Talk:Be'eri massacre/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Requested move 9 October 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: procedural close. The article was moved from its original title in an undiscussed move. Rather than start an RM, the article should have been moved back and the editor wanting to move it start an RM. Number 5 7 21:41, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Be'eri attack → Be'eri Massacre – This was a massacre of civilians A3811 (talk) 20:54, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Comment - we need reliable sources using that term to describe the event. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 20:57, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Support as Be'eri massacre. With the bodies of 100+ civilians already found, the first RS are already calling it a "massacre", and I think it's fair to say there will be far more as news of this barbaric act trickles out: Haaretz, The Messenger, Times of Israel, Jerusalem Post However, I'm fine waiting a day or two until more RS more clearly ettle on this language. Longhornsg (talk) 21:10, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Support obviously a massacre. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 21:22, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Support this was a massacre of civilians SuperSardus (talk) 21:34, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This whole article is a lie and baseless. There is no evidence that infants were killed here. A lot more infants are killed by Israeli airstrikes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Classicalguss (talk • contribs) 16:56, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

evidence that infants were killed:

דוב (talk) 23:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Checked your first source, CNN: "Children found ‘butchered’ in Israeli kibbutz, IDF says...". Is there any solid evidence? --Mhhossein ^talk 05:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Israel released pictures of infant with bullet wounds and charred infants.

Infants were killed. Rexi312321 (talk) 03:52, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

I am trying to say that IDF claims should be attributed to IDF. These sort of sources should not be used to wikivoice something. --Mhhossein ^talk 09:03, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

These "Claims" are provided and proved with the support of visual sources, there are many pictures available describing the butchering. These claims although made by the IDF are supported with facts, and should therefore be treated as such. DennisSher (talk) 17:47, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Comparing terrorists intentionally killing babies up close to babies dying in an airstrike aimed at Hamas, following a dud bomb drop with Israeli warnings for residents to evacuate, but Hamas preventing them from leaving is an oversimplified perspective, putting it extremely mildly. 2A01:6500:A10E:BF1D:A77:1228:EF:71AD (talk) 00:42, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

For the record; all the forged allegations of babies being killed in Israel were found to be totally bogus and unfounded with the CNN reported apologizing [1] for their claim. --Mhhossein ^talk 14:28, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

You should probably pick up a dictionary and learn the difference between killing and beheading before you try to edit Wikipedia. 2A0D:6FC7:32D:3057:278:5634:1232:5476 (talk) 13:14, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Babies were burned and shot, and there's ton of proof that was both provided to the public and to reporters.

Enough with the denial. 2A06:C701:9DA4:E700:DCC6:5806:CEAA:A09A (talk) 21:08, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

False, so much has been proven to be a lie, anyone burned would’ve been from Israeli tank fire clearly documented by eyewitnesses against their nation and footage of tank bombardment not Hamas. 216.213.162.217 (talk) 14:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

It a terror attack

I want to add thaht its a terror attack , just as 9/11 of al qaida. 2A06:C701:9CB5:9100:E8DA:9C73:4F6A:1B6A (talk) 20:31, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

The opening of the article is deceptive

It is unclear that the terrorist attack was initial aggression

It sounds like one of the battles in the "war" 84.110.51.210 (talk) 08:53, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

It should be made clear that Hamas started the conflict with this attack 84.110.51.210 (talk) 08:55, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia, this is Terrorism "David Forte states that the primary difference between terror and terrorism is that while terror can be neutrally evil (i.e., random violence committed by robbers, rapists and even military personnel), terrorism has the additional political or moral dimension, being the systematized use of randomly focused violence by organized groups against non-combatants to effect a political objective."

