I'm reading "A Close Look at Some Key Evidence in the Gaza Hospital Blast/A widely cited missile video does not shed light on what happened, a Times analysis concludes" in The New York Times.
"The Times’s finding does not answer what actually did cause the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital blast, or who is responsible. The contention by Israeli and American intelligence agencies that a failed Palestinian rocket launch is to blame remains plausible. But the Times analysis does cast doubt on one of the most-publicized pieces of evidence that Israeli officials have used to make their case and complicates the straightforward narrative they have put forth."
Posts
83 comments:
A NY Times analyst. Certainly the most trustworthy and knowledgeable of all sources.
Now where did I put that special sarcasm font...
"The Times’s finding does not answer what actually did cause the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital blast, or who is responsible.
Yes. They did find who was responsible. Guess who?
Of course, the Israelis always launch homemade rockets at hospitals.
The "blast" looks a helluva lot like a rocket fuel fire in the parking lot.
Hamas has been known to use civilians to shield fighters, and rack up the "massacres" to be blamed on Israel.
Israel as far as I know has not used this tactic since perhaps the 40s. It is a tactic to be used by the weak, hoping to be rescued, more than by the strong.
The famine in Bengal during WWII is often blamed on Churchill. The Brits were still nominally in control. Churchill actually did what he could in wartime, which wasn't much. The profiteers hoarding food were often natives. And Ghandi probably did what he could to make the situation worse, not better.
And now we are supposed to believe the NYT?
The NYT does so badly want to find Israel responsible for this.
"But the Times analysis does cast doubt on one of the most-publicized pieces of evidence that Israeli officials have used to make their case and complicates the straightforward narrative they have put forth."
What the Times analysis casts doubt on is its ability to have any objectivity on this issue.
All the experts are saying that the missile in the video is the likely cause of the explosion on the ground. Even CNN has admitted this.
Why would this analysis have any greater credibility than the comically propagandistic initial report? Baghdad Bob and the Islamic State apparently spawned a bastard spokesman who was then allowed to write headlines for a “paper of record.” Until the Times addresses how that happened, there’s no reason to believe anything else they print.
The rocket broke up in that flash. One part landed on the hospital parking lot.
The rocket videos aren't great evidence; what cinches it it the damage pattern in the parking lot, definitely small effect that matches a broken rocket. Israel hits the target (not the parking lot) and leaves a high explosive hole.
Best counternarrative is that it was a stray iron dome rocket but apparently they don't migrate that far.
Wish they'd put this much effort into evaluating the Palestinian death tolls put out by Hamas.
Dear NYTimes: Where is the evidence that the Hospital was hit by an Israeli rocket, killing 100s, as you initially reported?
Let me just suggest that you have no credibility at all on this topic. It's best that you just bury this next to your Pulitzer for Russian Collusion work.
Israel should destroy every single building in Gaza, down to the outhouses, *except* that hospital. That should sufficiently show the appropriate level of spite
The "Times" analysis? Why do they not quote the "expert" who they had to the analysis? Or was it just some 20-something NY Times writers who watched the video on the iPhone as the first time they've even analyzed rocket video?
The NYT relied on the accounts of a known terrorist organization.
Maybe they shouldn't have done that without checking first.
Just a thought.
Only the best and brightest...
NYT soon to discover that the paragliders were actually flown by White Supremacists(tm) from Texas.
It's called the fog a war you New York Ninnies. Hey NYT, do you plan to analyze every underway projectile you catch on film? If so don't let me stop you, at least is would take resources away from your God awful reporting.
Well, if the New York Times says so.....
Anyone who relies on this rag for news is ignorant.
Of course totally ignoring the intercepted radio traffic at that same instant where the Hamas guys were talking about the rocket fail and it dropping near the hospital.
we Should ask rcocean!!! he KNOWS what happened, and WON'T be swayed by facts or data
So it turns out that the headline "Israeli Strike Destroys Hospital Kills 500" was false in every word. Not Israel's missile or strike. The hospital was not destroyed . The event did not kill 500. But the worst part is how uncritically they repeat Hamas propaganda without checking. Much the same way they parrot any Leftist complaints within the USA without verifying. Much the same way they still report the "civilian deaths" quoting Hamas press releases without saying it is Hamas's propaganda.
They had a handy phrase they appended to every single statement made by Trump, "without providing evidence of the claim." Various iterations of this phrase were used by almost all major news outlets. Never once did they also disclose that (1) this is their business model, (2) they never bothered to confirm or dispute Trump's claims, (3) they had no intention of ever admitting a Trump claim had merit and (4) almost every crazy-ass claim made about Trump would be reported as if factual and repeated ad infinitum, even after evidence of its falsity was widely known.
