I find it's impossible to talk about this topic online, even in unrelated forms where I haven't seen the topic come up I've seen moderators suddenly decide to announce that they won't tolerate "antisemitism" and inexplicably the topic comes up where it never did before and their definition of antisemitism seems to be anything other than pro Israeli news and messages and pithy "those people" type comments.
HN is not much different, any story is flagged almost immediately. No discussion allowed.
Meanwhile Israel seems to bet actively trying to drive every last Gazan to have a reason to join some extremist group. I don't understand where they think this is going ...
I don't understand what's happening on either side, honestly - even as someone who pays fairly close attention, almost none of the reporting strikes me as reliable.
For example, this article is referencing another, published by "the Israeli-Palestinian outlet +972 Magazine". Right off the bat, I'm suspicious of their motives due to their location and its politics. The Guardian article couches statements as "reportedly" and gives an example of "[...] at least one case the unit misrepresented information [...]"
So I went to the source. It relies on unnamed sources. That's understandable, but this isn't an outlet that I'm familiar enough with to judge whether or not they're trustworthy.
The specific example the Guardian mentioned read like this in +972:
“They said: during the day he’s a journalist, at night he’s a platoon commander. Everyone was excited. But there was a chain of errors and corner-cutting.
“In the end, they realized he really was a journalist,” the source continued, and the journalist wasn’t targeted.
I... can't see anything to be upset about there. Israeli intelligence investigated someone, found insufficient evidence to believe they were guilty, and did not target that person. That sounds pretty reasonable to me.
This is not to say I trust pro-Israeli media, either. I don't. Articles I read there are similarly couched in "weasel words", making unsupported assertions and insinuations while carefully avoiding concrete statements.
T his articale includes ..... Al-Sharif wrote in his final message, posthumously published on his social media accounts. “I have lived through pain in all its details, tasted suffering and loss many times, yet I never once hesitated to convey the truth as it is, without distortion or falsification.”......
How would anyone know what is propaganda and what is not, from either side.
Both sides would be releasing propaganda.
plus lots misleading statements from both sides , I would say.
There is no independent media to speak of in Gaza, and journalists operate at either the direct command or the mercy of Hamas and other terrorist groups
What is definition of independent.
How many published media critical of HAMAS? How would we ever know they not working with Hamas. We do not.
Did any ever report on HAMAS killing some of the protestors.
I guess Hamas would have allowed it to shut Gaza's people up ?
13 comments
[ 0.15 ms ] story [ 45.3 ms ] threadI find it's impossible to talk about this topic online, even in unrelated forms where I haven't seen the topic come up I've seen moderators suddenly decide to announce that they won't tolerate "antisemitism" and inexplicably the topic comes up where it never did before and their definition of antisemitism seems to be anything other than pro Israeli news and messages and pithy "those people" type comments.
HN is not much different, any story is flagged almost immediately. No discussion allowed.
Meanwhile Israel seems to bet actively trying to drive every last Gazan to have a reason to join some extremist group. I don't understand where they think this is going ...
For example, this article is referencing another, published by "the Israeli-Palestinian outlet +972 Magazine". Right off the bat, I'm suspicious of their motives due to their location and its politics. The Guardian article couches statements as "reportedly" and gives an example of "[...] at least one case the unit misrepresented information [...]"
So I went to the source. It relies on unnamed sources. That's understandable, but this isn't an outlet that I'm familiar enough with to judge whether or not they're trustworthy.
The specific example the Guardian mentioned read like this in +972:
I... can't see anything to be upset about there. Israeli intelligence investigated someone, found insufficient evidence to believe they were guilty, and did not target that person. That sounds pretty reasonable to me.This is not to say I trust pro-Israeli media, either. I don't. Articles I read there are similarly couched in "weasel words", making unsupported assertions and insinuations while carefully avoiding concrete statements.
How unsurprising...
Did he ever post criticism of Hamas?
Some are embedded media, for example journalists which raided Israel together with Hamas on October 7th.
How would anyone know what is propaganda and what is not, from either side. Both sides would be releasing propaganda. plus lots misleading statements from both sides , I would say.