Hey does Pepperidge farms remember all the fucking morons on Lemmy urging not to vote for Harris because she was allegedly complicit in genocide? I sure as shit do.
Know what's gonna be objectively worse, 100% regardless of the veracity those allegations? The reality that they helped forge instead.
I still can't get over how they were essentially presented with a simplified version of the trolley problem and chose to not pull the lever.
By their own narrative that "the democrats are complicit in a genocide in Gaza", they were aware that Palestinians were metaphorically tied to both tracks, yet decided to not pull the lever when America itself and every marginalized person living within was also on the track the trolley barreled towards.
I suspected that many of the accounts were Russian plants or Trump supporters trying to divide the Democrat vote. Most of the time when I checked account age they were made either that day or the day before.
I know that Lemmy is new and all but still was sus.
I haven't gone back to accounts to see if they are still active. I suspect that they aren't.
Calling it simplified does a disservice of the real world impacts of the "trolley" - especially since unlike a thought experiment - this trolley problem is physically constructed by people to achieve imperialistic goals - so expending energy blaming random lemmings for this - instead of figuring out who built, maintains and presents the trolley as the only option and how to dismantle it seems useless.
I believe we should avoid infighting and actually organize to do something so we don't have to choose if we pull the lever or not every 4 years (if there even is another election..)
Why the fuck did the democrats leave Palestinians to their tracks?
This didn't have to be a difficult problem where we're forced to vote for genocide. The only people at fault for the democrats doing something as wildly unpopular as genocide, silencing anyone who said "You need to stop this if you want to win", and reaping the effects of that policy being unpopular are the democrats.
The point was to pressure the Dems into giving up on genocide. You wanna talk about "pepperidge farm remembers", I got one for ya
Remember when the Dems thought they could win while actively telling people who were anti genocide to go fuck themselves?
Hey, what's weirder? Not voting for someone committing genocide, or being unwilling to stop committing a genocide even if it costs you the election?
How does it feel that the only thing that Harris had to do was say "I will stop weapons to Israel" and she would of won?
You can't keep blaming the voters when the strategy was at fault. They knew they would lose votes. They thought they could court the centrists and liberal Republicans to make up for it. They were so fucking wrong. And somehow it's not their own fault for having the worst campaign strategy known to man.
Like, Christ. Y'all ain't ever gonna stop trying to blame leftists. You'll be up against the wall with leftists fighting for your life and you'll still be like "can't believe you didn't vote Harris". I can't believe Harris threw away the election over the continued genocide of palastinians. That's fucking crazy. Is that not crazy to you? You don't find it fucking insane that the Dems would rather a fascist state than stop actively committing a genocide? Cause that's the fucking Gambit they ran and look where we are.
Look. I'm pissed. Your pissed. But we are just people with no power. Same with all those voters you wanna complain about. All we have is the ability to yell and vote. And while I voted for Harris out of fucking fear, I cannot blame the people who yelled "I will not vote for you if you keep committing genocide" and were fucking CALLED ON THAT SHIT. What kind of monster gambles with their own base over a fucking genocide?
As a fellow reluctant Harris voter, what upsets me the most is that the numbers people have run shows that no, actually, genocide was not the deciding factor in this election, which is kind of an indictment of America itself, but regardless, I'm sick of leftists being blamed when all the ones I know STILL voted Harris and the data shows that it wasn't leftist that didn't turn out, it was centrists. Harris didn't have a voter base. Sure, some dems turned out, but she didn't actually inspire people to vote, and that's basically the only way dems win.
Remember when the Dems thought they could win while actively telling people who were anti genocide to go fuck themselves?
I do, and was downvoted for calling it out from my last account, and this one for remembering it.
Are these people gaslit or are they doing it for their favorite political celebrities who don't know they exist or care for them?
voting is power, hell not voting is power. is it a fair system?
fuck no, but not voting did help get us here
disclaimer: gerrymandering and voter suppression also played a huge role
It's also obvious that Trump and BB were coordinating during the election to ensure Biden couldn't get a ceasefire deal in place in order to harm him politically. But as soon as Trump takes the office they just agree to a ceasefire no problem (as if that hadn't been the plan all along) aaaaaaand then Trump goes off about finishing the job and annexing the whole west bank for the US. What a fucking surprise.