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_(politics)

There are videos showing rape, torture, beheaded people and KIDS! all are civilians. Some burnt alive, some kidnapped.. if this isn't terror then what is? Mila0333 (talk) 15:12, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

If it's not clear, I also request that Hamas will be called in it's name "terror-organization" there are many documentations that proofs the terror they do to Israel and their own people Mila0333 (talk) 15:16, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Hamas terrorists

By definition Hamas is a terror organization and not a military organization it's existing is not for protecting but controls over Palestinian and the Palestinian authority that has no power over them. Their control makes their own citizens under poor poverty and violence in an act of terror ao no one there can condemned but only join them for the sake of better life then the others which is also an act of terror. The right and correct term after all actions made by them is to say Hamas terrorists because killing baby's and abuse and burning innocent lives and rape before murder is not military form of any kind. Ades Matthew (talk) 21:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Per MOS:TERRORIST it's better to not use the term unless attributed to others. I wouldn't oppose adding something like "X described the incident as a terrorst attack" if you can find sources saying as such. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:28, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_attack@Hemiauchenia you can see in this 9 11 Wikipedia article the first term is to call the attack a terrorists attack so why can't you? Ades Matthew (talk) 21:49, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks Ades Matthew (talk) 21:52, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 November 2023

This edit request to Be'eri massacre has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The attack was hamas terrorists not militants 89.139.35.164 (talk) 21:25, 18 November 2023 (UTC) The attack was clearly terrorists not militants

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. see above sections for similar discussions and how to move forward. Request is outside the scope of a simple edit request as this is clearly contested Cannolis (talk) 22:15, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Most of this article is lies

Isreali eyewitnesses in kibbutz Be'eri said IDF soldiers not only shelled them but stood and watched as the isrealis died 2A00:23C8:1115:DE01:BFB2:D610:BB0F:C5C8 (talk) 03:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@2A00:23C8:1115:DE01:BFB2:D610:BB0F:C5C8 exactly. There are also leaked fottages of tanks shelling kibbutz homes with Jews inside, as well as testimonials that also Apache helicopter fired at kibbutz 77.254.148.185 (talk) 11:16, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

This is not a forum. If you think smth should be added to the article, please provide sources. Also, please note that Porat's interview is already mentioned in the article. Alaexis_¿question? 20:58, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

You literally haven't brought even a single source to back your dubious claims. Palestinian antizionist crimes were photographed and documented. 2A00:A041:2C22:700:5971:396C:180C:C66D (talk) 20:13, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 October 2023

This edit request to Be'eri massacre has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please change 'Hamas militants' to 'Hamas terrorists' 77.137.73.204 (talk) 11:28, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Not done: Please see MOS:TERRORIST. Tollens (talk) 10:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

according to the MOS:TERRORIST attached it should be changed to 'Hamas terrorists', similar to September 11 attacks. Sources including in the article already support that definition as well Sunshine SRA (talk) 21:22, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

According to Definition of terrorism

The use of violence or of the threat of violence in the pursuit of political objectives
The intentional use of lethal force against civilians, and/or destructive force against civilian areas, buildings or infrastructure.
Acts reaching more than the immediate target victims and also directed at targets consisting of a larger spectrum of society

The points above are proven to describe the current event in Israel and in Be'eri.

For other points that may be made to disprove such act as being an act of "Terror" such as :

Collateral damage, including the infliction of incidental damage to non-combatant targets during an attack on or attempting to attack legitimate targets in war

ANS: This was not collateral damage, as real intentional killing of civilians was happening in the surrounding kibbutz's and in Be'eri which would classify as a terror attack. civilians are not legitimate combat targets, at the very least unarmed civilians.

Wartime (including a declared war) or peacetime acts of violence committed by a nation state against another nation state regardless of legality or illegality and are carried out by properly uniformed forces or legal combatants of such nation states.

ANS: The Hamas "Militants" appear in video in sometimes partial uniform, and sometimes no uniform at all.

https://jcpa.org/frequently-asked-questions-about-the-2023-war-with-hamas/

Additionally, Hamas is considered a terrorist organization by many nations such as : Israel, USA, Japan, UK, Switzerland, Australia, and the EU.

https://www.foxnews.com/world/countries-designate-hamas-terrorist-organization

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-11/swiss-government-backs-labeling-hamas-as-terrorist-organization?leadSource=uverify%20wall

This is not a violation of the definition of "terrorism" , as I prove, this is the legitimate use of the term to classify the doings of this act as "Terrorism"

