they spotted some kind of optics following troops. hamas teams frequently have cameramen to film hits or remote controlled cameras in general for surveillance. also sniper rifle reflections and camera optics reflections at large distance looks similiar.
edit: few days ago they identified somebody who put camera on external stairs of hospital near roof and followed troops. troops got attacked a few times. they asked for approval to take whoever it is down. approval was given but it was conditioned to use "light munition" to prevent too much damage. from some reason was used heavier munition. currently they investigate why orders weren't followed.
Those "mistakes" and insubordinations are somehow _very_ convenient for Israel's agenda.
Apparently one strike isn't enough for the army that can perform point strikes against scientists in Iran, they "fumble" and bomb a hospital, then do it again and bomb the people who rush in to help.
The last witnesses who are able to expose the extent of unimaginable cruelty are being threatened, targeted and killed off.
Replying to your other comment here. I don't know if you've noticed but the article we were both commenting on was flagged. I know this is a trend on HN and am wondering if you're aware of a specific policy that forbids articles on international issues of public interest.
I'm just saying I'm not aware of the guideline that the article violated. It seems to me like there is a suppression campaign on any discussion of the subject at hand.
This was the deliberate targeting of a hospital. They then deliberately bombed the same spot as rescuers went to help.
It's not excusable and certainly can't be explained away. Israel has deliberately and repeatedly targeted hospitals, journalists and civilians. At some point hopefully enough of those carrying out these deliberate acts are tried to ensure that never again is this tolerated.
yes. they deliberately targeted external stairs near roof because there was somebody who was suspected to be a spotter for a few days. this is how war works. hospitals loose protected status in case they used for military activity.
Over 200,000 civilians deliberately killed and maimed by Israel. Over 2 million people deliberately starved by Israel. None of it admitted, trite comments trying to excuse war crimes, ethnic cleansing and genocide don't carry weight. Hopefully in the future these people will be brought to justice.
RE "....Over 200,000 civilians deliberately killed and maimed by Israel. Over 2 million people deliberately starved by Israel....." Seem to be cherry picking figures. Please attribute some blame to Hamas also too. Thank You.
Nothing is being cherry picked. Those figures are almost certainly an undercount. The point is about Israel's war crimes and them hopefully being brought to justice at some point in the future, twisting the narrative to divert from this being 100% a deliberate, calculated, long term choice is not appropriate.
such claims by one of the parties to the war (especially a party with such a long history of lying about it) are insufficient justification for attacking a hospital, doctors, journalists, etc
otherwise hamas could claim with at least as much credulity that every innocent person they killed just happened to be beside a soldier and they just missed, oops, so it's all good right?
or they could claim with at least as much credulity that there were no combatants launching attacks from the hospital, and that would cancel out israel's claims that there were, and thus israel's claimed justification
yes: absent independent investigation and judgement, there is no credible justification for this attack on civilians
of course, this is to say nothing of morality: killing innocent civilians and their press for exercising their right to video their own land? gross.
killing the rescuers and doctors and reporters who responded to your first killing (and were within their rights to do so)? sick.
genociding hundreds of thousands of innocent palestinian civilians to avenge a thousand israeli ones because you think israeli people are superior and more valuable than palestinian people? literally atrocious.
its literally satisfying justification for attacking hospitals and hamas operatives who pose as journalists. also i been told by mainstream media multiple times that there are no more hospitals in gaza as israel destroyed all of them. so i am mildly surprised here.
hamas takes pride in attacking civilians. which is evidenced by multiple attacks over past 30 years against purely civilian targets. for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphinarium_discotheque_bombi... . they later proudly take responsibility for actions like this. sometimes hamas/pij/pflp will all claim responsibility .
i wonder what is your take on 20 years of unguided rockets shot from gaza (around 20000 in total) after israel left it in 2005
it's literally not sufficient justification, in large part due to israel's long history of lying and coordinated efforts to prevent independent investigators from investigating the truth
otherwise hamas could claim with at least as much credulity that every innocent person they killed just happened to be beside a soldier and they just missed, oops, so it's all good right?
or they could claim with at least as much credulity that there were no combatants launching attacks from the hospital, and that would cancel out israel's claims that there were, and thus israel's claimed justification
israel takes pride in attacking civilians. which is evidenced by multiple attacks over past 30 years against purely civilian targets. for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settler_violence . they later proudly take responsibility for actions like this
i wonder what is your take on 20 years of illegal israeli occupation of palestine and terrorist attacks on palestinians?
It looks like the entirety of the above reply is off topic (and also ignores that everything you said is either false or equally true of hamas and israel, with a name or 2 replaced: s/sinwar/netanyahu/ etc) so let's try to rein it in:
Your assessment that this attack on innocent Palestinian civilians is justified by the unverified and unconvincing claims of the attacker, is incorrect. This is true for israel in particular because israel is globally notorious for lying, for attacking investigators and other civilians, and as we both noted in our posts, for 40+ years of violent, racist terrorist attacks against innocent Palestinian civilians.
Yes: absent independent investigation and judgement, there is no credible justification for this attack on innocent Palestinian civilians by israel. Only insufficient excuses based on probable lies.
