Troops humiliate Palestinians swept up in West Bank raid by referring to them only by their numbers instead of by name
When Israel re-arrested Palestinian men in the occupied West Bank town of Dura, the detainees faced familiar treatment.
They were blindfolded, handcuffed, insulted and kept in inhumane conditions. More unusual was that each man had a number written on his forehead.
Osama Shaheen, who was released in August after 10 months of administrative detention, told Middle East Eye that soldiers brutally stormed his house, smashing his furniture.
“The soldiers turned us from names into numbers, and every detainee had a number that they used to provoke him during his arrest and call him by number instead of name. To them, we are just numbers.”
the domiannace of the big news outlets by zionists is well documented.
notice how Israel has killed all the journalists and the sites that do report carefully use passive lagnuage for israeli actions and active and adverserial language for anything lebanese or gazan people do. Its obvious bias and controlled jouranlism. So why would you think them not covering something is meaningful?
Maybe you are just lookinbg for confirmation of your own bias?
Every single day heinous actions by the IDF are being reported in mainstream news. You’re straight lying or stuck in online echo chambers.
You’re arguing that this headline is biased against Israel, yet your implication here is “Israel’s heinous actions are being reported so there can’t be a bias against Israel.”
The BBC has been accused by more than 100 of its staff of giving Israel favourable coverage in its reporting of the war on Gaza and criticised for its lack of “accurate evidence-based journalism”.
A letter sent to the broadcaster’s director general, Tim Davie, and CEO Deborah Turness on Friday said: “Basic journalistic tenets have been lacking when it comes to holding Israel to account for its actions.”
“The consequences of inadequate coverage are significant. Every television report, article and radio interview that has failed to robustly challenge Israeli claims has systematically dehumanised Palestinians,” the letter said.
Someone is reporting according to journalistic standards what is literally and actually happening, which is the everyday dehumanisation of Palestinians through acts like drawing a huge number on their foreheads and calling them only using it instead of their name. And you’re making a huge deal about the reporting being biased and deceptive, when it’s neither of those things. And definitely not everyone on this comment thread is taking the “branding” to mean “burning with a hot iron”.
We need to robustly challenge Israel’s dehumanisation of Palestinians. I think to do that requires us not to whinge about a headline when it doesn’t fill some weird linguistic purity standard in your head where “branding” can only mean ‘burning with a hot iron’."
Searching for “branded people” and the first story to come up is
No one uses “brand” colloquially for printed form. I suspect you know this.
Not a native speaker, are ya?
Not to mention which, you still haven’t addressed the fact that demanding such linguistic prescription is wrong in general, not to mention in journalistic practice where standards are different.
See you’re trying to challenge linguistics when you have an understanding that’s probably from your lessons at whatever public school, because the teachers at those tend to be extremely prescriptive. Something which modern linguistics definitely wouldn’t agree with to that extent at least, and definitely not in the context of headlines, and definitely not in the context of this specific word, which actually has this definition as well.
(Also, you’re avoiding admitting Israel is committing crimes against humanity. Probably because you’re a filtht little genocide denier.)
You keep deferring whenever your childish garbage is shown to be moronic.
This in such a weird hill to die on.
Isn’t it just? Had you actually read the article I linked in the first place, your asinine ego wouldn’t be in your way to admit how wrong you are. But you’re not interested in actual linguistics. You don’t care about it and you’re not versed in it, which is apparent from you pushing views that high-schoolers might have, because you’ve just never read anything about linguistics beyond your lessons on that level. I’ve said it several times. Applying such a prescriptive criteria to journalistic headlines is beyond inane. Literally a 12-year old in my country would be expected to understand what I’ve been repeating to you several times now. So you’ve definitely not stepped a foot anywhere near a university anytime in your life.
You’re stomping your foot, crying “NO, ‘BRAND’ ONLY HAS ONE SINGLE MEANING. ONE SINGLE ONE. THAT’S HOW LANGUAGE WORKS. WAA-WAA!”*.
You desperately need your exaggerated bullshit to be right, but since you’ve exaggerated and generalised, it’s obviously not, which makes you ashamed, which makes you even more convicted to die on this hill on that you don’t understand the first thing about.
