WATCH: Hate crime hoaxer BACKS OUT of debate with Avi Yemini

You won't believe how anti-Israel Burgertory boss Hash Tayeh dodges an open and honest discussion instead of his proposed violence

Remove Ads

Controversial anti-Israel activist Hash Tayeh has chickened out of a proposed debate with me citing legal concerns. The saga began when Tayeh challenged me to a boxing match, a proposal rejected in favour of a peaceful debate.

I respectfully declined as I don't believe violence is the answer. However, I thought my counteroffer would be too good for him to resist! Surely he could match me in a battle of words?

Tayeh responded, initially offering a private conversation instead, expressing his reluctance to engage in a "televised or recorded debate."

But surely a public debate could help break down barriers and foster understanding in a very heated atmosphere among Melbourne's Middle Eastern communities.

Despite multiple attempts to accommodate Tayeh's conditions, my efforts were met with repeated refusals. Tayeh cited advice from his legal team, stating, "Legal team said it could prejudice our cases."

I remained skeptical of Tayeh's excuses, suggesting his reluctance was due to fear of exposing his views to public scrutiny.

The most bizarre part of our exchange however was his obvious use of AI to try and talk his way out of a debate! Go ahead and read it for yourself and have a good laugh!

READ THE FULL CONVERSATION:

13/06/2024, 6:38 PM: AVI YEMINI: Hi Hash, Avi Yemini here from Rebel News. I understand you've challenged me to a boxing match, which I respectfully decline as I don't believe violence is the answer. However, I'd like to counteroffer a peaceful debate, as dialogue is needed now more than ever. Are you up for it?

13/06/2024, 6:49 PM: HASH TAYEH: Avi, That's not a counteroffer. I laid out both options and you didn't respond to either. I'm not interested in a televised or recorded debate. It will go in circles with both of us trying to paint the other as evil or righteous in our cause as well as creating an echo chamber for the people that follow us to abuse each other. What I would be willing to do is catch up with you for a coffee and get to know you and your views through respectful dialogue. I am all for love and peace. If you're keen let me know. If not, that's fine. Hash

13/06/2024, 6:59 PM: AVI YEMINI: I'm happy to meet you for a coffee, however I'm confused as to what you thought a boxing match would achieve? I can see all your offer did so far was "create an echo chamber for the people who follow you to abuse me". Again, I'll happily meet you for a coffee but surely two adults talking it out with a large audience can only be positive in breaking down barriers. But I do understand if you're not confident enough to back yourself and your views in a live debate.

13/06/2024, 7:11 PM: HASH TAYEH: I understand your perspective, but I don't see anything confusing in offering a boxing match. Boxing is a regulated sport with rules and safety measures in place, allowing participants to channel their energy and resolve conflicts in a controlled and lawful environment. It promotes discipline, respect, and fair play, which aligns with my peaceful values. The goal isn't to harm but to engage in a structured, consensual activity where both parties understand the risks and benefits. Also don't try to bait me with your backhanded comments my friend. Send me the following and I promise to take it into consideration. 1. Scope and Focus: • What specific aspects of the Israel-Palestine conflict do you want to debate? (e.g., historical context, current political situation, humanitarian issues, potential solutions) 2. Objective: • What is the main goal of the debate? (e.g., to educate, to understand each other’s perspectives, to find common ground) 3. Format: • What format will the debate follow? (e.g., timed speeches, open discussion, question and answer sessions) 4. Moderation: • Will there be a neutral moderator to ensure the debate stays on track and remains respectful? 5. Rules: • What rules will govern the debate? (e.g., no interruptions, equal speaking time, no personal attacks) 6. Audience: • Who will be the audience for this debate? (e.g., private discussion, public forum, online audience) 7. Sources: • What types of sources or evidence will be acceptable to support our arguments? Are there specific sources we should avoid due to bias? 8. Impact: • How do you envision this debate impacting our relationship and understanding of the issue? What are the desired outcomes? I will also need to speak with my legal team to make sure they are happy for me to participate as we have several legal proceedings on foot with various parties. Hash

13/06/2024, 8:17 PM: AVI YEMINI: A boxing match seems like a very bizarre way to express one's 'peaceful values'. But I guess we can agree to disagree on that. Regarding the proposed debate I'm pretty flexible, whatever you choose or get 'approved' by your legal team. We can keep the scope to the current situation or include historical. However I would also like to discuss what's played out in Australia since Oct 7. My objective would be to show both sides and anyone tuning in that respectful debate is possible about this issue in Australia. We can confirm format and rules once you agree to do it. I'd suggest online as it won't take any resources and we already have the infrastructure in place. But again, I'm flexible. I think we're adult enough to do it without a moderator but I'm not against having one. I don't think we need a rule around sources. If either party questions a source that will form part of the debate. I hope a civil debate would lead to mutual respect and some level of understanding of the opposing views, between us and the viewers. Let me know what you think.

