and that they would deliver the goods to Gaza. The flotilla refused to allow inspection in the EEZ and also refused to leave. Israel attacked and took over the ship. I’m really not sure what anyone was expecting here?

Do you have any source of the legality of murdering many activists on that ship?

https://imeu.org/article/fact-sheet-legal-status-of-israels-siege-blockade-of-gaza

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2011/09/how-can-israels-blockade-gaza-be-legal-un-independent-experts-palmer-report

Can you provide anything to support that assertion?

Removed for misinformation.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220707221235/https://www.haaretz.com/2011-09-13/ty-article/un-independent-panel-rules-israel-blockade-of-gaza-illegal/0000017f-f617-ddde-abff-fe779a520000

"An earlier fact-finding mission named by the same UN forum to investigate the flotilla incident also found in a report last September that the blockade violated international law. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) says the blockade violates the Geneva Conventions.

Israel says its Gaza blockade is a precaution against arms reaching Hamas and other Palestinian guerrillas by sea.

The four-man panel headed by former New Zealand Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer found Israel had used unreasonable force in dealing with what it called "organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers.""

The blockade is illegal. Stop justifying the terrorist state actions

the opposite.

she overcame it, it's a mark of her character.

I didn't mean to come across as holding it against her. It's sad.

Nothing wrong with it. Didn't mean to come across that way.

That's depressing.

So far she's advocated for causes involving justice, what's wrong with that?

That's what the conspiracy theory about her was when she was just Climate Greta.

when she was younger she definitely was. not going to hold it against her as she was a literal child, however, it is obviously she learned she was being coerced into becoming a grifter and she broke off then.

she could have very easily have become a lib grifter and make kunmbaya world tours.

they probably really want to

Yes, but most bloodthirsty monsters don't get to use advanced military weapons and don't receive billions in aide to seek blood

Absolutely not. I would say zionists need to be stopped judiciously. Through the human rights courts and other organizations. This is all their making. We need to stop them before they start a nuclear war.

I'm gonna attach a screenshot so you can see that yes, the post they were replying to did indeed say Zionists, and they made it about all Jews. Not sure what exactly you're trying to say with point B.


Friendly reminder that even being Jewish doesn't preclude being racist against Jews.

I am not who you replied to, but my guesses:

A: Romani

B: The post they were replying "100%" to specified zionists.

While I do not agree 100% of zionists are bloodthirsty monsters I do believe any people who claim some holy right to a land are inevitably going to commit atrocities to take or defend their magic dirt.

Armenian. Our genetics show up as Jewish on 23 and me because we are similar tribes from wayyyyyyyyyy back. I also had my entire male side of my family killed in the Armenian genocide. And my aunts turned into slave sex workers for the Turks.

A: what exactly is a "similar tribe as Jewish people"? Like, Arabic? Cause that doesn't exactly preclude being racist against Jews...

B: my man, you literally just said that all Jews are blood thirsty monsters, and they should be taken out before they can harm other people. You can't seriously think you can somehow flip that around as some sort of enlightened anti-genocide platform.

I’m not an anti-Semite. I’m from a similar tribe as Jewish people. I just have family who lived through their own genocide and I have no patience for people perpetrating genocide in the this modern era. If I can’t be objective against this group for what I have anecdotally experienced. Then what do you call that? Because that’s not free speech. I don’t call people names or call them slurs.

Correct, there's nothing perjorative about "Jews", but the overall context can be concerning.

People get all hot and bothered and start conflating "Jews" with "Israelis" and "Zionists".

You can be a non-Israeli Jew. You can be a non-Jewish Zionist, they don't all mean the same thing.

Right, but "most" is not "monolith." There's around 16 million jews worldwide, so even if 90% of jews are pro-zionist that's still over a million non-zionist jews. List of Jewish anti-Zionist organizations. Generalizations about groups of people are harmful even if they're true, because it's unfair to the those who don't fit the generalization.

Most Jewish people are pro Israel and amongst those who are most religious or Orthodox most rises to an overwhelming majority.

This isn't pretending an ethic group has negative characteristics from a stereotype this is acknowledging an actual view most in a group have.

Most Americans are pro Christianity. Even if you view Christianity negatively it's ok to say Americans are infatuated with the trappings if not the actual virtues of Christianity because it's true even if this isn't true of every single one of us.

You're welcome to disagree, just don't make hateful statements.

It's more that pretending certain groups are a monolith, or really pretending anything is something it's not, to justify hate speech is banned. Sure, it's easy to pretend that all Jews are Zionists (ergo all Jews are pro-genocide) but it's demonstrably untrue and just lazy thinking.

To my understanding Jew is not perjorative but could be in context eg if offense is obviously intended or if mention of ethnicity or religion is otherwise irrelevant.

It sure feels like any disagreement with a certain group. Gets you banned.

You don't get banned for saying "Jews". You WILL get banned for saying the Jews should be exterminated, or that "100% of Jews..."

