Protesters block convoy, throw food into road and set fire to vehicles at Tarqumiya checkpoint near Hebron

The White House has condemned an attack on an aid convoy heading to Gaza by Israeli settlers who threw packages of food into the road and set fire to the vehicles.

Video of the incident on Monday at Tarqumiya checkpoint, west of Hebron in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, showed settlers blocking the trucks and throwing boxes of much-needed supplies on the ground. Photographs from the scene showed piles of damaged aid packages and drifts of rice and flour across the road.

Late on Monday, photos began circulating on social media showing the trucks on fire.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.worldEnglish
        12·
        7 months ago

        Very low. It’s basically the hobby of a single conservative Zionist (assisted by some volunteer and paid freelancers, though there’s no public transparency about who does what and when) pretending to be a reputable arbiter of truth and bias.

        • bartolomeo@suppo.fiEnglish
          3·
          6 months ago

          Lol yea, but is Dave M. Van Zandt really a Zionist? I hadn’t heard that.

          My favorite part of their Wikipedia page is

          Fact checks are carried out by independent reviewers who are associated with the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) and follow the International Fact-Checking Network Fact-checkers’ Code of Principles, which was developed by the Poynter Institute.

          …

          Writers at the Poynter Institute, which develops PolitiFact,[24] have stated that “Media Bias/Fact Check is a widely cited source for news stories and even studies about misinformation, despite the fact that its method is in no way scientific.”

        • Krauerking@lemy.lolEnglish
          1·
          6 months ago

          Seriously, any of these company run “bias” checkers are completely pointless and at best are directly useful for pushing specific propaganda under the guide of they have been neutral up until then.

          Thinking you know better because you know what someone else tells you the bias is of the statement doesn’t actually make people more informed it just makes them insufferable liberals.

      • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
        15·
        7 months ago

        Source credibility systems are just outsourcing trust to a third party. Its a ministry of truth on top of an already fucked media landscape, i dont get why people even recognize this as a real valid concept at all.

        • Bipta@kbin.social
          9·
          7 months ago

          It’s certainly valid if you treat it as one data point and not the end all be all.

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.worldEnglish
            4·
            6 months ago

            Not when it has its own unadmitted biases. For example, the guy who pretty much IS MediaBiasFactCheck is an avowed “Israel is always right and if you ever say otherwise it’s automatically antisemitic” level Zionist, which is most of the reason for The Guardian’s factuality being listed as mixed rather than high or even very high.

            A hidden bias like that makes a fact and bias checker worse than no checking.

        • WraithGear@lemmy.worldEnglish
          5·
          7 months ago

          The problem is that there is not much choice, how many news outlets are there? I can’t keep tabs on just the ones in the US. And i can’t read a bunch of unrelated articles just to start forming an opinion of the source. So it makes sense that you instead have a selected party do that for you. But they will have their own bias. I assume republicans will have their own version of politifact due to their views being against reality. But you are right that these systems can’t be trusted either, but the devil you know is better then the devil you don’t