Heartbreaking news report from Gaza - Dr receives bodies of her children

But this is a thread about a mother who lost several children and her husband in an Israeli attack on Palestine. What else would we discuss on such a thread but the conflict that caused it.

The trouble is, some on here appear to want to use the thread as a vehicle for scoring points over other posters. The thread isn't really about the wider conflict, it's about this terrible thing that has happened to a specific individual. The bickering and attempts at point-scoring are in poor taste imo. Nothing stopping people from starting their own thread(s) about the wider conflict, but to me this particular thread is about the human toll the hostilities are taking and not the place for squabbling. JMO.

Deflection. Exactly as predicted

I didn't say the person was saying they were freedom fighters, I was musing about the possiblity they may do. What I said was, Maybe they prefer to call them freedom fighters or something, I don't know.

Anyway, the post you describe wasn't the post I was referring to.

People should get back to discussing the title of this thread.

I think I remember that post. They asked the question whether you could consider Hamas actions terrorism now. They did not question whether the events of 7/10 was terrorism.

I don’t really agree. The Hamas rockets, largely don’t do a lot of damage or cause a lot of deaths because of the sophisticated Israeli defense system. But by their nature they are indiscriminate attacks and the whole point of them is to terrorise Israeli civilians.

However I don’t think this person was saying they were freedom fighters either. That’s a stretch. Overall the BBC have been criticised by both sides and that’s a fairly good indicator that they are remaining as impartial as you can. I think their reporting of this conflict has been excellent.

Bloody hell, just reading about this now...also reported on Haaretz?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/05/israel-accused-of-arming-palestinian-gang-who-allegedly-looted-aid-in-gaza

But this is a thread about a mother who lost several children and her husband in an Israeli attack on Palestine. What else would we discuss on such a thread but the conflict that caused it.
If you want to discuss Syria go ahead and start up a thread on that.

A BBC journalist was detained in Syria yesterday by the IDF, interrogated and then released which his footage deleted. I do think this is relevant because what are the IDF doing in Syria? Isn't Syria another country i.e. not Israel?

And plenty of Israelis are in opposition to this conflict in Gaza. Look at the thousands who have matched to the Gaza border. Are they anti-Israeli too? No, they are not.

I expect responses to my previous post will demonstrate exactly what I'm describing.

You'll say I'm 'attacking people who care about dead children' rather than engaging with the disproportion in focus I've identified. You'll demand specific evidence of 'lies' while ignoring the obvious pattern of ritualistic Hamas disclaimers followed by sustained Israeli obsession. You'll claim you focus more on Israel because they're 'supposed to have higher standards' - which is just another way of saying Hamas gets a free pass on moral responsibility.

What you won't do is explain why 45,000 deaths in Gaza receives more sustained moral attention than 500,000 in Syria. You won't seriously analyze Hamas's strategic use of civilian casualties. You won't acknowledge that making opposition to Israeli actions your moral universe while treating Hamas as background noise isn't 'balance.'

The fact that you can't engage with this observation directly - that you'll deflect through offense rather than examine the pattern - proves my point about the dishonesty of the discourse around Israel -Palestine

Posters think they are so clever. They can provide a non-stop commentary of the moral vacuousness of Israel, make opposition to the IDF the animating purpose of their politics, repeat anti-Israel lies, progoganda and half-truths. Assume bad faith by Israel and those defending the war. And act as if Hamas doesn't exist. And then when someone says that they are not balanced, they just say "but of course I do not support Hamas" before going back to their anti Israel obsession and pro-Hamas propaganda.

Don't worry, if I thought you'd written a post that was supporting a banned terrorist group I would report it and leave it to mn discretion. The buck stops with them.

You seemed to be insinuating that I and other posters here were supporting terrorism.

Now that you have confirmed that you are not suggesting this, I don’t think there needs to be a circular argument about it.

I believe there are a certain number of post deletions that get you banned...not sure how many but I'm told you get fair warning to proceed with caution before the big heave ho. If you come back after being banned and mn discover you, that shows in the deletion message on your posts.

Yes so best not to bring up historic posts and long gone posters, it's completely irrelevant to today's discussions

And there we have it @quantumbutterfly the circular argument that goes absolutely nowhere.

It is extremely frustrating when posters shutdown discussions or views they don't agree with by often unfounded accusations.

Well I think we can all agree on that point. I'm getting quite zen about it now though.

I have not accused "pro human rights posters" as being pro hamas, your comments often seem to suit your username.

Good so they've been reported, deleted and most likely banned so why raise it now insinuating those that support Palestine are all the same.

It's not unfounded, I have seen people deny that Hamas are terrorists but I can't be bothered to find links so you can believe or not believe it I don't care.

There was a debate about BBC impartiality recently where someone was saying they agree with the BBC's decision not to describe Hamas as terrorists. I'm sure there are better examples than that but still ... the BBC consider the word terrorist too loaded and there was a poster saying they agree.

Maybe they prefer to call them freedom fighters or something, I don't know.

Strangely enough 7/10 deniers and those that break talk guidelines by supporting illegal groups, get reported and deleted...and were I to track them down and name them I expect that also would be deleted as against talk guidelines....as any fool know.

Honestly for someone who has questioned evidence before you need to supply some instead of accusing pro human rights posters as being pro hamas.

so it's all pointless

Indeed this exchange was. It is extremely frustrating when posters shutdown discussions or views they don't agree with by often unfounded accusations.

Think what you want, I am completely done with finding things for other people just because they can't remember seeing the posts or don't believe me.

I can't remember the exact names and even if I could I could hardly post them without linking to the exact post or they would be up in arms so it's all pointless.

That's up to you but I also think it is in very bad faith to suggest you've seen things posted which is used as a stick to beat all with and discredit posters as Hamas supporters and not back it up.

I have seen people
At least name the 'people" you are referring to.

No, he is incredibly biased due to being an American with a very pro-Israel predisposition. His comments on the IDF are downright laughable. One of the claims he repeatedly makes (not only him) is that the 9:1 civilian casualty ratio is normal. This was debunked years ago and most military experts now consider it a myth. He, however, has not caught up with the times and continues to use it as a defence for the high number of civilian casualties. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240542361_Lives_and_Statistics_Are_90_of_War_Victims_Civilians

Could you give the gist of the posts ? Name any names?

No I won't and the reason is this - very recently (in the last day or two) someone on the pro Palestinian side challenged me to find evidence of something I had stated. They said "I haven't seen that anywhere" ...

It took time and effort to find the exact post that proved my point but when I posted it with a link to the person who had expressed disbelief, the reply I got was along the lines of "anyway, that's irrelevant".

So I decided then that I wasn't going to waste my time again going back through old posts because the reply is always going to be dismissive.

I know what I've seen on these boards and so do others but if you don't believe me, tough.