We do not tolerate hate speech, no matter who it's directed at.

Fuck off Nazi, anyone with sense knows the difference between Zionism and Jews.

“A certain percentage of rhombuses have four equal sides.”

“I think that percentage is 100.”

“I would say the same about rectangles, but you get banned if you say rectangles. So rhombuses it is.”

Not all rectangles are rhombuses. And not all rhombuses are rectangles. Don’t be racist and you won’t get banned.

anti-zionist jews are some of the loudest voices and most crucial organizers of resistance against the zionist occupation of palestine. fuck right off you antisemitic piece of shit.

To be clear, you're saying that you *would* say that 100% of Jews should be "taken out," except that this would get you banned?

I would say the same thing about the J word. But you get banned if you say the J word. So Zionist it is.

But a great panda.

I’m a terrible writer.

It might be voice to text. It sometimes gets carried away.

That "certain percentage" is 100%.

While I agree, why so much punctuation?

Is that percentage 100%? Because any desire to take land without any respect for the ones living there for thousands of years has a certain... _Lebensraum_ ambience attached to it

A certain percentage of all people are bloodthirsty monsters, especially when it comes to people unlike themselves.

And anyone who thinks this problem is caused by no one trying to use a bomb, gun, or flamethrower to solve it is the biggest idiot in planet earth.

Basically we need to stop being captain america and lean towards being the punisher.

Same with other side right?

A certain percentage of all *humans with personal causes* are blood thirsty monsters.

They're being lobbied to pursue charges against a children show host for expressing sympathy for starving children.

Precedent shows they follow the instructions of the lobbyists with the biggest and/or most recent check.

So it'd be a strongly worded statement of support for the extrajudicial slaying of a human rights activist, because that's already the norm.

I'm pretty sure that our government would issue a strongly worded statement.

....then what..... probably nothing

Holy shit, I think I stumbled upon an archaeological internet site!


That's not fun at all.

Fun fact

Carbon footprint from Israel's war on Gaza exceeds 100 countries

It's not like her international protesting license is limited to only climate change. You can dedicate 3 months out of a year to other forms without having to pay for the dual pretest license.

You mean in the book that neither of us believe in?

Power says "God" when it wants a gun cleaned. Blaming religion is just lazy analysis with a side of bigotry.

Ah, so now we’ve moved from antisemitism to full-on religious bigotry. Great.

I'm an atheist too. Demanding that Jews stop being Jews because some weaponize religion? That’s not liberation it's bigotry. The problem isn’t religion. It’s how power uses it. Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Shintoists: all have texts that have been twisted to justify violence. That doesn’t make faith itself the enemy.

Palestinians need solidarity, not purity tests. Antisemitism, religious or otherwise, only strengthens Zionism. Want to help? Fight oppression, don’t become its mirror.

Don't quote Ryan George in the same paragraph as this filth. Every religious text is violent. Not every religion is, but all have violent members. For most of history, Jewish people have been rather peaceful. They didn't have a single crusade. If the religion was entirely peaceful for thousands of years, and its members are just now

(comparatively, 80 years) having a genocide, then I'm pretty sure that its certainly not the fault of religion, that's just the given excuse from the Israeli government.

Antisemitism is morally wrong no matter what the reason. Actually the occupation create more antisemitism and make jews unsafe everywhere not vice versa

And spewing antisemitic vomit helps what exactly? Hating random Jewish people living in the US, Canada, France, Greece, wherever helps what exactly?

I will tell you what it helps. Antisemitism helps the Jewish Agency for Israel make the case that Jews cannot be safe unless they go colonize Palestine. Do you want to help Palestine? Protect the Jews in the country you live in. Every Jew that feels safe and happy in the diaspora is one less potential colonist in Palestine. Every thriving Jewish diaspora community is one more place that entices Israeli Jews away from the nightmare that is the Israeli apartheid.

Antisemitism is the enemy of Palestinian liberation. And is gross regardless. Period.

my synagogue always includes a prayer for gaza.

there are even explicit antizionist synagogues popping up, Finkelstein, Chomsky, JVP...

Does Europe contols the US government? given that most politicians are white?

or you only use that logic on Jews because you are a bigot waiting to coax a crisis to spread your vitriol?

Maybe other Jews in your community see you for an antisemite and avoid you.

congrats, you are one.

and a stupid one at that.

do you think AIPAC represents American jews? it's literally in the name, it's a foreign lobbying firm. it represents 0% of the American population.

You are the prime example of a true bigot.

nope, still A Bad Idea

One of the dumbest things I read today

don't let them coerce that term.

because:

• racism isn't ok

• some of the loudest antizionist voices are Jewish

• they want idiots within antizionist movements to say something antisemitic, so they can point at it and say that antizionists hate jews (that already do, don't give them evidence)

• if you go ahead jews that have nothing to do with the genocide, just because they are jews you are an asshole and deserve to be treated like the nazi you're becoming.

