Ilunga Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 1 hour ago, Canuck Surfer said: I also post video's / stories from Lebanese, Syrian, British, a couple of Iranian, German & Czech sources. Australian, including the crappy SKY news. Fox re the right in the US, NBC Middle Left. Al JaZeera even though its a Palestinian friendly source. CBN & TBN, other notably Israeli focussed sites. By the way, Al Jazeera have some excellent articles, even where they also post many just to stir up their own local base in the Middle East. All sources cater to their markets. Often, even usually with information not reflecting my own view in totality. Specifically because there is still something to be learned. And because I see my own interest in this conflict as ''how to negotiate, our, way out?'' So my own opinion is one thing. The summary view of sources I post is then recognizing points either side have & perhaps could bend / give / take towards solutions in this conflict. I have spent time debating with yourself for 3 or 5 days? Also posting some solutions I Believe Israel should put on the table. Next few days I am going to concentrate on ideas for Palestinians to offer. Get your knuckle dusters out... See, personally I don't believe it's credible to post sources that don't have credibility. I can give ideas for Palestinians to offer. Peace, respect, compassion. You know why they probably find it hard to offer these things to the Isrealis, because the Isrealis have treated them like shit for the last 30 or so years. Wby do you believe there has always been a high level of support for the Palestinian cause in Western countries ? Because people know injustice when they see it. Israeli supporters bang on about Isreals right to exist ? What about the Palestinians right to have an independent community. A community where their land isn't consistently being taken from them. A community where Palestinians can have hope for a better future for your kids. I wonder how you would feel if you lived in the West Bank or Gaza. I can tell you how I would feel if I was an Israeli living in Isreal. I would be one of those Isrealis who comments in the comment section of Haaretz articles. Criticizing Isreal for being an arpartheid state. Criticizing the religious fundamentalist leaders of Isreal. Criticizing Isreals slide into a fascist theocracy. Read the comments section of an Haaretz article on this topics, that's how many Isrealis feel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 7 minutes ago, Ilunga said: See, personally I don't believe it's credible to post sources that don't have credibility. Lots of sources have credibility. Often hidden? They certainly represent views. Your fact checkers are biased; 100% truth! I argue it's up to readers to see through nuance. You pick yours, painfully obvious to some, as credible or not based on requirement for accountability by Israel? Condemn Hamas sure, but all obvious solutions presented by yourself relate to a desire to have Israel reigned for their crimes. Just above ^^ even, Hareetz's article is truth according to you. Not debatable? As it is also the opinion of many Israelis? I posted videos of people who grew up in Gaza under Hamas. Who said their viewpoints were dictated and enforced if you were to function in that society? You said it was hogwash, not from a reliable source. Yet a Palestinian from Gaza's opinion. It just happened to differ from your view of truth. Its very important to distinguish viewpoints. Yours is its not worth, even dumb to negotiating Israeli activities by discussing them with Palestinians; you said it yourself, that we should rely on the ICC and various other bodies designed to enforce legality. The rule of law? Truth... Read the last 5 to 10 pages! The number of times you quote your fact check on credibility of sources as to whether something is true or not? As much as your own credo is respect & consideration. How considerate is it to dismiss so many other viewpoints? Well there are hundreds of countries, different international bodies. This rule of law is just not enforceable. Jurisdiction is an issue? Further, all countries don't all sign on or adapt the same legislation? Be it the ICC, UN or other bodies. Sometimes you cannot even find the criminals. There are also Israeli sources which would hope terrorists were automatically brought to justice by said bodies? Just like you want them to stop Settlers. There is no international body, for example, that can walk in to Gaza & arrest Sinwar. So Israel's use of military force is justifiable? According to that opinion. Law itself is biased & only has so many ways to be enforced. So conflicts occasionally get decided by military victory? Certainly with military pressure a factor. Most by negotiation! Commonly with war crimes owned by both sides, in almost all cases... 