The latest incident came hours after eight people were killed in an airstrike on an aid distribution centre at al-Nuseirat camp in central Gaza, health officials said.
The latest incident came hours after eight people were killed in an airstrike on an aid distribution centre at al-Nuseirat camp in central Gaza, health officials said.
Non-credible biased source that has been known to habitually lie to further their narrative. Probably doing it again here.
Again, notoriously untrustworthy source. It’s like trusting American cops to investigate each other. You’re not getting the truth that way.
Common precursor to a bunch of lies
Much more likely
Surprise surprise, more IDF lies that shifts the blame away from themselves, contrary to the reports of more credible sources.
Doesn’t that description match Hamas as well? “Gazan health ministry” is practically Hamas.
The casualty numbers and causal claims of the Gazan health ministry have repeatedly been judged consistent with the findings of neutral third party NGOs.
Besides, the health ministry might be nominally under Hamas control, but the major clinics are run by the UNRWA and staffed by doctors, nurses and medical administrators, not Hamas terrorists.
Gaza Health Ministry statistics are credible and used by everyone including the Israeli government and military. Athough the Israelis will publicly dispute the statistics, they use them internally as the numbers are good.
You will only believe what you want to believe, right? You will only look at information you agree with.
That’s rich coming from someone quoting a tweet about statements from the IDF about something that happened in Gaza 😂
Quoted in a string that is very much is to the contrary. Rich, huh. You want video?
Considering the source, no thanks. Video can be deceptively edited and otherwise doctored, which the propaganda arm of the IDF have been known to consistently do.
That you trust the IDF as a source in spite of their well-documented history of constant distortions amd outright fabrication makes it clear that you readily swallow horse shit and don’t understand why people don’t automatically agree that it’s actually prime beef.
That’s right, you only look at sources that agree with you. The contrary view is not considered and in fact discounted. You don’t want to see it because you may be deceived, when in fact you never consider you may already be deceived. Listen, I really don’t care what you believe. I am simply disrupting the chat box people like you enjoy. Carry on.
Not trusting a source with the reliability equivalent of The Daily Mail has nothing to do with whether I “agree”. That’s just a strawman you keep trotting out because you can’t defend your awful source.
Bias and source skepticism are not the same thing and pretending so is the refuge of people promoting poorly sourced bullshit.