Seems pretty conclusive.
Doesn't mean that Israel should continue the genocide, just that Hamas sucks: which we already knew.
Until this apartheid state is dismantled the violence can't stop: both sides are bound to keep fighting with each other.
It's definitely suspicious that there are no munitions remnants available for analysis. You would think there would be something. If there is anything, independent investigators need to be given access. Otherwise, the perception of impropriety will color peoples' analyses.
But the idea this has been "concluded" doesn't seem correct either.
As stated in this article, Al Jazeera, Channel 4, and Forensic Architecture reached conclusions that the air explosion shows the rocket was intercepted and destroyed, not misfired, and there is no causal link between the air explosion and ground explosion at the hospital.
The AP analysis argued against this, but did in fact note this was a possibility. I believe the CNN and others use the same arguments and resources as preliminary OSINT analyses.
Now, GeoConfirmed and other OSINT accounts (Oliver Alexander) are backtracking from their early hypotheses and concluding the Al Jazeera claim is in fact the likely scenario, arguing that the intercepted explosion is too far away from the hospital to be connected. They still think a rocket is the "likely" cause, however.
I wonder if we will ever know what happened for sure, but there is definitely more to this story.
It’s definitely suspicious that there are no munitions remnants available for analysis.
No munitions. No 500 dead. No destroyed hospital. No bomb crater. But Hamas said it, so it must be right. This whole thing has been an absolute clown show of incompetence from the worlds press.
Something something… independent UN and ICC verification… for the billionth time.
Will this change any Hamas supporter's mind that they are not to be trusted? No, because their minds were made up the moment they started supporting them.
Please don't confuse hamas supporters with supporters of Palestine. Two totally different things.
Of course!
Okay so who’s a Hamas supporter? Because I’ve never met anyone so far who supports them, to the point that this sounds like a strawman.
People protesting in Berlin, yelling antisemitic slurs, handing out candy to celebrate the deaths of Israelis. Those Hamas supporters. People like that are few but ubiquitous.
Funny how anyone who's suspicious of Israel's far-right, militaristic government is a "Hamas supporter".
Found suspicious by who? Dumbasses on the internet? As long as it's the not the government, I have a right to call out BB's dumbassery that sure didn't help this situation.
It's so absurd that it seems plausible to anyone that israel was the perpetrator! Nor that they had bombed hospitals and other buildings full of civilians before, or that they were dropping thousands of bombs a day on a densely populated city and it was entirely foreseeable that some would end up where they were not supposed to.
/s, necessary because of the limited capabilities of the zionists.
That hospital bombing you're referring to wasn't them. And are they the perpetrators of that Hamas attack? Fuck no, the responsibility lies squarely on Hamas' shoulders.
Yeah, it is nearly impossible to dismantle a belief system like this. Just like it is with extreme (both left and right) political beliefs.
Ah, the new York times, known for its journalistic integrity, inspiring such onion headlines as
"It Is Journalism’s Sacred Duty To Endanger The Lives Of As Many Trans People As Possible"
https://www.theonion.com/it-is-journalism-s-sacred-duty-to-endanger-the-lives-of-1850126997
Also well known for being on the right side of history/s https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/iraq-war-media-fail-matt-taibbi-812230/amp/
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/