How to avoid being deceived by the media.

[Daniyel]

Hi everyone,

I'm not sure if this thread fits here but I'll give it a go.
Here I'm going to share some insight on recognizing fake/false information that is unfortunately too common all across the media, mostly within the M.E. and US media, all tangled with propaganda techniques.


I've came across this picture recently which I believe to be an excellent example.

Here is another version of the original picture from Breaking: Israeli General Commanding ISIS Captured in Iraq | Veterans Today

Predetermine Facts -
"WHY Israel is behind ISIS ??" as any of the following claims were even suggesting that - the right question should be "IS Israel behind ISIS ??" instead of "WHY" as for predetermine the fact Israel is behind ISIS, lets assume the claims in this picture were true still it doesn't indicate Israel is behind ISIS, however, the origin of the picture doesn't share with us the actual evidence for that.
Accurate Numbers -
The Human conscious operates on raw information, memory, and emotion - upon reading this "military Number" - Re34356578765Az231434 one may think there is a hidden information behind it since its all accurate, so it may seem there is actually a secret code or formula for understanding it which is simply unknown to us yet, so that one may conclude its true, after all who'd be bother to cite its exact number, replace it with 10,000 and you'll tend to assume the previous one is the true while in fact both are false.
Matter of fact its all gibberish that was even written with the creators left hand as the numbers on the top of the keyboard are all polynomial if we break it down such as '343' - '545' - '787' and close to each other as '231434' - not as a copied data, but an act of self repetitive muscle memory, all created without a second thought, possibly during a rush.
Also note that it says 'Number' and not 'ID' while it includes letters.
Peacock Tails -
'Foreign Affairs High Representative' Is a big fancy title - that doesn't exists, that is maybe describes John Kerry's title 'Secretary of State' but there is no such thing as 'Foreign Affairs High Representative', neither 'Secretary General of "DESI" European Department for Security and Information Ambassador Dr' but a poor made website that was created for the purpose of misleading the masses.
Visual Stimulation -
Advertisement and Marketing trick for capturing the attention and deliver hidden message to the subconscious - "Yussi Elon Shahak COMMANDING ISIS terrorists" - next "captured by Iraqi popular army" and the conclusion "Now think WHY Israel is behind ISIS" is the first thing one may think of upon looking at this picture, a second read also leads to the same conclusion, which is also false, in addition the cold blue chilling "captured by Iraqi popular army" automatically connects with a relief, is it?
Content -
The content, poorly written, mention first 'Yussi' while in fact Israelis write 'Yossi' with an 'O' instead of 'U' (as used by Yiddish speaking Jews), mind the fact the Iraqi popular army dissolved in 1991, the officer in the picture is Benny Gantz
Covering Evidence -
Connecting to the false content - now you cannot verify the actual rank of the officer(that is not actually Brigadier) since there is a red circle covers the rank entirely. One cannot search the picture on image database since its also cropped and at least one year old by now, also a profile picture, and in the second one - blurred faces - even the man behind with the shades, that for strange reason was all exposed yet kept hidden.
Quick Sale trick -
The Human decision making system is based over emotions, most decisions are being made within 3-6 seconds, as we strive for information, all of what's written can be easily read by English reading audience within 3-6 seconds that obviously would skip the long 'military Number' by assuming its true and closing the sale as soon as possible, with the conclusion leaning on believe to what is said since its raw information and not a desperate convincing attempt.
Words Tonality and False Empowering
The Hidden empowerment in this text drives one to believe he/she is making their own mind, emotionally blinding with ego to a point of not being able to question the previously mentioned techniques, with predetermine facts this is neither a poll but a "are you still skeptical" tone, well failed.

I Hope you found it useful, and not for bad purposes.

 

[longknife]

First and foremost, one must consider the source of the "news",

 

[Coyote]

Hi everyone,

I'm not sure if this thread fits here but I'll give it a go.
Here I'm going to share some insight on recognizing fake/false information that is unfortunately too common all across the media, mostly within the M.E. and US media, all tangled with propaganda techniques.


I've came across this picture recently which I believe to be an excellent example.