A related note. You may recall the "fine people" hoax/lie the Left loves so much. Hell, Jow Biden know claims it was the formative moment of his childhood and the sign from the gods he would someday be president. But the Charlottesville myth, complete with bulging eyes and highly vocal hate speech soundtrack as recalled by dear old uncle Joe, is being reenacted every day now somewhere in America. On some days it is being reenacted in many varied locations. Yet those bulging eyes and that hate speech is of no interest to our somnolent president. He's too busy going on about the new myth of islamophobia awash in the heartland.
The NYT first headline repeated the Hamas claim it was an Israeli missile, as if it was a fact. The damage the NYT did with those initial reports was journalism at its worst.
Maybe next time do the “visual analysis” before publishing hysterical, dangerous disinformation.
The Babylon Bee said it best.
"New York Times Patiently Awaiting Zoom Call From Hamas To See What They Should Print Today"
The New York Times: Helping To Instigate WWIII.
What horseshit.
John Bender: Hospitals blow up all the time. The world's an imperfect place.
Shorter left-wing media default: How dare Israel do anything to fight back. Terror must be accepted..
12:11 - Earnest Prole. that.
Dave Chappelle on Space Jews
But the Times analysis does cast doubt on one of the most-publicized pieces of evidence that made the New York Times look like a pack of gullible ninnies.
Fixed it for them.
Hamas has no trouble hiding their military installations behind the innocent in hospitals and schools.
The WSJ came to the exact opposite conclusion last weekend on the same evidence, and went with a lead headline. Pick your news source, pick your truth.
The WSJ came to the exact opposite conclusion last weekend on the same evidence, and went with a lead headline. Pick your news source, pick your truth.
NYT putting more emphasis on rocket video than other evidence in order to pretend there is still a 50/50 chance Hamas is innocent.
BTW
Colonel William R. Higgins was captured by Hezbollah, the terrorist group acting as Iran’s hand in Lebanon, and tortured for months until his body was dumped near a mosque.
An autopsy report found that he had been starved and had suffered multiple lethal injuries that could have caused his death. The skin on his face had been partially removed along with his tongue and he had also been castrated.
"... a Times analysis concludes."
Imagine the possible responses to this. As for instance, "says you?" or "oh yeah, sure." or "don't make us laugh." Etc.
"a Times analysis". LOL.
Does "the Times" think we have all been waiting with bated breath for their "detailed analysis"?
The New York Times is not a legitimate source of news or analysis.
End of story.
Does the NYT think the video is the only evidence of who did it? Definitely covering themselves in glory.
rhharden is essentially right at 12:12
BTW, I think what is lost in all of this is the fact that Hamas admits (brags?) about firing over 5000 unguided missiles into Israel. Every one of these missiles was intended to cause discriminant civilian death and civil destruction. If they, themselves, had been able to accurately target 5000 Israeli hospitals or schools does anyone here believe they would not have?
All of this hand wringing over the obvious shrapnel and rocket fuel destruction of a parking lot, which has already confirmed by radio itercepts at the time of the explosion, is comical. Everyone here and at the NY Times knows the IDF has no history of targeting civilians. In fact, if they were the barbarians they are made out to be all of Gaza would already be a smoldering parking lot. On the other hand Hamas has a long history of civilian atrocities, including their new sport of butchering babies. Who you gonna believe?
Did the NYT rely on it's Hitler loving staff for this? Literally, a fan of Hitler - which explains her position at the NYT.
What extraordinary lengths they are going to in the effort to create the illusion that they might not have committed blood libel in their original reportage.
Has the crack analysis team of the Times discovered that the "blast" was in the parking lot? Or that there were not hundreds of deaths? Does the article address that? Do they come clean as to their faulty reporting? I'm betting no.
Crack, does your hallway make a chirp every 30 seconds?
Enigma said...
“NYT soon to discover that the paragliders were actually flown by White Hispanic Supremacists(tm) from Palestine, Texas”
Made a couple of adjustments to better fit the narrative.
It is very important that we not allow the news of the day to distract us from the most important aspect of all daily events: how Crack is impacted and what Crack thinks about other things...
...particularly when one Crack inanity after another suffers cataclysmic destruction from colliding with reality.
I also feel bad for LLR-democratial Rich since he is clearly struggling with this latest lefty lie with no clear rhetorical pathway yet to lay it all off on conservatives or Trump.
Thoughts and prayers during these difficult democratical-islamic supremacist alliance times....
Hopes and dreams defused, maybe. NYT experts bitterly clinging to fraud and awards of impeachments past.
Duke Dan said...
