"Along with the very real and violent war on the ground – there is also a fierce information war. Like Tuesday’s explosion at the Gaza hospital which Hamas says killed hundreds of people.

Israel says it was a misfired Islamic Jihad rocket, which they deny. Hamas says it was an Israeli airstrike, which they deny.

But tonight Forensic Architecture, Earshot and the Ramallah based NGO Al Haq have shared new information with Channel 4 News they say casts doubt on some aspects of Israel’s account."

The evidence is presented in the video

  • OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    1 year ago

    Doppler analysis is a really good approach. Assuming there are no glaring errors in the analysis: Israel is lying, it absolutely did not come from where they claim. It came from… the direction of Israel.

    But perhaps physics is just antisemitic now who knows

    • thefartographer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      64
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      As a Jew who passed physics, I can tell you that it is not antisemitic. Nor is it to say “fuck PeePee Netanyahu’s campaign of destruction and misinformation.” Saying all Israelis are bad isn’t antisemitic, but it’s not correct. Saying that you dislike Israel because it has too many Jews is both antisemitic and valid, oddly enough. Saying you hate all Jews is antisemitic.

      Anyway, most of the people telling you that not supporting Israel is antisemitic are, in fact, actual antisemites. They’re the same people who say that it’s actually racist to call someone a racist.

      • evader_fateful@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        That comment really made me think, thank you! The only part where I’m still stuck is the sentence “…most of the people telling you that not supporting Israel is antisemetic are, in fact, antisemites.” I can understand why their statement is incorrect at face value. But I haven’t quite untangled why they would be antisemites for making that statement. Would you please clarify that part for me?

        • snooggums@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The quite is about correlation, not causation.

          Antisemitic people tend to think that Isreal and all Jewish people do everything in lockstep because their antisemitic views include the “Jews controlling the world” myth. To them Isreal = Jews and therefore criticizing Isreal is the same thing as criticizing all Jewish people amd they want to play ‘gotcha’ based on that.

        • Zorque@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think the statement makes them anti-semitic, they just happen to be anti-semitic and use calling other people anti-semitic for anti-Israeli sentiments as a cover for their own racism.

      • OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        This story is about it, I haven’t seen it myself! I would like to though, I did the same thing once in a radio astronomy context

        • sirboozebum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Fair enough.

          I’m pretty bemused at people taking the “independent” review of the missile strike by the Pentagon at face value.

          I’m sorry, where are the weapons of mass destruction again?

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Doesn’t matter who did it. The issue is the systemic oppression of a population, apartheid leads to violence. Blame is immaterial here. Both belligerents are bad actors, having done terrible things to each other, and the civilians.

    The only resolution is how to end the apartheid. Truth and reconciliation, integration of the populations, total freedom and liberation of a country, take your pick.

    • agent_flounder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      This one attack is being skillfully used to redirect our attention from the real issue, that is, everything you said.

    • Diplomjodler@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      If your “only resolution” is completely unattainable, that’s not very helpful.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ending apartheid is attainable. It’s worked in many different countries. It’s not an easy process by any means. Nobody’s going to have peace, as long as apartheid continues.

        Granting Independence to Palestine has been on the table for 60 years. Very attainable, the will currently doesn’t exist but it’s attainable.

        The current plan of just ratcheting up the pressure doesn’t seem to be working…

    • Spzi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      People thought it matters who did it when they were still thinking it was Israel.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        The issue is the war and violence, lets not bicker and argue about who killed who… the continuation is the problem. If we were at peace and trying to find justice about war crimes, the blame and facts matter, but we are talking about a ongoing 60 year war, that has just come to a boil.

        There isn’t any diplomatic effort to find a solution on the table, just more violence and escalation…

      • febra@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re building a straw man here. Why do you think those were the exact same people? I think you’re creating an imaginary enemy here

        • Spzi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There were lots of posts and comments how Israel killed 500 civilians. A lot of people seemed to care who did it.

