5333 private links
Solar energy can be stored by converting it into hydrogen using hematite. //
Researchers from the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology have made a scientific breakthrough on the storage of solar energy, as reported by Energy & Environmental Science. A project led by Professor Avner Rothschild of the Technion's Faculty of Materials Science doctoral student Yifat Piekner from the Nancy and Stephen Grand Technion Energy Program (GTEP has shown that hematite can serve as a promising material in converting solar energy into hydrogen.
The process entails the use of photoelectrochemical solar cells, which are similar to photovoltaic cells, but instead of producing electricity, they produce hydrogen using the electric power (current × voltage) generated in them. The power then uses sunlight energy to dissociate water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen.
Hydrogen is easy to store and when used as fuel, does not involve greenhouse gas or carbon emissions.
A newly found inscription has forced archaeologists to rethink their dating of a fortification wall, and high-tech analysis is building a clearer picture than ever of the site //
With the fortress’s iconic round tower jutting into the sky behind us, Re’em recounted a thrilling discovery of a dated inscription located in secondary use, meaning it had been recycled from some earlier use, in the foundations of an outer western wall.
“We all thought that this was from the time of the Crusaders, the 12th century. It appears in the books! But now, when we conducted this excavation, we have a large question mark. Because right here we uncovered an Arabic inscription in secondary use that belonged to one of the great Ayyubid rulers of Jerusalem, his name is El-Melek El-Muatem Isa,” said Re’em.
Jerusalem was conquered by the Crusaders in 1099 and retaken by a Muslim dynasty, the Ayyubids, in 1187. By 1212, the city was ruled by the nephew of Saladin, El-Melek El-Muatem Isa, also commonly known in English as Al-Mu’azzam Isa.
According to Re’em, Al-Mu’azzam Isa erected the fortifications of Jerusalem in approximately 1212, “and on every tower he put a large sign in Arabic, ‘I’m the great ruler El-Melek El-Muatem Isa.'” Alongside his name on this stone was the year, 1212.
Rarely do archaeologists hit the jackpot of a securely dated inscription. This one, explained Re’em, also sheds light on the mindset of the Muslim ruler as he faced down encroaching Crusader forces, who moved toward the city in 1217.
Re’em said that as the Crusaders made their way to the Holy Land, the sultan did not have a standing army available in Jerusalem, so he decided to tear down the city’s fortifications, thinking it would be easier to retake that way after the Crusaders presumably entered the city.
“So he demolished all his walls and those inscriptions,” said Re’em, “but the Crusaders never came to Jerusalem.”
Eventually, the walls were rebuilt, and the stone with his name and date was used in the foundation of the walls of the western fortification of the citadel. There it would sit for centuries until being found by Re’em and his team, helping rewrite what we know about the citadel.
Imagine being so anti-Trump that you would throw even historic peace agreements between Israel and neighboring Arab nations down the memory hole just because President Donald Trump brokered those deals.
Well, according to a report from the Washington Free Beacon, that’s exactly what’s happening. According to the report, based on emails reviewed by The Washington Free Beacon, Biden’s State Department is discouraging employees from “referring to the historic peace agreements signed by Israel and its Arab neighbors by its official name, the Abraham Accords.” The name “Abraham Accords” has also “been erased from a wide array of official State Department communications as the new administration presses officials to refer to the Trump-era deals as ‘normalization agreements.'”
According to a new IAEA report, they haven’t been able to access data that monitors Iran’s nuclear program since late February, not just with the surveillance cameras but also it has “not had access to the data from its online enrichment monitors and electronic seals, or had access to the measurement recordings registered by its installed measurement devices” since Feb. 23.
The IAEA had 2,000 tamper-proof seals on nuclear material and equipment that provided for electronic information to be communicated to inspectors. They also had automated measuring devices that generated data. Now that access has been cut off.
That’s not all.
The IAEA is also saying that Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium is around 16 times the limit laid down in the 2015 nuclear deal.
On top of that, Iran refuses to explain traces of uranium found at several undeclared sites to the IAEA.