Here is another version of the original picture from Breaking: Israeli General Commanding ISIS Captured in Iraq | Veterans Today

Predetermine Facts -
"WHY Israel is behind ISIS ??" as any of the following claims were even suggesting that - the right question should be "IS Israel behind ISIS ??" instead of "WHY" as for predetermine the fact Israel is behind ISIS, lets assume the claims in this picture were true still it doesn't indicate Israel is behind ISIS, however, the origin of the picture doesn't share with us the actual evidence for that.
Accurate Numbers -
The Human conscious operates on raw information, memory, and emotion - upon reading this "military Number" - Re34356578765Az231434 one may think there is a hidden information behind it since its all accurate, so it may seem there is actually a secret code or formula for understanding it which is simply unknown to us yet, so that one may conclude its true, after all who'd be bother to cite its exact number, replace it with 10,000 and you'll tend to assume the previous one is the true while in fact both are false.
Matter of fact its all gibberish that was even written with the creators left hand as the numbers on the top of the keyboard are all polynomial if we break it down such as '343' - '545' - '787' and close to each other as '231434' - not as a copied data, but an act of self repetitive muscle memory, all created without a second thought, possibly during a rush.
Also note that it says 'Number' and not 'ID' while it includes letters.
Peacock Tails -
'Foreign Affairs High Representative' Is a big fancy title - that doesn't exists, that is maybe describes John Kerry's title 'Secretary of State' but there is no such thing as 'Foreign Affairs High Representative', neither 'Secretary General of "DESI" European Department for Security and Information Ambassador Dr' but a poor made website that was created for the purpose of misleading the masses.
Visual Stimulation -
Advertisement and Marketing trick for capturing the attention and deliver hidden message to the subconscious - "Yussi Elon Shahak COMMANDING ISIS terrorists" - next "captured by Iraqi popular army" and the conclusion "Now think WHY Israel is behind ISIS" is the first thing one may think of upon looking at this picture, a second read also leads to the same conclusion, which is also false, in addition the cold blue chilling "captured by Iraqi popular army" automatically connects with a relief, is it?
Content -
The content, poorly written, mention first 'Yussi' while in fact Israelis write 'Yossi' with an 'O' instead of 'U' (as used by Yiddish speaking Jews), mind the fact the Iraqi popular army dissolved in 1991, the officer in the picture is Benny Gantz
Covering Evidence -
Connecting to the false content - now you cannot verify the actual rank of the officer(that is not actually Brigadier) since there is a red circle covers the rank entirely. One cannot search the picture on image database since its also cropped and at least one year old by now, also a profile picture, and in the second one - blurred faces - even the man behind with the shades, that for strange reason was all exposed yet kept hidden.
Quick Sale trick -
The Human decision making system is based over emotions, most decisions are being made within 3-6 seconds, as we strive for information, all of what's written can be easily read by English reading audience within 3-6 seconds that obviously would skip the long 'military Number' by assuming its true and closing the sale as soon as possible, with the conclusion leaning on believe to what is said since its raw information and not a desperate convincing attempt.
Words Tonality and False Empowering
The Hidden empowerment in this text drives one to believe he/she is making their own mind, emotionally blinding with ego to a point of not being able to question the previously mentioned techniques, with predetermine facts this is neither a poll but a "are you still skeptical" tone, well failed.

I Hope you found it useful, and not for bad purposes.

Excellent post And it applies to all sides of the conflict and...in any situation!

 

[Daniyel]

Hi everyone,

I'm not sure if this thread fits here but I'll give it a go.
Here I'm going to share some insight on recognizing fake/false information that is unfortunately too common all across the media, mostly within the M.E. and US media, all tangled with propaganda techniques.


I've came across this picture recently which I believe to be an excellent example.

Here is another version of the original picture from Breaking: Israeli General Commanding ISIS Captured in Iraq | Veterans Today

