As horrible and disgusting as it is: it's the same as it ever was.
The US doesn't even give a damn about it's own citizens when it comes to Israel.
Hell the US came and joined Israel's side in a war after the IDF sank the USS Liberty.
Unfortunately this person did not have a western sounding name so there's going to be even less attention than Rachel's murder received.
Over 20 years ago they ran over US citizen Rachel Corrie with a bulldozer when she protested Israel stealing Palestinian land. As horrible and disgusting as it is: it's the same as it ever was. The US doesn't even give a damn about it's own citizens when it comes to Israel.
The Israeli government found they did nothing wrong and rejected the suit her parents brought against the state for a symbolic $1 (one US Dolllar).
Par for the course.
Israel also killed US. citizen Jacob Flickinger from world food kitchen in Gaza a few months ago.
The Israeli soldiers seem to be murderers and killers who shoot wildly at the slightest provocation. They probably deliberately escalated this protest too.
Israel is a fascist regime that should face harsh sanctions.
The IDF is just ABAC on steroids.
If you're referring to ACAB, many police departments are trained by Israel.
And the saddest thing is that if she wasn't an American citizen this incident would have simply been briefly mentioned in the news without providing a name or a story.
I'd argue that assuming they'd even get a passing mention is overly charitable - to your point, look at all the aid workers murdered outside that particular instance that got no reporting... and the fact that people need to be told that they've killed hundreds of aid workers and journalists - the most per day of any conflict in history initially.
Why is the US so soft on Israel killing US citizens, but so harsh on... anyone else that does it?
I mean, the Saudis did it a few years ago and we really didn't raise much of a stink.
Great point. Can't risk our oil interests!
The US makes Billions of dollars annually from Saudi Arabia and Israel, so they don't care when either of them murder, torture or rape people even when it's children.
There is also the Abraham Accords. Saudi Arabia was on the way to recognize Israel until October 7 happened.
I mean, y'all raised one hell of a stink about it, in Iraq, and every airport in the world.
I was thinking about Khashoggi, but fair point.
Don’t worry, the IDF will investigate themselves and (yet again) find no deliberate wrongdoing but maybe admit that ‘regrettable mistakes’ were made. This legal fig leaf is required so that an actually independent judiciary cannot enforce international law.
Article 17 of the Rome Statute allows the ICC to step in and exercise jurisdiction where states are unable or unwilling genuinely to investigate or prosecute
As long as there’s some form of judicial action by an Israeli court, the IDF can push everything under the rug and get away with what they please.
Normally you’d say she was killed by the IDF, or Israel shot and killed an American.
Instead the media makes strong use of passive voice:
Witnesses say Aysenur Ezgi Eygi, 26, was fired at by Israel Defense Forces soldiers positioned in a nearby field
...was fired at...
Gotta love a passive voice so passive that it doesn't even clarify that she was shot and killed and not merely "fired at".
IDF soldiers have been seen pulling small levers on handheld devices.
Eygi fell to the ground with blood coming out of her head around the same time.
The news loves to focus on individual Israeli hostages and victims by providing backgrounds and what they do for a living, but for the most part just lists Palestinian deaths by numbers and only occasionally includes names or family relationships.
There is one news agency, I think the BBC, which used the phrase "unprecedented attack" to refer to the Oct atrocity that kicked off the current hostilities but doesn't use any similar phrasing for the IDF killing many times more civilians as a response. So apparently genocide doesn't need called out in a similar fashion because it is apparently not unprecedented.
They're not technically wrong at least, the IDF killing civilians has plenty of precedent.
Could be rephrased as: US puppet military kills its own citizen
I mean. "she was killed by the IDF" is passive voice, no? I think IDF is out of control as much as the next person but passive voice can be communicative and clear as much as active voice. And clearly it's easy to reach for if you gave it as a counter example accidentally.
The problem is not that they use the passive voice, it's that they use the passive voice systematically for one side and the active for the other. It's always "Hamas kills" versus "shot dead by the IDF", and usually the "by the IDF" part is buried in the article instead of the headline.
I've seen reports that just say someone "dies" instead of that the IDF killed them.
I think a more sensible nation than the US would freeze shipments to israel until a full investigation was concluded.
Not only does failing to react to this give Israel free reign to murder US citizens, but it also says the US probably won't make any effort to protect any americans abroad.
The CNN article got comments from two other people present.
A resident:
Dr. Hisham Dweikat, a resident of Beita who took part in the demonstration, told CNN that as the protest was wrapping up, the Israeli military started firing tear gas towards the crowd.
“As people were running away, live fire was shot and a soldier fired directly at the protesters, hitting the American activist in the head from behind and falling to the ground,” he said.
An American activist:
Eygi was crouched behind a dumpster at the bottom of a hill when gunfire began, Vivi Chen, an American activist who was at the demonstration and who volunteers for Faza’a – another pro-Palestinian group which works in partnership with ISM – told CNN. Chen confirmed Eygi was there with ISM.