The New Democrat Response to the Surge in Anti-Semitic Attacks Will Have You Face-Palming – RedState
There’s no way this was a coincidence, right down to all of them making sure to put “antisemitic” first in the list before shifting to claims of bigotry against Muslims. This equivocation is just disgusting and it’s obviously purposeful. Jews are being beaten in the streets from New York to Berlin. I haven’t seen a single case of a pro-Palestinian protester being physically harmed, at least not in a fight they didn’t themselves start.
Where is this vast rise of Islamaphobia being cited by these Democrats? It simply doesn’t exist, but because people like Ayanna Pressley and Cori Bush see Jews as oppressors and Muslims as victims, their intersectional dogma demands they couch their criticism of antisemitism with false claims of Islamophobia. It’s a cynical game that should be called what it is, which is antisemitism in and of itself. //
Now, these same people are trying to pretend that the recent, massive spike in antisemitism is somehow correlated with a rise in Islamophobia. It’s absolute nonsense, and it’s simply another attempt to marginalize the real victims that we are seeing in the streets. This stuff is not just politically gross, it’s also morally gross.
Lastly, this shows the true rot of the social justice movement. Because its adherents are so invested in faux hierarchies of power, they can’t even be counted on to call out blatant antisemitism without having to include their other pet concerns. To just call out antisemitism would enrage their base, and they can’t have that. Thus, you get this disgusting display.
Two of her most famous quotes remain sourceless and bereft, despite the best efforts of The Jewish Press writer Harvey Rachlin. //
We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us
The fact that the White House has not acknowledged Netanyahu’s response is telling. They seem to have been under the illusion that Netanyahu, who is locked in a coalition government with his main political rival, would kowtow to Biden out of some sense of respect. They tried to play tough and got smacked down. The big question is will Biden’s staff move on and let their fluffers in the media continue to praise Joe’s genius, or are they under enough pressure from the anti-Semitic left in the Democrat party that they will ratchet up the pressure?
Just to give you an idea of what Israel is dealing with and why those cheering on Hamas are on the side of absolute evil, I submit to you the following video.
In an attempt to minimize civilian casualties in its ongoing war with terrorists, Israel warns Gazan citizens where they’re going to strike next. The Israeli Defense Force phoned one man in an effort to have him evacuate him and his family before they bombed a Hamas target.
IDF is heard pleading with the man to evacuate so that he and his children don’t die, but the Gazan made it clear that he wants him and his children to die so that it can be used against Israel:
Gazan man: You want to bomb? Bomb whatever you want.
IDF: No, brother. We need to do everything we can so you don’t die.
Gazan man: We want to die.
IDF: But you have a responsibility for children’s lives.
Gazan man: If the children need to die then they’ll die.
IDF: God forbid. God forbid. What do you want? To die?
Gazan man: This is how we reveal our cruelty. //
Golda Meir (Prime Minister of Israel from February 1969 to June 1974): “We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children. We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us”.
On the Palestinians & Violence
“We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children. We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us”
“We do not rejoice in victories. We rejoice when a new kind of cotton is grown and when strawberries bloom in Israel.”
“A leader who doesn't hesitate before he sends his nation into battle is not fit to be a leader.”
“It was not as if there was a Palestinian people in Palestine and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them. They did not exist.”
“We Jews have a secret weapon in our struggle with the Arabs - We have no place to go.”
“I guess we have no choice. Either we do everything that is possible, and may seem to others as impossible, and just give up. Or we do everything that is really impossible and we remain alive. There’s one more basic thing that I think that people outside of Israel must realize, and if they understand and accept that, maybe other things will fall into place.
Golda Meir was Prime Minister of Israel from February 1969 to June 1974. The following is an op-ed she wrote for The New York Times in 1975.
To be misquoted is an occupational hazard of political leadership; for this reason I should like to clarify my position in regard to the Palestinian issue. I have been charged with being rigidly insensitive to the question of the Palestinian Arabs. In evidence of this I am supposed to have said, “There are no Palestinians.” My actual words were: “There is no Palestinian people. There are Palestinian refugees.” The distinction is not semantic. My statement was based on a lifetime of debates with Arab nationalists who vehemently excluded a separatist Palestinian Arab nationalism from their formulations.
