I guess not strictly news - but with all of the vitriol I have seen in discussions on the Israel situation, that have boiled down to arguments over wording, I feel that this take from the BBC is worthy of some discussion.

Mods, feel free to remove if this is not newsy enough.

      • steventhedev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        27
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        UK Parliament added Hamas on the list of proscribed terrorist organizations in 2021. Press release here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/islamist-terrorist-group-hamas-banned-in-the-uk

        The EU have them listed as well (didn’t bother checking since when).

        The US has listed them since 1997 (US Department of Treasury Office of Foreign Asset Control is the agency in charge of sanctions enforcement).

        So yeah.

        Legally.

          • CookieJarObserver@ani.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            31
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ah yes of course, someone links a source with a list of what you just asked and now you complain that the one making the list doesn’t make the law…

            Are you insane?

            • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              24
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Law is not some immutable force. Many countries have laws.

              In some of those countries, Hamas is a designated terrorist organization. In others, it is not, and even considered and ally (or has been previously, such as Afghanistan, Algeria, Iran, Qatar, Syria).

              Hamas its self is a government. They have their own laws. So whose laws should we defer to?

              The point is that who is or isn’t a terrorist depends on the context and point of view you are speaking from.

              There is no universality in that kind of word, and so its appropriate that the BBC isn’t using it.

                • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  13
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I get the emotionalism behind this moment. But words matter. This was a state sponsored effort.

                  If there is any delineation between a terrorist act and state violence, it should be the existence of a state.

                  A state exists, Palestine. This was a state action, not a terrorist action. It was an act of open war, but not an act of terrorism. That’s a different thing.

                  Definitions and words matter. It can’t be “Everything I hate is terrorism”. Look at how the American right has done this with the word ‘fascism’ (largely to obscure their clearly fascistic approaches).

                  What Hamas did was not an act of terrorism. They have done that previously. This was an act of war.

        • Veltoss@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          So how far did you get in this article? Did you see the title and go into rage posting or did you actually read it?

          • eratic
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            This dude writes 50 comments a day on multiple accounts. From what I’ve seen they are completely filled with hatred and spitefulness and their personal conviction is more important than deliberation or compassion. It must be exhausting.

        • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Critically, though, not the U.N. I linked to the same thing above before I saw your comment but came to a different conclusion. I personally call them terrorists but I’m not a journalist trying to be impartial on a global network. I think it’s fine for the BBC to just say which countries do label them terrorists without taking a side.

        • hassanmckusick@lemmy.discothe.quest
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Kinda weird that New Zealand takes the time to differentiate calling the political arm of Hamas not terrorists and the militant arm of Hamas (Qassam Brigades) terrorists. Maybe someone should look into why.

    • Nighed@sffa.communityOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      73
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The well known phrase is “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. I Imagine from their point of view, Israel is the ‘terrorist’ group, routinely bombing apartment buildings etc and that their actions are a proportionate counter (recent events nonwithstanding!)

      Both sides of the current conflict have/are committing atrocities, but the reporting of those atrocities should be as factual and unbiased as possible.

      • wewbull
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        The best way I’ve heard it described is that they both view the other group of people as existential evil. Far beyond enemies, something which is evil just for existing. Not just the militaries, but the nation, race, state, religion, whatever classification. With that viewpoint, any action you take can be justified. Just as nobody would think twice about killing a million mosquito larvae in a country that has thousands die from malaria, killing a few thousand of the other side is morally neutral at worst.

        This is going to continue to be horrific for a while.

      • CookieJarObserver@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        64
        ·
        1 year ago

        The freedom fighters that behead babies, rape woman and abduct people… Oh and also rocketstrike civilians in general…

        If you believe in their “freedom” feel free to go there.

        • audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          44
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          So do you call the Israeli army terrorists? Because they’ve done all of those things to an even greater extent than Hamas has.

        • Pratai@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          36
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          You know, they BOTH do that shit, right? It’s important that you know this.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The military prosecuted and convicted the leader who ordered the killings, so implying the US military condones these actions is really stupid

            Regardless of the wrist-slap the criminal President gave him, he was convicted. There is no legal recourse after a Presidential commutation.

