4 ms·

If you read the Wikipedia it specifically says that there is no evidence. The human shield claim is so the IOF can bomb civilian areas with no responsibility fo

If you read the Wikipedia it specifically says that there is no evidence. The human shield claim is so the IOF can bomb civilian areas with no responsibility for their deaths. Also, as for your story, I don’t believe them. More likely that soldier killed civilians knowingly and then made up the story after.

dvfjsdhgfv 3y ago
> If you read the Wikipedia it specifically says that there is no evidence. There is a lot of it, but of course you can say it's all fabricated, e.g. these examples: https://web.archive.org/web/20111018011032/http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Hamas+war+against+Israel/Hamas+exploitation+of+civilians+as+human+shields+-+Photographic+evidence.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20111018011032/http://www.mfa.go... However, the gist of "lack of evidence" is found in this quote: > The United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict ("UNFFMG") that took place in 2008–2009 accepted the possibility that Hamas launched mortar attacks from the vicinity of a school and from residential homes, sometimes by the threat of force against residents. The report was unable to find specific evidence that civilians whose homes were used for rocket launches were "forced to remain in their houses" but the report repeatedly noted that Gaza residents were "reluctant" to discuss the conduct of Palestinian armed forces due to fear of reprisals. So yes, if you are going to look for Palestinians who will testify in court that the were forced to remain in a given place or enable to escape for some time, you will never find such a person.
- enterprise_cog 3y ago
  You’re right, I refuse to blindly believe anything put out by Israel and need hard evidence. Hearsay is not that. Funny you mention that report though, it also states that Israel intentionally targeted civilians. Goldstone also said the evidence presented did not meet "the criminal standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt".
invalidname 3y ago
There's a lot of evidence but here's the son of the head of Hamas providing some: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8YYmrgAeqw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8YYmrgAeqw
- enterprise_cog 3y ago
  An Israeli collaborator who worked as an undercover spy is repeating Israeli propaganda. That isn’t evidence.
  - invalidname 3y ago
    Sure. You can always discount the multiple sources of evidence that you're given. You can ignore the well published beliefs of the Hamas which specifically state that "innocent Muslims" killed in the Jihad are rewarded in the afterlife. You can ignore all of those things. You can ignore the fact that they placed their headquarters under a hospital or that they fire rockets next to another hospital (and hit it by mistake then blamed Israel). Just as long as it fits the narrative of Israel is lying and the Hamas is, truthful??? What level of evidence do you need? There's motive, there's justification, there's first person testimony... What do you think, that the people who send suicide bombers into busses with children are too nice??? Confirmation bias is a problematic thing. For instance, I don't want to believe that the Hamas is truthful about the number of deaths in Gaza. But I don't KNOW that they are lying. I have no source of that other than their history. It's also very clear that they don't divide combatants from civilians which is the number I want to know. But the difference is my belief doesn't factor into this. I just don't know. That isn't evidence either. In this case the evidence is pretty damn clear.
    - enterprise_cog 3y ago
      All the sources just happen to be Israeli. Weird. You repeat Israeli and us propaganda about Hamas intentions. Should I quote Likud members saying Palestinians need to be wiped from the earth? Sounds like concrete evidence they are killing civilians on purpose. You repeat the lie that the rocket hit the hospital (no evidence of this and the evidence points to an Israeli bomb or shell) You also repeat the lie that there is a base under the hospital. You are starting from the assumption Israel is good and Hamas is bad, then working backwards to justify that. You blindly believe US and Israeli governments, when they have lied and continue to lie to the public. What motive and justification are you even talking about? Why would they even keep using human shields if they know Israel is just going to kill them anyway? You think Hamas wants their own people to die for funsies? Or maybe it’s that Israel is a genocidal state that needs to justify globally why it’s massacring civilians? Also amusing you post that you can’t know about the civilian deaths. The UN and other human rights groups have confirmed the numbers and said they are probably a low estimate. How is that not evidence for you? Divide civilians from combatants? How many of the 1400 Israelis killed on the 7th were IDF btw? But yeah, you’re right about confirmation bias being a thing.