When in 1921 I came to Palestine – until the end of World War I a barren, sparsely inhabited Turkish province – we, the Jewish pioneers, were the avowed Palestinians. So we were named in the world. Arab nationalists, on the other hand, stridently rejected the designation. Arab spokesmen continued to insist that the land we had cherished for centuries was, like Lebanon, merely a fragment of Syria. On the grounds that it dismembered an ideal unitary Arab state, they fought before the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry and at the United Nations.
When the Arab historian Philip K. Hitti informed the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry that “there is no such thing as Palestine in history,” it was left to David Ben-Gurion to stress the central role of Palestine in Jewish, if not Arab, history.
As late as May 1956, Ahmed Shukairy, subsequently head of the Palestine Liberation Organization, declared to the United Nations Security Council, “It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria.” In view of this, I believe I may be forgiven if I took Arab spokesmen at their word.
Until the 1960’s, attention was focused on the Arab refugees for whose plight the Arab states would allow no solution though many constructive and far-reaching proposals were made by Israel and the world community.
I repeatedly expressed my sympathy for the needless sufferings of refugees whose abnormal situation was created and exploited by the Arab states as a tactic in their campaign against Israel. However, refugee status could not indefinitely be maintained for the original 550,000 Arabs who in 1948 joined the exodus from the battle areas during the Arab attack on the new state of Israel.
When the refugee card began to wear thin, the Palestinian terrorist appeared on the scene flourishing not the arguable claims of displaced refugees but of a ghoulish nationalism that could only be sated on the corpse of Israel.
I repeat again. We dispossessed no Arabs. Our toil in the deserts and marshes of Palestine created more habitable living space for both Arab and Jew. Until 1948 the Arabs of Palestine multiplied and flourished as the direct result of Zionist settlement. Whatever subsequent ills befell the Arabs were the inevitable result of the Arab design to drive us into the sea. Had Israel not repelled her would-be destroyers there would have been no Jewish refugees alive in the Middle East to concern the world.
Now, two years after the surprise attack of the Yom Kippur War, I am well aware of the potency of Arab petrobillions and I have no illusions about the moral fiber of the United Nations, most of whose members hailed gun-toting Yasir Arafat and shamefully passed the anti-Semitic resolution that described Zionism, the national liberation movement of the Jewish people, as racist.
But though Israel is small and beset, I am not prepared to accede to the easy formula that in the Arab-Israeli conflict we witness two equal contending rights that demand further “flexibility” from Israel. Justice was not violated when in the huge territories liberated by the Allies from the Sultan, 1 percent was set aside for the Jewish homeland on its ancestral site, while in a parallel settlement 99 percent of the area was allotted for the establishment of independent Arab states.
We successively accepted the truncation of Transjordan, three-fourths of the area of historic Palestine, and finally the painful compromise of the 1947 partition resolution in the hope for peace. Yet though Israel arose in only one-fifth of the territory originally assigned for the Jewish homeland, the Arabs invaded the young state.
I ask again, as I have often asked, why did the Arabs not set up a Palestine state in their portion instead of cannibalizing the country by Jordan’s seizure of the West Bank and Egypt’s capture of the Gaza Strip? And, since the question of the 1967 borders looms heavily in the present discussions, why did the Arabs converge upon us in June 1967, when the West Bank, the Golan Heights, the Sinai, the Gaza Strip and old Jerusalem were in their hands?
These are not idle questions. They go to the heart of the matter – the Arab denial of Israel’s right to exist. This right is not subject to debate. That is why Israel cannot by its presence sanction the participation of the Palestine Liberation Organization at the Security Council, a participation in direct violation of Resolutions 242 and 338.
We have no common language with exultant murderers of the innocent and with a terrorist movement ideologically committed to the liquidation of Jewish national independence.
At no point has the P.L.O. renounced its program for the “elimination of the Zionist entity.” With startling effrontery P.L.O. spokesmen admit that their proposed state on the West Bank would be merely a convenient “point of departure,” a tactical “first stage” and finally, a combatant “arsenal” strategically situated for the easier penetration of Israel.
I am often asked a hypothetical question: How would we react if the P.L.O. agreed to abandon its weapon, terror, and its goal, the destruction of Israel? The answer is simple. Any movement that forswore both its means and its end would by that fact become a different organization with a different leadership. There is no room for such speculation in the case of the P.L.O.
This does not mean that at this stage I disregard whatever national aspirations Palestinian Arabs have developed in recent years. However, these can be satisfied within the boundaries of historic Palestine.
