Hamas Spokesman on CNN

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: LightningStrikesHere
But this thread is not about me is it ?

And yet you continually make snide comments about other posters.
Hypocrisy. Address the topic and not the posters for a change.

originally posted by: LightningStrikesHere
Let me spell it out for you I DON'T CONDONE THE ACTIONS OF WHOEVER KILLED THOSE TEENS , ITS A TERRIBLE ACT OF PURE EVIL!

And that's all the Hamas guy had to say ... but he didn't.

Why do you assume he HAD TO say anything at all? He has the right to remain silent. The MSM don't own him.

soulwaxer

a reply to: Astrocyte

I didn't interpret his answer like that. The CNN guy was the instigator in this respect. Continually asking the same question because he didn't approve of the answer. Come on, if you were an official spokesperson would you get suckered into answering that question? I know I wouldn't. He avoided the question. I don't see where he admitted anything.

But, you know what. Let's assume he did what you said he did. I would rather have to deal with a person who admits to a killing(s) as opposed to a person that carries out killing(s) and lies about it. The way I interpret what you are saying goes like this: It's OK if a faction kills people as long as they lie about and sidestep the issue.

originally posted by: soulwaxer
Why do you assume he HAD TO say anything at all? He has the right to remain silent.

No he doesn't. He is an elected leader, not a private citizen. It's his responsibility to make a statement. It was IRRESPONSIBLE to remain silent. He is the head of a terrorist group that is thought to be responsible for the killings. His refusal to condemn the killings gives the nod to those in his group that it's okay to murder innocent Jewish teens. His refusal to condemn the killings emboldens Hamas followers to go out and kill.

originally posted by: My_Reality
if you were an official spokesperson would you get suckered into answering that question?

It's his JOB as elected spokesperson to answer the question. He refused. His refusal emboldens more killings. It was irresponsible of him not to answer it. Either that, or he was putting out a message to his Hamas troops that he does indeed approve of killing innocent teenage Jews.

originally posted by: Astrocyte
a reply to: LightningStrikesHere

I'm sorry. Grow up buddy. Were not children. We do not understand solely on explicit information. Implicit facts matter to. Refusing to answer a simple question: do you approve? And answering instead something that was not even asked - IMPLIES quite heavily that you DO in fact, approve.

This is how implicit inference works. You would think this way if you asked a good friend a question and they answered just as the Hamas' spokesman did. By not answering. In fact, I would imagine you'd get upset and annoyed and infer from his avoiding answering that he didn't want to deal with the consequences of an honest answer i.e a debate on the morality. Don't pretend that what he did was legitimate or somehow maintained a position of 'uncertainty'.

This is your opnion .

Its obvious not everyone shares the same view .

I didn't see any admission of guilt , nor did a few other members.

Simple as that .

a reply to: FlyersFan

You seemed to have missed my question on the last page so here you go again

So by that logic when the US or Europe fail to condemn the airstrikes that kill Palestinian children they actually approve of them?

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: soulwaxer
Why do you assume he HAD TO say anything at all? He has the right to remain silent.

No he doesn't. He is an elected leader, not a private citizen. It's his responsibility to make a statement. It was IRRESPONSIBLE to remain silent. He is the head of a terrorist group that is thought to be responsible for the killings. His refusal to condemn the killings gives the nod to those in his group that it's okay to murder innocent Jewish teens. His refusal to condemn the killings emboldens Hamas followers to go out and kill.

Let me put it this way. Let's say Netanyahu ordered the killings, as a false flag, for which the Israelis are notorious, and which is still entirely possible at this point since he provided no proof. If that was the case, then the Hamas leader was entirely correct not to stoop down to being grilled like that, thus preserving his self respect. It is important for a leader to be respected. This is exactly how I interpreted it.

Understand?

soulwaxer

originally posted by: sosobad
You seemed to have missed my question on the last page so here you go again

Oooops .. yep ... missed it ... thanks.

Our government has to make statements either in support or against what other countries and organizations do when they are asked. That includes what Israel does, what Hamas does, what Hezbollah does, what Syria does .... everyone. The entire world has to be very clear where each country stands. That's part of the point of being an elected official .. you have to make statements about where your country or organization stand on things.

