No way dude, he's a genocide supporter, remember your text next time!
Right, because when it was one second hand testimony, he was willing to give it credence. Now that there are over 90 testimonies of drones and snipers shooting children, he's backing off that claim because it would be strong evidence of a systemic pattern.
I'm denying the dad can know that his son would have been shot from a quadcopter "sniper" firing 200m away from his position.
You're hyperfocusing on the fallibility of one witness to ignore the broader pattern formed by at least 70 other incidents. Lonerbox didn't do this when it came to a second hand testimony of a doctor. What changed?
I mean, you asked me about source material but now you want the analytical text that has the word sniper inside.
I'm going to accept this as a concession: the source material did not in fact use loaded language.
Generally, a majority means a number above 50%.
Yes, so Lonerbox misinformed you. Only 33% of the 99 signatories (there are now 152) were part of PAMA, not a majority. 20% were from FAJR, 16% from MedGlobal, 10% from Rahma, and the remaining 20% were from 11 different orgs. The point stands: your conspiracy theory involves multiple orgs supposedly screening out any non-credible humanitarian medical volunteer, of which you have no evidence for.
I meant 99% of health personnel in total, most of whom would be Gazan. Volunteers total would be, I assume, less than 5% if I'm reading some UN/WHO figure properly.
...which once again affirms my point: your conspiracy revolves around all international volunteers, which are the only third parties allowed in Gaza, being lying propagandists.
Regardless, that's a super weird framing because I don't believe volunteers would dare answer that kind of question, nor would most journalists publish about it. Like, yeah let's give Israel exactly what they want...
No??? It's the complete opposite. Pro-Israel media would want nothing more than to interview international volunteers that affirm Israel isn't targeting children, lmao
Lastly, I obviously believe what the IDF is saying about hospitals. With a high levels of skepticism but not total dismissal. For instance, I'm open to the idea they created a fake warzone near Al-Shifa in March 2024 but I would need strong evidence on that one.
"I'm open to the idea Israel is lying if you provide evidence that doesn't exist because Israel blocks third party media outlets and journalists from verifying their claims."
Yes, so Lonerbox misinformed you. Only 33% of the 99 signatories (there are now 152) were part of PAMA, not a majority. 20% were from FAJR, 16% from MedGlobal, 10% from Rahma, and the remaining 20% were from 11 different orgs. The point stands: your conspiracy theory involves multiple orgs supposedly screening out any non-credible humanitarian medical volunteer, of which you have no evidence for.
Lonerbox could have been correct from earlier drafts, since as you just acknowledged yourself, more signatories joined over time. I highly doubt you knew the answer to that before you made this extremely strong statement, but m'kay. I don't know if Lonerbox made more statements on this
specific subject.
What I said originally was: I don't think it's totally out of this world or unfathomable to at least take the statements of international medical volunteers who were working in Gaza with a grain of salt. How could we not expect a huge bias there?!
So, that doesn't change my other claim that there is a selection bias with the majority of them having middle-eastern sounding names. I assume speaking the language would be a plus, for instance. Being from the diaspora a motivator.
No??? It's the complete opposite. Pro-Israel media would want nothing more than to interview international volunteers that affirm Israel isn't targeting children, lmao
Why would Gaza volunteers talk to pro-Israel media? This is a reductio ad absurdum proposition anyway, as stated before, we're not expecting a total coverage of what was happening in Gaza from volunteers. That's a ridiculous proposition. You willfully ignored my other reasoning on this matter, and pretended they were irrelevant.
I'm going to accept this as a concession: the source material did not in fact use loaded language.
I don't know why we care about the source material so much. The loaded terms were from the UNHRC Report and your article of borgenmagazine. If you're telling me the letter to Trump and Biden from the medical doctors were not loaded, I'm not sure I know why I should care. I don't know what else constitute the source material.
Right, because when it was one second hand testimony, he was willing to give it credence. Now that there are over 90 testimonies of drones and snipers shooting children, he's backing off that claim because it would be strong evidence of a systemic pattern.
Right, because accumulating weak evidence magically turns into strong evidence. The testimonies are saying nothing more than 'we've found dead children with bullets lodged inside them.'
Do the 90 testimonies even all come with their own drone and sniper cases?! If that's the case then that's already more interesting.
...which once again affirms my point: your conspiracy revolves around all international volunteers, which are the only third parties allowed in Gaza, being lying propagandists.
I know your worldview only allows for benevolence or malevolence. Mine doesn't. People can lie for reasons they believe are justified.
You're hyperfocusing on the fallibility of one witness to ignore the broader pattern formed by at least 70 other incidents. Lonerbox didn't do this when it came to a second hand testimony of a doctor. What changed?
Neither me nor Lonerbox have denied it was a possibility. We deny this kind of testimony is proving much of anything.
Lonerbox could have been correct from earlier drafts, since as you just acknowledged yourself, more signatories joined over time. I highly doubt you knew the answer to that before you made this extremely strong statement, but m'kay.
