Hamas attack Israel & subsequent genocide

[Milltown Row2]

There's a great question and answers segment on 5 live now..

Questions from the general public regarding the history and reasons behind the current war.

[Snapchap]

Christ almighty, talk about getting hung up on one point.
As I said before, at that press conference the IDF were doing their best to be seen as open and transparent

Incorrect. You didn't say they were trying  to "be seen" to be open and transparent in their press conference. You said they were anxious to "BE open and transparent". Two very, very different things.

And I'm not talking about a voice recording as a piece of evidence in its own right. I'm talking about the expert opinion that it is suggesting this specific voice recording was fabricated (two voices recorded separately and edited together with additional sound effects added to the track).

So I'd have thought that it is beyond question, that there is at the very least a reasonable doubt as to whether the evidence presented by the Israelis in their press conference was real and not falsified/fabricated.

So my question (again) is not whether you think the Israelis were trying to "seem"  open and transparent (because of course they were trying to SEEM that way ffs), or whether you still stand by your initial claim that they were "anxious to BE open and transparent".

I see the UK (who had been silent on it so far) have now said the evidence they have looked at points to the weapon that hit the hospital coming from Gaza and not from Israel.

Oh well there we have it then. I mean if the Brits said so, it must be true. I think I can speak for every six county nationalist when I ask you if you typed that bit with a straight face?

[Milltown Row2]

Christ almighty, talk about getting hung up on one point.
As I said before, at that press conference the IDF were doing their best to be seen as open and transparent

Incorrect. You didn't say they were trying  to "be seen" to be open and transparent in their press conference. You said they were anxious to "BE open and transparent". Two very, very different things.

And I'm not talking about a voice recording as a piece of evidence in its own right. I'm talking about the expert opinion that it is suggesting this specific voice recording was fabricated (two voices recorded separately and edited together with additional sound effects added to the track).

So I'd have thought that it is beyond question, that there is at the very least a reasonable doubt as to whether the evidence presented by the Israelis in their press conference was real and not falsified/fabricated.

So my question (again) is not whether you think the Israelis were trying to "seem"  open and transparent (because of course they were trying to SEEM that way ffs), or whether you still stand by your initial claim that they were "anxious to BE open and transparent".

Snap, do you feel confident that it was an Israeli missile strike? Similar to the ones that have been happening daily?

[armaghniac]

The question of whether babies were beheaded is a bit like arguing over whether the hospital was bombed or its car park. It is absolutely important to have correct facts but it also doesn't change the death toll.

As for the hospital evidence seems contradictory, perhaps it was some sort of black ops thing by one side to blame the other?

[seafoid]

Christ almighty, talk about getting hung up on one point.
As I said before, at that press conference the IDF were doing their best to be seen as open and transparent

Incorrect. You didn't say they were trying  to "be seen" to be open and transparent in their press conference. You said they were anxious to "BE open and transparent". Two very, very different things.

And I'm not talking about a voice recording as a piece of evidence in its own right. I'm talking about the expert opinion that it is suggesting this specific voice recording was fabricated (two voices recorded separately and edited together with additional sound effects added to the track).

So I'd have thought that it is beyond question, that there is at the very least a reasonable doubt as to whether the evidence presented by the Israelis in their press conference was real and not falsified/fabricated.

So my question (again) is not whether you think the Israelis were trying to "seem"  open and transparent (because of course they were trying to SEEM that way ffs), or whether you still stand by your initial claim that they were "anxious to BE open and transparent".

Snap, do you feel confident that it was an Israeli missile strike? Similar to the ones that have been happening daily?

Of course the Israelis bombed the Hospital. Israeli spokesman Hanana Naftali confirmed that the hospital was targeted on Twitter before the spin developed and he deleted his tweet. Israel previously bombed hospitals in Beirut and Gaza.

Israeli army open and transparent is a joke.

[Milltown Row2]

Christ almighty, talk about getting hung up on one point.
As I said before, at that press conference the IDF were doing their best to be seen as open and transparent

Incorrect. You didn't say they were trying  to "be seen" to be open and transparent in their press conference. You said they were anxious to "BE open and transparent". Two very, very different things.

And I'm not talking about a voice recording as a piece of evidence in its own right. I'm talking about the expert opinion that it is suggesting this specific voice recording was fabricated (two voices recorded separately and edited together with additional sound effects added to the track).

So I'd have thought that it is beyond question, that there is at the very least a reasonable doubt as to whether the evidence presented by the Israelis in their press conference was real and not falsified/fabricated.

So my question (again) is not whether you think the Israelis were trying to "seem"  open and transparent (because of course they were trying to SEEM that way ffs), or whether you still stand by your initial claim that they were "anxious to BE open and transparent".

Snap, do you feel confident that it was an Israeli missile strike? Similar to the ones that have been happening daily?

Of course the Israelis bombed the Hospital. Israeli spokesman Hanana Naftali confirmed that the hospital was targeted on Twitter before the spin developed and he deleted his tweet. Israel previously bombed hospitals in Beirut and Gaza.

