Did you read the full article because it also lists several valid points that he made and then attempts to equate everything as anti-jew and antisemitism. What he said may not be accurate, but saying something bad about Israel does not equate to being anti-jew or antisemitic
The article talks about Israeli oppression of Palestinians is bad. It’s quite clear that is not the same as antisemitism. It doesn’t condemn anti-Israel stuff, it condemns antisemitism.
It also makes the point that religious right wingers don’t care about antisemitism, just the anti-Israel stuff, which I think is an important takeaway.
Not trying to be rude, but it kinda seems like the person you’re replying to read it more thoroughly than you did.
Did you read the full article because it also lists several valid points that he made and then attempts to equate everything as anti-jew and antisemitism.
This is extremely vague. Can you be more specific?
Believe me, I’m not trying to defend the article. I didn’t read it because I don’t want to give that shit views. But I’m not about to defend this asshole who’s not even pretending to give a shit about the actual people dying. Both parties can be wrong.
I don’t see any direct quote of Tucker (mind you I don’t believe him to be an actual news analyst myself) in this article. Supposedly he praised the “strength” of Hama’s (the word strength is the only word quoted here). It’s also mentioned (without quote) he said Israel is hurting Christians.
The rebuttal by the article author:
It’s true that Palestinian Christians are suffering, though it’s largely because they are Palestinians rather than because they are Christians.
The author sees hypocrisy in the right media:
Substantively, it shows that the right is willing to forgive or downplay antisemitism unless it’s somehow linked to criticism of Israel — in which case there’s a zero-tolerance policy.
Unless I missed it, we need to find an additional source to see what Tucker said. I’m not really down for a dumpster dive into a Tucker “news” rabbit hole.
Ok? It’s a bad article. So what? What do you expect anyone else to do about that? You demand information, information that is very easily found, yet refuse to make any effort yourself. What an entitled, lazy position to take.
I didn’t demand a thing. I mentioned the flaws in the article. I specifically said I wasn’t going to dumpster dive looking for the info the article should have provided.
I specifically said I wasn’t going to dumpster dive looking for the info the article should have provided.
No. You said this -
Unless I missed it, we need to find an additional source to see what Tucker said.
If an article doesn’t have the information you want/need, you look for a better article, not demand “we” find something and then refuse to do anything yourself. Hell, you should be doing that for pretty much any article. That’s basic media literacy.
I mentioned we would need an additional source to see what he said. Which you must have found. I did miss you had that quote originally. Good job on that.
If you provided nothing, I promise you, I would have been just as content. I demanded nothing.
Did you read the full article because it also lists several valid points that he made and then attempts to equate everything as anti-jew and antisemitism. What he said may not be accurate, but saying something bad about Israel does not equate to being anti-jew or antisemitic
The article talks about Israeli oppression of Palestinians is bad. It’s quite clear that is not the same as antisemitism. It doesn’t condemn anti-Israel stuff, it condemns antisemitism.
It also makes the point that religious right wingers don’t care about antisemitism, just the anti-Israel stuff, which I think is an important takeaway.
Not trying to be rude, but it kinda seems like the person you’re replying to read it more thoroughly than you did.
This is extremely vague. Can you be more specific?
Believe me, I’m not trying to defend the article. I didn’t read it because I don’t want to give that shit views. But I’m not about to defend this asshole who’s not even pretending to give a shit about the actual people dying. Both parties can be wrong.
I don’t see any direct quote of Tucker (mind you I don’t believe him to be an actual news analyst myself) in this article. Supposedly he praised the “strength” of Hama’s (the word strength is the only word quoted here). It’s also mentioned (without quote) he said Israel is hurting Christians.
The rebuttal by the article author:
The author sees hypocrisy in the right media:
Unless I missed it, we need to find an additional source to see what Tucker said. I’m not really down for a dumpster dive into a Tucker “news” rabbit hole.
I literally provided a direct quote. You not feeling “down’” to verify it isn’t really anyone else’s problem.
I shouldn’t have to do a “journalist’s” work.
Ok? It’s a bad article. So what? What do you expect anyone else to do about that? You demand information, information that is very easily found, yet refuse to make any effort yourself. What an entitled, lazy position to take.
I didn’t demand a thing. I mentioned the flaws in the article. I specifically said I wasn’t going to dumpster dive looking for the info the article should have provided.
No. You said this -
If an article doesn’t have the information you want/need, you look for a better article, not demand “we” find something and then refuse to do anything yourself. Hell, you should be doing that for pretty much any article. That’s basic media literacy.
Also, again, I already provided a quote.
I mentioned we would need an additional source to see what he said. Which you must have found. I did miss you had that quote originally. Good job on that.
If you provided nothing, I promise you, I would have been just as content. I demanded nothing.