I'll stop you right there

Anti-Zion brother. Not every Jew supports Israel.

How about stfu. Palestine doesn't need antisemitic "friends" like this.

:/

Are we taking the classical definition of anti-Semite or the newer, politically-convienent definition?

All those lone wolves seem to have a lot in common. Hmmm

You can call anything terrorism at this point.

you know, except a white, right wing, man, who commits mass murder, for ideological reasons

Those are lone wolves, and tragically mentally ill, of course

Terrorism charges don’t really mean much anymore. You can call anything terrorism at this point. They will need something less generic.

Yeah I feel like years ago someone would have had to step down from their position and quit politics in shame for such a dishonorable statement.

Hoping someone shoots missiles and sinks civilians trying to feed the poor. What a terrible soul.

Especially once that are stupid and dont work on ANY logical reasoning

the biggest disability that comes with autism is dealing with neurotypicals.

Autists saving the world. But Neurotypicals know of our power so they created a society and social rules that work against us

having seen humanity, she's not the person we deserve, but the one we need

Where did you get my view from?

To your surprise, i can't agree more! You should never omit the fact:

questioning whether the civilians were *the target* or gruesome collateral victims (or "martyrs").

This fact is what tells the difference in our views, unfortunately. This hurts me as bad, as you, i guess.

It's the people slaying the other people including civilians in their homes. In all cases.

I really don't know how you find that difficult to grasp. Do you have a home? Would you like if they killed everyone you know and you? It's not the hardest empath challenge, you can do it if you try, I believe in you

aka zionists

'Pro-Israel figures' as the headline says are the terrorists they are probably referring to, the ones threatening to kill people on a humanitarian aid mission.

He's refering to Taiwan obviously.

as much as us random unqualified internet commenters? pshh

I'm sure she's aware

She’s going to be martyred if she’s not protected.

Yes, I'm afraid she probably will.

Spectator: The sinister transformation of Greta Thunberg

JNS Daily: Danish police arrest Greta Thunberg during pro-Hamas protest

NYPost: Greta Thunberg goes full in on Jew-hate because left politics is all one big blob

Conservatives have been gunning (quite literally) for Greta for nearly a decade. Israelis are going to 100% try and kill her. She's going to be martyred if she's not protected.

Well, ~~we all know~~ some people claim, that they know who the actual terrorists are.

/Ftfy.

The Jews? America? All of them? I don't know what you're insinuating.

Mozambique intelligence carried out way more sophisticated super secret stealth assassinations in collaboration with aliens and you cannot prove they didn't happen.

>If I claim I have super powers and there are 0 documented cases of me doing anything super natural,

Is it somehow hard for you to understand that there literally cannot be documented cases of Mossad killing someone and **not being linked to it**, because as soon as they were documented cases, they would be linked to it?

What theoretical evidence would you even need to believe in them being able to kill someone in secret?

Furthermore, your comparison doesn't hold water because you're turning the logic on it's head. You are the one claiming Clark Kent does **not** have superpowers because there are lots of documented cases of him taking the bus instead of super-flying to where he wants to be.

That's a very weird logic. If I claim I have super powers and there are 0 documented cases of me doing anything super natural, you have to be the one to prove I don't have such super powers??

You see how ridiculous this sounds? I am saying it gets ridiculous really quick.

>Should I assume also that Mozambique intelligence carried out a gazillion sophisticated stealth assassinations that none of us has discovered yet?

No, but if you claimed that they never carried out a single one **specifically with the argument** that none was ever discovered you'd be falling for the same logical fallacy.

Also, compared to Mozambique, you know that Israel has far higher technological capabilities, a certain international backing and is in semi constant war alternating between cold and hot with most of it's neghbour states, which makes one more likely to have both the need and the means to have successfully carried out secret killings than the other.

Especially since x (too lazy to research right now) assassinations by Mossad **were** discovered and linked to them, so you know they do kill people. And from there you basically claim they get discovered 100% of the time. Which is ridiculous.

No I don't, do you?

You could use this logic on anything and it gets ridiculous rather quickly.

Should I assume also that Mozambique intelligence carried out a gazillion sophisticated stealth assassinations that none of us has discovered yet? we don't have the count too, right?

(I can list some much more ridiculous examples, this logic doesn't work, here's the alternative: 0 evidence so far of any of that happened -> it's safe to assume it never did until proven wrong)

That's availability bias. Do you know how many they carried out that weren't discovered as such?

You're over-estimating the Mossad. ALL the previous assassinations were carried out in a primitive way and got linked back to them in a short time.

Lol, people should stop thinking that intelligence agencies are all powerful. They fumble and fuck up stuff all the time.

That said, the current Israeli government under the current political situation might very well arrange this basically as a public execution, knowing that western media will present it in the right light for them.

Because he's a racist.

