Just don't take it too seriously, I would say. Not every news piece from the same source is going to be of the same quality or bias.
Trump is not relevant to this story because 1) he's not currently in government, 2) is not being asked to stop the war by many voters in his base, and 3) clearly doesn't give a tinker's fig about the lives of Palestinians anyway.
With each passing week, there are more and more parallels to the aftermath of 9-11. Israel has now even had its own equivalent to the leaked photos of prisoners (held without trial) being degraded, tortured, and sexually assaulted at Abu Grahib.
It's depressing watching history repeat itself within your own lifetime, even despite the far greater visibility of Israel's war crimes thanks to the internet.
Well you haven't provided any solid evidence or reasons to believe that, so your arguments come across as pretty empty.
I think your perspective is very…binary. Politics is mainly shades of grey.
I have no idea how this relates to my previous comments, and as you don't seem inclined to elaborate I guess we'll move on.
You don’t know if kamala wants to appear sympathetic or actually is.
The issue isn't whether Kamala is genuinely sympathetic or not; it's whether or not she has the will and political capital to take action on a view that is so politically controversial. Not only would she have to stand up to the entire Republican party in the House and the Senate , she would have to deal with backlash from Pro-Israel Democrats and from military and pro-Israel lobbyists. Kamala is a pretty typical corporate Democrat and has done nothing to suggest that she is willing to deviate from Biden's policy except in terms of PR. If you want to argue that she is, you'll need something amazing to back it up.
If you think there is no difference why protest at all.
I didn't say that protests don't make a difference -- they certainly can, given the right circumstances. The key is the public applying pressure at the right place and the right time -- when is typically when politicians are seeking election, as Kamala is now.
why not protest at trumps rally.
And what would be the point in that? Trump certainly doesn't care, nor has he a vested in interest in paying attention to pro-Palestine protesters, unlike Kamala.
Well actually, while the binary choice is almost the norm in US, it quite often happens everywhere else in the world on all levels of governance.
But not nearly to the same extent. Even in countries like the UK, which have historically been dominated by two main parties, members of smaller parties still win elections and hold seats in the national legislature. When was the last time a member of Congress represented a party that was not either Democrat or Republican?
Lobbyists are strong, but defeatist attitude is the only reason they have the strength they do.
Uh no. The actual reason is money and political capital.
Big changes can happen when participation is high.
Such as?
But in the current situation when the candidates are so far apart on the subject, but so very close in the polls, I don’t see logic in undermining the chances of the only candidate who might be considering a change of politics.
Except she isn't. Her strategy is to appear sympathetic in public but maintain the status quo regarding Israel in terms of policy.
Politics is often a binary choice.
Well, the binary choice thing is almost solely a US problem. Pretty much all other democracies have a number of viable political parties to choose from. That's kinda part of the reason why the US political system is in such a mess. But I digress ...
then you try to push it the direction you want.
And unfortunately that's where this argument completely falls apart -- The US is more of an oligarchy than a democracy. There have even been academic studies that show that the general public in the US has virtually no influence on government policy whatsoever, given the overwhelming influence of lobbyists and billionaire/corporate donors.
Unless the elites would allow an arms embargo on Israel (and, surprise surprise, they wouldn't), the likelihood of progressives pushing Kamala to the left on this issue is basically zero.
The run up to an important election is the best opportunity for citizen groups to apply pressure on candidates because it's practically the only time that they can muster enough leverage to outweigh the interests of the billionaire class and the military-industrial complex.
They've pinned their hopes on her, because who else can they turn to? If your priority is campaigning for an end to the genocide, then of course you'd say that.
Sadly, her national security advisor just tweeted this today, so I'd say those of us who predicted Harris would just take Biden's policy and give it a more sympathetic face are already looking to be proven correct:
Her national security advisor tweeted this today:
Translation: "We're going to continue Biden's ineffectual policy of begging Israel to please be nice as they're dropping the bombs we keep sending them."
Ah, that was the explanation that I was looking for. Much obliged.
Same.
I've seen the photos of the aftermath of this airstrike -- the bodies of men, women, and children so obliterated that there is no hope of identifying them. The poor souls having to clear the area today have to sort the lumps of human remains into trash bags and hope all the parts belong to the same person.
There's no justification that anyone can give that would ever justify it, and yet it will just be brushed under the rug by the US State Department, just like the last time.