Hamas attack Israel & subsequent genocide

[Hound]

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 

That's for sure. Look at what Iran do to their own women/girls when they don't conform, there's no telling what they could do. And no doubt not only did Iran fund the Hamas atrocities of October 7, but probably also helped with the planning. And was it a coincidence that it happened when it seemed Saudi and Israel were very close to an agreement?

The Dutch PM over in Israel today, the latest in the line for shaking hands with Big Benjamin. Hamas have played so much into his hands, he just can't believe his luck, smiling like the cat that got the cream. 

[Armagh18]

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 

That's for sure. Look at what Iran do to their own women/girls when they don't conform, there's no telling what they could do. And no doubt not only did Iran fund the Hamas atrocities of October 7, but probably also helped with the planning. And was it a coincidence that it happened when it seemed Saudi and Israel were very close to an agreement?

The Dutch PM over in Israel today, the latest in the line for shaking hands with Big Benjamin. Hamas have played so much into his hands, he just can't believe his luck, smiling like the cat that got the cream. 

One more spineless bastard to add to the list.

[WT4E]

I totally agree with C4 that there's not enough evidence to decide either way. (Unlike you, who made up your mind immediately with no evidence and ignore all the evidence on one side and jump on the evidence on the other side).

What's the difference? You made up your mind based on one Israeli press conference.

Do you agree with Channel 4 that the version of events/evidence presented by Israel during that press conference looks likely to have been misleading and potentially falsified/fabricated? Do you still believe that they were being "open and transparent" about the attack in the press conference, which is what you immediately claimed after you watched it?

So, Hound? Given that Channel 4 have referenced expert opinion which suggests that the evidence relayed by the Israelis in their press conference about the hospital attack was misleading and potentially falsified/fabricated, do you stand by your belief that they were being "open and transparent" in said press conference?

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 - they were providing information that could be rebutted or not, they took questions from both, what they would see as, friendly and unfriendly journalists. This was different than previous press conferences when they would only take questions (probably pre-approved) from select journalists.

Is it just the recordings that two 'independent Arab experts' have questioned that you are saying was fabricated, or is there more?  Those recordings always were very flimsy in terms of so called 'evidence' and hold no water either way. The site itself is key. From what I have seen, C4 have not said the evidence points to Israel doing it, they said they have not reached a conclusion. But if there is new stuff please share.

Here is the CNN analysis. Very thorough and still not completely conclusive. Lots of independent experts and not all yanks. I think if Israel did it, Hamas would have been able to produce evidence from the site, but still can't point either way for sure.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/21/middleeast/cnn-investigates-forensic-analysis-gaza-hospital-blast/index.html

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. Wording used is 'likely' so still not absolute.

CNN took the Israeli line . So did Biden

The Israeli ambassador tried to convince Krishnan Guru Murthy that Israel didn't bomb the hospital.She justified her position citing Biden.

https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1715052724952179075

I totally agree with C4 that there's not enough evidence to decide either way. (Unlike you, who made up your mind immediately with no evidence and ignore all the evidence on one side and jump on the evidence on the other side).

What's the difference? You made up your mind based on one Israeli press conference.

Do you agree with Channel 4 that the version of events/evidence presented by Israel during that press conference looks likely to have been misleading and potentially falsified/fabricated? Do you still believe that they were being "open and transparent" about the attack in the press conference, which is what you immediately claimed after you watched it?

So, Hound? Given that Channel 4 have referenced expert opinion which suggests that the evidence relayed by the Israelis in their press conference about the hospital attack was misleading and potentially falsified/fabricated, do you stand by your belief that they were being "open and transparent" in said press conference?

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 - they were providing information that could be rebutted or not, they took questions from both, what they would see as, friendly and unfriendly journalists. This was different than previous press conferences when they would only take questions (probably pre-approved) from select journalists.

Is it just the recordings that two 'independent Arab experts' have questioned that you are saying was fabricated, or is there more?  Those recordings always were very flimsy in terms of so called 'evidence' and hold no water either way. The site itself is key. From what I have seen, C4 have not said the evidence points to Israel doing it, they said they have not reached a conclusion. But if there is new stuff please share.

Here is the CNN analysis. Very thorough and still not completely conclusive. Lots of independent experts and not all yanks. I think if Israel did it, Hamas would have been able to produce evidence from the site, but still can't point either way for sure.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/21/middleeast/cnn-investigates-forensic-analysis-gaza-hospital-blast/index.html

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. Wording used is 'likely' so still not absolute.

