#right after the flour massacre that happened yesterday

[journalofimprobablethings]

As the West and the US in particular keeps leaning on the whole "Israel has the right to defend itself" argument I keep wanting to ask them,

at what point do Palestinians get the right to defend themselves?

And of course the unspoken answer is never. No amount of Palestinian suffering will ever be enough for the West to see their fighting back as anything other than "terrorism".

The logic seems to be that even one dead Israeli is justification for whatever horrors the Israeli government feels like visiting on Palestinians, and that no matter how much the Israeli government does to them, how many innocents are killed, no Palestinian violence in response is ever justified.

At least 30,000 Gazans have been killed in five months (almost certainly a horrific undercount, as it does not include those under the rubble or those who have been killed by starvation or disease or cold). Civilians are routinely detained, stripped, humiliated, tortured. There is evidence that sexual assault of Palestinians, women and men both, by Israeli forces is a regular occurrence. 2 million people have been forcibly displaced, their homes destroyed, and are being systematically starved. And yet if any one of those people dares to have a violent response, to try to fight back against their deliberate annihilation, they will be called a terrorist.

Kids throwing stones at tanks are called terrorists. Or their deaths are justified because "well they just would have grown up to be a terrorist."

Armored soldiers shooting unarmed, starving people who are desperately trying to get food for themselves and their families are "defending themselves".

The double standard is so obvious and yet people are still trying to "both-sides" the matter as if there is anything resembling equal footing here.