Predetermine Facts -
"WHY Israel is behind ISIS ??" as any of the following claims were even suggesting that - the right question should be "IS Israel behind ISIS ??" instead of "WHY" as for predetermine the fact Israel is behind ISIS, lets assume the claims in this picture were true still it doesn't indicate Israel is behind ISIS, however, the origin of the picture doesn't share with us the actual evidence for that.
Accurate Numbers -
The Human conscious operates on raw information, memory, and emotion - upon reading this "military Number" - Re34356578765Az231434 one may think there is a hidden information behind it since its all accurate, so it may seem there is actually a secret code or formula for understanding it which is simply unknown to us yet, so that one may conclude its true, after all who'd be bother to cite its exact number, replace it with 10,000 and you'll tend to assume the previous one is the true while in fact both are false.
Matter of fact its all gibberish that was even written with the creators left hand as the numbers on the top of the keyboard are all polynomial if we break it down such as '343' - '545' - '787' and close to each other as '231434' - not as a copied data, but an act of self repetitive muscle memory, all created without a second thought, possibly during a rush.
Also note that it says 'Number' and not 'ID' while it includes letters.
Peacock Tails -
'Foreign Affairs High Representative' Is a big fancy title - that doesn't exists, that is maybe describes John Kerry's title 'Secretary of State' but there is no such thing as 'Foreign Affairs High Representative', neither 'Secretary General of "DESI" European Department for Security and Information Ambassador Dr' but a poor made website that was created for the purpose of misleading the masses.
Visual Stimulation -
Advertisement and Marketing trick for capturing the attention and deliver hidden message to the subconscious - "Yussi Elon Shahak COMMANDING ISIS terrorists" - next "captured by Iraqi popular army" and the conclusion "Now think WHY Israel is behind ISIS" is the first thing one may think of upon looking at this picture, a second read also leads to the same conclusion, which is also false, in addition the cold blue chilling "captured by Iraqi popular army" automatically connects with a relief, is it?
Content -
The content, poorly written, mention first 'Yussi' while in fact Israelis write 'Yossi' with an 'O' instead of 'U' (as used by Yiddish speaking Jews), mind the fact the Iraqi popular army dissolved in 1991, the officer in the picture is Benny Gantz
Covering Evidence -
Connecting to the false content - now you cannot verify the actual rank of the officer(that is not actually Brigadier) since there is a red circle covers the rank entirely. One cannot search the picture on image database since its also cropped and at least one year old by now, also a profile picture, and in the second one - blurred faces - even the man behind with the shades, that for strange reason was all exposed yet kept hidden.
Quick Sale trick -
The Human decision making system is based over emotions, most decisions are being made within 3-6 seconds, as we strive for information, all of what's written can be easily read by English reading audience within 3-6 seconds that obviously would skip the long 'military Number' by assuming its true and closing the sale as soon as possible, with the conclusion leaning on believe to what is said since its raw information and not a desperate convincing attempt.
Words Tonality and False Empowering
The Hidden empowerment in this text drives one to believe he/she is making their own mind, emotionally blinding with ego to a point of not being able to question the previously mentioned techniques, with predetermine facts this is neither a poll but a "are you still skeptical" tone, well failed.

I Hope you found it useful, and not for bad purposes.

Excellent post And it applies to all sides of the conflict and...in any situation!

I was hoping to find somewhere else to post it, but here we are.. thanks.

 

[Coyote]

Hi everyone,

I'm not sure if this thread fits here but I'll give it a go.
Here I'm going to share some insight on recognizing fake/false information that is unfortunately too common all across the media, mostly within the M.E. and US media, all tangled with propaganda techniques.


I've came across this picture recently which I believe to be an excellent example.

Here is another version of the original picture from Breaking: Israeli General Commanding ISIS Captured in Iraq | Veterans Today

Predetermine Facts -
"WHY Israel is behind ISIS ??" as any of the following claims were even suggesting that - the right question should be "IS Israel behind ISIS ??" instead of "WHY" as for predetermine the fact Israel is behind ISIS, lets assume the claims in this picture were true still it doesn't indicate Israel is behind ISIS, however, the origin of the picture doesn't share with us the actual evidence for that.
Accurate Numbers -
The Human conscious operates on raw information, memory, and emotion - upon reading this "military Number" - Re34356578765Az231434 one may think there is a hidden information behind it since its all accurate, so it may seem there is actually a secret code or formula for understanding it which is simply unknown to us yet, so that one may conclude its true, after all who'd be bother to cite its exact number, replace it with 10,000 and you'll tend to assume the previous one is the true while in fact both are false.
Matter of fact its all gibberish that was even written with the creators left hand as the numbers on the top of the keyboard are all polynomial if we break it down such as '343' - '545' - '787' and close to each other as '231434' - not as a copied data, but an act of self repetitive muscle memory, all created without a second thought, possibly during a rush.
Also note that it says 'Number' and not 'ID' while it includes letters.
Peacock Tails -
'Foreign Affairs High Representative' Is a big fancy title - that doesn't exists, that is maybe describes John Kerry's title 'Secretary of State' but there is no such thing as 'Foreign Affairs High Representative', neither 'Secretary General of "DESI" European Department for Security and Information Ambassador Dr' but a poor made website that was created for the purpose of misleading the masses.
Visual Stimulation -
Advertisement and Marketing trick for capturing the attention and deliver hidden message to the subconscious - "Yussi Elon Shahak COMMANDING ISIS terrorists" - next "captured by Iraqi popular army" and the conclusion "Now think WHY Israel is behind ISIS" is the first thing one may think of upon looking at this picture, a second read also leads to the same conclusion, which is also false, in addition the cold blue chilling "captured by Iraqi popular army" automatically connects with a relief, is it?
Content -
The content, poorly written, mention first 'Yussi' while in fact Israelis write 'Yossi' with an 'O' instead of 'U' (as used by Yiddish speaking Jews), mind the fact the Iraqi popular army dissolved in 1991, the officer in the picture is Benny Gantz
Covering Evidence -
Connecting to the false content - now you cannot verify the actual rank of the officer(that is not actually Brigadier) since there is a red circle covers the rank entirely. One cannot search the picture on image database since its also cropped and at least one year old by now, also a profile picture, and in the second one - blurred faces - even the man behind with the shades, that for strange reason was all exposed yet kept hidden.
Quick Sale trick -
The Human decision making system is based over emotions, most decisions are being made within 3-6 seconds, as we strive for information, all of what's written can be easily read by English reading audience within 3-6 seconds that obviously would skip the long 'military Number' by assuming its true and closing the sale as soon as possible, with the conclusion leaning on believe to what is said since its raw information and not a desperate convincing attempt.
Words Tonality and False Empowering
The Hidden empowerment in this text drives one to believe he/she is making their own mind, emotionally blinding with ego to a point of not being able to question the previously mentioned techniques, with predetermine facts this is neither a poll but a "are you still skeptical" tone, well failed.