'allegedly'
The mental gymnastics will only intensify as these fucking crypto-nazis get to distance themselves from their beliefs and actions of just a few months ago.
Cool, we remember - now what? What do we materially do now to resist that isn't just blaming non-voters online?
Blaming other people and feeling superior is how Democrats win! Aren't you paying attention? Hey, where are they taking us??!
Go protest, resist being part of that genocide by laying down work. Call or write your local representatives voice your opinion and ask how you can help to stop that.
Get ready to vote Dem really hard in 2028 /s
I remember the BBC manufacturing consent for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris complicity genocide as well.
Interesting that such a fucked system exists that could allow the 50/50 chance that who wins an election could singlehandedly decide if everything is fascism and genocide or not, with what appears to be no real checks of power in place.
And you choose to blame those who have nearly no control over said system.
Lemmy is also a tiny community relative to other similar communities online. Lenmy is also not even just people in the US. You also don't know how many of those posts were trolls or bots.
It sure seems to me that the larger system and set of choices are completely fucked to begin with and gives the "people" next to no options or say in much of anything.
But yes. If Lemmy people had not slammed Harris.... then... something might have been..... different?
The system is fucked but we exist within that system.
That's the thing American citizens/voters need to remember if/when we get past this term: Trump didn't do this by himself. He was enabled and empowered by Republican (and a significant number of Democrat) members of legislation, as well as crooked judges across every level from state to Supreme. Trump will be kicked out and Republicans will say "Phew, that guy was a disaster! Right, guys? Good thing we all worked together and survived it." And we can't just let them do it; everyone currently serving in office from the GOP and 60% (if I'm being very generous to the remainder) of the Democrats should be barred from holding office again. Extend that to the judges too.
The GOP has worked hard to sew shite into every strand of the fabric that binds the nation together. And so insiduously that many idiots will stare at a shite-brown rag and say it's still the same, ol' Red, White, and Blue they remember.
Honestly not sure why it hasn't been suggested that the 'no vote' bullshit was a tactic to get Repubs the win. Sure as hell worked and didn't do anything to solve the issue, as we can blatantly see now.
I mean she entirely was.
And considering the US blocked every ceasefire under her and Biden, and people pointed out even a year ago that the US and Israel want an alternative to the Suez canal, and people pointed out that Israel was moving Palestinians out with the US's help in order to do this, all that happened. Pretty sure it was going exactly the same way. If you haven't noticed, democrats aren't exactly sitting up and saying this is ethnic cleansing or genocide even now. Or trying to fight it.
I think people overestimating just how much the average person cares about wars abroad. This applies to every country.
Those millions of democratic voters that voted Biden in 2020, saw that the cost of living keeps going up, inflation happens and correlates with Biden's term, and most people doesn't understand that:
Correlation =/= Causation.
Most of those 7 million Democratic voters that voted Biden but didn't vote Harris are probably thinking: I voted for Joe Biden and nothing changed, why bother voting
I doubt that 7 Million people suddenly cared about a foreign genocide (like when have the average civillian cared?)
Harris was complicit in genocide.
Trump loudly talked about how he would make the genocide worse.
Why absolve Harris in an attempt to strengthen your argument?
nobody is absolving Harris. She was the lesser evil, and many people chose not to choose, resulting in the greater evil anyways.
Same shit, different asshole? Democrats at least could've promised an end to the genocide but they collected the pay cheque from AIPAC instead
Ergo, they lost
It's That Simple™
(Don't @ me I'm not American, thank god)
I don't think history looks back negatively on any "I won't support [a little] genocide" crowd, if there isn't maybe this will be the first.
Is there a particular "this group of common folk opposed Hitler wrongly, everything's their fault" narrative that is common? I meant this as a rant, but I'm too ignorant and perhaps there is. Obviously, Nazis and Nazi supporters are criticised. There's those in power that handed it off to Hitler that take some flak. But those without power and also didn't support Hitler what criticisms do they come under
Learning the lessons of history and who future generations are going to blame for the here and now. Is it going to be leftists that didn't vote Nazi?
