Amnesty Interational -- now we have an idea why they lie about Israel/Palestine

[Ford]

Let's see, which is worse?

Launching a murderous strike at a dense civilian terrorist area?

Or allegedly lying about casualties in a blog?

There...fixed. Remember that there's no such thing as a Palestinian "citizen" in this discussion. They're all murderous terrorists.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Let's see, which is worse?

Launching a murderous strike at a dense civilian area?

Or allegedly lying about casualties in a blog?

What's worse is the terrorists using the civilians as human shields.

 

[untermensche]

Let's see, which is worse?

Launching a murderous strike at a dense civilian area?

Or allegedly lying about casualties in a blog?

What's worse is the terrorists using the civilians as human shields.

Israel doesn't recognize the humanity of Palestinians. They have denied them, through force, basic human rights for decades. They can't be used as human shields from Israeli murderous violence by anyone.

 

[laughing dog]

Still waiting. Until LP can provide an explanation, the OP looks like another one of his promotions of a canard.

You're not going to accept the source but look back through that blog. He's been demonstrating repeated lies about the status of casualties in Gaza.

A blogger makes unsubstantiated claims about something that is not related to your alleged explanation of the allegation of why Human Rights lies about Israel/Palestine. So, your claim is still in the canard category until you can come up with an explanation of why this shows that HR lies about Israel/Palestine.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're not going to accept the source but look back through that blog. He's been demonstrating repeated lies about the status of casualties in Gaza.

A blogger makes unsubstantiated claims about something that is not related to your alleged explanation of the allegation of why Human Rights lies about Israel/Palestine. So, your claim is still in the canard category until you can come up with an explanation of why this shows that HR lies about Israel/Palestine.

If they were unsubstantiated Amnesty International would rebut them rather than say the facts he's pointing out don't matter.

In recent weeks he's been pointing out names that were identified as terrorists by B'tselem yet are called civilian in their stupid app. It's a simple case of cross-checking AIs app vs the sources on which it's based.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

A blogger makes unsubstantiated claims about something that is not related to your alleged explanation of the allegation of why Human Rights lies about Israel/Palestine. So, your claim is still in the canard category until you can come up with an explanation of why this shows that HR lies about Israel/Palestine.

If they were unsubstantiated Amnesty International would rebut them rather than say the facts he's pointing out don't matter.

Because Amnesty International feels the need to directly rebut the unsubstantiated claims of some blogger nobody's ever heard of?

 

[arkirk]

Let's see, which is worse?

Launching a murderous strike at a dense civilian terrorist area?

Or allegedly lying about casualties in a blog?

There...fixed. Remember that there's no such thing as a Palestinian "citizen" in this discussion. They're all murderous terrorists.

Not to even mention rock throwing teenage troglodytes who have failed to learn table manners because the IDF blew up the dinner table and the rules are different around a campfire. Loren has been so hateful toward theses people he actually thinks the rest of the world ought to go along with him. He accepts serial murders every few years by IDF forces of Gazans as a way to keep things "secure."

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If they were unsubstantiated Amnesty International would rebut them rather than say the facts he's pointing out don't matter.

Because Amnesty International feels the need to directly rebut the unsubstantiated claims of some blogger nobody's ever heard of?

When an inconsistency in data is pointed out any organization should look at it. I've contacted several over the years when I noticed a problem on a website. Most of the time I get a thank you in response. (Or quite a chuckle when I e-mailed a government website about a page that said that campfires shall be left unattended. Admittedly my report on the issue included some humorous speculation as to how to comply with their rules.) The only times I haven't gotten a response have involved websites that seem to be abandoned--I rather suspect there was nobody on the other end to even read my e-mail, let alone address the problem I was pointing out.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Because Amnesty International feels the need to directly rebut the unsubstantiated claims of some blogger nobody's ever heard of?

When an inconsistency in data is pointed out any organization should look at it.

Of course they should. And it's pretty reasonable to assume at this point that they have and continue to do so.

The question, in case you missed it, was:
Why should Amnesty International feel the need to directly rebut the unsubstantiated claims of some blogger nobody's ever heard of?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

When an inconsistency in data is pointed out any organization should look at it.

Of course they should. And it's pretty reasonable to assume at this point that they have and continue to do so.

The question, in case you missed it, was:
Why should Amnesty International feel the need to directly rebut the unsubstantiated claims of some blogger nobody's ever heard of?

1) They should fix the bad data. They aren't.

2) Their response was to call the guy calling them out as not a credible source. That's not a valid rebuttal as he's simply pointing out inconsistencies anyone can look up.

 

[arkirk]

Of course they should. And it's pretty reasonable to assume at this point that they have and continue to do so.

The question, in case you missed it, was:
Why should Amnesty International feel the need to directly rebut the unsubstantiated claims of some blogger nobody's ever heard of?

1) They should fix the bad data. They aren't.

2) Their response was to call the guy calling them out as not a credible source. That's not a valid rebuttal as he's simply pointing out inconsistencies anyone can look up.

Honestly, Loren...you would demand they satisfy YOU who are insatiable when it comes to Arabs. Because you are so fixed and predictable in your contempt for Muslims and Palestinians it would perhaps be fair to say the charges came from Loren...totally incredible! I defy you to show me where you have ever approved of a single thing any Palestinian has done. I defy you to ever show me where you have ever recommended any reparation of the IDF damage in Gaza to be paid for by Israel. You just hate. That makes you hard to read and hard to listen to.

 

[laughing dog]

2) Their response was to call the guy calling them out as not a credible source. That's not a valid rebuttal as he's simply pointing out inconsistencies anyone can look up.

Your MO is to call any source that provides facts that disprove your claims as "leftist" or "lying", I find this response fascinating.