Just yesterday - this read that the journo was from Al Jazeera.
90
Randomwhitelady21 day ago
+63
Al Jazeera reported this themselves.
63
stonertear1 day ago
+20
Why is Al Jazeera hiring terrorists? :/
20
Epyr1 day ago
+48
They actually have a pretty long history of that. Not convinced this specific one was the case but they have had many "journalists" who got their scoop by being members of the terrorist organizations they were reporting on
48
original_sh4rpie1 day ago
Do they? I can’t find a single source reporting that, only the IDF.
0
AntitheistArchangel1 day ago
+28
Several Al Jazeera “journalists” have been found to be active terrorists or on terrorist payrolls. Al Jazeera has also been found to deliberately publish false claims about Israel.
That said, its coverage of the war in Iran hasn’t been all that bad, mostly because Qatar doesn’t necessarily love Iran.
28
MarzyMartian1 day ago
+22
Always have been
22
sylfy1 day ago
+3
Why bother writing the pieces for them when you can just let them write it themselves?
3
3rdhouseonleft1 day ago
-2
because they themselves are funded by the same people who fund terrorists. Israel is garbage but so are the majority of muslim countries in that area as well.
-2
HarEr891 day ago
+5
That doesn't mean the he wasn't a Hamas terrorist.
5
TheBonerJam1 day ago
+120
Even with literal evidence that this guy was training with Hamas and moving RPGs + other weapons, people still think he’s a regular journalist
120
Ultra_Metal1 day ago
+40
Because much of the mainstream media is lying on behalf of terrorists and people are disinformed as a result.
40
Tegewaldt1 day ago
+1
Saviour complex of some kind maybe?
1
HarEr891 day ago
+32
Because many people on listnook are just dumb and hate Israel and somehow think the Islamists are the good guys.
32
renannmhreddit1 day ago
-14
The idea that Israel are "good guys" in every instance because they got a terrorist is absurd. Every action of every country and their armies should be scrutinised without blanket statements.
You didn't even care to name them Hezbollah, you just made a generalised statement of Islamists instead of extremists or terrorists. That's on the same level as Antisemitism, just towards another group, in this case a religious one that encompasses several countries and populations, many of which are not even involved in this conflict.
Viewing war and international politics as good guys vs bad guys is already completely distorted by itself.
-14
Seanspeed1 day ago
+18
>You didn't even care to name them Hezbollah, you just made a generalised statement of Islamists instead of extremists or terrorists.
Maybe you're not aware, but Islamism is not talking about any follower of Islam, but of a specific type of Muslim that desires a theocratic style government ruled by heavily conservative Islamic religious leaders. It's essentially an extremist viewpoint inherently, and these folks usually do support terrorist practices(which of course they dont view as terrorism themselves), even if they are not all individually part of a terrorist organization.
Hezbollah would not be able to operate they do without having general support of their communities. They are not some secret cell terrorist organization, they are are essentially a full on terrorist mini-government within southern Lebanon.
18
renannmhreddit1 day ago
-8
>Maybe you're not aware, but Islamism is not talking about any follower of Islam, but of a specific type of Muslim that desires a theocratic style government ruled by heavily conservative Islamic religious leaders.
No, I wasn't aware actually. That makes more sense now. "Islamismo" in Portuguese is just the religion, Islam, so I wasn't aware that the extremist version is called Islamism.
>Hezbollah would not be able to operate they do without having general support of their communities. They are not some secret cell terrorist organization, they are are essentially a full on terrorist mini-government within southern Lebanon.
Same could be said about criminal organizations and drug cartels in South America, they can operate very similarly. Doesn't mean that if someone came and invaded the country to destroy them and bombed these communities that they wouldn't be criticised.
Communities also support enemy armies in wars, and still, civilians are not supposed to be targeted. I think the same applies when we are dealing with paramilitary forces.
-8
Seanspeed1 day ago
+5
>Same could be said about criminal organizations and drug cartels in South America, they can operate very similarly. Doesn't mean that if someone came and invaded the country to destroy them and bombed these communities that they wouldn't be criticised.
I mean, to be clear, Israel did give explicit warning about what they were going to do and told people to get out ahead of time. This doesn't magically make everything ok by any means, but they aren't 'targeting civilians'. Granted, Netanyahu and co seem little concerned with whether civilians do get killed or not in their strikes, but at least in the case of Hezbollah, it would seem if civilians are remaining there in specific Hezbollah target locations, they are probably not exactly the wholesome types.