Please do not mark this request as "Answered" until it was rejected by legitimate means. DennisSher (talk) 07:37, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

This request keeps getting marked as answered even though, after clarification it was still not answered. DennisSher (talk) 18:20, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Edit requests should be marked as answered when they're on hold or awaiting consensus or further discussion. NotAGenious (talk) 09:33, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

'Militants' should be changed to 'Terrorists' with the mention of the parties which recognize them as such, e. g. Hamas Terrorists (as recognized by the government(s) of the US, UK, Israel, EU, Australia, Japan, Switzerland. DennisSher (talk) 10:51, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. There seems to be a rough consensus on the 2023 Israel-Hamas war page to call Hamas militants, as that is what most RS sources call them (ex. BBC, CNN). Calling them terrorists would require attribution. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 13:01, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Further suggestions, including new sentences, should be made under a new section in a new edit request. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 13:02, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

This suggestion relates to terminology, supporting arguments made above by DennisSher:

"Terrorist" to describe Hamas is reasonable for several RS reasons. First, we must recognize John Simpson's piece as the joke he intends it to be. Mr. Simpson frontloads his commentary with his own terrorist action against English grammar in substituting "who" for the proper "whom" - telling those of us who acknowledge context how he really feels - and how he sees his role as a messenger of ideas. In short, this Cambridge-educated British journalist - who understands English usage better than most of us - delivers a deliberate signal of satirical intent about his (assigned?) subject matter. Should we fail to see the "tell" by someone of Simpson's pedigree as an indication to take his polemic not too seriously, we are the fools, not he.

More to the technical point: "Extremist" and "terrorist" references from the Guardian underpin any argument that Hamas is not merely a "militant" group akin to Sandanistas or the Symbionese Liberation Army. If not "terrorist group," then "extremist" might best describe the group, as Hamas 1) is repeatedly reported to take "extremist" actions, 2) described by RSs as "extremist" and 3) composed a charter whose principles and goals are clearly founded in extremism (and whose initial version specifically advocates genocide - which its Oct. 7 attack supports, despite amended 2017 language that purports to walk back the genocidal mission per se). These three CNN sources - this one about a Gazan - contradict the source provided above, all terming Hamas and/or its actions as "terrorist."

While nuances of language use change with the times, describing Hamas as merely "militant" fails to meet the historical moment while simultaneously discrediting both the authority and credibility Wikepedia seeks to curate. Jetpower (talk) 03:09, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

@Jetpower: Connecting the grammar of the BBC piece to infer a satirical message is a bit of a stretch, and does not comply with our original research policy. The three CNN sources you cited are all opinion sources, and their regular coverage still refers to Hamas as militants (ex. here). An opinion piece would require attribution, as mentioned before.

Given the highly contentious nature of this topic, any change in Hamas' label, whether to extremist or terrorist, would probably require an WP:RFC. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 03:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Israel Hayom article proving there were tied children, debunking Haaretz claim plus Hamas-Massacre.net has picture of burnt bodies with hands tied, some of whom are children

Extended violation of the extended confirmed restriction

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

According to this article "Haaretz later found the claim regarding the tied children was false" but according to this article in the Israel Hayom newspaper https://www.israelhayom.co.il/news/local/article/14710533 (translated from Hebrew) ZAKA volunteers have said they witnessed that "They (Hamas terrorists) tied people to a chair with their hands behind, and set the building on fire while they were still alive" • "A father, mother and three children are tied together and shot - an entire family was slaughtered in cold blood". Yossi Landau has also said: "I saw about 20 children handcuffed from behind" Additionally, the site Hamas-Massacre.net which documented all of Hamas crimes and has all the pictures and videos of the kidnappings, murders and body mutilations has several pictures of burnt bodies with their hands tied and by taking a quick glance one can see, that some of those bodies belong to children and at least minors. Since I have a weak stomach I don't want to have to look again at those pictures again, so I did not put a link to the pictures themselves but you can find those pictures under the "Murdered in Their Homes" section and "The Nova Party Massacre" section https://www.hamas-massacre.net/ So I request that someone will add those sources to the article and write: "But although Haaretz claimed that there were no tied children, Israel Hayom newspaper article has said by using the testimonies of ZAKA volunteers who actually were at the crime scene that there were indeed tied children some of them were also tied together with their parents. and some of the pictures in the "Murdered in Their Homes" and "The Nova Party Massacre sections at Hamas-Massacre.net included burnt bodies of minors and even children with their hands tied." Thank you. Tikatan (talk) 18:09, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

