The aftermath of Israeli strikes on Rafah
The aftermath of Israeli strikes on Rafah
At least 67 Palestinians killed in Israeli attacks on Gaza’s southern city of Rafah as strikes hit houses and mosques.
At least 67 Palestinians killed in Israeli attacks on Gaza’s southern city of Rafah as strikes hit houses and mosques.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told US broadcaster ABC News that the Rafah operation would continue until Hamas was eliminated, adding he would provide “safe passage” to civilians wishing to leave.
When pressed to specify where they might go, Netanyahu said: “You know, the areas that we’ve cleared north of Rafah, plenty of areas there. But, we are working out a detailed plan.”
“The place we completely ruined? You can go die there or something, I haven't really thought about it yet. We’ll bomb you in the meantime though and circle back to you on the safe place thing after”
If you can stomach it, I highly recommend giving this article a read. We hear a lot about the attacks, rarely the victims and aftermath.
23Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told US broadcaster ABC News that the Rafah operation would continue until
Hamasall Palestinianswasare eliminated, adding he would provide “safe passage” tociviliansabsolutely no one wishing to leave.Just accuratly translating Bibi for everyone.
11Reminds me of that Onion article: Israel Assures It Doing Everything Possible To Minimize Civilians
14
Ngl I feel like we should all kill ourselves for the fact that we are so helpless in this situation while innocent people who literally have not done anything continue to die just for some bullshit economic interests
Please do not take the kill part seriously, some lemmings get very emotional on words like these, I am just trying to portray how helpless we are, but keep trying, your and my voice matters!
2Remember to join BDS activities in your area and globally. It works.
7
Is this the price of the story that started with Israel announcing that they rescued two hostages? Or is this a different action?
1Why do I have a problem with Al-Jazerra? Here is a link to their MBFC which to be honest, is lower than a credible news source should be.
-8AJ is still a credible news source.
In review, Al Jazeera reports news with minimally loaded wording in their headlines and articles such as this: UN approves team to monitor ceasefire in Yemen’s port city, and Erdogan delays Syria operation, welcomes US troop withdrawal. Both of these articles are properly sourced from credible news agencies. When reporting USA news, there is minimal bias in reporting such as this: Pentagon chief Mattis quits, cites policy differences with Trump. In general, straight news reporting has a minimal bias; however, as a state-funded news agency, Al Jazeera is typically not critical of Qatar.
Al Jazeera also has an opinion page that exhibits significant bias against Israel. In this article, the author uses highly negative emotional words as evidenced by this quote: “Europe is increasingly sharing Israel’s racist approach to border security and adopting its deadly technologies.” This article, however, is properly sourced from credible media outlets. Another article, “How many more ways can Israel sentence Palestinians to death?” also uses loaded language that is negative toward Israel. Further, the opinion page does not favor US President Donald Trump through this article: ‘Barbed wire-plus‘: Borders know no love. In general, opinion pieces are routinely biased against Israel and right-wing ideologies.
And the two articles that failed fact checks were an article about India and an article about South Africa both in 2018.
Here's another metric for bias and credibility
https://adfontesmedia.com/al-jazeera-bias-and-reliability/
Ad Fontes Media rates Al Jazeera (website) in the Skews Left category of bias and as Reliable, Analysis/Fact Reporting in terms of reliability.
When it comes to Qatar, India, or Africa then AJ is not a good source to turn to.
7https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/al-jazeera/
This is the site the mods recommend.-8Just from a reading of 4 of your comments as a sample size, it is obvious you are an Anti-Israel propagandist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_controversies_and_criticism
Allegations of antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment
An article by Sherry Ricchiardi in the American Journalism Review (AJR) noted that critics of Al Jazeera have "assailed what they see as anti-Semitic, anti-American bias in the channel's news content."[4] Ricchiardi had earlier criticized an Al Jazeera report that Jewish employees of 9/11 targets were informed of the attacks beforehand, a report which was also criticized in an October 2001 New York Times editorial. She cited the former Al Jazeera weekly show Sharia and Life, hosted by Yusuf Qaradawi (an Egyptian cleric who "argues clearly and consistently that hatred of Israel and Jews is Islamically sanctioned").[5] The organization held a 2008 on-air birthday party for Samir Kuntar, a Lebanese terrorist convicted of killing four Israelis who was released in July of that year, later admitting that its coverage of Kuntar's release violated its code of ethics.[6] The organization's Beirut bureau chief said, "Brother Samir, we wish to celebrate your birthday with you" and called him a "pan-Arab hero."[7][8]Former Fox News conservative commentator Bill O'Reilly has called Al Jazeera "anti-Semitic" and "anti-American."[9] Dave Marash who resigned from his position saying his exit was due in part to an anti-American bias at the network that is little seen in the US. Marash said he felt that attitude more from British administrators than Arabs. He said there were other reasons for his exit and was proud of the network's coverage of issues south of the equator, but that he ultimately felt that it was not the right place for him.[10] He appeared on The O'Reilly Factor to challenge conservative host Bill O'Reilly's lambasting of Al Jazeera and said: "They certainly aren't anti-Semitic, but they are anti-Netanyahu and anti-Lieberman and anti-Israeli, right."[4][11] Marash had also described Al Jazeera as “the best news channel on Earth.”[12]On May 30, 2017, Al Jazeera's English-language account retweeted an Anti-Semitic meme.[13][14][unreliable source?] The network tweeted an apology after the incident, calling it a "mistake."[15][unreliable source?]In May 2019, AJ+ produced a video denying and minimizing the Holocaust. Al Jazeera said it had "swiftly deleted" the video, stating that it had "violated the editorial standards of the network". The video stated that "[the] number [of Jews murdered in the Holocaust] had been exaggerated and 'adopted by the Zionist movement', and that Israel is the 'biggest winner' from the genocide."[16]-9
Probably because the bias checker goes out of its way to mark them down.
Wapo has many more negatives and still get a higher rating.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-post/
Hell the Sun and Fox News are only mixed
6
- -9
You might be interested in these
To summarise those 4 articles…
The original allegations against the UNWRA were unsubstantiated by any evidence, and the last two times they found tunnels there has been suspicion cast on the authenticity of the finds due to signs of tampering and misinformation by IDF forces. Its hard to lend much credence to their third time claims about an “electrical supply room” tunnel.
Nor would any of that justify ~30,000 mostly women and children even if it were all true.
19
@Deceptichum are these the strikes where hostages were rescued ?
-13