Strikes against Hezbollah leaders in Beirut and whatnot are harder to try and justify, of course. These are not getting advanced warnings, because the point is to ensure they are killing their specific Hezbollah targets, not give them a chance to escape.
5
TheBonerJam1 day ago
+7
We never said Israel are good guys in every instance and are absolved of all wrongdoing.
However Israel isn’t calling for the destruction of a religion or a state. Israel isn’t glorifying martyrdom and the killing of Muslims.
Israel isn’t praising terrorist attacks that r*** and pillage civilians. That’s why Hezbollah and the Islamic regime are evil and shouldn’t be given benefit of the doubt.
7
renannmhreddit1 day ago
-7
Another comment from the person I replied to
>Lebanon's military had more than a year to disarm Hebollah. They didn't. Hezbollah was dumb enough to join the war between Israel/US and Iran. Now Lebanon will pay the price.
It seems like a blanket justification that every collateral and all the suffering they cause to people not involved is justified because of their own government incapability or incompetency.
They are clearly implying that Israel are absolved from any damage they cause further on and that all of the destruction is on Lebanon itself.
-7
rhadenosbelisarius1 day ago
-5
You undermine your point a bit at the end, as representatives of the Israeli government have recently praised the Israeli troops seen raping prisoners on video and the govt has declined to prosecute them.
Also, attacks that damage civilian infrastructure and kill civilians are definitionally pillaging civilians, regardless of the intended target. Israel is definitely patting itself on the back even for its most recent strike, which fits neatly into that definition.
-5
TheBonerJam1 day ago
+6
Those people like Ben-Gvir and Smotrich are a disgrace and delegitimize the state of Israel. More than any attacks on civilian infrastructure.
I agree there’s a group of disgusting actors with too much power. They are actively being fought against in the Israeli Supreme Court and through bipartisan diplomatic battles.
The same cannot be said for Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran. If you disagree with their motive and don’t comply, you will die.
6
TheWhomItConcerns1 day ago
-1
>Israel isn’t glorifying martyrdom and the killing of Muslims.
Multiple prominent high ranking politicians within the Israeli government, like the Finance Minister and Minister of National Security, have advocated the "relocation" or ethnic cleansing of Gaza. There have also been multiple instances of Israeli soldiers facing zero repercussions for the illegal torture, r***, sexual abuse, and murder of Palestinian prisoners.
They may use more strategically savvy rhetoric and vernacular, like "voluntary migration", but based on the actions and tacit complacency of the Israeli government, it's pretty clear that they're at absolute *best* entirely ambivalent about the death of Arabs/Muslims, and would rather exercise that option than deal with even a modicum of inconvenience. You won't find a single one of my comments defending or even being sympathetic to any Islamic regime, but at this stage, there's also absolutely zero reason to give Israel the benefit of the doubt either.
Putting aside which is "worse" and instead focusing specifically on willingness to lie, omit, and obfuscate details of their actual intentions, there's no reason whatsoever to trust the reporting and claims of either side of these conflicts.
-1
ForcedEntry4201 day ago
Or we think neither are the good guys and that the US shouldn’t be sending its taxpayer’s money across the pond so Israel can bomb residential areas and commit ethnic cleaning.
Not a difficult concept no matter how much you act in bad faith. Nice bit of bigotry there with the Islamists statements. Yall just can’t help but go Mask Off. Disgusting.
0
SunMachiavelliTzu1 day ago
-3
Because the antisemitism is strong on listnook... and in the media... and then these same folks claim Israel 'owns the media'... you can't make this shit up...
-3
NirXY1 day ago
-4
It's not entirely antisemitism, not even close. some of it are propoganda accounts or stupid people falling for propoganda, mainly due to political camps.
-4
gabagoolwallah1 day ago
+3
I think there is a disconnect where people think that all media follows western principles and philosophies.
In our countries the media is usually owned by state actors (see Al Jazeera or anything affiliated with the IRGC). It's a mouthpiece rather than journalism.
In Lebanon you can shapeshift between being an avid Hezbollah supporter and an objective journalist by putting on a vest with the text "journalist" on it.
3
I_spread_love_butter1 day ago
-9
That happens when the source of the evidence has 0 credibility
-9
Sad_Explanation_64191 day ago
+93
Before the IDF came along, I would never have suspected so many journalists, doctors, nurses, ambulance drivers, grandmothers crossing the street, infants in incubators, displaced families in sodden tents and tens of thousands of children were "Hamas operatives"
93
SunMachiavelliTzu1 day ago
+19
Then you have not been paying attention to the operating methods of middle east terrorist organisations... this is nothing new and has no relation to the IDF... it may surprise you that terrorist organisations do not adhere to the rules of war...
