Kicking off in Israel

[Ymx]

I thought Gaza was supposed to have been a concentration camp

You are pretty stupid tbh if you thought that.
I suspect it's been said a couple of times on here but it's not really a common opinion.

Indeed

What was this "music festival for peace held near the Gaza border fence"?

Unless they had actively engaged Palestinian representatives, it just looks like Israeli settlers partying outside the doors of an open air prison.

Yup

Open air prison was the phrase.

[Ymx]

Some firm criticism of BBC Verify impartiality









Originally

https://x.com/cameraorguk?s=21

[Ymx]

And as a surprise to absolutely no one here, someone reviewed the Gaza ministry of health numbers.

No one believed the number and the ratio of women and children here anyway … I’m pretty sure.

This could be the devastating proof that Hamas is faking its death figures
But too many won’t believe anything other than that Israel is deliberately targeting women and children
JAKE WALLIS SIMONS
16 March 2024 • 9:00pm
Jake Wallis Simons

2334
One of the marks of anti-Semitism, George Orwell observed in 1945, is “an ability to believe stories that could not possibly be true”. Which brings us smartly to Hamas and how the broadcast media, aid organisations, international bodies and world leaders take its disinformation as gospel. Last week it became clear that this gullibility may have led to a crime against reality.

A new analysis of the group’s casualty statistics indicates that the rag-tag terror army may have pulled off one of the biggest propaganda coups of modern times. The figures, repeated by everyone from the White House to the BBC, are freighted with familiarity: 30,000 dead in Gaza, 70 per cent of whom are women and children. Yet it now seems overwhelmingly likely that these statistics are fabricated.

Professor Abraham Wyner, a data scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, has conducted a thorough analysis. He found that Hamas’s official civilian death toll was statistically impossible. “Most likely, the Hamas ministry settled on a daily total arbitrarily,” he wrote in an incendiary essay in Tablet. “We know this because the daily totals increase too consistently to be real. Then they assigned about 70 per cent of the total to be women and children, splitting that amount randomly from day to day. Then they in-filled the number of men as set by the predetermined total. This explains all the data observed.”

The giveaways were many. For example, the reported death toll mounted “with almost metronomical linearity”, Prof Wyner found, showing little daily variation. Obviously, this bore no resemblance to any plausible version of reality. Then there was the fact that, according to Hamas data from 29 October, 26 men came back to life; and the fact that on several days, no men were apparently killed at all, but only women. Were we really supposed to believe any of this?

In February, Hamas admitted to losing 6,000 of its fighters, representing more than 20 per cent of the total casualties reported. Given its claims that 70 per cent of the dead were women and children, there were two possible conclusions: either almost no male civilians had died, or almost all the men in Gaza were fighting for Hamas. Both were obviously absurd.

Therefore, the number of women and children killed was likely grossly exaggerated. If that is the case – if, as Prof Wyner suggests, “the casualties are not overwhelmingly women and children, and the majority may be Hamas fighters” – where does that leave western outrage? Has the West fallen victim to a monstrous con?

The true ratio of civilian casualties to combatants is likely to be exceptionally low, “at most 1.4 to 1 and perhaps as low as 1 to 1”. This, Prof Wyner says, is a “successful effort to prevent unnecessary loss of life while fighting an implacable enemy that protects itself with civilians”.

By rights, if the central pillar of the anti-Israel edifice has been discredited, the whole structure should come tumbling down. But don’t hold your breath. The reason why Hamas’s dodgy data is so easily believed is confirmation bias. The drip-drip of Israelophobic propaganda over the years has created a powerful tendency to view the Jewish state, Britain’s democratic ally, as a colonialist aggressor and the Palestinians – even as they butcher children – as the “freedom fighters”. Regardless of the evidence, to many people this has become second nature.