I Hope you found it useful, and not for bad purposes.

Excellent post And it applies to all sides of the conflict and...in any situation!

I was hoping to find somewhere else to post it, but here we are.. thanks.

Unfortunately there isn't a forum for "Critical Thinking"

 

[docmauser1]

Unfortunately there isn't a forum for "Critical Thinking"

"Eventually the whole world will be governed by Shari'ah and Muslims will have authority over China Russia USA etc This is the promise of Allah." Anjem Choudary.
That's some critical thinking, indeed.

 

[P F Tinmore]

First and foremost, one must consider the source of the "news",

If a report lumps everybody together as a group or calls names, it is not a legitimate source.

 

[docmauser1]

First and foremost, one must consider the source of the "news",

If a report lumps everybody together as a group or calls names, it is not a legitimate source.

Indeed, stereotyping crazed palistanian gunmen, for instance, is offensive, because each crazed palistanian gunman is an individual!

 

[Coyote]

First and foremost, one must consider the source of the "news",

If a report lumps everybody together as a group or calls names, it is not a legitimate source.

I agree - those are usually "red flags" when it comes to analyzing sources. Also the use of extremely inflammatory emotion laden words like "evil" "islamofascist" "zionazi" etc.

 

[Daniyel]

First and foremost, one must consider the source of the "news",

If a report lumps everybody together as a group or calls names, it is not a legitimate source.

I tend to disagree since the source of every claim is usually a follow up of some different event.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, longknife, et al,

As usual, you are trying to over simplify things.

First and foremost, one must consider the source of the "news",

If a report lumps everybody together as a group or calls names, it is not a legitimate source.

(COMMENT)

Seldom are the commentaries that use "global" terms "accurate." They may be a point of disagreement, but they are not a discriminator in terms of implied content. The Torah, Koran, and the Bible derive their legitimacy from the same ultimate and original divine source (the God of Abraham). Is the original source legitimate?

Many times we see the use of undefined terms, especially in this discussion group. Does this make the concept any less intuitive or legitimate?

Avoiding the Undefined by Underspecification
"We use the appeal of simplicity and an aversion to complexity in selecting a method for handling partial functions in logic. We conclude that avoiding the undefined by using underspecification is the preferred choice." Source: Cornell University​

In a forum such as this, there are a few basic concepts in the discussion that need to be understood; but are seldom used as reasons in a formal proof. We (collectively) seem to ask for "links" and "sources" that suggest or imply that by itself, a particular statement cannot stand alone. That the particular statement is not an original thought or could not have been independently derived from other sources of input. But this is not a true challenge to the statement. Just because I cannot prove (or provide a legitimate source) for the existence of a Supreme Being, does not mean there is no such thing as a Supreme Being or that I am not a legitimate source.

I often see pro-Palestinians in these discussion, suggest that the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) is not a "Legitimate Source;" just because they are guided by or support a regime of an opposing view. But that does not make them a de-legitimize them as a source. Just as I use the words, public statements and commentary of the Islamic Resistance Movement or the Palestinian Islamic Jihad as a source of information, does not de-legitimize them as a source.

Finally the "Lump Sum" concept and the practice of: "lumps everybody together as a group or calls names." Then there would virtually be no legitimate sources that meet this standard. At one time or another (probably more often than not), nearly every media outlet has used the terms: "the Americans" -- "the Palestinians" -- "the refugees" --- etc, to describe a disposition when in reality - the statement was made in its most simplistic form.

The statement that: "Palestinian political violence refers to acts of violence or terror undertaken to further the Palestinian cause."