19
vaticanhotline1 day ago
-18
Do you mean the IDF?
-18
SunMachiavelliTzu1 day ago
+1
Whatever... 'it is difficult to win an argument from a smart person, impossible to win from an idiot'
1
vaticanhotline1 day ago
-20
You said it, buddy.
-20
Seanspeed1 day ago
+1
"I know you are but what am I?"
1
rhadenosbelisarius1 day ago
-6
Saying this has no relation to the IDF is pretty wild.
I want to throw a couple numbers at you: Per capita mobilization numbers. In the modern era, the most mobilized country is North Korea, with ~5% of its population mobilized. There are many reasons for this(and reasons why mobilization never reaches WWII percentages), but NK is in a unique position to leverage its own population, with specific incentive to do so. 5% is an upper bound. The highly militarized US comes in at 0.7% for reference.
In a place like Lebanon, with divided internal political groups, it’s a good assumption that terror groups for any one faction can’t mobilize more than 1/3 the usual number, so somewhere between 0.2% and 1.6%.
So Israel might be dealing with a population that is generally sympathetic to its enemies, but only around 1% of that population can ever be considered legitimate targets.
With these percentages in mind, I hope you can recognize that Israeli bombing campaigns are killing a huge number civilians, at a rate completely inconsistent with any military threat. Are they all journalists and doctors? Probably not. Are many of them children? It certainly fits with the local demographics. Are more than 90% of them civilians?Yes.
The propagandistic definitions are almost irrelevant in the face of “Israel needs to stop dropping bombs on populated areas, period.”
-6
CatchPhraze1 day ago
+15
Hamas has no official military branch, but recruitment for it's "operations" starts at 12. Also armed conflict polls higher on the Palestinians side than the Israelis.
This not a war that's more popular on the IDFs side, and I do not fault them for winning it.
15
rhadenosbelisarius1 day ago
-3
This is true, but it doesn’t remove the mobilization restrictions for the fighting population nor the ratio of combatants to civilians. It’s about 1%(talking about Hezbollah in Lebanon rather than Hamas, assuming yours was a typo).
On average it is estimated that every 1 civilian death galvanizes 5.5 people to be willing to fight, and every combatant death galvanizes 0.5. To win hearts and minds Israel would need to kill 11 combatants for every civilian they kill. You just can’t get there with this type of air campaign. All this does is push the enmity out.
Your last line looks like it may have a typo but if I’ve take your point correctly, you should fault Israel for every civilian deaths it inflicts, as you should fault the enemies of Israel for every civilian death they inflict.
-3
CatchPhraze1 day ago
+5
People are responsible for their own choices and the bigotry of low expectations cannot exist in this situation, it's too costly for them.
The onus is not for Israel to ignore being attacked over and over. It's for Palestine to promote peaceful resolutions so they stop baiting themselves into a war they cannot win.
Also, war is less popular in Palestine during war, meaning that the data runs counter to your suggestions.
Ultimately regardless of how they feel, the only viable path forward for Palestine is peaceful coexistence, Israel has other options, so the onus is on Palestine to make the option that suits them best the most attractive.
5
Cobrastrikenana1 day ago
Children
0
Aggressive_Chair14701 day ago
+1
the more you know!
1
[deleted]1 day ago
-4
[removed]
-4
Archiver_test41 day ago
-11
fine. but be ready for something worse than 7 october whenever that might be. don't say "oh the poor israelis. they were innocent".
you cannot say this line when you consider an entire people "enemy", then YOU ARE THE ENEMY to them also.
-11
Investigator_Inside1 day ago
+19
Do you apply this logic to Israel as well?
19
Deltasims1 day ago
+15
>fine. but be ready for something worse than 7 october whenever that might be. don't say "oh the poor israelis. they were innocent".
Once again, I'll ask the same question I've been asking since october 2023: what should Israel have done instead?
* Accepted Hamas' proposed trade (hostages for emprisonned terrorists)? This would have emboldened Hamas to repeat the same scheme.
* Launched an unsupported infantry assault into Gaza to get good international PR by avoiding killing civilians? Great idea. I'm sure the Israeli electorate will be thrilled to see their conscripted sons and daughters return in caskets
>you cannot say this line when you consider an entire people "enemy", then YOU ARE THE ENEMY to them also.