@NoneOfUrBusiness @palestine @technocrit @RowRowRowYourBot

90 day old account has big opinions on who and who isn't trustworthy - more at 5

!A picture of RowRow's profile showing "Joined February, 2025"

Uh... Why would a network founded, owned and run by Palestinian volunteers be Iranian propaganda?

How about posting yourself one?

THE USSR IS NOT RUSSIA.

THE USSR WAS A HUGE CONTRIBUTOR TO CLIMATE CHANGE.

IT IS NOT CAPITALISM THAT IS THE PROBLEM BECAUSE AN OVERCONSUMING COMMUNIST NATION WOULD HAVE THE SAME RESULTS

Because Russia is a capitalist nation, with a healthy mix of Putin's dictatorship thrown in for good measure.

To deny that, simply because Russia says they operate under socialist gov't, is to be blind to the truth.

Why did you ignore the first paragraph entirely as that’s kind of the point of my post? The USSR was the second largest contributor to climate change after the USA when it existed.

And yet emissions got worse, and capitalism is making advertisements to over consume everything. One is not isolated from the other.

Also, kinda weird to suggest that industrialised economies were not capitalistic...

>The real issue is overconsumption

Don't blame people for what capitalism has done all on its own.

The fact that it ended in 1991 is why I mention “while it existed”.

The fact remains a counter example of a non-capitalist economy that drove climate change on a massive scale exists so you cannot blame capitalism as easily as industrialization.

@NoneOfUrBusiness @palestine @technocrit @Tattorack @RowRowRowYourBot @HellsBelle RowRow you glowing goofball smh

The USSR stopped existing in 1991, by which point climate change wasn't taken nearly as seriously as it is today. Now that it *is* taken seriously, capitalism hinders or entirely prevents serious action from being taken because it puts power in the hands of the people who directly benefit from polluting the atmosphere. I mean how many times have you seen "oil lobby kills climate bill" in a headline?

Which are two things capitalism thrives on.

That’s part though I believe the CO2 output of the USSR when it existed strongly suggests the issue is overconsumption and industrialization.

I think they're saying that's why she lost the spotlight.

No because industrialized economies that were not capitalistic have also significantly contributed to climate change in the past (The USSR primarily).

The real issue is overconsumption and industrialization and we would see climate change regardless of the ideology regulating the economy provided it was industrialized.

Um, do you really believe they aren't linked?

She lost the spotlight when she connected capitalism to climate change.

She's not gonna save anyone, she's gonna be shot down, or captured if lucky. Her martyrdom *might* do something, considering she's a privileged white kid, but not enough that matters – she'll be off the news in days and all the nazis will get is stern criticism.

I do hope i'm wrong.

Trying to save people from a holocaust is not stupidity.

"What a silly thing to say.

I'm certain that pretty much every person in ukrain or gaza or a bunch if other places has more demonstrated bravery than Greta.

"

Are you claiming that there's only 20k people in Ukraine? Cause otherwise, yeah, you did claim that.

Also, yes, they're brave no question about that. But they're protecting their own. Greta is helping others. I'd argue that that's braver.

I didn't say that ?

I did however provide 20,000 examples of women braver than Greta.

Oh, damn. I didn't know 20k out of 20 million is "most people". That changes things.

Wikipedia says there are 20,000 women in combat roles in Ukraine, who have chosen to put their life in danger for others when they don't have to. Most of them don't post videos about it.

What makes you say that? She's choosing to put her life in danger for others when she doesn't have to. How is that less brave than simply being born in a certain place?

No, you're right. I jumped the gun on that. My bad

Is alternating case not the standard format for unescaped sarcasm?

No /s needed. Im at fault on this one.

I think it was missing an "/s"

BuT sHe'S a WoMaN!

What a silly thing to say.

I'm certain that pretty much every person in ukrain or gaza or a bunch if other places has more demonstrated bravery than Greta.

Bravest woman I every heard of in that generation. I hope she makes it safe. She would make excellent world leader someday. Fuck Lindsay Graham and rest of the ghouls.

Those people are insanely brave

Or insanely stupid, it's a thin line.

Ok

@cygnus The suspension was removed pre-Elon acquisition.


Maybe Elon let them back in. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/11/2/twitter-suspends-accounts-of-palestinian-quds-news-network

Thanks - straight from the horse's ass.

PNN and WAFA come to mind, but I'm sure there are others. In any case I'm not sure why it falls upon me to prove a negative when you're the one suggesting a grand conspiracy.

Are you sure about that? Are there Palestinian (or strongly pro-Palestinian) news agency actively antagonizing Israeli occupation with a following as big as QNN that aren't banned by centralized social media sites? The only one that comes to mind is Al-Jazeera, and they avoid the ban hammer by maintaining the same journalistic standards as agencies like AP and Reuters (for example you'll never see Al Jazeera call Zionists pro-genocide).

By that logic they'd all be banned, but they are not.

Uh... Ads and reader donations like almost every other news agency in existence? If you don't know, Quds is Arabic for Jerusalem, so it doesn't need a massive Iranian conspiracy to show up all over the place.

definitely not zionists

Who do you think is financing it?

This is a different Quds.

You don't see why a popular Palestinian news network dedicated to exposing and highlighting the realities of Israeli occupation would be banned by establishment media?

@cygnus @technocrit https://www.newarab.com/news/greta-thunberg-faces-threats-after-joining-gaza-bound-flotilla

and here's lindsey graham directly:

https://x.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1929266986455814415

@cygnus @technocrit Quds News isn't banned on Twitter.


QudsForce is part of the Iranian National Guard. Anyone who takes issues with Voice of America/Europe/Asia should have similar concerns for QudsNews

Then why are all the governments collectively punishing people for speaking out? I'm sure there is some astroturfing, but I know a number of people who have some weird opinions on this bcz they get their news from conservative sources.

They're clearly not speaking from their own perspective.

I'm personally scared for what the future holds, we are living in a post-Enlightenment society.

At the risk of sounding a little chud-y... we are tasked with the same challenge people like Newton or Spinoza dealt with in life; we need to rebuild meaning, reason, and thought from first principles in a way that is amicable to the modern order.

People, like those that we're seeing in action here, probably think *Modest Proposal* is actually encouraging the audience to eat children. It's a serious problem.

of course he means it literally?

that’s why i think, as i said, his comment is reductionist. the key word is

I think the **only** bad thing…

he’s just trying to draw an edgy hyperbolic narrative that the world only cares about the Holocaust in particular not because it is a genocide but because it threatened the international status quo. he’s wrong, but he’s not a nazi, at least as far as i can tell from his singular comment. i won’t come up to bat for the original commenter, he very well could be a bigot or a nazi. i don’t have enough context to know as a reader. his use of leftist diction and the way he wields it is a pretty strong indicator that this was his intended thesis, on top of obvious contextual clues.

man fuck idek what else to say. your response here is purely reactionary, you aren’t even saying anything other than reaffirming things you’ve already said.

Hard agree. And many folk forget, English is not everyone's first language.

It's janky phrasing, but after a reread, it makes sense.

When someone says "I think the only bad thing about the Holocaust was that Germany did it" they need to do a fair amount of work to clarify that they do not mean that literally. Otherwise, I will be inclined to take them at their word.

i don’t agree with the original comment bc it is pessimistic reductionism but i think you and the people dogging on it severely lack media literacy and critical thinking skills, as kindly as that can be stated.

in what way is the former reading more likely than the latter??

you need to make far more assumptions about the original comment and commenter to come to the conclusion that he made the comment out of some weird bigoted malice than to just accept the obvious reading of it being a commentary on global society’s attitudes towards various genocides.

jesus fucking christ i see this shit all over the internet and it is why our society is collapsing. just droves of people behaving and thinking in ways that would fucking abhor a literature teacher from even just a decade ago.

The fact that you’re stopping to read what the person said and form a charitable interpretation of it instead of just leaping down their throat while smashing your phone / keyboard with rage is commendable.

Ignoring the actual content / intended meaning of what they said the moment THIS right here disappears from Lenny is the moment it’s dead.

I mean, if they actually think the holocaust was hunky dory then fuck them, but I agree it’s probably just poorly phrased.

If that were the case I'd hope they would try to be clearer.

The "@mhague@lemmy.world is a giant asshole" reading is much, much easier than the "@mhague@lemmy.world thinks the world sucks" reading, for me at least. The second reading takes some mental gymnastics for me.

Hoping you're right, but not convinced. Also giving a lot of side-eye.

I'm sure he only means it as "this is the shitty way the world actually works". Not that he personally believes it himself.

Yeah. People misunderstand your comment's viewpoint, but it's accurate.

The allies have retconned their WWII history as brave defenders of modern society and freedom when in reality they did not intervene for anyone's sake but their own. Least of all the Jews'. Tons of advocates for eugenics and phrenology along vocal fascists like Henry Ford in the US, imperialist ambitions towards non-western countries, the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact...

You actually think that? Please tell me it's just poorly phrased.

If you do a holocaust then you’re not one of the good guys. It’s pretty simple.

What? I’m not saying anything like that. But… if you’re offering, I wouldn’t mind checking out that bridge.

If you don't think Israel's propaganda campaign extends to lemmy I've got a bridge to sell you.

And most said their families were all very pro Israeli government / Zionist. It sounded a lot like most were complicit.

Impressive research effort!

I don't know if it's them or the media not giving them equal voice,

then educate yourself and stop speculating

Who said that the government represent all jews?

Said government says it, and jewish non-Israelis are barely heard disputing that. I don't know if it's them or the media not giving them equal voice, but one or the other is essentially promoting Netanyahu as spokesperson for everything jewish.

That may be; I know nothing. But somebody just posted something like “Jews of lemmy, how is your family on Israel / Gaza?” And most said their families were all very pro Israeli government / Zionist. It sounded a lot like most were complicit.