Cry all you want, but the journalist has done nothing wrong, and unlike you claim, people in this thread definitely aren’t assuming “physical mutilation” when they read “brand”. You can cry and cry and cry all day, it won’t make your sixth grade approach to philology any better, kiddo. :D
I recommend you stick to some safe bubble or echo chamber from now on.
No one here is talking about linguistic purity dumbass.
Everyone in the comments are assuming the literal and first dictionary definition of branding by physical mutilation.
You’re saying everyone in the comments is interpreting this headline as prescriptively as you pretend it is meant. Us using the same bar of prescriptiveness for your statement means you mean literally every single person is interpreting it as literal physical branding using a hot iron.
That’s a ridiculous statement, and just me disagreeing with you would make it incorrect, and several other people have tried explaining this to you. You refuse to admit that there’s such a thing as descriptive language or that “branding” can be used descriptively even if it lacked a meaning of a printed mark, which it does not.
“Moronic strawmen about linguistic purity”
You’re the one making that moronic strawman though. You’re denying the existence of descriptive language. This is what I meant earlier. You don’t even understand what that word means, so you don’t understand you’re doing it, which makes this rather hilarious, as your linguistic understanding is on the level of a 16-year old.
You’re trying to say the article is essentially propaganda against Israel. It’s not. To say Israel is branding people in this context is well within linguistic and journalistic standards, despite you not understanding what those standards are, even when half a dozen people are trying to explain them to you.
See the usage going down steadily throughout the 1900’s, until there’s a marked uptick in the 80’s, when the word resurfaced with a new context, that is currently the most colloquially used (brand as in trademark). That usage has lead to a semantic shift of the word, making it lose it’s connotation of “physical mutilation with a hot iron” as you can see from for example the playphrase.me link despite you pretending that all of the examples I used referred to objects instead of people. Is Candyman an object or a person, hmm? What about “I”? “They”? Hell, even the clip from a show that’s depicting a scene in the wild west, where there was actual branding, the quote isn’t referring to “branding” via a hot iron, but in the sense that it is most commonly used. Here in the headline of our article it just happens to overlap with making a physical mark on the people, which also fits the definition of “brand”.
You don’t understand linguistic or journalistic standards. You’re wrong in your childish assertions, but you’ll never be able to accept that.
Writing a number on someone with a marker is not branding. This is stupid. The IDF is committing actual atrocities, and this article is about writing a number on people with a marker and referring to them by that number. Relatively humane prison systems refer to people by their inmate number as well.
What is even going on? This is literally a distraction from the actual terrible things regularly occurring. Think about it this way: within the horrifyingly violent context of Palestine right now, here is an entire article that could be headlined: “IDF Uses New Weapon Against Palestinians: A Marker.” See how absurd that is when there are much more important events occurring?
They did not hold a prison number sign. Or a piece of clothing with a number. They were marked with the number on their forehead.
No prison system kidnaps people and throws them in a “jail” without process, writes a number on their forehead, tortures them for months and then releases them because they were innocent.
And I do not mean a combination of those things.
I mean not one of those things is done in a prison.
Well the police in Chicago have been accused of running dark site interrogation and torture facilities, it’s cost the city millions in human rights abuse.
TBF it depends on the prison. In this comment I will be referring to jails and prisons within the U.S., and I am working with the same assumptions you made in your comment.
People are put in jail without trial all the time, when awaiting trial. This is extremely common especially with poorer people who can’t afford bail.
Most prisons and many jails give prisoners a number, and will sometimes even refer to them only by the number. It’s not written on their head, but it is often attached to their uniform, and they can sometimes be punished for taking them off. It’s weird to write it on their head, and really just kinda silly if you ask me. They probably don’t have the resources for name tags because they’ve spent 200% of the budget on more bombs it seems.
Some jails and prisons have conditions that equate to actual torture according to the UN. Extreme heat without AC, cruel punishments, inadequate nutrition and safety. Most notable of these is solitary confinement, which is a very common prison punishment, and which is rightly classified as torture by the United Nations. Some people spend months or even years or decades in solitary confinement.
