Hamas being Hamas.... Excusing murder

[RetiredUSN]

Like I didn't see that one coming sooner or later.

I gave you the chance to find out my views but you chose to assume you know them, like you are doing again in the above, it's such a weak tactic

You take a very one sided view of the situation in Israel. A view that is often shared by anti Semites all around the world.

There is no reason to give people like yourself any credence.

 

[Fledermaus]

See , you have been forced into being honest, progress of sorts for the above but down hill again below. ( which we can go through later but for now)

So she makes the distinction between Israeli civilians and Israeli military and rejects that she set out to murder civilians ?

She rejects that it is permissible for Muslims kill/target civilians because of their faith ? That's what she says,correct ?

She was responding to a question about the innocent civilians killed in the Cafe in Tel Aviv.

First she states Hamas does not kill civilians.

The part you dishonestly truncated:

However, that is exactly what was done and what was referred to in the script.

Then we see why she said that.

The innocent civilians killed in the Cafe in Tel Aviv were considered "criminals" in the eyes of Hamas.

No other entity, group or persons were referred to in the script.

She makes NO distinction between between Israeli civilians and Israeli military. None. They were both discussing the murder of innocent civilians in the Cafe in Tel Aviv. Discussed in the past tense. The murdered civilians. In the Cafe. In Tel Aviv. Murdered. Those people. "So who did you set out to murder ?" As in paste tense. Her response is....?

Hamas kills civilians. Hamas makes excuses for it in this script.

 

[oneworld2]

She was responding to a question about the innocent civilians killed in the Cafe in Tel Aviv.

First she states Hamas does not kill civilians.

The part you dishonestly truncated:

Let's be clear, the only dishonesty here is coming from you

Recall it was you that missed out her first sentence in order to apply it to a different situation/part of the dialogue ? Correct?

The highlighted part is her FIRST distinction, you claim there are no distinctions made remember ?

So you are already caught out with your own dishonest references to both the script and the bogus claims you have been making.

We will go through this slowly just so we can see exactly where you misrepresent and exactly what you misrepresent.

Okay?

So now, referring to her words, we see the FIRST distinction that she rejects the idea that civilians were the intended target of the attack. Correct ?

 

[Fledermaus]

Let's be clear, the only dishonesty here is coming from you

Recall it was you that missed out her first sentence in order to apply it to a different situation/part of the dialogue ? Correct?

The highlighted part is her FIRST distinction, you claim there are no distinctions made remember ?

So you are already caught out with your own dishonest references to both the script and the bogus claims you have been making.

We will go through this slowly just so we can see exactly where you misrepresent and exactly what you misrepresent.

Okay?

So now, referring to her words, we see the FIRST distinction that she rejects the idea that civilians were the intended target of the attack. Correct ?

She was responding to a question about the innocent civilians killed in the Cafe in Tel Aviv.

First she states Hamas does not kill civilians.

However, that is exactly what was done and what was referred to in the script.

Then we see why she said that.

The innocent civilians killed in the Cafe in Tel Aviv were considered "criminals" in the eyes of Hamas.

No other entity, group or persons were referred to in the script.

She makes NO distinction between between Israeli civilians and Israeli military. None. They were both discussing the murder of innocent civilians in the Cafe in Tel Aviv. Discussed in the past tense. The murdered civilians. In the Cafe. In Tel Aviv. Murdered. Those people. "So who did you set out to murder ?" As in paste tense. Her response is....?

Hamas kills civilians. Hamas makes excuses for it in this script.

The only dishonesty is injecting entities not mentioned in the script.

 

[oneworld2]

She was responding to a question about the innocent civilians killed in the Cafe in Tel Aviv.

Correct

First she states Hamas does not kill civilians.

She actually says that Muslims don't kill civilians, " our religion ". That's the FIRST distinction she makes. You deny she makes any. Busted once already

However, that is exactly what was done and what was referred to in the script.

You don't know that because the IDs of everyone shot are not known. Some are obviously civilians but the text does not confirm ALL are civilians. They might be but the text never confirms it. Fact. You ASSUME they are all civilians but you CANNOT know they are

Then we see why she said that.

The innocent civilians killed in the Cafe in Tel Aviv were considered "criminals" in the eyes of Hamas.

There would be no point in her making two distinctions if she thought they were all civilians and/or criminals. At NO POINT does she EVER refer to those killed as criminals, regardless of their status. That's just your bogus claim

No other entity, group or persons were referred to in the script.

They don't have to be for your claim to be false, which it obviously is.

She makes NO distinction between between Israeli civilians and Israeli military.

She makes the distinction TWICE. The first when she states that it against Islam to murder/target civilians. Mentioned and shown above. Then she makes it a SECOND time when he asks her if civilians were not the intended target then who was? To which she replies " criminals like you " , HIM being an Israeli military.

Your claim is based on lies about what she says and assumptions about the status of everyone shot in the diner that you cannot possible know because their ids are Not known.

