How is forced starvation allowed?

[Tinycatnoise]

The top story in the BBC right now is the starvation of Gazans by Israel. The images are horrifying and not dissimilar to seeing those images of concentration camps in Nazi Germany. I cried seeing those and am crying now. I am sure someone will claim antisemitism because of this statement, but anyone looking at these images of starving children would agree.

How is this still going on? I feel like we are watching a genocide take place that the world has turning a blind eye to. The daily shooting by Israel of people trying to get aid too is just barbaric. If nothing is being done to stop this, what is the next horror that will unfold in the world that people will just accept?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9xkx7vnmxo

Well, we can agree that verification is important because misinformation is being spread by both sides. It shouldn’t be any surprise that the media uses eye catching images and headlines to increase readership. They’ve done it for years and do it most days with most topics, especially ones that are emotive topics. So it happening with Gaza isn’t anything new or special. It’s the joy of living in the ‘post-truth’ world where fact is suddenly equal to opinion.

And I’m genuinely happy to have a handful of sources from you. Or what you’ve read this week to inform you. I genuinely want to know where people with your opinion are getting their news.

Putting aside all the media images, are the other sources untrustworthy too? So the U.N., NGOs, charities? And do you trust Israel’s version of events?

I'm middle aged and I've never seen the BBC or the Guardian pass off photos of terminally ill or very sick kids as evidence of mass starvation before. Have you?

I don't take any news source as gospel, but I'm highly dubious of anyone who takes Hamas' word over Israel's. Israel is a massively more reliable source and that has little to do with ideology and everything to do with accountability, transparency, and structural realities.

Israel has a robust, independent media ecosystem. Outlets like Haaretz, The Times of Israel, and Jerusalem Post frequently criticise the government and military. You’ll regularly see investigative reports exposing Israeli failures, corruption, or misconduct, including during wartime. That kind of internal scrutiny simply doesn’t exist in Gaza, where the press operates under Hamas control and dissenting journalists risk imprisonment or worse.

Israel is a liberal democracy with functioning courts, civilian oversight, and active opposition parties. Policies and military decisions are routinely challenged, sometimes overturned, through legal channels, including by NGOs operating within the country. Contrast this with Hamas, an authoritarian regime with no elections since 2006, that violently suppresses dissent.

Israel often accompanies claims with verifiable data: satellite imagery, drone footage, intercepted communications, and footage from bodycams. When it makes accusations (e.g., about weapons stored in hospitals or aid diversion), it's typically backed by documentation. In contrast, many claims from Gaza rely on anonymous "local sources" or unverifiable videos from one-sided actors with zero transparency.

Israel is under constant international observation. Every misstep is picked apart by dozens of hostile media outlets, UN bodies, and NGOs. The sheer level of scrutiny makes outright fabrication extremely risky. Hamas, by contrast, controls access and narrative in Gaza, and expels or threatens journalists who don’t toe the party line. That's not a free press, it's propaganda. And they don't give two shits if they're caught lying because no one expects anything else.

Israeli officials and media have retracted or corrected false claims in the past. For example, the IDF corrected early reports in previous conflicts when further evidence emerged. This willingness to revise based on fact is absent in authoritarian regimes, where narrative takes priority over truth.

In Israel, a lie can lead to legal consequences, resignations, and media backlash. In Gaza, telling the truth about Hamas's actions, like stealing aid or using civilian infrastructure for terror, can cost a journalist their life. That alone tells you where honesty is more likely to survive.

In short: no source is perfect. But Israel, by design, operates under democratic pressure, internal critique, and global accountability. That makes its version of events far more testable, and usually, more reliable, than a regime that answers to no one.

The UN and NGOS are not fully honest with the world. In the fullness of time there will have to be accountability and serious questions answered, but for now I personally do not take their word on anything because I've caught them pants down too many times.

Yes, because Israel hasn’t been found lying at all murdering aid workers and burying an ambilane have they?

If people aren’t starving why are there air drops happening? Why is Israel pausing to allow aid in?