          With that background, it’s worthwhile to post additional information if the previous was misleading. Doesn’t matter if it’s the same people (not exactly sure to who you’re referring), neither did I create an enemy.

          Apparently there was demand for the information who did it, so it’s good to post updates, even if other people think it doesn’t matter.

          • febra@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, some people thought it mattered. Yes, some people are hypocrites. But saying “people” just paints everyone with the same brush. Some people said from the very beginning that the entire situation has to stop. Hell, Israel has bombed hospitals countless times in the past, so it’s not like it even matters that much anyway. I just got annoyed with your “people thought it mattered” as if everyone has the exact same opinion as of the people you have encountered.

            • Spzi@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Oh, alright. Seems you would have been fine if I had written “Some people” instead of just “People”. As a non-native speaker, I’m not sure wether “People” actually means some or all people.

              Like when I say “People like the new iPhone”, are you sure that means all people like it? Or can that sentence be said when a large number likes it, although some don’t, and the overall majority didn’t even consider to buy it?

              Either way, I could have clarified with a short emphasis, yes.

              • febra@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yeah I’m not a native speaker either. Any other way I’m glad that was clarified.

    • jungle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Of course, that’s the reasonable objective.

      How do you integrate a population that wants to kill you though?

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you try to kill them right back, that just proves their point.

        Need to find a stable situation for the area. Either bite the bullet and make a independent state of them, or integrate them into the one country. Two separate populations in the same area will just beget more violence.

        Hamas can only be defeated by the people seeing that they have better options, its a difficult path, but it has to be done.

        • jungle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          So you just let them kill you without response. And you think Hamas and the other fundamentalist Islamic terrorists will stop killing Jews once they have their own state, which they rejected when they were offered it.

          • jet@hackertalks.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            You carry out a proportional response. When there’s a huge power asymmetry you have to consider that in your responses.

            There will never be peace with Hamas, or any religious fundamentalist. The entire exercise is to get the population to have a better option so they don’t back the extremists. Both populations

            • jungle@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I agree completely, the power asymmetry is a fundamental issue that has to be considered as part of any response. Several instances where that’s been an issue easily come to mind: Nazis industrially killing Jews, gypsies and others; Argentina’s military torturing and raping civilians, and now Israel flattening a city.

              But Palestinians getting to where we’d all like them to be, with their own state, with open borders, welcome anywhere they go… Unfortunately we’re way past the point where that’s an option. There’s a reason not even their Islamic neighbors want them.

              Also, they had a better option. Many Palestinians lived in peace, they even worked in Israel. Their extremists don’t care though, that’s not what they’re after. They just want to kill Jews.

              • jet@hackertalks.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I think you will find it a hard sell to tell any population they haven’t earned their freedom (yet) and expect them to accept it and be peaceful.

                The cycle is just repeating, the frustrating thing is those with the ability to break the cycle have no incentive to do so.

                • jungle@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  So what do you suggest? Let’s assume the Israeli government stops the retaliation right now (as they should). What’s next? Who do they talk to? The rest of the Arab world doesn’t want to have anything to do with the Palestinians, except, of course, those who want to use them as pawns to attack the Jews by proxy.

                  Israel and the west have tried to solve this situation since the creation of the state. It’s been sabotaged every time. If course the Israeli right has done some horrible things as well. But that’s not the reason they’re being attacked. Even if they didn’t do any of those things, the Islamic terrorists would still be killing them at every opportunity.

                  I don’t know what the solution is. But let’s not be naive.

  • Seudo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Okay. So who is keeping tally? Does the side with the least war crimes win or something?..

    • febra@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      What does the investigation have to do with that though? It raises some great questions and shows that no war party shall be trusted in this information war.

      • ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        From OPs text:

        But tonight Forensic Architecture, Earshot and the Ramallah based NGO Al Haq have shared new information with Channel 4 News they say casts doubt on some aspects of Israel’s account."