dvfjsdhgfv 3y ago

> If you read the Wikipedia it specifically says that there is no evidence. There is a lot of it, but of course you can say it's all fabricated, e.g. these examples: https://web.archive.org/web/20111018011032/http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Hamas+war+against+Israel/Hamas+exploitation+of+civilians+as+human+shields+-+Photographic+evidence.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20111018011032/http://www.mfa.go... However, the gist of "lack of evidence" is found in this quote: > The United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict ("UNFFMG") that took place in 2008–2009 accepted the possibility that Hamas launched mortar attacks from the vicinity of a school and from residential homes, sometimes by the threat of force against residents. The report was unable to find specific evidence that civilians whose homes were used for rocket launches were "forced to remain in their houses" but the report repeatedly noted that Gaza residents were "reluctant" to discuss the conduct of Palestinian armed forces due to fear of reprisals. So yes, if you are going to look for Palestinians who will testify in court that the were forced to remain in a given place or enable to escape for some time, you will never find such a person.

enterprise_cog 3y ago
You’re right, I refuse to blindly believe anything put out by Israel and need hard evidence. Hearsay is not that. Funny you mention that report though, it also states that Israel intentionally targeted civilians. Goldstone also said the evidence presented did not meet "the criminal standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt".

invalidname 3y ago

There's a lot of evidence but here's the son of the head of Hamas providing some: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8YYmrgAeqw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8YYmrgAeqw

enterprise_cog 3y ago
An Israeli collaborator who worked as an undercover spy is repeating Israeli propaganda. That isn’t evidence.
- invalidname 3y ago
  Sure. You can always discount the multiple sources of evidence that you're given. You can ignore the well published beliefs of the Hamas which specifically state that "innocent Muslims" killed in the Jihad are rewarded in the afterlife. You can ignore all of those things. You can ignore the fact that they placed their headquarters under a hospital or that they fire rockets next to another hospital (and hit it by mistake then blamed Israel). Just as long as it fits the narrative of Israel is lying and the Hamas is, truthful??? What level of evidence do you need? There's motive, there's justification, there's first person testimony... What do you think, that the people who send suicide bombers into busses with children are too nice??? Confirmation bias is a problematic thing. For instance, I don't want to believe that the Hamas is truthful about the number of deaths in Gaza. But I don't KNOW that they are lying. I have no source of that other than their history. It's also very clear that they don't divide combatants from civilians which is the number I want to know. But the difference is my belief doesn't factor into this. I just don't know. That isn't evidence either. In this case the evidence is pretty damn clear.
  - enterprise_cog 3y ago
    All the sources just happen to be Israeli. Weird. You repeat Israeli and us propaganda about Hamas intentions. Should I quote Likud members saying Palestinians need to be wiped from the earth? Sounds like concrete evidence they are killing civilians on purpose. You repeat the lie that the rocket hit the hospital (no evidence of this and the evidence points to an Israeli bomb or shell) You also repeat the lie that there is a base under the hospital. You are starting from the assumption Israel is good and Hamas is bad, then working backwards to justify that. You blindly believe US and Israeli governments, when they have lied and continue to lie to the public. What motive and justification are you even talking about? Why would they even keep using human shields if they know Israel is just going to kill them anyway? You think Hamas wants their own people to die for funsies? Or maybe it’s that Israel is a genocidal state that needs to justify globally why it’s massacring civilians? Also amusing you post that you can’t know about the civilian deaths. The UN and other human rights groups have confirmed the numbers and said they are probably a low estimate. How is that not evidence for you? Divide civilians from combatants? How many of the 1400 Israelis killed on the 7th were IDF btw? But yeah, you’re right about confirmation bias being a thing.