(Also, I looked at your sources, and surely you can't be serious. Obviously they're quite biased and can't be trusted to provide an accurate or full view of the situation.)
could you please point me at 1 war in history of humanity when every single attack that supposedly resulted in "innocent civilians" been killed was under microscope and people demanded independent investigation in order to verify claims that led to a strike ?
Why? If there is wrongdoing, then there is wrongdoing. It doesn't matter if the wrongdoer disagrees, or what anybody else did. Thus, the request is a "whataboutism" distraction from the point:
The unsubstantiated claims of the attacker are pretty much always insufficient justification for an attack, but in particular here, because israel in particular is globally notorious for lying, for attacking investigators, journalists, and other innocent civilians, and as we both noted in our posts, for 40+ years of violent, racist terrorist attacks against innocent Palestinian civilians.
On that note, in furtherance of the truth, maybe you could point me at the independent investigatory or journalistic organizations that israel has authorized to operate unmolested by them in Palestine? After all, we're interested in the truth, not propaganda from one of the two combatants, right?
it's a war. israel doesn't have to provide justification to you or anybody else. just like usa and allies didn't have to provide justification to anybody when they leveled Mosul, falluja or raqqa. or when they leveled germany.
all western media operating in west bank. the only problem is that PA authorities are interfering with it. or west bank not palestine enough for you ?
and what makes you think that journalist organization promote truth ? i saw multiple times main stream media at prime time lying and twisting facts. recently (3 weeks ago) abby phillips said that facts doesn't matter in case they stand in a way of "righteous narrative"
Your post is full of shallow, unconvincing dismissals, mostly just you claiming stuff that isn't true, or essentially saying "nuh uh!” So, if you reply here, please make sure you back up your claims with reliable sources.
> it's not whatabouatism
It is common for someone engaging in whataboutism to unconvincingly deny it. Unfortunately, your whataboutism is whataboutism. If you want to avoid accusations of whataboutism, don't engage in it. That means not saying stuff like 'but what about Y' when defending X.
> and what makes you think that journalist organization promote truth
What makes you think israel does? They're certainly less reliable than the average journalist, given that israel in particular is globally notorious for lying, for attacking investigators, journalists, and other innocent civilians, and as we both noted in our posts, for 40+ years of violent, racist terrorist attacks against innocent Palestinian civilians.
> the only problem is that PA authorities are interfering with it.
You seem to be confused—israel is the one perpetrating the most journalist killing lately (the most in Palestine? No, the most in the entire world), and they forbid and prevent most journalists from entering or reporting from both the Gaza areas of Palestine and the West Bank areas of Palestine.
> israel doesn't have to provide justification to you or anybody else
If you mean in a legal sense, of course they do. The unsubstantiated claims of the attacker are pretty much always insufficient justification for an attack, but in particular here, because israel in particular is globally notorious for lying, for attacking investigators, journalists, and other innocent civilians, and as we both noted in our posts, for 40+ years of violent, racist, israeli terrorist attacks against innocent Palestinian civilians.
If you mean in a nazi-germany/russia-esque sense of, "we're gonna commit war crimes and perpetrate a genocide, you can't stop us, we can do anything we want and don't have to do anything we don't", you are right that israel is indeed just like that.
Israel literally bombed a hospital then double tap killed the rescue crew and the journalists covering the original war crime, and it's all on video for anyone to see.
yes. i literally wrote that they bombed a hospital after they followed up somebody who was suspected as hamas spotter with cameras for a few days. they used different ammo than they were approved to, and now there is investigation
in same hospital a couple of dozens of israeli hostages were kept for a while.
at same hospital IDF arrested in past around 100 hamas members who were hiding.
in area where combatants frequently crossdress, it's hard to know who is who
The people you're opposed to think it's them we're biased against, and that we let your side dominate. One of the weird things one learns in this job is how symmetrical these dynamics are; not just about this topic, but every polarized topic.
Many HN commenters deplore what Israel is doing in Gaza. Their views are certainly not suppressed. But your account is the first I saw calling for striking an entire population. That's shocking, and banning is not a borderline call.
The mystery is why/how it's so easy to turn into the thing one deplores. I'm not just talking about you, but a lot of people, and maybe all of us.
I would say dang, that is getting really hard to take this justifications seriously, specially in threads like this where the interlocutor is fishing for reactions. Calling for the whole population to be struck is bad, like really bad; but it's not coming out of nowhere where the other guy is pretty much (politely) celebrating the actual annihilation that is happening right now.
It seems to me that you're repeating the dynamic I just described, which is that you feel like your side is getting treated worse and the opposing side is getting favored. I don't agree that that's the case—not at all. It's just how this cognitive bias works, and it's a powerful one - maybe the most powerful.
I think the way out of this is to agree that a comment like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45019132 is unacceptable regardless of who the commenter wants to see killed. When you add a "but", you undermine that. There shouldn't be a "but" here.
Exactly the same standard applies to the symmetrical situation. If you (or anyone) see other comments which are that egregious, you're welcome to send us links so we can take a look.
edit: few days ago they identified somebody who put camera on external stairs of hospital near roof and followed troops. troops got attacked a few times. they asked for approval to take whoever it is down. approval was given but it was conditioned to use "light munition" to prevent too much damage. from some reason was used heavier munition. currently they investigate why orders weren't followed.