Unironically, there's people that blame Hitler on the German communists for not bending the knee to the people who sicced literal death squads on them, kill lists and everything, less than two decades prior.
GeNoCiDe jOe!!!
So, every hypothetical situation besides Trump winning, in the end, did not play out, due to the failure of the American population to mount a united opposition to Trump. Harris didn't win, De la Cruz didn't win, Stein didn't win, West didn't win, etc.
Now let's focus on this question for two seconds, because I don't think you all have ever actually addressed it. Putting aside the supposed "viability" as a reason for to vote for them - since that's circular logic before the election has even happened. Putting that ASIDE. Of all the non-Trump candidates, who, in the seat of the Presidency, would have been the best candidate for the job? Who, sitting in that office, would have produced the best outcome for Americans, or the world as a whole?
I argued with them constantly. I think a lot of them were bots but whatever
Man I really wish you guys elected Harris or Joe Biden to sit back and watch this happen instead of talking about it openly, that would have been great for the Palestinians.
Alright new atrocity from Israel just dropped, who should we blame:
The fascists running Israelthe fascists running the USthe democratic party who teed up the atrocity- a couple hundred leftists on lemmy who didn't vote
All of the above, plus:
- Reddit for turning their platform into a partisan shithole
- Elon Musk, Sundar Pichai and Mark Zuckerberg for allowing right wing propaganda and disinformation to proliferate on their platforms.
- Joe Rogan for political bias (inviting Donald Trump and not Kamala Harris onto his podcast)
Clearly it's the leftists, they personally didn't vote or voted third party or voted for Trump or whatever we need to say to deflect blame, and they did it in every swing state! It's their fault, not the candidate!
This is sort of strawmanning some of the criticism. Leftists who held up nonvoting as some kind of magic bullet for gaza definitely seem like they are dumber than rocks for thinking nonvoting is the same as strategic voting.
However, There's a bunch of like consultants and dem strategists that have clung to this to scapegoat these people as though there wasn't a long chain of massive errors dems and their braindead consultants weren't heavily involved in.
At the end of the day just stop listening to "not voting is a moral stance" people and put fires under the real culprits: lying republican media and apathetic democrat politicians
It's the Palestinian Muslim Leftists who have completely overrun our beloved liberal institutions and undermined them. These tankies are the fifth column that brought Harris's glorious march to office down from the inside.
We clearly need to purge our companies, our schools, and our political organizations of anyone who resembles, aligns with, or appears to look like a Palestinian or a Leftist sympathizer.
We absolutely must do this in order to Beat Trump. You do want to Beat Trump, don't you?
How about the lemmy people who actively campaigned for trump and attacked anyone for Biden because Biden was anti Palestine. Those people can go fuck themselves. Its a guarantee they swayed votes to trump based on lies.
Leftists, regardless of how they voted.
Its good to mock those couple hundred people anyway, but to blame them for it is scapegoating. They're obviously kind of dumb but yeah like Joe Biden running for re-election is like probably the #1 dick that Democrats tripped over. Campaigning with abysmally unpopular Cheneys, buying ads on republican media instead of knocking on doors or spending money on dem neutral media, focusing too much on trump instead of on strengths, moving right on immigration all contributed.
2024 was nothing less than a strategic clusterfuck.
Dems should run primaries even when they're running for re-election. Its free coverage and right wing media has to address it.
Neither party runs presidential primaries when their guy is incumbent. It's almost superstitious, that having someone 'primary' your incumbent is going to make them lose (because of losses under those circumstances by Ford, Carter, and Bush Sr.
Of course the cause/effect is backwards, they were primaried because their administration was at risk, they weren't at risk because of the primary, but as superstitions go...
If the fascists running israel, the fascists running the us, the DNC, and all the other people that are to blame for this outcome were on Lemmy, you'd see us arguing against them a lot more
To be fair to the BBC, they're 'supposed' to report the facts without judgement. How successful they are at that is debated endlessly, you can find anyone of any political flavour who will swear blind the BBC is 'obviously' biased against 'them'. They can't win no matter what they do.
