News Hundreds killed in Gaza hospital massacre

[Excommunicado]

Hundreds of civilians have been confirmed dead with even more feared dead, after an attack on a hospital in Gaza.

Here are a few articles reporting today’s events:

Hundreds killed in Israeli air raid on Gaza hospital

Palestinian Health Ministry says at least 500 people have been killed in an attack on a hospital in central Gaza.

www.aljazeera.com

Jordan cancels Biden summit after deadly explosion at Gaza hospital

Israelis and Palestinians blame each other after blast in which hundreds are feared dead

www.ft.com

After blast kills hundreds at Gaza hospital, Hamas and Israel trade blame as rage spreads in region

The Hamas-run Health Ministry in the Gaza Strip says at least 500 have been killed in an explosion that it says was caused by an Israeli airstrike.

apnews.com

I have once again provided multiple sources due to the misinformation and biased reporting regarding this conflict.

As for my person opinion, well done to the UK, US & co for urging Israel on to massacre innocent Palestinian civilians - most of which are children. Bravo!

 

[Al]

What do you make of reports that this was a misfired rocket from Islamic Jihad, a Hamas ally and not the results of an Israeli strike? The claims and counter-claims mean we may never know the truth.

Gaza hospital: What video, pictures and other evidence tell us about Al-Ahli hospital blast https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67144061

Information in the article above seems to suggest this was likely an ‘own goal’ and not an Israeli air strike.

As for my person opinion, well done to the UK, US & co for urging Israel on to massacre innocent Palestinian civilians - most of which are children. Bravo!

Before people start apportioning blame for this, on 7 October, Hamas attacked Israel killing more than 1,400 people and taking 222 hostage.

If 7 October didn’t happen, perhaps the hospital tragedy wouldn’t have happened either. I’m not suggesting Israel is innocent of any wrongdoing, but if you want peace, you don’t achieve it through mass murder.

 

[Excommunicado]

What do you make of reports that this was a misfired rocket from Islamic Jihad, a Hamas ally and not the results of an Israeli strike? The claims and counter-claims mean we may never know the truth.

Gaza hospital: What video, pictures and other evidence tell us about Al-Ahli hospital blast https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67144061

Information in the article above seems to suggest this was likely an ‘own goal’ and not an Israeli air strike.

I don’t believe it. The findings from the footage are inconclusive therefore it doesn’t suggest or prove anything. In fact, the article points out the inconsistency in Israel’s briefing of the attack. On that subject, isn’t it interesting that Israel got ahold of an audio conversation between Hamas members in which they talk about who did the attack, how it happened and where it happened, all in the space of 60 seconds in the form of crystal clear, uninterrupted audio. Almost studio-like - couldn’t be doctored, right?

Before people start apportioning blame for this, on 7 October, Hamas attacked Israel killing more than 1,400 people and taking 222 hostage.

If 7 October didn’t happen, perhaps the hospital tragedy wouldn’t have happened either. I’m not suggesting Israel is innocent of any wrongdoing, but if you want peace, you don’t achieve it through mass murder.

That would be true if this conflict started on 7 October. You wouldn’t know much about it though because this conflict has only received this much publicity because Israel was in the receiving end for once (to which they retaliated with horrific war crimes against children and hospitals).

Also, that isn’t a justification for war crimes on innocent people.

 

[Al]

I don’t believe it. The findings from the footage are inconclusive therefore it doesn’t suggest or prove anything.

Precisely my point. Nothing is conclusive and it is all theory - but you were very quick to point the finger with emotive language such as "well done to the UK, US & co for urging Israel on to massacre innocent Palestinian civilians - most of which are children. Bravo!"

People are quick to either blame Israel or blame Hamas depending upon their political or religious point of view - and stuck in the middle of this, the people of Palestine. I do not support either Israel or Hamas/Hezbollah or any other group. My concern is for the people stuck in the middle.

That would be true if this conflict started on 7 October. You wouldn’t know much about it though because....

I was aware of Israeli-Palestine 'problem' before you were born, young man. You don't need to lecture me about when the conflict started! I remember seeing Yasser Arafat on TV in the 90s and reading up on the formation of Israel and the Arab-Israeli wars which occurred as a result. I remember the Oslo Accords from 1993. As I said above, "I’m not suggesting Israel is innocent of any wrongdoing, but if you want peace, you don’t achieve it through mass murder."

