An entire Economist article on famine in Gaza doesn’t say the word “Israel” once. Not even when describing damage to farmland and water facilities or severely restricted aid deliveries. Saying *who* is destroying the farmland and restricting aid seems like basic info to include.
@AssalRad “severely restricted” because the 5 UN agencies on the ground can’t figure out how to distribute it and ASKED FOR ISRAEL TO SLOW THE TRUCK CROSSINGS.
@AssalRad "Severely restricted aid deliveries" -- UNRWA itself confirms COGAT entry of more food trucks that prior to war; UN WPF's own statistics confirm Israel has sent 2x the food necessary to feed Gaza. x.com/aizenberg55/st…
@AssalRad "Severely restricted aid deliveries" -- UNRWA itself confirms COGAT entry of more food trucks that prior to war; UN WPF's own statistics confirm Israel has sent 2x the food necessary to feed Gaza. x.com/aizenberg55/st…
@AssalRad George Orwell was sweet child of summer...
@AssalRad It's a genre x.com/koenswinkels/s…
@AssalRad I'm genuinely fascinated (in the worst possible way) by how they manage to twist a topic so much to avoid naming Israel I dont think i could write it like that even if i tried
@AssalRad The Economist feels like saying: Gazans damaged their farmland, depleted water facilities, imposed restrictions so that aid would not reach them, and finally killed themselves.
@AssalRad We need to boycott mainstream media. These outlets shouldn't be part of our consciousness anymore.
@AssalRad Amazing, not even once, how very telling
@AssalRad They have updated the article since..archive.ph/TC27u