The problem for the BBC is that not all stories have equally valid opposing views but they are forced to treat both sides equally at all times.. So as the world drifts further and further to insanity, their reporting makes crazy positions seem legitimate as they have to be aired alongside more mainstream views.
It worked OK when the world was fairly stable and political positions were close together. It doesn't work when political positions are so polarised and extreme.
Case in point: Brexit. The BBC really struggled in challenging extreme positions and outright lies during the brexit campaign.
Unfortunately though I'm not sure there is much alternative. Its fat from perfect but provably the best a public service broadcaster can try to do. At least it tries to provide the facts so people can make up their own minds - that in itself remains laudable.
One of the newsreaders said after leaving that they could easily find 60 economists willing to say brexit would be disastrous, and 1 saying it would be good. Come the show, they'd present one of each to demonstrate balance, but it was very lopsided. Before he went mental, they had Graham Linehan and his wife on a current affairs show to tall about the stress of getting an abortion in Ireland. The producers were then lambasted for not having a pro-abortion person on.
Definitely agree with you there. In an effort to appear balanced they try and present different sides of an argument as if they're both valid. I guess that's how Farage got on so much.
That this is a very poor excuse at propaganda because the BBC goes out of its way to use "loaded terms" when it comes to adversaries of the empire.
Here is an example from yesterday. https://youtu.be/34Ta0IcQi-E?t=85
Impartiality goes out of the window when the BBC needs to remind everyone that "the Palestinian health ministry is ran by Hamas which is designated as a terrorist organisation in America, the UK and Europe" every single time the death toll in Gaza is brought up as well.
"The unprecedented attack on October 7th." is here to justify Israel slaughtering tens of thousands of starving civilians.
of the empire.
I thought sun already set on that
They had a bazillion complaints (and still get them) that they report the figures at all and that they don't treat Hamas being a terrorist organisation as a statement of fact. For a couple of weeks after the October the 7th attack, the reporting was more neutral, and the whole rest of the British press was up in arms about the BBC being antisemitic, and the current situation was the compromise that calmed it down. In a world where Israel having done nothing wrong ever is somehow part of the Overton window, this is what counts as impartial. Impartiality is a bad thing when it's forced to apply to viewpoints divorced from reality.
Nah, I remember back when Corbyn was the leader of the Labour Party and the BBC gleefully participated in the campaign to slander him, including in a news program having as a background a large picture of him digitally altered to put a Soviet hood on his head.
I also remember countless "two side" discussions hosted by the BBC on things like worker rights or the Environment were they put a professional politician on the side against it facing a total amateur on the side for it.
The BBC's "two sides" has always been a multi-layered propaganda format, starting by the small detail that any social and political subject which is not ridiculously simple has more than 2 options to interpret and tackle it - in other words, more than 2 sides - and going into the above mentioned point that their supposedly open "giving equal voice to both sides" is actually controlled by their choice of the subject matter, who represents each side and even the interviewer's take on each side and accompanying materials (a typical example would be them reporting as event as "such and such happened" when the source is IDF versus "According to Hamas such and such happened" when the source is Hamas).
The BBC are very sophisticated in how they do it, but their output is heavily spinned and propagandistic.
I'm all for impartiality. But if a dude says "We should kill everyone who isn't like me!" You don't have to say "Before you judge, let's hear his side." You can start judging immediately.
It's not factual reporting when one side refuses to interact with the truth
See: More than 100 BBC staff accuse broadcaster of Israel bias in Gaza coverage
They're not trying to be fair, they're trying to be pro-israel.
They are not impartial on this one
If both ends of the spectrum are saying it, they're probably threading the needle pretty well.
"Both the Palestinians and Israelis are saying they are being treated unfairly. This means we are treating both fairly". - enlightened centrist after Biden refuses to send one shipment of 2000 pound bombs to Israel.
that is not sound logic
Most legacy media is controlled by oligarchs and often is only mouth pieces for them.
So much for "never again," eh? More like "whenever we feel like it" if trends in global hegemony are any indication.