The Netherlands counterterrorism agency think that Israel is a threat to National security like Russia and Iran because their disinformation and attempts to "control public opinion and political decision making." is so bad.

They aren't calling NGOs and the UN a threat to national security.

Loving this open government malarkey, always good to know what the security services really think.😶did they mention how we should view the info. from islamic extremists?

Thank you for helping illuminate my point.

Event: A convoy of World Central Kitchen aid workers is hit by Israeli drone strikes.

Casualties: 7 aid workers are killed.

Initial IDF Position: Israel does not immediately confirm responsibility but says it's “reviewing the incident.”

Confirmation: Israel confirms it carried out the strike, describing it as a tragic error.

Internal Investigation Begins: Israel launches a probe.

Investigation Concludes: The IDF admits systemic failure. Two IDF officers are dismissed. Israel publicly releases the findings and confirms changes to avoid future errors.

This is exactly how truth gets out reliably in a democracy with scrutiny, cameras, free press, political opposition etc.

It cannot happen this way in Gaza, so the information is much more murky with no accountability at all.

You say you’re not outraged and that’s the part I find most revealing. Because what’s happening in Gaza should provoke outrage. Not just sadness. Not just disapproval. Outrage.

Yes, global hunger is a massive issue and many of us care deeply about it across contexts. But when nearly 2 million people are being deliberately starved, when aid trucks are being physically blocked, when newborns are dying because fuel and medical supplies are being withheld- that’s not a general tragedy. That’s a manmade, targeted siege. And it deserves a focused response.

You keep returning to the image, but the image didn’t create the crisis. The crisis was already there. Whether the child in the photo had medical vulnerabilities or not, the truth remains: he died because vital supplies were denied to him. That’s not “context that changes the story.” That is the story.

And just to be clear:
No “vital context” has been hidden. The child’s condition has been reported- that doesn’t undermine the reality that he died because the formula he needed was unavailable due to the siege.

And the image hasn’t been doctored. It was cropped. You may not like how it was framed, but that’s not the same as deliberate manipulation.

This is just more deflection, whataboutism, and minimisation- all of which conveniently shift focus away from the real issue:
A blockade is starving people. Children are dying.

So I’ll ask again:
If the suffering is real- and you’ve admitted that it is- why focus so much energy on the packaging rather than the content?
Why interrogate the journalism more than the siege?
What’s really bothering you here? That people are finally paying attention?

Very strange how some cling to this.

You’ve written a detailed defence of Israeli media infrastructure- but let’s not mistake structure for truth, or freedom of press for freedom from propaganda. Having courts and newspapers doesn’t automatically make a state honest, especially when it’s under mounting accusations of war crimes by dozens of international bodies.

Let’s be real: Israel has a functioning PR machine, not necessarily a functioning conscience. The fact that Haaretz prints critical editorials doesn’t change the fact that aid trucks are being blocked, that international UN agencies are documenting mass hunger, or that doctors are performing surgeries without anaesthetic.

Also: questioning Israel’s version of events is not the same as “taking Hamas’ word.” That’s a false binary. What I trust and what I reference- are organisations like the UN, Save the Children, Médecins Sans Frontières, the Red Cross, Oxfam, and countless independent journalists who are not affiliated with Hamas and who have consistently raised the alarm.

If every journalist or humanitarian in Gaza is written off as a liar because Hamas is in power, then you’re silencing the entire population and excusing the siege without needing to engage with its actual impacts. That’s not critical thinking- that’s ideological filtering.

You’re choosing to focus on how an image was framed instead of why it exists: because a child died for lack of medical nutrition, and that’s just one of thousands.

The humanitarian crisis is real. Malnutrition is real. Babies dying in incubators is real. And these are not “claims from Hamas.” They’re confirmed by UNICEF, WHO, and the people desperately trying to get aid into Gaza and being blocked.

So yes, media literacy matters. But so does basic humanity.

