this post was submitted on 28 May 2025

136 points (97.9% liked)

Australia

4216 readers

92 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
Politics, post it to Australian Politics
World News/Events, post it to World News
A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

lodion@aussie.zone

Fluid@aussie.zone

bestusername@aussie.zone

eatham@aussie.zone

Nath@aussie.zone

136

ABC pulls interview with Palestine advocate from website and iview (www.crikey.com.au)

submitted 1 week ago by Zagorath@aussie.zone to c/australia@aussie.zone

42 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 43 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] maniacalmanicmania@aussie.zone 38 points 1 week ago

The missing interview and dead link were later noted by independent Senator Lidia Thorpe, who posted about it on Instagram.

Legend.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 33 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The URL of the removed article: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-26/pms-gaza-comments-too-late-says-advocate/105338640

I'm currently on https://www.abc.net.au/news/contact providing "Feedback" criticising the ABC for this decision. In my message, I'm noting:

The ABC's legislated requirement to provide a broad range of perspectives
The growing international consensus that Israel is committing genocide
The ABC's recent history of caving to pro-Israel pressure (and the waste of taxpayer resources in taking their Lattouf case to court) and how this latest case is showing a trend that damages the ABC's reputation for impartiality

And calling on the ABC to explain why this was removed, immediately reinstate the interview, and commit to ensuring they do better about representing human rights in the future. I encourage others to do the same.

edit: after completing that form, I was informed that actually I should be submitting here: https://help.abc.net.au/hc/en-us/requests/new?ticket_form_id=6354974197519 to "make a complaint". I am saying "Bias" best describes my issue, on the ABC NEWS website.

edit the second: in making the complaint, I decided to also add a bit about:

The ABC's duty to fair and honest dealing with interview subjects. Mashni should have been informed by the ABC that they took down his interview and why. It should not come to his attention when readers tell him they couldn't find the interview.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 31 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Someone has an archive of the video: https://xcancel.com/JonesHowDareYou/status/1927235160472215770

[–] maniacalmanicmania@aussie.zone 23 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It looks like Nasser or his team had already uploaded a copy to Instagram and it also seems to be a higher quality copy:

https://www.instagram.com/iamthenassman/reel/DKHKBUlTTsZ/

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 1 week ago

Streisand effect, go!

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 5 points 1 week ago

Oh awesome!

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Cowards. They're so afraid of blowback that they capitulated to the most disingenuous bastards imaginable.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ain't mordoch from AU?

Parasite got too much pull over global media. May st Luigi bless his heart.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 5 points 1 week ago

Murdoch is an American citizen. He literally chose to give up his Australian citizenship. As far as I'm concerned, that makes him less Australian than the average random American who's never been to Australia. They at least have zero Australianness. Murdoch has negative.

[+] sqgl@beehaw.org -38 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

So he is calling for the elimination of Israel? Or is he calling for a one-nation state where a Palestinian majority will supposedly conduct a democracy without misogyny, homophobia ignoring the Hamas agenda to expel all Jews?

Am well aware there are a growing number of Jews with an agenda to expel all Arabs from Gaza. I wouldn't want ABC propagating sloganeering from them either.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 30 points 1 week ago (2 children)

He's calling for an end to the genocide, and for the Australian government to cease promoting genocide by doing two-way arms trade with the genocidal state.

Anything else is whataboutism.

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The Post is literally summarised here in my Lemmy feed with:

During the interview, Nasser Mashni made a pointed remark that it was time 'for Palestine to be free, from the river to the sea'

That could well be why the interview was pulled. One could argue whether that slogan is sinister or not. If sinister they could have aired it without the slogan (but some would argue against platforming someone with that view).

These are the actual issues it seems, certainly not whataboutism.

EDIT: Turns out this Crikey article is not paywalled (unlike most of Crikey). So I read it and platforming should not be an issue since it says the guy is a regular.

The closing paragraphs are:

Crikey received a statement from the ABC on Wednesday morning, a day after this story was published, which said the interview had been uploaded to the broadcaster's website and iview accidentally.