The majority of the refugees never left Palestine; they are settled on the West Bank and in Jordan, the majority of whose population is Palestinian. Whatever nomenclature is used, both the people involved and the territory on which they live are Palestinian.
A mini-Palestine state, planted as a time bomb against Israel on the West Bank, would only serve as a focal point for the further exploitation of regional tensions by the Soviet Union.
But in a genuine peace settlement a viable Palestine-Jordan could flourish side by side with Israel within the original area of Mandatory Palestine.
On July 21, 1974, the Israeli Government passed the following resolution: “The peace will be founded on the existence of two independent states only – Israel, with united Jerusalem as its capital, and a Jordanian-Palestinian Arab state, east of Israel, within borders to be determined in negotiations between Israel and Jordan.”
All allied problems can be equitably solved. For this to happen the adversaries of Israel will have to stop devising overt schemes for her immediate or piecemeal extinction.
There are 21 Arab states, rich in oil, land and sovereignty. There is only one small state in which Jewish national independence has been dearly achieved. Surely it is not extravagant to demand that in the current power play the right of a small democracy to freedom and life not be betrayed.
Unhappy at inheriting a quiescent Middle East where Israel and the Arab world are developing economic, security, and diplomatic ties and Iran is so cash-strapped that it is finding it difficult to fund its terrorist operations, the Biden bunch is, in a flashback from the Obama administration, attempting to bolster Iran as the regional superpower while limiting assistance and cooperation with our Arab allies and with Israel. The same sort of big-brain thinking that gave us the Arab Spring, a terrorist state in Libya, ethnic cleansing and genocide in Syria, and made Iraq into a de facto Iranian satrapy is now trying to encourage the Palestinians to engage in a new intifada. //
The success of Iron Dome and the astonishing lack of casualties on both sides should be a cause for hope and celebration among sane people but such folk are in short supply on the pages of the Washington Post. For instance, there is this from the Washington Post’s aptly named “Monkey Cage” section that purports to provide “Analysis:” Israel’s Iron Dome defense system protects Israeli lives. It also perpetuates the Israel-Gaza conflict. //
Consider this for a moment. You have a defensive system that protects Israelis from Hamas terrorism and because it is damned effective, there is no political pressure on the Israeli government to conduct a punitive expedition into the terrorist stronghold of Gaza. This saves the lives of Israeli soldiers and Gazan civilians. Yet, the system is bad because it saves lives, renders Hamas terrorism ineffective, and Israel is not bludgeoned into accepting a victory by the terrorists. This is an incredible admission that the Washington Post stands foursquare with Hamas terrorists and their methods and endorses the idea that the more people killed the better. //
In 2014, the WaPo ran another op-ed, with the same message headlined _The missiles keeping Israel safe may do more long-term harm than good-. //
First off, saving lives is a good thing. I think there is one of those “commandment” thingies about it in some religious book or the other, I’m pretty sure. Saving lives from terrorist attacks is something that civilized people celebrate. Second, as someone who knew something about armed conflict, that would be Carl von Clausewitz, observed a while back, war is just a continuation of political intercourse by other means. Negotiations and rocket attacks are just different points on the conflict continuum with the same objective. The conflict ends when both sides agree that there is nothing to gain from pursuing said conflict. Third, there is no evidence, anywhere, that negotiating with a terrorist state that preaches literal genocide produces a better or more permanent outcome than just killing them. Killing terrorists without losing your own soldiers or killing innocent civilians in large numbers is a good thing. Trust me. It really is.
One of the things that’s been fascinating to watch, as Israel is being attacking by Hamas on Joe Biden’s watch, is who the folks on the left are blaming for the implosion.
Are they blaming Hamas? No.
Are they blaming Joe Biden? Most definitely not.
They are, through a process of twisted pretzel logic, blaming Jared Kushner: the bête noire of the left. //
George Takei
@GeorgeTakei
Two things are certain. Jared Kushner left a mess in the Middle East. And he’s probably gleeful at how the current awful situation pits progressives and liberals against one another.
