▲ 413 ▼ Netanyahu rejected ceasefire-for-hostages deal in Gaza, sources say (www.theguardian.com) submitted 2 years ago by snek@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world 142 comments fedilink hide all child comments Israeli PM said to have turned down proposal in early talks and continues to take tough line
[–] mwguy@infosec.pub -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) I mean future articles covering it have said things like "Ceasefire for $x hostages rejected" for exactly this reason. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Sure but your case is still weak and honestly not even there. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub -1 points 2 years ago (2 children) "Ceasefire-for-hostages" Would you assume that they're asking for a ceasefire in a percentage of the territory or the full territory? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] snek@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 2 years ago* [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) I wouldn't assume anything. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) That's not the truth. When you hear the title: "Netanyahu rejected ceasefire-for-hostages deal in Gaza, sources say" Do you assume that it's 40% of the hostages for a ceasefire im 40% of the territory? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) I think if you want the truth then stop being lazy and read the whole article instead of getting your information from misinterpreting headlines. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) I did. That's why I pointed out the misleading headline as a comment. Had I not read the article I would have assumed that it was a ceasefire in 100% of the territory for 100% of the Hostages that Israel turned down. Just like you would have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just like you would have Nope. But whatever you need to say to make yourself feel better. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago If you'd have thought a different amount, you'd have said it when i pointed it out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Sure but your case is still weak and honestly not even there. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub -1 points 2 years ago (2 children) "Ceasefire-for-hostages" Would you assume that they're asking for a ceasefire in a percentage of the territory or the full territory? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] snek@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 2 years ago* [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) I wouldn't assume anything. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) That's not the truth. When you hear the title: "Netanyahu rejected ceasefire-for-hostages deal in Gaza, sources say" Do you assume that it's 40% of the hostages for a ceasefire im 40% of the territory? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) I think if you want the truth then stop being lazy and read the whole article instead of getting your information from misinterpreting headlines. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) I did. That's why I pointed out the misleading headline as a comment. Had I not read the article I would have assumed that it was a ceasefire in 100% of the territory for 100% of the Hostages that Israel turned down. Just like you would have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just like you would have Nope. But whatever you need to say to make yourself feel better. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago If you'd have thought a different amount, you'd have said it when i pointed it out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mwguy@infosec.pub -1 points 2 years ago (2 children) "Ceasefire-for-hostages" Would you assume that they're asking for a ceasefire in a percentage of the territory or the full territory? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] snek@lemmy.world [S] 1 point 2 years ago* [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) I wouldn't assume anything. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) That's not the truth. When you hear the title: "Netanyahu rejected ceasefire-for-hostages deal in Gaza, sources say" Do you assume that it's 40% of the hostages for a ceasefire im 40% of the territory? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) I think if you want the truth then stop being lazy and read the whole article instead of getting your information from misinterpreting headlines. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) I did. That's why I pointed out the misleading headline as a comment. Had I not read the article I would have assumed that it was a ceasefire in 100% of the territory for 100% of the Hostages that Israel turned down. Just like you would have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just like you would have Nope. But whatever you need to say to make yourself feel better. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago If you'd have thought a different amount, you'd have said it when i pointed it out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) I wouldn't assume anything. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) That's not the truth. When you hear the title: "Netanyahu rejected ceasefire-for-hostages deal in Gaza, sources say" Do you assume that it's 40% of the hostages for a ceasefire im 40% of the territory? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) I think if you want the truth then stop being lazy and read the whole article instead of getting your information from misinterpreting headlines. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) I did. That's why I pointed out the misleading headline as a comment. Had I not read the article I would have assumed that it was a ceasefire in 100% of the territory for 100% of the Hostages that Israel turned down. Just like you would have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just like you would have Nope. But whatever you need to say to make yourself feel better. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago If you'd have thought a different amount, you'd have said it when i pointed it out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) That's not the truth. When you hear the title: "Netanyahu rejected ceasefire-for-hostages deal in Gaza, sources say" Do you assume that it's 40% of the hostages for a ceasefire im 40% of the territory? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) I think if you want the truth then stop being lazy and read the whole article instead of getting your information from misinterpreting headlines. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) I did. That's why I pointed out the misleading headline as a comment. Had I not read the article I would have assumed that it was a ceasefire in 100% of the territory for 100% of the Hostages that Israel turned down. Just like you would have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just like you would have Nope. But whatever you need to say to make yourself feel better. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago If you'd have thought a different amount, you'd have said it when i pointed it out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) I think if you want the truth then stop being lazy and read the whole article instead of getting your information from misinterpreting headlines. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) I did. That's why I pointed out the misleading headline as a comment. Had I not read the article I would have assumed that it was a ceasefire in 100% of the territory for 100% of the Hostages that Israel turned down. Just like you would have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just like you would have Nope. But whatever you need to say to make yourself feel better. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago If you'd have thought a different amount, you'd have said it when i pointed it out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mwguy@infosec.pub 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child) I did. That's why I pointed out the misleading headline as a comment. Had I not read the article I would have assumed that it was a ceasefire in 100% of the territory for 100% of the Hostages that Israel turned down. Just like you would have. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just like you would have Nope. But whatever you need to say to make yourself feel better. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago If you'd have thought a different amount, you'd have said it when i pointed it out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] snek@lemmy.world [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just like you would have Nope. But whatever you need to say to make yourself feel better. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago If you'd have thought a different amount, you'd have said it when i pointed it out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 2 years ago If you'd have thought a different amount, you'd have said it when i pointed it out. permalink fedilink source parent