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilunga Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 (edited) 2 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said: Lots of sources have credibility. Often hidden? They certainly represent views. Your fact checkers are biased; 100% truth! I argue it's up to readers to see through nuance. You pick yours, painfully obvious to some, as credible or not based on requirement for accountability by Israel? Condemn Hamas sure, but all obvious solutions presented by yourself relate to a desire to have Israel reigned for their crimes. Just above ^^ even, Hareetz's article is truth according to you. Not debatable? As it is also the opinion of many Israelis? I posted videos of people who grew up in Gaza under Hamas. Who said their viewpoints were dictated and enforced if you were to function in that society? You said it was hogwash, not from a reliable source. Yet a Palestinian from Gaza's opinion. It just happened to differ from your view of truth. Its very important to distinguish viewpoints. Yours is its not worth, even dumb to negotiating Israeli activities by discussing them with Palestinians; you said it yourself, that we should rely on the ICC and various other bodies designed to enforce legality. The rule of law? Truth... Read the last 5 to 10 pages! The number of times you quote your fact check on credibility of sources as to whether something is true or not? As much as your own credo is respect & consideration. How considerate is it to dismiss so many other viewpoints? Well there are hundreds of countries, different international bodies. This rule of law is just not enforceable. Jurisdiction is an issue? Further, all countries don't all sign on or adapt the same legislation? Be it the ICC, UN or other bodies. Sometimes you cannot even find the criminals. There are also Israeli sources which would hope terrorists were automatically brought to justice by said bodies? Just like you want them to stop Settlers. There is no international body, for example, that can walk in to Gaza & arrest Sinwar. So Israel's use of military force is justifiable? According to that opinion. Law itself is biased & only has so many ways to be enforced. So conflicts occasionally get decided by military victory? Certainly with military pressure a factor. Most by negotiation! Commonly with war crimes owned by both sides, in almost all cases... My fact check are biased....sure. They are known as credible fact checkers because they check facts CS. Most of the articles I post contain facts about people and events that have happened, or are happening. You can try and deny they are facts because they might not suit your narrative but that does not stop them being facts. When it is an " opinion piece " I state that. Let's look at the head of Shin Bets claim that Jewish terrorism is endangering Isreal. Sure that is his opinion, however his opinion is based on facts. The fact the Isreali/Jewish settlers terrorise Palestinians in the west bank. They kill them, they injure them. They drive them from their homes and take their land. Are you going to deny that Isreali/Jewish to settlers do this ? Theses facts are well documented. Now let's look at my assertion that Isreal uses Palestinians as human shields. Dated a few hours ago " How Isreali army uses Palestinians as human shields in Gaza " https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/14/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-military-human-shields.html https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-times/ High Factual Reporting High Credibility " Israeli Army uses Palestinian civilians to inspect potentially booby trapped tunnels in Gaza https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-08-13/ty-article-magazine/.premium/idf-uses-gazan-civilians-as-human-shields-to-inspect-potentially-booby-trapped-tunnels/00000191-4c84-d7fd-a7f5-7db6b99e0000 https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/haaretz/ High Factual Reporting High Credibility "Use of Palestinian as Human shields in violation of high court justice order " http://www.btselem.org/publications/summaries/200211_human_shield https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/btselem-bias/ You will note that that B'tselem does not get a high rating due to the Israeli government complaining they are biased against Isreal. Most human rights organisations are considered biased by those they accuse of human rights abuses. You will also note they have no failed fact checks. Now CS, if it was just one source, maybe, two, alright, but three credible sources all claim the same thing, it's true mate. They are US and Israeli sources. This is me critically thinking mate. I make an assertion and I back up that assertion with articles from credible sources that contain facts about events I am making an assertion about. Why are you bringing my personality into this. My " credo ". It is not disrespectful to point out that sources of information lack credibility. You can't just claim whatever you want, without backing up your claims with information from credible sources. It is also not disrespectful to dismiss sources that aren't credible. What you are basically saying is that I should respect bullshitters like trump. Or anyone that talks shit. Well sorry mate, if the sources you post have failed fact checks, then I have no respect for them. This does not mean that I don't respect you. Ergo I am not breaking my " credo ". I am certainly not making it about you as a person, who I have told, I hold a lot of respect for. You on the other hand are making it personal. Edited October 14 by Ilunga Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 3 hours ago, Ilunga said: They are known as credible fact checkers because they check facts CS. According to who? Not that it matters. Articles and their content are there to be evaluated. Posting a cred check saying Al JaZeera isn't entirely credible? Its just mind bogglingly too simple to hold weight. In the meantime; 300,000,000 people read the stuff & let it influence their point of view. My point was you better know what that point of view is. How people react sets momentum on everything from rage to empathy, to file under 'who cares', to catalyst for violence. From the same facts... Worse; when you fact check stuff people tell you to go stuff it. People don't like it when you tell people how to think! Why do you think Donald Trump is so popular? Its not personal. I just don't need you to tell me people get 'raped' in Israeli jails. Then insist I should change my opinion because you add a fact checker. I am aware what some soldiers do when they capture another who was killing his mates. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 300 Meters from border are trails and weapons caches. Tunnels 100M from UN base, which Israel is now asking the UN to vacate. All 20KM closer than the Litani River agreed no weapons zone via UN 1701. More sources; Spoiler WSJ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrayDog Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 5 hours ago, Ilunga said: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/btselem-bias/ You will note that that B'tselem does not get a high rating due to the Israeli government complaining they are biased against Isreal. Most human rights organisations are considered biased by those they accuse of human rights abuses. There is nowhere in the link that states that Israeli complaints are what lowered their rating, although it did note Israel complained. I would ask if you're going to say that you only use highly rated sources then you should only use highly rated sources, and not choose some because you think the rating was changed due to government complaints; the Trump administration complained a lot about the NYT but it didn't affect their rating. From the link (emphasis mine): "Overall, we rate B’Tselem Left Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that favor the left. We also rate them as mostly factual in reporting due to not always sourcing information." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 3 minutes ago, grover said: The source for this seems to be the israeli military.... The same trusted source with regards to the Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza being used as a Hamas command post, with the Hamas tunnels under it... I'm not saying this isn't true, just that the source lacks credibility. And is this supposed to justify the last four days of attacks on UNIFIL? Clearly the “peace keepers” in these areas are infested by terrorists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 I have a lot of respect for UNIFIL, but their mission does not include any ROE for this situation. For the safety of the mostly South Asian UN troops there, they need to evac. Take some RnR at Cypress and wait. The thin blue line doesn't work when hostilities are in fact going on. It works to keep the peace after hostilities. The first "I" in UNIFIL stands for Interim. It has been Interim since 78, I think from memory? Maybe 1980 at the lastest? they aren't allowed to shoot anyone, they clearly have not done their job well lately in keeping Hezbollah tunnel and infrastructure and weapons infiltration in the south of Lebanon down to a dull roar. LIke UNDOF in the GOlan: there was well worked out rules say, like 500 (not the real number) tanks from each side of the line allowed within a certain distance of the line between Israeli forces and Syrian forces: the UN troops literally counted every day and ensured any excess were pointed out, shamed and made to move. That kind of work can't be done in an open war: all they are doing there is putting UN soldiers lives at risk right now. Time to evac temporarily and prepare to keep the peace once more after hostilities are complete. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 6 minutes ago, grover said: If they clearly are, then it will be easy to prove. I think the Canadian Government disagrees with you, though. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/canada-alarmed-by-israeli-attacks-on-un-peacekeepers-in-lebanon/3358338 Where’s the citation for this very bias “news” article? The crazies in the ME have infested government and “peace keeping” forces. The crazies must be illuminated and they will be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 4 minutes ago, grover said: After citing the Al-Shifa hospital in a previous post, I thought I should back up that staement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_military_use_of_al-Shifa_hospital Would you like to live in one of these countries that is controlled by crazies? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 I have a hard time believing this one, but it isn't outside the realm of possibility. It was reported by locals to Al Jazeera with zero confirmation sources. The thing is there is a massive field of anti tank mines completely along that border with the exception of impassable mountain sides and one little gravel road running from an IDF checkpoint to a UN checkpoint to a Syrian Army checkpoint. Also, Quneitra has been nothing but rubble for 60 years. No building there left standing, just piles of rubble about a meter high at most. From memory anyways... So I think maybe Syria moved some equipment around and the freaked out locals misunderstood what they were seeing, or it is purely made up, OR if actually as reported: today is going to be a big day over there for a lot of folks. 