• تحريرها كلها ممكن@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        ostensibly in support of the Palestinians. Their campaign is an affront to the principle of freedom of navigation,

        Does the author really believes their own lies? both of their claims here are false. Is the author ignorant of how important Palestine is to Arabs? Would they say that Western support for Ukraine is ostensible?

        This is a blockade in response for a blockade on the Gaza Strip, and it is limited to Israeli ships and ships heading to Israeli ports.

          • تحريرها كلها ممكن@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            “stated or appearing to be true, but not necessarily so”

            I have zero doubt that Yemenis support Palestine as passionately as I do if not more. If I could seize Israeli ships I would too. Heck, I’d gladly have myself strapped to a missile and fired at Tel Aviv. Death to Israel.

            • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              I have always understood that to mean, and be used to mean, that in the absence of explicit statements confirming the conjecture, we have to rely on appearances. So in this context it would mean that while the Yemeni’s have not stated that the reason for their actions is to support Palestine, the evidence and obvious appearances lead us to this conclusion.

              My issue with the use of the term is that I believe the Houthis have stated as much, so the author sounds like he’s ignoring official statements, but it’s possible that no official statements have been made, and in that case “ostensible” would be appropriate here.