"The original content was done as a live-to-air interview as part of broader coverage and was not intended to be published as a stand-alone clip. It was mistakenly uploaded and when that was noticed it was taken down," a spokesperson said.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ah interesting. That edited statement was not there when I first read the article. Frankly, I don't believe the ABC's claim. If it were true, that's an answer that could easily have been provided in time for publication. They've come up with a post-hoc excuse after seeing how much play this story was getting. They had initially hoped to quietly acquiesce to the pro-genociders without attracting as much attention as the last time they did so.

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And since they went through the bother of "accidentally" uploading it, why did they go through the extra bother to remove it?

They play both sides. Am sure they have their own internal battles of which side to support since they do not seem consistent to me.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

From what I can tell, the average ABC worker is on the right side of this. But ABC management seems to have a direct line to the genocide supporters. And when the Israel lobbyists tell Kim Williams (or formerly Ita Buttrose) to jump, he (she) asks "how high?" We only need look at the Lattouf case or, less sensationally, Sandy Gutman, to see that.

That's why what repeatedly happens is the right thing happens at first. Then management gets wind of it, usually because of DMs from lobbyists, and orders a reversal.

In this case, I think what probably happened is it got uploaded as normal. Because that's what they do. Any vaguely interesting segment of television gets uploaded to their website and iView. Then the Israel lobby saw it, saw that he was calling out their genocide, and got on the like to Williams or Hugh Marks or someone else on the board or management, and they sent down the instruction to nix it.

[–] Ilandar@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Didn't Media Watch report on this exact phenomenon earlier this year?

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Maybe. I couldn't find the report if it did, but that's not a huge surprise given how hard this is to google for.

I'd be extra interested if it happened under the current Media Watch host, who has ties to zionist organisations (he studied at Moriah College, a member of the zionist "Jewish Communal Appeal"), and started on Media Watch in February or March this year.

[–] Ilandar@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It was under Besser, in just his second episode. They investigated the way ABC management handled criticism over Antoinette Lattouf's social media comments, which I guess you're already familiar with given you referenced this previously.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago

Oh nice, thanks. Just watched that segment and he really didn't pull his punches.

Yeah I was already familiar, from other news articles and from watching some of the case (the court case was broadcast on YouTube).

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org -4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

From what I can tell, the average ABC worker is on the right side of this.

The average worker is Left wing and therefore agrees with Hamas' position. I am Left but often disagree with them on the Gaza issues. In fact their dodgy reporting on Al Ahli hospital early on lost them their credibility.

I have not seen any news organisation consistently report "fairly". The only example of even-handedness was a pair of entries from a blogger a couple of months into the war (probably still valid - let me know if it has dated)...

https://yoavfisher.medium.com/israel-has-lost-the-war-d7b9b3934f73

https://yoavfisher.medium.com/hamas-has-lost-the-war-5bea9813fcf3

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think it's very important to start from the place of acknowledging that nothing Hamas does or has done is relevant. Whether someone condemns Hamas or wholeheartedly supports them, or (as most people probably do) sit somewhere in between, really doesn't matter. Because genocide is absolutely, totally, inexcusable. Even if Hamas were committing genocide themselves, that does not excuse Israel's genocide. And the fact is that Hamas isn't committing genocide. They literally could not if they wanted to. They haven't the power necessary for it.

Any organisation that is censoring people who accuse Israel of genocide, or who play whataboutism games by trying to ensure that condemnations of Israel are always followed by condemnations of Hamas, are abetting genocide.

This meme summarises it nicely.

A cartoon of a cat saying "It's impossible to starve children to death in self defense"

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org -1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

That meme ignores Hamas hijacking aid.

Hamas could just surrender.

[–] IncongruousMonkey@aussie.zone 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

ah yes "stop making me hit you, just do what I say! this is all your fault!"

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

And you want what? Israel to roll over and allow continuous repeats of Oct 7 (which Hamas vowed to do, on the record)?

Here is a more mature argument you could have used against me: How would Israel know if all of Hamas surrendered anyhow? What could possibly count as a surrender?

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Stop the whataboutism. Stop defending genocide. Nothing Hamas does or could do can defend genocide.

But if you really want to play that game: everything Hamas does is also Israel's fault. Israel created Hamas. They funded Hamas deliberately as a way to destabilise the Palestinians. They create oppressive conditions in which a militant organisation like Hamas is bound to thrive. Everything that Hamas does is a predictable outcome of Israel's actions, and the ultimate blame lies squarely on them.