I think we all agree that the IDF is committing acts of genocide and inexcusable violence against civilians and captured combatants, but it’s also important to not inflate the facts, and to focus our attention on greater issues. Does it really matter so much that the IDF writes a number on their forehead, when they’re also bombing children? Is a marker really a greater evil than a bomb?
People can be held in jail before they are charged but they require a charge and a trial.
Here the IDF is picking up people, throwing them in confinement, beating them up and then throwing them out.
Wiithout a trial ever happening. Nor do they plan it to happen. There is no legal system involved.
Comparisons can be made. Guantanamo bay, Uyghur camps, etc. But that is not what most people call a “jail”. This is kangaroo court stuff.
I agree that the kids getting bombed is bigger news. But seeing “Israel bombed 50 kids today” every single day doesn not hit the same after a while. And it is not really “boring” in the way this is.
I’m not disagreeing that It is a terrible thing. What they’re doing is wrong and they should be punished. However we are not so different, and that is the damn truth of the thing. To that end, my comment was merely pointing out that the previous comments argument was very flawed.
Personally I’d be unwilling to write numbers on people and refer to them by that number, I just read a lot of accounts of the holocaust and that’s too close for me to be around without feeling sick. Don’t know how IDF can stomach this. But, you know, no end to the depth of human depravity and evil. I’m not a great person. Still couldn’t do this.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
–Be a Decent Human Being
–Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
Yellow star was already patented
The right-wing religious nutters in Israel read plenty of NKVD and SS manuals.
deleted by creator
Found this but I don’t know how credible it is. From around the same time.
Article says numbers written, title says branded.
It’s not good, nothing about this is. However, I’m not seeing actual hot branding to foreheads.
https://www.democracynow.org/2024/11/1/headlines/israeli_forces_detain_beat_and_brand_palestinians_after_deadly_west_bank_raid
It could be just one squad, and not systematic.
deleted by creator
Numbers are so 1940’s, I thought they might have moved to QR codes by now.
History repeats itself
Israel: Yes, again.
This seems vaguely familiar but I can’t quite put my forearm on it.
Elizabeth Warren supporters?
… branding detainees with numbers, check… now, what’s next on Hitler’s to do list?
—Bibi, apparently
My grandfather had a number tattooed on his arm. Never again means never again for everyone.
Shame on Israel. Zionism is an evil racist ideology, distinct from Judaism
They have become that which they hated.
Treating Gaza like an open air extermination camp and even branding them the way prisoners were tattooed in German camps.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/Auschwitz_survivor_displays_tattoo_detail.jpg
How disappointed the generation before them would be, having survived that same treatment only to become the monsters that they struggled to escape.
Israel wasn’t founded by holocaust survivors and treated them less than equal.
removed by mod
the domiannace of the big news outlets by zionists is well documented.
notice how Israel has killed all the journalists and the sites that do report carefully use passive lagnuage for israeli actions and active and adverserial language for anything lebanese or gazan people do. Its obvious bias and controlled jouranlism. So why would you think them not covering something is meaningful?
Maybe you are just lookinbg for confirmation of your own bias?
removed by mod
You’re arguing that this headline is biased against Israel, yet your implication here is “Israel’s heinous actions are being reported so there can’t be a bias against Israel.”
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/2/over-100-staff-accuse-bbc-of-bias-in-its-coverage-of-israels-war-in-gaza
Someone is reporting according to journalistic standards what is literally and actually happening, which is the everyday dehumanisation of Palestinians through acts like drawing a huge number on their foreheads and calling them only using it instead of their name. And you’re making a huge deal about the reporting being biased and deceptive, when it’s neither of those things. And definitely not everyone on this comment thread is taking the “branding” to mean “burning with a hot iron”.
We need to robustly challenge Israel’s dehumanisation of Palestinians. I think to do that requires us not to whinge about a headline when it doesn’t fill some weird linguistic purity standard in your head where “branding” can only mean ‘burning with a hot iron’."