 

[Excommunicado]

Precisely my point. Nothing is conclusive and it is all theory - but you were very quick to point the finger with emotive language such as "well done to the UK, US & co for urging Israel on to massacre innocent Palestinian civilians - most of which are children. Bravo!"

People are quick to either blame Israel or blame Hamas depending upon their political or religious point of view - and stuck in the middle of this, the people of Palestine. I do not support either Israel or Hamas/Hezbollah or any other group. My concern is for the people stuck in the middle.

Considering there is a war going on, I don’t think it is far-fetched to point the finger at the opposition when an attack happens. Israel have already shown that they have no problem committing war crimes - cutting off water & electricity, using illegal gasses and killing children; they have no regard for any Palestinian lives even if they are children so I wouldn’t put attacking a hospital past them. They’ve also lied about plenty of things such as women being raped and babies being beheaded so I wouldn’t put lying past them either. Forgive me for looking at it from a logical perspective and not taking Israel’s word for it. It’s crazy how Israel can commit a war crime such as this, claim they didn’t do it and it’s inconclusive.

I was aware of Israeli-Palestine 'problem' before you were born, young man. You don't need to lecture me about when the conflict started! I remember seeing Yasser Arafat on TV in the 90s and reading up on the formation of Israel and the Arab-Israeli wars which occurred as a result. I remember the Oslo Accords from 1993. As I said above, "I’m not suggesting Israel is innocent of any wrongdoing, but if you want peace, you don’t achieve it through mass murder."

So what are Palestinians supposed to do in an apartheid? Is mass murder only a reasonable option to ‘achieve peace’ if it is done by the UK, US, Israel, etc?

 

[Al]

The BBC article cites four 'experts'. They say:

• J Andres Gannon, an assistant professor at Vanderbilt University, in the US, says the ground explosions appeared to be small, meaning that the heat generated from the impact may have been caused by leftover rocket fuel rather than an explosion from a warhead.
• Justin Bronk, senior research fellow at the UK-based Royal United Services Institute, agrees. While it is difficult to be sure at such an early stage, he says, the evidence looks like the explosion was caused by a failed rocket section hitting the car park and causing a fuel and propellant fire.
• Mr Gannon says it is not possible to determine whether the projectile struck its intended target from the footage he has seen. He adds that the flashes in the sky likely indicate the projectile was a rocket with an engine that overheated and stopped working.
• Valeria Scuto, lead Middle East analyst at Sibylline, a risk assessment company, notes that Israel has the capacity to carry out other forms of air strike by drone, where they might use Hellfire missiles. These missiles generate a significant amount of heat but would not necessarily leave a large crater. But she says uncorroborated footage shows a pattern of fires at the hospital site that was not consistent with this explanation.

Of four who commented. Three say it is likely to be a misfired rocket. One says it might be Israeli but asserts that there no evidence of this.

UK intelligence services have concluded that the deadly blast at al-Ahli Arab hospital in Gaza was caused by a rocket fired by a Palestinian militant group rather than by an Israeli airstrike. LINK

Irrespective of who is to blame, it's a tragic situation. No less tragic than the 1400 civilians murdered by Hamas. No less tragic than the thousands and Palestinian's killed by Israeli Security Forces over the years. No less tragic than the numerous arab-israeli wars. No less tragic than the mass displacement of Palestinians when Israel was formed. No less tragic than the Holocaust which had a decisive influence on the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948. No less, no less, no less.

You see, as long as there are humans on the planet there will be humans willing to kill each other over land, resources, money, ideology or religion. There are no easy answers. If there were we wouldn't be in this situation. John Lennon said, "GIVE PEACE A CHANCE" - but whilst you have people ready and willing to kill and die for a cause, that just ain't gonna happen.

 

[Uncrowned Guard]

Sadly this war is getting so much personal feelings and media drama around it that the details are likely to never be proven. The hospital explosion does seem to be a Hamas-generated incident, but overall the war as a whole is the second wrong answering the first wrongdoing. Granted, I (and most people) seem to have no answers on the correct solution here as simply having "peace" does not work out over and over again.