8:55 AM · May 16, 2021
Yet, this is utter nonsense. If Kushner had “failed,” why is the Middle East blowing up under Biden and not under President Donald Trump? I realize this is a hard question for them because, logic. But it’s a simple one they can’t answer. //
So, yes, let’s funnel even more money to folks who want to obliterate Israel, because we think that money is going to make them more compliant? I feel think we’re in such a stupid part of history that anyone could really be dumb enough to think or say this.
Head of Public Diplomacy at the Israeli Embassy in Berlin, Yaki Lopez, put it to George Takei plainly: what was bad with what Kushner achieved?
Yaki Lopez 🇮🇱
@YakiLopez
Replying to @GeorgeTakei
The Abraham Accords crated peace between Israel and two Arab countries (and later two more also came on board). This is something that hasn’t been achieved in almost 30 yrs (since peace with Jordan. How is this a bad thing?
8:58 AM · May 16, 2021
Pres. Trump decided that 43 waivers in a row were enough, and announced in December 2017 that there would not be a 44th waiver in the summer of 2018. So the folks in the Embassy started packing their bags, and they moved to Jerusalem when the summer of 2018 arrived.
The problem facing the Biden Administration is that the confirmation process for any US Ambassador is going to draw calls for moving the US Embassy from Jerusalem back to Tel Aviv, and the Biden Administration nominee is going to need to address that question.
But having the Embassy located in Jerusalem means it is now in compliance with US law, and any effort to force a relocation of the Embassy would be in violation of US law. So the nominee will not be able to join in the chorus that is certain to rise from the radical anti-Israel wing of the Democrat party.
The Jerusalem Post also wasn’t quite buying that whole AP statement, based on past history.
After Operation Protective Edge in 2014, former AP reporter Matti Friedman wrote in The Atlantic: “Hamas understood that reporters could be intimidated when necessary and that they would not report the intimidation… The AP staff in Gaza City would witness a rocket launch right beside their office, endangering reporters and other civilians nearby – and the AP wouldn’t report it, not even in AP articles about Israeli claims that Hamas was launching rockets from residential areas.”
So, either they’re incredibly ignorant or they knew and they’re not being truthful. Either way, not a good look there, AP.
Jerry Dunleavy
@JerryDunleavy
AP CEO: "AP’s bureau has been in this building for 15 years. We have had no indication Hamas was in the building or active in the building. This is something we actively check to the best of our ability. We'd never knowingly put our journalists at risk."
https://blog.ap.org/announcements/
Andy Ngô
@MrAndyNgo
Israel says your building also housed Hamas military assets. All of you were given warning to evacuate, which you did, before the place was destroyed. And AP last year released guidelines saying journalists shouldn’t focus on property destruction.
The Associated Press
@AP
AP President and CEO Gary Pruitt says he's "shocked and horrified that the Israeli military would target and destroy the building housing AP’s bureau and other news organizations in Gaza." Pruitt says AP is seeking information from the Israeli government. http://apne.ws/Li8Hj4Q //
Jack Posobiec
@JackPosobiec
AP stated we must not focus on property destruction it is only the underlying grievance that matters!
APStylebook
@APStylebook
Replying to @APStylebook
Focusing on rioting and property destruction rather than underlying grievance has been used in the past to stigmatize broad swaths of people protesting against lynching, police brutality or for racial justice, going back to the urban uprisings of the 1960s. (2/5)
3:40 PM · May 15, 2021
Suddenly they realized that property destruction does matter — when it’s their own. But the destruction of the property of Americans apparently didn’t matter, when the AP had no problem with the ideology of those doing the destruction.
The Biden Administration chose this past week to inform Congress that it would be releasing millions of dollars in US assistance to the Palestinians, as armed clashes between the Israeli Defense Forces and Hamas intensified in the aftermath of Jerusalem Day on Monday.
The funds are part of $100 million in aid the Administration has designated for Palestinian causes, which represented a huge policy reversal from the Trump Administration, which had cut off nearly all financial assistance for Palestinians. //
Here is the earlier statement issued by Secretary of State Nod — I mean Blinkin — on the resumption of the aid program announced last month.
The United States is pleased to announce that, working with Congress, we plan to restart U.S. economic, development, and humanitarian assistance for the Palestinian people. This includes $75 million in economic and development assistance in the West Bank and Gaza, $10 million for peacebuilding programs through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and $150 million in humanitarian assistance for the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). We are also resuming vital security assistance programs.
