• phoneymouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    142
    ·
    3 months ago

    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

    • gerbler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      …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”.

  • filister@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    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.

    • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      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.

    • SassyRamen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s the same thing with any first world. When one of their citizens are murdered abroad, it makes headlines.

  • tortillaPeanuts@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    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.”

    • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      3 months ago

      “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?

      • tortillaPeanuts@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 months ago

        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.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    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.

  • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    I wonder if Kamala or anyone in the white house will talk about this? They won’t because they’re owned by CUFI/AIPAC

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      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.

      • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        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

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          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.