Israeli forces killed a pair of Palestinian men in the occupied West Bank after they appeared to surrender to troops, drawing Palestinian accusations that the men were executed “in cold blood.”
If you cannot provide a good source in your first post, screaming about others not believing you several posts later serves no purpose - you could have avoided that. If you want others to believe you, it’s your job to convince them. Name-calling won’t convince anyone.
Congratulations, I missed something - the article in “The New Arab” references the words of a medic and provides his name - dr Ghassan Abu Sittah. He is a reputable source.
This could have been your first post. Instead you posted a link to your own post on Lemmy, in which this was source no. 7 - which I, for some reason, missed.
You could have also posted a link to this article, but you have so far not done so.
Advise: learn to argue better. Drop the name-calling. Don’t call a person a propagandist if they aren’t. In the best case, you will stress yourself and the other person before getting to the core of information at hand. In a worse case, discussion will stop right there. Provide direct sources immediately. Prefer reputable sources. Don’t provide a wall of links, but a relevant link.
You just spent 3 days to convince me that Israel could be guilty of organ harvesting. I am convinced, they could be guilty. But you could have used your time better, and could have convinced me with 30 minutes by providing direct links to relevant sources. For example, the below link might have convinced me of the plausibility of your allegations in even less time, maybe a mere 15 minutes - because it’s from a reputable source (no background digging needed) and from a different period - not influenced by current events.
So, your claim is plausible. But don’t claim to know the outcome of a particular incident if you don’t know the outcome of a particular incident - people will think you’re lying and ask you to prove stuff.
In reality, we don’t currently know what happened to the remains of those 2 guys. What should matter more at this time - they were shot after surrendering.
If you cannot provide a good source in your first post, screaming about others not believing you several posts later serves no purpose - you could have avoided that. If you want others to believe you, it’s your job to convince them. Name-calling won’t convince anyone.
Congratulations, I missed something - the article in “The New Arab” references the words of a medic and provides his name - dr Ghassan Abu Sittah. He is a reputable source.
This could have been your first post. Instead you posted a link to your own post on Lemmy, in which this was source no. 7 - which I, for some reason, missed.
You could have also posted a link to this article, but you have so far not done so.
Advise: learn to argue better. Drop the name-calling. Don’t call a person a propagandist if they aren’t. In the best case, you will stress yourself and the other person before getting to the core of information at hand. In a worse case, discussion will stop right there. Provide direct sources immediately. Prefer reputable sources. Don’t provide a wall of links, but a relevant link.
You just spent 3 days to convince me that Israel could be guilty of organ harvesting. I am convinced, they could be guilty. But you could have used your time better, and could have convinced me with 30 minutes by providing direct links to relevant sources. For example, the below link might have convinced me of the plausibility of your allegations in even less time, maybe a mere 15 minutes - because it’s from a reputable source (no background digging needed) and from a different period - not influenced by current events.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/dec/21/israeli-pathologists-harvested-organs
So, your claim is plausible. But don’t claim to know the outcome of a particular incident if you don’t know the outcome of a particular incident - people will think you’re lying and ask you to prove stuff.
In reality, we don’t currently know what happened to the remains of those 2 guys. What should matter more at this time - they were shot after surrendering.