:Nearly 89 percent of Palestinians support Hamas and other terrorists firing rockets from the Gaza Strip at Israeli civilians, according to a new poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion (PCPO)." Source: Poll: 89 Percent of Palestinians Support Terror Attacks on Israel, BY: Adam Kredo, August 27, 2014

POLL #191

Now, since it is against Customary International Humanitarian Law to allow (Rule 2) Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited; (Rule 9) Civilian objects are all objects that are not military objectives; and (Rule 12) Indiscriminate attacks; Are the Palestinians guilty of condoning (thereby supporting) “acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population”.--- Prohibited by Article 51(2) of Additional Protocol I, to the Fourth Geneva Convention? OR must we say that only 88.9% support the firing of rockets from Gaza at Israel; an act described by the Additional protocol as an act of spreading terror? How finely do these lumps have to be cut? And since they support the violation described as having the "purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population" is the statement that Palestinians support State Terror really name calling, or and accurate description as acknowledge by them (88.9% of them anyway)?

This is idea of "lumping them together" and "name calling" are frivolous complaints by Palestinians that want to portray themselves as something they are not --- and distancing themselves from the description of what they are.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Challenger]

P F Tinmore, longknife, et al,

As usual, you are trying to over simplify things.

First and foremost, one must consider the source of the "news",

If a report lumps everybody together as a group or calls names, it is not a legitimate source.

(COMMENT)

Seldom are the commentaries that use "global" terms "accurate." They may be a point of disagreement, but they are not a discriminator in terms of implied content. The Torah, Koran, and the Bible derive their legitimacy from the same ultimate and original divine source (the God of Abraham). Is the original source legitimate?

Many times we see the use of undefined terms, especially in this discussion group. Does this make the concept any less intuitive or legitimate?

Avoiding the Undefined by Underspecification
"We use the appeal of simplicity and an aversion to complexity in selecting a method for handling partial functions in logic. We conclude that avoiding the undefined by using underspecification is the preferred choice." Source: Cornell University​

In a forum such as this, there are a few basic concepts in the discussion that need to be understood; but are seldom used as reasons in a formal proof. We (collectively) seem to ask for "links" and "sources" that suggest or imply that by itself, a particular statement cannot stand alone. That the particular statement is not an original thought or could not have been independently derived from other sources of input. But this is not a true challenge to the statement. Just because I cannot prove (or provide a legitimate source) for the existence of a Supreme Being, does not mean there is no such thing as a Supreme Being or that I am not a legitimate source.

I often see pro-Palestinians in these discussion, suggest that the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) is not a "Legitimate Source;" just because they are guided by or support a regime of an opposing view. But that does not make them a de-legitimize them as a source. Just as I use the words, public statements and commentary of the Islamic Resistance Movement or the Palestinian Islamic Jihad as a source of information, does not de-legitimize them as a source.

Finally the "Lump Sum" concept and the practice of: "lumps everybody together as a group or calls names." Then there would virtually be no legitimate sources that meet this standard. At one time or another (probably more often than not), nearly every media outlet has used the terms: "the Americans" -- "the Palestinians" -- "the refugees" --- etc, to describe a disposition when in reality - the statement was made in its most simplistic form.

The statement that: "Palestinian political violence refers to acts of violence or terror undertaken to further the Palestinian cause."

:Nearly 89 percent of Palestinians support Hamas and other terrorists firing rockets from the Gaza Strip at Israeli civilians, according to a new poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion (PCPO)." Source: Poll: 89 Percent of Palestinians Support Terror Attacks on Israel, BY: Adam Kredo, August 27, 2014

POLL #191

View attachment 55393 ​

Now, since it is against Customary International Humanitarian Law to allow (Rule 2) Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited; (Rule 9) Civilian objects are all objects that are not military objectives; and (Rule 12) Indiscriminate attacks; Are the Palestinians guilty of condoning (thereby supporting) “acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population”.--- Prohibited by Article 51(2) of Additional Protocol I, to the Fourth Geneva Convention? OR must we say that only 88.9% support the firing of rockets from Gaza at Israel; an act described by the Additional protocol as an act of spreading terror? How finely do these lumps have to be cut? And since they support the violation described as having the "purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population" is the statement that Palestinians support State Terror really name calling, or and accurate description as acknowledge by them (88.9% of them anyway)?

This is idea of "lumping them together" and "name calling" are frivolous complaints by Palestinians that want to portray themselves as something they are not --- and distancing themselves from the description of what they are.

Most Respectfully,
R

As usual, you are trying to over simplify things...

Perhaps you might be trying to overcomplicate things? Polls are great fun much beloved by media pundits; one question I always ask looking at polling data, how large and representative was the sample?

89% of Palestinian HAMAS supporters probably wouldn't have any problem with HAMAS firing rockets into Israel, for example, also how representative of the Palestinian people is a sample of say 1000?

Remember, there are lies, damned lies, and...polling data (statistics).

