DW Turkish reported a massacre that took place in Melilla, one of Spain’s two autonomous cities in Morocco. The tone used in the article titled, “Human rights organizations demand investigation of tragedy in Melilla,” was no surprise. The article reports the events as a “stampede.”
This has always been the case and has not changed at all over the years. No matter what, even though it is clear that people trying to cross the border were shot at, 37 people died, and Moroccan police beat even injured people with batons, you use the terms “stampede” instead of “massacre” if that is what the circumstance requires. Everything is political in this cursed world. Especially if it is going to involve a European country.
If we asked them now, they would likely defend themselves saying, “We currently have no clear information regarding the event, and we do not want to implicate anyone until the matter is clarified.”
Don’t get me wrong. I would not consider this statement an excuse. Quite the contrary, such a defense can even be considered proof of the sincerity of the journalist who reported this news. Because even all sensitivities in this ugly world have become political now.
Death? Death is already a “political” matter for the world, both in practice and in theory. There is a massive mechanism in the world that decides which death is worth grieving over, which is worth accepting, and which deserves to lament over. Of course, it is the same mechanism that decides which death will have statistical significance alone.
The information we have is as follows: As many as 17or 23 or 27or 37 refugees died in the Melilla stampede. You would need to be a fool to think the “statistical ambiguity” here is due to the difference in the figures announced by different organizations.
For example, “It is reported that more than 100 people died in Russia’s bombing in Aleppo.” The phrase, “more than 100,” is entirely the result of a political frame based on statistical ambiguity. In other words, instead of reporting a certain figure like 151, which cannot be denied, it is, “More than 100, and the number of dead is expected to increase.” For a media that knows the details of the red line on the Russian soldier’s outfit, and defines reporting this as “journalistic success, and acting in accordance with the principles of news,” the ambiguity of “more than 100” is no problem at all. Of course, unless the dead are not among the group of “those whose death is considered acceptable.”
Naturally, the death of black refugees, who came from Africa and reached Melillais, is not “acceptable” but “statistical.”
It is also natural that if those who died are African, then it does not matter whether the figure is 17, 23, 27, or 37. They are African and they can die. It is not like they are going to hold a funeral for them. The color of their skin, the region in which they live, their poverty, et cetera guarantee their death will make it on the list of “insignificant deaths.”
Yet, if the scale of the “stampede” is beyond denial, then the “small piece of information method” will come to the rescue. Because there is no need to show unnecessary empathy towards refugees and make Spain upset.
Two bits of information were immediately put into circulation regarding the Melilla massacre. Two pieces of information to prevent us from showing empathy, identifying the events with terms such as “atrocity,” “massacre,” and “murder,” so that the modern world is not disturbed.
The first bit of information is: “It was stated that refugees were carrying bats and iron rods.”
So you understand? Those carrying the bats and iron rods are African refugees. What could be more natural than killing them? What if an African refugee crossing the border struck a Spanish police officer with their bat, and the poor man was injured? Right?
The second piece of information came from the Spanish prime minister: “The mafia is behind these refugees.”
Now, this is totally unacceptable. African refugees backed by the mafia demand to cross the border with the bats and iron rods in their hands. What else can be done but open fire on them? Should the mafia enter European territory? Is that what we want?
Yet, there is one plain truth that cannot be concealed by politics, by DW, BBC, France 24, or VOA, and that plain truth is the real “political” one.
This ridiculous hypocrisy cannot last much longer. Europe cannot continue its own presence at the cost of the lives of every other community in the world. Today, you will have “500 Africans with no hope left” reach your doors, the next day Paris streets will be a complete mess, and the next day, 1 million people will start slaughtering blue-eyed, blond-haired people on the streets with their bare hands.
If it goes on like this, the “privileged, superior, acceptable white people” theory that Europe and the U.S. developed and are determined to continue at all costs may be the end of the world.
As far as I can see, rage is spread across the world, and let it be known that rage is not political but destructive. All the world’s “cursed classes” will eventually find a way to set the world on fire. The world cannot carry on like this forever.
