There is widespread outrage at a video clip on social media posted by an Israeli soldier showing the interrogation and “torture” of a Palestinian from Gaza with a wounded leg....

The same Israeli soldier has posted video clips showing soldiers arresting dozens of men, women and children who were stripped, blindfolded and handcuffed in areas across Gaza.

  • DarkGamer@kbin.social
    1628·
    11 months ago

    Not a credible source.

    According to Ehud Rosen, MEMO generally supports Islamist positions within Palestinian politics. According to Andrew Gilligan, the Middle East Monitor promotes a strongly pro-Muslim Brotherhood and pro-Hamas viewpoint. Anshel Pfeffer described MEMO as a “conspiracy theory-peddling anti-Israel organisation”. Our review shows that the Middle East Monitor has a left wing bias in the use of loaded words and also in story choices that promote Islamic positions. We could not find any instances of the Middle East Monitor failing fact checks, but they do sometimes source to questionable media outlets and hence garner a Mixed factual rating.

    • Maalus@lemmy.worldEnglish
      211·
      11 months ago

      “We couldn’t find any instances od it failing fact checks” then why the fuck is it “a mixed factual check”?

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldEnglish
        132·
        11 months ago

        They’re using a dude from “The Telegraph” in their criticism section.

        The Telegraph is a right wing pro israel tabloid that tells you all you need to know.

        MBFC is has some really pathetic sourcing for their “debunking”.

        On MBFC pro israel sites are highly factual, pro Palestinian sites are “mixed”.

        • ???@lemmy.worldEnglish
          71·
          11 months ago

          I am so close to waging a war on MBFC. Not a single one of them is actually an expert… And they think it’s a “strength” that they made up an unscientific system to rate things.

      • bamboo@lemm.eeEnglish
        63·
        11 months ago

        Because that entire site is just one guy’s opinion presented as if it were objective fact. The claims credibility of sources reflects the guy’s biases and opinions and nothing more.

    • isles@lemmy.worldEnglish
      162·
      11 months ago

      Anshel Pfeffer

      Pro-Israel Anshel Pfeffer doesn’t like pro-Arab messaging? Color me shocked

    • Deceptichum@kbin.socialOP
      124·
      11 months ago

      It is a credible source and meets the requirements set out in this subreddit.

      Being criticised by right wingers does not take away the credibility, if anything it only adds to its.

      Stop posting misinformation.

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        411·
        11 months ago

        It’s “mixed” factual reporting, which is literally the minimum acceptable in this forum to not be removed, and has high anti-Israel, pro-Islamist bias. Citation above. It’s not what I’d consider a good source. Pointing this out is not, “misinformation.”

        • Deceptichum@kbin.socialOP
          133·
          11 months ago

          Oh no anti-Israel! How could anyone be against Israel. Every news source should be a pro-Israel mouthpiece or its garbage!

          Mixed is the same rating The Guardian gets.