 

[Excommunicado]

The BBC article cites four 'experts'. They say:

• J Andres Gannon, an assistant professor at Vanderbilt University, in the US, says the ground explosions appeared to be small, meaning that the heat generated from the impact may have been caused by leftover rocket fuel rather than an explosion from a warhead.
• Justin Bronk, senior research fellow at the UK-based Royal United Services Institute, agrees. While it is difficult to be sure at such an early stage, he says, the evidence looks like the explosion was caused by a failed rocket section hitting the car park and causing a fuel and propellant fire.
• Mr Gannon says it is not possible to determine whether the projectile struck its intended target from the footage he has seen. He adds that the flashes in the sky likely indicate the projectile was a rocket with an engine that overheated and stopped working.
• Valeria Scuto, lead Middle East analyst at Sibylline, a risk assessment company, notes that Israel has the capacity to carry out other forms of air strike by drone, where they might use Hellfire missiles. These missiles generate a significant amount of heat but would not necessarily leave a large crater. But she says uncorroborated footage shows a pattern of fires at the hospital site that was not consistent with this explanation.

Of four who commented. Three say it is likely to be a misfired rocket. One says it might be Israeli but asserts that there no evidence of this.

UK intelligence services have concluded that the deadly blast at al-Ahli Arab hospital in Gaza was caused by a rocket fired by a Palestinian militant group rather than by an Israeli airstrike. LINK

Given the mass spread of misinformation by the western media, I don’t believe a word these ‘experts’ say. I can’t convince you either. Sad truth is that we’ll never truly know and the culprit, whoever it may be, has escaped accountability for this catastrophe.

Irrespective of who is to blame, it's a tragic situation. No less tragic than the 1400 civilians murdered by Hamas. No less tragic than the thousands and Palestinian's killed by Israeli Security Forces over the years. No less tragic than the numerous arab-israeli wars. No less tragic than the mass displacement of Palestinians when Israel was formed. No less tragic than the Holocaust which had a decisive influence on the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948. No less, no less, no less.

You see, as long as there are humans on the planet there will be humans willing to kill each other over land, resources, money, ideology or religion. There are no easy answers. If there were we wouldn't be in this situation. John Lennon said, "GIVE PEACE A CHANCE" - but whilst you have people ready and willing to kill and die for a cause, that just ain't gonna happen.

I agree. It is a very tragic situation and ‘peace’ is an almost impossible outcome.

 

[Al]

I don’t believe a word these ‘experts’ say.

J Andrés Gannon - Assistant Professor of Political Science Vanderbilt University.
Professor Justin Bronk - Senior Research Fellow, Airpower & Technology.
Valeria Scuto - MSc in Conflict Studies from the London School of Economics and Political Science.

What rationale do you have for not believing people with significant experience in this field? I have no reason to doubt them. I do not support Israel in this, or Hamas. I'm impartial; are you?

 

[Excommunicado]

J Andrés Gannon - Assistant Professor of Political Science Vanderbilt University.
Professor Justin Bronk - Senior Research Fellow, Airpower & Technology.
Valeria Scuto - MSc in Conflict Studies from the London School of Economics and Political Science.

What rationale do you have for not believing people with significant experience in this field? I have no reason to doubt them. I do not support Israel in this, or Hamas. I'm impartial; are you?

Bias. Just because you have a fancy degree does not mean I’m going to take your word for it. Take a look at Justin Bronk’s X account. He seems to have chosen a side in the Russia-Ukraine war, so what makes you think he couldn’t have done the same in this conflict? Isn’t it interesting that his only tweet(s) reporting this conflict since October 7 is defending Israel.

These experts are also provided by the BBC so even less reason to believe them.

Here’s another source: https://www.ft.com/content/95c5fcf1-c756-415f-85b8-1e4bbff24736

• Chris Cobb-Smith, a former British army major and weapons and munitions expert, said that while it was hard to draw a definitive conclusion, the available evidence suggested the most likely cause of the blast was a missile strike.
• Desmond Travers, a munitions expert, said that based on the damage to the fatally wounded people and the vehicles suggests it was a precision-guided shrapnel-delivered missile that was launched, and that there could have been several of them to create the effect shown on the videos.

They’re also ‘experts’ so what am I supposed to believe now?

Lastly, no, I’m not impartial, in a genocide. I’m on the side of Palestinian civilians who are being killed under the pretence of eradicating Hamas.

 

[Al]

The FT article is behind a paywall so I will have to take your word for it. Or maybe you're making it up? Maybe this is anti-Israeli disinformation.

Lastly, no, I’m not impartial, in a genocide. I’m on the side of Palestinian civilians who are being killed under the pretence of eradicating Hamas.

No-one wants to see innocent people killed.

