International Hamas launches surprise attack on Israel; Israel has declared a state of war. Vol. VII

[Chad R. Thundercock]

People like you were sent overseas to spread democracy and you are confused as to why they are mad.

I wonder why people get mad when people who want to wipe them out invade their country.

You are a disgusting human.

You're a massive hypocrite, you know that? To see you constantly rail against Western Civilization while enjoying the fruits of democracy in the comfort of your Australian home is high comedy.

You're a Uyghur who supports the CCP and defends their persecution of your people. Enough said.

 

[tastaylvr]

You're a massive hypocrite, you know that? To see you constantly rail against Western Civilization while enjoying the fruits of democracy in the comfort of your Australian home is high comedy.

You're a Uyghur who supports the CCP and defends their persecution of your people. Enough said.

What the fuck are you babbling on about now? Did you misquote me or someshit?

Why can’t I criticise American imperialism while living in Australia?

Hell what does your reply have to do with me criticising the extremism of the person I quoted?

It takes a special type of person to join the army in the west. You sit here and criticise these terrorists everyday for joining a group after their whole country gets destroyed under lies. They watch their whole family die but you’re telling me someone in the west joining the army to go across the world to kill farmers is normal?

If these terrorists are extremists then anyone joining the army in the west is ducking bat shit insane and needs to be locked up.

 

[Hog-train]

According to mediabiasfactcheck.com, Tablet Magazine has a higher factual reporting score than al-Jazeera.

According to them they're also right-center based and favors the pro-Israel nationalist right.

 

[Samjj]

According to them they're also right-center based and favors the pro-Israel nationalist right.

Ok and you repeatedly post unhinged propagandized sources like Finkelstein or comedians on podcasts to support your positions. Because somehow Kurt Metzger (a comedian) is a legitimate legal voice in your eyes in determining if there is a genocide or not in Gaza, but you can't accept a Jewish statistics professor's statistical analysis on the grounds that they don't agree with you politically. (Unrelated to their identity, right.)

You really don't have any due diligence in vetting your sources. You even repeatedly have misquoted your sources in these threads which has resulted in you accusing me of engaging of "Gotcha" arguments, but in actuality it's just fact checking and accountability.

You clearly have a double standard in how you pick and choose which information you deem reliable or not.

 

[ferrisjso]

Ok and you repeatedly post unhinged propagandized sources like Finkelstein or comedians on podcasts to support your positions. Because somehow Kurt Metzger (a comedian) is a legitimate legal voice in your eyes in determining if there is a genocide or not in Gaza, but you can't accept a Jewish statistics professor's statistical analysis on the grounds that they don't agree with you politically. (Unrelated to their identity, right.)

You really don't have any due diligence in vetting your sources. You even repeatedly have misquoted your sources in these threads which has resulted in you accusing me of engaging of "Gotcha" arguments, but in actuality it's just fact checking and accountability.

You clearly have a double standard in how you pick and choose which information you deem reliable or not.

Has it ever occured to you that leftists discriminate against people for their political views not their race or religion?

And yes people do have a double standard. Its called bias which is actually a natural part of the human experience that people who say they are unbiased(lawyers who swear they believe in stare decisis first among them) are lying about. Its us filtering information sources we do and don't trust based on past experiences. I trust Finklestein. I don't trust Tablet and people with a world view that signifigantly differs from mine. Does that mean said people are always wrong about every single thing thats every happened anywhere? No but I'm going to start with the assumption they are full of shit.

 

[Chad R. Thundercock]

According to them they're also right-center based and favors the pro-Israel nationalist right.

So what? Haaretz is a leftist Israeli media outlet. And every pro-Pally loves to quote them.

 

[kflo]

No the IDFs mistakes do not happen in war without intent. Hence why they have killed more journalists then the Nazis did.

People with a decent world view will prioritize stopping the right wing govt.

has nothing to do with the fact that anyone with a phone can be a journalist now. note not a single casualty has been attributed to hamas or other terror groups in gaza. not one.

