Israel ‘hit squad’ kill 3 Palestinians in West Bank Hospital

It's double standards at work yet again. Some posts have been deleted yet others have remained which falls into the category of material which should not be allowed (on other threads) It is quite telling

While I have no idea about the "spokesperson" role: the rest essentially is in synch with what Hamas/PIJ themselves have stated.

From the Guardian

Israel said the dead men were

Mohammad Jalamana, a spokesperson for Hamas’s military wing,

Basel Ghazawi, of Islamic Jihad,

and his brother Mohammed.

All three were allegedly active in the umbrella force known as the Jenin Battalion.

Sorry about the random bolding

Technically, not even that. The question was "what is the source for this information?" and what I said was "conjecture on the part of the poster - plenty of reason why the relationship between those killed would have warranted a visit for reasons other than a planning meeting; they were literal family".

But, no, I did not say they were not terrorists. They were members of Hamas and PIJ, FWIW. Source: Hamas and PIJ. What their roles were, whether they were combattants, etc.: no bloody idea! And it also does not matter!

But even if: hors de combat is a thing. In other words: even in war, you cannot simply walk into an enemy field hospital and massacre all the patients. That is still a war crime. And for good reason! These rules were established in the aftermath of the horrors of two world wars. Clearly, we are not doing very well at remembering how we once came to the conclusion that even war needed rules!

Edit to add: Israel, of all countries, ought to be bloody happy about the Geneva Conventions, Paris Accords, and similar components of so-called ius in bello [law at war]: with (near) universal conscription, any failure to distinguish between "actively engaged in combat" vs. "currently unarmed" vs. "injured" vs. [you name it], basically any Israeli within a certain age bracket could be reasonably assumed to be a combattant and, therefore, a legitimate target. As someone who has met plenty of Israelis in my life and has been friends with some: I do not want that for them! (Not even for that horrible former boss of mine, who was an active IDF reservist! I might have wanted to strangle him multiple times a day for work-related reasons - but: no, you do not get to assassinate him sitting at his desk in the office ... much as I would - again, for work reasons - have found it hard to be particularly sad for him on a personal level.) That is just, literally, not how "the rules" work. And we should all be glad! A world in which "might is right" (which we de facto have - but at least we pretend) is a dark and scary place for literally every single human on the planet. Any single one of us might come across "the guy whose gun was bigger than my own" on any given day!

She never said they can't be terrorists. She said that even if they are terrorists the idea that they went to the hospital to plan an attack with a recently paralysed person isn't very likely. It's more likely they went to visit like you would do if your brother was recently paralysed. She never denied that they were terrorists or that brothers can't be terrorists. She was simply talking about the reason for the visit.

The post says that a brother visiting a brother in hospital is something perfectly normal, and a perfectly reasonable grounds for visiting, which it is.

But that doesn't mean that the brothers cannot be terrorists, as well as brothers.

I think you should read her post again. It really doesn't say what you think it does. It didn't say they were less likely to be terrorists at all.

Yes, the post says it was less likely for them to be terrorists. Are there no brothers in terrorists organisations?

She didn't say it was nonsense for them to be terrorists. She said it was nonsense that the only reason a man would go to hospital to visit his recently paralysed brother was to plot a terrorist attack.

Also pure nonesense: two of the dead were brothers. Contrary to popular belief, Palestinians - yes, even militants! - do, in fact, have friends and family that they love and would go see in hospital without any nefarious reasons.

How does being brothers mean it was "nonesense" for them to be terrorists?

Thanks @HeidiInTheBigCity Was puzzled I'd not seen these details in the news.

The bit with the pistol seems to come from pro-Israel twitter (with at least one account on pro-Palestine Twitter accusing Israel of planting it).

The bit about "being there for planning, because nobody would otherwise ..." I think is pure conjecture, I suppose.

Also pure nonesense: two of the dead were brothers. Contrary to popular belief, Palestinians - yes, even militants! - do, in fact, have friends and family that they love and would go see in hospital without any nefarious reasons.

Where was that reported, please?

Hope those that say Hamas dresses like citizens don’t use this excuse anymore after we’ve seen soldiers dresses as doctors/ citizens to commit this war crime

I think one of them was a patient and the other two were visiting to plan something (which I don't think was a new flower arrangement for the entrance or a sponsored swim to raise money for the baby unit). At least one of them had a pistol. Quite difficult to arrest people in the circumstances - I suspect it would have led to far more violence and deaths. And I don't think that gunman roaming hospitals are a particularly unusual sight in Jenin.

@Parkingt111 "No Palestinian should be threatened with forcible displacement or relocation."

But bombing them to smithereens they're A-OK with.

I’m flabbergasted that there are people who don’t think the Israeli forces are terrorists at this point.

I had no idea this was in the West Bank.
So it’s only a matter of time before the same happens in Jordan or Egypt? What’s to stop them then?

The UK is alarmed by the conference in Jerusalem calling for the resettlement of Gaza, and that Israeli ministers participated," a spokesman said.
"The UK's position is clear: Gaza is occupied Palestinian territory and will be part of the future Palestinian state.
"Settlements are illegal. No Palestinian should be threatened with forcible displacement or relocation."

@HeidiInTheBigCity noted
In this case it was to clarify what has been happening in Gaza, might also start happening in the other OPT
As the UK foreign office said in their statement today when talking about the Jerusalem conference of settlements in Gaza, that Gaza is occupied territory

I would disagree with sky news analysts to word it as 'Israelis are terrorists'
I personally don't think that even if I am against many of the actions of the IDF and the current government.
It would be better worded if it specified the actions of both the government and members of the IDF
As 'Israelis' would include civilians too

I know that is not at all what you mean but please say "West Bank" for the West Bank. The "occupied Palestinian territories" comprise all of the West Bank as well as the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. Using it to only describe the WB accidentally gives the impression that this is not the case (which is precisely what Israel claims - they like to pretend they have "withdrawn" from Gaza and they have declared the annexation of EJ, even though nobody recognises this internationally).

That really should be on a separate thread but to highlight the absolute continuous disregard for all factions of healthcare in Gaza, and its terrifying that the occupied territories (west bank) might be going the same way