It speaks of millennia of inherited anti-Semitism. A 2012 study by economists Nico Voigtländer and Hans-Joachim Voth found that Germans from towns where Jews were blamed for the Black Death and burnt alive in the 14th century were significantly more likely to vote for the Nazis 600 years later. In his 1945 essay, Orwell recalls a “young intellectual, communist or near-communist” remarking: “No, I do not like Jews. I’ve never made any secret of that. I can’t stick them. Mind you, I’m not anti-Semitic, of course.” Depressingly little has changed.

That is the advantage enjoyed by the jihadis of Gaza. They didn’t even need to keep their strategy a secret. Everyone knows they try to get civilians killed for propaganda gains, aiming to curtail Israeli operations with international outrage. Everyone knows that their censors keep dead terrorists away from the cameras, giving the world the impression that Israel is only attacking civilians (look up former AP reporter Matti Friedman’s seminal 2014 essay, “What the media gets wrong about Israel”, for a sense of how long such games have been played). A gang that murdered and mutilated babies may also, on occasion, be tempted to lie. So much should be obvious. But all this is smoothly eclipsed when a greater narrative is at work.

It’s not that there is a lack of journalistic curiosity in large parts of the media. It’s just that, when it comes to Israel, facts are subordinated to assumptions. In February, BBC Verify quoted a World Health Organisation official: The [Hamas] ministry has “‘good capacity in data collection’ and its previous reporting has been credible and ‘well developed’”. This was the same WHO that had singled out Israel for condemnation at an international assembly largely devoted to Covid. And this was the same BBC Verify that had partly based a story on an eyewitness who had reportedly worked for an Iranian state news outlet and celebrated the deaths of Jews on social media.

It is time for us to say: J’Accuse. Just as Emile Zola laid the charge of anti-Semitism at the feet of the French establishment during the Dreyfus Affair in 1898, we must do so to the international establishment today.

[Hugo]

Has the West fallen victim to a monstrous con?

In what way has the West "fallen victim" to a con?

If you accept the premise of the article - that Hamas has inflated the number of casualties - its not like western governments have changed course in either their outright support of Israel or passive indifference to the humanitarian crisis.

UNWRA funding was stopped at the drop of a hat by governments who have shown no similar sense of urgency in calling for a ceasefire.

If the West has fallen victim in anyway its surely in the sense that as this situation has unfolded its been shown to be a toothless Tiger in lacking the ability to rein Israel in.

[Ymx]

Don’t know the West has demanded Israel stop. So not sure the teeth have really come out. I expect the US could stop the response if they really wanted. Probably not the UK. But I expect they (US) want Hamas gone, as do many Arab states for that matter.

As for UNRWA, they are not exactly supposed to be getting involved in conflict, certainly not celebrating it nor getting directly involved. So it’s a bit of a red line for a charity …

[Guy Smiley]

David Collier is a researcher on antisemitism inside anti-Zionist activity. In 2017 David was named by the Algemeiner in the J100 as one of the ‘top 100 people positively influencing Jewish life’. In 2022 the media watchdog CAMERA gave David Collier a ‘Portrait of Courage’ award.

https://fathomjournal.org/author/david-collier/

[Guy Smiley]

Eitan Fischberger is the Israel Campus Coordinator for CAMERA on Campus and a former intern for the Israeli Mission to the United Nations in New York.

https://www.algemeiner.com/author/eitan ... erger-jns/

[Hugo]

They are book burning fascists, plain & simple.

[Slick]

YMX, do you not really see anything at all troublesome that you post a rebuttal of BBC impartiality by a well know Israel journalist and then a rebuttal of Hamas figures by the editor of the Jewish Chronicle quoting a piece by a well known Jewish academic?

All posted with such confidence. I think it would lead most people to think that everyone shouting loud in this conflict are cunts, but hey ho.

[Ymx]

YMX, do you not really see anything at all troublesome that you post a rebuttal of BBC impartiality by a well know Israel journalist and then a rebuttal of Hamas figures by the editor of the Jewish Chronicle quoting a piece by a well known Jewish academic?

All posted with such confidence. I think it would lead most people to think that everyone shouting loud in this conflict are cunts, but hey ho.