---

Here it is, and it is a bit better than when I saw it first, but still…

No one implied otherwise here, and speaking of here, you're rather preaching to the choir, don't you think?

Who said that the government represent all jews?

Governments set up country policies. When we say israel of course we mean israeli governments Israel since it's creation policies was to oppress, steal land kill and rape palestinians.

The fact that you choose tocsay this bs comment instead of those activists risk to die from israel terrorism show how tou don't care about those people and the activists

That is completely true and also unlikely to matter.

I was born 3 decades after the end of WWII. By that point Germany and Austria had gone through great lengths to repudiate the policies of the Nazis. They had paid massive reparations. They had issued numerous official and unofficial apologies. The monuments of the Nazis were torn down in favor of memorials for their victims. That didn't stop other kids from calling me a Nazi as soon as they found out I spoke German. To this day people are comfortable making Nazi jokes about random Germans (see Oliver Zeidler).

Similarly, we have evidence that the vast majority of sexual assaults are committed by a small number of repeat offenders. That doesn't stop the repeated mantra of, "Not all men but always a man."

Many people, particularly in Asia, are offended that the Nazis turned the Swastika into a symbol of hatred. Most people are aware that the Nazis stole the symbol but you really can't wear one without risking a fight, even if you have the little dots in it.

It doesn't matter if they should or shouldn't be assumed to be complicit; they will. People around the world will see the Star of David as a symbol of death and destruction for generations.

Indeed, while Israel is indeed a Jewish country, it does not represent all Jews, nor do all Jews agree with the way the Israeli behave. Condemning Israel is justified, hating all Jews because of Israel is not.

Yeah, no shit.

If there was only one person on earth I could choose to marry it would be that guy

I see you're also a Climate Town enjoyer. 😄

Of course, but the disconnect growing on this coincides with the disconnect on other important issues and things are eventually coming to a head.

A line from Rage Against the Machine's "Darkness"

>They say they'll kill them off, take their land and go there for vacation

>genocide is always followed by claiming and then divvying up the resources once held by the displaced/dead.

Like this

So you're saying the favor should be returned- reciprocated, even.

I like that idea.

Good thing Luigi's mansion is common man's game.

Emphasis on "rich" here. History has shown that genocide is always followed by claiming and then divvying up the resources once held by the displaced/dead. That's always a rich-man's game.

They're attempting to astroturf a Holocaust. People aren't on board but the rich goombas are.

Opinions outside of Israel have largely shifted against it even in the US.

Not in Congress. Not on Wall Street. No where the power congeals. We're hitting the end-stage of the War on Terror. Western states are not going to be happy until the entire Muslim world is cowed or exterminated.

People who vote for nazis/murderers are complicit. Politicians are elected, so the “constituents” do not get to wash the blood from their hands. They are just as guilty.

Yeah, the debates seems to be mostly people questioning if it is war crimes or genocide, different experts and different organizations have different conclusions, although it seems more conclusions are shifting towards genocide.

"even the US" bro they have been feeding their people milk and cheese tobacco and lies for decades because it's how you get rich, it's literally a country where you can be a politician, decide to give you money, there's nothing over there that has ever represented what actual people want for 50 years, they're having a civil class war and the rich won long ago, megacorps decide what the people want

I don't think it's most people. Opinions outside of Israel have largely shifted against it even in the US. Politicians often misrepresent their constituents on this one. At least that's what it looks like in some polls I've seen.

The Israeli government doesn't represent everyone who follows the Jewish faith. Jewish practitioners (especially abroad) shouldn't be assumed to be complicit unless they claim or are shown to be.

It is a holocaust, essentially.

Most people in the west you mean. Most people in the world are very much against Israel and it's genocide. I think we forget this.

If you live in the west you can feel alone in caring about the suffering. You just feel alone in the west.

Not most people, most bots

I think the only bad thing about the Holocaust was that Germany did it. Germany threatened established colonial powers. They threatened international order. Therefore the Holocaust is a terrible thing and Germany had to be stopped.

When the good guys do a Holocaust it's not bad anymore.

Edit: I mean as far as most people use it.

It will be well worth your time as the writing is sublime. The Joker's foray into the middle-class lifestyle is wonderful as is Bane's trip to Italy. And that's amongst so many other fun story lines.

I still haven't seen it but I *really* need to

My introductory scene with Harley Quinn was her shooting a guard with the cancer raygun. The other guard blurts out, "He has kids!" - I was hooked.

Maybe this is why Wayne Enterprises made the Cancer Ray

Yeah but those aren't worthy victims.

A rich white girl on the other hand... that'll be newsworthy... for a couple of days.

She points out that things are preventably bad while also being a normal-looking young woman. How dare she.


Wow.... I didn't realize that got posted.

I wrote it out (mostly - I didn't finish it), but then thought better of it, but I didn't immediately delete it. Then later when I opened my screen, there it was, still. And I actuslly thought "Lucky I didn't butt-post that."