Advocates of the funding will no doubt claim that the money is targeted for groups involved in “promoting peace” with Israel, but those last 8 words sort of stick out.
Iron Dome
More than 2,000 rockets have been fired towards Israel by Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups in five days.
But about 90% of the rockets have been intercepted by its flagship Iron Dome missile defence system, according to the Israeli military.
The Iron Dome was specially designed to protect against a range of incoming short-range threats.
The system has its roots in the war Israel fought with Lebanon's militant Hezbollah movement in 2006, when thousands of rockets were launched into Israel - causing huge damage, mass evacuations and dozens of deaths.
After that Israel said a new missile defence shield would be developed.
If Hamas wanted to protect Palestinian life, they wouldn’t launch thousands of rockets into population centers; they would not use their own people as human shields; and they would not invest in weapons instead of defense, food, or shelter for their own people.
As writer David French correctly notes, “There is absolutely no equivalence — either in morality or the laws of armed conflict — between firing unaimed rockets directly into civilian population centers and responding with aimed fire at militants hiding in civilian population centers.” One of the two governments in this conflict is a terrorist government, but it is certainly not Israel’s. //
It has also been suggested that anger over the evictions of four families from Sheikh Jarrah, a neighborhood in East Jerusalem, is responsible for the violence. While this legal dispute going back to the 1970s understandably flared tensions, a more significant reason for the violence is the myth that Israel denies Palestinians the right to self-determination — a myth Hadid amplified.
In truth. the entire Israeli-Palestinian conflict comes down to a basic fact: the Jews want to have a state where they can live in safety and security while the Palestinians will do anything in their power to prevent a Jewish state that is safe and secure. This has been evidenced by the fact Israel has accepted every peace plan offered while the Palestinians have rejected every peace plan offered. //
In Einat Wilf and Adi Schwartz’s book, “The War of Return,” they point out that the reason for this continuous violence is that many Palestinians truly believe the war of 1948 is not over and that Israel is simply a temporary project. But if both sides can simply accept that the other has a right to live safely in a country of their own, then this conflict would be over.
After all, Israel was able to make peace with Egypt just two years after they said they wanted peace, a fact further bolstered by the openness to peace Israel displayed through the 2020 Abraham Accords. Until Palestinian leaders reach out a hand for peace, however, this tragic cycle of violence will continue.
Julie Pace
@jpaceDC
So stunned. Our @AP bureau in Gaza has been destroyed by an Israeli airstrike. //
LIVE footage of the moment an Israeli air raid bombed the offices of Al Jazeera and The Associated Press in Gaza City ⬇️
🔴 LIVE updates: https://t.co/RvtP1lEX1x pic.twitter.com/RBO1ZiDAl0
— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) May 15, 2021 //
This was decision by the AP to place their bureau offices within a known Hamas safehouse; the reason they did it was for journalistic access, never imagining that something like this might happen. Hamas, of course, WANTED either defense or for it to happen for propaganda. https://t.co/8c7vH9T5zU
— Jeff B. tried to do his best, but he could not (@EsotericCD) May 15, 2021 //
Pro tip:
Make sure your landlord isn’t Hamas.
— Richard Grenell (@RichardGrenell) May 15, 2021 //
Israel Defense Forces
@IDF
Here's some important context to the headlines you’re seeing about Israel Defense Forces operations in the Gaza Strip
1/ Hamas has turned residential areas in the Gaza Strip into military strongholds.
It uses tall buildings in Gaza for multiple military purposes such as intelligence gathering, planning attacks, command and control, and communications.
2/ When Hamas uses a tall building for military purposes, it becomes a lawful military target.
3/ The Israel Defense Forces struck a number of such buildings in recent days, but before we did so, we took steps to try and ensure that civilians would not be harmed.
4/ We called the building's residents and warned them to leave. We sent SMS messages. We dropped "roof knocker" bombs; they make loud noises and hit only the roof. We provided sufficient time to evacuate.
5/ We'll say it again: When Hamas places military assets inside such a building, it becomes a lawful military target. This is clear international law.
This is the thread the world needs to see. //
Ben McDonald
@Bmac0507
The irony of mainstream media being headquartered in a Hamas building is too much for one Saturday