@Voxon

You’re putting a lot of energy into discrediting sources rather than confronting the substance of what’s being reported: that children are starving, aid is being blocked, and entire families are being wiped out.

This isn’t just about media trust: multiple independent organisations, including UN agencies, Médecins Sans Frontières, and human rights groups, have reported on the unfolding humanitarian catastrophe. You don’t have to take Hamas’ word for it. You don’t even have to trust the BBC. The pattern of suffering is too widespread, too corroborated, and frankly too visible to be dismissed as propaganda.

Yes, critical thinking matters. Yes, image use should be ethical. But when fact-checking becomes a tool for deflection- where you’re more concerned about who took a photo than why that photo exists in the first place- then it stops being about truth, and starts becoming a shield from accountability.

The real scandal here isn’t the cropping of an image. It’s that a disabled child starved to death for lack of specialist formula. If your instinct is to distrust that because you don’t like who reported it… ask yourself what exactly you’re defending.

Oh Gawd, I can save you the sore fingers if it's helpful by saying the accusations have no effect on me. I don't do performative morality, I don't do selective moral judgement. And when I do form opinions on world events they are always formed after careful thought and analysis, for which true information from which to draw said conclusions is kind of a pre-requisite.

I'd prefer the press and world organisations didn't lie to me, but given that so many people have given them carte blanche to continue doing it, I don't see much chance of it stopping any time soon.

Just to be absolutely clear: what's happening in Gaza is tragic. As are many very tragic things happening around the world. But what saddens me more is the global circus of useful idiots who’ve helped prolong this war, not out of concern for peace, but because their hatred of Israel (and, let’s be honest, often Jews more broadly) runs so deep they'd rather fuel a global smear campaign than work toward a real solution.

There is a solution: Hamas could return the hostages and surrender. The war, and the hunger crisis, could end tomorrow if they chose to. But every person shouting “blame Israel” instead of demanding that Hamas take responsibility is doing exactly what Hamas wants. These manipulative, misleading images? They're not just dishonest, they're likely the reason Hamas walked away from the ceasefire table.

It would be forgivable if it was done in ignorance, but this group time and time again has the badic facts pointed out to them and utterly dismisses them because this is a political game for them - heck, Ive watched this group support Hezbollah, the Houthis and even Iran. Theyd accept bloody anything as long as it keeps up the momentum of hating Israel.

Hamas have Israeli hostages, right now, today. And they've learned they don’t need to negotiate in good faith, because the world keeps showing them they don’t have to. That’s what I find disappointing. Because I'm old and weary enough to understand kids, women, people are suffering horrifically all around the world and I hate the feeling of helplessness, but this is the first time I've seen the British public largely support the bloody terrorists causing it all.

I’m tired of watching people cheer on propaganda while innocent people suffer for it. So what’s bothering me is exactly what you’re demonstrating: that emotionally loaded outrage is being used to override facts, context, and truth. That framing is being used to whip up mass condemnation of one side, while suppressing uncomfortable realities about the other. That children’s corpses are being held up like weapons, stripped of medical context and individual story, to force a narrative.

You say the child’s medical condition wasn’t hidden. Then why did the original viral post crop out his healthy brother? Why was there no mention of the condition until people pointed it out? Why have multiple similar images of medically vulnerable children now been used in the same misleading way? If the story is “that he died due to siege,” then tell that story honestly - don’t sanitise the context to manufacture rage.

And yes, the image was cropped for effect. That is manipulation. When you alter how something is seen in order to provoke a reaction while omitting material context, that’s deliberate framing, especially when it keeps happening.

You ask why I focus on the “packaging” rather than the “content.” It’s because the packaging is being weaponised. If I can’t trust the image, if I can’t trust the caption, if the details are filtered to produce outrage rather than understanding, then I have to question the whole narrative. That is how disinformation works. And it’s no small matter when it fuels real-world consequences like UN votes, diplomatic pressure, and the further destabilisation of an already volatile region.