5 hours ago - Local sources to Al Jazeera: Two Israeli tanks cross the dividing line with Syria and are positioned near the village of Kodna in the Quneitra countryside Just did up a quick map so you get the idea there: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 Interestingly Kudnaa is south of Qunaitra, and closer to the Dara region where ISIS was holding out against the Syrian Armed Forces for some time and even at one point hijacked a UN bus full of UN troops. I wonder if this is an operation against ISIS remnants? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 3 minutes ago, grover said: What does my crazies mean? slang. a sense of extreme unease, nervousness, or panic; extreme jitters. The crew was starting to get the crazies from being cooped up belowdecks for so long. I couldn't agree with you more, Alf. What does illuminated mean? Illuminated Mind means a Mind demonstrating Consciousness, Knowledge, Intellect, Reason, Discernment and Wisdom in the studies of the Humanities and the Nature of Man that has also recognized themselves as being “not of the world, but in the world”. Grover the Grammar Greyhound strikes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 2 hours ago, Alflives said: Would you like to live in one of these countries that is controlled by crazies? Give someone an hour to decide where you'd want your daughter to live in the ME. Do you even need an hour? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taxi Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 On 10/10/2024 at 7:08 PM, Ilunga said: I wish those that call the shots did. IMO, it's situations like this that the UN was created for. The UN was supposed to enforce a military free zone in southern Lebanon for the last 18 years. They stood back and let Iran arm Hezbollah with hundreds of thousands of rockets. All they UN has accomplished in the region is creating a system of human shields for Hezbollah. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilunga Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 9 hours ago, StrayDog said: There is nowhere in the link that states that Israeli complaints are what lowered their rating, although it did note Israel complained. I would ask if you're going to say that you only use highly rated sources then you should only use highly rated sources, and not choose some because you think the rating was changed due to government complaints; the Trump administration complained a lot about the NYT but it didn't affect their rating. From the link (emphasis mine): "Overall, we rate B’Tselem Left Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that favor the left. We also rate them as mostly factual in reporting due to not always sourcing information." For starters, that's what you take from that post. Rather than address the issues of Jewish terrorism in the west bank and the fact that the IDF uses Palestinians as human shields, which is a war crime you are more concerned about catching me out in a " gotcha " moment. I will admit I got it wrong in regards to why Media Bias had them rated as mostly factual. The important thing is that they don't have any failed fact checks. Didn't you want to mention that ? Here is a third source https://www.timesofisrael.com/report-idf-using-gazans-to-check-areas-that-may-be-booby-trapped-before-troops-enter/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/times-of-israel/ Do you have the courage to condemn the IDF for using Palestinians as human shields ? Do you have the courage to condemn Jewish/Israeli terrorism in the West Bank ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilunga Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 (edited) 12 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said: According to who? Not that it matters. Articles and their content are there to be evaluated. Posting a cred check saying Al JaZeera isn't entirely credible? Its just mind bogglingly too simple to hold weight. In the meantime; 300,000,000 people read the stuff & let it influence their point of view. My point was you better know what that point of view is. How people react sets momentum on everything from rage to empathy, to file under 'who cares', to catalyst for violence. From the same facts... Worse; when you fact check stuff people tell you to go stuff it. People don't like it when you tell people how to think! Why do you think Donald Trump is so popular? Its not personal. I just don't need you to tell me people get 'raped' in Israeli jails. Then insist I should change my opinion because you add a fact checker. I am aware what some soldiers do when they capture another who was killing his mates. What I am saying about Al Jazeera is that it is a biased source and that it has failed fact checks. Therefore I find it hard to trust anything it states. I don't trust it. I am not telling anyone what to think. I am not telling anyone to " stuff it ". Where have I ever insisted that you change your opinion. Please quote where I have stated that. How many times do I have to say the truth is important. I was watching a show about BS on the internet last night, and how people both post, and believe it. They want to believe bullshit