Yes.
Because no one there has a smart phone. Because they actually killed the journalist. /s
Of the course the obvious explanation is the correct one, the building housed military targets (Hamas operations etc) and it was destroyed.
Because no one there has a smart phone. Because they actually killed the journalist. /s
Of the course the obvious explanation is the correct one, the building housed military targets (Hamas operations etc) and it was destroyed.
"Blinken: U.S. received more info on Gaza tower bombing
American top diplomat says he cannot comment on further information received through intelligence channels on the destruction of the building that housed Associated Press, Al Jazeera offices"
Not only that, but what is your proof to call it the correct explanation?
Targetting a news organization might be a multi-purpose action, including to limit the amount of photos from the area. The fact that this action has resulted in even worse optics then the photos would have provided, and the fact that people on the ground are still a source of visual evidence for the destruction does not mean that there is no conspiracy, just that they are bad at it.
Given the absence of evidence of any Hamas activity in that tower, and given the clear motive improve the optics of IDF, I would say that both explanations hold at least the same ground.