I have heard the USA both approve and condemn actions done by the Israelis. I haven't seen statements every day on everything that is done .. but the statements ARE made when the questions of where the USA stands are asked.

If the USA doesn't condemn when asked, then it tacitly approves. Same with the Hamas leader. No condemnation when asked? Then he tacitly approves. There are times when the USA has stated that it is neutral. Those are usually the cases of when it doesn't have a treaty or agreement with the country in question or when it has agreements with both parties involved.

originally posted by: soulwaxer
Let's say Netanyahu ordered the killings, ... If that was the case, then the Hamas leader was entirely correct not to stoop down to being grilled like that,

Um ... no. If Israel had done a false flag, then he still should have condemned the killings if he disapproved of it. Why would it stop him from condemning killings if Israel had done it. That makes no sense ...

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: sosobad
You seemed to have missed my question on the last page so here you go again

Oooops .. yep ... missed it ... thanks.

Our government has to make statements either in support or against what other countries and organizations do when they are asked. That includes what Israel does, what Hamas does, what Hezbollah does, what Syria does .... everyone. The entire world has to be very clear where each country stands. That's part of the point of being an elected official .. you have to make statements about where your country or organization stand on things.

I have heard the USA both approve and condemn actions done by the Israelis. I haven't seen statements every day on everything that is done .. but the statements ARE made when the questions of where the USA stands are asked.

If the USA doesn't condemn when asked, then it tacitly approves. Same with the Hamas leader. No condemnation when asked? Then he tacitly approves. There are times when the USA has stated that it is neutral. Those are usually the cases of when it doesn't have a treaty or agreement with the country in question or when it has agreements with both parties involved.

Haven't heard them condemn the killings of innocent Palestinian kids yet

www.timesofisrael.com...

“We strongly condemn the continuing rocket fire into Israel and the deliberate targeting of civilians by terrorist organizations in Gaza,” Earnest said.

The spokesman also backed the Jewish state’s right to respond to the attacks.

So by your logic and remember it is your logic, the USA must approve of the killing of innocent Palestinian children? They condemned Hamas for firing rockets that killed no-one bit failed to condemn Israel for killing children.

So the USA supports killing of innocent Palestinian children. You must agree with that statement?

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: soulwaxer
Let's say Netanyahu ordered the killings, ... If that was the case, then the Hamas leader was entirely correct not to stoop down to being grilled like that,

Um ... no. If Israel had done a false flag, then he still should have condemned the killings if he disapproved of it. Why would it stop him from condemning killings if Israel had done it. That makes no sense ...

Thanks for only quoting parts of my reply... Why do you do that? It would have been easier to just hit reply instead of cutting parts out.

To answer your question, he is not allowing the Zionist controlled media to take control of the conversation. You may have noticed that both the CNN and the BBC asked him the exact same question. He is using his talking time to make a very important point. That makes perfect sense.

soulwaxer

originally posted by: sosobad
the USA must approve of the killing of innocent Palestinian children?

The USA approves of the Israeli strikes and therefore it tacitly approves the 'collateral damage' from that, which includes civilian deaths. As to if it's murder by Israel, or if it's murder by Hamas because Hamas puts civilians into the line of fire ... that is open to debate. But yes, since the USA supports Israels right to self defense, then the USA considers the deaths to be in the collateral damage to be expected from a retaliation strike.

The Hamas spokesman needs to make the Hamas position clear when he is asked. And since he didn't condemn the murders, then he tacitly gave his approval to the murders.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Our government has to make statements either in support or against what other countries and organizations do when they are asked. That includes what Israel does, what Hamas does, what Hezbollah does, what Syria does .... everyone. The entire world has to be very clear where each country stands. That's part of the point of being an elected official .. you have to make statements about where your country or organization stand on things.

Right..

Its obvious the "US" standerd way of press dealings apply to hamas ..

Just because the "US" does it , does not mean everyone has to fallow the leader .

What was apparent to me in the second video i posted was the spokes man was trying to make a point on Israel's violation of agreements
And how many Palestinians have been killed by isreal forces.


But for some dam reason the news agency was hard pressed for him to answer that question.
That then spilled over to the CNN interview.

