this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2024
533 points (93.5% liked)

People Twitter

5236 readers
1957 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
533
If you won't call this genocide, what is it? (lemmy.world)
submitted 8 months ago by jimmydoreisalefty to c/[email protected]
43 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Kim Iversen on the Flour Massacre.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

To be fair, most of them were actually run over, not shot.

It boggles the mind that they think this is a valid argument.

Edit: I know it isn’t true, it was a bullshit claim initially made by the IDF. But how is running them over instead even remotely better?

[–] HappycamperNZ 33 points 8 months ago

Something like 100 of the ~ 115 dead had bullet wounds, but that doesn't include the 700 or so wounded.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Wrong. The only source for that claim is the idf. Doctors who received the wounded said 80% had gunshot wounds.

[–] ikidd 15 points 8 months ago

Are we into triple digits for "shit the IDF says that's soon proven to be utter bullshit" yet?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Everything I've read said the majority where hit by bullets, source?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

It was an initial claim made by the IDF.

I guess a /s was needed