Apparently not.

Ah well...

Good question! I hope he responds.

Also, guaranteed he talks about "females" on reg.

In some ways I think the "attention" is counter productive.

Everyone is aware of the debate around climate change or gaza. Getting views from lemmy users on YouTube videos doesn't help anything.

Greta is incapable of reaching the people who need to be reached. A fresh faced gen z can't guilt boomers into changing their behaviour.

I don't dislike Greta specifically, but the obsession with her every utterance is ridiculous.

And that's kind of my point. She's great at getting attention for her but isn't getting things done. She's a celebrity-activist

>Thunberg's climate activism began when she persuaded her parents to adopt lifestyle choices that reduced her family's carbon footprint.

>She protested outside the Swedish parliament where she called for stronger action on climate change by holding up a Skolstrejk för klimatet (School Strike for Climate) sign and handing out informational flyers.[3] After the election, Thunberg spoke in front of supporters, telling them to use phones to film her. She then said she would continue school striking for the climate every Friday until Sweden was in compliance with the Paris climate agreement.

Sweden signed the agreement and is on track with the Paris climate agreement from what I can tell.

>After Thunberg addressed the 2018 United Nations Climate Change Conference, weekly climate strike protests took place on Fridays around the world. In 2019, coordinated multi-city protests involved over a million students each.

>Thunberg's rise to world fame made her an ad hoc leader in the climate activist community.

>Thunberg's influence on the world stage has been described by The Guardian and other media as the "Greta effect"

>She has received honours and awards, including in Time's 100 most influential people, named the youngest Time Person of the Year in 2019, inclusion in the Forbes list of The World's 100 Most Powerful Women (2019),[19] and nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize.

>Thunberg won a climate change essay competition held by Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet. In part, she wrote: "I want to feel safe. How can I feel safe when I know we are in the greatest crisis in human history?"

>In December, after Sweden's 2018 general election, Thunberg continued to school strike – but only on Fridays. She inspired school students across the globe to take part in her Friday school strikes. In December alone, more than 20,000 students held strikes in at least 270 cities.

>Thunberg's speech during the plenary session of the 2018 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP24) went viral.[67] She said that the world leaders present were "not mature enough to tell it like it is".[68] In the first half of 2019, she joined various student protests around Europe, and was invited to speak at various forums and parliaments. At the January 2019 World Economic Forum, Thunberg gave a speech in which she declared: "Our house is on fire."[69] She addressed the British, European and French parliaments; in the latter case several right-wing politicians boycotted her.[70][71] In a short meeting with Thunberg, Pope Francis thanked her and encouraged her to continue her activism.

>While in New York, Thunberg was invited to give testimony in the US House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis on 18 September. Instead of testifying, she gave an eight-sentence statement and submitted the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C as evidence.

>...made an official complaint against five nations that were not on track to meet the emission reduction targets they committed to in their Paris Agreement pledges: Argentina, Brazil, France, Germany, and Turkey.[83][84] The complaint challenged these countries under the Third Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

>In late September 2019, Thunberg entered Canada where she participated in climate protests in Montreal, Edmonton and Vancouver, including leading a climate rally as part of the 27 September 2019 Global Climate Strike in Montreal.

>Thunberg participated in climate protests in New York City with Alexandria Villaseñor and Xiye Bastida; in Washington, D.C., with Jerome Foster II; Iowa City; Los Angeles; Charlotte; Denver with Haven Coleman; and the Standing Rock Indian Reservation with Tokata Iron Eyes.

>Thunberg arrived in the Port of Lisbon on 3 December 2019,[96][97] then travelled on to Madrid to speak at COP25 and to participate with the local Fridays for Future climate strikers.

>On 30 December 2019, Thunberg was guest editor of the BBC Radio's flagship current affairs programme...

>On 21 January 2020, Thunberg returned to the World Economic Forum held in Davos, Switzerland, delivered two speeches, and participated in panel discussions hosted by The New York Times and the World Economic Forum. Thunberg used many of the themes contained in her previous speeches, but focused on one in particular: "Our house is still on fire." Thunberg joked that she cannot complain about not being heard, saying: "I am being heard all the time."

I'm not even halfway through the wikipedia article.

Before you jump in and say "well, she hasn't actually done anything" let me ask you; What did Martin Luther King Jr. actually do?

I read it. That’s why I asked. There isn’t much there

Even without tangible achievements, boosting the climate movement on a global level like she did is not nothing.

Thank you for being the first to actually provide an example of something she did.

She also lost like 90% of public and media attention over speaking out against Israel. And she is putting her own life at great risk at this very moment.

You could check the Wikipedia entry for her, there's a few accomplishments in there. in any case, I'd say attempting to bring food to starving people under death threats and attempts for doing so makes any of her _attempts_ at doing something, whether the goal is accomplished, far better than whatever you've got going on.

The person I replied to spoke of her “growing credentials”. Im askng what she has achieved because last I checked she hasn’t actually achieved anything other than getting some fame.

