“the low level of non-traumatic death of children reported by the survey participants does not support a scenario of widespread malnutrition, let alone starvation-driven excess mortality.
…
Relying on original documents, visual evidence, and numerous other sources, we demonstrate that Hamas, according to reports from its own operatives, consistently employs Gazan civilians as “human shields” to deliberately increase casualties and, in turn, amplify international pressure on Israel. In fact, the practice of increasing civilian fatalities to limit Israeli operations and generate international pressure is a central component of Hamas’ battlefield tactics. Hamas has used civilian homes, hospitals, and schools to store weapons, launch rockets, house combatants, and establish operational positions. Its operatives also wear civilian clothing to blend in with the population in areas designated as “safer” or humanitarian zones. Most notably, Hamas has focused on booby-trapping a vast number of buildings, leading to widespread devastation in the Gaza Strip—destruction that surpasses that typically seen in high-intensity urban warfare in other conflicts.
…
There is no evidence to suggest a systematic Israeli policy of targeting or massacring civilians. Our assumption is that every war involves war crimes, and it is the responsibility of the military to investigate, identify, and hold accountable those responsible in order to minimize such transgressions as much as possible. Throughout our research, we have also reviewed verified forensic evidence that may indicate war crimes committed by individual IDF soldiers. However, those who accuse Israel of genocide erroneously suggest that most civilian casualties in Gaza were entirely unjustified from a military standpoint, portraying those cases in which deaths do seem unjustified not as outliers, but as part of a broader, systematic, and deliberate policy of extermination by the IDF. The small number of instances involving persuasive supportive evidence of intentional killings by military personnel does not support this accusation.
…
throughout the Israeli-Gaza War, no credible forensic evidence has been provided to substantiate claims of close-range mass killings of civilians or executions of helpless noncombatants. The majority of such allegations appear to be based on Hamas-related organizations who offer no tangible evidence. This contrasts sharply with the substantial forensic evidence documenting atrocities in the 2025 massacres of Syrian Alawites, the Battle of Mosul, the Second Gulf War, and, of course, the October 7 attacks. However, there is credible forensic evidence for possible atrocities committed by IDF soldiers during the March 2025 attack on paramedics in Tal al-Sultan, a case that we examine in detail.
…
Subsequently, we provide a detailed and comprehensive review of testimonies from physicians associated with the Palestinian American Medical Association (PAMA), who volunteered in Gaza and made claims of the systematic murder of Palestinian children by IDF soldiers. We demonstrate that these claims are statistically and quantitatively improbable, contradict other studies on the distribution of injuries in the Strip, and are scientifically dubious.
Specifically, we question why physicians who have worked in Gaza’s hospitals for months claimed they never encountered armed Hamas operatives or infrastructure on hospital grounds, which contradicts the testimonies of Israeli hostages, a kidnapped Yazidi woman unrelated to the Israel-Palestine conflict, a Kurdish volunteer physician, and many Palestinians, which are also supported by forensic evidence produced by the IDF. Furthermore, we show that reports from volunteer physicians on the use of Israeli drones armed with sniper rifles to hunt down children throughout the Gaza Strip are contradicted by the facts. The IDF does not possess such weapon systems, and to date, we were unable to find credible reports of similar platforms being used by other militaries as well, except an improvised platform used by the Ukrainians.
…
We have found no evidence to support claims of deliberate bombing of civilians by the IDF during the war, nor any indication of carpet bombing intended to inflict mass civilian casualties in Gaza. While we did identify a significant number of tragic cases where innocent civilians were killed, some of which raise concerns about negligence, lack of caution, or even disregard for human life, it is clear that the IDF has employed numerous protective measures to minimize “collateral damage.” Some of these precautions are unprecedented in global military history and have come at a significant cost to the IDF, particularly in terms of losing military advantages such as the element of surprise. Moreover, senior military command has vetoed several operations due to concerns over disproportionate collateral damage. As a result, urban warfare experts have raised concerns that IDF tactics, such as focused warnings to evacuate specific areas, may set unrealistic operational standards for other militaries in the future.
…
Reports from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry (GMOH) are unreliable, and this data is inevitably tainted by the “illusion of certainty”—the unfounded assumption that a single existing source is inherently trustworthy. The absence of official alternatives has led to a situation where all parties involved in the conflict, including UN-affiliated human rights organizations, Western countries, and even the Israeli government, rely on the GMOH. This occurs despite the fact that the ministry is directly controlled by Hamas.