“We were all at the bottom of the hill and the Israeli army was at the top,” Chen said. “There were two volunteers sitting behind a dumpster and they fired one shot at the dumpster. It hit a metal plane. And then there was another shot and they shot – they shot her in the head.”
...
“They are one of the most advanced armies in the world,” Chen said. “They have weapons from America. It is not an accident that they hit her in the head. That was on purpose. It’s not that they shot a hundred shots at the same time, and she was hit with one. We were all standing still, not moving. Just standing there, and they shot her through the head.”
“They have weapons from America. It is not an accident that they hit her in the head. That was on purpose."
Everyone understands this is bullshit, right, that that's not how evidence or logic work?
If you just mean the part about advanced weapons from America then I agree with you, it's nonsense, obviously an accurate rifle can be manufactured anywhere.
The not an accident part has a decent argument. Considering that only a few shots were fired, one hit the dumpster she was hiding behind and one hit her in the head, it seems unlikely it was accidental.
Kamala Harris issued a Whitehouse statement condemning Hamas after the body of an American hostage was found last week:
Hamas is an evil terrorist organization. With these murders, Hamas has even more American blood on its hands. I strongly condemn Hamas’ continued brutality, and so must the entire world.
...
As Vice President, I have no higher priority than the safety of American citizens, wherever they are in the world.
Will this be the trigger for her to use equally strong language to condemn Israel, who has killed 30 times more people in the ongoing genocide than Hamas? Or will she just reiterate as she did in her recent CNN interview that:
I’m unequivocal and — and unwavering in my commitment to Israel’s defense and its ability to defend itself.
...
CNN Reporter: But no change in policy in terms of arms and — and so forth?
No.
Does she care about all Americans, or only those whose deaths justify continuing this genocide?
Shame “genocide Kamala” doesn’t have the same ring, maybe “colonizer Kamala”?
Either way I’m disappointed, I had some hope and refrained from commenting about her for a while, but it’s clear she has zero intention of differing her stance from Biden.
Killer Kamala?
Same. I wanted to believe so badly. I would honestly accept the smallest hint that she was going to be different. Something to tell myself as I pull the lever. But if anything, she is toeing the line even more carefully than she did before.
Maybe, just maybe, she wants to get the facts before nuking Israel.
There's a BIG spectrum between unequivocal support of Israel and nuking it. Right now she's on one end of the spectrum. No one is asking her to swing to the other.
Right? Fuck.. you mentioned facts when it comes to Hamas. See you in down vote hell.
Does she care about all Americans, or only those whose deaths justify continuing this genocide?
She says what she is told to say
I wonder if Kamala or anyone in the white house will talk about this? They won't because they're owned by CUFI/AIPAC
I'm not sure she's owned by them. But pissing them off in an incredibly close election is not wise. Unfortunately their money dump on tight progressive primaries had exactly the effect they wanted. "Talk about Israel during the campaign and we dump tens of millions in strategic states and demographics."
So we're not likely to see her true position on that until November 5th.
When a group gives millions to a campaign that's a quid pro quo, the candidate will do what they want when elected. There's no chance Kamala will change her stance on Nov 5th because the cash will still be flowing
Eh, that's not totally true. There's no formal contract, a politician can absolutely take the money but not give them anything. That's how they keep it from being bribery. But also, when you're talking about the really influential groups, it's seen as better to just take their money and keep quiet until you have to publicly do something.
So there is absolutely a chance. It's not a guarantee, but it's not nothing either.
What an anti-semite, she literally came in front of the bullet and then died to make israel look bad.
Over 20 years ago they ran over US citizen Rachel Corrie with a bulldozer when she protested Israel stealing Palestinian land.
As horrible and disgusting as it is: it's the same as it ever was.
The US doesn't even give a damn about it's own citizens when it comes to Israel.
Hell the US came and joined Israel's side in a war after the IDF sank the USS Liberty.
Unfortunately this person did not have a western sounding name so there's going to be even less attention than Rachel's murder received.
The Israeli government found they did nothing wrong and rejected the suit her parents brought against the state for a symbolic $1 (one US Dolllar).
Par for the course.
Israel also killed US. citizen Jacob Flickinger from world food kitchen in Gaza a few months ago.
The Israeli soldiers seem to be murderers and killers who shoot wildly at the slightest provocation. They probably deliberately escalated this protest too.
Israel is a fascist regime that should face harsh sanctions.
The IDF is just ABAC on steroids.
If you're referring to ACAB, many police departments are trained by Israel.
And the saddest thing is that if she wasn't an American citizen this incident would have simply been briefly mentioned in the news without providing a name or a story.
You remember the food kitchen workers and how much noise there were around those killings. But the reality is since the conflict started at least 284 aid workers were killed and no one is talking about it: https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-gaza-war-palestinians-statistics-40000-7ebec13101f6d08fe10cedbf5e172dde.
I'd argue that assuming they'd even get a passing mention is overly charitable - to your point, look at all the aid workers murdered outside that particular instance that got no reporting... and the fact that people need to be told that they've killed hundreds of aid workers and journalists - the most per day of any conflict in history initially.