Of course totally ignoring the intercepted radio traffic at that same instant where the Hamas guys were talking about the rocket fail and it dropping near the hospital.
I'm sure that the NYT will say that the Israelis faked it and when asked for proof will say; "It's a bunch of Jews! They had their cousins in Hollywood do it!", while pointing vaguely West.
Antisemite assholes!
1. I detest the lying liars at the New York Times.
2. A Hamas rocket failed and killed people in the parking lot of the hospital.
Now that that's out of the way, I'll just repeat what I said a few days ago - there's a problem with the short timing between the mid-air explosions and the explosions on the ground in the video under discussion.
There are several possible reasons for this, but I don't know the answer. It would be a good thing for some knowledgeable people to attempt an explanation purely in the pursuit of a fuller understanding of the event.
Or just rant away. That's cool too if it makes you feel better.
It appears that you're sharing a news article from The New York Times regarding the Gaza hospital blast. The article suggests that a detailed visual analysis by The Times concludes that the missile seen in a widely circulated video is not what caused the explosion at the hospital. The conclusion of the analysis doesn't determine what actually caused the blast or who is responsible. However, it does cast doubt on one piece of evidence that Israeli officials have used to support their case. This development complicates the narrative put forth by Israeli officials. It's essential to consider multiple sources and perspectives when evaluating a complex situation such as this.
Having just read their pathetic SAT "analysis," I'll ignore this other analysis of theirs.
I am glad the NYT went to the trouble to do a close analysis of the film. But am I too cynical if I think they were hoping they would find something to make their initial headline "Israeli Strike Destroys Hospital Kills 500" look less wrong? And make themselves look less gullible? Am I also too cynical if I think they would never do a close analysis of a claim that advanced their politics?
NYT is publishing in the dusk's late darkness of Ukraine-gate, Iran-ISIS affair, and Obama/ Biden Springs to come.
The Times first reported that the hospital was blown up and 500 people killed. The Times rushed this claim out without analysis or fact checking.
But there was some damage in the parking lot. And now the brilliant reporters and analysts at the Times want us to accept their analysis that the damage (almost minuscule compared to the Time's original claims) was not done by an errant Hamas or Hamas JV rocket. Nope--whatever cause it, it wasn't a Hamas rocket.
The Times blew chunks big time with the original story; and now they want us to believe them while their team plays around in what's not much more than a mud puddle? There is a reason I routinely decline the NYT's "teaser ads" for a cheap annual digital subscription.
Was it the Babylon Bee or instapundit?
"Major US news organizations are now demanding an apology from Israel for not bombing Gaza hospital."
The "hospital blast" in question didn't actually blast a hospital, it didn't kill 500 people, and it was caused by Israel.
Other than that, the original NYT reporting was spot on.
Still waiting for the media to explain why they accepted blindly the 500 killed figure. Best I can estimate based on the overhead pictures were that about a dozen cars were destroyed, several more damaged but without even having their windows blown in. Perhaps the Times et al think the cars were filled with Hamas frat members trying to set world records for how many people could fit in a dozen cars.
If Dave Chapelle's "Space Jews" did return to the earth and insist on taking it back, there wouldn't be a goddamned thing we could do about it. So, might as well get on with our lives and try to make use of some of that advanced technology they have, right? That was the point he was making, isn't it? The inescapable fact of life is that might does in fact make right. Or at least it can establish the facts on the ground that a given population must live with. The Israelis are FAR too accommodating. It won't go on forever I suspect.
The only entity less trusted than the NYT is the Washington Post.
"The WSJ came to the exact opposite conclusion last weekend on the same evidence, and went with a lead headline. Pick your news source, pick your truth."
Or one could just not give a shit. War is a messy business. Best not to start one.
"Well, if the New York Times says so....."
The New York Times. The Paper of Retards.
"The Crack Emcee said...
Dave Chappelle on Space Jews"
DO NOT FEED THE TROLL
NYT: "Perhaps the old Jew did sleep with the sixteen year old girl, after all."
Did "the Times" come clean about including the photo of a destroyed building 15 miles away from the still intact hospital in their initial report? Yeah, I'm sure they did.
You can't get hired at the NYT unless you have gone to college!
This is the same NYTs that famously declared that rockets couldn’t fly in space because there was nothing to push against.
http://www.rfcafe.com/miscellany/factoids/ny-times-admits-moon-flight-possible.htm
You would think that they would be embarrassed and no longer make any pronouncements about things they know nothing about. However, that is not the case. They are still trying to create doubt about the fact that Israel was not responsible for the blast in the hospital parking lot. The fact that US intelligence agencies confirmed that it was not Israel that was responsible for the blast is not good enough for the NYT. However, they had no problem of printing what HAMAS said without questioning its veracity. Once again the NYT's anti-Semitism is out in the open.
