Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[hector13]

How deaths are counted in the current conflict.

[LoSboccacc]

The Palestinian Ministry of Health's figures have historically been reliable.  They have only ever, to the best of my knowlege, provided total death figures for the current conflict.  Figures which Israel has repeatedly said are 'generally correct'.  Nor was it even claimed by Israel to be a Hamas missile but rather one they said was fired by Palestinian Islamic Jihad.  The incident continues to be disputed both as to origin of the missile and total casualty figues.  But I guess you know all this, right?

yeah of course. figures are roughly correct because come from the list of missing persons. why people are missing is wiggled around, a lot, since the list don't actually track the death event, the numbers are packed into events retroactively for maximum impact on the press, and again, since there's no much tracking, many combatants end up as civilian on the list, further paddig the figures with extra bodies they can "put" wherever they need to control the narrative

for example after they gave that ludicrous figure for the parking lot falling debrees, they found out 417 name and id to put next to it to make it feel real.

but hey, we are all looking into things right?

[Maximum Spin]

Look, nobody is bringing dead headshotted children to emergency rooms in hospitals Israel is supposed to be illegally bombing, in an entire region that's supposedly devastated to unliveability and on the brink of starvation, for anything other than a publicity stunt. It's absurd.

[Strongpoint]

The whole plot of the story:

1) A group of people just wanted to get home
2) But evil Israeli genocidial snipers ambused them and shot their small children like game, going for headshots
3) Desperate parents rushed their mortally wounded children to the hospital
4) Heroic doctors tried to save them but having no supplies failed to do so

Is a piece of literature designed to provoke an emotional reaction to a tragedy. It is also absolutely unplausable on many levels.

Just telling the truth is boring and innefective. Instead of reporting the sad reality like children with head wounds are being brought to the hospitals or real children being caught in firefights and dying, propaganda produces such emotionally charged pieces.

[StrawBarrel]

Do you believe that a child can receive a sniper bullet in the head and keep breathing long enough to be brought to the hospital? Yes or no?

And this kind of miracle happened not once... The article claims that it happened to a handful of children.

Yes I believe it is possible.  But it is beside the point because...

The article does not claim that any of the children were alive when they reached the hospital.  It does clearly state that none of them survived.

The Palestinian Ministry of Health's figures have historically been reliable.  They have only ever, to the best of my knowlege, provided total death figures for the current conflict.  Figures which Israel has repeatedly said are 'generally correct'.  Nor was it even claimed by Israel to be a Hamas missile but rather one they said was fired by Palestinian Islamic Jihad.  The incident continues to be disputed both as to origin of the missile and total casualty figues.  But I guess you know all this, right?

Thank you feelotraveller for mentioning how Palestinian Islamic Jihad is a possible culprit for the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion. It helped me find the wikipedia page for the event:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ahli_Arab_Hospital_explosion

Response to LoSboccacc:
The death toll is accurate

so the article open citing unquestioning hamas ownh number for casualties, which we already know are inflate like that time one of their own rocket hit a parking lot and there were "thousands deaths at an hospital", then goes on with that story of parent with children executed from unknown sources providing absolutely zero chain of trust, neither from the parent nor from the hospital, and we're just supposed to take all of that at face value, from people that made a point to use every bit of truth they can get their hand on as propaganda?

These war crimes are very disturbing.

they would be indeed.

I disagree. The Gaza Health Ministry does not inflate the causalities.
What feelotraveller has said is correct:

The Palestinian Ministry of Health's figures have historically been reliable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Health_Ministry#Casualty_counts
A cursory glance at this wikipedia table shows that the Gaza Health Ministry has fatality reporting that is very similar to the United Nations.


The wikipedia article also states that the UN, WHO, HRW, and DOS consider the Gaza Health ministry to be accurate as well.

The health ministry's numbers have historically been considered reliable by the United Nations, the World Health Organization, Human Rights Watch, and the United States Department of State.

A December 06, 2023 piece from The Lancet has found no evidence of inflation in death toll.
No evidence of inflated mortality reporting from the Gaza Ministry of Health
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(23)02713-7/fulltext

Public scepticism of the current reports by the Gaza MoH might undermine the efforts to reduce civilian harm and provide life-saving assistance.

The authors correctly point out the harm of not believing in the current death toll of Gaza. I believe it is possible that you LoSboccacc have been consumed by misinformation. The US government and non-governmental organizations like the UN have recognized the accuracy of historic Gaza Ministry of Health reporting. The above The Lancet piece has found no evidence of inflation as well.

[bloop_bleep]

Perhaps it wasn't a sniper round. Perhaps it clipped their head. Perhaps the parents wanted to try to save their child anyway. There's many reasons why this is plausible.