I never suggested they themselves would not be looking for such angles. But these are still valid and accurate points.

However, BBC is failing massively in being impartial. If I didn’t have to pay for the junk, I would just put it down as another Pali organisation and leave it be.

Especially with something that purports to be BBC verify.

[Tichtheid]

The rebuttal of the death toll hinges on the linearity of the increase

Professor Abraham Wyner, a data scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, has conducted a thorough analysis. He found that Hamas’s official civilian death toll was statistically impossible. “Most likely, the Hamas ministry settled on a daily total arbitrarily,” he wrote in an incendiary essay in Tablet. “We know this because the daily totals increase too consistently to be real.

Here's a graph showing the increase every five days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualtie ... _graph.png


Here's one for Ukrainian civilian casualties due to Russian invasion https://www.statista.com/statistics/129 ... ies-daily/

[Sandstorm]

The rebuttal of the death toll hinges on the linearity of the increase

Professor Abraham Wyner, a data scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, has conducted a thorough analysis. He found that Hamas’s official civilian death toll was statistically impossible. “Most likely, the Hamas ministry settled on a daily total arbitrarily,” he wrote in an incendiary essay in Tablet. “We know this because the daily totals increase too consistently to be real.

Here's a graph showing the increase every five days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualtie ... _graph.png


Here's one for Ukrainian civilian casualties due to Russian invasion https://www.statista.com/statistics/129 ... ies-daily/

To be fair the Ukrainians had a lot further West they could run than the Palestinians.

[Ymx]

The rebuttal of the death toll hinges on the linearity of the increase

Professor Abraham Wyner, a data scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, has conducted a thorough analysis. He found that Hamas’s official civilian death toll was statistically impossible. “Most likely, the Hamas ministry settled on a daily total arbitrarily,” he wrote in an incendiary essay in Tablet. “We know this because the daily totals increase too consistently to be real.

Here's a graph showing the increase every five days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualtie ... _graph.png


Here's one for Ukrainian civilian casualties due to Russian invasion https://www.statista.com/statistics/129 ... ies-daily/

It does not hinge on that one thing. That’s propaganda.

[Ymx]

Read this again , before spreading misinformation TH

The giveaways were many. For example, the reported death toll mounted “with almost metronomical linearity”, Prof Wyner found, showing little daily variation. Obviously, this bore no resemblance to any plausible version of reality. Then there was the fact that, according to Hamas data from 29 October, 26 men came back to life; and the fact that on several days, no men were apparently killed at all, but only women. Were we really supposed to believe any of this?

In February, Hamas admitted to losing 6,000 of its fighters, representing more than 20 per cent of the total casualties reported. Given its claims that 70 per cent of the dead were women and children, there were two possible conclusions: either almost no male civilians had died, or almost all the men in Gaza were fighting for Hamas. Both were obviously absurd.

[Guy Smiley]

oh, a pot just rang and said the kettle is black.

[Tichtheid]

The rebuttal of the death toll hinges on the linearity of the increase

Professor Abraham Wyner, a data scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, has conducted a thorough analysis. He found that Hamas’s official civilian death toll was statistically impossible. “Most likely, the Hamas ministry settled on a daily total arbitrarily,” he wrote in an incendiary essay in Tablet. “We know this because the daily totals increase too consistently to be real.

Here's a graph showing the increase every five days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualtie ... _graph.png


Here's one for Ukrainian civilian casualties due to Russian invasion https://www.statista.com/statistics/129 ... ies-daily/

It does not hinge on that one thing. That’s propaganda.

Read this again , before spreading misinformation TH

The giveaways were many. For example, the reported death toll mounted “with almost metronomical linearity”, Prof Wyner found, showing little daily variation. Obviously, this bore no resemblance to any plausible version of reality. Then there was the fact that, according to Hamas data from 29 October, 26 men came back to life; and the fact that on several days, no men were apparently killed at all, but only women. Were we really supposed to believe any of this?

