"You've lost my respect," wrote one social media user, while another said: "Disappointed but then again expected nothing less from the likes of you!!"

Concluding her post, the Academy Award winner called for a ceasefire, writing: “Palestinian and Israeli lives—and the lives of all people globally—matter equally.” “Anything that can prevent civilian casualties and save lives most be done,” she said.

Although some followers praised the Maleficent star for her statement, which had received more than 777,000 likes at time of publishing, others slammed Jolie for refusing to choose sides.

“How did you manage to say so much without saying anything at all?” said Marcelina Maria.

  • @NewNewAccount
    -5•1 year ago

    Which side did she pick even? Different groups can interpret her statement differently, I imagine.

    • @SkyezOpen
      17•1 year ago

      Putting 5 bucks on zionists being mad at her for not supporting Israel’s right to genocide people

      • @kromemEnglish
        8•1 year ago

        Can I collect your $5?

        Because it looks like pretty much all of the comments in the article were the opposite take:

        “If you’re neutral in situations of injustice, you’ve chosen the side of the oppressor,” said lifeashira.

        “Call it what it is a genocide!!” said Afuhana Suria. “Disappointed but then again expected nothing less from the likes of you!!”

        “Interesting that even after 3 weeks, you are still choosing to acknowledge Israel before Palestine,” wrote KK.

        “You’ve lost my respect,” said A.T, while allyroza commented: “You can now stop calling yourself a humanitarian. Shame on you.”

        • @[email protected]
          -4•1 year ago

          We don’t know until the problem is solved, but people who have suggestions are saying more than this person.

          • TinyPizzaOP
            7•1 year ago

            Stopping civilian casualties seems like a valid first step, no?

              • TinyPizzaOP
                4•1 year ago

                Any sort of ceasefire or halt in the bombing campaign to allow for the stabilization of the civilian population and to give them time to find safer ground seems like the universal first step. The major criticism here is largely the civilian death toll, collective punishment by denying the basic fundamentals to sustain human life, and the inconsistent messaging that’s leading to more civilian deaths. Putting those lives over short term victory goals seems the smarter move for a lasting peace.

                • @[email protected]
                  -1•1 year ago

                  Yeah. If she said any of that then odds are she wouldn’t be criticized nearly as harshly.

                  She never said bombing should stop, because that would condemn Israel.

                  • TinyPizzaOP
                    2•1 year ago

                    she cannot condone “the innocent lives lost in bombing a civilian population in Gaza that has nowhere to go.”
                    “No access to food and water, possibility of evacuation, and not even the basic human right to cross a border to seek refuge,” she continued.
                    “The few aid trucks that are entering are a fraction of what is needed, and the bombings are causing desperate new humanitarian needs daily,” she said.
                    “The denial of aid, fuel and water is collectively punishing a people.”

                    I mean, that’s how this reads to me.