This is the article about the Be'eri Massacre. The Israel Hayom article does not give the location where people were tied to each other and then burned alive. Further down in the article it does mention several atrocities carried out in Be'eri but none of them is about the tied children, which was the original claim. Please review what this article says already about the atrocities committed in Be'eri and let us know if there's something you'd like to add. Alaexis_¿question? 21:38, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

To add to this, there's no reason to consider "Hamas-Massacre.net" a reliable source. There's no about page containing information indicating who is running it or anything that would indicate that its reputable. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:45, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Does it really matter who runs it? Most of the videos and pictures there are from Arabic telegram channels such as Gaza Now filmed by Hamas Go Pro cameras and also uploaded by the Israeli official twitter account, for example this picture: https://twitter.com/Israel/status/1718265852301136072/photo/1 this picture:https://twitter.com/Israel/status/1713092721227743739/photo/1 this picture: https://twitter.com/Israel/status/1712065956351000853/photo/1 this video: https://twitter.com/Israel/status/1711016332089606406/video/1 this picture: https://twitter.com/Israel/status/1710979198741827924/photo/1 and this video: https://twitter.com/Israel/status/1710690179558555708/video/1 Additionally a lot of big news media confirmed the videos and pictures in that site, like the CNN https://edition.cnn.com/videos/world/2023/11/01/the-lead-jake-tapper-israel-forensics.cnn the BBC https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67343928 CTV https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/israel-releases-horrific-images-of-slain-children-after-hamas-attack-1.6598070 Reuters https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-shares-video-hamas-gunman-executing-woman-oct-7-2023-11-20/ and many many more. Plus in most of the pictures background there is a ZAKA bag (the blue and white bag) since I'm a native Hebrew speaker I can see clearly that the acronym זק"א (ZAKA) is written there, and in the pictures with no ZAKA bag for example the pictures with bodies in the streets, I can see Hebrew language signs in the background and me being an Israeli I'm able to recognize the towns and the kibbutzim where those atrocities took place, in the Nova Party Massacre Section you can see the emblem of ZAKA on the car with the Israeli number plate next to the pile of burnt bodies and you can see the ZAKA bags as well, in the videos of Israelis hiding I can hear the partygoers speaking Hebrew and in some of the kidnapping videos you can see people who different news media have said that Hamas kidnapped them such as Noa Argamani https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2OEktej8pk Bibas Family https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Y9fHUOhTMY and Naama Levy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FVUxvp6Ah0. and in the Mass rapes section the videos are from the Israeli Police https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/b1gyfliba

https://www.mako.co.il/men-men_news/Article-cbf7c1400693c81027.htm (articles in Hebrew) it also says that men were also raped in order to humiliate. To sum it up Hamas-Massacre.net is a reliable source since there are many news media backing the pictures and videos posted there, and both as an Israeli and a native Hebrew speaker I see the ZAKA bags in the horrible pictures and the Israeli number plates on the cars, I see the Hebrew language signs on the streets and I recognize the sidewalks and the appearance of the towns and kibbutzim and I can very clearly hear Hebrew in the videos where the partygoers were hiding and you can recognize the hostages that were kidnapped. Hamas-Massacre.net is a site which purpose is to put all the proof, all the pictures, all the videos and all the testimonies taken by Hamas Go Pro cameras, ZAKA, the victims/survivors, security cameras and Israeli Police which were spreaded by news media and telegram channels in one *single* place.