In February, Hamas admitted to losing 6,000 of its fighters, representing more than 20 per cent of the total casualties reported. Given its claims that 70 per cent of the dead were women and children, there were two possible conclusions: either almost no male civilians had died, or almost all the men in Gaza were fighting for Hamas. Both were obviously absurd.

You really are clueless.

I am not purporting to be anything other than a guy on the internet who is sceptical about any information coming out of a war zone, irrespective of the origin of the information. I don't think the Hamas numbers will prove to be correct at the end of all this and I don't believe the numbers or explanations you seem to put great stock in which come from the Israeli government.

That's it. That is the extent of my "misinformation" and "propaganda" you dolt.

Fucking stupid ringpiece, really, how many fucking times do I have to explain this?

[Ymx]

[Ymx]

Gotcha

[Tichtheid]

I picture you doing that idiotic country bumpkin glottal stop guffaw there.

I invite you to go through my posts on this thread and see where I've posted numbers or anything else.

Calculon accused me of supporting Hamas, but when asked to prove that accusation they slithered off and haven't been seen on this thread since.

I'm asking you do do something similar, prove where I've been peddling misinformation or propaganda (your terms) as opposed to being sceptical about sources and numbers.

[C69]

Gotcha

Errr

[Calculon]

I picture you doing that idiotic country bumpkin glottal stop guffaw there.

I invite you to go through my posts on this thread and see where I've posted numbers or anything else.

Calculon accused me of supporting Hamas, but when asked to prove that accusation they slithered off and haven't been seen on this thread since.

I'm asking you do do something similar, prove where I've been peddling misinformation or propaganda (your terms) as opposed to being sceptical about sources and numbers.

It has been pointed out so what is the point of engaging with you if you choose to ignore it

[Guy Smiley]

More lies and obfuscation

[Tichtheid]

I picture you doing that idiotic country bumpkin glottal stop guffaw there.

I invite you to go through my posts on this thread and see where I've posted numbers or anything else.

Calculon accused me of supporting Hamas, but when asked to prove that accusation they slithered off and haven't been seen on this thread since.

I'm asking you do do something similar, prove where I've been peddling misinformation or propaganda (your terms) as opposed to being sceptical about sources and numbers.

It has been pointed out so what is the point of engaging with you if you choose to ignore it

Err, no it hasn't been pointed out. You made an accusation and went to ground when asked to prove it, twice.

I'll try to explain this without even an analogy in case that gets misunderstood or misrepresented. I have been critical and suspicious of some of the sources YMX has used, they have been anything from former Israeli secret service, to current Israeli spokespeople to a random tweet from a stop the boats Brexity Glasgow Rangers fan, that was a doozy.
I have not been pointing out who the BBC are because I assume people who are posting on this board know who the BBC are.

To reiterate my own point of view, I am in favour of stopping all the killing, all of it. I deplore what is being done in Gazza because it looks for all the world like it's collective punishment which is against the Geneva convention.

International law posits that no person may be punished for acts that he or she did not commit. It ensures that the collective punishment of a group of persons for a crime committed by an individual is forbidden... This is one of the fundamental guarantees established by the Geneva Conventions and their protocols.

I can't believe I'm having to write this but it doesn't seem to have sunk in, because I call for a ceasefire, it DOES NOT mean I support Hamas or what happened in October last year, but for the third time, you are welcome to find one sentence I've written in support of Hamas or the atrocities that happened on October the 7th

[Uncle fester]

Gotcha

Errr

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E ... prov=sfla1

[Ymx]

I picture you doing that idiotic country bumpkin glottal stop guffaw there.

I invite you to go through my posts on this thread and see where I've posted numbers or anything else.

Calculon accused me of supporting Hamas, but when asked to prove that accusation they slithered off and haven't been seen on this thread since.

I'm asking you do do something similar, prove where I've been peddling misinformation or propaganda (your terms) as opposed to being sceptical about sources and numbers.