 

[Fledermaus]

She actually says that Muslims don't kill civilians, " our religion ". That's the FIRST distinction she makes. You deny she makes any. Busted once already

And it is a lie. Hamas intentionally targets civilians. Regularly. As a openly stated tactic.

You don't know that because the IDs of everyone shot are not known. Some are obviously civilians but the text does not confirm ALL are civilians. They might be but the text never confirms it. Fact. You ASSUME they are all civilians but you CANNOT know they are

A lie. The script tells us who.

Innocent civilians. No one else inferred, implied or stated.

There would be no point in her making two distinctions if she thought they were all civilians and/or criminals. At NO POINT does she EVER refer to those killed as criminals, regardless of their status. That's just your bogus claim

No such distinction is made.

Her response as to why innocent citizens were killed in the Cafe in Tel Aviv was that they were criminals.

They don't have to be for your claim to be false, which it obviously is.

Incorrect. You are trying to invent a narrative not supported by the script.

She makes the distinction TWICE. The first when she states that it against Islam to murder/target civilians. Mentioned and shown above. Then she makes it a SECOND time when he asks her if civilians were not the intended target then who was? To which she replies " criminals like you " , HIM being an Israeli military.

Her mentioning that it against Islam to murder/target civilians is a lie as innocent civilians in the Cafe in Tel Aviv had just happened. Hamas does kill innocent civilians. She excuses this incident as killing of civilians. Her response is in regards to the innocent civilians murdered in the Cafe in Tel Aviv. There is no distinction made anywhere in the script.

Your claim is based on lies about what she says and assumptions about the status of everyone shot in the diner that you cannot possible know because their ids are Not known.

Another lie. The script makes it abundantly clear who is being discussed. Innocent civilians. The entire script.

 

[oneworld2]

And it is a lie. Hamas intentionally targets civilians. Regularly. As a openly stated tactic.



A lie. The script tells us who.

Innocent civilians. No one else inferred, implied or stated.



No such distinction is made.

Her response as to why innocent citizens were killed in the Cafe in Tel Aviv was that they were criminals.



Incorrect. You are trying to invent a narrative not supported by the script.



Her mentioning that it against Islam to murder/target civilians is a lie as innocent civilians in the Cafe in Tel Aviv had just happened. Hamas does kill innocent civilians. She excuses this incident as killing of civilians. Her response is in regards to the innocent civilians murdered in the Cafe in Tel Aviv. There is no distinction made anywhere in the script.



Another lie. The script makes it abundantly clear who is being discussed. Innocent civilians. The entire script.

The distinctions were made twice and I highlighted each one. You fail in the bogus claims department.

The IDs of everyone killed in the diner are not found in the dialogue. Fact. You assume because you have invested in dishonestly portraying both the video and how it relates to the text.

I have said it is a Hamas propaganda video. It is obvious they have targted civilians and that she lies about that, BUT she never refers to those killed as criminals, she reserves that usage ONLY for the Israeli military. Those are just the facts and thus the claim is bogus still stands

 

[Fledermaus]

The distinctions were made twice and I highlighted each one. You fail in the bogus claims department.

The IDs of everyone killed in the diner are not found in the dialogue. Fact. You assume because you have invested in dishonestly portraying both the video and how it relates to the text.

I have said it is a Hamas propaganda video. It is obvious they have targted civilians and that she lies about that, BUT she never refers to those killed as criminals, she reserves that usage ONLY for the Israeli military. Those are just the facts and thus the claim is bogus still stands

The innocent civilians murdered in the Cafe in Tel Aviv are the only people mentioned in the script. They are the people referred to by the interrogator and the people the Heroine responds to questions about.

No other entity, persons or groups are mentioned.

Your fantasy is rejected.

Hamas being Hamas.

 

[oneworld2]

The innocent civilians murdered in the Cafe in Tel Aviv are the only people mentioned in the script. They are the people referred to by the interrogator and the people the Heroine responds to questions about.

No other entity, persons or groups are mentioned.

Your fantasy is rejected.

Hamas being Hamas.

I cited the two occasions when and where she makes the distinctions between Israeli military and Israeli civilian targeting. You claim she makes no such distinction which is obviously a BS dishonest claim.

You don't know that everyone killed was a civilian and the text cannot and does not confirm or deny this....................you are forced to assume.

Assumptions and lies about what she says................ that's your case lols

 

[Fledermaus]

I cited the two occasions when and where she makes the distinctions between Israeli military and Israeli civilian targeting. You claim she makes no such distinction which is obviously a BS dishonest claim.

You don't know that everyone killed was a civilian and the text cannot and does not confirm or deny this....................you are forced to assume.

Assumptions and lies about what she says................ that's your case lols

We know what the script tells us.

The innocent civilians murdered in the Cafe in Tel Aviv are the only people mentioned in the script.

They are the people referred to by the interrogator and the people the Heroine responds to questions about.

There is/are no other entity, persons or groups are mentioned.

It is you trying to read into the script things that are not present.