What a shit article. All she did was support the Palestinian cause and now they're putting shit in her mouth (no pun intended).
I don't like how the narrative is being forced in this conflict. They are clearing the way for something very sinister. We're about to witness a western sanctioned genocide. There's no way Israel is letting this opportunity go.
Something is going to happen soon in the West Bank too, I call it.
Look man, you can support Palestine, but telling the soldiers to turn their phones horizontally for better execution videos of civilians is a bit much.
Can someone please tell the freedom fighters in Palestine to flip their phones and film horizontal
— Mia K. (@miakhalifa) October 7, 2023
So... she didn't say that. Those words are very different.
Well, that's your choice to side with her on that. A lot of people are interpreting it as 1) a terrible time to try to be funny and 2) can easily be interpreted as support for Hamas, until she got a ton of backlash and it started to cost her money and then she 'totes didn't mean it that way, just a prank, for realz!'
It really is a choice to claim someone said something which they did not actually say at all.
Saying "they said x and I think they meant y" is entirely different from claiming "they said y" while knowing they in fact said x.
This is not controversial. Interpretations are fine, actively crafting disinformation is not.
That was her mistake - the comment was too vague, so the media jumped on it, skewed the narrative, took that skewed narrative and grossly exaggerated it further, and denounced her as pro-Hamas. It's obvious to see with even a little bit of reading and it's both frightening and disgusting.
Uhh, no. It was not her mistake that biased media outlets with an agenda say she said something while not actually reporting the exact thing she said.
It's bad journalism, but I don't think anyone expects reputable journalists to take this matter seriously.
Yeah, I see your point and I agree.
No, that one comment was not vague, the only active "fighters" to be called "freedom fighters" were Hamas.
There is no ambiguity, no vagueness.
There is absolutely ambiguity, it just doesn't suit your worldview (or similar) so you lie. It's your right to lie, but just know that anyone who isn't dogmatic knows you're lying.
Good ol' Dubya set the stage for this 20 years ago. Yer either fer us or yer agin us. Either you support every thing we do without question or you support terrorism.
The stage was set long before him. He was just one step in the plan.
Bruh. The stage was set by British cunts in the early 20th century.
you mean another Western sanctioned genocide?
China with Uyghurs has been going on for a while with no response from the west.
Saudi Arabia, UAE etc wih Yemen, the weapons were sold for ot by the west.
I'm not sure how you consider the Uyghurs a western sanctioned genocide, if anything it's only the western media that is drawing any attention to it whatsoever.
no sactions though, are there?
So... The west is the only one who gives a damn, but somehow it's their fault because they're not doing enough?
does the west give a damn though?
media reporting it I don't really qualify as giving a damn.
I would also wager that if I go out on the street here in slovakia and start asking people about it most people would look at me like an idiot and say, WTF is "Uyghurs"?
Slovakia is like, the most eastern of the West
The word sanction is an antonym of itself. You're disingenuously arguing semantics.
Sanction: noun Authoritative permission or approval that makes a course of action valid.
Sanction: noun The penalty for noncompliance with a law or legal order.
When people use the term "sanctioned genocide," they are almost assuredly using the first definition.
The Uyghur Genocide is not sanctioned by the west because, unlike Gaza and Yemen, this genocide doesn't have the support of most western governments.
The lack of economic sanctions against China does not make the Uyghur genocide a sanctioned one. Despite using the same word.
"Evil wins when good men do nothing" or is that notbhow the saying goes?
I am not arguing semantics, it's just my view that the lack of sanctions by the west for China for commiting genocide is about as good as sanctioning it.
I don't think that's a far fetched view, I think you are the one arguing semantics, or the exact meaning of words rather than realizing the lack of action against evil is about as good as an endorsement of it.
It's a sad commentary on the state of education nowadays that I also initially assumed that you were dumb enough to not know the difference between "sanctioned genocide" and "applying sanctions"
I've had enough "well regulated militia" arguments that it's scarred me
Of course not. We can't risk losing out on cheap Chinese crap for Prime Day!
There's a difference between just looking the other way and actively endorsing it.
The West is 100% backing Israel and they're not letting this chance go. Palestininans are going to be killed and deported, including Israeli Arabs. I call it. Something will happen in the West Bank soon or even in Israel itself and then Israel will come up with its own "final solution". We'll definitely see mass expulsions. The propaganda machine is already clearing the road ahead.
And when we see what we were actually endorsing we'll try to take back our support but it'll be too late. Their blood will be in our hands.
There's a difference between just looking the other way and actively endorsing it.
let's agree to disagree. I unfortunately have this nice example from history where they looked he other way, until they couldn't.
maybe you have heard of it it's like one of those rare sequels that's a bigger box office hot than the first installments WW something
What a shit article. All she did was support the Palestinian cause and now they're putting shit in her mouth (no pun intended).