[LoSboccacc]

So what you saying is that passing storytelling as fact is OK as long as it align with stereotypes

And again casualty bunch up combatants with civilians, then attributes the death to whichever event is more convenient, the number match the amount of people missing, but are attributed to tell the most convenient story, that's how you get 417 people with name and surname attributed to a rocket falling in a parking lot at night, they just use factual number overall, albeit with no distinction between civilian and not since all their combatants are non uniformed, but make up when and where and how

[StrawBarrel]

The whole plot of the story:

1) A group of people just wanted to get home
2) But evil Israeli genocidial snipers ambused them and shot their small children like game, going for headshots
3) Desperate parents rushed their mortally wounded children to the hospital
4) Heroic doctors tried to save them but having no supplies failed to do so

Is a piece of literature designed to provoke an emotional reaction to a tragedy. It is also absolutely unplausable on many levels.

Just telling the truth is boring and innefective. Instead of reporting the sad reality like children with head wounds are being brought to the hospitals or real children being caught in firefights and dying, propaganda produces such emotionally charged pieces.

Response to Strongpoint

Your conjecture does not disprove. I have not seen you Strongpoint present any evidence to debunk the killing of these children.

There have been multiple reports of Israeli military snipers shooting civilians in Gaza.


In December it was reported by the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem that:

An Israeli military sniper shot and killed two women inside the Holy Family Parish in Gaza on Saturday, according to the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/16/middleeast/idf-sniper-gaza-church-deaths-intl-hnk


On the 13th of this month, 3 Palestinians were killed by sniper fire at Nasser Hospital.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/three-palestinians-killed-by-israeli-sniper-fire-gazas-nasser-medical-complex-2024-02-13/


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Alon_Shamriz,_Yotam_Haim,_and_Samer_Talalka
According to this wikipedia article, on December 15, 2023 in Gaza three Israeli civilians: Yotam Haim, Alon Shamriz, and Samer Talalka were killed by the IDF.

An Israeli sniper then opened fire on them, killing Shamriz and Talalka and wounding Haim.

Yotam Haim was soon killed when

a soldier acting against the battalion commander's order shot and killed him.

https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20240111-ora-01-00-bi.pdf
On page 30 of Transcript of South Africa's submissions regarding provisional measures

This intent is evident from Israel’s conduct in:
(1) specially targeting Palestinians living in Gaza;
(2) using weaponry that causes large-scale homicidal destruction, as well as targeted sniping of
civilians;

A Palestinian father and daughter were killed by Israeli snipers in Gaza
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6__JTz_1iso&rco=1
This Middle East Eye video reports that:

Israeli snipers were conducting a field execution in Al-Shatie Refugee Camp in Gaza, in which they killed multiple Palestinian civilians, including a Palestinian father and daughter who were trying to find shelter.

War crimes perpetrated by snipers have occurred. Your disbelief does not bring those Palestinian and Israeli civilians back to life. I think that the best way to avenge those civilians is to bring those Israeli military snipers to The Hague in the Netherlands. War criminals, including snipers, must stand trial for the killing of innocent unarmed people.

[Strongpoint]

Perhaps it wasn't a sniper round. Perhaps it clipped their head. Perhaps the parents wanted to try to save their child anyway. There's many reasons why this is plausible.

You are looking for explanations as to why the story you like is true instead of examining it critically. It is like those who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible and believe an absolutely not plausible story of the Noah Ark. They will look for ways of how it could actually happen. It is pointless to point at geology, biology, geography, physics, and other facts that contradict the story

____________

This story may be based on reality. It is very likely that a group of children was brought to a hospital and some of them head wounds in their heads and no one of them survived. 

But why create a story that tells a dramatic cinematic propaganda story? Because the goal is not reporting, goal is to extract emotions and paint Israelis as demons.

Spoiler: Here is a photo I witnessed on a pro-Palestinian Twitter page (click to show/hide)

 

It is a rather obvious fake staged propaganda crap.

Does it mean that there are no injured people in Gaza? Nope. Thousands there have far worse injuries. But this is an emotion-inducing propaganda piece. A young injured Palestinian in a dramatic pose looking defiantly into the camera offers a cool and cinematic retweetable story.

This children murdered by snipers story is a similar BS designed to be a cool drama. There are many tragic events happening in Gaza. There is a healthy dose of actual Israeli war crimes.

__________________
Edit to illustrate

A Palestinian father and daughter were killed by Israeli snipers in Gaza
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6__JTz_1iso&rco=1
 

Here, we see a blurry video of dead people accompanied by someone's words. As we can see, for many people, it is enough of proof of intentional Israeli sniper fire, as if there are no other possible causes of death in a war zone.

What can I say to people who eat propaganda so happily and readily? Really, nothing

[bloop_bleep]

Perhaps it wasn't a sniper round. Perhaps it clipped their head. Perhaps the parents wanted to try to save their child anyway. There's many reasons why this is plausible.

You are looking for explanations as to why the story you like is true instead of examining it critically.

