It's incredibly frustrating because the only "reasonable" opinion we're allowed is full-throated denial of Israel's right to exist and the end of anything Jewish associated with it. There's no allowance for nuance.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48715189

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

"AbaThembu King Buyelekhaya Dalindyebo says he has removed Mandla Mandela as the traditional leader of Mvezo in the Eastern Cape."

"[His spokesperson] accused Mandela of being more concerned about the people of Palestine than his own people. "Palestine must give him a place to rule; they make him a chief there. Here in the land of AbaThembu, he is no longer welcome,” he said."

https://www.citizen.co.za/news/south-africa/politics/abathem...

Most South Africans have a very low interest in Israel-Palestine. Anecdotally, in person Palestinian rally struggle to get more than 100 people.

There are plenty of domestic issues which people care about more. For one, there are 20,000-25,000 murders here per year. Relatively the deaths in Gaza are much higher (it is about 25x smaller), but when people march its for the 127,000 murdered here over the last 5 years, not the 70,000 killed in Gaza.

Yes, did forget that one. Reinstatement of the prohibition to Judaism's holy sites, expulsion of hundred thousands of Israelis from the West Bank, and unlimited Arab immigration to the Jewish state. But it was a peace plan.

Edit: I'm still in shock you argued that 100,000 people in a population of 83.6 million is a lot - front and centre - but hand waved the forced relocation 500,000 people in a population of 10 million in a much smaller country as just the cost of peace.

It is no longer flagged.

A few rebutals: > Yes the author is pro-Israel. I would assume the author the Reuters article is anti-Israel. This doesn't automatically disqualify either account.

> The issue is with the MoH is the breakdown of the numbers, not the overall number. No contradiction.

> He provides an alternative to Lancet. His numbers do not follow Lancet, so mixing his calculations with Lancet's is disingenuous.

> Hamas said they had 40k trained fighters which was about 2% of the population. They also recruited heavily throughout the war. Israel has a standing army of 170,000. The area is an active war zone. These numbers are feasible.

> The 8900 is fighters identified by Israel by name. This is an extremely high standard you are applying to identify fighters overall. For example in Ukraine, this standard would identify most of the 200,00 Russians they have claimed to kill to be civilians.

> Your logic is inconsistent. According to you over a 2 year period Israel couldn't kill tens of thousands of fighters in a large active military all over Gaza but could kill tens of thousands of exposed and trapped civilians in the crossfire but Hamas couldn't have harmed a few thousand of those same civilians.

> No genocide.

> This is not disputing numbers. It's disputing the nature of the conflict.

It does appear to skew one way too. You can say far worse things about Israel and not be flagged at all. For example, see these comments here:

waynecochran 12 hours ago | prev | next [–]

[flagged]

   lorecore 12 hours ago | parent | next [–]
   
   Israel is mass killing civilians in Lebanon, just as they did in Gaza, while they simultaneously enact pogroms in the West Bank.

In 2016 the UK based Cambridge Analytica was blamed for Trump's win in 2016. Then he won again in 2024 without them. Meanwhile both USA parties invested heavily in social media campaigns.

In my country local government elections are in a few months and political parties are already flooding my social media with rage bait (primarily Instagram and Facebook).

This short article is about a private company, not linked to the government, that may or may not have been retained by locals, that may or may not have breached foreign interference laws, and that certainly did not lend its targeted candidates an overwhelming advantage (Mamdani was the most popular candidate in the NYC mayoral election). But because it is about Israel everyone goes crazy.

The article argued her success was due to her own style of grievance reporting.

At the Free Press she spoke often about values, and you can still see this in her CBS press releases. I believe this contributed more.