What’s weirder is that all the people defending her cannot provide anything at all in response other than insults.

Do YOU have any examples to offer of something she actually achieved?

No one should ever do anything to help anyone unless they PASS A BILL (even writing a bill is not good enough)based on the help they give.

She makes chuds like you cry.

That's something.

She sparked Fridays For Future, the last German government got elected largely in the wake of their protests (among others) and achieved huge steps forward in transitioning our energy supply to renewables.

We are sadly now back to conservatives, but they won't be able to reverse all that was achieved.

The answer is, she's a serial protester and very successful at getting arrested.

There are innumerable people who are actually achieving things but no one cares.

For example, medicines sans frontiers has medical professionals in Gaza. I haven't seen any posts about them on lemmy. Those people have been being heroes every day for many months.

I don wonder what her actual role is on the boat. I suspect she's head person in charge of raising awareness.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greta_Thunberg

Serious question here, what has she been successful at doing? Has there been a bill passed because of her work?

She’s done more than you ever will, so she’s got that going for her.

Threatening her life is very different than criticizing her ideals and unacceptable no matter how annoying you believe she is.

Also, her credentials are growing by the day despite your personal opinions.

Well, that was an absolutely garbage take. Good on you.

How exactly is she annoying?

Let her have her last few years of relevancy.

So what's your opinion on Andrew Tate?

Allow me to translate.

I form my worldview on vibes alone and am incapable of thinking for myself. My perception of people is entirely filtered through memes and sensationalist media.

Like you have cred.

More relevant, but less annoying than you are.

How _dare_ you?!

/S

The passage of time confuses and scares me

Small correction that does not take away from the point your making, but Greta is 22.

Serves them right if they're... *checks notes*... feeding starving people. Yep.

Pieces of shit

however very on brand

She hasn't been a teenager for a while. This idea has been perpetuated by Right Wingers since she came on the scene, and despite her turning 18 four years ago, people treat her as if she was an ignorant child. We need to all know this and stop propagating this.

I mean they're well past threatening. They've been killing hundreds of actual children in Palestine for months.

Man, if the holocaust happened today, turns out most people would actually be on team holocaust. Wait, that's exactly whats happening...

Ah, yes, threatening to murder teenage girls - Clearly, the moral high ground

The last boat was destroyed. Everyone on this boat could die, too. Those people are insanely brave doing this. hopefully they all come out of this alive and are able to help those in need.

Well, we all know who the actual terrorists are.

Death threats are not 1A-protected free speech. So terrorism charges against those making the threats, yes?

/we all know the answer to that question

Wow, that's a pretty insane reaction, why would they say something like th- Oh, I see, they say shit like that all the time and almost no one calls them out on it? They'd kill her with impunity if she were even slightly darker-skinned, and will brook no interference with their ethnic cleansing? It's a good thing that the ICC is at least reining them in befo- oh, they've also been largely impotent to stop the bloodbath from flying off the rails?


Sen. Lindsay Graham among the threats

Lindsey Graham is a pus riddled sore. Why does cancer harm the innocent when there is righteous work to be done?

Honestly, my generation (80s) does not deserve Ms. Thunberg.

Can we all agree. A certain percentage of Zionists people. Are blood thirsty monsters? And they should be taken out before they can harm other people. Preferably put in prison.

At least they’re consistent in how they want to resolve conflict.

If only some.countries was brave enough to bring security to those type of ships

Way too many folks that enjoy genocide these days.

Just put little silver skulls on the front of your hats already.

Good. This means Greta is doing the right thing. Also, it's about time she's back in the spotlight, and not some minor footnote when talking about activism events.

If Mossad had been given orders to kill her, she wouldn’t have made it to the boat. (It’d have been a “hit-and-run accident”, or a previously undiagnosed allergy or something. The people speculating that Mossad assassinated her would be dismissed as cranks, and would be right entirely by coincidence.)

May a million Greta's protect our. Greta on this mission for pace.

Haha do it. Kill and stream it. Show everyone even clearer what is in your heart

to the mods that removed FreakinSteve@lemmy.world bs.

good job 👍

Bad headline. They are advocating for killing her. They are not threatening to kill her because most of the people mentioned do not have the power to do so. I could threaten to arrest Netenyahu but it would not be a credible threat because that's not within my power at all. But I can post online in favour of the idea.

Looks like the fatwa's on the other foot.

I'm gonna be so devastated when she dies...

Qudsnen.co:

"Quds News Network (QNN) is the largest independent and comprehensive Palestinian youth electronic news network."

I wish people would provide at least this brief information on the "sources" they link to. This really helps to assess the alleged credibility and objectivity.

Oh please.

Can you update this with a different source rather than Quds News?

Do you have a source that isn’t Iranian propaganda? Im not doubt this is possible Im just not giving Quds any credibility

This is doing so much harm to the climate cause it’s crazy