I find it funny (as long as you ignore that these events involve dead people) that Silver here is up in arms for an alleged misattribution when it happens otherwise every day and nobody is bothered.
A novel thought: maybe stop bombing civilians and the chance of you unjustly being accused of bombing civilians goes dramatically down.
When Israeli military officials say "this was certainly a Palistinian attack", the news media should be noting cases where they lied about that in the past (eg the death of journalist Shireen Abu Akleh).
Likewise when Gaza officials say the reverse, the same should happen.
I get that journalism will have bias, both personally and based on past actions because they're human and because of basic pattern recognition. But when discussing the facts of an event, it's important to separate what we know (an explosion happened at a hospital in Gaza) and what we're getting from dubious sources (that it was an Israeli airstrike or an Islamic Jihad rocket failure).
In the end, it looks very likely that it was, in fact, the Islamic Jihad rocket. But on day one? No journalistic source should be repeating assertions of blame from untrustworthy and extremely interested parties without the appropriate caveats.
So you believed a Church was bombed today when in fact it was a building next to it and Church is fine. What does that tell you about sources you use for news?
> maybe stop bombing civilians
There are missile barrages incoming from Gaza daily, civilians dont shoot rockets. Civilian buildings dont experience secondary explosions when collapsing.
> A Greek Orthodox church in the Gaza Strip which was sheltering hundreds of displaced Palestinians was hit overnight by an Israeli air strike, the Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem said, and Palestinian health officials said 16 people were killed.
> There was no word from the Church on a death toll.
> The Israeli military said a part of the church was damaged in a strike on a militant command centre and it was reviewing the incident.
I do not read anything with a name referencing osint, nor other astroturfers.
There are missiles coming into Gaza also daily. I think it should all stop. Do you agree?
[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/orthodox-church-says-it-was-hi...
https://twitter.com/greekcitytimes/status/171550351226695719...
In no shape or form was it anywhere implied that the church no longer exists, just that it was bombed. The quote from a non-hamas source in a respectable news source confirms it was hit. That you're poorly attempting to make some kind of an argument that never was tells me you have no leg to stand on.
"Hey, someone burned down my car last night! Its standing over there, the one with minor smoke damage two cars over from the wreck of actually burned car."
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/israel-hamas-war-gaza-strip...
I guess you will need to go spread doubt in another case. Until then.
1. There was Israeli bombing near the Church. Nobody was ever disputing that.
2. Church wasnt hit by the bomb.
3. Church is still standing.
Whoever is now claiming Church was hit/bombed/destroyed is the one lying, with clear multi party corroborated photographic/video evidence. You might argue Israel has no right to bomb Gaza, international law says otherwise. Geneva Convention Article 28 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/art... Treatment II. Danger zones
"The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations."
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/art...
"Consequently, the presence of civilians must never be used to render immune from military operations objectives which are liable to be attacked."
"The Israeli military said that a blast Thursday night on the St. Porphyrius Greek Orthodox Church campus in Gaza City was the result of its airstrike."
And if you still are not sure, I'd go to a doctor to get it checked out. Take care.
"a destructive wave of highly compressed air spreading outward from an explosion."
What kind of post truth are we living in when you can calmly believe in a building being bombed when that building is still standing the next day and there is footage of a bomb striking two buildings away?
"News" media isnt helping by spreading lies like NBCs "collapse of Gaza’s oldest church" immediat repost from Hamas sources without any verification https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp-video/mmvo196026949728
Example:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/canadian-killed-a...
https://legionmagazine.com/one-martyr-down-the-untold-story-...
IDF fired on a UN post and killed neutral UN observers, including a Canadian citizen. They've never admitted it was deliberate... but they did it because of the specific neutrality interventions of that UN post... as a signal to STFU ... and everybody knows it. And because of alliances with Israel even the Canadian gov't wouldn't raise protest.
"The question of how and why it [UN base] was on their targeting list has never been legally resolved. The Israelis claim it was a data-entry error—put on their target list by mistake. But they have prevented any organization or government from verifying that claim; including both the UN and the Canadian government."
It's not like anybody is forcing you to think in terms where there's only Hamas or IDF to choose from. That's a mental framework you're choosing for yourself. It's not a football game.
Hamas, meanwhile, has been caught lying multiple times over the years with actual evidence of those lies. Objectively one of these is far more reliable than the others in their relationship to the truth.
JFC, you're in a mental prison. Hate.
1. Hamas is proudly on the record that they want their people to die as human shields.
2. Hamas is proudly on the record that they seek the genocide against the jews.
3. Isreal does not typically lie and say it wasn't their missile when they fire them.
4. Isreal's munitions are very effective and Hamas is using homemade rockets made from water pipes and are much more consistent with the type of damage caused in the hospital parking lot.
To your broader point, yes just ignore the problem and everything will go away. That has worked so well.
The folks calling for an unconditional surrender of Hamas are not wrong. That's the only way to end this bloodshed, that, yes, includes civilians on both sides. Only one side is doing it with the primary intent to kill civilians though.
“says Palestinian Officials”.