this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2023
143 points (88.6% liked)

World News

38278 readers
2657 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

"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

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 41 points 10 months ago (3 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 57 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

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 8 points 10 months ago (2 children)

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?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months 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.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months 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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

There is a lot to unpack in your comment.

But good food for thought.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago

Now they have the right to defend themselves from physics.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Not disputing what you are saying but do you have a link to such an analysis?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 10 months ago (4 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago

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

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If your "only resolution" is completely unattainable, that's not very helpful.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months 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...

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (4 children)

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

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months 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......

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Of course, that's the reasonable objective.

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

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (16 children)

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

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 14 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Actually, the goal seems to be committing the most war crimes that you're somehow absolved of, it appears.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Is this like breaking the hi-score counter by going higher than what the counter can do? Except it's for war crimes?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

Number of casualties: 00000

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (6 children)

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.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (15 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months 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.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›