Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib refused to apologize Wednesday for saying on Tuesday that Israel is to blame for the hospital explosion that day in Gaza, an accusation that sparked political backlash against her from Republicans as Israel denies fault.

Tlaib joined thousands of protesters calling for a ceasefire in Gaza during a solidarity rally hosted by the left-leaning group Jewish Voice for Peace at the National Mall. She was visibly emotional, at times pausing her speech to openly weep and criticizing lawmakers who have not backed a ceasefire resolution.

  • Copernican@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think it’s fair criticism . At the very least walk back and reserve judgement until there’s more conclusive evidence. But I think until there’s better evidence, there should be more respect given to the US intelligence community. It was not long ago trump was criticized for accepting foreign intelligence over the US intelligence community. I think it’s fair to criticize tlaib for this as well.

    And the thing is, the blame of who bombed the hospital isn’t critical to advocating for peace, criticizing unproportial Israeli response, or other pro Palestine messaging.

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I like that they claim it wasn’t Israeli because of the lack of shrapnel damage to the buildings… directly under a picture of someone inspecting shrapnel damage on one of the buildings.

        • Apollo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s a difference between your understanding and the author - the level of shrapnel damage from an air detonated bomb would be an order of magnitude higher than shown from the hospital explosion, but that doesn’t mean no shrapnel is produced by a rocket explosion or cars cooking off.

          If your munition is designed to explode above the ground its designed to spread a hail of shrapnel in the detonation zone. There are plenty of pictures from ukraine showing the effects of these munitions, it turns the area into a cheese grater.

          Lack of crater and a large fire are hallmarks of a conflagration vs an explosion.

    • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      But I think until there’s better evidence, there should be more respect given to the US intelligence community

      The US intelligence community isn’t an objective organization with a mission to inform US citizens of what’s really going on in the world. Anything they release is at the direction of political actors and intended to cause some effect. They can be good at their jobs and their released information is still inherently untrustworthy.

      • Copernican@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        So what is the unbiased source that investigated this faster than the US Intelligence community that was not directly involved in the current conflict?

        Yes, there are blemishes on the US Intelligence’s history. But a US Politician should have a little more deference you the US Intelligence Community.

        • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It doesn’t matter if the US Intelligence community is faster, they’re still not trustworthy. Within the government, hopefully intelligence is just a confidential useful tool to inform government officials, but press releases are political actions.

          And frankly, US politicians (outside of the president) shouldn’t be overly trusting of the intelligence community. They’re heavily influenced by the executive’s wants and were (under pressure) a key player in justifying the war in Iraq. That’s not a small blemish, and I’m not aware of any changes that would make that impossible in the aftermath.

    • chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      It feels like she is too close to this, and is expressing her passion instead of allowing evidence to be presented. It’s gonna look real bad if things don’t pan out her way, and she’s the one supporting terrorism.

      • Not_mikey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        How would she be supporting terrorism?, she’s one of the few in Congress calling for a ceasefire and an end to the violence. Even if she’s wrong and islamic jihad were responsible that doesn’t mean she accidentally supported them. She said the bombing of the hospital was horrific and unless she changes her tone once she realizes Palestinians did it then this isn’t supporting terrorism.

        • danhakimi@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago
          1. She’s calling for a ceasefire while Hamas has its hostages. Hamas isn’t going to give back the hostages in honor of a ceasefire. A ceasefire, even a temporary one, is a win for Hamas in that it prolongs the terror, and resolves nothing. The best-case scenario of a ceasefire is they wait two months, Hamas jerks everybody around, and then it all starts over again, except now with the babies indoctrinated two months further into Islam.

          2. She’s blaming Israel with only one piece of evidence: Hamas’s accusation. Meanwhile, OSINT + Israeli intelligence made public + US Intelligence all make it clear that Israel was not at fault. She chooses to repeat Hamas’s story instead of looking at the evidence. She is supporting Hamas.

        • paintbucketholder@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          She said the bombing of the hospital was horrific and unless she changes her tone once she realizes Palestinians did it then this isn’t supporting terrorism.

          She didn’t just say the bombing of the hospital was horrific. She explicitly said that Israel bombed the hospital:

          Israel just bombed the Baptist Hospital killing 500 Palestinians (doctors, children, patients) just like that.

          There’s enough evidence - from third parties, not from either Hamas or the IDF or another invested party - out there that runs counter to the claim that it was an Israeli airstrike that Tlaib should have at least modified here initial statement.

          But she hasn’t.

          I agree that she hasn’t openly supported terrorism, but blaming one side for something that was very likely caused by the other side, and then completely refusing to acknowledge that once evidence to the contrary comes out is, at the very least, doing nothing to calm tensions.

        • chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          18
          ·
          1 year ago

          Even if she’s wrong and islamic jihad were responsible that doesn’t mean she accidentally supported them.

          War doesn’t exist in a vacuum. If you add weight to one side of the scale, the other side is raised. If I have a can of Coke and a can of Pepsi, and I point to the Coke and say, “This one gave me diabetes,” it doesn’t matter that the Pepsi is just as bad, all that matters is that I pushed the blame on Coke.