CNN took the Israeli line . So did Biden

The Israeli ambassador tried to convince Krishnan Guru Murthy that Israel didn't bomb the hospital.She justified her position citing Biden.

https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1715052724952179075

She argues about hamas killing their own. There is strong evidence to suggest that Israel killed a significant number of their own eople in the 7th Oct attacks. A tactic they have employed before.

They decided to shell buildings in kibbutzs where hamas where hiding out knowing they would kill plenty of their own citizens.

Terrible altogether.

Have deleted everything BBC I can at this stage.

[Hound]

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?

Did you read the CNN link MR? What was your take on that?

[PadraicHenryPearse]

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 

That's for sure. Look at what Iran do to their own women/girls when they don't conform, there's no telling what they could do. And no doubt not only did Iran fund the Hamas atrocities of October 7, but probably also helped with the planning. And was it a coincidence that it happened when it seemed Saudi and Israel were very close to an agreement?

The Dutch PM over in Israel today, the latest in the line for shaking hands with Big Benjamin. Hamas have played so much into his hands, he just can't believe his luck, smiling like the cat that got the cream. 

Ireland hardly has a strong history of looking after our own women and babies.

given the 'west' created Israel and supports Israel its not like the Palestinian resistence can get their weapons and funding from them, they are too busy funding Ukraine to stop that occupation.

80% of Israelis in a recent poll blamed Benjamin for what happened, strong rumours of a split/resignations in his Govt.

as a previous posters commented, there is growing evidence of Israelis bombing the kibbutz's taking no care for Israelis who were captive. This shouldn't be much of a surprise given their history of this, and  comments made on the 7th.

[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.

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?

Is it cos your Prime Minister said so on BBC "Northern Ireland"?
https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1716473178845745544

[seafoid]

I totally agree with C4 that there's not enough evidence to decide either way. (Unlike you, who made up your mind immediately with no evidence and ignore all the evidence on one side and jump on the evidence on the other side).

What's the difference? You made up your mind based on one Israeli press conference.

Do you agree with Channel 4 that the version of events/evidence presented by Israel during that press conference looks likely to have been misleading and potentially falsified/fabricated? Do you still believe that they were being "open and transparent" about the attack in the press conference, which is what you immediately claimed after you watched it?

So, Hound? Given that Channel 4 have referenced expert opinion which suggests that the evidence relayed by the Israelis in their press conference about the hospital attack was misleading and potentially falsified/fabricated, do you stand by your belief that they were being "open and transparent" in said press conference?

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 - they were providing information that could be rebutted or not, they took questions from both, what they would see as, friendly and unfriendly journalists. This was different than previous press conferences when they would only take questions (probably pre-approved) from select journalists.

Is it just the recordings that two 'independent Arab experts' have questioned that you are saying was fabricated, or is there more?  Those recordings always were very flimsy in terms of so called 'evidence' and hold no water either way. The site itself is key. From what I have seen, C4 have not said the evidence points to Israel doing it, they said they have not reached a conclusion. But if there is new stuff please share.

Here is the CNN analysis. Very thorough and still not completely conclusive. Lots of independent experts and not all yanks. I think if Israel did it, Hamas would have been able to produce evidence from the site, but still can't point either way for sure.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/21/middleeast/cnn-investigates-forensic-analysis-gaza-hospital-blast/index.html

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. Wording used is 'likely' so still not absolute.

CNN took the Israeli line . So did Biden

The Israeli ambassador tried to convince Krishnan Guru Murthy that Israel didn't bomb the hospital.She justified her position citing Biden.

https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1715052724952179075

I totally agree with C4 that there's not enough evidence to decide either way. (Unlike you, who made up your mind immediately with no evidence and ignore all the evidence on one side and jump on the evidence on the other side).

What's the difference? You made up your mind based on one Israeli press conference.

Do you agree with Channel 4 that the version of events/evidence presented by Israel during that press conference looks likely to have been misleading and potentially falsified/fabricated? Do you still believe that they were being "open and transparent" about the attack in the press conference, which is what you immediately claimed after you watched it?

So, Hound? Given that Channel 4 have referenced expert opinion which suggests that the evidence relayed by the Israelis in their press conference about the hospital attack was misleading and potentially falsified/fabricated, do you stand by your belief that they were being "open and transparent" in said press conference?