 

[Challenger]

First and foremost, one must consider the source of the "news",

Correct! That's rule no. 1

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, longknife, et al,

As usual, you are trying to over simplify things.

First and foremost, one must consider the source of the "news",

If a report lumps everybody together as a group or calls names, it is not a legitimate source.

(COMMENT)

Seldom are the commentaries that use "global" terms "accurate." They may be a point of disagreement, but they are not a discriminator in terms of implied content. The Torah, Koran, and the Bible derive their legitimacy from the same ultimate and original divine source (the God of Abraham). Is the original source legitimate?

Many times we see the use of undefined terms, especially in this discussion group. Does this make the concept any less intuitive or legitimate?

Avoiding the Undefined by Underspecification
"We use the appeal of simplicity and an aversion to complexity in selecting a method for handling partial functions in logic. We conclude that avoiding the undefined by using underspecification is the preferred choice." Source: Cornell University​

In a forum such as this, there are a few basic concepts in the discussion that need to be understood; but are seldom used as reasons in a formal proof. We (collectively) seem to ask for "links" and "sources" that suggest or imply that by itself, a particular statement cannot stand alone. That the particular statement is not an original thought or could not have been independently derived from other sources of input. But this is not a true challenge to the statement. Just because I cannot prove (or provide a legitimate source) for the existence of a Supreme Being, does not mean there is no such thing as a Supreme Being or that I am not a legitimate source.

I often see pro-Palestinians in these discussion, suggest that the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) is not a "Legitimate Source;" just because they are guided by or support a regime of an opposing view. But that does not make them a de-legitimize them as a source. Just as I use the words, public statements and commentary of the Islamic Resistance Movement or the Palestinian Islamic Jihad as a source of information, does not de-legitimize them as a source.

Finally the "Lump Sum" concept and the practice of: "lumps everybody together as a group or calls names." Then there would virtually be no legitimate sources that meet this standard. At one time or another (probably more often than not), nearly every media outlet has used the terms: "the Americans" -- "the Palestinians" -- "the refugees" --- etc, to describe a disposition when in reality - the statement was made in its most simplistic form.

The statement that: "Palestinian political violence refers to acts of violence or terror undertaken to further the Palestinian cause."

:Nearly 89 percent of Palestinians support Hamas and other terrorists firing rockets from the Gaza Strip at Israeli civilians, according to a new poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion (PCPO)." Source: Poll: 89 Percent of Palestinians Support Terror Attacks on Israel, BY: Adam Kredo, August 27, 2014

POLL #191

View attachment 55393 ​

Now, since it is against Customary International Humanitarian Law to allow (Rule 2) Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited; (Rule 9) Civilian objects are all objects that are not military objectives; and (Rule 12) Indiscriminate attacks; Are the Palestinians guilty of condoning (thereby supporting) “acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population”.--- Prohibited by Article 51(2) of Additional Protocol I, to the Fourth Geneva Convention? OR must we say that only 88.9% support the firing of rockets from Gaza at Israel; an act described by the Additional protocol as an act of spreading terror? How finely do these lumps have to be cut? And since they support the violation described as having the "purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population" is the statement that Palestinians support State Terror really name calling, or and accurate description as acknowledge by them (88.9% of them anyway)?

This is idea of "lumping them together" and "name calling" are frivolous complaints by Palestinians that want to portray themselves as something they are not --- and distancing themselves from the description of what they are.

Most Respectfully,
R

The statement that: "Palestinian political violence refers to acts of violence or terror undertaken to further the Palestinian cause."​

Good link, thanks.

Palestinian nationalism is the national movement of the Palestinian people. It has roots in the national liberation movements emerging in the 19th and 20th centuries, calling for the rejection of colonialism and movements calling for national independence.[1] In opposition to pan-Arabism,[citation needed] Palestinian nationalism has emphasized Palestinian self-determination and has rejected the historic occupation of the Palestinian territories by Israel[2] and the non-domestic Arab rule by Egypt over the Gaza Strip and Jordan over the West Bank.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes --- I like to leave good links.

The statement that: "Palestinian political violence refers to acts of violence or terror undertaken to further the Palestinian cause."

Good link, thanks.

Palestinian nationalism is the national movement of the Palestinian people. It has roots in the national liberation movements emerging in the 19th and 20th centuries, calling for the rejection of colonialism and movements calling for national independence.[1] In opposition to pan-Arabism,[citation needed] Palestinian nationalism has emphasized Palestinian self-determination and has rejected the historic occupation of the Palestinian territories by Israel[2] and the non-domestic Arab rule by Egypt over the Gaza Strip and Jordan over the West Bank.[/QUOTE]
(COMMENT)

Don't read more into this than what is written.

