There was a time when I considered @aliShihabi - who has been on my Jazeera show twice - to be one of the most credible/effective spinners for Saudi Arabia in DC. But I think he pissed all that credibility away with his ludicrous/debunked responses to the killing of #Khashoggi.https://twitter.com/nahaltoosi/status/1054811180647231490 …
-
-
No one can deny the fact that a crime has been committed; what we deny is the predetermined accusations based on media propaganda. Investigation is in process, the guilty will be severely punished, and justice will be served. Moreover, corrective preventive actions been taken.
-
People know that the best case scenario for
#JamalKhashoggi was imprisonment with the likes of Salman Al Ouda and Loujain Al Hathloul. It's because the Saudis failed to to do that, they had to resort to killing him. Stop pretending like it's an honest mistake. -
A post-truth situation is one in which people are less influenced by factual information than by their emotions or by beliefs they already hold. You want justice, wait for it; we all do care as well, no one is pretending.
-
You still don't get it. The person who has ordered the unjust arrests of Saudis who have expressed their opinions (or even have stood silent), can only be the prime suspect in killing Jamal. Moreover, doing so by using diplomatic leverage is simply a state sponsored terrorism.
-
I guess you’re not getting it...! As an opinion, you’re entitled to express whatever opinion you want; and I respect. As a judgement, I’d rather wait for the investigation, experts opinion, and court judgment - if you want justice. You can’t be the judge, jury, and executioner.
-
Will there be an official & transparent prosecutions for the Saudis such as Al Ouda, Zamel, Hathloul & many more, who were arrested within this year & unjustly put in jail? I find it difficult to understand your call to wait on
#Khashoggi's investigation and not for the others. -
I Respect your concern for a just trial; yes, I do believe in the legal system and it’s process.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
"don't take seriously stenographers, propagandists and apologists for tyrants" is one hard lesson I think some of us could stand to learn
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The last person you have to explain yourself to is mehdi Ali, Iran regime’s mouthpiece with a deep premeditated resentment for KSA!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"that they even may not know was false" still spinning. You just can't stop it, can you?pic.twitter.com/U4a8YXAmZR
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
But it's not only about the initial information is it? Your continued defense of MBS regardless of what he's done speaks volumes about your credibility. I wonder what would you say if the investigation ended up blaming MBS.
-
Bias? Maybe. Credibility? Definitely not, just because someone leans in favor of someone for good and for worse doesn't mean they aren't credible. After all, the whole picture won't be clear if only one side is talking.
-
Of course he's not credible if he's biased! That's common sense. Shihabi seems to be a person who would stand for MBS (even if he's killed his own people) until the day comes when MBS is no longer in power. He'll then go to the next one in power. I hope I'm wrong though.
-
No, see, that's where you're wrong buddy, being biased towards a cause DOES NOT mean you don't have credibility. For instance, Aljazeera is obviously biased AGAINST Saudi Arabia, does that mean it's news are incredible?
-
No news agency/channel is unbiased. AJ (Arabic at least) is biased towards the cause of exposing the Trump/MBS/MBZ/Netanyahu’s catastrophic agenda. However, MBS is not a cause. He's a person. Loyalty to a person is bias. Bias for a person is the opposite of credibility.
-
-Let's establish the premise that you don't get to define what is true and what is not. -We mutually concur that no media agency is unbiased, both "Mehdi" and Mr.Shihabi are obviously biased. Mr.Shihabi made indisputable points, his bias does not make him incredible. Mmmkay?
-
Indisputable points? I think you should read the other comments on both pages with an "unbiased stance".
- 47 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
BEWARE
@mehdirhasan An Apologist for#MassMurderers Of Assad-IRAN-Russia. Heavily sectarian who never squeaks about Syrian Genocide & has been waiting for an incident like#Khashoggi agnst#Saudi. Gives other journalists columns@AlJazeera_World etc SO they- Apologist to#IranThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Dude, you don’t seem like you’re off your rocker, stop defending them. Blink once if your life is in danger. I get it, it’s support or get beheaded. Maybe find a new line of work? I’m starting to feel bad for you. I don’t think you’re as corrupt as the Royal family.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.