Do you think Hamas should be eradicated?

________

EDIT: Seems you're keen on changing thread titles when they are incorrect. Are you going to change this one too seeing as it's not proven to be Israel?

 

[Excommunicado]

The FT article is behind a paywall so I will have to take your word for it. Or maybe you're making it up? Maybe this is anti-Israeli disinformation.

The link wasn’t originally behind a paywall for me, but here are the two experts I quoted:

Do you think Hamas should be eradicated?

Do you think rebellion groups in an oppression should be eradicated? Should they be held accountable for their actions? Sure, right after the US, UK & Israel are held accountable for theirs.

 

[Al]

Do you think rebellion groups in an oppression should be eradicated? Should they be held accountable for their actions? Sure, right after the US, UK & Israel are held accountable for theirs.

Answering a question with a question is bad form. Hamas is widely accepted to be a terrorist organisation. Answer the question: Do you think Hamas should be eradicated?

 

[Excommunicado]

Answering a question with a question is bad form. Hamas is widely accepted to be a terrorist organisation. Answer the question: Do you think Hamas should be eradicated?

It’s not such a straight forward question - you have to understand how and why Hamas was born and who joins Hamas. Nelson Mandela was also widely regarded as a terrorist. Do you think Nelson Mandela was a terrorist?

 

[Al]

It’s not such a straight forward question.

Well, it is. It's quite a simple question. It's a yes or no answer.

Hamas has struggled to govern Gaza. There is a school of thought which suggests the October attack on Israel by Hamas was because they were losing control of the territory and needed to galvanise the opinion of Palestinians. How to do this? Force Israel to attack Gaza. How does Gaza fair compared to the Fatah-controlled West Bank?

 

[Excommunicado]

Well, it is. It's quite a simple question. It's a yes or no answer.

I kinda already answered the question. Should a rebellion group in an oppression be eradicated? Of course not.

Hamas has struggled to govern Gaza. There is a school of thought which suggests the October attack on Israel by Hamas was because they were losing control of the territory and needed to galvanise the opinion of Palestinians. How to do this? Force Israel to attack Gaza. How does Gaza fair compared to the Fatah-controlled West Bank?

Sounds like a pro-Israeli school of thought. So do you believe that people in an oppression should not fight back and accept it like Fatah-controlled West Bank?

Also, you never answered my questions:

Should rebellion groups in an oppression be eradicated?

Do you think Nelson Mandela was a terrorist?

Interested to know your thoughts.

EDIT: Seems you're keen on changing thread titles when they are incorrect. Are you going to change this one too seeing as it's not proven to be Israel?

Although I strongly believe that Israel was behind the attack, I have changed the thread title and OP since it’s not ‘proven’.

 

[Al]

You support Hamas. I support the people of Palestine to self-governance. That won't be achievable whilst Hamas terrorists behead men and rape women. Hamas is bankrolled by Iran which stipulated that 'Israel should be wiped off map'. That will not bring peace. You're never going to be able to solve the problem of Israel and Palestine through violence on either side. There has to be peaceful co-existence. That will not be achieved through violence. Violence will only result in death until one faction is 'eradicated'. Given the disparity in military strength. It is likely to be Palestinians who are eradicated. Do I want that? No. Do you? No. Does Israel? I don't know. I hope not. In 2007 they 'withdrew' from Gaza and West Bank to some extent. Was it enough? No. Was it a start? Yes. Do the Palestinians want to see Palestinians killed? No. Does Hamas? I'm not so sure.

I question to the logic of the attack on Israel on 7th October by Hamas. What are the political aims of the organisation? Military aims? What was achieved other than the Israeli response? What did Hamas expect would occur?

The Palestinians need to eject Hamas from Gaza if they have any hope of a peaceful resolution. The October attack will not bring about change. Instead it galvanised international opinion against Palestine. An own goal even greater than dropping a rocket on a hospital.

Should rebellion groups in an oppression be eradicated?

That depends upon the nature of the 'rebellion'. Armed rebellion almost never succeeds. Apartheid in South Africa was not stopped by armed conflict. It was stopped by peaceful opposition.

Do you think Nelson Mandela was a terrorist?

Let's define terrorism: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

Mandela pleaded guilty in court to acts of public violence, and behind bars sanctioned more, including the 1983 Church St car bomb that killed 19 people. By that definition he was a terrorist, yes. On release after 27 years(!) he negotiated the peaceful end to apartheid. A that point in his life he wasn't a terrorist. People change. They realise that violence against the oppressor will not result in the change required, especially when it's rocks against tanks.

