The same organization is making it very clear that this is not proof because they only have publicly available Intel.
The group cited several clips believed to be of the explosion from different sources and claimed the “geolocation and timing of the footage is conclusive”. However, they said their conclusions are not “proven fact”.
“That doesn’t mean that they are THE truth, just what we think is highly likely based on our geolocations(facts) and logic/reason,” they wrote on Twitter.
“We are geolocators, not official investigators… To be sure what really happened, different official investigations are needed.”
Israel and the US have more intelligence that could definitely prove what happened…
But for some reason they aren’t releasing it. Most logical reason is it shows Israel launched it, or blew up the hospital while trying to shoot a rocket down.
If it cleared Israel, that satellite footage would be out by now. Gaza is too tiny for me to believe Israel just wasn’t surveiling it at the time.
Is that really the most logical conclusion to be drawn? It’s been less than a day, and I would really hope intellegince services are more diligent than your average twitter sleuth. Id rather they be right than first, personally.
Also what satellite footage are you talking about?
You dont think Israel has satellites looking at Gaza?
It’s a very very small area, and missiles/rockets are more than visible enough. It should be really easy to see if it came from Israel or further in Gaza.
Hamas doesn’t have satellites, so it makes sense they can’t offer proof.
If Israel wants people to believe them in 2023, they need to understand they’ve already burnt up their benefit of doubt.
And again**One quick google search brings you to satellite pictures of the damage published by Israel (and also by other non biased news sources) Just search for it, please. I understand you have your agenda but come on don’t let it hide truths and evidence.
Not OP but my read on this is that OP is suggesting that Israel or the US should have a recording of the rocket being fired that would have been captured by a satellite and could be shared.
Obviously there are images that have been published showing the destruction, but it’s not clear to me how looking at a picture of rubble would help to establish the origin of the rocket fire.
Given how many bombs have been dropped in Gaza (more in 6 days than the US dropped in a year of fighting in Afghanistan), it’s easy for me to imagine that the destruction of this Palestinian hospital was due to an errant Israeli bomb, but pretty difficult to imagine that a Hamas soldier with bad aim accidentally took out one of their only hospitals. From the outside, it feels like the burden of proof lies with the side that seems to be trying to flatten Gaza, not the side without access to food, water, electricity, or medical supplies.
Having said that, I sincerely doubt that this will be the last atrocity committed by either side before this is over, so I doubt that we will ever get any evidence that is truly conclusive.
it’s easy for me to imagine that the destruction of this Palestinian hospital was due to an errant Israeli bomb, but pretty difficult to imagine that a Hamas soldier with bad aim accidentally took out one of their only hospitals.
Maybe it’s because your missing context. Depending on the type of rocket fired, Palestine rockets generally fail to leave the Gaza Strip between 5-20% of the time. A small imperfection in the steel of a water pipe may not cause a failure for 100 years of used to transport water. But that same imperfection can easily buckle under the load of sever g’s during rocket launch. Hundreds of people have died in Gaza from Gazan rockets that didn’t make it to target and it’s standard practice for Hamas to blame am Israeli airstrike for the rocket’s failure.
Oh yeah that totally makes sense, and I’m not excluding the possibility that it could have been Hamas. Both sides are involved in some pretty fucked up shit, nobody’s hands are clean here.
In this case we have one side who conducted a hostage raid and slaughtered civilians living in kibbutz (which are essentially the Jewish equivalent to the Amish or Mennonites), started a war as the aggressors, have launched 2-20k rockets of various types at Israel somce the atart of hostilities (widely disputed), has been car bombing people trying to evacuate (and falsely blamed it on an Israeli airstrike), admittedly accidentally bombed a hospital (and falsely blamed it on an Israeli airstrike).
There’s one side here who is clearly more wrong than the other.
I don’t understand. Ya’ll think Israel is gonna burn an intelligence asset they have by making it public just so people who are already convinced by one narrative (because underdogs are always easier to support) have proof of one attack not being their own? They have better use for that intelligence. Like fighting a war.
And the resolution of those satellites is literally a state secret. You won’t ever see direct imaging from them being released publicly.
Edit: Also US intelligence said this assessment comes in part based on communications intercepts, which you are definitely never seeing directly released unless leaked.
