By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following a double strike on a Gaza hospital, which killed 20 people including five journalists, the Israeli military stated the target was a Hamas surveillance camera. However, the initial strike killed a Reuters cameraman, contradicting the military’s account of the events. The military’s explanation for striking twice and the identification of some of the dead as militants have drawn criticism. Hamas has denied operating a camera at the hospital, while international leaders and rights groups have condemned the attacks and called for accountability.
Read the original article here
Israeli military says strikes on Gaza hospital targeted what it says was a Hamas camera, and honestly, the whole thing feels like a bad joke, a really, really dark one. The idea that a hospital, a place overflowing with civilians, including journalists and medics trying to do their jobs, was bombed because of a camera – a surveillance camera, they say, belonging to Hamas – is almost too absurd to believe. The fact that they’re even trying to sell this narrative is infuriating.
Their excuse for the attack just feels incredibly callous. A “camera”? That’s the justification for the loss of innocent lives, for the destruction of a place meant to provide care and comfort? It’s almost as if they’re not even pretending to care anymore, as if they believe they can get away with anything. The reported number of casualties is staggering – twenty people dead, including five journalists, and hundreds more impacted by the strikes. And the reasoning? To take out a camera? It’s hard to wrap your head around the sheer scale of the tragedy in relation to the alleged target.
The phrase “tragic mishap” used by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu feels so detached and dismissive. It’s difficult to imagine anyone believing this was an accident when it involved a double tap bombing. The fact that the military acknowledges “gaps” in the investigation, including the kind of ammunition used, only adds to the sense of a cover-up and a lack of accountability. They killed people and destroyed a hospital, and their excuse for it is flimsy, at best.
The fact that the military believes militants were using the camera to observe Israeli forces and the long-held belief that Hamas is present in hospitals feels more like a pretense than a legitimate reason. It’s convenient, perhaps, to label everything as a “Hamas camera” or “Hamas leader” to justify an action. But the question remains: at what point does the supposed threat justify the cost in human lives? It’s a question that desperately needs answering, yet we see no answers.
The notion that these strikes were anything other than a deliberate attack, a calculated choice, is hard to accept. The military’s assertion that they believed the camera belonged to Hamas doesn’t change the fact that they targeted a hospital. The double tap bombing, the second strike hitting the site after the initial attack, is a grim indication of the intent to cause maximum damage and casualties. It’s not an accident; it’s a choice.
The comments about the world’s view on Israel are hard to ignore. It feels like there’s a sense of frustration and a growing belief that there will be no real consequences for such actions. The comparison to historical events, like the Holocaust, only emphasizes the sense of outrage and the perception of impunity. And the sentiment that it’s all about the get-out-of-jail-free card is very hard to ignore.
The fact that America is still providing aid is another source of deep disappointment for some. There’s a strong feeling that the world is enabling, rather than preventing, further tragedy. The level of distrust and anger directed towards the Israeli government is palpable, especially from people who are watching events unfold.
The claim that journalists are being targeted, labeled as “Hamas cameras,” is particularly disturbing. It suggests a deliberate attempt to silence those who are reporting on the situation, to prevent the truth from coming out. It’s a tactic that is sadly familiar in conflicts around the world, but to see it happening here, in this context, is incredibly disheartening.
The idea of killing 20 people for a camera is truly difficult to accept. The destruction of a hospital, the deliberate targeting of a place dedicated to healing and care, is something that should be universally condemned. This incident, and the justifications given for it, highlights the deep-seated problems and the utter lack of respect for human life.
The entire situation is a mess of tragedy, excuse, and apparent indifference to the suffering of innocent people. It’s hard to see how anything positive can come out of it. But it’s something that the world needs to see, so it’s worth talking about.