Let’s be clear: no child should ever die for lack of medical care. That should provoke grief and rage alike. But if you truly care about those children, then fight for truth, not propaganda. Because when lies and distortion take over, the people who suffer most are the very ones you claim to be defending.

IMO those kids best interests would be served far better by the BBC, the New York Times, the Guardian and the hoardes of westerners around the world if they stood up and said "HAMAS MUST RETURN THE HOSTAGES AND SURRENDER".

They started a war, did everything in their power to endanger innocent people on both sides and have openly and quite smugly declared they've enjoyed doing that and that Palestinians should just be happy being martyrs. Saying NO to that would probably bring an end to this inside of a week. Instead you've distorted their cause, and turned them into some kind of global fashion trend.

You say you don’t do “performative morality” but what you’re doing is exactly that.
Not because you’re shouting or crying, but because you’ve built an entire argument that looks neutral while quietly flipping the moral compass upside down.

You deflect attention away from mass civilian death (including the starvation of children) by focusing on image crops and captions. You moralise against “emotional outrage” instead of against a siege that’s killed over 15,000 kids.
That’s not careful analysis. It’s a very neat way of shifting blame.

You claim to want truth, but only interrogate one side. You accuse people of antisemitism while ignoring the Israeli officials who’ve openly called to wipe Gaza off the map. You say the war could end “tomorrow” if Hamas surrendereda- as though starvation, occupation and mass displacement didn’t exist long before October 7.

You accuse others of emotional manipulation, but your whole post is doing just that: reframing grief as propaganda, outrage as ignorance, and protest as hate.

Some of us are tired too but not from defending war crimes. From watching people intellectualise the slow killing of a population, and call it nuance.

If every journalist or humanitarian in Gaza is written off as a liar because Hamas is in power, then you’re silencing the entire population and excusing the siege without needing to engage with its actual impacts. That’s not critical thinking- that’s ideological filtering.

Has any of these people shared a story since the war began calling for Hamas to return the hostages and surrender so the people of Gaza can be freed from this war? Has a single one done that? If not, why not?

Performative neutrality / superiority
“I don’t do performative morality, I don’t do selective moral judgement.”
“My opinions are always formed after careful thought and analysis.”
“I’m old and weary enough to understand…”

What they’re doing:
Claiming the moral high ground while pushing a deeply partisan and emotionally loaded view. This feigned neutrality is used to discredit emotionally-driven concern for civilians as irrational or naive.

Moral reversal
“What saddens me more is the global circus of useful idiots…”
“You’re demonstrating that emotionally loaded outrage is being used to override facts…”
“These manipulative, misleading images… likely the reason Hamas walked away from the ceasefire.”

What they’re doing:
Turning the blame onto activists, journalists, and ordinary people sharing images. It reframes your concern as the actual harm, while the mass killing and starvation of Palestinians becomes secondary.

Accusations of antisemitism as distraction
“…because their hatred of Israel (and, let’s be honest, often Jews more broadly) runs so deep…”
“They’d accept bloody anything as long as it keeps up the momentum of hating Israel.”

What they’re doing:
Accusing critics of antisemitism without evidence, as a way to discredit and shut down all discussion. This is used to stop uncomfortable conversations about Israel’s actions by making it about hate.

Victim-blaming
“There is a solution: Hamas could return the hostages and surrender. The war, and the hunger crisis, could end tomorrow if they chose to.”
“They started a war… they’ve enjoyed doing that…”
“Saying NO to that would probably bring an end to this inside of a week.”

What they’re doing:
Suggesting all civilian suffering — including the deaths of children — is Hamas’s fault. This erases the role of Israeli policy (blockade, bombings, denial of aid) and shifts all responsibility onto the victims’ side.

Image policing / ‘optics’ obsession
“Then why did the original viral post crop out his healthy brother?”
“Why have multiple similar images of medically vulnerable children now been used in the same misleading way?”
“If I can’t trust the image… then I have to question the whole narrative.”

