placeholder

Here's an article from the anti-zionist anti-semites at Haaretz. Much Harder for Children': Severe Hunger Is Spreading in Gaza. Four Voices From a Human Catastrophe The impossible reality of Gaza: Mothers who are too malnourished to breastfeed, searches for food under the threat of bombings and aid organizations collapsing under the strain https://archive.ph/8e1X8#selection-321.1-325.176

Here's an eye-witness report from "Professor Nick Maynard, a senior surgeon from Oxford University Hospital and the EMT’s clinical lead..." “We are seeing children and adults in the hospital with serious malnutrition. At the first hint of any infection these patients lose weight rapidly and look ever more profoundly malnourished.” https://www.map.org.uk/news/archive/post/1546--medical-aid-for-palestinians-and-international-rescue-committee-emergency-medical-team-report-serious-malnutrition-and-harrowing-injuries-in-gaza-hospital I do have a question that I wish I could ask Professor Maynard. Here it is: Who you gonna believe, COGAT or your lying eyes?

The same excerpt from this article his been tried on before. You might try reading in its entirety the quote this article came from. "These accounts of the Oct. 2 meeting have been disputed by senior U.S. officials and others familiar with intelligence surrounding the attacks. Several U.S. officials said Washington has “compelling” intelligence indicating that Iranian leaders were surprised by the Hamas assault. “The information that we have does not show a direct connection to the Hamas attacks on Oct. 7 as it relates to Iran. Again, that’s something that we’ll continue to look closely at,” Pentagon spokesman Air Force Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder said last week." https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/hamas-fighters-trained-in-iran-before-oct-7-attacks-e2a8dbb9 Subsequent to this article... "The Israeli military has said there is no concrete evidence of Iranian involvement in the Hamas attack from Gaza, after denials issued by the Iranian foreign ministry. “Iran is a major player but we can’t yet say if it was involved in the planning or training,” said R Adm Daniel Hagari, a spokesperson for the Israel Defence Forces." https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/09/no-evidence-yet-of-iran-link-to-hamas-attack-says-israeli-military#:~:text=The Israeli military has said,by the Iranian foreign ministry.

IDF conclusion: The investigation concluded that the soldiers acted rightly to the best of their understanding and that "there was no malice in the event". https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-29/thousands-move-fresh-exodus-central-gaza-israeli-advances/103271274 So, on the one hand, the soldiers violate the rules, but on the other hand they "acted rightly to the best of their understanding"? The snipers who saw 3 men naked from the waist up (in order to show they weren't wearing explosive vests) and waving a white flag acted rightly according to the best of their understanding? So the rules exist but when they're violated it's not a violation? It is to laugh.

I know you've appointed yourself as forum referee. Now you've appointed yourself the forum spokesman, too? The fact that you engage in this kind of denialsm instead of addressing the facts, shows how little you've got. We have eyewitness reporst from the Wall Street Journal, one of the best and most accurate media sources there is, and more importantly from the World Food Programme. The report from the World Food Programme dated Dec 21 is the first time they've said that there is actual ongoing starvation. As the New Yorker article delineated, the World Food Programme goes through a lot of procedures to make sure that the information is accurate. All you've got to offer in rebuttal of that is unsourced blather about the nature of such organizations.

Implicit in your assumptions is that efficiency as a concept in physics is the same efficiency as a concept in economics. Just because a process requires adding the energy that's going to be drawn on letter, that doesn't mean that it's economically inefficient and uncompetitive. It's how much it costs to create that energy. Economists reckon that at a cost of about $2 oer kilo, hydrogen would be competitive against natural gas. At least as far as onsite usage goes. The cost of creating hydrogen is dropping fast but it's not there yet. And onsite demand would be huge. Lots of industrial processes require high heat. As for batteries, the same reckoning of costs applies. Already, solar and wind are driving coal powered plants out of business. Gas-powered peaker plants, which charge high rates and are only fired up when baseline power supply is inadequate, are now regularly being outcompeted by batteries. And new kinds of batteries , such as those that rely on iron oxide (rust), are now in the beginning stages of commercial production and can offer energy at a much cheaper price than gas peaker plants can.