I’m not responding to you personally so much at responding in a communal thread to naive or incorrect points.
Again, this shouldn’t exactly be new news at this point, as stories on topics like how revealing satellite imaging reveals state secrets have been mainstream stories before (i.e. forbes.com/…/trump-accidentally-revealed-the-amaz… ).
But it’s less about trying to convince you personally that the idea USINT would release satellite images to back up claims by Israel is ridiculous, and more about providing the context for anyone else that follows on the conversations’ wake.
If it was about you personally, I’d have direct messaged.
And blocking people that disagree with points online is kind of puerile, so that’s not a place my mind ever went to.
But feel free to block if you want. Again - it’s not about you.
You think intelligence agencies would release primary source data that could reveal collection methods and fidelity to other nation state intelligence agencies just to win PR points?
There’s only one individual I can think of that would do something like that, and he’s currently facing charges relating to his handling of classified materials.
Yeah the original claims seemed as likely to be true as all the times that terrorists fought to take credit for disasasters that didn’t involve them. It’s quick easy points in fast moving propaganda campaigns. That being said I have seen this fricking twitter thread of internet sleuths used like 4 times and called different things and we keep passing around the same short clip and the complete nonsense arguments.
No I don’t think anyone can say anything about this other than a hospital in gaza was partially blown up like many others and people are still suffering while aid is being kept at arms length from the victims. That’s the real story and I don’t care who did it until real intelligence has something to say on the matter.
While I can’t take Hamas’ word at face value, I also can’t forget that many people who are not Israeli have a vested interest in spreading misinformation. Why did Israel change it’s story so many times immediately following? Can IDF not launch missiles from inside Gaza? The article mentions this ordinance has been used by Hamas before, when? How is Hamas able to smuggle missiles into Gaza, which has been described as a locked down prison with hundreds of checkpoints?
This is an incredible claim and I expect incredible proof.
First they blamed Hamas. Then they posted a video from 2022. Then they posted a video with a wrong timestamp (even though it was live). There were probably more but these are what came to mind.
Blaming Hamas makes sense if all you know is “We don’t think we did this and the org we are at war with are blaming us”. And I am not certain, but I want to say most of what you listed after that was less an Israeli Government statement and more The Internet (we even have shades of “jet fuel can’t melt steel beams” in “hamas can’t make an explosion that big”)
But also? We are about 24 hours out from this. All news is breaking news. The Internet, much like The 24 Hour News Cycle, have made it incredibly easy to see every update as they exist (and, because of misinformation campaigns,non-stop FUD). But it is important to take a breath and wait for things to settle. Keep yourself informed, but avoid leaping to conclusions until there is time for third parties to vet information. And understand that, even now, we are still missing a lot of info.
And also learn how to vet your sources. because we are responding to a post that has decided the obvious answer to evidence indicating it was (probably) not the IDF is “Well, it was obviously a false flag by the IDF”. Which… gets back to crisis actor and “jet fuel can’t melt steel beams” territory.
I hate this breaking news armsrace because it is a breeding place for fake news, especially on social media platforms like the cesspool twitter.
I rely on two news stations a German one, mandatory founded by German citizens (so no investments and ideology from other sources needed) and Reuters. And if a news is on both and without the “not independently verified” label I believe and maybe share it.
Information to people who don’t know how to parse it is dangerous and ever increasingly dangerous.
But… it is also clear that people are going to spew lies regardless. Again, “jet fuel can’t melt steel beams”.
And, as it stands? I very much prefer that I know a few people and orgs I trust to analyze available data. And they also document that analysis. Which is a lot better than hoping CNN paid someone competent to write a piece for Anderson Cooper to read out on air.
Like, reddit doxxing multiple victims over the years comes up every time. And… that is a definite concern. But that also gets into knowing how to vet your sources. Because I don’t care what some rando on a message board says about “that sounded like a JDAM to me” or “hamas doesn’t have explosives that big”. I care about what people who used to be CIA analysts and have a solid track record AND who understand what information you don’t publish online have to say.
It’s wild to me how “jet fire can’t melt steel beams” persisted as a myth. Several engineering fields know that a material’s strength goes down at higher temperatures.