"... the Times found ...." LOL!
How? By a long distance call from their Hamas correspondent?
"This is the same NYTs that famously declared that rockets couldn’t fly in space because there was nothing to push against."
They also stated in an article on solar power that the sun rises in the west. Seriously. They did issue a correction.
David Mitchell said...
It appears that you're sharing a news article from The New York Times regarding the Gaza hospital blast...It's essential to consider multiple sources and perspectives when evaluating a complex situation such as this.
10/25/23, 2:54 PM
This is the most AI-sounding comment I've read in a while.
To paraphrase Mark Twain, from a perspective of 125 years ago, if you don't read the NYT you are uninformed. If you read the NYT you are misinformed.
Crack at 1:18
brilliant clip by Chapelle
thanks for that
The NYTimes is not an honest news source. Aljazeera is more trustworthy.
This is the same NYTs that famously declared that rockets couldn’t fly in space because there was nothing to push against.
Don't forget the NYT obsession with blotting out the sun.
Ezra Klein, quoting some idiot: "We are as gods and might as well act like it."
Why don't you run that one by Hamas and see what they think?
It's like Obama and his insane "science czar."
If a cult fucks up the USA
it will be "science" masquerading as truth
"I stand w Isreal. Leftists, Mullahs, Hamas-Palistinian terrorists can suck it" said:
Hamas has no trouble hiding their military installations behind the innocent in hospitals and schools.
Hey, you left out the Mosques and Retirement Homes!
NYT analysis to obfuscate its libeling Israel.
The Times has been an awful newspaper for more years than I can count. Its descent into madness continues unabated. My high school journalism teacher would say that it’s useful only to wrap dead fish.
Drago said...
It is very important that we not allow the news of the day to distract us from the most important aspect of all daily events: how Crack is impacted and what Crack thinks about other things...
&&&&&&
It's very, very clear that Crack thinks a black sun shines from his ass.
Days after the explosion several opens source analysts concluded it was likely the rocket based on identifying and locating buildings visible from different camera angles. They showed their homework more fully than the times.
David Mitchell said...
"It appears that you're sharing a news article from The New York Times regarding the Gaza hospital blast...It's essential to consider multiple sources and perspectives when evaluating a complex situation such as this."
10/25/23, 2:54 PM
This is the most AI-sounding comment I've read in a while
If this becomes a ChatGPT bar, I'm outta here!
(I had exactly the same thought.)
At this point, Hamas might be more trustworthy than the New York Times. Hamas lies to your face and sticks with the bit. The New York Times lies to your face, then, when caught in the lie, not only tries to justify it with obvious bull**** but bull**** for which they are the source. "We made stuff up, but it was totally justified by this other stuff we just made up!"
The credibility is completely gone. There's no coming back from this without firing everyone and staring over.
I, for one, suggest that before every attack on Hamas sites by Israel, the Israeli press spokesman should go on TV and state, "Israel is attacking a Hamas site where Hamas is using civilians for human shields. This is a war crime by Hamas, and deaths of civilians in this circumstance is caused by Hamas. Those Hamas members who survive this war will be tried and punished for this and every other war crime."
Then bomb Hamas, wherever they may be, whoever may be their human shields.
Remove the utility of human shields, and the use of humans shields will perhaps will lessen or cease. Punish those responsible for using human shields, publicly, and perhaps THAT incentive not to use human shields also will help decrease the use of human
Al Jazeera and the NYT?
Say no more.
---The credibility is completely gone. There's no coming back from this without firing everyone and starting over. [StaticPing]
"Never! As long as we have one subscriber, we will keep on printing!!
sotto voce "Is that lady from Madison still paying?
"OK then! Damn the fuggin facts, run the press! The little one.... "
“US President Joe Biden said the Israeli position is backed by US intelligence. CNN’s forensic analysis of images and videos suggests a rocket fired from within Gaza caused the blast, not an Israeli airstrike.”
They are still killing kids. I hear it's over 3000 now.
That's sure to bring peace.
The willfully underinformed Crack Emcee tells us “They are still killing kids. I hear it's over 3000 now.”
Simon and Garfunkel’s observation of “hear(ing) what he wants to hear and disregard(ing) the rest” seems apt. As does “you can’t cure stupid.”
Poor Hamas. Picking up all the fragments from that rocket, and they didn't find one piece with English writing on it to put on front pages all over the world.
What are the odds?
I'm not sure what analysis of trajectories is supposed to tell you. The rocket in the video breaks up and pinwheels across the sky, so any given fragment could be falling in any direction.
Post a Comment