Meanwhile 🦗🦗🦗🦗 from the genocide Joe caucus.
Hey, me here from the Genocide Joe caucus, I voted for Harris, Trump is a despicable pathetic genocidal idiot...and Genocide Joe disgustingly facilitated the conditions for a genocide to be expanded upon by Trump.
Also while saying all those things I was chewing gum and walking, heap praise on me for doing the impossible.
Do you not think Biden was instrumental in setting this up?
Biden: doesn't invade Gaza
Genocide Joe crowd after Trump cleanses Gaza: But did you think about how this is Joe Bidens fault?
It's clear that Israel has major sway with the US. We were not gonna stop them no matter who was in charge. I think Joe did as much as he could without pissing off our corporate overlords but him ending the conflict was never gonna happen.
I'm not sure the incessant chorus of 'I told you so's is really helping the cause.
Personally, I'm watching the dumpster fire from up on your hat, without any option to participate in your elections either way, but it's still getting pretty grating. Surely, there's a better strategy.
I’m not sure the incessant chorus of 'I told you so’s is really helping the cause.
I've heard so much MSNBC bigotry in the last month.
"Palestinians cost us the election!"
"Trans people cost us the election!"
"Hispanics cost us the election!"
"Everyone under 40 cost us the election!"
This is typically followed by some sickeningly smug "I hope they enjoy what they get" from the most vile and repulsive insider slime the party has to offer. And now Dem Leadership is just throwing up its hands, insisting Trump's just a dictator now and there's nothing any of them can do.
Hell, the fucking CIA - the agency that exists to topple foreign governments - seems equally indolent and feckless. So, idk. Maybe saying "I told you so" isn't impacting the cause one way or another.
What the fuck are we supposed to say? We spent a year and a half doing everything in our power to show the dems what they need to do to have a chance to win, they chose genocide instead.
And we (informed voters) spent a year and a half painting you a very detailed picture of what was going to happen if you didn’t suck it up and do what was necessary to keep a rapist traitor out of the White House. Hell.. even HE spent a year and a half telling you exactly what he was going to do.
Remember Project 2025? Yeah… that is the actual name of what’s happening right now.
Sooo…..
What the fuck are we supposed to say?
Start with: “I’m sorry” and work from there. Because anything short of this is unacceptable.
🤡
You spent a year criticising your own side and supporting a "both sides" narrative. You can't now pretend that you were trying to help the dems get elected.
There are literally commenters all over this thread (about Trumps intention to invade gaza), who believe Trump will produce a better outcome for Palestinians.
Its difficult because the dems 100% were enabling genocide. But, crazy enough, there's bad and worse genocide.
People who protest vote think they're "showing the dems" when they don't vote. Maybe the dems lose now but they learn a painful lesson and change in the future.
But here's the thing. The dems would rather lose to republicans than change. They will eat your protest vote. And they will accept they lost power for 4 years. And then they get re-elected and go back to what they were doing before. Being greedy and taking money from lobbyist as much as possible, including AIPAC, but not outright malicious. They never change because people only vote centrist dem or further right.
And them dems suck. They're bad. But Republicans? They're worse. They aren't doing genocide just for the profits. They're also doing it for the fun of it. The dems will show some restraint to avoid war with Iran. The Republicans won't.
So the protest vote won't show the dems shit. It will just unleash unapologetic genocide instead of milquetoast genocide. And while they're at it, the republicans will tank the economy and fuck up the lives of every minority they can manage.
Work within the constraints of the first past the post voting system you have while working toward ranked choice or something more functional.
(sheer insanity has just been described in detail)
BBC Presenter (nods thoughtfully, shifts some papers)
"Alright, thanks. That was Charles Manson there, live from Narnia."BBC Presenter (split-second later, brightly)
"And now an endangered frog species sees a new life on Mars! Our nature correspondent Jethro Tull with the latest.."The BBC has been complicit in the last 16 months of genocide and for good reason.
Robbie Gibb, who is on the BBC's Board of Trustees, is also Editor of the Jewish Chronicle, a fanatically Zionist rag whose funding is hidden but suspected to be tied to the Israeli embassy.