Whats crazy is given how stable the casualty numbers have been in recent weeks by the Hamas ministry of health they've clearly been drastically undercounting because they have no way of knowing the real numbers. Like imagine seeing the numbers barely move for a month or two and thinking "damm Hamas must be overcounting!!"

lol. so hamas casualty numbers were accurate until a month or 2 ago, and now "they have no way of knowing the real numbers".......

 

[Hog-train]

So what? Haaretz is a leftist Israeli media outlet. And every pro-Pally loves to quote them.

I'm not demanding you believe Haaretz like these other posters. They're admonishing me because I'm not taking (at face value) an organization who's tagline is "We Believe in Israel." That's literally on their website.

I'm supposed to believe that is impartial about this war? Lmao - ok.

Ok and you repeatedly post unhinged propagandized sources like Finkelstein or comedians on podcasts to support your positions. Because somehow Kurt Metzger (a comedian) is a legitimate legal voice in your eyes in determining if there is a genocide or not in Gaza, but you can't accept a Jewish statistics professor's statistical analysis on the grounds that they don't agree with you politically. (Unrelated to their identity, right.)

You really don't have any due diligence in vetting your sources. You even repeatedly have misquoted your sources in these threads which has resulted in you accusing me of engaging of "Gotcha" arguments, but in actuality it's just fact checking and accountability.

You clearly have a double standard in how you pick and choose which information you deem reliable or not.

I'm posting interviews not as "proof" of anything. It's simply a debate on Piers Morgan for entertainment.

And I just did vet your source. It's from BICOM, a self reported "pro-Israel advocacy organization in the United Kingdom." Why in the world would I trust them to be impartial in matters of Gaza.

You clearly can't articulate or argue for your positions in your own words.

Explain to me, in your own words - what is the evidence the current death toll numbers are fabricated.

 

[Siver!]

Gazans increasingly back a two-state solution, as support for Hamas drops

Support for a two-state solution nearly doubled in Gaza, as fewer back “armed struggle” for an independent Palestinian state.

www.nbcnews.com

I think we should all keep up to date with the polls since the idea Hamas have 90 % support or whatever is not and never was true.

@DEVILsSON whether this does or does not represent a change in your eyes, this is the most up to date data.

 

[Samjj]

I'm not demanding you believe Haaretz like these other posters.



You clearly can't articulate or argue for your positions in your own words.

Explain to me, in your own words - what is the evidence the current death toll numbers are fabricated.

Sorry buddy, I know you have poor reading comprehension as demonstrated by your repeated misquoting of sources but I don’t need to summarize the article for you.
Feel free to point specific questions here or to other posters who can clarify any difficulties you might have.

 

[Hog-train]

Sorry buddy, I know you have poor reading comprehension as demonstrated by your repeated misquoting of sources but I don’t need to summarize the article for you.
Feel free to point specific questions here or to other posters who can clarify any difficulties you might have.

Stop replying to me this same bullshit. You seem incapable of articulating your position other than crying that I don't believe your article.

Point blank, I do not believe your source is impartial for the reasons I already explained.

If you can't even explain what is the evidence the current death toll numbers are fabricated, then there's no point in talking about it with you.

 

[kflo]

You just completely (and conveniently) ignored everything I just said about the ministry having a history of accuracy. And how Israel itself used their figures in the past.

lol.

hamas has been planning this attack and subsequent war for years. they also know they can't win a conventional war and their only chance at success is through the emotions of their supporters (and the nations that support them). and as the only source of casualty figures they have every incentive to slant them to their advantage. they have never had to report casualty figures like this before. and your only response to any evidence they aren't reliable is "well they were accepted in the past absent anything else".

 

[Samjj]

Stop replying to me this same bullshit. You seem incapable of articulating your position other than crying that I don't believe your article.

Point blank, I do not believe your source is impartial for the reasons I already explained.

If you can't even explain what is the evidence the current death toll numbers are fabricated, then there's no point in talking about it with you.

