this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2023
413 points (96.0% liked)

World News

38987 readers
1832 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Israeli PM said to have turned down proposal in early talks and continues to take tough line

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] snek@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And yet nowhere did anyone claim otherswise 😕 nor does it improve the situation or change how Bibi is viewed now

(judging by how you phrased this comment)

[–] mwguy@infosec.pub -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The headline implies otherwise.

[–] snek@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The headline says nothing about the number nor implies anything.

This is why you need to read the rest of an article.

[–] mwguy@infosec.pub -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The hostages are a group that's assumed to be complete. That's like if someone stole your tires off your car and offered to give "your tires" back to you but only 2 of the 4. People assume they offered all the tires if the headline doesn't say otherwise.

If you include the partial hostage release, it essentially robs the story as it's clear why you wouldn't do a deal for some of the hostages. Making any deal for some of the hostages is stupid.

[–] snek@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think this is dumb. The title didn't say all hostages. The article didn't say all hostages. You invented this in your own head then decided to build an argument around it.

[–] mwguy@infosec.pub -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean future articles covering it have said things like "Ceasefire for $x hostages rejected" for exactly this reason.

[–] snek@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure but your case is still weak and honestly not even there.

[–] mwguy@infosec.pub -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"Ceasefire-for-hostages"

Would you assume that they're asking for a ceasefire in a percentage of the territory or the full territory?

[–] snek@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's not the truth. When you hear the title: "Netanyahu rejected ceasefire-for-hostages deal in Gaza, sources say"

Do you assume that it's 40% of the hostages for a ceasefire im 40% of the territory?

[–] snek@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think if you want the truth then stop being lazy and read the whole article instead of getting your information from misinterpreting headlines.

[–] mwguy@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I did. That's why I pointed out the misleading headline as a comment. Had I not read the article I would have assumed that it was a ceasefire in 100% of the territory for 100% of the Hostages that Israel turned down.

Just like you would have.

[–] snek@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just like you would have

Nope. But whatever you need to say to make yourself feel better.

[–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 11 months ago

If you'd have thought a different amount, you'd have said it when i pointed it out.