This particular passage doesn't actually say anything that I've not said before. And it certainly does say anything pertaining to the use of threats or force.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes --- I like to leave good links.

The statement that: "Palestinian political violence refers to acts of violence or terror undertaken to further the Palestinian cause."

Good link, thanks.

Palestinian nationalism is the national movement of the Palestinian people. It has roots in the national liberation movements emerging in the 19th and 20th centuries, calling for the rejection of colonialism and movements calling for national independence.[1] In opposition to pan-Arabism,[citation needed] Palestinian nationalism has emphasized Palestinian self-determination and has rejected the historic occupation of the Palestinian territories by Israel[2] and the non-domestic Arab rule by Egypt over the Gaza Strip and Jordan over the West Bank.

(COMMENT)

Don't read more into this than what is written.

This particular passage doesn't actually say anything that I've not said before. And it certainly does say anything pertaining to the use of threats or force.

Most Respectfully,
R

Why do you consistently hold Israel's point of view?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This calls for an off-topic personal opinion.

Why do you consistently hold Israel's point of view?

(OFF-TOPIC)

Some views on which moral judgments are based and decisions are made --- hold relative to some particular viewpoint --- and --- that no viewpoint is so unique as to be preferred over any other viewpoint. It has long been held that different cultures often exhibit radically different moral values. Certainly we see this in the everyday differences between Islamic moral views and western moral views (not including these aspects which are radicalized).

I do not believe that the radicalized and hostile Arab Palestinians exercise the same set of values on life and pursue the same moral obligations towards their citizenry as do the western cultures; including Israel. There was a point in the early 1970's that I could have been sympathetic to either side. But since the 1972 Olympics, the Palestinians that hijacked a commercial airliner and killed an American - throwing his body onto the tarmac, when the Palestinians pirated a Cruise Ship and threw a crippled American overboard in his wheelchair, etc, etc, etc, I began to take a critical look at the Palestinians that called themselves victims. I began to look at the way they place a value on life (virtually none) and their duty to Jihad as a justification for suicide bombing, hijackings, piracy, improved explosives, and other forms of coercion of protected citizens. And today, while over time the countermeasures have reduced some of these types of attacks, the Palestinians of varying types and kinds, still think that it is proper to target civilians, fire rockets indiscriminately, and to use densely populated areas as a screen against military responses.

My view is not unique and is not necessarily preferred as the discriminator in identifying factions of Palestinians as NOT a people that have much in common cause with me. I see no redeeming qualities at all that warrant a change in my position relative to the worthiness of the Palestinians. The Palestinians are just as radicalized as other Islamic threat we could name. I advocate that the Arab Palestinians be held accountable to the same standards (Customary IHL) for all the various terrorist actions since 1949, as a just cause for an active defense against them.

Yes, I'm consistent.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This calls for an off-topic personal opinion.

Why do you consistently hold Israel's point of view?

(OFF-TOPIC)

Some views on which moral judgments are based and decisions are made --- hold relative to some particular viewpoint --- and --- that no viewpoint is so unique as to be preferred over any other viewpoint. It has long been held that different cultures often exhibit radically different moral values. Certainly we see this in the everyday differences between Islamic moral views and western moral views (not including these aspects which are radicalized).

I do not believe that the radicalized and hostile Arab Palestinians exercise the same set of values on life and pursue the same moral obligations towards their citizenry as do the western cultures; including Israel. There was a point in the early 1970's that I could have been sympathetic to either side. But since the 1972 Olympics, the Palestinians that hijacked a commercial airliner and killed an American - throwing his body onto the tarmac, when the Palestinians pirated a Cruise Ship and threw a crippled American overboard in his wheelchair, etc, etc, etc, I began to take a critical look at the Palestinians that called themselves victims. I began to look at the way they place a value on life (virtually none) and their duty to Jihad as a justification for suicide bombing, hijackings, piracy, improved explosives, and other forms of coercion of protected citizens. And today, while over time the countermeasures have reduced some of these types of attacks, the Palestinians of varying types and kinds, still think that it is proper to target civilians, fire rockets indiscriminately, and to use densely populated areas as a screen against military responses.

My view is not unique and is not necessarily preferred as the discriminator in identifying factions of Palestinians as NOT a people that have much in common cause with me. I see no redeeming qualities at all that warrant a change in my position relative to the worthiness of the Palestinians. The Palestinians are just as radicalized as other Islamic threat we could name. I advocate that the Arab Palestinians be held accountable to the same standards (Customary IHL) for all the various terrorist actions since 1949, as a just cause for an active defense against them.

Yes, I'm consistent.