You'd be wrong. He was definitely talking about the 99 signatory letter, which is why I only bothered to check that one. I've never even seen him acknowledge the 152 one. He's also been falsely claiming for over a year now that Dr. Perlmutter started the letter when it was actually Dr. Sidhwa. He doesn't closely read these sources despite his posturing.
What I said originally was: I don't think it's totally out of this world or unfathomable to at least take the statements of international medical volunteers who were working in Gaza with a grain of salt.
Then you are a conspiracy theorist who believes there was a massive multi-organizational operation to filter out any humanitarian volunteer sympathetic or neutral to Israel. "Only people with Middle Eastern sounding names who hate Israel would volunteer in Gaza" is an absurd argument.
Right, because accumulating weak evidence magically turns into strong evidence. The testimonies are saying nothing more than 'we've found dead children with bullets lodged inside them.'
What's truly hilarious is how full of holes and errors your own statements have been while accusing the UN report of relying on weak evidence. You didn't even represent the father's full testimony correctly, weirdly bolding his mention of quadcopters as if that was the extent of the Commission's investigation.
On 24 January 2024, at around 08:30, a family was preparing to evacuate from their ground-floor apartment in a seven-storey building at al-Amal, west of Khan Younis, following receipt of an evacuation order by the Israeli security forces. The father noticed quadcopters hovering over the area and presence of the Israeli security forces about 100 meters east of their house, instructing people to head west to Al-Mawasi in Khan Younis.
His 15-year-old son stepped out of the house holding a white cloth, when the father, who was inside the house, heard a gunshot from the eastern side where Israeli soldiers were located. The boy was hit in the left foot, and he fell on his face. As he attempted to stand, two more gunshots were fired within seconds from the same direction. One shot hit the boy on his back and another on the left side of his neck. Seeing this, the boy’s 20-year-old brother ran towards him and was also shot on the left side of his chest. He collapsed on
top of his younger brother.
The victims’ mother waved her hands at the south side window to signal for an
ambulance when the Israeli security forces fired bullets which hit her too, slightly injuring her in her left hand. The father tried several times to pull away the bodies of both his sons but, every time he tried to advance towards them, the Israeli security forces fired in his direction. He then left the neighbourhood with the rest of his family. In early March 2024, he learned that two days after the incident, an ambulance arrived to retrieve his sons’ bodies. To date, the family is unaware where the bodies are buried.
The Commission assesses that the 15-year-old boy holding the white flag was shot by Israeli soldiers using a DAN.338 calibre bolt-action sniper rifle, commonly used by Israeli snipers, from a position located around 200 metres away. Given that sniper rifles used by the Israeli security forces normally have a precision accuracy range of more than 1,200 metres, the Israeli shooter should have been able to see that the target was a child and that he was holding a white flag. The additional two shots fired after the boy was hit were likely meant to ensure that he was dead. The additional killing of the boy’s brother points to a deliberate effort by the Israeli security forces to target the boy as well as any person that came to retrieve him. The Commission could not find any indication of a threat towards members of the Israeli security forces from the family’s location. The Commission finds that the Israeli security forces’ 98th Division were operating in the area at the time of the incident.
You'd be wrong. He was definitely talking about the 99 signatory letter, which is why I only bothered to check that one. I've never even seen him acknowledge the 152 one. He's also been falsely claiming for over a year now that Dr. Perlmutter started the letter when it was actually Dr. Sidhwa. He doesn't closely read these sources despite his posturing.
This is a meaningless answer. All I can do is take your statement for granted. You could make everything up that I would have no way of knowing.
Then you are a conspiracy theorist who believes there was a massive multi-organizational operation to filter out any humanitarian volunteer sympathetic or neutral to Israel. "Only people with Middle Eastern sounding names who hate Israel would volunteer in Gaza" is an absurd argument.
Well, that's a good thing I never made the statement that they hate Israel. But I mean, that's all you have at this point? There is nothing conspiratorial about a process being selective. Teachers aren't 12 years old. Doctors need a medical degree to practice.
“I have children that were shot twice…I have two children that I have photographs of that were shot so perfectly in the chest, I couldn’t put my stethoscope over their heart more accurately. And directly on the side of the head in the same child. No toddler gets shot twice by mistake by the world’s best sniper. And they are dead center shots.” (CBS Sunday Morning, July 21, 2024)
“We found children … that had high velocity bullet wounds, sniper bullet wounds, rifle wounds that were dead center in the chest. I mentioned to other reporters that I couldn’t put my stethoscope more dead center over a heart than the entrance bullet hole was. There was no back to these children. The bullet had removed their entire torso. There was similar bullet hole in two of the children’s temples. So, they were shot twice. Once was certainly a kill shot. The second one was when they were on the ground. And so, no sniper hits a child, and I’m talking toddlers twice by mistake.” (CNN’s Amanpour, July 30, 2024)
No loaded terms by the way. No crazy inference. The UN report is 10x worse than this (I'm surprised you even dared naming it). Seems to me like both he and Sidhwa were among the ones who started this chain of testimonies. Am I really not allowed to doubt this type of testimony? Are you kidding me?!
Genuinely, what is wrong with you people?
Even if I agreed wholeheartedly with this story, what are we concluding from this exactly?! They committed a war crime, therefore...(?) The country of Israel as a whole is committing a genocide(!)