…
By analyzing original Hamas documents, we demonstrate that since 2014, Gaza authorities have mandated the classification of all fallen combatants as “innocent civilians.” Hamas has consistently sought to present the highest possible civilian fatality count, directing its health ministry to manipulate data. This includes concealing natural mortality figures, reporting statistically improbable daily variance in fatalities, and omitting the names of Hamas military operatives who have been killed.”
Treating the Israelis simply as settler colonialists that inherently need to genocide the people they stole their land from gives the Palestinians no agency. It ignores that Palestinians really could have had a Palestinian state but some Palestinians have repeatedly made that not possible by acts of terror.
The Israel-Hamas conflict is surrounded by so much misinformation, and people latch on to the misinformation and propaganda so unquestionably, that it makes it hard to tell what’s going on and many professionals don’t want to even touch the story. Everything is so he-said-she-said and stories always change after bad information has already spread, that it is difficult to know what the truth is.
Seems pretty clear that Israel can argue that their goal is regime change, not genocide. It makes sense that a country would not want to live next to a regime that actively wants to wipe them off the face of the planet. Hamas and other terrorist groups could end this at any time by surrendering and allowing the rule of a non-terrorist entity. As long as they don’t, Israel has to either fight the terrorist group, which cannot be done without civilian casualties, or just wait for the next Hamas attack. Nevertheless, Israel has committed war crimes.
When people say MSNBC is on the left and Fox News is on the right, they are misunderstanding what Fox News is. Fox News isn’t an honest conservative news network, it acts as the propaganda arm of the Republican Party. Its creator cynically created Fox News to spread bullshit in favor of his ideology.
MSNBC had a liberal bent, but its hosts don’t go help a current or running president campaign. Each host has his own thing, but there isn’t an overarching propaganda goal to the organization.
Fox News may be unique in the Western World when it comes to a supposed news network designed as a partisan and ideological propaganda arm.
“There is a real issue with South African farmers being killed or violently attacked, experts told us. But most of the violent acts are committed during robberies in a country where most of the wealth and land post-apartheid is still owned by a relatively small white minority.
“Yes, white farmers are being killed in South Africa,” political scientist Jean-Yves Camus, co-director of the Observatory of Political Radicalism at the Jean Jaurès Foundation in Paris, told us via email. “However, there is nothing like a ‘white genocide.’ And the issue needs to be seen in the broader context of a country plagued by crime and gang activity.”
Although police statistics are imprecise on the issue, there have been about 50 farm murders per year over the last several years. That’s less than 1% of all murders in the country.
“Murder victimization is far more correlated to class, gender and location than race,” Lizette Lancaster of the Institute for Security Studies in South Africa, told us via email.
“Farm attacks, including murders, do occur in South Africa, and many are undeniably brutal,” Anthony Kaziboni, a political and critical sociologist at the University of Johannesburg’s Centre for Social Development in Africa, told us via email. “However, South Africa must be understood in its broader socio-economic and historical context.” South Africa has “extreme inequality, with approximately 10% of the population (largely white) owning over 80% of the wealth. It also has a deeply violent past, and the country’s structural violence persists today alongside physical violence, economic violence, and many other forms of violence.”
“Violent crime affects all sectors of society, not just farmers,” Kaziboni said.”
“After more than a year of neglect from global leaders and massive funding gaps for humanitarian assistance, the war in Sudan has reached a critical tipping point. Warring parties are waging a deadly battle for control of El Fasher — the capital of the state of North Darfur and, until recently, one of the last safe havens for civilians. If the city falls, experts warn there will be dire human rights consequences, ranging from ethnic cleansing to outright genocide for millions of people.
What’s happening in El Fasher is just the latest in the year-long conflict between two rivaling military groups struggling for power after working together to oust Sudan’s former president and his successor. General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the general of the country’s military, known as the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), became the de facto ruler of Sudan in 2021 — but tensions with his temporary ally, the paramilitary group known as the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), soon boiled over as the leaders attempted to integrate the RSF into the SAF. This tension grew into a civil war last year, one that has created the world’s largest displacement crisis: On Monday, the United Nations told the AP that more than 10 million people — about a quarter of the population — have already been internally displaced since the war began.
The SAF and RSF have clashed sporadically in El Fasher, which is the government military’s last foothold in all of western Sudan, but the town has largely been spared the worst of the war until recent weeks. That changed on the morning of May 10, when heavy fighting between the two groups broke out. Near daily bombings, indiscriminate shelling, and airstrikes have rocked the city since. More than 1,000 civilians have been injured and 206 people have died, according to Claire Nicolet, the emergency program manager at Médecins Sans Frontières. Hospitals and camps for internally displaced people have been damaged by gunfire and explosions. Very few aid convoys carrying food and health supplies have reached the estimated 2 million civilians in the city. ”