Al Jazeera denies rumor that hostage was held at employee’s home
Qatari news network Al Jazeera is stridently denying any link to Gaza-based journalist Abdallah Aljamal, amid unverified rumors that hostage Noa Argamani had been held at his home in central Gaza’s Nuseirat.
According to various rumors, some of which have been picked up by Hebrew-language media with varying levels of credulity, Argamani was held at the home of Dr. Ahmed Aljamal and his son Abdallah. They also claim that Abdallah is an employee of Al-Jazeera.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/al-jazeera-denies-rumor-that-hostage-was-held-at-employees-home/Open linkView original on slrpnk.net
Please stop flagging this thread as misinformation. Whether or not you believe that the Al Jazeera journalist had any responsibility here, the article is about them denying it.
That is not misinformation. They do deny it.
This is the articles source
How is it not?
Because Al Jazeera denies it. That is a fact. If you're saying that the Times is claiming Al Jazeera denies a rumor the Times started themselves, it does not make it any less factual that Al Jazeera denies it. And the article is about Al Jazeera denying it.
Times of Israel – Bias and Credibility
Bias Rating: Left-Center
Factual Reporting: High
Country: Israel
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rank: Moderate
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: High Credibility
MediaBiasFactCheck.com: About + Methodology
Ad Fontes Media Rating: N/A
By: Gianluca Pacchiani
Archive: 9 Jun 2024 19:06:44 UTC
Perfect example of how suspect MBFC is.
Times of Israel has such immense bias in favor of the IDF and the fascist apartheid regime, and such lax fact checking on the one subject people outside Israel read it for that it's not AT ALL credible and MBFC, being basically the hobby of a conservative Zionist, rates it left of center and highly factual 🤦
Eta examples from the "detailed report":
Both examples of absolutely atrocious levels of bias on the part of MBFC.
Fox news only being mixed rating is another big reason
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/fox-news-bias/
Fox News has a mixed score for factual reporting…
But a “Low Credibility Rating”
For the made up rating mbfc makes then puts no reasoning in their actual post.
MBFC tries to make itself credible then does shit like that where makes it fit what they want. like ranking higher pro Zionist publications
And they are subject to military censorship!
Want to see a headline from an Israeli source with a stronger bias?
Arutz Sheva: IDF confirms: Al Jazeera journalist was terrorist who held hostages
Their ratings from MBFC:
Arutz Sheva (Israel National News) – Bias and Credibility
Bias Rating: Right-Center
Factual Reporting: Mixed
Country: Israel
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: Moderate
Media Type: TV Station
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: Medium Credibility
The bias is strong in the case of TOI. This is extreme bordering on [email protected] territory.
And still MBFC rates them center right rather than far right and the factuality "mixed" rather than "low" or "very low".
My favorite is the only source listed in every article is just IDF, totally credible
It’s all relative. Want to see something from a further right Israeli source?
Israel Hayom:
Report: Former hostage Noa Argamani held captive in Al-Jazeera cameraman's house
Their ratings from MBFC:
Israel Hayom – Bias and Credibility
Bias Rating: Right
Factual Reporting: Mixed
Country: Israel
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: Moderate
Media Type: Newspaper
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: Medium Credibility
It's impossible! Because that would mean that Hamas is hiding among civilians, effectively using them civilians as shields...
Nobody is saying Hamas isn't using civilians as human shields, they're just saying that it doesn't justify bombing civilians...
فلسطين حرة 🇵🇸 Слава Україні 🇺🇦
Hamas isn’t using civilians as human shields. At least, not at scale. Israel and its western co-conspirators manufacture evidence to use to justify the genocide, but none of that evidence is concrete. It’s just intelligence people making baseless claims.
Unless you define "human shields" as "another person within a quarter mile".
Thanks for this, I've kind of stepped away from the news cycle as of recent to focus on school, etc. I genuinely was not aware of this.
I'm sure that would have been very easy for the well over 10,000 children who have been killed. Especially the babies.
I have said this multiple times and I will continue to say it- if you have to kill thousands of children in the name of protecting your nation, maybe your nation isn't worth protecting.
Ironically, nearly every major nation in existence has done this at some point in their history. The world is a fucked up place.
Non-ironically, maybe they aren't worth protecting either.
On one hand I can sympathize with that sentiment, on the other hand, I can’t imagine the horrors that would have occurred if the Axis powers had been allowed to conquer the world.
The Axis Powers that were also killing lots of children and thus not worth protecting?
How many terrorists have to be at the table? Itamar Ben-Gvir is a convicted terrorist. Should the cabinet adjourn every time a Kehanist or two shows up? Or does it require a 5/6 ratio before guilt by association kicks in?
If you have one nazi...
Going along with this thought…
Does the setting matter?
Like if I allow or invite one terrorist to live with me, is that the same as regularly attending a governmental meeting with one?
This is a war criminal and combatant. Not a civilian. I wonder if Hamas is going to also claim him as an innocent civilian killed by the IDF?
I mean, the Gaza Health Ministry already fails to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants when reporting casualties, so does it really matter what Hamas’ political or military branches claim?