[lamp987]

>That is not a straw man argument.

It is a textbook example of a strawman. He is putting words in my mouth that I never said to debunk my post. That is exactly what strawman fallacy means. Lmao.

>If anything you seem to be conducting one by focusing on a single detail to discredit a narrative

Another strawman. I merely pointed out it was a hoax, as briefly and straightforwardly as possible. I didnt say anything about any "narrative" at all.

>The method of execution is really irrelevant here.

It is very relevant when it was explicitely stated. Falsehoods must be pointed out. Relentlessly.

[invalidname]

They published verified photos of dead and burnt babies. You're grasping on literal straws.

[lamp987]

>They published verified photos of dead and burnt babies.

This is irrelevant to the topic discussed which is "validity of the Israel's claim of decapitated babies". You entered this specific topic and keep derailing it with these claims that are unrelated to the original statement.

>You're grasping on literal straws.

Literal straws is what grows behind your house. Perhaps you meant figurative straws.

[invalidname]

> Literal straws is what grows behind your house.

This is exactly my point. You're being purposely petty as if decapitation of a baby or mutilation with a knife are different. There are many lies perpetrated in the fog of war. But your choose to focus on the methodology of baby execution as the "hill to die on" in terms of "truth" is pretty f*ed up.

[msla]

It is very relevant to the topic of whether Hamas murders babies.

Stop defending people who murder babies.