There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

fubo ,

To be clear, the news organizations haven’t rejected the claim that the freelance photographers they worked with were complicit in the attacks. They’ve just rejected the claim that they (the news organizations) were complicit, and have cut ties with the photographers who are alleged to be complicit.

Some of the freelance photographers appear to have accompanied Hamas members on attacks on civilians, in a way that implies that they knew the attack was going to happen and were able to prepare to cover it.

steventhedev ,

It also means these companies don’t have working financial controls. They gave money to people who they knew have a close connection to terrorists and may be members of a terrorist organization.

Doorbook ,

Well if that’s the logic that you are using here is a good one.

Qatar send money to Isreal to send to Hamas. Because Hamas is an acting government with different branches including there military branch.

US have one of the biggest military bases in Qatar.

So if the US says Hamas is terrorists, then US and Isreal are directly involved in funding them and should be sanctioned.

steventhedev ,

Not how sanctions work. You can legally do business with a SDGT or FTO if you get a waiver from the US Department of Treasury.

They only really hand those out to state actors as part of negotiated agreements.

Reuters does

Annoyed_Crabby ,

The New York Times, which works with Yousef Masoud, another of the four photojournalists, called the accusations that its newsroom had advance knowledge of the attacks “untrue and outrageous”.

“We also want to speak in defense of freelance photojournalists working in conflict areas, whose jobs often require them to rush into danger to provide first-hand witness accounts and to document important news. This is the essential role of a free press in wartime,” a statement by the newspaper said.

Well NYT of all people defending the journalist, the rest denied their knowledge of the attack, Reuter and CNN cut ties. The allegation is made by Dishonest Reporting is simply untrue.

fubo ,

Read closely. They’re saying the newsroom didn’t have advance knowledge of the attacks; not that the independent photographer didn’t.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •