• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Palestine Media Watch, A Dubious Source ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
22,771
Reaction score
3,890
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
In a recent thread Palestine Media Watch were given as the source for a claim, repeated in the Jerusalem Post , that " it is permissible under Islam to kill Israeli civilians because they are criminals. The message came in a television series broadcast on Hamas' Al Aqsa TV." see link at botttom.

Having watched the " scene " for the alleged claim, it becomes wholly apparent that the dialogue has been completely misrepresented. Not only was it misrepresented to try to support the claim , when one watches it , the woman involved actually states the opposite. The distinction made is that it is okay for Palestinians to attack the Israeli military personnel.

Throughout the JP article we are met with the commentary of one Marcus Itamar , director of PMW .

I like a research project every now and then , so, having stumbled across this misrepresentation by Palestine Media Watch ( PMW) I decided to spend some time having a look at them. Itamar Marcus, it turns out, is originally from NY but lives in the occupied West Bank as an illegal settler. He was the " expert witness " in a 2013 case brought before an Israeli court against the PA media on the charge of " incitement" ( oh the irony given his actions above ). He was basically laughed out of court and the case fell to pieces , according to +972 magazine under the title " Judge dismisses credibility of Palestine Media Watch"( see link below )

The judge, Dalia Ganot, in Tel Aviv-Jaffa District Court , stated that " “Marcus’s expert-witness testimony does not meet the definition of ‘expert-witness testimony." Although it was found that some " incitement " against Israel could be found in a small section of the Palestinian media, the case depended on it being an official policy of the PA over a 15 year period. This was conclusively dismissed because it was shown that Itamar Marcus had selectively quoted the Palestinian media and had ignored entirely the most read/watched sections of it. In other words he had cherrypicked information to make a case that was dismissed in court.

Now you would think people would be wary of such an outfit after such a damning indictment, ( there was much more damning stuff stated by the court but time constraints etc etc ) but aparaently not the case with Donna Rachel Edmunds , the author of the Oct 2020 piece in the JP.

The top and bottom of it is, imo, is they are an obviously biased outfit that cherry pick and, obviously too, as was shown in the recent cited article in the JP, are apt to completely misrepresent media so much so they could be slated for engaging in incitement themselves.

All links as promised


 
In a recent thread Palestine Media Watch were given as the source for a claim, repeated in the Jerusalem Post , that " it is permissible under Islam to kill Israeli civilians because they are criminals. The message came in a television series broadcast on Hamas' Al Aqsa TV." see link at botttom.

Having watched the " scene " for the alleged claim, it becomes wholly apparent that the dialogue has been completely misrepresented. Not only was it misrepresented to try to support the claim , when one watches it , the woman involved actually states the opposite. The distinction made is that it is okay for Palestinians to attack the Israeli military personnel.

Throughout the JP article we are met with the commentary of one Marcus Itamar , director of PMW .

I like a research project every now and then , so, having stumbled across this misrepresentation by Palestine Media Watch ( PMW) I decided to spend some time having a look at them. Itamar Marcus, it turns out, is originally from NY but lives in the occupied West Bank as an illegal settler. He was the " expert witness " in a 2013 case brought before an Israeli court against the PA media on the charge of " incitement" ( oh the irony given his actions above ). He was basically laughed out of court and the case fell to pieces , according to +972 magazine under the title " Judge dismisses credibility of Palestine Media Watch"( see link below )

The judge, Dalia Ganot, in Tel Aviv-Jaffa District Court , stated that " “Marcus’s expert-witness testimony does not meet the definition of ‘expert-witness testimony." Although it was found that some " incitement " against Israel could be found in a small section of the Palestinian media, the case depended on it being an official policy of the PA over a 15 year period. This was conclusively dismissed because it was shown that Itamar Marcus had selectively quoted the Palestinian media and had ignored entirely the most read/watched sections of it. In other words he had cherrypicked information to make a case that was dismissed in court.

Now you would think people would be wary of such an outfit after such a damning indictment, ( there was much more damning stuff stated by the court but time constraints etc etc ) but aparaently not the case with Donna Rachel Edmunds , the author of the Oct 2020 piece in the JP.

The top and bottom of it is, imo, is they are an obviously biased outfit that cherry pick and, obviously too, as was shown in the recent cited article in the JP, are apt to completely misrepresent media so much so they could be slated for engaging in incitement themselves.

All links as promised



Who was murdered in the video in Tel Aviv?

Innocent civilians.

Who did the interrogators refer to being murdered in Tel Aviv?

Innocent civilians.

Who excused the acts of murder?

The Palestinian

Why?

The innocent civilians were "criminals" in the eyes of pro Hamas scum.

Start ten threads about this and the reality remains.

Hamas targets civilians. They simply made excuses to do som
 
The only reason some people read the opinions of Americans living in illegal West Bank Israeli settlements such as Marcus Itamar is to reinforce what they already want to believe and maybe to use it as propaganda in order to dismiss embarrassing truth. Such people are to be treated with utter disregard.
 