Is that all you've got? Thanks for the reflexive nonsense. If you believe that the difference between predictions and reality is a matter of "nitpicking", then have I got some stock picks for you.

Since you have decided to harp on it. allow me to join you. My comment was about actual starvation. No reports I or apparently you could find, at least not from credible sources, until the World Food Program report dates Dec 21.

Just to be clear: those last 2 links of your were about predictions. My comment was about actual starvation being reported on.

As for your statement about reports predicting the imminent exhaustion of food supplies about to be exhausted. That's about predictions. Do you understand the difference betweenreports about predictions and reports about actual conditions? It looks like you don't. Out of the 3 links you subsequently offered in a later post, 2 link to predictions. Only one of those links leads to a report on actual starvation. And my comment was about reports of actual starvation. Actual starvation. And the World Food Program report you linked is one I already cited. It's dated Dec 21.

But that's not all it said. In effect, it said both. It also said that they engaged in right action based on their understanding. What does that mean?

I have a probllem with the headline of this article. It says "More Than a Third of US Adults..." I think it should read Most of America's Crybabies

You did everything but address the comment from the IDF about the right action, The IDF also explained that the third hostage was shot because the shooter didn't hear the order not to shoot because there as some loud noise going on in their vicinity. Why would they need to hear an order if there were the rules of engagement that prohibited this? "Commanders declared a cease-fire to try to identify the third person, who called out for help minutes later. Another cease-fire was ordered and the person “came out of a structure toward the force,” the IDF said. But two soldiers who had not heard the order to hold their fire “due to noise from a nearby tank” shot and killed the third person." https://archive.ph/Ao8Px#selection-759.0-759.345

"The Chief of Staff determined that the hits on the hostages could have been prevented,” the investigation results read. “Alongside this, the Chief of Staff clarified that there was no malice in the event, and the soldiers carried out the right action to the best of their understanding of the event at that moment.” https://archive.ph/Ao8Px#selection-427.0-427.74 https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/12/29/hostages-killed-idf-investigation/ So the killing of the 3 hostages by the soldiers was a right action because it was carried out according to the best of their understanding..

Which does nothing to support your claim made for the reliability of UN Watch.

Overly stringent checks on trucks at the Rafah crossing from Egypt into Gaza were slowing the flow of humanitarian aid to a "dribble" as hunger grows among Palestinians there, UN World Food Programme (WFP) Executive Director Cindy McCain told Reuters on Thursday. The Rafah crossing, which is controlled by Egypt and does not border Israel, has become the main point of aid delivery since Israel imposed a "total siege" of Gaza in retaliation for an attack by Hamas from the coastal strip on 7 Oct. https://www.tbsnews.net/hamas-israel-war/un-food-chief-criticizes-strict-rafah-crossing-checks-limiting-gaza-aid-727486

Fox News, among others, is also considered to be a credible source on these pages.

Maybe you should look at the history of UN Watch a little more closely: "After Abram died in 2000, David A. Harris, Executive Director of the American Jewish Committee, was elected Chairman of UN Watch. In 2001, Harris announced that UN Watch had become a wholly owned subsidiary of the American Jewish Committee." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Watch#cite_note-UN_Watch,_AJC_Seal_Partnership-14 And I'm not the one who originally invoked the Bias in Media Fact Check reports. Hung by your own petard much?

From the same source UN Bias Fact Check: These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using an appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports, and omit information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy Overall, we rate UN Watch Right Biased based on information and political positions that favor the right and Mostly Factual due to the use of poor sources that have failed fact checks. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/un-watch/ These media sources are moderate to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports, and omit information reporting that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. Overall, we rate the NGO Monitor Right biased based on support for the right-wing Israeli government. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting based on the consistent promotion of pro-Israeli propaganda.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ngo-monitor-bias/