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 - they were providing information that could be rebutted or not, they took questions from both, what they would see as, friendly and unfriendly journalists. This was different than previous press conferences when they would only take questions (probably pre-approved) from select journalists.

Is it just the recordings that two 'independent Arab experts' have questioned that you are saying was fabricated, or is there more?  Those recordings always were very flimsy in terms of so called 'evidence' and hold no water either way. The site itself is key. From what I have seen, C4 have not said the evidence points to Israel doing it, they said they have not reached a conclusion. But if there is new stuff please share.

Here is the CNN analysis. Very thorough and still not completely conclusive. Lots of independent experts and not all yanks. I think if Israel did it, Hamas would have been able to produce evidence from the site, but still can't point either way for sure.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/21/middleeast/cnn-investigates-forensic-analysis-gaza-hospital-blast/index.html

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. Wording used is 'likely' so still not absolute.

CNN took the Israeli line . So did Biden

The Israeli ambassador tried to convince Krishnan Guru Murthy that Israel didn't bomb the hospital.She justified her position citing Biden.

https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1715052724952179075

She argues about hamas killing their own. There is strong evidence to suggest that Israel killed a significant number of their own eople in the 7th Oct attacks. A tactic they have employed before.

They decided to shell buildings in kibbutzs where hamas where hiding out knowing they would kill plenty of their own citizens.

Terrible altogether.

Have deleted everything BBC I can at this stage.

https://mondoweiss.net/2023/10/a-growing-number-of-reports-indicate-israeli-forces-responsible-for-israeli-civilian-and-military-deaths-following-october-7-attack/

[seafoid]

This is an important contribution from Obama, which reflects thinking in political circles in the US.
There is no going back to Netanyahu's occupation. The Yanks are not going to sacrifice Middle East stability for the sake of AIPAC

https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/1716524464643375138

[LeoMc]

I totally agree with C4 that there's not enough evidence to decide either way. (Unlike you, who made up your mind immediately with no evidence and ignore all the evidence on one side and jump on the evidence on the other side).

What's the difference? You made up your mind based on one Israeli press conference.

Do you agree with Channel 4 that the version of events/evidence presented by Israel during that press conference looks likely to have been misleading and potentially falsified/fabricated? Do you still believe that they were being "open and transparent" about the attack in the press conference, which is what you immediately claimed after you watched it?

So, Hound? Given that Channel 4 have referenced expert opinion which suggests that the evidence relayed by the Israelis in their press conference about the hospital attack was misleading and potentially falsified/fabricated, do you stand by your belief that they were being "open and transparent" in said press conference?

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 - they were providing information that could be rebutted or not, they took questions from both, what they would see as, friendly and unfriendly journalists. This was different than previous press conferences when they would only take questions (probably pre-approved) from select journalists.

Is it just the recordings that two 'independent Arab experts' have questioned that you are saying was fabricated, or is there more?  Those recordings always were very flimsy in terms of so called 'evidence' and hold no water either way. The site itself is key. From what I have seen, C4 have not said the evidence points to Israel doing it, they said they have not reached a conclusion. But if there is new stuff please share.

Here is the CNN analysis. Very thorough and still not completely conclusive. Lots of independent experts and not all yanks. I think if Israel did it, Hamas would have been able to produce evidence from the site, but still can't point either way for sure.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/21/middleeast/cnn-investigates-forensic-analysis-gaza-hospital-blast/index.html

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. Wording used is 'likely' so still not absolute.

CNN took the Israeli line . So did Biden

The Israeli ambassador tried to convince Krishnan Guru Murthy that Israel didn't bomb the hospital.She justified her position citing Biden.

https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1715052724952179075

I totally agree with C4 that there's not enough evidence to decide either way. (Unlike you, who made up your mind immediately with no evidence and ignore all the evidence on one side and jump on the evidence on the other side).

What's the difference? You made up your mind based on one Israeli press conference.

Do you agree with Channel 4 that the version of events/evidence presented by Israel during that press conference looks likely to have been misleading and potentially falsified/fabricated? Do you still believe that they were being "open and transparent" about the attack in the press conference, which is what you immediately claimed after you watched it?

So, Hound? Given that Channel 4 have referenced expert opinion which suggests that the evidence relayed by the Israelis in their press conference about the hospital attack was misleading and potentially falsified/fabricated, do you stand by your belief that they were being "open and transparent" in said press conference?