The only reason some people read the opinions of Americans living in illegal West Bank Israeli settlements such as Marcus Itamar is to reinforce what they already want to believe and maybe to use it as propaganda in order to dismiss embarrassing truth. Such people are to be treated with utter disregard.

TRANSLATION : Facts hurt
 
Who was murdered in the video in Tel Aviv?

Innocent civilians.

Who did the interrogators refer to being murdered in Tel Aviv?

Innocent civilians.

Who excused the acts of murder?

The Palestinian

Why?

The innocent civilians were "criminals" in the eyes of pro Hamas scum.

Start ten threads about this and the reality remains.

Hamas targets civilians. They simply made excuses to do som


You have your own thread to carry on making posts with misrepresentations of what Palestinians are saying and misrepresentations of what other posters are doing wrt the video currently being misrepresented in another thread. This subject is about PMW as a source.

I get it though. they misrepresent in a way that suits your preferred narratives so you have no issue knowingly posting their misrepresentations in posts of your own that are, in fact, incitement posts based on lies.

Reality, facts, logic, reading comprehension, objectivity are all absent from every post you make in that thread. This one seeks to explore who PMW are, who runs them, their credibility as a source, examples of their misrepresentations , selective quoting, bias, th court case rubbushing their founder as " expert witness" etc etc. So, if you don't want to discuss that away from a thread where your posts are filled with falsehoods and baseless claims you steadfastly refuse to back, you are welcome to post. If you want to sully this thread with a string of falsehood posts that belong in another thread you are deliberately attempting to derail this thread.

Your choice.
 
The only reason some people read the opinions of Americans living in illegal West Bank Israeli settlements such as Marcus Itamar is to reinforce what they already want to believe and maybe to use it as propaganda in order to dismiss embarrassing truth. Such people are to be treated with utter disregard.

I agree Jean-s.

It appears the Israeli judge was able to see his outright propaganda and, as I pointed out in the OP, his own misrepresentations/selective quoting/ignorance of crucial material that scuppers his claims could be deemed an incitement against Palestinians that will , as we have seen here, be taken up by those who want an anti Palestinian bias confirmed for them, if their posts are anything to go by.

I hold the view that rather than to ignore people who repeat the spoutings of this, imo, highly dubious source, the best way to deal with them is to put their posts/claims under the microscope and show them for the frauds they are.

We should also not forget that the work of PMW was the material used by the Jerusalem Post writer Donna Rachel Edmunds in the paper itself. So both of them are also sullied imo. If you are going to use any source, as a professional writer, you should check the validity of the claims being made against the evidence being supplied, at the very least. Obviously , the writer either didn't check or didn't care about any misrepresentations going on. There is no other way to see it.
 
You have your own thread to carry on making posts with misrepresentations of what Palestinians are saying and misrepresentations of what other posters are doing wrt the video currently being misrepresented in another thread. This subject is about PMW as a source.

I get it though. they misrepresent in a way that suits your preferred narratives so you have no issue knowingly posting their misrepresentations in posts of your own that are, in fact, incitement posts based on lies.

Reality, facts, logic, reading comprehension, objectivity are all absent from every post you make in that thread. This one seeks to explore who PMW are, who runs them, their credibility as a source, examples of their misrepresentations , selective quoting, bias, th court case rubbushing their founder as " expert witness" etc etc. So, if you don't want to discuss that away from a thread where your posts are filled with falsehoods and baseless claims you steadfastly refuse to back, you are welcome to post. If you want to sully this thread with a string of falsehood posts that belong in another thread you are deliberately attempting to derail this thread.

Your choice.

More long winded nonsense.

You dislike PMW because they expose Hamas' agenda.
 
More long winded nonsense.

You dislike PMW because they expose Hamas' agenda.

What I wrote is backed by evidence, and evidence from an Israeli court hearing that toasted pmw leader Itamar Marcus as an " expert witness " showing how he had cherry picked evidence to create a false narrative. No wonder you repeat his words in your own posts.

You obviously like them because they don't mind misrepresenting things to incite ire towards Palestinians regardless of the facts. Your postings have been doing the same of late and have become evidence free zones full of false claims.
 
What I wrote is backed by evidence, and evidence from an Israeli court hearing that toasted pmw leader Itamar Marcus as an " expert witness " showing how he had cherry picked evidence to create a false narrative. No wonder you repeat his words in your own posts.

You obviously like them because they don't mind misrepresenting things to incite ire towards Palestinians regardless of the facts. Your postings have been doing the same of late and have become evidence free zones full of false claims.

You link was where someone was denied as an "expert witness".

And?

From your link...

The Palestinian Authority and its leaders voiced incitement against Jews and Israel, but they are not responsible for a shooting attack that killed an Israeli.

One case.

So?
 
What I wrote is backed by evidence, and evidence from an Israeli court hearing that toasted pmw leader Itamar Marcus as an " expert witness " showing how he had cherry picked evidence to create a false narrative. No wonder you repeat his words in your own posts.

