The Movement for Settlement in Southern Lebanon said the settlement of the area will bring ‘true and stable security to northern Israel’
The Movement for Settlement in Southern Lebanon said the settlement of the area will bring ‘true and stable security to northern Israel’
Clearly, more violence is what will fix this. /s
Be sure to let me know when an #-page report is released and/or casualty projections are large enough that the price-tag isn’t worth it. Otherwise you’re using violence to justify violence and this cycle of death continues… to whose benefit again?
If you read the first three chapters of that report, you’ll have your answer
Israel has repeatedly chosen violence over peace. They’ve even assassinated the Principal Peace Negotiator multiple times, in order to continue delaying peace negotiations
The question was rhetorical. But no, I’m not reading your clearly biased copypasta.
Now you’re calling a Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor Report a ‘biased copypasta’ and completely disregarding the entire report.
Yes, I am. Didn’t get a paragraph in when these criticisms became obvious to me before I even checked. OFC I disregard the report. It is biased af.
Ooof, I’ve never seen someone use MBFC as a source before. That’s just sad.
Not as sad as what 42k dead? Keep on defending violence with violence though. Definitely not sad.
MBFC is a terrible way to consider whether a source is credible or not. But even if you look at the MBFC for Euro-Med, is shows no failed fact checks and a bias for human rights… If you consider that kind of bias worth disregarding, what does that say? You’ve given no genuine reason to ignore the Report.
Like I said, MBFC is not a good way to determine if a source is credible. Credibility is about facts and honest reporting, both of which are present in Euro-Med Monitor reporting. Nor do they omit context, the entire first two chapters of the report are about the context of the conflict. The MBFC page even contradicts itself by admitting the sources used by Euro-Med are also credible. Euro-Med and other Human Rights Organizations apply International Law equally to all parties. The amount of violations is obviously disproportionate when one side is committing genocide, that does not mean these organizations are ‘one-sided’ as MBFC wants to believe, they each have multiple reports condemning human rights violations by Hamas and other resistance organizations. You’re refusal to consider these reports when it comes to the human rights violations of Israel shows how one-sided your views of this conflict are.
I’ll make my own determination tyvm. And as already stated, I agree with their analysis. Find a less biased source.
Just a question do you get tired of being a genocide apologist or does it just come naturally to you?