No, I am showing that not one of the series of assumptions you made about an eyewitness account, one of many, many similar, to discredit it has any bearing at all. You made up your own story to project onto what was actually said, then went "see? Look how implausible, my feelings say so." You're the one here who is constantly nitpicking and clutching for excuses to try to explain away every single one of the hundreds upon hundreds of direct first-person accounts of Israeli war crimes. But of course, we are just Israel haters, while your assertion that every single one of the 2 million people in the Gaza strip, from ordinary Palestinians to foreign aid workers to Western journalists, are scheming Hamas propagandists is completely rational and not based in any prejudice at all.

As well as your convenient amnesia about what we have already known about Israel. Have you forgotten when Israel shot dead three of its own hostages who were clearly and unmistakably surrendering because they thought they were Palestinian civilians? Or when Israel let go a bomb on top of the AP press building? Or when Israel blatantly assassinated a journalist, Shireen Abu Akleh, lied and said they didn't shoot her, sent police to beat up mourners at her funeral, then after the evidence started to appear made an about face and admitted that yes, they did actually shoot her? How about when they shelled and killed a Reuters journalist in the middle of an empty field right next to other journalists? Why is it so unreasonable to think Israel shot some more civilians, again, and lied about it, again? Are Israel's press office which contradicts itself all the time also a Hamas agent? Why does every reliable eyewitness account that is remotely critical of Israel gets to be surgically dissected but Israel's constant and effortless lies get a shrug?

While we were gone Israel massacred over 100 hungry people standing to get food. Again they contradicted themselves, first saying they didn't use any lethal force at all, saying the Palestinians ran over each other with trucks, and then saying they were defending themselves from the threat of the crowd of starving people. Utter depravity.

[hector13]

BBC article on the convoy massacre.

They can’t even get their story straight on it:

In further comments to the UK's Channel 4 News, IDF spokesman Lt Col Peter Lerner said a "mob stormed the convoy bringing it at some stage to a halt.

"The tanks that were there to secure the convoy see the Gazans being trampled and cautiously tries to disperse the mob with a few warning shots."

In a video statement posted on X at 20:35 GMT - 22:35 in Gaza and Israel - the IDF's Daniel Hagari claimed: "Hundreds became thousands and things got out of hand."

He said the tank commander decided to retreat to avoid harming civilians and "they were backing up securely, not shooting at the mob".

Which is it? Firing shots to calm civilians - never mind considering why they think that is step one in trying to de-escalate a situation - or retreating to get out the way?

[Maximum Spin]

BBC article on the convoy massacre.

They can’t even get their story straight on it:

In further comments to the UK's Channel 4 News, IDF spokesman Lt Col Peter Lerner said a "mob stormed the convoy bringing it at some stage to a halt.

"The tanks that were there to secure the convoy see the Gazans being trampled and cautiously tries to disperse the mob with a few warning shots."

In a video statement posted on X at 20:35 GMT - 22:35 in Gaza and Israel - the IDF's Daniel Hagari claimed: "Hundreds became thousands and things got out of hand."

He said the tank commander decided to retreat to avoid harming civilians and "they were backing up securely, not shooting at the mob".

Which is it? Firing shots to calm civilians - never mind considering why they think that is step one in trying to de-escalate a situation - or retreating to get out the way?

You... you can back up and fire into the air at the same time.
Look, it was absolutely a stupid, terrible plan - although the point of warning shots isn't to calm or de-escalate, but to scare people away - but don't you think you're getting a little too knee-jerk?

[bloop_bleep]

The most in-depth analysis I could find was, somehow, from CNN.

First Israel said Palestinians looted the convoy and in such a way trampled over themselves. Then they said that they shot Palestinians because they felt threatened. Now they're saying they just fired warning shots? But also, they didn't fire anything but just retreated calmly? Are there five different versions from the IDF at this point?

Such warning shots, that scores of people ended up with gunshot wounds in a nearby hospital, as relayed by the UN secretary general's spokesperson.

[hector13]

In what way is it knee-jerk? Just read the article.

Israeli spokespeople say most of the casualties were from stampeding and trampling and the aid vehicles leaving, while a hospital says that of the 176 patients they saw, 142 had bullet wounds. That falls into question “warning shots while leaving” narrative.

Even from the quotes I put in, the spokespeople seem very surprised that starving people are desperate for food.

[Maximum Spin]

In what way is it knee-jerk? Just read the article.

Israeli spokespeople say most of the casualties were from stampeding and trampling and the aid vehicles leaving, while a hospital says that of the 176 patients they saw, 142 had bullet wounds. That falls into question “warning shots while leaving” narrative.

Even from the quotes I put in, the spokespeople seem very surprised that starving people are desperate for food.

You said:

They can’t even get their story straight on it: [...] Which is it? Firing shots to calm civilians - never mind considering why they think that is step one in trying to de-escalate a situation - or retreating to get out the way?

but there's no conflict or contradiction between those two statements. Firing warning shots isn't shooting at the mob. If you believe the statements are false, that's another story, but to scoff that "they can't even get their story straight" when the two things are completely compatible is just a knee-jerk, poorly-thought-through reaction.