Germany says Israel's massacre at Gaza school justified in 'self defense'
Germany says Israel's massacre at Gaza school justified in 'self defense'
Israel fired three US-made munitions at the Al-Tabiin school, slaughtering 93 Palestinians as they gathered for morning prayers
Germany justified Israel's recent strike on the Al-Tabiin school in Gaza, which killed almost 100 Palestinians during morning prayers, saying that Israel has the "right to defend itself."
Palestinian survivors of the attack described how men, women, and children sheltering at the school were torn to pieces after Israel targeted it with three separate strikes on Saturday.
"Israel has the right to defend itself. The reality is that Hamas uses schools, hospitals, kindergartens as command centers and that the people in the Gaza Strip are also abused against their will as protective (human) shields," government deputy spokesman Wolfgang Buechner claimed while speaking the press in Berlin.
Buechner provided no proof of his assertions.
"Israel has the right to defend itself. The reality is that Hamas uses schools, hospitals, kindergartens as command centers and that the people in the Gaza Strip are also abused against their will as protective (human) shields," government deputy spokesman Wolfgang Buechner claimed while speaking the press in Berlin.
Does anybody know of a source for that? This article gives next to no context and just seems to list vaguely related assertions and claims made by other media outlets.
Is Buechner specifically talking about the "strike on the Al-Tabiin school in Gaza" or just about the situation in general? This information is pretty important and leaving it out is potentially misleading.
Maybe you can provide other evidence of Hamas using hospitals as bases since the start of the conflict. Any single instance will do.
You must have misunderstood. I'm not trying to argue about that. I'm merely pointing out that context is very important and that the article lacks context when presenting that quote.
Please don't assume that I'm claiming the article to be misleading. I am asking for other sources to verify the article. But until somebody provides useful sources/context/both, the article is just a catchy headline with little to support it.
If you fail to provide anything like that, I won't assume this to be factual reporting of any kind. And as you are obviously very invested in this and I don't assume any malice on your end, I believe you can help.