The Israeli navy has carried out attacks on a power plant near the Yemeni capital Sanaa, according to Israeli media reports.
Houthi-affiliated Al Masirah TV reported on Saturday that the “aggression” damaged generators at the Hezyaz power plant, sparking a fire that was later contained. The country’s deputy prime minister confirmed emergency crews managed to prevent further damage. Residents in Sanaa also reported hearing at least two loud explosions.
The Israeli military claimed that the site was being used by Houthi fighters. But it did not present evidence to justify hitting a civilian power station, raising concerns that the strike may constitute a war crime.
Israel will attack so many places now.
Yeah. We showed them it was okay woth palestine.
Thete is one way to stop the zionists. They need to die. Thwy need so much death that zionism cannot be reconstituted. The survivors need to be hunted down like every idf chef was josef fucking mengele.
And then maybe this shit will stop.
And they need to die extravagantly mercilessly and messily enough that nobody eber thinks they can get away with this again.
NEVER THE FUCK AGAIN (but actually for real this time?)
Things are dire enough that I can’t even fathom what peace would look like, but I don’t believe that genocide can be an answer to a genocide.
I realise that this may seem like a naive view, but based on what I have learned from anti-zionist Israelis, I think that there are many Israelis who are, in a way, also victims of Zionism; fearful, traumatised citizens are easier to funnel into the Zionist cause, so Israelis are subject to pretty extreme propaganda from a young age.
We need to hold war criminals accountable for their crimes if we want things like human rights or international law to ever have meaning again. However, there are a great many people who haven’t committed any such crimes, yet hold abhorrent views such as actively being in favour of the ongoing genocide. I fear that eliminating all such people would only serve to fuel Zionism in the long term.
What is genocide?
No like… What us it and why us it bad?
Becsuse its the eradication of a culture. Zionists… There’s nothing there culturqlly but atrocities. You cant just take the guns-they’ll keep going with sharp sticks. You can’t just kill the ones that have already fone provable shit; they get the bloodlust in their mother’s milk-their nursery rhymes their schooling every experience. They’ll just keep killing.
Look, it sounds horrible, but my family were american slavers. After they lost that war, they still had slaves. They hid their stolen wealth. They got into government the moment reconstruction stopped, and they kept their slaves, kept their money, and, last i heard, were backing the american fascist movemejt, 150 years later in an unbroken line, with all their hearts and their deep wallets filled with slaver-money. They should have been exterminated. They weren’t, and we’re all suffering for it-all their fucking feiends were like that too.
Maybe there were other solutions. Maybe if each of them had been put in front of each slave they kidnapper, and each slave been told theyll get 5$ and no punishment if they kill this fucker, it ciule have worked. But more if them needed to die, and we still suffer for that failure.
And we saw the same shit in germany. We veat them in war, then let the same fuvkers keep running their government, invited them into ours. Every member of the nazi party, unless they could prove rhey were like an oskar schindler or member of the resistance, needed to die, because you see how that turned out.
Maybe there’s some way to rehabilitate them, but, im sorry, we can’t scale it like tgat, abd the vost yoletting them live while we try would be unfair to their future victims.
ever have meaning again
Lol, nobotsuke kishi says hi.
My view is that genocide is not just the eradication of a culture — for instance, one of the widely accepted definitions of genocide includes the forced removal of people from an area, which isn’t necessarily the eradication of a culture. You raise an interesting question though, about why genocide is bad. Honestly, I can’t answer that question because much of my view here is based in the deep sense of moral wrongness I feel when I think about the blanket eradication of a people.
I suspect that the “blanket” part of things is what I most object to. There’s always going to be people who fall through the gaps, the question is who we’d rather fall through the gaps: would we rather have war criminals escape justice, or murder people who don’t deserve it. We get to decide which side of caution to err on, but the problem is that it’s not a 1:1 ratio.
To use an example from a completely different domain, in my country, there is a lot of harmful rhetoric around people who receive social security benefits, especially disability benefits. Even though benefit fraud is extremely rare, this rhetoric (and the policies that result from it) lead to extreme levels of bureaucracy to ensure that a handful of “benefit scroungers” who are not entitled don’t receive money, at the cost of huge numbers of vulnerable people who are entitled falling through the gaps. People have died because of this, and the number of people harmed is far higher than the reduction in benefit fraud (given that levels of that were already so low).
I get that when we’re talking about such egregiously awful acts that are happening today, it’s a completely different situation, but the blanket killing of people in the way you describe feels to me like an overly retributive approach that will not lead to lasting peace.
I understand what you are saying by highlighting past times where justice was not done, and I see how those past failures have continued to cause strife right through to the present day. I don’t know what would have been a more appropriate approach, but I agree that more needed to be done.