I mean, in this case, you were working away at someone who said the Hamas information was incorrect. So you are in effect (net effect) doing the opposite and defending Hamas numbers.

And you mistakenly or very calculatingly suggested that it hinged on linearity, which is clearly lies as the article was right there. So either you’re a bit of a moron or have an agenda.

In any case

[Tichtheid]

I picture you doing that idiotic country bumpkin glottal stop guffaw there.

I invite you to go through my posts on this thread and see where I've posted numbers or anything else.

Calculon accused me of supporting Hamas, but when asked to prove that accusation they slithered off and haven't been seen on this thread since.

I'm asking you do do something similar, prove where I've been peddling misinformation or propaganda (your terms) as opposed to being sceptical about sources and numbers.

I mean, in this case, you were working away at someone who said the Hamas information was incorrect. So you are in effect (net effect) doing the opposite and defending Hamas numbers.

You have completely misunderstood this in every possible way.

And you mistakenly or very calculatingly suggested that it hinged on linearity, which is clearly lies as the article was right there.

Early in the article it states,

Professor Abraham Wyner, a data scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, has conducted a thorough analysis. He found that Hamas’s official civilian death toll was statistically impossible. “Most likely, the Hamas ministry settled on a daily total arbitrarily,” he wrote in an incendiary essay in Tablet. “We know this because the daily totals increase too consistently to be real.

The way the article is written this first premise is what everything else is extrapolated from. I showed a graph for the death toll and compared it to a graph from the war in Ukraine, which had a similar linearity to it.

So either you’re a bit of a moron or have an agenda.

I've expressed my agenda, a ceasefire from all parties, several times now but it still doesn't seem to sink in.

on the moron bit, when you've consistently shown that you don't understand something, "No, you're stoopid" isn't a great look.

[Ymx]

The other factors are not at all linked or require linearity. They come from the daily data. That’s made up by you and your deliberate misreading of it. The author proposes a manner in which the numbers were constructed by Hamas. But the telling factors are in the actual data (not needing linearity).

Here they are (again)

2) according to Hamas data from 29 October, 26 men came back to life;

3) and the fact that on several days, no men were apparently killed at all, but only women. Were we really supposed to believe any of this?

4) In February, Hamas admitted to losing 6,000 of its fighters, representing more than 20 per cent of the total casualties reported. Given its claims that 70 per cent of the dead were women and children, there were two possible conclusions: either almost no male civilians had died, or almost all the men in Gaza were fighting for Hamas. Both were obviously absurd.

[Tichtheid]

The other factors are not at all linked or require linearity. They come from the daily data. That’s made up by you and your deliberate misreading of it. The author proposes a manner in which the numbers were constructed by Hamas. But the telling factors are in the actual data (not needing linearity).

Here they are (again)

2) according to Hamas data from 29 October, 26 men came back to life;

3) and the fact that on several days, no men were apparently killed at all, but only women. Were we really supposed to believe any of this?

4) In February, Hamas admitted to losing 6,000 of its fighters, representing more than 20 per cent of the total casualties reported. Given its claims that 70 per cent of the dead were women and children, there were two possible conclusions: either almost no male civilians had died, or almost all the men in Gaza were fighting for Hamas. Both were obviously absurd.

Whoosh yet again.

Did you read the original article in Tablet? There is a link at the bottom of it to the numbers the article is based on. There are no days where only women were killed, bar the -26 which I have no explanation for, it may be that some deaths were recorded and then corrected, there are other days mentioned where this happened. (disclaimer, I've now read five articles on this subject this morning, it may not have been the Tablet one which said corrections on numbers were published when more information came to light.)

This is the numbers chart the article is based on https://cdn.sanity.io/images/z2aip6ei/p ... 3x1162.jpg

According to a Reuters article, Isreal claims 12 000 Hamas combatants have been killed, rather than the 6000, which would make it around 40% of the total killed are Hamas combatants, if the 30k is near the truth.

