Two direct quotes from your link:
The ministry never distinguishes between civilians and combatants. That becomes clearer after the dust settles, when the U.N. and rights groups investigate and militant groups offer a tally of members killed. The Israeli military also conducts post-war investigations.
The Health Ministry doesn't report how Palestinians were killed, whether from Israeli airstrikes and artillery barrages or other means, like errant Palestinian rocket fire. It describes all casualties as victims of “Israeli aggression.”
To be clear, this means that in the records of the Gazan medical system there is no difference at all between a rocket blowing up in the face of a squad of terrorists trying to launch it, and a mosque full of pensioners getting hit by an IDF air strike.
Uh considering the "Gaza officials" cited in this article are Hamas employees that knowingly lied about a "hospital strike" just a week ago, I'd wait with the self-righteous fury...
Uh can you cite any of that "Doppler sound analysis and crater analysis"? Because from what I've seen so far, the damage, crater, and footage are all wildly inconsistent with an Israeli munition, and it's a known fact that this point that militants were firing rockets nearby.
For those wondering, this 2000 figure comes from... The Gaza ministry of health (specifically, a nonprofit citing the ministry of health), notable for fabricating a hospital bombing just last week where supposedly 500-870 people died (which is also turning out to almost certainly be a lie)
Did anyone commenting read the article? He literally tweeted
there have been no confirmed reports of rapes. You repeat this nonsense out of racism
Doctor denies well-documented rape, gets fired. Fully deserved. When people ask how Holocaust denial happens when the Nazis literally recorded everything, this is how.
Ah yes, 90 second long video by Al Jazeera (known for posting literal Holocaust denial on their social media) with sources as reputable as... videos from random Facebook and TikTok pages...
Christ the state of source evaluation these days.
The closest I can find from a source without a history of public Holocaust denial is that essentially Egypt closed it after nearby strikes, and is refusing to open it until there are no strikes even somewhat nearby. A pretty far cry from the "made inoperable" nonsense in this dumpster fire of an article
Did you read the article? It makes claims about "Cairo" and "Egypt" saying something, never actually quoting any entity from the Egyptian government on the reason the pass is not operational. The foreign minister says merely that there is "an urgent need", whatever the hell that means. The writers very conveniently leave out any reliable quotations for the single most contentious part of the entire piece. If anybody credible actually believed that Israel bombed this crossing, the authors would have no trouble finding a quote saying so.
The authors of this unbelievably lazy piece of journalism are all you need to look at to know why this article includes only quotes from a Hamas radio station and some random civilian on the ground to explain why the border crossing is not operational... Why Reuters would willingly publish such drivel is just beyond me
A brief catalogue of how the goalposts have shifted:
First, there was a comparison of Palestinian deaths to Israeli ones. Well, that turned out to be totally empty for a variety of reasons including (but not limited to) Hamas' tactics that have the sole purpose of maximize Palestinian deaths.
Then, you decided that Gazans had nowhere to run since you couldn't leave Gaza. Well, sadly that didn't hold up very well since this operation was limited in scope to specific regions within Gaza, so there was no need to leave Gaza to avoid the bombing.
Next, you decided that the origins of Hamas were somehow relevant (besides pointing fingers, still not sure how this is relevant to your lovely theory of "whoever has more corpses must be in the right"). Unfortunately, that also turned out to be essentially a nothing burger, when the very source you decided to cite explicitly stated that a) it wasn't Israeli money funding Hamas, it was Qatari and b) the economic consequences of blocking that Qatari money would inevitably lead to war, leaving Israel no choice but to allow it.
Then, you decided to move the goalposts over to "but the Palestinians have no way of knowing since the power [that Israel provides free of charge] is off". Unfortunately, that also turned out to be baloney since Israel uses nontechnological means to warn Gazans of bombings.
When will the goalposts take off their roller skates and settle down? Great as your endurance might be, gish gallop is not a legitimate way to make a point.
Did you read the links in your own source? These were a) not Israeli, but rather Qatari dollars and b) according to a source your article cites completely unavoidable. Here's a direct quote from an article linked in what you just sent -- "... this seems to be the right thing to do under the circumstances... the alternative is war".
As for how Israel warns civilians -- while the power Israel provided free of charge to Gaza is currently shut off, yours presumably isn't. Google is free, and reveals that Israel has literally showered Gaza in leaflets warning about this bombing. So long as the Gazans know how to read, your point is moot.
Well, it's an absolutely indisputable fact that many of the civilian deaths are the fault of Hamas. The sources I've linked show that beyond any doubt. I have not claimed, and will not ever claim, that 100% of the civilian deaths are solely the fault of Hamas. I do, however, think that any sort of argument relying on comparing death counts is made inherently invalid by the fact that Hamas does its best to maximize those numbers.
Have you read the IDF warning to the citizens of Gaza? I find it pretty unlikely, else you wouldn't make a claim as plainly false as "there is nowhere to run". This particular warning is about bombing a very specific region of Gaza that has a large number of terrorist tunnels in it. There are plenty of places "for them to run", as you put it -- quite literally anywhere other than that specific spot.
Regarding Hamas' origins, while this story makes for an excellent straw man, it's not particularly relevant to the question of deceptive statistics. It's also some remarkably dishonest journalism -- it manages to go from "an Israeli official admitted to giving some money to Hamas" to implying that Israel essentially started the organization. All the while, it very conveniently neglects to include any sort of information that might give a sense of scale. Not to mention, it conveniently neglects to mention that all the rival factions to Hamas were also terrorist groups at the time (Fatah only renounced terrorism after Israeli support of Hamas, and the PLO continues to engage in acts of terror to this day).
I'm a little curious where you saw that in my comment. I do think it's a little telling that your first response to me pointing out the (relatively uncontroversial) fact that Hamas attempts to maximize civilian casualties by using human shields is to ask "do you think Israel is perfect?"
When you have the government of Gaza quite literally doing everything in their power to maximize their own civilian casualties, "tHeRe HaVe BeEn MoRe DeAd PaLeStInIaNs" is not a salient point.
There's a shocker -- using human shields increases civilian casualties. Tonight at 8 -- water is wet.