Man, who would have expected the ride we’re all having right now? This is pretty amazing…. Who would have thought that this circus would come to town? But, you know—it may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS, that’s all I got to say. So what can I say? It’s—you know, the money’s rolling in, and this is fun.
While that is in regards to the orange piece of shit in America, it 100% applies to this news arms race as you call it.
They see the opportunity for money, who needs anything else once you’re first out the gate? Offer any contracts or don’t based on new evidence, it truly doesn’t matter once they get their clicks
My man, this current conflict started with Hamas launching ~2,500 missiles at Israel. Israel famously has the Iron Dome system to shoot down the missiles that have been coming from Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon for years. It is not at all an incredible claim that Hamas and other anti-Israel groups in Palestine have missiles; it's well-proven fact. Here's an info-graphic of the different types of missiles Hamas was known to have as of 2021.
Not sure why you added “there’s just a difference between missiles and rockets”. There is a difference, but is not particularly relevant here. Many people mix up these terms anyway: the post you replied to mentions missiles but Hamas, as per linked graphic, probably only has rockets. It may matter to the iron dome system, as that relies on a predictable path of a rocket to decide what to target.
I added it because they are different. All news sources I saw said it was a missile that hit the hospital. It is reasonable to think that journalists will use the words that they mean. When a truck crashes into a building, I wouldn’t look at people who only have cars for the culprit.
Why did Israel change it’s story so many times immediately following?
Because their psyop instinct jumped the gun without double-checking whether they actually hit any target even in the rough vicinity. Imagine a bunch of neck-bearded shitposters in uniform salivating over their keyboards, then brass storming in saying “stop that it wasn’t us, this time”.
10-minute video captured by AJArabic around the time the al-Ahli hospital was hit.
As per @Ted55643099:
Explosions on this video: (0:19) hospital. (0:16, 4:25, 4:49) behind and to the left of the hospital. (5:33, 5:56, 9:26, 10:46) behind hospital, most likely the same place. (9:38, 10:51) to the right of the hospital outside of the frame, likely the same place.
Well the first claims out by Hamas was 500+ dead and an Israeli airstrike.
Now we are learning it's more like 20-50 dead, landed in the parking lot next to the hospital and was due to a failed Hamas/related groups rocket.
Yeah either way people died but the entire situation has greatly raised tension in the middle east. It could have been responsible for opening up another front of the war with Hezbollah.
No it doesn’t. The IDF will lie. Hamas will lie. Did it matter who blew up the Nordstream pipeline? At best, we’ll find out years from now, and, by then the world will have moved on, and it won’t matter.
It absolutely matters, yeah people died but guess what, shit don’t end there.
If this is a verifiable attack from Israel it is a clear indicator a war crime and can be used to reduce support to Israel in this effort. Ya know what that could do? Reduce the number of people who will die
Just because someone died doesn’t mean it’s off limits to those that didn’t. What kind of brain dead take is that
No it doesn’t. Israel has committed war crimes leading up to this. Did the world stop that? How many lives did knowing that Israel committed war crimes save? Hamas committed war crimes. Did knowing that save lives? Did I mention that Israel is still committing war crimes? They bombed a school. They bomb the people fleeing. They shot people (including children) during a peaceful protest in 2018. Why didn’t the world care then? It’s that kind of brain dead take.
Not really, because even some news stations now access this public available data and checked it with their sources. Good example would be Bucha where those sources were used to verify the crimes that happend there. But yeah of course you always need a trustful source which uses this data.
Good starting point is to go to official news pages and avoid social media like twitter, Reddit or even lemmy until those news is proven.
Law enforcement also used geofence data (obtained via search warrant) and flight records to place her at the Capitol riot. Indeed, charging documents show that many of the January 6 defendants were identified by law enforcement using these triangulation methods — largely based on OSINT — to piece together proof that they were involved. The challenge of the reliability of OSINT data was able to be overcome through the large amount of digital evidence available.
Have you actually ready any of it yourself? Or are you just passing armchair judgement based solely on headlines?
Ive had to start putting ublock origin on cuatomers systems by default. The web has become a far worse cesspool for scams than what it was a few years ago. The ads blend in with real content. The internet is a shit hole now.
(aside of social network’s disinformation, conspiracies, hate breeding and false news) this is prime example of what the internet ended up as, to a regular user: how-i-experience-web-today.com
‘entrepreneur’ lacks the positive vibe it used to bring. like saying ‘visionary’ or ‘genius’. overuse has tipped these terms into ‘yeah right’ and ‘clickbait’ especially when appearing in headlines. blame google for aggregating clickbait headlines but they aren’t writing them. interesting that telegraph.co.uk hosting this is packed full with ‘clickbait’. designed with LCD appeal and low value content like this story
And why do you think they are written in this manner? Does it have something to do with ads? Praytell, who owns the ad platform as well as search?
Pretty balsy to blame the writers, they are simply chasing the algorithm Google makes. In the end, Google does really control it all. So if you wanna be mad at someone, I’d say start with the one forcing everyone to do this.
Maybe this is the equivalent of defending ethical capitalism, but an ad-supported model can enable poor users to access content they couldn’t afford if it were paid.
If you are too poor to consume the advertised items/services then the actual customers of those products/services are paying for your access. I personally use an ad-blocker, but I only hate ads because they can be a vector for malware.
That is a problem, because what I tell people all the time is that your data is money. Ad services also serves as a tracking service, and as such gets paid from two directions: from advertisers and mass collection of data.
The problem with both is that they have been devalued in a race to the bottom, mostly thanks to ads swarming the web in the early 2000s.
This also solidifies Google’s monopoly, because now all advertiser’s have to go through them, as well as Meta or other social networking platforms - which all have their own tracking and ad services.
Pre-Google Internet wasn’t exactly great either. If you think current Google is bad, wait until you are stuck with AltaVista, a 5MB email inbox and video sharing without Youtube or services like AOL or MSN that try to outright replace the Web. Google got big in the first place because what they offered was substantially better than the competition.
If you travel back 15 years ago or so, you have Google at its best, providing lots of great services and still innovating.
I was there and can tell you we had a peak of quality maybe in the 00s and have been going backwards towards worse than the early Internet really fast in the last decade or so.
Sure, if you want to find info on something, now you can now watch a glitzy 1080p video with lots of fancy graphics on Youtube of some guy explaining it - it will have a clickbait title and be interspected with Ads, sponsor segments, and it will take half an hour to explain something which in the old days you could read all about on a website in 10 minutes and actually came out knowing more about it.
The funny bit is that the old website is still there, but if you use Google to search for it that video and another 20 like it will be shoved in front of you, along with “sponsored results” and a ton of SEO-optimized clickbait websites which you’ll have to wade through to find the one needle in between all that straw (and meanwhile the system is designed to distract you away from what you want, so you’ll have to battle your own subconscious pulls to stay the course).
And don’t get me started on how you actually had a decent expectation of privacy on the Internet back in the late 90s and early 00s whilst nowadays all dominat players almost force you (in some cases actually do) to give them your phone number to better link your various online and offline profiles in multiple devices.
IMHO, the actual Internet in software, usability and software systems terms now is not superior to what we had in the late 90s, early 00s, it’s the electronics tech (mainly thanks to bandwidth and portable computing devices) that’s superior.
Goolag went completely off the rails when they decided to drop the “Don’t Be Evil” pledge. There were whole projects dropped on a dime the moment anyone questioned if a certain project or action was “evil”. Now nobody at Goolag even cares anymore. It’s all about that $earch For More $$$; anyway they can get it.
“Don’t be evil” is still the last line of Google’s corporate conduct. Seemingly not many people understand that Alphabet is Google’s parent company, not their direct replacement, and all they did was change it to “Do the right thing”, because generally when you’re broken up in anti-trust measures, you don’t want to just rename your company.
Note: I am not arguing that Google is a “Good” company. It’s just nonsensical to point to a completely arbitrary “Evil” in their policy and say that without that they would, y’know, be evil. Particularly when Google itself still has that policy.
he co-founded deepmind, which was acquired by google. he also worked at google itself (left last year). he knows a fair bit about google and its inner workings, especially in regards to ai tech integration into its various properties. so more than just a 'competitor' or 'businessowner'
I know Google is a big corpo but its hardly the only reason behind the state of the internet. It is a major factor, but to single out Google when Microsoft and others have played just as significant of a role is odd.
telegraph.co.uk
Active