There is an AP article here that is worth a read (now that I think of it, it may be this one that talks about numbers being revised)

What is Gaza’s Ministry of Health and how does it calculate the war’s death toll? https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas ... 703400b033

[Rhubarb & Custard]

2) according to Hamas data from 29 October, 26 men came back to life;

Such narrative was common and popular before the bible, has proved popular as a work of fiction in the bible and continues to prove popular now

[Tichtheid]

By the way,

Person A says Numbers 1 can't be right because it's statistically impossible.

Person B point to another situation where Numbers 2 are similar to Numbers 1.

by YMX's "logic" Person B is saying Numbers 1 is correct.

Which of of course is logical bollocks.

[Hugo]

Pointless getting bogged down in a debate about numbers.

Whichever way you slice it, its a lot and the numbers don't do the trauma of the whole thing any justice..... The number 2 will reflect a mum who goes the shops and comes back to find her twin boys dead. The number 4 might reflect a whole family killed dying whilst at the dinner table.

You got kids without limbs or parents. Kids who are malnourished and near starvation. Entire generations of a family wiped out.

Whether its 30,000 dead, 20,000 dead or 10,000 dead what difference does it make? Its human suffering on a grand scale.

[Tichtheid]

Pointless getting bogged down in a debate about numbers.

Whichever way you slice it, its a lot and the numbers don't do the trauma of the whole thing any justice..... The number 2 will reflect a mum who goes the shops and comes back to find her twin boys dead. The number 4 might reflect a whole family killed dying whilst at the dinner table.

You got kids without limbs or parents. Kids who are malnourished and near starvation. Entire generations of a family wiped out.

Whether its 30,000 dead, 20,000 dead or 10,000 dead what difference does it make? Its human suffering on a grand scale.

Yes, aside from the military assaults, the starvation caused by the displacement is an unfolding humanitarian catastrophe. There must be an immediate ceasefire to allow aid in to Gazza

Melanie Ward is the CEO of Medical Aid to Palestine, MAP

[Ymx]

By the way,

Person A says Numbers 1 can't be right because it's statistically impossible.

Person B point to another situation where Numbers 2 are similar to Numbers 1.

by YMX's "logic" Person B is saying Numbers 1 is correct.

Which of of course is logical bollocks.

That is utter rubbish!

You made up that the entire theory that Numbers 1 were flawed was completely hinged on the linearity trait. This was a nonsense assertion. On that basis you went further to suggest linearity is not unheard of (Numbers 2) in your see-through attempt to dismiss the theory.

Then you got pulled up on it and that it was several elements about the data in the data which made the numbers 1 not credible.

You got upset, and had an amusing tantrum.

You’re welcome

[Ymx]

Pointless getting bogged down in a debate about numbers.

Whichever way you slice it, its a lot and the numbers don't do the trauma of the whole thing any justice..... The number 2 will reflect a mum who goes the shops and comes back to find her twin boys dead. The number 4 might reflect a whole family killed dying whilst at the dinner table.

You got kids without limbs or parents. Kids who are malnourished and near starvation. Entire generations of a family wiped out.

Whether its 30,000 dead, 20,000 dead or 10,000 dead what difference does it make? Its human suffering on a grand scale.

Well actually I disagree.

If 13,000 Hamas soldiers are killed with 17,000 civilians it’s a lot different to 3,000 Hamas vs 27,000 civilians.

On the mum returning home from the shop. I watched that but it just looked ridiculously fake.

[Tichtheid]

By the way,

Person A says Numbers 1 can't be right because it's statistically impossible.

Person B point to another situation where Numbers 2 are similar to Numbers 1.

by YMX's "logic" Person B is saying Numbers 1 is correct.

Which of of course is logical bollocks.

That is utter rubbish!

You made up that the entire theory that Numbers 1 were flawed was completely hinged on the linearity trait. This was a nonsense assertion. On that basis you went further to suggest linearity is not unheard of (Numbers 2) in your see-through attempt to dismiss the theory.

Then you got pulled up on it and that it was several elements about the data in the data which made the numbers 1 not credible.

