114

Gaza health ministry issues list of names of thousands killed in Israeli bombing (english.alarabiya.net)

submitted 10 months ago by snek@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

36 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Access the list in Arabic: https://www.aljazeera.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D9%86%D9%87%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%8A-%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%A1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%A1-2.pdf

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

And their ID card numbers, which can be indexed to the existing systems that The Israeli government controls.. and I imagine also that the US has access to.

So now to prove that Hamas is lying about the death toll, they just have to find one person on this list who is still alive and put them on television. Seems easy enough, considering that all the cell phones in Gaza strip are easily monitored.

Sorry I don't mean to imply they have to prove the Hamas is lying, it's just a great PR opportunity, so they won't pass it up if they have that capability

[-] snek@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

I was wondering what it is that the health ministry would have to do to be seen as credible. What would be good enough?

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Nothing would be seen as good enough. We are in a war, and that includes information war, that means constantly attacking the credibility of your enemy, even if what they're saying is true.

Releasing IDs, and photos of each body, to create a somewhat morbid wiki death would probably go a long way to establishing credibility.

But again they would be attacked, because we are in the information war phase.

Getting third parties in there to certify the deaths would help, but the UNRWA is deliberately not doing that, because they don't want to be political.

So whatever the ultimate death toll will be, it'll be contested hotly for decades to come. All will be able to agree on is a lot of people died, but not exactly how many...

[-] snek@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

We are in a war

As much as I agree, I don't think the main factor now is the fog of war. Seems like it's the White House deliberately removing credibility from a governing entity, which didn't echo well at all, and diplomatically could be seen as giving the middle finger to Gazan civilians are already invisible in their suffering. Biden made them even more invisible. He didn't say that the numbers were inflated (as far as I recall), but that they cannot be trusted at all. This is very different from saying, "take these numbers with a grain of salt".

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 3 points 10 months ago

War is war. Even if the information is 100% accurate and true and undeniable, the war playbook says you deny it, say the enemy is lying, and undermine their credibility at every turn.

War is not about accuracy, it's not about fairness, it's not about law, it's about winning.

Deny, deny, deny, until you believe.

[-] scrape@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

I agree with your overall point but take issue with referring to the hostilities in Palestine as a "war". We do not say that Nazi Germany was at war with Jewish People. We call it genocide. This is extermination of a civilian population.

Palestine does not have a standing army. Calling it a war normalizes the actions of Israel.

this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2023

114 points (86.1% liked)

World News

38563 readers

2933 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.