Why is the US so soft on Israel killing US citizens, but so harsh on... anyone else that does it?
I mean, the Saudis did it a few years ago and we really didn't raise much of a stink.
Great point. Can't risk our oil interests!
The US makes Billions of dollars annually from Saudi Arabia and Israel, so they don't care when either of them murder, torture or rape people even when it's children.
There is also the Abraham Accords. Saudi Arabia was on the way to recognize Israel until October 7 happened.
I mean, y'all raised one hell of a stink about it, in Iraq, and every airport in the world.
I was thinking about Khashoggi, but fair point.
Don’t worry, the IDF will investigate themselves and (yet again) find no deliberate wrongdoing but maybe admit that ‘regrettable mistakes’ were made. This legal fig leaf is required so that an actually independent judiciary cannot enforce international law.
As long as there’s some form of judicial action by an Israeli court, the IDF can push everything under the rug and get away with what they please.
Normally you’d say she was killed by the IDF, or Israel shot and killed an American.
Instead the media makes strong use of passive voice:
Gotta love a passive voice so passive that it doesn't even clarify that she was shot and killed and not merely "fired at".
IDF soldiers have been seen pulling small levers on handheld devices.
Eygi fell to the ground with blood coming out of her head around the same time.
The news loves to focus on individual Israeli hostages and victims by providing backgrounds and what they do for a living, but for the most part just lists Palestinian deaths by numbers and only occasionally includes names or family relationships.
There is one news agency, I think the BBC, which used the phrase "unprecedented attack" to refer to the Oct atrocity that kicked off the current hostilities but doesn't use any similar phrasing for the IDF killing many times more civilians as a response. So apparently genocide doesn't need called out in a similar fashion because it is apparently not unprecedented.
They're not technically wrong at least, the IDF killing civilians has plenty of precedent.
Could be rephrased as: US puppet military kills its own citizen
I mean. "she was killed by the IDF" is passive voice, no? I think IDF is out of control as much as the next person but passive voice can be communicative and clear as much as active voice. And clearly it's easy to reach for if you gave it as a counter example accidentally.
The problem is not that they use the passive voice, it's that they use the passive voice systematically for one side and the active for the other. It's always "Hamas kills" versus "shot dead by the IDF", and usually the "by the IDF" part is buried in the article instead of the headline.
I've seen reports that just say someone "dies" instead of that the IDF killed them.
I think a more sensible nation than the US would freeze shipments to israel until a full investigation was concluded.
Not only does failing to react to this give Israel free reign to murder US citizens, but it also says the US probably won't make any effort to protect any americans abroad.
The CNN article got comments from two other people present.
A resident:
An American activist:
Everyone understands this is bullshit, right, that that's not how evidence or logic work?
If you just mean the part about advanced weapons from America then I agree with you, it's nonsense, obviously an accurate rifle can be manufactured anywhere.
The not an accident part has a decent argument. Considering that only a few shots were fired, one hit the dumpster she was hiding behind and one hit her in the head, it seems unlikely it was accidental.
Kamala Harris issued a Whitehouse statement condemning Hamas after the body of an American hostage was found last week:
...
Will this be the trigger for her to use equally strong language to condemn Israel, who has killed 30 times more people in the ongoing genocide than Hamas? Or will she just reiterate as she did in her recent CNN interview that:
...
Does she care about all Americans, or only those whose deaths justify continuing this genocide?
Shame “genocide Kamala” doesn’t have the same ring, maybe “colonizer Kamala”?
Either way I’m disappointed, I had some hope and refrained from commenting about her for a while, but it’s clear she has zero intention of differing her stance from Biden.
Killer Kamala?
Same. I wanted to believe so badly. I would honestly accept the smallest hint that she was going to be different. Something to tell myself as I pull the lever. But if anything, she is toeing the line even more carefully than she did before.
Maybe, just maybe, she wants to get the facts before nuking Israel.
There's a BIG spectrum between unequivocal support of Israel and nuking it. Right now she's on one end of the spectrum. No one is asking her to swing to the other.
Right? Fuck.. you mentioned facts when it comes to Hamas. See you in down vote hell.
She says what she is told to say
I wonder if Kamala or anyone in the white house will talk about this? They won't because they're owned by CUFI/AIPAC
I'm not sure she's owned by them. But pissing them off in an incredibly close election is not wise. Unfortunately their money dump on tight progressive primaries had exactly the effect they wanted. "Talk about Israel during the campaign and we dump tens of millions in strategic states and demographics."
So we're not likely to see her true position on that until November 5th.
When a group gives millions to a campaign that's a quid pro quo, the candidate will do what they want when elected. There's no chance Kamala will change her stance on Nov 5th because the cash will still be flowing
Eh, that's not totally true. There's no formal contract, a politician can absolutely take the money but not give them anything. That's how they keep it from being bribery. But also, when you're talking about the really influential groups, it's seen as better to just take their money and keep quiet until you have to publicly do something.
So there is absolutely a chance. It's not a guarantee, but it's not nothing either.