        To me this sounds like an advocate for Hamas which is unnecessary because there is no good hamas. Maybe excessive hatespeech here: https://lemm.ee/post/11191373 also made me just point that out again. There is no good Hamas and no need to talk to them, negotiate with them or just even verify any of their misinformation - they are nothing but terrorists.

        • febra@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          or just even verify any of their misinformation

          I’m sorry, but I will not blindly trust any kind of information, no matter if it’s from Hamas, the IDF, or the Pentagon. Why would you even mind that open source investigators are looking at this? If you are so sure that what hamas are saying is misinformation, then you should be totally happy that even more open source investigators are looking into it.

          • ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            does anything you just wrote make sense?

            so you will not “blindly” trust any info, right? and you are upset because there is more informatiom?

            • febra@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I believe you need to take a second read then. Or at least look under what post you’re even discussing.

              To you, independent investigators looking into events without involving any war party is “supporting Hamas”. That’s a very, very interesting position you have there and shows a great bias. Again, how did you connect the two points? What’s wrong with having open source investigators look into these events? Why is that “supporting Hamas”?

  • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    This still leaves two major questions unanswered; if it was Israel, why did they use so much smaller bomb than they usually do and why did they target the parking lot? I’ve only seen them drop JDAMs from planes and not use traditional artillery. Someone can correct me on this if I’m wrong.

    I’m also wondering wether they considered the fact that as the videos seems to show a malfunctioning rocket falling back to Gaza, maybe the direction of the impact could be explained by that the rocket effectively turned around mid flight.

    The only sensible explanation for this being Israeli rocket would be that it’s a rogue anti-air missile from iron dome that was trying to intercept these rockets but failed and for some reason didn’t self-destruct before hitting the ground.

    • JWayn596@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Al Jazeera had been live streaming and live reporting the entire thing, and there are multiple angles and phone videos from them and other sources that show the entire incident, from the rocket barrage, to the booster failure, to the hospital explosion.

      The Associated Press has the complete analysis to your question, including the videos I mentioned, posted yesterday.

      Alot of the videos in there were confirmed 8 hours after the incident, this is the first mainstream media outlet that put it all together.

      The AP was one of the first to report what the Gaza Health Ministry said, “Israel strikes hospital, killing 500”, then edited their article 3 times in 1 hour, with new titles and recharacterizing the report as “they said” to try and cover the increasing uncertainty of the situation. Along with the casualty number dropping. Now some might say “But any death at all is bad, 50 or 500!”. That’s true, it’s still really tragic, but it’s also a 90% error, which is a disaster for journalism.

      The article covers the JDAM theories, the Israel warned them, the Hamas announcing their launching rockets a little after the incident. All things that would make the situation more murky.

      I admit I do sound like I’m defending Israel with this. This particular event is a flashpoint for me personally since I’m heavily invested in the state of journalism in an age where the flood of information can overwhelm news and lead to innaccuracies.

      The rocket turning around video is a different video from last year.

      Unfortunately I got banned from World News on lemmy.ml because posting this was “War Crime Denial” apparently.

      • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Got banned from there for the same reason. I more or less independently came to the same conclusion as most news outlets later on; while there still remains a lot of unanswered questions about this - nothing, however, seems to indicate it was a deliberate Israeli airstrike.

      • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think so. This was powerful enough to wreck the parking lot after all.

        I’m curious to hear why you think roof knocking is bullshit?

          • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I agree, but you seemed to say there, that the practice of “knocking” before the actual strike is bullshit, which I found surprising and was asking clarification for.

            • egonallanon@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              The knocking the IDF does is done using low yeild or dummy munitions not kindly notifying people. It’s a flimsy justification for bombing civilians.

              • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Would it be better if they did what Hamas does instead and just strike without a warning?

                I find it odd that you think warning before hand so that people can evacuate is bullshit. They didn’t need to do that, but they still go thru the effort to minimize civilian casualties.

                • egonallanon@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Because hitting something with a small munition isn’t a warning. It’s just bombing civilians. Just because it’s a small vldevice doesn’t make it good or civilised, it’s just bombing civilians.