To say all pro-Palestinians should watch Fauda on Netflix?

I have, actually, posted this before but think link may not have loaded properly.

https://www.commentary.org/seth-mandel/hamas-debunks-the-genocide-narrative/?edge_reader_page

How is it a strawman? Your post very clearly implied under-18s who have been recruited by Hamas (or used as human shields, not even recruited) are fair game as “not innocent”.

I believe most people would read your post that way. If it had some other meaning in your head, that did not come across.

I know you think the sole answer is antisemitism, but there’s very clearly a range of factors that play into why Israeli war crimes get a lot of coverage in the UK.

Good to know you don’t deny their existence though - you’re just annoyed about the level of scrutiny on them.

Ok, so I went followed the link in the Seth Mandel article to the source which is a very thorough thread posted by Gabriel Epstein on the death toll a/o Nov 2025 of 68,820. Epstein is a widely respected researcher and posts data that is as accurate as can be expected from a war zone where the very apparatus of counting deaths has been largely destroyed and no international investigators have been allowed in to verify the death toll.

While Epstein does say that non-trauma deaths listed in a separate chart are “natural” I don’t think I agree as his basis for that is a chart showing 400 or so deaths from malnutrition or where malnutrition was a contributing cause. He also refers to deaths by aid contractors as natural. I don’t think being shot by a mercenary in the pay of the IDF can be called a natural death. I personally don’t think he provided any evidence that the death toll includes any natural deaths, and even if I agreed with him it amounts to less than 1,000 deaths.

Nowhere does Epstein estimate 10,000 are natural deaths or state 25,000 were Hamas. He simply says “some” for both and posits that as bodies are uncovered, we will find a higher % of Hamas fighters.

He confirms that the missing estimated at 8-10k are already excluded from the death toll.

I don’t know how Seth Mandel came up with that 10,000 natural deaths figure or the 25,000 of the dead are Hamas combatants figure to do his maths.

Hamas started the war with 25-30,000 fighters. Israel has records showing it killed 14,000 fighters which jives with estimates of how many are left (barring mass recruiting). It is important to note that more civilian teen boys and men will be killed because they are fighting age males and so more likely to be perceived as a threat and presumed to be Hamas. We must be careful not to assume all male deaths over age 15 were Hamas.

(It is important to note that in the context of genocide the number of dead qualifies both for Oct 7th being a genocide of Jewish people and the Gaza war a genocide of Palestinians. Prior rulings on genocide have made it clear that you don’t need huge death tolls or even any deaths to qualify. Whether a genocide occurred is more complex than counting bodies or quibbling over combatant to civilian ratios and best left to the ICJ)

I don’t hate race or ethnicities either. You entirely made it up in your brain, for some reason.HTH

So you do think its at least in part down to antisemitism then?

I notice you didnt answer my question, just put words in my mouth instead, then pointed 'look over there'.

I don't think anyone would deny war crimes have taken place. Can you name a single war where they haven't?

Care to answer my original question or just stick with the deflection?

Would you like to see the war crimes in other places getting more coverage, or the ones committed by Israel getting less?

What I’d like to see is for people to stop painting Israel as somehow uniquely evil.

Ok, so I went followed the link in the Seth Mandel article to the source which is a very thorough thread posted by Gabriel Epstein on the death toll a/o Nov 2025 of 68,820. Epstein is a widely respected researcher and posts data that is as accurate as can be expected from a war zone where the very apparatus of counting deaths has been largely destroyed and no international investigators have been allowed in to verify the death toll.

While Epstein does say that non-trauma deaths listed in a separate chart are “natural” I don’t think I agree as his basis for that is a chart showing 400 or so deaths from malnutrition or where malnutrition was a contributing cause. He also refers to deaths by aid contractors as natural. I don’t think being shot by a mercenary in the pay of the IDF can be called a natural death. I personally don’t think he provided any evidence that the death toll includes any natural deaths, and even if I agreed with him it amounts to less than 1,000 deaths.

Nowhere does Epstein estimate 10,000 are natural deaths or state 25,000 were Hamas. He simply says “some” for both and posits that as bodies are uncovered, we will find a higher % of Hamas fighters.

He confirms that the missing estimated at 8-10k are already excluded from the death toll.

I don’t know how Seth Mandel came up with that 10,000 natural deaths figure or the 25,000 of the dead are Hamas combatants figure to do his maths.