Why do you keep insisting this childish bullshit that no-one has argued for?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/brand
removed by mod
Oh fuck right off. It has a way stronger connotation in colloquial English to be any other definition except an actual burning hot iron.
IF we were having this conversation 150 years ago, it would be different.
We’re not.
https://www.playphrase.me/#/search?q=Branded
What sort of a percentage of those is referring to an actual brand and isn’t from a piece of media depicting something before 1900’s?
How about here?
https://edition.cnn.com/search?q=Branded&from=0&size=10&page=1&sort=relevance&types=article§ion=
Here?
https://apnews.com/article/wawa-tumbler-recall-metal-straw-injuries-0225d1ec580c880d3f1aef199e6580ca
https://apnews.com/search?q="branded"&s=0
https://apnews.com/search?q="branded+people"&s=0
Searching for “branded people” and the first story to come up is
Not a native speaker, are ya?
Not to mention which, you still haven’t addressed the fact that demanding such linguistic prescription is wrong in general, not to mention in journalistic practice where standards are different.
See you’re trying to challenge linguistics when you have an understanding that’s probably from your lessons at whatever public school, because the teachers at those tend to be extremely prescriptive. Something which modern linguistics definitely wouldn’t agree with to that extent at least, and definitely not in the context of headlines, and definitely not in the context of this specific word, which actually has this definition as well.
(Also, you’re avoiding admitting Israel is committing crimes against humanity. Probably because you’re a filtht little genocide denier.)
removed by mod
You keep deferring whenever your childish garbage is shown to be moronic.
Isn’t it just? Had you actually read the article I linked in the first place, your asinine ego wouldn’t be in your way to admit how wrong you are. But you’re not interested in actual linguistics. You don’t care about it and you’re not versed in it, which is apparent from you pushing views that high-schoolers might have, because you’ve just never read anything about linguistics beyond your lessons on that level. I’ve said it several times. Applying such a prescriptive criteria to journalistic headlines is beyond inane. Literally a 12-year old in my country would be expected to understand what I’ve been repeating to you several times now. So you’ve definitely not stepped a foot anywhere near a university anytime in your life.
You’re stomping your foot, crying “NO, ‘BRAND’ ONLY HAS ONE SINGLE MEANING. ONE SINGLE ONE. THAT’S HOW LANGUAGE WORKS. WAA-WAA!”*.
You desperately need your exaggerated bullshit to be right, but since you’ve exaggerated and generalised, it’s obviously not, which makes you ashamed, which makes you even more convicted to die on this hill on that you don’t understand the first thing about.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_description
https://spcollege.libguides.com/c.php?g=254319&p=1695321
https://newslit.org/educators/resources/seven-standards-quality-journalism/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378216608002798
Cry all you want, but the journalist has done nothing wrong, and unlike you claim, people in this thread definitely aren’t assuming “physical mutilation” when they read “brand”. You can cry and cry and cry all day, it won’t make your sixth grade approach to philology any better, kiddo. :D
I recommend you stick to some safe bubble or echo chamber from now on.
removed by mod
You’re saying everyone in the comments is interpreting this headline as prescriptively as you pretend it is meant. Us using the same bar of prescriptiveness for your statement means you mean literally every single person is interpreting it as literal physical branding using a hot iron.
That’s a ridiculous statement, and just me disagreeing with you would make it incorrect, and several other people have tried explaining this to you. You refuse to admit that there’s such a thing as descriptive language or that “branding” can be used descriptively even if it lacked a meaning of a printed mark, which it does not.
“Moronic strawmen about linguistic purity”
You’re the one making that moronic strawman though. You’re denying the existence of descriptive language. This is what I meant earlier. You don’t even understand what that word means, so you don’t understand you’re doing it, which makes this rather hilarious, as your linguistic understanding is on the level of a 16-year old.
You’re trying to say the article is essentially propaganda against Israel. It’s not. To say Israel is branding people in this context is well within linguistic and journalistic standards, despite you not understanding what those standards are, even when half a dozen people are trying to explain them to you.