14/06/2024, 4:35 PM: AVI YEMINI: We doing this mate?

14/06/2024, 5:09 PM: HASH TAYEH: Unfortunately not. Legal team have said it could prejudice our cases. However, If you wanted to catch up for an off the record chat, more than happy to host you. Hash

14/06/2024, 6:17 PM: AVI YEMINI: Lol. Right.

17/06/2024, 4:18 PM: HASH TAYEH: Sorry I can't talk, can you please text me?

17/06/2024, 4:23 PM: AVI YEMINI: I'm just with my producer and we were discussing our conversation. I guess we wanted to see what specific issues the lawyers were worried about and see if maybe we can still run the debate but avoid discussing those topics? Unless you're only using the legal advice as an excuse to avoid the debate.

17/06/2024, 4:26 PM: AVI YEMINI: Also he noticed that your long message about the debate structure was written by AI (aside from the final paragraph about the lawyers) That's a bit odd, but I'm happy for you to use AI in the debate if you need.

17/06/2024, 4:28 PM: AVI YEMINI: I'm basically saying we will do whatever you want, need or prefer to make this debate happen. I think it's important.

17/06/2024, 4:51 PM: HASH TAYEH: Thanks for your messages Avi, I hope you're having a great start to your week. Rebel News and yourself are being considered as parties subject to various legal claims. Due to the above it has been highly recommended that I do not share a public platform with you. Also, do you really think I'm someone that you can bait into tilting by making certain insinuations? I am not like the other people that you've approached that are reactive to your tactics. Be genuine please. I like genuine and authentic people.

17/06/2024, 5:22 PM: AVI YEMINI: Oh. Scary stuff. Although it's a little ironic how someone using AI to formulate his text messages wants 'genuine and authentic' communication. Just to ensure I understand correctly: Your lawyers have okayed a boxing match but not a debate with me because y'all "considering" suing me? That makes sense. Since you're now threatening legal action, I better be extra careful and give you the right to reply to a story I've been working on. Please provide any response or comment you'd like included for the following questions: 1. Just before the Burgertory firebombing, you were on a podcast condemning the now dubbed "tobacco wars", claiming it was Arab-on-Arab attacks. Why did you then jump to blame the Jews when you, an Arab who owns tobacco shops, was targeted days later? 2. Why do you continue to blame Jews for the firebombing of your Caulfield store and home when one of the arrested suspects has been charged for his alleged involvement in the same "tobacco wars" you were discussing? Is it not far more likely that it has to do with you being the owner of EzyMart's across Melbourne? 3. I believe you've previously encouraged your followers to boycott Israeli brands and products; however, at a recent protest, you claimed to initiate an investigation using Fiverr, which is a proud Israeli company. Why is it okay for you to use Israeli services but not your followers? My story deadline is tomorrow 9am.

17/06/2024, 5:37 PM: HASH TAYEH: You're a great reporter I'm sure you'll write the truth.

17/06/2024, 7:19 PM: AVI YEMINI: Thanks for the compliment. The truth is absolutely what we're after. In that vein, I have a few supplementary questions that may form part of my story: 4. After the November 10 fire at Caulfield Burgertory, you initially declined to give a statement to Victoria Police. Why did you initially decline to give a statement? 5. The fire caused a reported $450,000 in damages -- has your insurer paid you for the damages? 6. Is your business insurer conducting its own investigation into the cause of the fire? 7. A 'Go Fund Me' was established to raise $300,000 to 'Rebuild Burgertory Caulfield', and you are named as the beneficiary. So far, over $63,000 has been raised. What have you spent the money on? 8. The GoFundMe is called Rebuild Burgertory Caulfield -- do you intend to reopen Burgertory in Caulfield? If you don't reopen, will you return the GoFundMe money? Given the money was given on the basis that the store would be rebuilt. 9. Two men have been charged over the fire, Wayle Mana and Habib Musa, do you have a social connection to either man? Directly or indirectly? 10. You often refer to Melbourne as "Naarm" on social media and at protests chant "always was, always will be Aboriginal land" followed by "from the river to the sea Palestine will be free". Is that meant to imply Australia, like Israel, is what you perceive to be an illegitimate colonial entity and "resistance is justified by any means necessary"? Again, my story deadline is tomorrow at 9am.

Remove Ads
Remove Ads

Don't miss a thing!

Follow Rebel News reporter Avi Yemini on all social media platforms, as he brings you the other side of the story.

FOLLOW AVI

Don't Get Censored

Big Tech is censoring us. Sign up so we can always stay in touch.

Remove Ads