Raffi Berg, BBC News online editor, is a former state department employee, fan of Netanyahu and has been described by one journalists as "This guy’s entire job is to water down everything that’s too critical of Israel”
More here:
https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/bbc-civil-war-gaza-israel-biased-coverage
China really needs to start throwing their weight around on the global stage if they want to be anything more than a regional power.
China should be filling the vacuum on the global stage that the US is vacating.
China already is extending their hand to places affected by USAID being shut down, I believe.
Everyone had this prediction that China would become the world's number one superpower at some point, but I don't know if people predicted that was because the U.S. shot itself it the face.
the hostile corporate takeover is in full effect in the USA. The downfall of America is happening in realtime at an accelerated rate. Capitalism will be the downfall of whatever democracy was left in the US.
Maybe after the Chinese authorian regime is done with the cleansing of the uyghurs, they take the place of the US and help Israel with the cleansing of Palestine
Still #Undecided?
We still litigating this?
The dems ran a deeply unpopular candidate on status quo in an election about how the status quo was hurting non-rich Americans. They shoved leftists out of the way in favor of more moderate and conservative leaning people trying to reach out to those that were already not going to vote for them.
I did vote, and I voted for Kamala; that vote wasn't an excited vote, but one in the hopes that she could win and we could inch another 4 years to a hopefully better candidate set. The amount of emails sent to both Biden and Kamala, and the amount of shitty responses about how its totally OK was deeply disheartening, but I still voted, even though it felt like nothing would change.
Those that didn't vote due to Gaza, which if memory serves was a small block, specifically stated they just wanted to be recognized. The campaign instead tried to go on Joe Rogan and "toured" with a Cheney.
There's not some crazy reason people stayed home. They stayed home because either choice felt like doom, and probably felt they didn't want to participate in either.
That's all without even getting into the amount of actual voter suppression in general.
But yea, blame those voters.
We still litigating this?
Others might. I am not. I would like to know if people are still identifying as #Undecided, and if it is still a movement. If yes, what's the plan to influence Trump's policies on Palestine? If no, is it because they met their goals and thus came to a natural end, or is it because they feel they were played? And if that's the case, where does that leave the leaders and influencers of the #Undecided movement within the larger Free Palestine movement?
If I came across as brusque, it is because I am frustrated. As shitty as Biden was (I'd like to see him clapped in irons and sent to the Hague, along with Netanyahu and his cronies), how can it be seriously mooted that the administration sending bombs and insisting on a two-state solution is somehow equivalent to the present administration who is sending bombs AND has stated it wants to "clear out" Gaza AND wants American companies to build resorts on Palestinian soil AND wants to send American troops to occupy Palestine AND moved the US Embassy to Jerusalem AND so on?
They stayed home because either choice felt like doom, and probably felt they didn't want to participate in either.
This is the false equivalency trap they were led into.
Neither side was supporting their cause, but one side was supporting Israel while trying to push for getting aid into the country, and the other side literally said Israel wasn't killing Palestinians fast enough. You have to be a special kind of dumb to think those two things are the same.
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice. By not voting, they contributed to the win of the candidate who thinks Palestine shouldn't exist.
Yes, I absolutely hold those people accountable, for this and every other action he takes. Sitting on the sidelines is immoral. Not participating because they couldn't get exactly the outcome they wanted isn't ethically defensible. The system is the way it is until we who are working to change it succeed (which may be never), and until then you pick the lesser of two evils, because not voting isn't going to prevent the election.
Maybe they argue that by not voting they "sent a message." Ok, maybe they did. As a consequence, the cost of their message is likely to be the extinction of Palestine.
Many of us tried to "send a message" in 2000, and it changed nothing; those of us who voted for a third party in protest are directly culpable for the war in Iraq and the continued expansion of the Republican agenda in courts and state legislature through two terms.
The protest voters, and protest non-voters, in 2024 participated in what's to come.
The most infuriating thing about this is that it seems nobody learned anything from WWII. This is like Ghandi preaching passive resistance to German Jews; I have no respect for these people who refused to take a side knowing full well that one candidate was a worse outcome for Palestine.