But again, that's irrelevant. Because even if Hamas's own actions weren't Israel's fault, Israel's actions obviously are. Murdering children, doctors, and journalists by the hundreds are classic fascist moves. Displacing people en mass from their homes is genocide. Collective punishment is a war crime. Deliberately starving people is a war crime. Stop defending genocide.

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org -1 points 1 week ago

Senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri.. [in an] interview, which aired on a Libyan television channel... referred with indifference to the number of Palestinians who have been killed in the Gaza war, calling this "the price we have to pay," and remarked that the women of Gaza will compensate for the loss by "producing" more babies than those who have been killed.

https://www.memri.org/reports/gazans-furious-hamas-it-has-nothing-contempt-victims-war-and-prepared-sacrifice-us-all

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

ProPals throw accusations of "whataboutism" when someone tries to discuss nuance as often as Zionists throw "anti-Semitism" when they are criticised.

The two points remain unaddressed by you:

Hamas hijack aid and are complaining now that IDF wants to control the distribution to prevent this.

Hamas could surrender for a swift end to the war.

everything Hamas does is also lsrael's fault. lsrael created Hamas. They funded Hamas deliberately as a way to destabilise the Palestinians.

Indeed. Bibi favoured Hamas over Fatah and for cynical reasons as you point out. You are not talking to a one-eyed football mentality person.

Hamas (being right wing fascists like Likud) should have known the consequences of Oct 7 well in advance but they naively thought they could rally Arab neighbours to battle like in the past.

[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You're not understanding. Theres a point when the crimes become so heinous that it doesn't matter what justification they claim, no justification is sufficient. Israel has passed that point, a long time ago in my opinion.

October 7th was heinous and likewise Hamas' crimes have no justification. That doesn't somehow ameliorate or absolve the Israelis of the crimes they're committing.

The difference between the two groups from an Australian perspective is, Israel is a so called liberal democratic nation and has been an erstwhile ally of Australia due to our percieved alignment in values.

What they are doing to Palestinians is so against these ideals that it must call into question our relationship with them.

In Hamas' case Australia has next to no relationship with, so our reaction to their behaviour is more simple, as its a contnuation of our determinations of them as a group.

[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Hamas hijack aid and are complaining now that IDF wants to control the distribution to prevent this.

If the Israeli's had shown an ounce of good faith actions throughout this whole horrible period, then maybe this demand would be less critically read.

But as it stands they have constricted supply of food, electricity and everything else as much as they can, restricted the water supply to, i think, one desal plant, don't let journalists (even target them) in for a less biased appraisal of whats going on, continually attack the UN and International court for their calls for investigations, attack medical workers, as well as killing, through, bombs or other means, the Palestinians en-masse no matter their gender, age, or relation to their so called enemy Hamas.

Multiple internal surveys of Israeli public opinion paint a putrid picture of the overall societies vision for the ongoing survival of the Palestinian people.

And so, after all of this, the international community is supposed to trust the Israelis will act in good faith and fair dealing in their distribution of aid and resources?

I think not.

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Luckily the distribution seems to be going well though. That is a good thing, yes?

[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

No, what Israel and The US are doing is catastrophically bad. It is exactly what my comment warned against.

Israel cannot be trusted to deliver anything for the Palestinians in good faith. What happens as soon as the world's eyes shift.

The Israeli's cannot be trusted to be fair minded on this issue for the same reason victims of rape cannot be allowed to name the sentence of their rapist. An impartial party that can as genuinely as possible guarantee the actual aid delivery in the amounts is needed.

I think that video is shot like its a PR stunt, but it doesn't even matter if its real, fake, a PR stunt, or the sign of a genuine change. There can be no genuine assurances while the Israelis and the US allies control the aid flow, there is no impartiality, and every reason for them to use the aid to maximise their own benefit. Its grotesque that this needs to be explained.

These quotes are from your linked article, and summarise the issue well,

Jens Laerke, spokesperson for the UN aid coordination office, OCHA: "It is a distraction from what is actually needed, which is a reopening of all the crossings into Gaza, a secure environment within Gaza and faster facilitation of permissions and final approvals of all the emergency supplies that we have just outside the border; [aid] needs to get in."

UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini was equally blunt. "This new aid model is not only wasteful but a distraction from atrocities," he told Reuters. The GHF system, Lazzarini argued, circumvents established humanitarian norms and risks using food as a weapon of population control.

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

UNWRA was compromised so the impartial party option has been abandoned.

It requires military to keep Hamas from stealing the aid. It is not realistic to expect an outside neutral military to take on this task. UN could not keep Hezbollah in check in Lebanon.

It seems Hamas are annoyed not just that they are being denied supplies for themselves and to sell to civilians but also because they need civilians to be starving to win the PR battle. Full stomachs will divert attention from the war so should we starve the people? Which is it? Allowing Hamas to hijack it isn't going to happen so forget what the UN says (which is very vague).

Regardless of what we argue here, the distribution will continue. It is just two days into it so let's see if it going well. Of course for some ProPals it will not go well unless Jews vacate the Levant (an unrealistic fantasy regardless of whether one believes they should be there or not).

[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago

UN aid teams plead for access amid reports Gazans shot collecting food

Your points read like propaganda, they're not a reflection of reality. I suggest you read the link above.

UNWRA was compromised

Doesn't matter that you think they're some cartoonish bad guy. Its not a spy agency, its an aid agency and it needs to work with Palestinian people in the country.

By Israel's conveniently umbrella-like 'assessments' of these compromised 'agents' half the US military would be classified Taliban because they farted in Kabul. They're people working in the place they're in, with the people they're with.

People don't get to both sides starvation or colllective punishment, or the myriad other crimes. Israel is starving the population of Gaza, simple. When/if we see Hamas doing it, you'll see my attitudes towards starvation of populations, and other crimes unchanged.

As i've said above, it doesn't matter Hamas' crimes, it doesn't mean Israel gets a free pass on their crimes, and withholding food aid, or using it as a method of coercion absolutely are ongoing crimes.

I've never seen any verified and independent evidence of this iron grip Hamas apparently has over this bombed out tent city. Read the linked article, who would have thought scarcity created by Israel has had spiralling and detrimental effects on the social cohesion of ~2 million men, women and children.

Unfortunately Israel attempts to block the worlds view of what is happening in Gaza, so their claims must be read down as suspicuous at best, but more likely lies, until one day their actions match their words.

Four rationing points, and this is for a free people of millions?

Aid distributed and closely guarded by their oppressors. Freely given, no coercion, you think?

Think about those questions as you watch this murderous State squeeze this population, and extinguish these people's lives.

[+] Seagoon_@aussie.zone -17 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Listen to the words he actually said

He said 'for Palestine to be free, from the river to the sea'.

That is a call for Islamic Imperialism, for the end of Israel and the killing of all Israelis including the 20% of Israelis who are Muslim.

[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

He qualified what he meant by that statement in his very next breath. And it very much wasn't a call for imperialism.

It doesn't do anyone well to ignore the clearly stated intentions behind somebody's words.

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You are right but it wasn't in the Crikey article of OP so go maybe easy on the commenter.

[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Wasn't it? Okay.

Its Seagoon_@aussie.zone, i hope they know, i know they're a good person.

Lots of AZ regulars know each other's views fairly well now. I's actually surprised this was seagoon's first comment in this thread tbh.

[–] Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is it Jewish imperialism when the Likud party in 1977 election manifesto said: "Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty."?

Or does that not count because whataboutism?

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org 0 points 1 week ago

It is a good point however Likud took 5 dud attempted coalitions before coming back in power. Bibi was about to go on trial for embezzlement. They were not that popular.

Unfortunately while Likud are still not popular, political pundits say the Left would be very unlikely to form a coalition government in the next election.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No, listen to all the words he said that Palestinian freedom needs to come, not at the expense of other people.

[–] sqgl@beehaw.org 0 points 1 week ago

Admittedly Crikey accidentally made it sound worse by taking it out of context but they may not have had access to the video (which has since been posted in this thread).

Nevertheless, a one-state solution cannot work because Hamas are not seeking what this guest is talking about.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 0 points 1 week ago

Nobody cares about Israel in the main stream opinion

Tell Israeli regime played it self 🤡