because it's fits with their narrative. You want to know why trump is so popular ? They talked about this in the show. He was the first " political " figure that gave a " voice " to the bullshitters ". The people who believe, and post conspiracy theories on the Net. He is one of them. Up until he rose to prominence, those people weren't so keen to promote their bullshit. Now more than ever, the truth is important. I post information on this board to back up what I assert. I want people to know the information I am posting is the truth, that it's not bullshit, that it comes from credible sources. The only way to do this is to use a fact checking organisation. It is also a way to check the information that other people post. I want to ascertain if that information is truthful, not bullshit. Those that actually post links to back up what they assert. And seriously mate, you bring up the fact that Palestinians are mistreated in Isreali jails and you complain that you don't want your opinion changed ? You don't think that this wrong ? You post so many negative things about the Palestinians, and Arabs in general. I agree that many of the things that the Palestinians, the Iranians and other Arab people do are wrong. Their acts of terror, their treatment of women. Their treatment of their own people full stop. I have never told anyone what to do ever in my life. Again, I post information, I want people to know that information is truthful. What you do with that information is up to you. Edit. I was reading your post again. I just want to clarify something. Are you suggesting that when a soldier sees his mates killed, then there is justification for him to abuse and or torture the person/people who are responsible ? That it is understandable ? That we should not condemn that ? What about the Palestinian kids who have witnessed their parents being killed in Gaza over the last 12 months. Parents watching their kids being killed in Gaza over the last 12 months. Is it understandable or do they have any justification to kill/torture or abuse the people(Isreali soldiers) who have done this ? Edited October 14 by Ilunga Clarification Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilunga Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 1 hour ago, Taxi said: The UN was supposed to enforce a military free zone in southern Lebanon for the last 18 years. They stood back and let Iran arm Hezbollah with hundreds of thousands of rockets. All they UN has accomplished in the region is creating a system of human shields for Hezbollah. So that's how you rationalise the fact the the IDF attacked and killed UN peacekeepers. An Irish peacekeeper was killed and another injured in an attack by Hezbollah fighters. Both these sets of killings are crimes. All they have accomplished is in the region is create human shields ? More misinformation from you taxi. It is the primary economic driver in southern Lebanon. It provides a boost to the economy by buying supplies. It provides computers for classrooms, builds soccer's fields. They are far more than just a military presence in a country that is economically devastated. https://www.npr.org/2024/10/11/nx-s1-5150044/un-peacekeepers-lebanon-israel-united-nations Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted October 15 Share Posted October 15 7 hours ago, grover said: The source for this seems to be the israeli military.... The same trusted source with regards to the Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza being used as a Hamas command post, with the Hamas tunnels under it... I'm not saying this isn't true, just that the source lacks credibility. And is this supposed to justify the last four days of attacks on UNIFIL? 7 hours ago, grover said: The source for this seems to be the israeli military.... The same trusted source with regards to the Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza being used as a Hamas command post, with the Hamas tunnels under it... I'm not saying this isn't true, just that the source lacks credibility. And is this supposed to justify the last four days of attacks on UNIFIL? Well? It is Israel's argument! Or part of it. No I do not believe UN forces should be impacted except under extreme circumstances. See below. That said; I don't believe hype in headlines. Do I believe the tunnel is there, yes? I posted it & multiple other sources in the hidden spoilers. That said, Israeli sources, as u distrust, mentioned the same at Al Shifa hospital, same under Rafah & Khan Yunis. Which were widely debunked by ''Fact Checkers'' as biased sources. Funny thing? Once the area was cleared more and more video's surfaced of the IDF blowing up extensive tunnel networks. Complete with weapons bunkers, documents, communications; then a dead Israeli hostage recovered. Followed by the famous 1st Arabic Israeli guy who was rescued from a tunnel. Then the attempt to rescue 5 more who were even more famously shot in the back of the head. Israel brazenly thinking they could rescue everybody; Hamas explaining to the world who they are as well! My point is, it's now proven time and again these tunnels and tactic exist extensively. In this case it was only safe to take foreign press to one site, they say they found hundreds. I suspect you will see them being destroyed in the weeks that come as areas are cleared above? They have found so many tunnels, my own opinion is its kinda dumb that people question it. Just like its dumb that people question if Israelis have killed reporters. In making the post, I don't personally do so buying most rhetoric, or angle presented. Example I did not ''assume'' Israel was innocent about attacking Unifil because they displayed this tunnel. I just posted it, because at least the tunnel existing is plain to see as truth. I expect people like yourself to equate your own view of why it is there. Personally; it is war & when bad events are reported I almost always believe there is an element of truth! Regardless of side. To me actual UN forces should be treated like Israeli hostages. Israel has avoided getting a surrounded Sinwar; these people deserve the same protection. To answer your question as to it being a justified attack, thanks! I also believe the UN forces, while not responsible for confronting Hezbollah. Not their role as pointed out by @Optimist Prime. I do believe they should be surveilling and reporting these tunnels & issues LONG before these conflicts come up. Asking for white flag inspections, notifying the international press of potential command centers, weapons bunkers, tunnels, build ups. Before I get flagged for bias; I also think that is a role the UN should be playing in West Bank. Surveilling, yes Hamas bunkers but also surveil Israeli activities! Demand disclosure when you knock a building over, proof of legal purchases at legitimate market values before settlements. Investigate violence by Settlers, when a reporter or protester gets shot, when a riot in East Jerusalem takes place? The UN is embedded in one side. Not the other. Hires predominantly locals. I presume it's a mathematical certainty some are operators. But it does not justify all events. I used the Telegraph; whom I also used to quote that a Gaza hospital had been struck on this same page an hour or so earlier? Yet you questioned this, not the hospital? It shows people select which one 'might' be bulshit based on their own bias. As above, I presume there is an element of truth to either. Then a couple questions surface. To what extent are the crimes & impact, number one. How can sides be persuaded to make concessions and negotiate that it happens less, or not at all, number two? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrayDog Posted October 15 Share Posted October 15 4 hours ago, Ilunga said: For starters, that's what you take from that post. Rather than address the issues of Jewish terrorism in the west bank and the fact that the IDF uses Palestinians as human shields, which is a war crime you are more concerned about catching me out in a " gotcha " moment. I will admit I got it wrong in regards to why Media Bias had them rated as mostly factual. The important thing is that they don't have any failed fact checks. Didn't you want to mention that ? Here is a third source https://www.timesofisrael.com/report-idf-using-gazans-to-check-areas-that-may-be-booby-trapped-before-troops-enter/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/times-of-israel/ Do you have the courage to condemn the IDF for using Palestinians as human shields ? Do you have the courage to condemn Jewish/Israeli terrorism in the West Bank ? Nope. No gotcha moment. Just wanted to point out that you consistently state you will only use highly rated factual sources. If you want to compromise on that, then cool. But it makes you less objective and clinical than you claim. And I'm not getting dragged into one of your arguments that becomes about how righteous you are. I was here to let you know that you had presented a fact wrong. For someone who claims to be all about critical thought and arguments based solely on fact, that struck me odd. But sure, go ahead and call my courage into question because I pointed out you made an error. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilunga Posted October 15 Share Posted October 15 11 minutes ago, StrayDog said: Nope. No gotcha moment. Just wanted to point out that you consistently state you will only use highly rated factual sources. If you want to compromise on that, then cool. But it makes you less objective and clinical than you claim. And I'm not getting dragged into one of your arguments that becomes about how righteous you are. I was here to let you know that you had presented a fact wrong. For someone who claims to be all about critical thought and arguments based solely on fact, that struck me odd. But sure, go ahead and call my courage into question because I pointed out you made an error. You have to make it a personal attack. I have never claimed to be righteous, that's a label people like you give me to discredit me. Rather than actually dealing with the topic of the post. If I am righteous for pointing out that Isrealis commit terror acts in the west Bank, and the IDF use Palestinians as human shields, then you are righteous if you claim the same things about Hamas'. I had the courage to admit I was wrong. Have I ever claimed to be perfect ? No I haven't. I asked you if you had the courage to admit that Isrealis commit acts of terror in the west bank and use Palestinians as human shields. Going by your answer you obviously don't. So yes, your post and the follow up is all about a " gotcha " moment. You think that's more important that acts of terror and wars crimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.