In my (unfortunately wide) experience, this is the way the majority of people react when you challenge their beliefs.
But yeah, I don’t believe it would change her mind about calling for aid and a ceasefire. And I don’t think she ever expressed support for Hamas’ actions (a few on the far left did, but they’re a minority).
Because in my experience, the view that people that far on the political spectrum have of October 7 is incredibly skewed. People like Greta, Sam Seder, Hasan Piker, and other far leftists have views like the one espoused in this clip - notice how he doesn’t once mention civilians, only talking about Hamas’ actions against military targets:
So yeah, when your view is that twisted, I think a dose of reality would do you good.
Do I think it would make her change her mind? It depends. I think some people, like Jeremy Scahill, know exactly how bad October 7 was, and they’re presenting it the way that they are in bad faith. I’d like to hope Greta is just someone who fell for that, because I used to like her; but it’s very possible that she is the same.
So the logic here is that Sam Seder believes Israel is starving Gazans and downplays Hamas atrocities. Hreta Thunberg believes Israel is starving gazans so she must therefore also believe what Seder either believes or professes to believe about Hamas atrocities.
It’s absolutely possible to discuss October 7th without mentioning the deaths of Israeli civilians. Hell, you’ve had many posts in this thread where you don’t specifically mention the deaths of Palestinian children. Am I supposed to infer something from that?
The full conversation, which was much longer than that snippet without context, was actually a pretty interesting listen.
Oct 7th was an attack on Israeli civilians, just like 9/11 was an attack on the US at the WTC and Pentagon.
If you are referring to what has happened as a consequence of Oct 7th, that’s not Oct 7th.
The full conversation that I linked is around the history of Hamas as well as the thought process leading to October 7th. The linked snippet is just a tiny fraction of the conversation. I can have that conversation without including a body count. I can discuss aid, or the blockage thereof, without mentioning a body count. I can talk about whether the MSF or the IDF is more trustworthy without mentioning a body count. If you REALLY want to talk body counts on each side, we can do that as well.
The point is that not mentioning a body count in a single conversation doesn’t mean that Sam Seder doesn’t think Hamas did a bad thing.
For the record, this is from the Minority Report transcript just after the attacks:
Meanwhile. Over the weekend, Hamas attacked Israel in a coordinated surprise, assault, killing at least 700 Israelis and taking over a hundred hostages, nine US citizens. Among those killed. In response, Israel announces a full blockade of food, fuel, electricity on the civilians and Gaza, and formally declared war on Hamas. More than 500 killed so far in Gaza. In response, the Wall Street Journal ran with a story blaming Iran for involvement in Hamas’ assault.
It’s part of a greater pattern of behavior. But if I posted a dozen or even ten dozen clips of Hasan Piker, Emma Vigeland, Sam Seder, or Anna Kasparian (in her specific case echoing the precise language of Elias Rodriguez’s manifesto, by the way) or any other far left type influencer being absolutely unhinged about October 7, that still wouldn’t be enough to prove to you that this is a serious problem, would it?
Further, the problem isn’t not mentioning a body count. It’s pretending that the main thrust of the attack was against military targets.
It would be like taking about D Day but neglecting to mention the boats or the beaches of Normandy.
So, i really know very little about Greta. But other than, “she took part in a publicity stunt about bringing humanitarian aid to Gaza”, do you have any reason to believe she “fell for” anything? It’s entirely possible to condemn the brutal October 7th attack and also condemn Israel’s response. I’m pretty sure that’s the majority opinion in the US, honestly.
The way she made a huge ass of herself between Oct 8, 2023 and Dec of the same year when I stopped paying attention to her until this latest stunt:
Anyone who chants “fuck Israel” or “crush Zionism” at a rally is my bitter enemy. Especially if they do it days after October 7. Much as they might like it if it was otherwise, Zionism is the only reason that both sides of my family were not extinguished by antisemites. I’m not going to take that sort of thing quietly.
Okay, thanks.
From the Guardian:
Johnnie Moore, an evangelical leader and religious adviser to Donald Trump, with a record of outspoken support for Israel and minimal experience of humanitarian work, was appointed the new chair of the GHF.
I’m guessing that Babale is going to be disappointed if he actually expects this group is ever going to get better at their job. Looks like a smokescreen to excuse their keeping all the real humanitarian aid groups out of Gaza.
The US is also a democracy with a functioning free press. Does it follow from this that all statements coming from the White House Press Office should be regarded as trustworthy and factually accurate?
I’m part way through it but a lot of what Scahill is saying is either actually wrong or extremely out of context. For example, the government that prevented elections in Gaza after 2006 was Hamas, not anyone else. It’s tough to say if he’s ideologically captured to that degree or deliberately lying.
…some really horrible, horrible things will be happening in Gaza real soon.
The internet in the north has been cut off for a couple of days. And now reports are coming in that the internet has been cut off in the south. Only people using esims are able to access the internet and get word out.
Also reports that a GHF convoy has been attacked. People kidnapped. Killed. They are “blaming Hamas.” But a reminder that IDF funded gangs have been responsible for almost all of the attacks on aid and aid convoys.
Since the GHF started, over 200 people have been massacred trying to get food, with over a thousand wounded. This entire sham and pretence of “providing aid” seems to be much worse than just a “publicity stunt.” It was a set-up for whatever Israel has planned for the next stage of what every reputable human rights agency are calling it: a genocide.
The Economist has an article about the gang Israel is funding in Gaza, the Popular forces. Israel is providing them with weapons and impunity. I’ll post a link, but The Economist’s gift links are one-time use, but I think they allow a couple of free articles.
One of the more interesting bits that I didn’t know was this:
This is not the first time Israel has tried to play Palestinian groups off one another. In the 1980s it formed a tacit partnership with the Islamic Society, a religious group in Gaza. Israel allowed the group to raise funds and looked the other way when it started to stockpile weapons. This was a calculated gamble. Islamists had never shown much interest in fighting Israel, so perhaps they could be a cudgel against Fatah, the nationalist group that was, back then, Israel’s main threat.
Israel would soon come to regret that bet. A few years later, the group would start a long campaign of suicide-bombings. It would also rename itself the Islamic Resistance Movement—better known by its Arabic acronym, Hamas
What could possibly go wrong?
They’re about three or four orders of magnitudes more trustworthy and factually reliable than statements coming from Hamas, yes. I’d think that’s obvious?
Sure, they’re about five or six orders of magnitude more reliable when anyone but Trump is president, and that’s a huge decrease. But they’re still going to be miles ahead of Hamas’ communications.
Was that a serious question or a gotcha attempt? Do you really think that the Trump Admin is even in a similar ballpark to Hamas?
Reminder that you’ve provided exactly 0 evidence for this quite extraordinary claim.
This is absolutely a massive mistake on Netanyahu’s part, that he’s taking a ton of heat for internally.