Thanks for the correction. So essentially Israeli merely dropped about the same number of bombs in 2 months on Gaza as the US did for all of Iraq in one month. Allies provided about 9% of bombs. During the Iraq War 62% of bombs dropped were smart. https://www.airandspaceforces.com/PDF/MagazineArchive/Magazine Documents/2003/July 2003/0703Numbers.pdf Over a decade later, Israel actually dropped a lower percentage. And I notice you've left uncommented on the massive destruction wreaked on Gaza. don't know what this sentence is supposed to mean: "The paywalled WSJ article and you were unaware, or your quoting?" I guess it has something to do with the link and something else. Usually I remember to put an alternative link. Here's a tip so you are never thwarted again in attempting to follow WSJ links. Copy WSJ URL. Go to archive.today. Paste URL into blank field. Press enter

First you cite COGAT as a reliable source and now your info comes from 2 organizations that are way over the top in their support for israel. As for the reliability of Hamas figures. If you want a far less biased look at how the information is gathered you'll have to look up the Reuters report dated dec 9 which is an explanation of the death toll offered by the Health Authorities in Gaza. If anything it's an undercount since only bodies that make it to the hospitals are counted. There the names, age and ID card number is recorded.. And an unnamed Israeli official concurred that the figures are more or less right.

You might want to read this interview in the New Yorker with the chief economist of the World Food Program. He explains how reports from Gaza are created. It's a laborious process and involves many agencies. https://archive.ph/a5Ybu https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/gaza-is-starving Here's a quote from him: "I’ve been doing this for the past two decades, and I’ve been to all kinds of conflicts and all kinds of crises. And, for me, this is unprecedented because of, one, the magnitude, the scale, the entire population of a particular place; second, the severity; and, third, the speed at which this is happening, at which this has unfolded, is unprecedented. In my life, I’ve never seen anything like this in terms of severity, in terms of scale, and then in terms of speed."

I would have my doubts if these reports had come from some agency connected to the Israeli government instead of an independent agency like COGAT....oh wait a minute... The Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) implements the government's civilian policy within the territories of Judea and Samaria and towards the Gaza Strip. COGAT is responsible for implementing the civilian policy within Judea and Samaria and towards the Gaza Strip, in coordination and cooperation with officials from defense and government offices in various fields. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/coordination-of-government-activities-in-the-territories/govil-landing-page Funny how COGAT cites a list from the WFP without a link to source to give context but absolutely contradicts the WFP when it comes to the food situation in Gaza: "Everyone in Gaza is hungry! Skipping meals is the norm, and each day is a desperate search for sustenance," WFP said in a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Tuesday. "People often go the entire day and night without eating. Adults go hungry so children can eat." https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/everyone-hungry-gaza-now-un-humanitarians And here's a report from the WFP dated dec 20 Gaza on the brink as one in four people face extreme hunger https://www.wfp.org/stories/gaza-brink-one-four-people-face-extreme-hunger

More nonsense and ludicrous denialism from you. Here's somethingfrom Nov 7 "UN agencies such as the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) and UNICEF, and other international agencies such as the World Health Organization have deplored the situation in the territory and called for increased supplies to be transferred, but have not stated that there are shortages of critical supplies." https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-says-theres-no-lack-of-food-water-and-humanitarian-supplies-in-gaza/ So, it hasn't been claimed several times by the responsible agencies. Buit as time goes by and Israel allows only a fraction of food supplies to enter Gaza, what to you think is going to happen? But please, share with me the reports that say Israel is allowing adequate amounts of food to be shipped into Gaza. The only people making such claims are the Israelis. Have food prices in Gaza have rocketed because there's enough? And by the say, you also asked back when, if the Israeli goal was to make Gaza unlivable,, why wasn't Rafah bombed? Another question of yours that hasn't aged well.

They definitely are strangers to destruction on this scale: 'An assessment by the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence found that Israel dropped 29,000 weapons on Gaza in a little over two months, according to U.S. officials. By comparison, the U.S. military dropped 3,678 munitions on Iraq from 2004 to 2010, according to the U.S. Central Command.' https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/gaza-destruction-bombing-israel-aa528542 I can remember when you asked me if Israel is trying to dispossess the Palestinians, why haven't the Israelis attacked Central Gaza? Not a question that has aged well. And there's this: Israel-Gaza war: Half of Gaza's population is starving, warns UN https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67670679 I've no doubt the Gazans are strongly attached to their land but they are not superhuman.