Are you condoning October 7th? War crimes aren't just a numbers game, they are a matter of intent You can't wave aside Hamas' massacre of civilians because "they didn't kill that many of them" and then claim they will do worse in the future.
Do not confuse means and intent.
15
maorcules1 day ago
+12
For me. An attempted murderer is still a murderer, if hamas could, if they were not met with any form of resistance, there would be no single israeli alive in the october 7 invasion, it doesn’t matter how many they actually killed be it one person or 2000 their intent was “as many as physically possible” and if that’s not genocidel intent then i don’t know what is
12
Deltasims1 day ago
+6
Exactly! But as always, most people are (acting) naive and keep confusing means and intent.
6
maorcules1 day ago
+3
Yup. I also really love the good ol, the “6000 rockets lunched at israel on oct 7 don’t count cuz israel has iron dome and gaza doesn’t” so like… are you just straight up upset that less israelis died then they were supposed to?
3
3rdhouseonleft1 day ago
+9
isnt that the same sentiment in muslim countries where jews need to be removed / killed? Stop pretending this is a 1 country problem. just like all the people crying about civilian deaths in this war but always fail to mention the slew of missiles launched directly at urban cities as well as attacks by proxies. if these countries cant control their populations out of fear or ignorance then they have to understand they are also part of the problem.
9
EquivalentOne2411 day ago
+6
>fine. but be ready for something worse than 7 october whenever that might be. don't say "oh the poor israelis. they were innocent".
>you cannot say this line when you consider an entire people "enemy", then YOU ARE THE ENEMY to them also.
It's nothing new, they have been doing Oct 7 like massacres for 1400 years. It's in their holy book.
Only difference is Jews have started fighting back. This conflict was never about the land.
6
TrumpBad_UpvotesPls1 day ago
-2
Glad you got educated
-2
GaddockTeegFunPolice1 day ago
+46
I am sure the hospital they bombed yesterday in downtown Beirut was also filled with operatives
46
Seanspeed1 day ago
+6
Do you really think Israel is just indiscriminately bombing hospitals and whatnot? Y'all seem to believe in this cartoonishly evil view of Israel because it's what you want to believe. It's kind of disturbing. Israel's intelligence tends to be pretty damn good.
6
reformed_lurker_11 day ago
+3
Have you seen Gaza? Israel has no problem with bombing civilian infrastructure.
War crimes are second nature to the IDF.
3
GaddockTeegFunPolice1 day ago
+2
Ben Gvir and cronies wore golden noose pins when they voted to establish capital punishment for the inhabitans of palestine
2
Match-Tone1 day ago
-3
Terrorists of october 7*
-3
government_not_ok1 day ago
+1
Yes.
1
vaticanhotline1 day ago
-9
Either it was tunnels hiding Hamas fighters, or a secret manufacturing facility for rockets, or Hamas/Hezbollah accidentally did it themselves (they have phone records).
-9
gabagoolwallah1 day ago
Well if they were filled with operatives, does it change your opinion? If not your comment is meaningless.
0
Araminal1 day ago
+22
Is this the one where 4 journalists were killed, because one of them was supposedly a Hamas operative? Or is this a new one? The journalist killings all blur into one for me.
22
Naijan1 day ago
+11
What constitute a journalist in this day and age? I've seen the list, and it's basically 10 out of 250 that actually works for a credible newspaper, and I include al-jazeera has "credible" even though known hamas operatives have worked for al-jazeera, for example, the journalist that held several israelis hostage.
11
Shaggy27721 day ago
+6
Organized HAMAS cell disguised as 14 day care students eradicated by IDF. See page 7.
6
AthasDuneWalker1 day ago
+1
"Israeli legislator brutally maimed in the toe by Hamas-affiliated nightstand."
1
HarEr891 day ago
+8
A terrorist with a camera is still a terrorist
8
S3simulation1 day ago
-5
So a journalist was killed and the cover story is that he was a Hamas operative?
-5
Away_team421 day ago
+102
I mean is he not the same guy holding the rpg in the photo there..?
102
[deleted]1 day ago
-7
[deleted]
-7
maxofJupiter11 day ago
+27
Hes in a hamas nukba uniform. Did you even look at the pictures?
27
[deleted]1 day ago
-2
[deleted]
-2
Away_team421 day ago
+7
Prove it’s not him 🤷♀️
7
[deleted]1 day ago
-3
[deleted]
-3
CubertdeCube1 day ago
-56
Do we know those pictures are not AI? It's really not hard to make pictures these days. Also, why the f*** would they takes pictures of that..... it makes no sense lol.