Hamas started the war with 25-30,000 fighters. Israel has records showing it killed 14,000 fighters which jives with estimates of how many are left (barring mass recruiting). It is important to note that more civilian teen boys and men will be killed because they are fighting age males and so more likely to be perceived as a threat and presumed to be Hamas. We must be careful not to assume all male deaths over age 15 were Hamas.

(It is important to note that in the context of genocide the number of dead qualifies both for Oct 7th being a genocide of Jewish people and the Gaza war a genocide of Palestinians. Prior rulings on genocide have made it clear that you don’t need huge death tolls or even any deaths to qualify. Whether a genocide occurred is more complex than counting bodies or quibbling over combatant to civilian ratios and best left to the ICJ)

Ah yes, the old chestnuts that all criminal gangs operating in Gaza are in fact "mercenaries paid by the IDF " and "no independent journalists are allowed into Gaza".

I trust you have evidence to prove the former claim? No. Didn't think so. Its just a talking point you saw on the internet.

The UN have since admitted Hamas were stealing aid- contrary to the previous lie they span that "israeldiddit"

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/13/world/middleeast/un-says-hamas-forces-interfered-with-aid-distribution-at-a-gaza-site.html

And yes, malnutrition deaths are counted as "natural" because people die of malnutrition even in Western Countries like the USA. 400 in two years is actually low compared to many countries where no so called "famine" exists.

I think it’s absolutely bonkers to believe that e.g. the BBC coverage of Israeli war crimes is motivated by antisemitism. Just bonkers.

Is there antisemitism amongst the wider pro-palestine movement? Of course there is. It would be equally bonkers to deny that.

If you really want just a few reasons why the Israeli conflict is particularly interesting to many British people, and why it therefore gets a fair bit of coverage:

• Unique relationship between the UK and Israel, and our part in its formation
• ditto the US
• Optics of the Israel - Palestine situation appearing as a genocide of white settlers against brown natives, making it a particularly attractive cause for the anti-racist left
• Israel being perceived as very culturally similar to the UK in a way that many other countries that appear perpetually at war are not
• Significant proportion of British people feeling strongly aligned to one or other side due to religion
• Historical alignment of other various UK groups with one side or the other - e.g. Irish republicans with Palestine, Unionists with Israel
• The specific circumstances of the conflict, e.g. the “open air concentration camp” nature of Gaza, the ruthless nature of the IDF, the completely unhinged messaging from the Israeli government
• the obvious comparisons with apartheid, which britain was instrumental in bringing down
• the “David vs Goliath” factor

I could go on. But basically this conflict is of unique interest to British people, and hat interest is now self-sustaining. You could ask why this is the go-to cause for many leftists, and a big part of the answer is that it has been for so long now that it’s very easy to get involved with. So in that sense it’s the go-to because it’s the go-to.

Come on now. You really think Hamas are going to be totally honest and upfront with "International Investigators"? Absurd. And you seem to forget Hamas aren't some splinter group: they are the official government of Gaza. Which means there are going to be more Hamas members than the registered and known fighters.

You are correct on only one point: genocide isn't determined by numbers. Its determined by a premeditated intent to target a group for destruction on the basis of race or ethnicity. Hamas are not a race: killing them cannot be genocidal by definition.

It’s certainly not uniquely evil but it (by which I mean the current government) is evil.

I think it’s absolutely bonkers to believe that e.g. the BBC coverage of Israeli war crimes is motivated by antisemitism. Just bonkers.

Is there antisemitism amongst the wider pro-palestine movement? Of course there is. It would be equally bonkers to deny that.

If you really want just a few reasons why the Israeli conflict is particularly interesting to many British people, and why it therefore gets a fair bit of coverage:

• Unique relationship between the UK and Israel, and our part in its formation
• ditto the US
• Optics of the Israel - Palestine situation appearing as a genocide of white settlers against brown natives, making it a particularly attractive cause for the anti-racist left
• Israel being perceived as very culturally similar to the UK in a way that many other countries that appear perpetually at war are not
• Significant proportion of British people feeling strongly aligned to one or other side due to religion
• Historical alignment of other various UK groups with one side or the other - e.g. Irish republicans with Palestine, Unionists with Israel
• The specific circumstances of the conflict, e.g. the “open air concentration camp” nature of Gaza, the ruthless nature of the IDF, the completely unhinged messaging from the Israeli government
• the obvious comparisons with apartheid, which britain was instrumental in bringing down
• the “David vs Goliath” factor

I could go on. But basically this conflict is of unique interest to British people, and hat interest is now self-sustaining. You could ask why this is the go-to cause for many leftists, and a big part of the answer is that it has been for so long now that it’s very easy to get involved with. So in that sense it’s the go-to because it’s the go-to.