Most Respectfully,
R

WOW are you racist and misinformed.

I suppose that you think that violence is created in a vacuum.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you can believe what you want.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This calls for an off-topic personal opinion.

Why do you consistently hold Israel's point of view?

(OFF-TOPIC)

Some views on which moral judgments are based and decisions are made --- hold relative to some particular viewpoint --- and --- that no viewpoint is so unique as to be preferred over any other viewpoint. It has long been held that different cultures often exhibit radically different moral values. Certainly we see this in the everyday differences between Islamic moral views and western moral views (not including these aspects which are radicalized).

I do not believe that the radicalized and hostile Arab Palestinians exercise the same set of values on life and pursue the same moral obligations towards their citizenry as do the western cultures; including Israel. There was a point in the early 1970's that I could have been sympathetic to either side. But since the 1972 Olympics, the Palestinians that hijacked a commercial airliner and killed an American - throwing his body onto the tarmac, when the Palestinians pirated a Cruise Ship and threw a crippled American overboard in his wheelchair, etc, etc, etc, I began to take a critical look at the Palestinians that called themselves victims. I began to look at the way they place a value on life (virtually none) and their duty to Jihad as a justification for suicide bombing, hijackings, piracy, improved explosives, and other forms of coercion of protected citizens. And today, while over time the countermeasures have reduced some of these types of attacks, the Palestinians of varying types and kinds, still think that it is proper to target civilians, fire rockets indiscriminately, and to use densely populated areas as a screen against military responses.

My view is not unique and is not necessarily preferred as the discriminator in identifying factions of Palestinians as NOT a people that have much in common cause with me. I see no redeeming qualities at all that warrant a change in my position relative to the worthiness of the Palestinians. The Palestinians are just as radicalized as other Islamic threat we could name. I advocate that the Arab Palestinians be held accountable to the same standards (Customary IHL) for all the various terrorist actions since 1949, as a just cause for an active defense against them.

Yes, I'm consistent.

Most Respectfully,
R

WOW are you racist and misinformed.

I suppose that you think that violence is created in a vacuum.

(COMMENT)

It is not racist to oppose radicalized Islamic terrorists and jihadists. I did not even mention a particular "race."

Nothing I've said here is based on misinformation.

Like I said, believe what you want. You asked the question and I gave an answer. I recommend that you don't play the race card all the time. It gets old.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you can believe what you want.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This calls for an off-topic personal opinion.

Why do you consistently hold Israel's point of view?

(OFF-TOPIC)

Some views on which moral judgments are based and decisions are made --- hold relative to some particular viewpoint --- and --- that no viewpoint is so unique as to be preferred over any other viewpoint. It has long been held that different cultures often exhibit radically different moral values. Certainly we see this in the everyday differences between Islamic moral views and western moral views (not including these aspects which are radicalized).

I do not believe that the radicalized and hostile Arab Palestinians exercise the same set of values on life and pursue the same moral obligations towards their citizenry as do the western cultures; including Israel. There was a point in the early 1970's that I could have been sympathetic to either side. But since the 1972 Olympics, the Palestinians that hijacked a commercial airliner and killed an American - throwing his body onto the tarmac, when the Palestinians pirated a Cruise Ship and threw a crippled American overboard in his wheelchair, etc, etc, etc, I began to take a critical look at the Palestinians that called themselves victims. I began to look at the way they place a value on life (virtually none) and their duty to Jihad as a justification for suicide bombing, hijackings, piracy, improved explosives, and other forms of coercion of protected citizens. And today, while over time the countermeasures have reduced some of these types of attacks, the Palestinians of varying types and kinds, still think that it is proper to target civilians, fire rockets indiscriminately, and to use densely populated areas as a screen against military responses.

My view is not unique and is not necessarily preferred as the discriminator in identifying factions of Palestinians as NOT a people that have much in common cause with me. I see no redeeming qualities at all that warrant a change in my position relative to the worthiness of the Palestinians. The Palestinians are just as radicalized as other Islamic threat we could name. I advocate that the Arab Palestinians be held accountable to the same standards (Customary IHL) for all the various terrorist actions since 1949, as a just cause for an active defense against them.

Yes, I'm consistent.

Most Respectfully,
R

WOW are you racist and misinformed.

I suppose that you think that violence is created in a vacuum.

(COMMENT)

It is not racist to oppose radicalized Islamic terrorists and jihadists. I did not even mention a particular "race."

Nothing I've said here is based on misinformation.

Like I said, believe what you want. You asked the question and I gave an answer. I recommend that you don't play the race card all the time. It gets old.

Most Respectfully,
R

You believe that Israel can do whatever it wants to the Palestinians and they are supposed to sit on their hands.

That is a racist view.