But this was expected right? Is there anyone who genuinely thought this wouldn't happen? I thought all the people calling out "Genocide Joe" were right-wing alts breaking up the left.
Sadly some of them were just single issue idiots with half a braincell
Please don't engage with trolls like this. They're trying to divide the left.
Do you imagine this wouldn't have happened if the election had gone the other way? Yeah they've gone mask off, so it's harder now to pretend it isn't happening, but the results for people in Gaza are pretty much the same, since this was already Israel's plan for decades and the US government continued to supply them with the weapons to carry it out. The only real difference is the republicans language saying it out loud and making it harder to ignore.
So the last and final attempt to steer the United States from fuelling genocide failed.
The one moment in history America has actually stopped a genocide solely because it was a genocide was in Bosnia, and we still bombed hospitals to do it.
You think the Europeans are going to do anything about it? Think again.
If the American President wants to take Gaza by force and turn it into a Mediterranean Vegas, he's going to do it with very little pushback.
Don't act so surprised. We all knew elections have consequences, right? This (among other things) is the obvious and predictable outcome of allowing Trump to win the election.
This was happening under the Democrats as well
BUT WHAT ABOUT GENOCIDE JOE!?! KAMALA IS BAD! TRUNP WILL FIX EVERYTHING!
/s
No one said this.
They did their job: telling you about news that just occurred at that moment. For the analysis they will need some time. Which is absolutely right.
If you expected them to be surprised then you clearly haven't been paying attention to Trump's statements before now.
he only said this to distract from what Elmo is doing right now… the classified computers he’s taken over…
the fact that they’ve already begun reprogramming the treasury computer system, meaning they must have had illegal access to plan that well before trump was sworn in….
i don’t think trump will ever get the authority to occupy gaza and “relocate” all of them…What fucking world are you living on dude?
What should the BBC have done?
Factually state the implications of what Trump is saying, forcefully?
They don't have to turn into a Fox opinion segment, they can just explain reality instead of blowing past it, then turning to talking heads.
I happen to have BBC News on just now. Besides factually reporting on what Trump said, over the past hour they’ve interviewed a number of people about the topic each offering different perspective. Many of them commented on what utter rubbish Trump’s statements were. I’d say BBC reporting on the topic has been factual, balanced and to a good standard I’d expect of them.
It's not really a news agency's place to start guessing or claiming on what this might mean. They could report on people making that claim they, as they have done
The UN Secretary General’s spokesperson Stephane Dujarric has just previewed remarks that we are expecting this afternoon from Antonio Guterres, in response to President Donald Trump's shocking plan for the US to take over Gaza.
On Gaza, Guterres will say that it is “vital to stay true to the bedrock of international law” and “essential to avoid any form of ethnic cleansing”.
Since Trump made his controversial Gaza remarks yesterday, some Democrats have taken to social media to condemn his comments.
Many have accused the Republican president of "promoting ethnic cleaning" for saying Palestinians should leave Gaza and settle elsewhere.
"It is horrific," Democratic Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told reporters, adding: "It is part of the culmination of what I view to be genocide of the Palestinian people."
Use the term "Ethnic Cleansing" because that is literally the term which describes Trumps plan...
I don't think it's a new agency's job to make such claims, but they have reported on people calling it that
The UN Secretary General’s spokesperson Stephane Dujarric has just previewed remarks that we are expecting this afternoon from Antonio Guterres, in response to President Donald Trump's shocking plan for the US to take over Gaza.
On Gaza, Guterres will say that it is “vital to stay true to the bedrock of international law” and “essential to avoid any form of ethnic cleansing”.
Since Trump made his controversial Gaza remarks yesterday, some Democrats have taken to social media to condemn his comments.
Many have accused the Republican president of "promoting ethnic cleaning" for saying Palestinians should leave Gaza and settle elsewhere.
"It is horrific," Democratic Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told reporters, adding: "It is part of the culmination of what I view to be genocide of the Palestinian people."
Watch: 'Definition of ethnic cleansing', Ocasio-Cortez says on Trump's Gaza plan
Can't say I see anything wrong with BBC's actions here tbh.
