3 ms·

You're the one who is reading into what I'm saying... why not just take it at face value, I'm asking you to only take facts from the real world not some imagina

You're the one who is reading into what I'm saying... why not just take it at face value, I'm asking you to only take facts from the real world not some imaginary propaganda one. I would say that at this point it's becoming increasingly clear you're gaslighting and/or trolling and not arguing in good faith, well played. From the continued insistence on a false accusation of genocide against all Jews to the willful ignorance about the history of Israel. I guess I should have expected no less from someone with pronouns on their profile.

runarberg 2y ago
> I'm asking you to only take facts from the real world not some imaginary propaganda one > You continue to appeal to authority as if that proves everything. Nothing you've said in this entire discussion is based in reality. > anything can be true… doesn’t mean it actually is tho, it could be true we’re living on the sun… especially if we totally redefine the meaning of “living”, “true”, and “sun”. > Calling AJ or WP established news organizations is like calling water dry. They're both propaganda arms of the same type of people > 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. I honestly don’t know what you want me to do. If I make a claim which is widely believed, recited by international organizations as well as governments and media outlets. If I cite a news source, then you simply claim their claim is not base in reality either and/or they are just propaganda. A pedantic side note (to bring some curiosity back into this discussion): Water can indeed be dry. When water is frozen it is indeed dry, when you touch it, it melts the surface and it is the melted liquid water you touch which is wet. A second pedantic side note: AJ and WP (and every other media outlet) is off course propaganda. I never pretend otherwise. However they usually propagandize with editorializing, while still reporting truthfully, these are all true statements: “34 000 have been murdered by the Israeli military in an ongoing genocide in Gaza” “Israeli assaults have now killed at least 34 000 in Gaza” “Hamas controlled Gaza health ministry has now confirmed 34 000 lost their lives in Gaza” Even though they are propaganda, there is still a widely excepted true statement in there that we can use as source. If you want to dispute that, then you are going to have to provide some evidence, and honestly this is such a widely believed number I will probably not believe the evidence you would give against it.
- nolongerthere 2y ago
  You continue to spread misinformation and lies. all three quotes are false and do not reflect reality. A true statement would be: "Hamas, a genocidal organization that has often been found to make inaccurate or totally false statements is claiming without sufficient evidence or proof that 34,000 people have been killed in the ongoing war they started; the IDF confirms it has killed at least 15,000 Hamas or PIJ operatives". If you'd like a succinct headline that includes some information: "Hamas unverifiably claims more dead today, of ongoing war they initiated" "Over 16,000 civilians killed in Hamas-started war" (group those killed by Hamas, and those killed by IDF, only using data that has been independently verified, even Hamas only claims it can actually verify ~15k of the deaths[1]) You are of course guilty of innumerable logical fallacies throughout our discussion, your favorite is of course an appeal to authority, but here you attempt the bandwagon fallacy. Just because a bunch of people have been duped into believing something to be true, that doesn't make it so. You cannot wish truth into existence. To use that number at all without any context around the fact that it has been soundly debunked by multiple organizations who examined the claims [0] is irresponsible or more likely dishonestly malicious. Again the only conclusion I can come to is that you are intentionally trolling. [0]https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-he... [1]https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/media/7168?disposition=inline https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/media/7168?disposition=i...

runarberg 2y ago

> I'm asking you to only take facts from the real world not some imaginary propaganda one > You continue to appeal to authority as if that proves everything. Nothing you've said in this entire discussion is based in reality. > anything can be true… doesn’t mean it actually is tho, it could be true we’re living on the sun… especially if we totally redefine the meaning of “living”, “true”, and “sun”. > Calling AJ or WP established news organizations is like calling water dry. They're both propaganda arms of the same type of people > 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. I honestly don’t know what you want me to do. If I make a claim which is widely believed, recited by international organizations as well as governments and media outlets. If I cite a news source, then you simply claim their claim is not base in reality either and/or they are just propaganda. A pedantic side note (to bring some curiosity back into this discussion): Water can indeed be dry. When water is frozen it is indeed dry, when you touch it, it melts the surface and it is the melted liquid water you touch which is wet. A second pedantic side note: AJ and WP (and every other media outlet) is off course propaganda. I never pretend otherwise. However they usually propagandize with editorializing, while still reporting truthfully, these are all true statements: “34 000 have been murdered by the Israeli military in an ongoing genocide in Gaza” “Israeli assaults have now killed at least 34 000 in Gaza” “Hamas controlled Gaza health ministry has now confirmed 34 000 lost their lives in Gaza” Even though they are propaganda, there is still a widely excepted true statement in there that we can use as source. If you want to dispute that, then you are going to have to provide some evidence, and honestly this is such a widely believed number I will probably not believe the evidence you would give against it.

nolongerthere 2y ago
You continue to spread misinformation and lies. all three quotes are false and do not reflect reality. A true statement would be: "Hamas, a genocidal organization that has often been found to make inaccurate or totally false statements is claiming without sufficient evidence or proof that 34,000 people have been killed in the ongoing war they started; the IDF confirms it has killed at least 15,000 Hamas or PIJ operatives". If you'd like a succinct headline that includes some information: "Hamas unverifiably claims more dead today, of ongoing war they initiated" "Over 16,000 civilians killed in Hamas-started war" (group those killed by Hamas, and those killed by IDF, only using data that has been independently verified, even Hamas only claims it can actually verify ~15k of the deaths[1]) You are of course guilty of innumerable logical fallacies throughout our discussion, your favorite is of course an appeal to authority, but here you attempt the bandwagon fallacy. Just because a bunch of people have been duped into believing something to be true, that doesn't make it so. You cannot wish truth into existence. To use that number at all without any context around the fact that it has been soundly debunked by multiple organizations who examined the claims [0] is irresponsible or more likely dishonestly malicious. Again the only conclusion I can come to is that you are intentionally trolling. [0]https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-he... [1]https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/media/7168?disposition=inline https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/media/7168?disposition=i...