You obviously like them because they don't mind misrepresenting things to incite ire towards Palestinians regardless of the facts. Your postings have been doing the same of late and have become evidence free zones full of false claims.
You will get nowhere attempting to debate this person, oneworld2.
 
It's Palestinian Media Watch, not Palestine Media Watch.


You are right, thanks for the correction...Palestinian Media Watch it is.
 
You link was where someone was denied as an "expert witness".

And?

From your link...

The Palestinian Authority and its leaders voiced incitement against Jews and Israel, but they are not responsible for a shooting attack that killed an Israeli.

One case.

So?


Not just " somebody ", the founder of Palestinian Media Watch. That's what the thread is about, that organisation.

And, you are not known to post accurate characterizations from the material found in OP's when PMW have been the source.

The reasons why he was rejected as " expert witness " are key to the theme of the thread. He was rejected by the judge because he had cherrypicked parts of the Palestinian media to create a false narrative. Just like PMW had misrepresented the words in that Hamas tv show clip to create a false narrative.

More will be cited to give a better picture of how the leader of this group is cherrypicking/misrepresenting/misquoting/misleading in order to present false narratives that ,imo,are intended to stir up anti Palestinian sentiments and deflect from his underhanded methods to do it.

It is one case, where the case was thrown out, nobody claimed otherwise. However, the reasons given as to why it was thrown out are relevant to this thread.
 
Courageously ignoring those who disagree...

It's probably not that you disagree with them. Their reluctance to engage you in your posts is most likely based on a revulsion of where those posts are coming from, in my opinion. I can sympathize with that too, tbh.

When people put up posts in the full knowledge that they are misrepresentations aimed at demonizing a people it can be an odious task to engage with them and I fully understand why some people choose not to.
 
You will get nowhere attempting to debate this person, oneworld2.


I understand your sentiments and thank you for the advice Jean-s but I think it comes with the territory to have to engage with posters who you might have a strong dislike of. The challenge, for me, is to sort out the truth from the tripe and in that you are forced to engage with those whose posts are based on tripe.
 
It's probably not that you disagree with them. Their reluctance to engage you in your posts is most likely based on a revulsion of where those posts are coming from, in my opinion. I can sympathize with that too, tbh.

When people put up posts in the full knowledge that they are misrepresentations aimed at demonizing a people it can be an odious task to engage with them and I fully understand why some people choose not to.

TRANSLATION : Ignoring those that disagree.
 
Not just " somebody ", the founder of Palestinian Media Watch. That's what the thread is about, that organisation.

And, you are not known to post accurate characterizations from the material found in OP's when PMW have been the source.

The reasons why he was rejected as " expert witness " are key to the theme of the thread. He was rejected by the judge because he had cherrypicked parts of the Palestinian media to create a false narrative. Just like PMW had misrepresented the words in that Hamas tv show clip to create a false narrative.

More will be cited to give a better picture of how the leader of this group is cherrypicking/misrepresenting/misquoting/misleading in order to present false narratives that ,imo,are intended to stir up anti Palestinian sentiments and deflect from his underhanded methods to do it.

It is one case, where the case was thrown out, nobody claimed otherwise. However, the reasons given as to why it was thrown out are relevant to this thread.

Is he not somebody?

Is this one case?
I thought so.
 
Is he not somebody?

Is this one case?
I thought so.


Oh dear. Is this seriously the best level of posts you have ?

You obviously don't appear to ever read links properly. Either in stuff you create or in stuff others create.

What the court case showed was that he manipulated/cherrypicked, exagerrated, misrepresented, mislead and was found out doing so, hence his dismissal as an " expert witness. " That's not insignificant wrt his credibility as a source.

I understand his misrepresentations are what you want to hear and then repost here but as a source they are rubbish
 
Oh dear. Is this seriously the best level of posts you have ?

You obviously don't appear to ever read links properly. Either in stuff you create or in stuff others create.

What the court case showed was that he manipulated/cherrypicked, exagerrated, misrepresented, mislead and was found out doing so, hence his dismissal as an " expert witness. " That's not insignificant wrt his credibility as a source.

I understand his misrepresentations are what you want to hear and then repost here but as a source they are rubbish

You are triggered that someone dares expose Hamas and many other Palestinians for what they are. Somebody that targets civilians....
 
You are triggered that someone dares expose Hamas and many other Palestinians for what they are. Somebody that targets civilians....

I am interested in accuracy. Your posts show you are not and there's the difference


" Hamas and many other Palestinians" .............. we are getting closer imo one day you will post a fraudian slip and there will be no doubts from then on in.
 
I am interested in accuracy. Your posts show you are not and there's the difference

" Hamas and many other Palestinians" .............. we are getting closer imo one day you will post a fraudian slip and there will be no doubts from then on in.

Why lie?

You, who created fantasies in regards to the video, are not interested in accuracy.

And what are you babbling about IRT a Freudian slip?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom