A US-based aid group admitted Friday that a group of individuals — who the Israeli military says were armed — took control of an aid convoy in the southern Gaza Strip the day before, without the organization having vetted them or coordinated the matter with the Israel Defense Forces.
The military said Thursday that it struck the gunmen, killing them while not harming aid workers.
According to the IDF, Hamas operatives frequently try to hijack aid deliveries.
The IDF had said on Thursday that a convoy of aid trucks from the American Near East Refugee Aid (Anera) organization entered the southern Rafah area with Israeli coordination. It said that during the drive, it identified a group of gunmen taking over a vehicle at the front of the convoy and beginning to lead it. The IDF described the act as a hijacking attempt.
Shortly afterward, the IDF said it was able to determine that it could strike just the car with the gunmen, without harming the rest of the convoy, and so it carried out a strike, killing at least four.
Times of Israel + IOF as sources is an instant red flag, and no matter what happened in this single incident let’s keep talking about the fact that there’s a genocide going out carried out by apartheid settler colonialists who want to kill every single Palestinian on this planet. We need a ceasefire now and an end to the colonization.
carried out by apartheid settler colonialists who want to kill every single Palestinian on this planet
This is the kind of hyperbole that makes it real easy for others to label critics of the actions of current Israeli leadership antisemites.
No, Israelis are not trying to exterminate all Palestinians; Yes, Netanyahu does not care about limiting collateral damage when targeting suspected Hamas militants.
If you’re passionate enough to comment, be passionate enough to communicate unambiguously.
Yes, the “all Palestinians on the planet” bit was indeed extreme. They don’t really care about Palestinians in, say, Michigan. It’s the ones in Gaza and the West Bank they want to get rid of. Ideally with “simple” ethnic cleansing and expulsion, a second Nakba, like their high ranking government officials have been saying. But in less than ideal situations, like the current one, their low ranking officials, military officers, prison guards, soldiers etc have already shown they are perfectly capable of hearing the genocidal dog whistle.
Nah I really mean it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Israeli_assassinations
They also killed many non violent political activists. Additionally Zionists deny Palestinians their Palestinian identity and just refer to them as „Arabs“. Any Palestinian who insists on their right to exist in their native homeland and is politically active in that matter can be killed literally anywhere anytime. The only way for a Palestinian to be left alone by the Zionist entity is to renounce their Palestinianness.
I didn’t say you didn’t mean It, I said it was an extreme statement and I stand by that characterization. I won’t deny that Israel has assassinated Palestinians in the rest of the world (I mean, …Haniyeh) but it’s absolutely not the case that any Palestinian anywhere is in danger from the Mossad simply for asserting their identity. The Israelis just haven’t sunk down to that level.
Fair enough, just saying that as the list shows even being merely an intellectual trying to keep the identity and culture alive can get you killed and what keeps alive a people’s identity if not culture? Anyway I understand that it sounds extreme to some and I think that’s okay.
This is the kind of hyperbole
no, it’s not hyperbole, please look up what many members of the Israeli government actually want, they are literally international wanted terrorists who’s sole missions is the extermination of the Palestinian peoples, that’s why they are literally referred to as “human animals”, “Canaanites”(a people that historically were genocided by the Israeli, even according to their own holy texts), are blamed for the holocaust (yes really).
Try harder
no matter what happened in this single incident
Who cares about the truth.
Happy to translate this to German in case there’s a language barrier here, but that’s not how most people have read my comment.
Have they been hunting Palestinian people across the globe? That’d make the Israeli regime worse than the Nazis, which is a bold claim. I think that, like the Nazis, they just want their targets removed from the land they claim as their own. They just happen to be fine with genocide to achieve that goal.
Yes, they have. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Israeli_assassinations
And that’s just the ones we know about.
Yes they have been hunting Palestinian across the globe, they carried out a lot of assassinations against the Palestinian resistance. Although really I don’t see how there’s any comparison to the Nazis necessary so please don’t put words in my mouth.
I agree with you on the second part it’s just that their claim is based on a settler colonial ideology that can’t function without dehumanizing the colonized people and challenging their right to exist and they challenge that globally because every Palestinian existing anywhere on this planet potentially blocks them from achieving their sick goals
Israelis and Palestinians aren’t monoliths and both groups generally want to coexist peacefully in a region they both have legitimate historical ties to. Yes, to stop the current fighting a ceasefire is needed. However, a ceasefire is not going to solve the problem of the IDF’s unrestricted killing of civilians as bystanders in response to Hamas directly targeting civilians as part of their genocidal aims towards Jews (in general).
Just because the Israeli government has more power doesn’t suddenly make Israelis the “baddies.” There’s a reason why Palestinians, and other regional groups, want Hamas gone and look to the West Bank for the PLO to lead the future of a Palestinian state. Hamas takes actions without caring what happens to the people of Gaza as long as they get to kill some Jews (and inspire their killing globally) and provoke disproportionate retaliation from Netanyahu to feed back into their system of civilian oppression.
The moment lasting peace settles in the region, Netanyahu can’t continue to avoid his personal legal problems, Hamas can’t reach their goal of a global Jewish genocide, and Iran can’t continue to destabilize the region and avoid its own internal instability. The fact that weapons manufacturers don’t get to profit from this stability is also a global win.
The goal is to prevent the killing of Palestinian civilians and to restore their self-governance where they’re settled- also to rebuild. It should be fairly obvious that Hamas is the biggest roadblock. The IDF can then focus on right-wing settlers breaking Israeli law and restore those settlements back to Palestinians in their new state.
Some things are really simple. The zionists have colonized Palestine and established an apartheid settler colonial regime that is currently committing genocide against the colonized. They are the baddies. That is not to say that Hamas are in any way the good guys, it’s just that colonizing people is wrong and apartheid and genocide are some of the worst crimes against humanity so an entity committing these crimes is of course bad.
If that is simple to you, then you really haven’t done any research into the subject. Would you call the native tribes of Oklahoma colonizers after they regained much of their land from the state? Of course not, because it’s not as simple as I’ve described it - imagine a non-native Oklahoman calling the Chickasaw colonizers because suddenly they are in the jurisdiction of that Nation? That’s what extremists sound like, using charged words that evoke emotions from other situations unlike the one described.
What are you even on about? I don’t think I can follow you.
the native tribes of Oklahoma are:
- mainly dead
- didn’t colonize areas people already lived, forcing them out at the end of a barrel
- don’t have a fucking apartheid state
tho, it’s not surprising that someone who supports the Israeli settler colonial project would unironically pull “what if we have the Native Americans their land back”, a group of people who the US still saw as literal second class humans during WW1 and still had as second class residents during the 70s
but if you believe the Indians should stay in their reservations, I guess any stance other than brutal settler colonialism is meaningless.
Where do you draw the line for “legitimate historical ties”? Because Israel was carved out of Palestinian territory in 1948.
If you keep going back, there was a Kingdom of Israel in the same region, but that was all the way back in the Iron Age. I don’t know if you can draw a line from there to modern Israel.
I understand that a line has to be drawn somewhere, and frankly it doesn’t matter how far back either’s claim goes - there are significant numbers of Palestinians and Israelis who have only known the current boundaries and any changes fundamentally alter their identities. Sure, we can go into the genocides committed against the Jews in the region over the past 2000 years that expelled them from the area and gives cause to antisemites that call Jews “white”, or violence perpetrated by Europeans when breaking up the Ottoman Empire and stoking ethnic violence over the past 100. But those claims only matter to the extremists as wedge issues used to divide.
Extremists shouldn’t get to determine the future of millions who clearly want to live peacefully together. No one can bring back the murdered, but Israel, regional powers, the US, and European countries owe it to humanity to rebuild the destroyed cities in the same fashion that we intend to rebuild Ukraine.
The Jewish people were expelled from the area in 70 CE so Palestinians essentially lived there for almost 2000 years.
now wouldn’t it be something if the Israeli government didn’t help Hamas win the civil war in Gaza, and have been supporting them by outlawing any secular alternatives?
dude, are you comparing the current far right, xenophobe, government trying to create an ethno-theocracy to Nazis? that’s anti-Semitic.
what, you’re going to say they both saw fit to commit genocide to gain “Lebensraum”, have an ideology of racial hierarchy and superiority, spread conspiracy theories that their chosen targets are actually at fault for every bag thing that happened to them, and of course spread the 14 words (with very slight modification) while portraying their “enemies” as literal “human animals”?
As Bill Burr said about the difficulty of raising kids vs. pets, you can compare anything. I could compare frisbees to Bundt cakes. They’re both round, but one has a hole in the center. See? I compared them.
So if I compare a genocidal, xenophobic ethno-state to a genocidal, xenophobic, theocratic ethno-state, well, that doesn’t mean they’re the same thing.
damn, if only we could categorize the actions of genocidal, xenophobic, ethno-states… maybe with some well known example that everyone knows is evil
First, these yahoos have no credibility after repeatedly lying and covering their criminal asses, so just from it’s sources, this very neat explanation is suspect from the get go.
Second, the very framing of the situation (unknown gunmen hijackers) is itself highly loaded and designed to make the Israelis and their enablers to feel OK about an attack on an aid convoy. It is meant to convey certainty that these were nefarious Nazgûl that just had to be taken out. For all we know, they could just as well be non-hamas good Samaritan actors trying to help the aid workers navigate the ruins of the bombed out ghetto because there is a famine going on. We have no way of knowing without an independent investigation. But that’s impossible because Netanyahu’s political survival depends on a forever war.
Third, there is obviously here the narrative of the moral army, that only takes necessary action, very carefully etc. This narrative seems to only come up when non-palestinians are involved, as is the case here, because Palestinian lives simply don’t really matter to them. Again, notice how there is zero information or concern about who the dead actually were and what their motivations and behaviour actually was. They simply don’t matter: they were Palestinians.
The “group of individuals” was the local movement company. They were assisting getting to the destination and there was no evidence that they made any hostile actions. That’s what ANERA says in this article even. So they didn’t admit to any of the made up nonsense that IDF or this Times of Israel article is claiming.
Given IDF’s less-than-stellar behavior so far, I’m going to remain skeptical until we know for sure that the aid workers in the rest of the convoy are alive and well.
No need to wait. Here’s their statement: https://www.anera.org/press/anera-convoy-attacked-en-route-to-emirati-red-crescent-hospital-four-killed/
No Anera staff were harmed, though one Anera employee, who was in the second vehicle, witnessed the incident at close range.
Despite this attack, the remainder of the convoy continued its mission and successfully delivered the critical aid to the hospital. Anera has coordinated with the United Arab Emirates 24 prior shipments for the Emirati Red Crescent Hospital since May.
Here’s the key bit, IMO:
The four community members were neither vetted nor coordinated in advance, and Israeli authorities allege that the lead car was carrying numerous weapons. Every initial report from those at the scene indicate that no weapons were present.
Sounds a lot like the scandal around the “Collateral Murder” tapes. Unidentified people on ground and low level personnel “identify” weapons = dead civilians.
Thanks. Nice to see some good news for once.
Reported by Iarael, the paragon of truth. /s
There is no true reporting in a war zone. The only people with access and reach are the conflict parties, both of which have a strong incentive to lie.
Yes there can be true reporting in a war zone. The probem here is Israel has refused to allow any foreign journalists into Gaza or the West Bank … leaving Palestinians as the only source outside of Israeli news sources. Then Israel targeted and murdered over 100 Palestinian journalists, so now very few are there to tell their side of the story.
I can’t place exactly which variant of the no true Scotsman fallacy this is.
Anyway here is a list of some of the most impactful and amazing journalists in history: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_correspondents
it’s not a no true Scotsman fallacy, it’s the literal fact that the IDF has laid siege to Gaza, refused entry to any foreign journalists, lead targeted strikes against those who were still in Gaza, killing the journalists and destroying their equipment, do you think that these war corespondents had some plaentier to scry over the wars they reported on or something?
If course what you’re saying is true but you’re barking under the wrong tree, that’s not what OP is saying.
These Fuckers made the exact same excuse when they struck the World Central Kitchen convoy back in April.
All their rhetorical damage control speaks exactly like the Kremlin.
Even if it turns out true, boy, have they lost all trust.
I won’t believe this story until a neutral source like Hamas or Al Jazeera confirms it.
What makes you think Hamas and Al Jazeera are neutral?
Lookie here boys, a wooooosh in the wild!
Because they come down on the side of the Palestinians every time, and I don’t want facts to get in the way of how I feel about this.
Do you support the rape and torture camp sde teiman that Israel runs?
Wtf does that have to do with anything here?
This is a post where the obvious intent is to whitewash an attempt to murder aid workers by the IDF. Something that continually happens time and time again with every aid group because Israel explicitly doesn’t want the aid coming in.
Questioning the motives of the poster trying to justify yet another atrocity is appropriate.
No
Then why are you trying to provide cover for a country actively engaged in systemized rape, torture, and Genocide?
There’s no genocide going on. It’s a war against an extremely deeply entrenched enemy in a densely populated urban environment.
systemized rape, torture
Rape and torture have happened, but are not systemic.
Israel does questionable and bad things, for sure. However it’s not the most evil state ever, that it’s often depicted as.
Nuance, truth, and perspective of the other side are important in this conflict.
Any country that intentionally withholds food, medicine, and potable water from a population it considers problematic is a nation intentionally committing genocide.
It is, in fact, the most common, and efficient, form of genocide ever.
That is just one of the reasons the ICC, the organization literally with the legal authority to determine of some thing is genocide or not determined that Israel is plausibly committing genocide.
You like to talk about truth and nuance a lot. Forgive me if I trust the literal genocide determining organization and not the self confident black and white statement og some asshole on the internet that loves to talk about nuance except when it comes to their own statements.
As to the systemic system of rape and torture, why don’t you read Israels OWN fucking reporting on Sde Teiman.
Any nation that murders at least 100,000 children is fucking evil. And those are not Hamas’s numbers. Those are the Lancet medical journals numbers. I’m not saying they are the most evil, as that would maybe be the British Empire, off the top of my head.
Any nation that murders at least 100,000 children is fucking evil. And those are not Hamas’s numbers. Those are the Lancet medical journals numbers.
That number is an estimate in an opinion piece, not a peer reviewed article. There’s no factual basis. The authors have already regretted putting the numbers in there.
People under 18 are not all children. Young adults of 17 definitely aren’t children like 3 year olds. Plenty of teenagers in Gaza are members of armed groups and participating in the fighting.
It’s not an opinion piece. It was labeled a correspondence, and isn’t peer reviewed, but the methodology for measuring dead in conflicts where the ability to make such counts is, and they used the conservative side of those calculations. The authors didn’t express regret, merely that some people made claims the article didn’t make.
Such methods are required, because Israel has intentionally bombed every hospital in Gaza to make counting the dead difficult, if not impossible, then insulting the methods required to actually estimate the dead. It sure would be nice if Israel didn’t intentionally destroy all civilian medical infrastructure and send many of the doctors to a torture camp so we could have some actual numbers.
But, that’s the point, isn’t it? That’s also the point of my comment you didn’t bother addressing at all because you know there is no moral defense, even though you’re willing to try and justify the murder of children.
Concentrating people in an enclosed area, and removing their access to food, water, and medicine is both the most common and the most efficient method governments have used historically engaged in the process of genocide.
And starvation kills children first, with the youngest dying the earliest.
It isn’t astounding that you (presumably, based on your instance) are from a country whose highest proportion of people charged with antisemitism are Jewish people protesting the genocide.
That is just one of the reasons the ICC, the organization literally with the legal authority to determine of some thing is genocide or not determined that Israel is plausibly committing genocide.
That is a misrepresentation of what the ICJ ruled. You can’t even tell apart the ICJ and the ICC, it seems. You can’t even get the organization right.
Here you can hear the President of the ICJ explain what is meant by plausible.
“At this stage of the proceedings, the Court is not called upon to determine definitively whether the rights which South Africa wishes to see protected exist,” said the ICJ. “It need only decide whether the rights claimed by South Africa, and for which it is seeking protection, are plausible. “In the Court’s view, the facts and circumstances… are sufficient to conclude that at least some of the rights claimed by South Africa and for which it is seeking protection are plausible.”
Plausible only refers to the right of South Africa to bring this case to the ICJ.
the ICJ had only ruled that Gaza Palestinians had a plausible right to be protected from genocide - in other words, that it had been dealing with a complex and somewhat abstract legal argument.
A day later, Joan Donoghue - now retired from the ICJ - appeared on the BBC’s HARDtalk programme and explicitly tried to end the debate by setting out what the court had done. “It did not decide - and this is something where I’m correcting what’s often said in the media… that the claim of genocide was plausible,” said the judge. “It did emphasise in the order that there was a risk of irreparable harm to the Palestinian right to be protected from genocide. But the shorthand that often appears, which is that there’s a plausible case of genocide, isn’t what the court decided.”
You’re right about the ICJ vs ICC which is a mistake I don’t ordinarily make. My only execute for that is I woke up in the middle of the night from a migraine.
Your quotes however are extremely cherry picked, and your description of what they mean is absolutely wrong.
Part of the case was about establishing South Africa’s right to bring the case, but part of it was to determine the plausibility of the charge.
https://www.npr.org/2024/01/26/1227078791/icj-israel-genocide-gaza-palestinians-south-africa
The International Court of Justice has found it is “plausible” that Israel has committed acts that violate the Genocide Convention. In a provisional order delivered by the court’s president, Joan Donoghue, the court said Israel must ensure “with immediate effect” that its forces not commit any of the acts prohibited by the convention.
Donoghue said the court cannot make a final determination right now on whether Israel is guilty of genocide. But she said that given the deteriorating situation in Gaza, the court has jurisdiction to order measures to protect Gaza’s population from further risk of genocide.
But, I’m sure NPR is Hamas, right?
Since when does the West Bank have restrictions on Journalists entering?
You don’t believe the president of the court you cite, okay then.
Times of Israel - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Times of Israel:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - Israel
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