It’s a really simple explanation which doesn’t require complicated articulation. The numbers from a statistical perspective in their appearance, are an impossibility.

You are too lazy to have read that but I get reading is hard for you. I am also sorry that you don’t like being called out for being a hypocrite and being fact checked.

 

[kflo]

Stop replying to me this same bullshit. You seem incapable of articulating your position other than crying that I don't believe your article.

Point blank, I do not believe your source is impartial for the reasons I already explained.

If you can't even explain what is the evidence the current death toll numbers are fabricated, then there's no point in talking about it with you.

so the source is "impartial". what about the numbers? are the numbers "impartial"?

 

[iwannabeadored]

Same reason that I don’t trust RT.

State funded propaganda machines.

Why don’t you trust an independent Jewish publication? Why don’t you trust the analysis of a Jewish statistician and academic?

He is a sitting Professor of Statistics at UPenn. Why can’t you trust him?

Bahahahaahahah yeah he got you

 

[kflo]

Gazans increasingly back a two-state solution, as support for Hamas drops

Support for a two-state solution nearly doubled in Gaza, as fewer back “armed struggle” for an independent Palestinian state.

www.nbcnews.com

I think we should all keep up to date with the polls since the idea Hamas have 90 % support or whatever is not and never was true.

@DEVILsSON whether this does or does not represent a change in your eyes, this is the most up to date data.

• Finally, we asked the public about if it is for or against an idea of a long-term vision for the day after in which the US and an Arab coalition comprising Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan would develop a plan that would strengthen the PA, restore negotiations based on the two-state solution, and bring about an Arab-Israeli peace and normalization. Almost three quarters (73%) said it stands against the idea and only 23% said it stands for it. It is worth noting that the support for the idea among Gazans is much higher than it is among West Bankers, 36% and 14% respectively.+

• When asked if Hamas did commit these atrocities that are seen in these videos, the overwhelming majority (93%) said no, it did not, and only 5% said it did. As shown in the figure below, the belief that Hamas fighters have committed atrocities against civilians is higher among those who did watch videos showing such atrocities (17%) compared to those who did not (2%).
• As we did in our previous poll three months ago, we asked the respondents in this poll what they thought of Hamas’ decision to launch the October the 7th offensive. A vast majority of 71%, compared to 72% in December 2023, say it was correct. However, despite the stability of the total response, the findings do show significant change when looking at the two areas separately. As the figure below shows, the perception that the decision of the offensive was correct drops in the West Bank by 11 points and increases in the Gaza Strip by 14 points.

• When asked about their own preferences for the party that should be in control in the Gaza Strip after the war, 59% (64% in the West Bank and 52% in the Gaza Strip) selected Hamas; 13% selected the PA without President Abbas; 11% selected the PA with Abbas; 3% selected one or more Arab country;1% selected the UN, and 1% selected the Israeli army. Three months ago, we asked an identical question, but with a slightly different set of options to choose from. At that time, a similar percentage (60% in total; 75% in the West Bank and 38% in the Gaza Strip) selected Hamas as the party preferred by the respondents to control the Gaza Strip after the war. The change in the preferences of the Gazans, with a 14-point increase among them selecting Hamas today, is one of the most intriguing findings of the current poll. But it is consistent with the increase, indicated above, in the percentage of Gazans who think Hamas will win the current war. This is particularly interesting because the opposite happened in the West Bank, with the preference for Hamas dropping significantly by 11 points. Yet, this West Bank finding is consistent with the significant decrease by 14 points, also indicated above, in the percentage of West Bankers who think Hamas will win the war.