What they’re doing:
Fixating on a minor aspect of image composition (a crop) to discredit the broader, documented reality of mass child deaths and starvation. It’s a distraction tactic dressed as media literacy.

False binaries
“Every person shouting ‘blame Israel’ instead of demanding Hamas take responsibility is doing exactly what Hamas wants.”
“This group… has the basic facts pointed out to them and utterly dismisses them…”
“You’ve distorted their cause, and turned them into some kind of global fashion trend.”

What they’re doing:
Portraying people as either truth-seekers or Hamas cheerleaders. There’s no room for someone who condemns Hamas and Israel’s actions — nuance is erased to frame criticism as extremism.

Weaponising ‘rationality’
Long-winded, circular explanations packed with abstract language: “manipulative, misleading images… stripped of medical context and individual story… to force a narrative.”
“That is how disinformation works…”
“Deliberate framing… filtered to produce outrage rather than understanding…”

What they’re doing:
Using complex, pseudo-intellectual language to flood the conversation. This overwhelms the reader with the illusion of reason and depth, making it hard to argue back without sounding “emotional” or simplistic.

Garbage.

I'm interested in the truth about cuvilian deaths. I can't get that because Hamas will not provide honest data.

I'm interested in the truth about the hunger crisis. I can't get that because NGOs are not being honest and the global media is shared doctored images

The "blame" for everyone who is dead, by the way, falls on the party that started the war and has refused for 600+ days to surrender and return the hostages they took.

You've revealed yourself here, your interest isnt in a humanitarian crisis...its framing it as the fault of Israel.

By all means keep doing it.

Give Grok a pat on the back for that.

Doesn't change that sharing images as sick kids passed off as starving is propaganda not journalism.

It’s fine- I can just remind myself that- thankfully - you’re in the minority. Maybe I’ll revisit this thread when Israel are convicted of war crimes.

I think most, logical, rational people can agree that the “blame” for starving nearly 2 million people is on the state who have withheld food and aid since March.

Hamas thanks you.

Are you aware that historically, death numbers by Hamas have been found to be accurate. In this conflict, they generally considered to be an underestimate if anything.

If you weren't aware of that (and you can look it up...), there's no justification for you saying any more, 'we don't know how many have died'

If you were aware, then why are you spreading misinformation as an excuse?

Absolutely. It’s thanks to this mentality that this war has continued for so long IMO. Hamas are well aware of the public support they have and also that these people will blindly accept the propaganda coming out of Gaza, and use it to put pressure on governments with public opinion.

They are literally enabling terrorists to use their people as human sacrifices.

While shouting about how much they care about the babies.

If I wasn’t alive to see it myself playing out in real time, I wouldn’t believe it tbh.

Lol. I'm not sure where you got this from (and ignoring the bizarre petition over the honesty of Jihadi terrorists) but you're very much mistaken.

Hamas are notorious liars about casualty figures.

In the 2008–09 conflict, Hamas claimed most of the dead were civilians. Later, they admitted up to 60% were their own fighters - exactly what Israel had said all along.

The same occured in 2014 - The UN used Gaza Health Ministry data, but independent analysis later showed that at least half of the casualties were combatants, despite early Hamas figures suggesting they were mostly civilians.

In this war, the Gaza Health Ministry is under Hamas control, and has again been economical with the truth.

They do not distinguish between combatants and civilians. They position people as press or aid workers without mentioning they're also military. They include people killed by misfired rockets (about 10–15% of Hamas' own launches). They count duplicate names, people who were already dead, and in some cases, falsified identities (as noted by multiple watchdogs).

The Biden administration and multiple international analysts have expressed serious doubts about the figures, especially the gender and age breakdowns Hamas provided in October and November, which dramatically shifted without explanation.

The OCHR are careful to point out their casualty data is unverified.

Me neither. I used to think people from historical situations believed propaganda because they had limited sources of information. Now I see they believe it because they want to. I've seriously just had to reply to a post where I'm pretty sure the person was claiming Hamas don't lie 😂