I wish for a peaceful resolution. I know this conflict has been going on for decades. There are no easy answers.

 

[Excommunicado]

You support Hamas.

Not wanting them eradicated does not mean I support them.

Let's define terrorism: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

So the US & UK against Iraq and countless other countries and Israel against Gaza right now. Got it.

Terrorism is simply a label given to people the US, UK & co don’t like when it suits their agenda. When they’re terrorising other countries themselves, it’s fair game.

 

[Al]

Not wanting them eradicated does not mean I support them.

Well, do you or don't you? You have not once condemned the attack on Israel on 7th October. You have not condemned the beheading of men and raping of women by terrorists. Do you - Does Discussion Hub - support rape and murder of innocents? I mean, you're "Running the show" so I must ask. To the best of my knowledge, you launched Discussion Hub on 24th September. The attack on Israel was on 7th October. It wasn't mentioned or referenced. There was no condemnation. Nothing until 17th October when you could post that "ISRAEL MURDERS CIVILIANS AT HOSPITAL". This speaks volumes of your bias, of your personal and religious ideology. All the evidence you put forward now is called confirmation bias (the tendency to search for, interpret, favour, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values).

I also have to ask. How do you get from here:

terrorism: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.​

to here:

So the US & UK against Iraq and countless other countries and Israel against Gaza right now. Got it.​

Care to explain? I should point out that the terrorism definition was from the dictionary:


If you have an alternative definition, I'm all ears eyes.

My opinions are as a neutral. I condone the attacks on Gaza by Israel and the attacks on Israel by the terrorist organisation, Hamas. I know that this conflict is not going to solve anything and will only bring death and destruction to Gaza and foster hate on both sides. It's clear from your responses that you are not a neutral but I understand that it's an emotive subject.

 

[Excommunicado]

Well, do you or don't you? You have not once condemned the attack on Israel on 7th October. You have not condemned the beheading of men and raping of women by terrorists. Do you - Does Discussion Hub - support rape and murder of innocents? I mean, you're "Running the show" so I must ask. To the best of my knowledge, you launched Discussion Hub on 24th September. The attack on Israel was on 7th October. It wasn't mentioned or referenced. There was no condemnation. Nothing until 17th October when you could post that "ISRAEL MURDERS CIVILIANS AT HOSPITAL". This speaks volumes of your bias, of your personal and religious ideology. All the evidence you put forward now is called confirmation bias (the tendency to search for, interpret, favour, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values).

I condemn the loss of all innocent lives, regardless of race, religion, etc. What I refuse to do however is label one side in a war ‘terrorists’ when the other side is just as bad, if not worse - the only difference being that they have the backing of the world superpowers. There is no proof of beheading of men (it was claimed to be children before, until that got debunked) or women being raped. There is however proof of children being slaughtered at the hands of the IDF. Also, my problem with this whole ‘Hamas started this’ angle is that, well… they didn’t. You asked me what the aims of the attacks on October 7th were. What were the aims of Israel’s attacks on a mosque back in April?

Israel: UN expert condemns brutal attacks on Palestinians at Al-Aqsa Mosque

GENEVA (6 April 2023) – A UN expert today condemned the violent incursions by Israeli forces into the Haram Al-Sharif compound and the attacks on Palestinian worshippers at Al-Aqsa Mosque on Wednesday. “As Palestinian Muslims gathered for Ramadan prayers exercising their right to worship in...

www.ohchr.org

Just to make it very clear: I condemn all acts of terrorism, just not only when it suits the western agenda. I condemn all acts of terrorism by not only Hamas, but also Israel, the US and UK. They’re all as bad as each other, but only one gets labelled terrorists. That doesn’t sit right with me.

I also have to ask. How do you get from here:

terrorism: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.​

to here:

So the US & UK against Iraq and countless other countries and Israel against Gaza right now. Got it.​

Care to explain? I should point out that the terrorism definition was from the dictionary:
View attachment 37

Isn’t that the perfection definition of what the US & UK did to Iraq?

unlawful: would you not say it was unlawful?

violence .. especially against civilians: almost 200,000 civilians were killed in Iraq.

in the pursuit of political aims: bingo!

Yet I don’t see anyone labelling the US & UK governments terrorists. The double standards never cease to amaze me.