            • thoro@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              My Lai was not an isolated incident.

              Only one involved was convicted as stated, but then completely let off so who cares? The higher ups that enabled it were completely let off. Others who were involved in the cover up completely let off. The whistleblowers, etc were shunned and ostracized by the military for decades.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                10
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                so who cares

                Being that is invalidates the point you were making, you should care.

                But then, your only interest in contrarianism, so no one really gives a fuck about your opinion either, you sick fucking terrorist apologist.

            • angrymouse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              18
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              But complaining about whataboutism while you ignore the problem everytime somoeone powerfull or ally does sucks the same. A war of suckers.

              • Pratai@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                But redirecting attention away from the topic being discussed just so you can whine about someone else doing the same makes it appear as if you’re justifying it so long as someone else does it.

                Stop doing this. It’s juvenile and muddies the water. You want to discuss how shitty America is, do it in its own post where that can be discussed in full. Here, it doesn’t belong.

                • angrymouse@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I’m not trying to do that, I’m trying to understand how to international interests interact with the war, if you really want to understand international conflicts you should do this all the time.

                  Saying “Hammas bad” is much more juvenile, and is equivalent of saying “fart” for the discussion

            • gregorum@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              16
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              And while you have every right to your opinion, your opinion isn’t a newsworthy or relevant fact.

    • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Journalists should never label a group of people with an adjective. It’s Journalism 101. Your writing should be free of personal bias and report the facts and quoted statements. No assumptions are allowed.

            • gregorum@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Lmao, you’re seriously linking to a deleted comment to try to make your case?

              Laws are, by definition, a legal opinion— which can be overturned, by the way, by another legal opinion. The only fact here is that it is, is some jurisdiction, a law.

        • angrymouse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          That just is not the point. I mean, if you are involved in the conflict you can totally believe in anything, but the point is in the moment you call them terrorist and call it a day you lost any possibility to analyze the situation and understand WTF is happening and why.

          BBC is not saying they are NOT terrorists, but it does not matter in this context.

    • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      The U.S., U.K., E.U., and others designate them as a terrorist group but the U.N. does not. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_groups

      The reality is that they’re the militant faction of the de facto government of a quasi-state under Israeli occupation. It is complicated so the BBC just says who thinks they’re a terrorist group. That seems reasonable for journalists striving to be neutral.

      • kautau@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Everybody wants to occupy ‘the holy land’ and everyone who is taking part of that sucks”

        While Israel has been basically a terrorist state, attacking Palestinians nonchalant, bombing civilian districts, and Hamas has grown in number, also basically being a terrorist state (the iron dome exists for a reason), it feels like we are forgetting that this whole argument comes down to religious rights. The argument will never end. The conflict will never end. Both groups are thumping their book claiming it’s their land. The war will go on for centuries until there’s nothing left to claim. That’s how religious war works, unless some other great motivator stops it.

        • hassanmckusick@lemmy.discothe.quest
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          The war will go on for centuries until there’s nothing left to claim

          The US is older than Israel. My grandfather is older than Israel and he’s still alive. There was no state of Israel in 1920 and the Jewish population in the region was ~11%. This hasn’t been going on for centuries. It’s been going on for century.

          • kautau@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The history of the Jews and Judaism in the Land of Israel has its origins in the 2nd millennium BCE, when Israelites emerged as an outgrowth of southern Canaanites, During biblical times, a postulated United Kingdom of Israel existed before splitting into two Israelite kingdoms occupying the highland zone

            The Crusades, the Ottoman Empire, thankfully those only lasted a century and that’s when we determined who got what.

            Yes I’m sure that since they didn’t have it before, they wouldn’t try to have it again. My point is not about nations that rise and fall. It’s that they will continue to rise and fall for this holy war on what they consider to be “their land”

            Are you really sure that without US intervention, and the nation of Israel starting, there wouldn’t be orthodox Jewish terrorists on the other side of the border claiming it was “their land?”

            Those claiming it’s “their land” will continue to fight, until everyone is dead. That’s my point.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s pretty ballsy to start using an alt with the same name as the last account you got banned under…

      How long you think this one will last?