-56
avroLancasterBPR11 day ago
+52
> why the f*** would they take pictures of that
wait till this guys finds out about the combat footage sublistnook
52
LongErza1 day ago
+28
I've got some bad news for you...Terrorists love being famous. Take October 7 for example. Everything is raw footage from Hamas' body c***.
28
Away_team421 day ago
+37
Why would a terrorist take pictures of themselves doing terrorist shit..? 🤔
37
Seanspeed1 day ago
+5
>Do we know those pictures are not AI?
We've been telling ourselves that even if there were pictures of Trump raping kids, Trump supporters would simply deny it by accusing it of being AI or fake news or whatever.
Here y'all are basically doing this exact same shit if you dont want to believe something.
And we really have to ask - why are you so eager to WANT to not believe a story like this? Because it makes Israel's actions look more justified? Why does that bother you so much? What does this say about how strong your biases have become in all this?
5
HarEr891 day ago
+1
Hamas makes no sense.
1
eagleshark1 day ago
-28
He's a journalist and these look like a series of journalistic photos taken by another press photographer. In the U.S. our Director of Homeland Security has done many similar photo series, showing herself holding weapons, etc. Those photos did not make her a soldier, and neither do these alone prove this man is a soldier.
Maybe Israel has irrefutable evidence of his crimes, I have no idea. But if Israel has photos of this man actually in real combat, they should have shown them as proof. They did not.....
-28
maorcules1 day ago
+17
Just moving the goalpost ha, he’s a journalist. Here’s footage of him in full Hamas/hezbolla gear in a hamas/hessbola training camp,
Welll what if he was just having fun ya know? Practiced armed combat for shits and giggles
17
Ultra_Metal1 day ago
+25
No, a terrorist was killed and Hamas' cover story was that he's a journalist.
25
S3simulation1 day ago
-21
That may very well be the case but unfortunately Israel has damaged its credibility to the point that it’s automatic to distrust whatever they say
-21
Seanspeed1 day ago
+13
Yet you guys buy Hamas government claims or those from Al Jazeera without blinking.
Bottom line is that you're simply just so radicalized into hating Israel, you have completely lost your ability to see things even remotely objectively.
13
HarEr891 day ago
+6
Yes, because when you are a Hamas terrorist you are not a real journalist. Or do you call ISIS terrorists with cameras also journalists?
6
[deleted]1 day ago
-19
[removed]
-19
Extension-Toe-70271 day ago
+6
Do you speak Hebrew?
6
Maleficent-Being-2381 day ago
-13
I reckon every child they rnd up killing is also a Hamas spokesperson?
-13
Hartman6191 day ago
-28
Can we just stop posting Israeli news ? It's clear as day what their objectives are. It's like posting Russian news about Ukrainain people, it's not trustworthy.
EDIT:this one account only posts from Israeli sources. Safe just to block it.
-28
JarJarBingChilling1 day ago
+20
Jpost is generally ranked highly on factuality by media bias checkers. More so than Al Jazeera - should we go ahead and stop posting Al Jazeera articles under this logic? I think not.
>This one account only posts from Israeli sources.
Yeah, including ynetnews which is ranked higher than Jpost *and* is generally anti-establishment/Netanyahu. Or is that irrelevant because it’s Israeli?
20
LongErza1 day ago
What's wrong with Israeli source news?
0
MrAce931 day ago
-19
God damn I didn't think hamas connections were this elaborate, not that I am surprised because according to idf hamas can recruit even a newborn child.
-19
Electrical-Staff7351 day ago
-12
Israel would never lie just like trump would never touch kids /s
-12
bssbronzie1 day ago
-24
"IDF Says"
-24
Desperides1 day ago
-17
Given the IDF's track record, why would anyone think dressing up like a journalist would keep them safe?
-17
zumera1 day ago
-11
Everyone is Hamas. /s
If this was a Ukrainian journalist, people would not be acting stupid in here.
-11
BigDaddyJongus1 day ago
-15
Wait a minute why would I believe the Jerusalem Post on who is and isn’t a Hamas operative?
-15
Seanspeed1 day ago
+6
Why would you believe reports on deaths by Gazan Health Ministry?
Y'all are just picking and choosing what to believe at this point based on your preferred narrative.
There's a picture of this guy with an RPG, ffs.
95 Comments