You got upset, and had an amusing tantrum.

You’re welcome

Nope.

You haven't understood a single word on this.

You can't seem to get beyond my use of the term "hinged", is this because you think it's some kind of "gotcha!"?

Lets just say for the sake of argument that you are correct and the "hinged" is completely untrue, there is still the statement in the article you posted that says it's statistically impossible to have casualties rising at that rate - you can't deny that because it's mentioned twice in the article - agreed?
There is the graph from the conflict in Ukraine that shows a similar level of increase in casualties, so it's not statistically impossible after all.

Now, think about this for a while - that does not mean I think the original numbers are accurate and therefore I support Hamas (sic), it just means that if the numbers from Ukraine are accurate then it is statistically possible - that was my point. Do you need any further clarification on this?

I exaggerated my exasperation for effect, but this really is like try to explain something to Bimbo, a guy so impervious to information that it must have been on purpose.

[Guy Smiley]

a guy so impervious to information that it must have been on purpose.

I think you're homing in on it now.

[Ymx]

The giveaways were many

[Tichtheid]

The giveaways were many

I already addressed that, I can't force you to absorb information, but to reiterate,

On the "men coming back to life" - numbers are always revisited in combat zones. I don't know if that was the case for that day, neither does anyone else from what I can find by searching.

"on several days no men were killed only women" - that is not what shows on the table the original article in Tablet is based on.

On the 6000 or 12000 Hamas combatants - the discrepancy only shows how difficult it is to get accurate numbers.

There is another bit in the original article about the numbers of women and children killed - but the premise is not supported by the table on numbers used for the article

Did you read the article I posted from AP on the numbers? There is a bit towards the end on how accurate Hamas numbers have proven to be in previous episodes of this ongoing conflict.

Having said all of that, we have no way of knowing the accuracy of any numbers coming out of Gazza at the moment, from whatever source. Going down this route is a fool's errand at the moment, so I'm going to draw a line under this particular strand of the topic.

[MungoMan]

The other factors are not at all linked or require linearity. They come from the daily data. That’s made up by you and your deliberate misreading of it. The author proposes a manner in which the numbers were constructed by Hamas. But the telling factors are in the actual data (not needing linearity).

Here they are (again)

2) according to Hamas data from 29 October, 26 men came back to life;

3) and the fact that on several days, no men were apparently killed at all, but only women. Were we really supposed to believe any of this?

4) In February, Hamas admitted to losing 6,000 of its fighters, representing more than 20 per cent of the total casualties reported. Given its claims that 70 per cent of the dead were women and children, there were two possible conclusions: either almost no male civilians had died, or almost all the men in Gaza were fighting for Hamas. Both were obviously absurd.

Whoosh yet again.

Did you read the original article in Tablet? There is a link at the bottom of it to the numbers the article is based on. There are no days where only women were killed, bar the -26 which I have no explanation for, it may be that some deaths were recorded and then corrected, there are other days mentioned where this happened. (disclaimer, I've now read five articles on this subject this morning, it may not have been the Tablet one which said corrections on numbers were published when more information came to light.)

This is the numbers chart the article is based on https://cdn.sanity.io/images/z2aip6ei/p ... 3x1162.jpg

According to a Reuters article, Isreal claims 12 000 Hamas combatants have been killed, rather than the 6000, which would make it around 40% of the total killed are Hamas combatants, if the 30k is near the truth.

There is an AP article here that is worth a read (now that I think of it, it may be this one that talks about numbers being revised)

What is Gaza’s Ministry of Health and how does it calculate the war’s death toll? https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas ... 703400b033

Late October last year, MSNBC ran a piece explaining how the Ministry of Health in Gaza contains bureaucrats from the Fatah era as well as those of more recent vintage and pointing out that the US State Department, the WHO and UN bodies have found Ministry of Health fatality numbers from past conflicts pretty much in line with their own numbers. Other articles from early in this conflict made the same points.

[Guy Smiley]

yeah bUt hAmAs