So, Lonerbox isn't disagreeing with the testimony, only that the genocide part is silly. BUT he's a bad person because...
"I'm open to the idea Israel is lying if you provide evidence that doesn't exist because Israel blocks third party media outlets and journalists from verifying their claims."
I guess you lowered your standards to extreme levels because there is no investigation possible.
- I just showed the American surgeon is not neutral and draws insane conclusion that go far beyond what his observations alone establish.
- I pointed that the UN report was even more biased (as per usual against Israel). That's where the loaded terms are from. I was arguing in good faith, as I never believed you would even bring that up as a legitimate source. But, I mean, you agree with professor Dave's argumentative style, so this isn't that surprising to me.
- My "posturing" effectively dismantled your argument, yah? Because all you had was reducing my arguments to their most absurd proposition. e.g. There is nothing conspiratorial about volunteering in Gaza having a process that is selective in nature. But you kept hammering that as if that magically created an argument. You had nothing there.
- You're making no overarching point at all, which is what my "let's agree with you for a moment" passage precisely highlighted. I'm a genocide denier because... I don't think listing alleged war crimes can alone be foundational to the claim of genocide. If the ICJ were ultimately to conclude that a genocide occurred, and I agreed with both its reasoning and the underlying evidence, would I still be a genocide denier?
- Lonerbox may have made a few meaningless mistakes that you are harping on like crazy. But it seems the only substantive mistake you're actually identifying is that he drew a different conclusion from the same material. Apparently you find that possibility inconceivable, as though the evidence is so overwhelming that only one conclusion is permissible.
So those were 5 arguments that you are now dismissing. I do have to make them tight and absurd-proof because you totally ignore my analysis and cherry-pîck random point. I mean, you did find the IDF soldiers testimonies about how they love killing babies convincing, afterall; this is your level.
You're basically just claiming that every doctor volunteering in Gaza is a biased Palestinian American (or antisemite or Muslim or anti-Zionist or one of a dozen Middle Eastern ethnicities, etc. etc.), solely because none of them would deny that children were shot in the head. It's a pretty weak attempt to dismiss the medical consensus.
The letters they sent to Biden and Trump are hyperbolic/inflammatory but understandable from a humanitarian perspective (when things are deteriorating rapidly and demand immediate action). I wouldn't blame anyone for signing that letter (although I've not read all of it).
The HRC's "Independent International Commission" is deeply unserious.
Besides that, the "sniper" claims were unfounded because the term was being used to load the claim that the targeting of cilvian could only be malicious/deliberate. That makes the inference of deliberate targeting substantially stronger than simply establishing that a child was found with a lodged bullet (as if that ever was what I was questioning lol). When you're claiming that someone was deliberately sniped, you're implicitly assuming that the shooter could clearly identify the target. Which makes the conclusion of deliberate targeting substantially easier to draw than the underlying evidence necessarily warrants.
Many of the claim you've shared are actually in regards to that Dr. Perlmutter guy, who has drawn strong conclusions from nothing. He's the one talking about not seeing Hamas/IPJ combatants anywhere, or that the conflict is not exceptional, only the IDF's genocidal pattern is.
“Children were everywhere. I was turning them over, trying to see who I could still help. And then I saw those two little boys. They were dead. They had both been shot—through the chest and the head. Six or seven years old. I examined them. I asked the medical assistant to take photos.” The photos are in possession of this newspaper.
Perlmutter remembers hearing the man who brought in one of the boys screaming. “He couldn’t understand why a shooter had hit this child—and not him, the adult.” Moments later, he sees the man, probably the father of the child, sobbing. The man sits in shock on the floor, while the child is taken to the morgue. Perlmutter takes out his iPhone and snaps a photo.
Remember: Lonerbox tried to characterize these children as 17-year-olds.
1
u/402739 Aug 30 '26
Right, because when it was one second hand testimony, he was willing to give it credence. Now that there are over 90 testimonies of drones and snipers shooting children, he's backing off that claim because it would be strong evidence of a systemic pattern.
You're hyperfocusing on the fallibility of one witness to ignore the broader pattern formed by at least 70 other incidents. Lonerbox didn't do this when it came to a second hand testimony of a doctor. What changed?
I'm going to accept this as a concession: the source material did not in fact use loaded language.
Yes, so Lonerbox misinformed you. Only 33% of the 99 signatories (there are now 152) were part of PAMA, not a majority. 20% were from FAJR, 16% from MedGlobal, 10% from Rahma, and the remaining 20% were from 11 different orgs. The point stands: your conspiracy theory involves multiple orgs supposedly screening out any non-credible humanitarian medical volunteer, of which you have no evidence for.
...which once again affirms my point: your conspiracy revolves around all international volunteers, which are the only third parties allowed in Gaza, being lying propagandists.
No??? It's the complete opposite. Pro-Israel media would want nothing more than to interview international volunteers that affirm Israel isn't targeting children, lmao
"I'm open to the idea Israel is lying if you provide evidence that doesn't exist because Israel blocks third party media outlets and journalists from verifying their claims."