I mean saying " I can't

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: sosobad
the USA must approve of the killing of innocent Palestinian children?

The USA approves of the Israeli strikes and therefore it tacitly approves the 'collateral damage' from that, which includes civilian deaths. As to if it's murder by Israel, or if it's murder by Hamas because Hamas puts civilians into the line of fire ... that is open to debate. But yes, since the USA supports Israels right to self defense, then the USA considers the deaths to be in the collateral damage to be expected from a retaliation strike.

The Hamas spokesman needs to make the Hamas position clear when he is asked. And since he didn't condemn the murders, then he tacitly gave his approval to the murders.

That's a cop out and you know it, collateral damage or not you are basically saying that US supports killing children. They haven't condemned it so your government is all for baby killing, your logic not mine.

originally posted by: soulwaxer
Thanks for only quoting parts of my reply... Why do you do that?

I quoted the appropriate parts that asked the question ... without the emotion. Just so you know .. if we over quote here then we get hit with 'warnings' from the moderators. You have to be careful not to over quote.

he is not allowing the Zionist controlled media to take control of the conversation.

Oh please! That's silly. It was a simple question that was being asked of a group spokesperson. It's his JOB to answer it. A simple question ... do you condemn the murders, yes or no? It's not 'being controlled'. It's called BEING A SPOKESPERSON AND ANSWERING QUESTIONS. It comes with the job. It was a fair question. His refusal to condemn was tacit approval of the murders.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: soulwaxer
Let's say Netanyahu ordered the killings, ... If that was the case, then the Hamas leader was entirely correct not to stoop down to being grilled like that,

Um ... no. If Israel had done a false flag, then he still should have condemned the killings if he disapproved of it. Why would it stop him from condemning killings if Israel had done it. That makes no sense ...

Oh yeah does Mr. Yahu condem all the Palestinian death ? Or the abuse of children and woman by the hands of Israel forces?

Nay..

He condemned only this case ...

Because it got huge Media attention... That's the only reason.

originally posted by: sosobad
That's a cop out and you know it,

What the hell are you talking about? I answered directly. The US approves the Israeli response and considers the civilian deaths to be acceptable collateral damage. It approves. I stated it very clearly.

You are just looking to argue with someone.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: sosobad
You seemed to have missed my question on the last page so here you go again

Oooops .. yep ... missed it ... thanks.

Our government has to make statements either in support or against what other countries and organizations do when they are asked. That includes what Israel does, what Hamas does, what Hezbollah does, what Syria does .... everyone. The entire world has to be very clear where each country stands. That's part of the point of being an elected official .. you have to make statements about where your country or organization stand on things.

I have heard the USA both approve and condemn actions done by the Israelis. I haven't seen statements every day on everything that is done .. but the statements ARE made when the questions of where the USA stands are asked.

If the USA doesn't condemn when asked, then it tacitly approves. Same with the Hamas leader. No condemnation when asked? Then he tacitly approves. There are times when the USA has stated that it is neutral. Those are usually the cases of when it doesn't have a treaty or agreement with the country in question or when it has agreements with both parties involved.

Remember a few days ago, when the Palestinian/American kid was beaten to a pulp by Israelis? The only response from the US was that it was a worrying situation. Is that a condemnation?

soulwaxer

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: sosobad
That's a cop out and you know it,

What the hell are you talking about? I answered directly. The US approves the Israeli response and considers the civilian deaths to be acceptable collateral damage. It approves. I stated it very clearly.

You are just looking to argue with someone.

And then followed it with

As to if it's murder by Israel, or if it's murder by Hamas because Hamas puts civilians into the line of fire ... that is open to debate.

Israel fired the weapons that are killing those children.

Cop out

originally posted by: LightningStrikesHere
Its obvious the "US" standerd way of press dealings apply to hamas ..
Just because the "US" does it , does not mean everyone has to fallow the leader .

What part of 'SPOKESPERSON" don't you get? It's part of the job of an elected official to make clear where his country/group stands and to answer questions put to him. It's what the job is. The Hamas idiot refused to answer. That's the way it works ... not just in the 'USA' ... but in the entire civilized world.