• When asked which political party or political trend they support, the largest percentage selected Hamas (34%), followed by Fatah (17%), while 11% selected other or third-party groups, and 37% said none of them or did not know.
• However, if new parliamentary elections were held today with the participation of all political forces that participated in the 2006 elections, only 64% say they would participate in them, 30% would vote for Hamas, 14% for Fatah, 6% for third parties, and 15% remain undecided.
• 49% (compared to 54% three months ago) believe that Hamas is the most deserving of representing and leading the Palestinian people today while 17% (compared to 13% three months ago) believe that Fateh under the leadership of Abbas is more deserving; 29% (compared to 26% three months ago) believe both are unworthy of representation and leadership. Six months ago, 27% said Hamas is the most deserving, 24% said Fateh led by Abbas is the most deserving, and 44% said both are unworthy of representation and leadership.
• 45% support and 52% oppose the idea of a two-state solution, which was presented to the public without providing details of the solution. Three months ago, support for this solution in a similar question stood at 34% and six months ago support stood at 32%. In the current poll, support for this solution came from Gaza Strip, a 27-point increase while remaining stable in the West Bank at 34%.
• We offered the public three methods to end the Israeli occupation and establish an independent state and asked it to select the most effective. 46% (51% in the West Bank and 39% in the Gaza Strip) selected “armed struggle;” 25% (27% in the West Bank and 23% in the Gaza Strip) selected negotiations; and 18% (12% in the West Bank and 27% in the Gaza Strip) selected popular non-violent resistance. As shown in the figure below, these findings indicate a 17-point drop in support for armed struggle; a 5-point rise in support for negotiations; and a 5-point rise in support for non-violence. The drop in three months in support for armed struggle comes equally from both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip

yeah, the future does not look great......

 

[Hog-train]

It’s a really simple explanation which doesn’t require complicated articulation. The numbers from a statistical perspective in their appearance, are an impossibility.

You are too lazy to have read that but I get reading is hard for you. I am also sorry that you don’t like being called out for being a hypocrite and being fact checked.

The numbers from the IDF's Hamas killed claims are the true statistical impossibility.

They're claiming nearly every single adult male killed is Hamas. Do you realize how retarded that claim is? How about collateral damage in the bombing? It didn't kill any innocent civilians that happen to be adult males? That claim is absurd and goes against just basic common sense.

You're the one being lazy. I asked you IN YOUR OWN words - what is the evidence the death tolls numbers are fake? Proof?

 

[kflo]

The numbers from the IDF's Hamas killed claims are the true statistical impossibility.

They're claiming nearly every single adult male killed is Hamas. Do you realize how retarded that claim is? How about collateral damage in the bombing? It didn't kill any innocent civilians that happen to be adult males? That claim is absurd.

You're the one being lazy. I asked you IN YOUR OWN words - what is the evidence the death tolls numbers are fake? Proof?

lol. your starting point is hamas numbers about how many men, women and children have been killed. do you even realize this? fuckin read the statistical report and come back. but you won't. because the only source you trust is hamas, even if their #'s don't make sense.

 

[Samjj]

The numbers from the IDF's Hamas killed claims are the true statistical impossibility.

They're claiming nearly every single adult male killed is Hamas. Do you realize how retarded that claim is? How about collateral damage in the bombing? It didn't kill any innocent civilians that happen to be adult males? That claim is absurd and goes against just basic common sense.

You're the one being lazy. I asked you IN YOUR OWN words - what is the evidence the death tolls numbers are fake? Proof?

Stop being lazy.
Read the article and stop crying and deflecting. Come back after.

Then you can in YOUR OWN WORDS articulate why the analysis is biased or flawed and stop copping out and refusing to engage in the premise.

"Derp, the statistician is a Zionist, and therefore his analysis is wrong" is not an argument.

 

[iwannabeadored]

lol.

hamas has been planning this attack and subsequent war for years. they also know they can't win a conventional war and their only chance at success is through the emotions of their supporters (and the nations that support them). and as the only source of casualty figures they have every incentive to slant them to their advantage. they have never had to report casualty figures like this before. and your only response to any evidence they aren't reliable is "well they were accepted in the past absent anything else".

Lmao you’re getting smacked. So you acknowledge they’ve never had to report figures like this before which is assuming what exactly? That they are lower than they’ve ever been or higher?