See the usage going down steadily throughout the 1900’s, until there’s a marked uptick in the 80’s, when the word resurfaced with a new context, that is currently the most colloquially used (brand as in trademark). That usage has lead to a semantic shift of the word, making it lose it’s connotation of “physical mutilation with a hot iron” as you can see from for example the playphrase.me link despite you pretending that all of the examples I used referred to objects instead of people. Is Candyman an object or a person, hmm? What about “I”? “They”? Hell, even the clip from a show that’s depicting a scene in the wild west, where there was actual branding, the quote isn’t referring to “branding” via a hot iron, but in the sense that it is most commonly used. Here in the headline of our article it just happens to overlap with making a physical mark on the people, which also fits the definition of “brand”.
You don’t understand linguistic or journalistic standards. You’re wrong in your childish assertions, but you’ll never be able to accept that.
ITT: a bunch of non-native English speakers lecturing native English speakers on the meaning and usage of English words in colloquial English :-/
Writing a number on someone with a marker is not branding. This is stupid. The IDF is committing actual atrocities, and this article is about writing a number on people with a marker and referring to them by that number. Relatively humane prison systems refer to people by their inmate number as well.
What is even going on? This is literally a distraction from the actual terrible things regularly occurring. Think about it this way: within the horrifyingly violent context of Palestine right now, here is an entire article that could be headlined: “IDF Uses New Weapon Against Palestinians: A Marker.” See how absurd that is when there are much more important events occurring?
Who wrote this? The IDF?
They did not hold a prison number sign. Or a piece of clothing with a number. They were marked with the number on their forehead.
No prison system kidnaps people and throws them in a “jail” without process, writes a number on their forehead, tortures them for months and then releases them because they were innocent.
And I do not mean a combination of those things.
I mean not one of those things is done in a prison.
Well the police in Chicago have been accused of running dark site interrogation and torture facilities, it’s cost the city millions in human rights abuse.
Its the Homan Square Black Site. Used to be a Sears warehouse. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homan_Square_facility
TBF it depends on the prison. In this comment I will be referring to jails and prisons within the U.S., and I am working with the same assumptions you made in your comment.
People are put in jail without trial all the time, when awaiting trial. This is extremely common especially with poorer people who can’t afford bail.
Most prisons and many jails give prisoners a number, and will sometimes even refer to them only by the number. It’s not written on their head, but it is often attached to their uniform, and they can sometimes be punished for taking them off. It’s weird to write it on their head, and really just kinda silly if you ask me. They probably don’t have the resources for name tags because they’ve spent 200% of the budget on more bombs it seems.
Some jails and prisons have conditions that equate to actual torture according to the UN. Extreme heat without AC, cruel punishments, inadequate nutrition and safety. Most notable of these is solitary confinement, which is a very common prison punishment, and which is rightly classified as torture by the United Nations. Some people spend months or even years or decades in solitary confinement.
I think we all agree that the IDF is committing acts of genocide and inexcusable violence against civilians and captured combatants, but it’s also important to not inflate the facts, and to focus our attention on greater issues. Does it really matter so much that the IDF writes a number on their forehead, when they’re also bombing children? Is a marker really a greater evil than a bomb?
People can be held in jail before they are charged but they require a charge and a trial.
Here the IDF is picking up people, throwing them in confinement, beating them up and then throwing them out.
Wiithout a trial ever happening. Nor do they plan it to happen. There is no legal system involved.
Comparisons can be made. Guantanamo bay, Uyghur camps, etc. But that is not what most people call a “jail”. This is kangaroo court stuff.
I agree that the kids getting bombed is bigger news. But seeing “Israel bombed 50 kids today” every single day doesn not hit the same after a while. And it is not really “boring” in the way this is.
I’m not disagreeing that It is a terrible thing. What they’re doing is wrong and they should be punished. However we are not so different, and that is the damn truth of the thing. To that end, my comment was merely pointing out that the previous comments argument was very flawed.
Personally I’d be unwilling to write numbers on people and refer to them by that number, I just read a lot of accounts of the holocaust and that’s too close for me to be around without feeling sick. Don’t know how IDF can stomach this. But, you know, no end to the depth of human depravity and evil. I’m not a great person. Still couldn’t do this.