Hamas built a mock Israeli town in Gaza and practiced its attack in plain sight — but Israel didn't react, report says
Hamas built a mock Israeli town in Gaza and practiced its attack in plain sight — but Israel didn't react, report says
Leading up to the attack, Hamas fighters were being trained and drilled — often in plain sight, Reuters reported.
-
Hamas duped Israel into thinking it cared more about economic stability than a war, Reuters said.
-
Meanwhile, it was practicing for an attack in plain sight, the report said.
-
Hamas trained its fighters on a mock Israeli settlement, learning how to storm it, Reuters added.
———
The Palestinian militant group Hamas built a mock Israeli town in Gaza and practiced attacking in plain sight — but Israel didn't react, Reuters reported on Sunday.
Hamas militants launched a surprise offensive on Israel on Saturday, in what has been described as the worst breach in Israel's defenses in decades.
The attack followed a careful campaign of deception by Hamas that ensured Israel was caught off guard over the weekend, an unnamed source, with connections to the group, told Reuters.
Despite convincing Israel that they had no interest in war, Hamas militants were practicing for the offensive in plain sight by setting up a mock Israeli settlement in Gaza to train its fighters.
You're viewing a single thread.
This just further raises questions on whether Netanyahu was actually unaware or if this attack was allowed to happen to provide cover for his corruption charges.
With so many different blatantly apparent elements and the well known past efforts by the IDF and Israeli intelligence to prevent things like this, such a massive buildup toward the attack in plain sight seems impossible to have been missed.
Turn the tinfoil hatting down by about ten notches.
Drills and the like are happening all the time. Hell, back when I used to live near one of the juicier US bases, I could literally see them building up and tearing down kill houses/training structures on the regular. Asked a few on business meetings and it was very much a mix of training and preparation/drilling.
Arguments like this suggest israel should have bombed them even harder. And the news media would likely report that as blowing up people building sheds or new housing. And, knowing israel, that is what it would devolve into.
Deliberately fiddling with the dial on Palestinian tension for political reasons is like Netanyahu's go to move. I admit I would be a bit surprised if it turns out he green lit this. It's a lot of Israeli lives and at this scale it looks a lot like incompetence, which is probably not ideal.
But it's totally reasonable to discuss the question.
No, it is not "totally reasonable to discuss the question". That is the basis for conspiracy theories and is why the world is so massively full of FUD and misinformation.
Because you have taken "Failing of intelligence" and turning it into the kind of conspiracy theory that makes people assume only idiots would question this because... yeah
What a genuinely stupid take. There is absolutely no question that governments have ignored intelligence, or allowed attacks to occur in order to bolster support for military engagements from the general public.
Seriously, how naive do you have to be to suggest that is a conspiracy theory or misinformation? We know the Bush administration ignored warnings from the CIA of impending attacks by Al Qaeda prior to 9/11. Whether you chalk that up to malice or incompetence is ultimately irrelevant when it led to a quagmire that has shaped decades of US foreign policy and military action.
If you don't think it is even worth discussing if far right crypto-fascist authoritarian like Benjamin Netanyahu is willing and able to let his own people die because the means justify the ends then you are not a serious interlocutor.
"The bush administration, and the clinton before them, did not act on warning signs of 9-11" is not a conspiracy theory
"The US government allowed 9-11 to happen" is.
Deliberately fiddling with the dial on Palestinian tension for political reasons is like Netanyahu’s go to move.
and
This just further raises questions on whether Netanyahu was actually unaware or if this attack was allowed to happen to provide cover for his corruption charges.
Are very much the latter.
There is a difference between QUESTIONING a narrative and ASSERTING a cause or motivation.
Are you actually suggesting that there is no appropriate time in which to question if there is institutional corruption or an organized conspiracy within the government?
No, there are plenty of appropriate times.
You want to know when an inappropriate time is?
When information is still incredibly sparse and misinformation is running rampant because social media is compromised.
Or when bodies aren't even buried and people are starting "crisis actor" level narratives.
As for why "I am just asking questions" is not a valid excuse for propagating conspiracy theories and baseless misinformation: Hey, I hear that Ricosuave user might be a pedophile. I don't have any concrete evidence, but don't you think they might be the kind of person to diddle kids? I mean, I am not asserting anything, just asking.
Can you see why JAQing off is bad?
Hey, I hear that Ricosuave user might be a pedophile. I don't have any concrete evidence, but don't you think they might be the kind of person to diddle kids? I mean, I am not asserting anything, just asking.
The difference is that you have absolutely zero evidence (circumstantial or otherwise) that would lead you to raise this question about me in good faith or engage in such loaded speculation.
The same cannot be said for government level inaction or malice that leads to the deaths of its own citizens in order to justify its own ends. We have MOUNTAINS of direct evidence that this can and does happen.
Just because SOME people make illogical leaps into conspiracy theory naval gazing does not mean that we just shouldn't question the transactional nature of any government narratives when bad things happen.