I think it’s absolutely bonkers to believe that e.g. the BBC coverage of Israeli war crimes is motivated by antisemitism. Just bonkers.

Is there antisemitism amongst the wider pro-palestine movement? Of course there is. It would be equally bonkers to deny that.

If you really want just a few reasons why the Israeli conflict is particularly interesting to many British people, and why it therefore gets a fair bit of coverage:

• Unique relationship between the UK and Israel, and our part in its formation
• ditto the US
• Optics of the Israel - Palestine situation appearing as a genocide of white settlers against brown natives, making it a particularly attractive cause for the anti-racist left
• Israel being perceived as very culturally similar to the UK in a way that many other countries that appear perpetually at war are not
• Significant proportion of British people feeling strongly aligned to one or other side due to religion
• Historical alignment of other various UK groups with one side or the other - e.g. Irish republicans with Palestine, Unionists with Israel
• The specific circumstances of the conflict, e.g. the “open air concentration camp” nature of Gaza, the ruthless nature of the IDF, the completely unhinged messaging from the Israeli government
• the obvious comparisons with apartheid, which britain was instrumental in bringing down
• the “David vs Goliath” factor

I could go on. But basically this conflict is of unique interest to British people, and hat interest is now self-sustaining. You could ask why this is the go-to cause for many leftists, and a big part of the answer is that it has been for so long now that it’s very easy to get involved with. So in that sense it’s the go-to because it’s the go-to.

Once again you are accusing me of saying things I never said or implied.

all criminal gangs operating in Gaza are in fact "mercenaries paid by the IDF "
That’s not what I said or even close. Gabriel Epstein was referring to the deaths by the IDF contractors for GHF who took over aid distribution from the UN which was a failed initiative:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025GazaStripaiddistributionkillings
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/gaza-humanitarian-foundation-deaths-palestinians-1.7568517
Your link is about a separate, not relevant issue where the WFP (UN) distributed aid was interfered with by Hamas. Which was never not acknowledged.

and "no independent journalists are allowed into Gaza".
That is actually not a chestnut but true.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8d7yrp80m8o

But also did not mention journalists, I said no international investigators have been allowed in to verify the death toll which is true. These would be UN officials from OCHA. Their website tracking death tolls currently states
Casualties in the context of the ongoing hostilities in the Gaza Strip and Israel, which started on 7 October 2023, will only be added to this page once these incidents have been independently verified. https://www.ochaopt.org/data/casualties.

You really must stop doing this, especially against Jewish posters, it’s starting to feel like you are weaponising the self-loathing Jew trope against me. I’m tired of you accusing me of posting antisemitic things I have never and would never post.

And you seem to forget Hamas aren't some splinter group: they are the official government of Gaza.

On this, they aren’t the official government so much as the de facto government given that they violently seized power in Gaza from the PA in 2007.

No, I don’t think that but don’t you think an independent investigation will get us better numbers than what we are doing now? Which is accepting the Hamas Ministry of Health numbers without any independent validation at all? I agree there is risk the Hamas numbers are deliberately fudged, but why the objection to having them investigated?

Well antizionist Jews have, historically been used as tokens by genuine antisemites to shield them from criticism. That's all I'm going to say.

Its the go-to cause because of misinformation and myths. Around half of the points you bought up are patently wrong.

For example the "white on brown" conflict

• 25 of Israelis are Arabs
• Of the 72% Jews, around half are descended from Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews from MENA.
• Arab Israelis and other minorities enjoy the same civil and legal rights as Jews.
• Palestinians were historically aligned with Hitler and the Nazis. Most notable example being Hajj Amin al Husseini,

I specifically said the optics. It’s widely perceived as white settler violence against brown natives. You can argue about the accuracy of that perception all you want, but it’s clearly part of why people are particularly interested in this conflict, which is the question I was answering.