In my school a fellow teacher proposed a minute of silence specifically for Gaza, but the Director rephrased it as a minute of silence "for all the victims of war in the world", which was welcomed by an applause and hastily approved. I was quite disappointed, and I wish I had the wits and courage to say it loud - but I just had a few seconds before they moved to the next topic and didn't have time to gather my thoughts. I think that this rephrased, generic definition for our initiative makes it completely pointless, and that it is also a cunning move to avoid controversy. Of course there are many conflicts around the world and of course all victims of violence deserve the same recognition. But the ongoing genocide in Gaza is different and should be addressed differently. First, it is not even a war, not even an asymmetrical counter insurgency operation, but rather a massacre of civilians. So even calling it "war" is misleading. Second, the great difference between this crisis and others around the world is the close political, economic and cultural relationship between our country and the state who is committing the genocide. This is what is outrageous about Gaza crisis and sets it apart from other wars or human rights violations around the world. This is why I think it would have deserved a specific and unambiguously dedicated minute of silence, or else if we don't want to pick a side or prefer to support Israel it would have been more honest to just have said so. What would you have done?
Submitted September 01, 2025 at 05:25AM by SupportSure6304 https://ift.tt/oViXSuY