Stupid people are going to have stupid ideas regardless, and that should not stop the rest of us from maintaining our skepticism and using common sense when evaluating the progression of history as it is unfolding before us.
Stupid ideas like jumping from "intelligence was not acted on" to "this is a false flag action to kill israeli civilians to expedite the mass murder of Palestinians"?
YOU ARE THE ONE CONFLATING THESE THINGS.
JESUS H FUCKING CHRIST, Nobody ever said it was a "false flag" you absolute fucking goon. All these conspiracy buzzwords were entered into the conversation or equation BY YOU. You are attempting to place the "tinfoil hat" on everyone's head, and then screaming SEE I GOT YA.
No, no you didn't. You are just arguing in bad faith because for whatever reason that is your modus operandi.
“The bush administration, and the clinton before them, did not act on warning signs of 9-11” is not a conspiracy theory. “The US government allowed 9-11 to happen” is.
You're the only one here making that leap though.
My comment only highlights his history of doing things like this, and several times I say I don't think he was involved.
@Silverseren only says that the obviousness of the build-up makes more people wonder if netanyahu knew - which of course it does. They don't say he did either.
There will be conspiracy theories whether there is anything to base them on or not.
It's definitely reasonable to discuss whether Netanyahu was involved in something that benefits him and he is known for. As I said, at the moment it looks unlikely to me that he was. But come on! He has motive, means, priors and it's great timing for him personally. Acknowledging that all that is true doesn't mean agreeing to a vast web of conspiracy. All that is true but it it can still be a legit intelligence failure.
I would not at all be surprised if the israeli government allowed this to happen.
But there is no evidence beyond "they did not act on questionable intel". And the sooner we enter full conspiracy theory mode, the less credence there is TO (more) nefarious actions coming to light later. US-centric, but I know plenty of people who consider "The Bush Administration lied about evidence of WMDs" to be on the same level as "jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams" in terms of "conspiracy theories"
And all we do by entertaining conspiracy theories is erode the concept of truth.
The question is not "so was this a false flag action and all the festival goers were crisis actors?". It is "why did israel not act on this intelligence. What made them think it was not valid"
No, it is not "totally reasonable to discuss the question". That is the basis for conspiracy theories and is why the world is so massively full of FUD and misinformation.
I would not at all be surprised if the israeli government allowed this to happen.
Uhhh, okay well which is it then? One second you say it is totally unreasonable to question, and the next you are actively agreeing that you would not be surprised if the government had allowed this to happen. I'm sure even you can see the hypocrisy in that.
But there is no evidence beyond "they did not act on questionable intel".
I don't recall ever suggesting that there was, nor did the OP of this chain.
The sooner we enter full conspiracy theory mode, the less credence there is TO (more) nefarious actions coming to light later.
I'm willing to give you a pass on this point because I think this is probably true. However, let's not also act like the government doesn't intentionally muddy the waters and paint anything that is counter to their chosen narrative as conspiracy theories anyway...
And all we do by entertaining conspiracy theories is erode the concept of truth.
That is entirely the point isn't it? The government & intelligence community are fully aware of this phenomenon, and use it to their advantage as one of their main tactics to either squash or foment dissent depending on their objectives.
The truth has already been eroded to such a degree that whoever controls the largest & fastest means of information dissemination is able to control the narrative. It takes people who are willing to entertain other perspectives to weed through the bullshit in order to eventually land at something that more closely APPROXIMATES the truth.
The question is not "so was this a false flag action and all the festival goers were crisis actors?". It is "why did israel not act on this intelligence. What made them think it was not valid"
Wow, this is such a laughable conflation that I don't even know what to say about it really. Yes, there are morons who think that way, but I don't think anybody in this discussion is one of them as far as I can't tell. So, let's stick to higher level discourse that can be potentially productive.
No, it is not “totally reasonable to discuss the question”
I would not at all be surprised if the israeli government allowed this to happen.
Are you familiar with the old robot saying, "does not compute"?
I have a lot of suspicions about a lot of things. Many based on a "gut feeling"
But when there is no meaningful evidence to support it other than speculation and said "gut feeling"? It is not something I bring up.
Ah, interesting! I personally have no moral qualms with discussing possibilities.
Already pointed this out in the other branch but always worth repeating
You know, I have my suspicions about that Hegar guy. He said a few things that makes me wonder if he is a pedophile. Like, I am not saying he diddles kids, but he says the kinds of things that make me think he might? You know?
Can you see why baseless speculation (because not properly acting on intelligence is pretty much the one constant of intelligence gathering) might have negative repercussions?
But it's baseful speculation, based on Netanayahu's past actions.
He intentionally dialed up tensions as recently as the first round of protests against eliminating judicial independence.
A more apt anology would be if I was convicted sex offender and suddenly there were hundreds and hundreds of molested children, and people started "just asking questions" about whether I was involved. It's unlikely that I would have done something on that scale - I'm not a priest. But it's not a bad faith argument to discuss whether I could be involved.
I think you're mistaking some noncommittal discussion of the reality of politics in that region with a known bad faith argument.