5 ms·

It's why they target news agencies such as AP. Now you can't get pictures on the ground. So we all have to rely on is low resolution maps to judge damage. "S

It's why they target news agencies such as AP. Now you can't get pictures on the ground. So we all have to rely on is low resolution maps to judge damage. "Security measures", or so they say. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

loceng 5y ago
And plausible deniability only goes so far - shallow thought, propaganda only goes so far until it meets adequate critical thinking; reminds me of Jordan Peterson in his last book Beyond Order - it's the intelligent ideologue that's the most dangerous.
Zhenya 5y ago
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.
- gokhan 5y ago
  IDF couldn't provide any evidence of Hamas' existence in that building, it was all over the media yesterday. https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/1394287848950427649 https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/1394287848950427649
  - LeoNatan25 5y ago
    IDF provided the evidence to US intelligence, and apparently that hasn’t made its way to the US state department yet.
    - sschueller 5y ago
      That is absolutely ridiculous. The US state department is on top of things. There is no way they do not have this information if it exists.
      - LeoNatan25 5y ago
        More info was sent: https://www.ynetnews.com/article/SJA7sEZYd https://www.ynetnews.com/article/SJA7sEZYd "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"
  - yuvalr1 5y ago
    I wouldn't say IDF couldn't provide. Classified evidence takes time to compile when being passed to foreign countries. If this was truly a Hamas operations office, it changes the whole picture.
  - cnlevy 5y ago
    The postman was late. It doesn't mean there's no evidence https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/1394631387265777666 https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/1394631387265777666
    - guerrilla 5y ago
      I'm thinking as democracies we should not rely on secret evidence. I'll buy it when it's public, until then the burden of proof remains on them. It's okay not to kmow.
    - mslm 5y ago
      There needs to be an independent investigation, as top AP people have said. The world won't at this point believe any "evidence" because the criminal claims they have it.
- M277 5y ago
  I don't understand. AP claims to have been using the building for years, and they didn't know that there were Hamas operations with them? Not only that, but what is your proof to call it the correct explanation?
- runarberg 5y ago
  Don‘t discount a conspiracy just because the conspirators are incompetent. In fact, the opposite is usually true. Your average conspiracy usually has multiple layers of incompetents. If a conspiracy looks flawless, it is usually because there is no conspiracy. 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.
asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
I'm not seeing any shortage of pictures from the ground. I mean, I agree that targeting news agencies would be a step you would take if you wanted to prevent images from the ground but you would have to be far more sweeping in your approach. If the goal is to prevent news images from making their way out of Palestine this may be the most abject policy failure the world has ever witnessed.
- jussij 5y ago
  The facts remain; Israel did bomb the offices of Al Jazeera and The Associated Press. That action looks a lot like Israel targeting news agencies and the two news agencies involved have both raised their concerns about that unprecedented action by Israel.
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
    > That action looks a lot like Israel targeting news agencies and the two news agencies involved have both raised their concerns about that unprecedented action by Israel. They might be targeting those news agencies, but not for the purpose of suppressing images on the ground, which is what we were talking about. It's just implausible given the totality of evidence that that is the main concern. You can't just look at that one action to draw a conclusion when there is a massive amount of other contravening evidence.
    - mslm 5y ago
      There is such a thing as being too haughty and thinking, "why not?". Given the impunity with which they're currently carrying out their massacres, it wouldn't have seemed to them that blowing up a media building would be problematic. Now they're getting railed even by people who would normally not care otherwise.
  - ridiculous_lol 5y ago
    More like they bombed a building which has offices of Al Jazeera and the AP among other things.
- 5y ago

loceng 5y ago

And plausible deniability only goes so far - shallow thought, propaganda only goes so far until it meets adequate critical thinking; reminds me of Jordan Peterson in his last book Beyond Order - it's the intelligent ideologue that's the most dangerous.

Zhenya 5y ago

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.

gokhan 5y ago
IDF couldn't provide any evidence of Hamas' existence in that building, it was all over the media yesterday. https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/1394287848950427649 https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/1394287848950427649
- LeoNatan25 5y ago
  IDF provided the evidence to US intelligence, and apparently that hasn’t made its way to the US state department yet.
  - sschueller 5y ago
    That is absolutely ridiculous. The US state department is on top of things. There is no way they do not have this information if it exists.
    - LeoNatan25 5y ago
      More info was sent: https://www.ynetnews.com/article/SJA7sEZYd https://www.ynetnews.com/article/SJA7sEZYd "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"
- yuvalr1 5y ago
  I wouldn't say IDF couldn't provide. Classified evidence takes time to compile when being passed to foreign countries. If this was truly a Hamas operations office, it changes the whole picture.
- cnlevy 5y ago
  The postman was late. It doesn't mean there's no evidence https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/1394631387265777666 https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/1394631387265777666
  - guerrilla 5y ago
    I'm thinking as democracies we should not rely on secret evidence. I'll buy it when it's public, until then the burden of proof remains on them. It's okay not to kmow.
  - mslm 5y ago
    There needs to be an independent investigation, as top AP people have said. The world won't at this point believe any "evidence" because the criminal claims they have it.
M277 5y ago
I don't understand. AP claims to have been using the building for years, and they didn't know that there were Hamas operations with them? Not only that, but what is your proof to call it the correct explanation?
runarberg 5y ago
Don‘t discount a conspiracy just because the conspirators are incompetent. In fact, the opposite is usually true. Your average conspiracy usually has multiple layers of incompetents. If a conspiracy looks flawless, it is usually because there is no conspiracy. 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.

asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago

I'm not seeing any shortage of pictures from the ground. I mean, I agree that targeting news agencies would be a step you would take if you wanted to prevent images from the ground but you would have to be far more sweeping in your approach. If the goal is to prevent news images from making their way out of Palestine this may be the most abject policy failure the world has ever witnessed.

jussij 5y ago
The facts remain; Israel did bomb the offices of Al Jazeera and The Associated Press. That action looks a lot like Israel targeting news agencies and the two news agencies involved have both raised their concerns about that unprecedented action by Israel.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
  > That action looks a lot like Israel targeting news agencies and the two news agencies involved have both raised their concerns about that unprecedented action by Israel. They might be targeting those news agencies, but not for the purpose of suppressing images on the ground, which is what we were talking about. It's just implausible given the totality of evidence that that is the main concern. You can't just look at that one action to draw a conclusion when there is a massive amount of other contravening evidence.
  - mslm 5y ago
    There is such a thing as being too haughty and thinking, "why not?". Given the impunity with which they're currently carrying out their massacres, it wouldn't have seemed to them that blowing up a media building would be problematic. Now they're getting railed even by people who would normally not care otherwise.
- ridiculous_lol 5y ago
  More like they bombed a building which has offices of Al Jazeera and the AP among other things.
5y ago