I don't like how the narrative is being forced in this conflict. They are clearing the way for something very sinister. We're about to witness a western sanctioned genocide. There's no way Israel is letting this opportunity go.
Something is going to happen soon in the West Bank too, I call it.
Look man, you can support Palestine, but telling the soldiers to turn their phones horizontally for better execution videos of civilians is a bit much.
Is that what she said?
She did, but she removed it https://twitter.com/miakhalifa/status/1710663220619313397
So... she didn't say that. Those words are very different.
Well, that's your choice to side with her on that. A lot of people are interpreting it as 1) a terrible time to try to be funny and 2) can easily be interpreted as support for Hamas, until she got a ton of backlash and it started to cost her money and then she 'totes didn't mean it that way, just a prank, for realz!'
It really is a choice to claim someone said something which they did not actually say at all.
Saying "they said x and I think they meant y" is entirely different from claiming "they said y" while knowing they in fact said x.
This is not controversial. Interpretations are fine, actively crafting disinformation is not.
That was her mistake - the comment was too vague, so the media jumped on it, skewed the narrative, took that skewed narrative and grossly exaggerated it further, and denounced her as pro-Hamas. It's obvious to see with even a little bit of reading and it's both frightening and disgusting.
Uhh, no. It was not her mistake that biased media outlets with an agenda say she said something while not actually reporting the exact thing she said.
It's bad journalism, but I don't think anyone expects reputable journalists to take this matter seriously.
Yeah, I see your point and I agree.
No, that one comment was not vague, the only active "fighters" to be called "freedom fighters" were Hamas.
There is no ambiguity, no vagueness.
There is absolutely ambiguity, it just doesn't suit your worldview (or similar) so you lie. It's your right to lie, but just know that anyone who isn't dogmatic knows you're lying.
Hmm. That's actually not that bad.
It's nice to see original sources for things. Everyone likes to twist and distort reality to support their agenda.
Who are the Palestinian freedom fighters she's referring to?
Edit: She clarifies she means the civilians. It's an awful choice of wording, but I can give her the benefit of the doubt.
She said "Palestinian freedom fighters" - it's telling that when people read that they think she means Hamas.
Good ol' Dubya set the stage for this 20 years ago. Yer either fer us or yer agin us. Either you support every thing we do without question or you support terrorism.
The stage was set long before him. He was just one step in the plan.
Bruh. The stage was set by British cunts in the early 20th century.
you mean another Western sanctioned genocide?
China with Uyghurs has been going on for a while with no response from the west.
Saudi Arabia, UAE etc wih Yemen, the weapons were sold for ot by the west.
I'm not sure how you consider the Uyghurs a western sanctioned genocide, if anything it's only the western media that is drawing any attention to it whatsoever.
no sactions though, are there?
So... The west is the only one who gives a damn, but somehow it's their fault because they're not doing enough?
does the west give a damn though?
media reporting it I don't really qualify as giving a damn.
I would also wager that if I go out on the street here in slovakia and start asking people about it most people would look at me like an idiot and say, WTF is "Uyghurs"?
Slovakia is like, the most eastern of the West
The word sanction is an antonym of itself. You're disingenuously arguing semantics.
Sanction: noun Authoritative permission or approval that makes a course of action valid.
Sanction: noun The penalty for noncompliance with a law or legal order.
When people use the term "sanctioned genocide," they are almost assuredly using the first definition.
The Uyghur Genocide is not sanctioned by the west because, unlike Gaza and Yemen, this genocide doesn't have the support of most western governments.
The lack of economic sanctions against China does not make the Uyghur genocide a sanctioned one. Despite using the same word.
"Evil wins when good men do nothing" or is that notbhow the saying goes?
I am not arguing semantics, it's just my view that the lack of sanctions by the west for China for commiting genocide is about as good as sanctioning it.
I don't think that's a far fetched view, I think you are the one arguing semantics, or the exact meaning of words rather than realizing the lack of action against evil is about as good as an endorsement of it.
It's a sad commentary on the state of education nowadays that I also initially assumed that you were dumb enough to not know the difference between "sanctioned genocide" and "applying sanctions"
I've had enough "well regulated militia" arguments that it's scarred me
Of course not. We can't risk losing out on cheap Chinese crap for Prime Day!
There's a difference between just looking the other way and actively endorsing it.
The West is 100% backing Israel and they're not letting this chance go. Palestininans are going to be killed and deported, including Israeli Arabs. I call it. Something will happen in the West Bank soon or even in Israel itself and then Israel will come up with its own "final solution". We'll definitely see mass expulsions. The propaganda machine is already clearing the road ahead.
And when we see what we were actually endorsing we'll try to take back our support but it'll be too late. Their blood will be in our hands.
let's agree to disagree. I unfortunately have this nice example from history where they looked he other way, until they couldn't.
maybe you have heard of it it's like one of those rare sequels that's a bigger box office hot than the first installments WW something
That is enough of a sin though