Israeli army open and transparent is a joke.

I've asked someone else the question, but previously blowing up churches, schools hospitals and buildings is not what we are talking about, I've seen multiple 'experts' on multiple news stations claiming xy and z..

At this point it doesn't really matter, as everybody knows the Israeli government has lied so many times in the past, it sorta falls on deaf ears.

I'm not on the ground and have as much expertise on the situation as you and your google button.

Nearly 5000 deaths or more and more than double that soon enough, how many deaths will be enough for the Israeli government?

[Snapchap]

Christ almighty, talk about getting hung up on one point.
As I said before, at that press conference the IDF were doing their best to be seen as open and transparent

Incorrect. You didn't say they were trying  to "be seen" to be open and transparent in their press conference. You said they were anxious to "BE open and transparent". Two very, very different things.

And I'm not talking about a voice recording as a piece of evidence in its own right. I'm talking about the expert opinion that it is suggesting this specific voice recording was fabricated (two voices recorded separately and edited together with additional sound effects added to the track).

So I'd have thought that it is beyond question, that there is at the very least a reasonable doubt as to whether the evidence presented by the Israelis in their press conference was real and not falsified/fabricated.

So my question (again) is not whether you think the Israelis were trying to "seem"  open and transparent (because of course they were trying to SEEM that way ffs), or whether you still stand by your initial claim that they were "anxious to BE open and transparent".

Snap, do you feel confident that it was an Israeli missile strike? Similar to the ones that have been happening daily?

Can I prove Israel bombed it? Of course not. Am I confident that they did bomb it? Absolutely. I mean, they did already bomb it twice earlier that same week and they also stated their intention to carry out this third attack.

Mind you, Israel said they didn't actually do this third bombing, and, Hound now says the Brits have stated that they don't believe Israel didn't bomb it, and as we all know, the Brits have never lied about anything, especially not about state murder of civilians. Never ever ever. So it's a real toughie alright.

[Milltown Row2]

Don't fall into the trap of they did it before and they'll do it again, I'm no way disputing that they carried out previous attacks.

Just this attack I'm looking at.

They more than likely did but with all the conflicting evidence it's not definitive for me, or a lay person like yourself.

Israel should have been able to show the timing of rockets fired at that time, the Americans should have that info as well, via their own satellite capabilities. But it's telling they haven't been able to, or at this stage would anyone believe them!

We should be well aware of that growing up here, were we've never got the truth on so many deaths.

Like I said earlier it's disgusting knowing what's going to happen next

[PadraicHenryPearse]

2 more hostages released both in their 80's.  they are the two hostages the Israelis refused to take yesterday.

[Milltown Row2]

2 more hostages released both in their 80's.  they are the two hostages the Israelis refused to take yesterday.

Who took them?

[PadraicHenryPearse]

who took them hostage or who took them as Israel refused to take them earlier? its not hard to use Google or twitter to find out either!!!

Hamas released them to the Red Cross(I believe) and then into Eygpt and then Israel. It is not the same two Israel refused yesterday. Its only 1 of the 2.

I can only guess that Israel was bombing so much yesterday and didn't want to stop so refused the release. 

[theskull1]

Where is  the Israel Hamas war headed? Could it lead to WWIII?

Good discussion on Twitter at the minute

[Milltown Row2]

I'm not sure of the context of your post, are you saying that it's a good thing?

[imtommygunn]

Where is  the Israel Hamas war headed? Could it lead  to WWIII?

Good discussion on Twitter at the minute

I would have a bad feeling this thing is going to spiral soon enough and it could end up very bad. Russia visiting Iran and various other things going on.

The world not in a healthy state 

[Snapchap]

Don't fall into the trap of they did it before and they'll do it again, I'm no way disputing that they carried out previous attacks.

Just this attack I'm looking at.

They more than likely did but with all the conflicting evidence it's not definitive for me, or a lay person like yourself.

Israel should have been able to show the timing of rockets fired at that time, the Americans should have that info as well, via their own satellite capabilities. But it's telling they haven't been able to, or at this stage would anyone believe them!

We should be well aware of that growing up here, were we've never got the truth on so many deaths.

Like I said earlier it's disgusting knowing what's going to happen next

It's not definitive in that we don't have the evidence, but as far as I'm concerned, it's the experience of living here which has taught me that nobody should take a state like Israel at their word. And their record of being caught out lying about war crimes and murders demonstrates that I'm right to not take them at their word.

As I said earlier, just because I can't definitely prove it was an Israeli attack, doesn't mean I'm not absolutely confident that it was an Israeli attack, and not just because of their denials, but because of a multitude of other reasons which, as I've previously outlined, make it a textbook Occam's razor scenario, where the most simple explanation is generally the right one: The hospital was most likely bombed by the group that bombed it twice previously the same week, that said they were going to bomb it again, that has bombed a succession of other hospitals and civilian buildings in the last fortnight, that has dropped over 6000 bombs on buildings in the region in the last fortnight and which produced evidence to support their denials of responsibility which experts have suggested may have been fabricated/falsified.