← Back to context

Comment by JohnMakin

7 days ago

The claim is that the IDF shot his family. Even the IDF does not dispute this. What are you thinking this article is saying?

I'm not sure the IDF has confirmed who was killed, but even so the article goes much further than that. That it was a bad shoot, that the car was stationary, that no warnings were given, that the family did nothing to prompt it, that the IDF weren't legitimately mistaken, that the kid's injury is from the incident, that this kid was even there, that they spent 50+ rounds, that the kid who died has special needs. And more. You can literally just read the article and extract the facts. Those are uncomfirmed save by anecdote.

  • Literally read it, thanks. Glad you did too. Your original post said “unverifiable story” which seemed like the basic facts of the matter could be determined by reading said article and making inferences based on the sources provide. I trust you performed such dilligence.

    • The only agreed upon basic facts by both sides are that someone has died at the hands of the IDF. The rest (i.e. what makes up most of the claims) is pure anecdote and thus, unverifiable. I'm not sure what the issue is with saying as much.