• fukhueson@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Sadly doesn’t prove they’re Israeli plants, as the other user had noted below. I’m sure you know what you are and aren’t responding to. My source from Stanford paints a different picture qualitatively (and quantitatively, and is newer), but that’s a personal interpretation of the sources.

    So by not entirely wrong, you’re saying something is wrong?

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Sure, the source I found mentions nothing of Fatah, only the Palestinian Authority, and with the vast, vast majority unhappy with the PA, you can’t really call them “Israeli plants”.

        • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’m leaving it with the note that I can prove it’s at least PARTIALLY correct. The statement is overblown, and Fatah may be just as disliked, I just don’t see a source as definitive as the bit about the PA.

          • fukhueson@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            This is… An odd standard. So am I to understand that if part of a comment is deemed partially correct (and accompanied by verifiable misinformation) this is not removed? Seems like a lack of enforcement to me, and that the comment should be corrected at the very least. But if this is traditionally how things are done here, then I suppose this is what I should expect moving forward.

            Personally, this seems like a less than sneaky way to avoid the rules of the sub.