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 - they were providing information that could be rebutted or not, they took questions from both, what they would see as, friendly and unfriendly journalists. This was different than previous press conferences when they would only take questions (probably pre-approved) from select journalists.

Is it just the recordings that two 'independent Arab experts' have questioned that you are saying was fabricated, or is there more?  Those recordings always were very flimsy in terms of so called 'evidence' and hold no water either way. The site itself is key. From what I have seen, C4 have not said the evidence points to Israel doing it, they said they have not reached a conclusion. But if there is new stuff please share.

Here is the CNN analysis. Very thorough and still not completely conclusive. Lots of independent experts and not all yanks. I think if Israel did it, Hamas would have been able to produce evidence from the site, but still can't point either way for sure.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/21/middleeast/cnn-investigates-forensic-analysis-gaza-hospital-blast/index.html

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. Wording used is 'likely' so still not absolute.

CNN took the Israeli line . So did Biden

The Israeli ambassador tried to convince Krishnan Guru Murthy that Israel didn't bomb the hospital.She justified her position citing Biden.

https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1715052724952179075

She argues about hamas killing their own. There is strong evidence to suggest that Israel killed a significant number of their own eople in the 7th Oct attacks. A tactic they have employed before.

They decided to shell buildings in kibbutzs where hamas where hiding out knowing they would kill plenty of their own citizens.

Terrible altogether.

Have deleted everything BBC I can at this stage.

https://mondoweiss.net/2023/10/a-growing-number-of-reports-indicate-israeli-forces-responsible-for-israeli-civilian-and-military-deaths-following-october-7-attack/

Like Hamas, Israel are not above creating a few martyrs.
The Palestinian and Israeli people are caught in a struggle between a nihilistic death cult and an ethnic-fascist machine that wants to oblige them.

[seafoid]

One of the big differences between the North and the rest of the island rears its ugly head in times of war. The UK is currently run in the interest of MI5 and maintaining the global power system. The UK media  reflects that.
https://twitter.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1715987601738620982
https://twitter.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1713803445256204421

RTE is Irish and reflects Irish culture which always stands up for modern day Croppies because that is who we were. The GAA emerged out of that history. Every parish is equal. It's the opposite of British war culture.

https://twitter.com/speirin/status/1712970747457507810
https://twitter.com/umyaznemo/status/1712911970041577885

[Rossfan]

Dies Netanyahu and his gang of thugs realise that they have created maybe 50,000 new guerrillas to fight them in the future by their indiscriminate bombing and killing of Civilians including 2,000 children

Arrogant use of brute force seldom pays off.

[PadraicHenryPearse]

from Rte correspondant - At least 5,791 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli strikes on Gaza since Oct 7, according to its health ministry, including 2,360 children. It added 704 Palestinians had been killed in the previous 24 hours alone.

[burdizzo]

Dies Netanyahu and his gang of thugs realise that they have created maybe 50,000 new guerrillas to fight them in the future by their indiscriminate bombing and killing of Civilians including 2,000 children

Arrogant use of brute force seldom pays off.

Dunno. Look at Hiroshima. Look at Nagasaki. Even Dresden. If anything, the Israelis aren't going hard enough. I remember our old history teacher saying there's no use in being half-assed about using force: either don't use it at all, or use it so brutally that the population will be cowed into submission. Thus, if there's a sniper in a block of flats, destroy the whole block of flats. Make the populace see there's no profit in harbouring insurgents. He was talking about putting down unrest in the Eastern Bloc countries (and he was a communist), but the same could apply here. Mind you, the Israelis are possibly getting there in the brutality stakes.

[Snapchap]

I see the New York Times has become the latest media outlet to question the evidence Israel has presented on the hospital attack following an analysis of the video Israel used as evidence.

To quote their artcile:
"The Times concluded that the missile in the video was never near the hospital. It was launched from Israel, not Gaza, and appears to have exploded above the Israeli-Gaza border, at least two miles away from the hospital."

Their investigation also suggests that the hospital attack took place at a time when:

"footage suggests that Israeli bombardment was taking place and that two explosions near the hospital can be seen within two minutes of it being struck."

Hound, I know I've asked you this a few times to no avail, but I may as well try again: do you stand by your claim that Israel was "anxious to BE open and transparent" about the hospital attack during their press conference?

[johnnycool]

The UN Secretary General has grown a big, bold set of balls and come out and said out loud what we all know and think.

Will he last today in his job?

If he's forced to resign then you might as well bin the UN as an entity, they're only the play things for the US and it's allies.