That being said, I can’t ever feel okay with the extreme approach you describe. I realise that this may well be a naive view, because I know that a big part of why I feel this way is because I need to believe that people can be redeemed. I’m not saying that everyone can be redeemed — “true justice” may well involve the execution of people who are responsible for these atrocities. However, for the large number of Zionists who merely hold reprehensible views because it has been taught to them from a young age, I need to believe that people like this can change — I cannot bear thinking about what that would mean if such change weren’t possible. Whether we call it genocide or not, I don’t want to live in a world where mass murder is okay.
To cap off this comment, I want to say that I really appreciate your comment. We disagree profoundly, and I suspect that neither of us will have changed our mind by the end of this. However, part of why I wrote this comment at all is because I felt like your comment was made in good faith and was earnestly engaging with my points. Even if we don’t see eye to eye on this topic, I appreciate that we’ve been able to have this discussion
I think even a solution where youre trying to redeem them would require a willingness to exterminate them completely. One idea i had was to require that each one have some number of Palestinians endorsing their continued existence, or they are killed, which would make their continued existence proof that they’re wrong. Or by making any crime by any palestinian survivor against any zionist not only legal but somehow rewarding, to the same end; making ig so their very existence is an undeniable proof that they were hoth monstrous or wrong. But this requires a willingness to completely devalue their lives, or it wouldnt work.
“Houthi”
“May constitute a war crime”
Death to Qatar too
Their only good coverage is Palestine. The rest is what you could expect from a weird country like Qatar. Just western propaganda.
Al Jazeera, actually al Udeid, is a weapon of US imperialism. Theres two very good articles on this.
All US Military Bases Are Your Enemy
Today, the most widespread and influential Arab media institutions in traditional and digital media operate under the protection of US military bases. This presence is not a coincidence, but a clear, well-defined role that entails a lot of role distribution while maintaining the main goal, which is to obscure the enemy. For example, since the start of the Zionist extermination war on the Gaza Strip, there are daily shipments of weapons from Washington’s Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar to the occupation entity’s bases in occupied Palestine. Shipments carrying tools of extermination are accompanied by pressure and threats against anyone working to stop the extermination.
But the Arab viewer will not see even one news item (even in passing) about the role of the Al-Udeid base in the extermination of the Palestinian people (and before them the Syrian, Iraqi, Yemeni, Afghan, and Libyan peoples.) Why? Because the media empire dominating minds and screens operates under the protection of this base and will not deviate—even by mistake—from the path of media propaganda for which it was established under the shadows of this US base. From here, we can understand the ease of the “hostility” that Al Jazeera shows towards Israel, in exchange for completely and deliberately obfuscating the role of US military bases in the war of extermination against the Palestinians (whom Al Jazeera claims to support.)
Inconsistencies Between Arabic and English Broadcast Programming: Al Jazeera Walks a Tightrope
Syrian writer Naram Serjoonn published an article on his blog entitled “Al Jazeera Performs the Dance of Salome* for the Arab People … and It Will Demand a Head in Return for Its Dance in Gaza.” He stated that the channel “is pleased to lose some reporters because that will grant it credibility. Just as the US killed the Kuwaiti journalist Tariq Ayoub (1967 – 2003), a correspondent for Al Jazeera during the US invasion of Baghdad, and Al Jazeera reclaimed ‘innocence’ following his death. Despite fueling the bloodbath of the Arab Spring, today the outlet will present its reporters’ injuries as a certificate of innocence, claiming to be targeted because it poses a threat to Israel.” Thus, the channel walks a tightrope, gaining viewers’ trust in some circumstances, while exploiting it politically in subsequent phases.
The constant shifting in Al Jazeera’s coverage according to circumstances is also present in its English-speaking channel, which generally targets a Western audience. It does not dedicate its full broadcast and bulletins to Palestine despite having the most airtime on the subject. In its coverage of Palestinian news, it focuses on what matters to the Western audience—similar to international and UN positions— demonstrations, boycotts, and calls for ceasefires. It almost entirely neglects what the Palestinian Resistance’s Military Media publishes, seemingly due to considerations of broadcasting in Western countries and fear of potential repercussions.
Consequently, a defeatist tone dominates the content of Al Jazeera English. Meanwhile it fails to showcase the capabilities of the resistance that prove the futility of the occupation’s actions and its inability to achieve any of its declared objectives. Mostly, its coverage involves the killing of innocent civilians. Al Jazeera’s English channel’s coverage of Palestinian resistance operations can be likened to how its Arabic-speaking channel deals with operations in Lebanon. It treats them as if they do not exist. However, despite this, Al Jazeera English plays a striking role in shaping public opinion in the West.
Hadn’t even heard of Orinoco Tribune. Seems like a pretty good outlet. Also Venezuelan, like a lot of teleSUR broadcasting.
I like Orinoco Tribune a lot as well 👍
