2 ms·

Congratulations, you found the one fringe publication that contradicts the overwhelming consensus from OSINT and official investigations alike. You wanted so ba

by shykes 7mo ago

Congratulations, you found the one fringe publication that contradicts the overwhelming consensus from OSINT and official investigations alike. You wanted so badly Israel to be responsible, that you decided to trust the least credible source possible.

tovej 7mo ago
Least credible? Fringe? Forensic Architecture is a very respected source that has done in-depth technical analysis of many, many accidents and incidents, e.g. the Beirut port explosion. Articles from Forensic Architecture are often featured on HN. It received the Peabody award in 2021. It received the Right Livelihood award in 2024. It is a research unit under the university of London. Its reports have been used as evidence in cases in the Israeli supreme court and in the UN. The project has gotten numerous grants from the European research council, collaborated with Bellingcat, Amnesty international, and ACLED [1] Your kneejerk reaction to information that contradicts your priors is obvious. If you had bothered to do even a small google search you could have checked what FA actually is, rather than just lash out. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Conflict_Location_and_Event_Data https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Conflict_Location_and_Ev...
- shykes 7mo ago
  You haven't addressed the fact that the overwhelming OSINT consensus contradicts their claim, making it fringe by definition. I am very familiar with FA, and with that particular paper. That's the thing with echo chambers: the people inside of it are all repeating the same exact talking points, drawing from the same narrow set of "approved" sources. And in the case of Al-ahli, the set is very, very narrow, so it gets repeated a lot. Al-ahli is the ultimate test, because the evidence is so one-sided. If you can convince yourself, against overwhelming evidence, that Israel is still responsible - then you can convince yourself of anything.
  - tovej 7mo ago
    You have not presented any evidence, you're just claiming there is a consensus, and that it's foolproof. Please stop the posturing and produce something. As it is your post contains zero information content. Afaik, the cause of the explosion has not been conclusively shown by anyone, and it is still contested. But FA has presented the most detailed analysis of all. You're also painting with vey broad strokes, making claims about me picking from a narrow set of sources. Based on what? Vibes? Why don't you throw out some more accusations while you're at it. If you're familiar with FA, then your claim that they are not credible is very strange indeed. Because they are very thorough in their analysis, and known for it. It seems you have some very strong ideological reasons not to like the conclusions they come to.
    - shykes 7mo ago
      > You have not presented any evidence, you're just claiming there is a consensus - US government (Biden administration): https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-has-high-confidence-palestinian-rocket-caused-gaza-hospital-blast-official-2023-10-25 https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-has-high-confid... - Canadian government: https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/news/2023/10/statement-from-the-department-of-national-defence-and-the-canadian-armed-forces-on-the-recent-strike-at-al-ahli-hospital-in-gaza.html https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/news/20... - French government: https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-france-intelligence-7be0d59b9ceb58bbf2f03c5dc8222356 https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-france-intellige... - IDF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y70TjUKVYk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y70TjUKVYk - Human Rights Watch: https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/26/gaza-findings-october-17-al-ahli-hospital-explosion https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/26/gaza-findings-october-17... - Wall Street Journal: https://www.wsj.com/video/video-analysis-shows-gaza-hospital-hit-by-failed-rocket-meant-for-israel/120A1C22-BA32-418E-8837-BC4141FEFB00 https://www.wsj.com/video/video-analysis-shows-gaza-hospital... - Bellingcat: https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2023/10/18/identifying-possible-crater-from-gaza-hospital-blast/ https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2023/10/18/identifying-possi... > making claims about me picking from a narrow set of sources. Based on what? Based on the fact that you only provided one source? I did find two more sources that corroborate your claim that Israel is responsible: Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad... > Because they are very thorough in their analysis, and known for it. It seems you have some very strong ideological reasons not to like the conclusions they come to. And what conclusions would that be?

by shykes 7mo ago

tovej 7mo ago

Least credible? Fringe? Forensic Architecture is a very respected source that has done in-depth technical analysis of many, many accidents and incidents, e.g. the Beirut port explosion. Articles from Forensic Architecture are often featured on HN. It received the Peabody award in 2021. It received the Right Livelihood award in 2024. It is a research unit under the university of London. Its reports have been used as evidence in cases in the Israeli supreme court and in the UN. The project has gotten numerous grants from the European research council, collaborated with Bellingcat, Amnesty international, and ACLED [1] Your kneejerk reaction to information that contradicts your priors is obvious. If you had bothered to do even a small google search you could have checked what FA actually is, rather than just lash out. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Conflict_Location_and_Event_Data https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Conflict_Location_and_Ev...

shykes 7mo ago
You haven't addressed the fact that the overwhelming OSINT consensus contradicts their claim, making it fringe by definition. I am very familiar with FA, and with that particular paper. That's the thing with echo chambers: the people inside of it are all repeating the same exact talking points, drawing from the same narrow set of "approved" sources. And in the case of Al-ahli, the set is very, very narrow, so it gets repeated a lot. Al-ahli is the ultimate test, because the evidence is so one-sided. If you can convince yourself, against overwhelming evidence, that Israel is still responsible - then you can convince yourself of anything.
- tovej 7mo ago
  You have not presented any evidence, you're just claiming there is a consensus, and that it's foolproof. Please stop the posturing and produce something. As it is your post contains zero information content. Afaik, the cause of the explosion has not been conclusively shown by anyone, and it is still contested. But FA has presented the most detailed analysis of all. You're also painting with vey broad strokes, making claims about me picking from a narrow set of sources. Based on what? Vibes? Why don't you throw out some more accusations while you're at it. If you're familiar with FA, then your claim that they are not credible is very strange indeed. Because they are very thorough in their analysis, and known for it. It seems you have some very strong ideological reasons not to like the conclusions they come to.
  - shykes 7mo ago
    > You have not presented any evidence, you're just claiming there is a consensus - US government (Biden administration): https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-has-high-confidence-palestinian-rocket-caused-gaza-hospital-blast-official-2023-10-25 https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-has-high-confid... - Canadian government: https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/news/2023/10/statement-from-the-department-of-national-defence-and-the-canadian-armed-forces-on-the-recent-strike-at-al-ahli-hospital-in-gaza.html https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/news/20... - French government: https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-france-intelligence-7be0d59b9ceb58bbf2f03c5dc8222356 https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-france-intellige... - IDF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y70TjUKVYk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y70TjUKVYk - Human Rights Watch: https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/26/gaza-findings-october-17-al-ahli-hospital-explosion https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/26/gaza-findings-october-17... - Wall Street Journal: https://www.wsj.com/video/video-analysis-shows-gaza-hospital-hit-by-failed-rocket-meant-for-israel/120A1C22-BA32-418E-8837-BC4141FEFB00 https://www.wsj.com/video/video-analysis-shows-gaza-hospital... - Bellingcat: https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2023/10/18/identifying-possible-crater-from-gaza-hospital-blast/ https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2023/10/18/identifying-possi... > making claims about me picking from a narrow set of sources. Based on what? Based on the fact that you only provided one source? I did find two more sources that corroborate your claim that Israel is responsible: Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad... > Because they are very thorough in their analysis, and known for it. It seems you have some very strong ideological reasons not to like the conclusions they come to. And what conclusions would that be?