Annon227

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.

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.