5 ms·

So you are right, we have records of all their work... so why would you post falsehoods... Based on their own work they were spying on an IDF encampment in the

So you are right, we have records of all their work... so why would you post falsehoods... Based on their own work they were spying on an IDF encampment in the area, its so sad that you can't even do the barest of research and present obviously misleading information and then have the audacity to accuse someone of being slanderous and disrespectful, you've been slandering Jews all day on multiple threads but get insulted when someone calls a spade a spade. Additionally, every single time so far that Israel was accused of killing a journalist its later come out the "journalist" was working with Hamas, Obviously the Hamas propaganda mouthpiece (AJ) isn't gonna publicize that when they have people like you who will happily swallow every single falsehood they peddle. Please consider getting your facts from this reality and not the false one you invent in your imagination, barring that simply sit down and stop spreading more hate.

runarberg 2y ago
> Based on their own work they were spying on an IDF encampment in the area Where is that work? Where did you read that? I haven’t seen it. I gave you a link to a story by an established media organization which outlines the story includes quotes from interviews, answers to questions, quotes other media organizations (including the NBC). Other media outlets seem to agree with al-Jazeera here. Here is a link from Washington post on the same story: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/19/gaza-journalists-killed-israel-al-jazeera-footage/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/19/gaza-journal... Could you extend me the courtesy and provide me with the source of where you got the information that Hamza Dahdouh and Mustafa Thuraya were spying on the IDF? I don’t even know where to begin looking for where you could read that. The IDF doesn’t even claim they were, instead stating they were shot by mistake (which is it self a questionable claim).
- nolongerthere 2y ago
  Calling AJ or WP established news organizations is like calling water dry. They're both propaganda arms of the same type of people who have never had a good thing to say about Jews. AJ in particular is literally owned by the very people harboring and funding Hamas. while WP is owned by and run by the same people who chant "from the river..." and talk about the Nakba and the innocent palestinians without any irony. These are people incapable of understanding the actual facts on the ground either because they've been totally brainwashed or like in your case, their jobs prevent them from accepting rational arguments.
  - Thiez 2y ago
    I think we can safely conclude that you have no source for your original claim of spying and are just resorting to throwing mud when people request evidence for your false claims. If you're trying to convince anyone, I would highly recommend more evidence and less name-calling and accusations of brainwashing. Have the day you deserve.
    - nolongerthere 2y ago
      I engaged with him elsewhere in the thread on this topic. All you safely assume is that he's a troll.
      - runarberg 2y ago
        After a lot of gish galloping and moving the goal post, you finally found a claim in one of my side notes which you could dispute with sources. This claim was merely a demonstration of media bias, an example of how true statements can be editorialized to adhere to propaganda. I was using this to agree with you that Al Jazeera was indeed spouting propaganda while still telling the truth. This was the number of victims to date. The BBC is just like Al Jazeera. A biased media outlet owned and funded by a partial state, which runs an independent news program. Qatar and, by extension, Al Jazeera is partial towards the Palestinian cause while the UK and, by extension, the BBC are partial towards Israel. Here are two articles by the news outlet partial towards Israel which dispute your disputing of the casualty numbers. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67347201 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67347201 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68387864 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68387864 Of course this was never engaging with my claims, rather it was finding a single claim (no matter how irrelevant) which you could dispute, win an argument over, and claim victory on the whole debate. If you wanted to engage with my true claims, you would provide me with a source on where you read that Hamza al-Dahdouh and Mustafa Thuraya were Hamas “spotters” spying on IDF encampment in the area. You would tell me which definition of Genocide you are using and explain how Israel’s conduct doesn’t fall under it. You would dispute the 85 page document filed by South Africa claiming genocide, not by ad-hominem stating that South Africa is an evil country, nor by claiming me citing it is an appeal to authority, but by reading the content, providing counter points and counter evidence of the report.

runarberg 2y ago

> Based on their own work they were spying on an IDF encampment in the area Where is that work? Where did you read that? I haven’t seen it. I gave you a link to a story by an established media organization which outlines the story includes quotes from interviews, answers to questions, quotes other media organizations (including the NBC). Other media outlets seem to agree with al-Jazeera here. Here is a link from Washington post on the same story: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/19/gaza-journalists-killed-israel-al-jazeera-footage/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/19/gaza-journal... Could you extend me the courtesy and provide me with the source of where you got the information that Hamza Dahdouh and Mustafa Thuraya were spying on the IDF? I don’t even know where to begin looking for where you could read that. The IDF doesn’t even claim they were, instead stating they were shot by mistake (which is it self a questionable claim).

nolongerthere 2y ago
Calling AJ or WP established news organizations is like calling water dry. They're both propaganda arms of the same type of people who have never had a good thing to say about Jews. AJ in particular is literally owned by the very people harboring and funding Hamas. while WP is owned by and run by the same people who chant "from the river..." and talk about the Nakba and the innocent palestinians without any irony. These are people incapable of understanding the actual facts on the ground either because they've been totally brainwashed or like in your case, their jobs prevent them from accepting rational arguments.
- Thiez 2y ago
  I think we can safely conclude that you have no source for your original claim of spying and are just resorting to throwing mud when people request evidence for your false claims. If you're trying to convince anyone, I would highly recommend more evidence and less name-calling and accusations of brainwashing. Have the day you deserve.
  - nolongerthere 2y ago
    I engaged with him elsewhere in the thread on this topic. All you safely assume is that he's a troll.
    - runarberg 2y ago
      After a lot of gish galloping and moving the goal post, you finally found a claim in one of my side notes which you could dispute with sources. This claim was merely a demonstration of media bias, an example of how true statements can be editorialized to adhere to propaganda. I was using this to agree with you that Al Jazeera was indeed spouting propaganda while still telling the truth. This was the number of victims to date. The BBC is just like Al Jazeera. A biased media outlet owned and funded by a partial state, which runs an independent news program. Qatar and, by extension, Al Jazeera is partial towards the Palestinian cause while the UK and, by extension, the BBC are partial towards Israel. Here are two articles by the news outlet partial towards Israel which dispute your disputing of the casualty numbers. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67347201 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67347201 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68387864 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68387864 Of course this was never engaging with my claims, rather it was finding a single claim (no matter how irrelevant) which you could dispute, win an argument over, and claim victory on the whole debate. If you wanted to engage with my true claims, you would provide me with a source on where you read that Hamza al-Dahdouh and Mustafa Thuraya were Hamas “spotters” spying on IDF encampment in the area. You would tell me which definition of Genocide you are using and explain how Israel’s conduct doesn’t fall under it. You would dispute the 85 page document filed by South Africa claiming genocide, not by ad-hominem stating that South Africa is an evil country, nor by claiming me citing it is an appeal to authority, but by reading the content, providing counter points and counter evidence of the report.