Tikatan (talk) 00:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

It does though, "Yossi Landau a senior volunteer of the organization, shares his feelings from the sights he witnessed in Kibbutz Be'eri. "We saw children hugged with their mothers, shot. We saw parents and children in the same room, facing each other. Their hands were cuffed behind their backs. By all indications, they must have been severely abuse"

Tikatan (talk) 00:14, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Yossi Landau's testimonies have been shown to be unsubstantiated time and time again. It's a wonder why his material still keeps cropping up. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:30, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

What the Haaretz piece says is that the ZAKA volunteers have been unreliable narrators and have claimed things that have turned out not to be true. nableezy - 00:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Can you give me the unpaywalled version? I'ts paywalled not only in English but in Hebrew as well so how could someone know what Haaretz actually wrote there? the other source is middleeasteye which says a few number of things and then adds "According to Haaretz, these allegations were false" but how can I know the middleeasteye didn't just made it up? they didn't give a screenshot or anything and as I said the actual article is paywalled. In the Israel Hayom article Yossi Landau says "We saw parents and children in the same room, facing each other. Their hands were cuffed behind their backs" he doesn't say how much children he saw cuffed together with their parents. And you know a lot of commenters in the Hebrew version of the Haaretz article were mad at the title for presenting some atrocities as things that never happened instead of things that DID happen just not in the way they were spread, according to one commenter Haaretz said there was no baby in the oven BUT there were indeed burnt babies and someone must have thought that they were burnt because they were put in the oven https://www.haaretz.co.il/news/politics/2023-12-03/ty-article-magazine/.premium/0000018c-2036-d21c-abae-76be08fe0000?lts=1701608901038 (translate the comments). Plus, you can actually go to Hamas-Massacre.net and see burnt bodies of adults, kids and babies and just so you won't be able to say that "we can't know where are those pictures from", you can see in the background actual ZAKA bags which are the blue and white bags with the acronym זק"א ZAKA on them and sometimes you can also see the ZAKA emblem in Hebrew on their volunteers chests or cars, So basically people cherry picked things from Haaretz's title as usual without actually reading the article and understanding that ZAKA's volunteers reports on who was murdered and how much were murdered and what happened to their bodies (if their body was burned, mutilated, raped etc) are true while SOME of the stories on how whoever was murdered was murdered are not true. So there's no proof there were only 9 murdered children in Be'eri and even if there were there's also no proof none of them were cuffed, while there is proof in the Israel Hayom article that some murdered children in Be'eri were handcuffed.

Tikatan (talk) 02:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Here is an archived version. nableezy - 03:11, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

As I said even if "only" 9 children were murdered in Be'eri, the article does not say that none of them were cuffed, this page (Be'eri Massacre) says that there were no tied (cuffed) children because there were only 9 children and Yossi Landau said that he saw 20 burnt bodies of tied children, so maybe there weren't 20 tied children but who said none of the 9 were tied? Yossi Landau has reported he saw in kibbutz Be'eri children cuffed together with their parents.

And like I said if people couldn't cherry pick from titles only, they could see that as I said ZAKA's volunteers reports on who was murdered, how many were murdered and what happened to their body is true just sometimes the story on how they were murdered is not true, like Haaretz did say that Hamas murdered a pregnant Bedouin woman by shooting at her stomach like ZAKA said, the only thing wrong in ZAKA's report is that Hamas didn't cut her umbilical cord. Same thing with the baby in the oven story, ZAKA is correct and there were indeed burnt babies, the only think wrong in their report is that they weren't burnt in an oven, although it actually wasn't even ZAKA who said it.

Speaking about the burnt babies, Haaretz said in this article that only one baby died but if you check Hamas-Massacre.net you would find several pictures and videos of burnt babies (some even beheaded) as well as pictures of dead but not burnt babies, as I said those pictures and videos have in the background the ZAKA bag and emblem which proves that those pictures were indeed taken in Israel - some were even posted by Israel's official account in Twitter and Instagram, so if there was "only" one dead baby how come we have several pictures of dead babies? This of course means that like any newspaper in the world Haaretz is not 100% perfect and not 100% reliable, so you can't take every word they say as God's word and should check other sources as well. This isn't their first time being incorrect by the way, they posted a few days ago another article which made both the Israeli police and IDF call out their bullshit and its author had to apologize (in Hebrew of course) which makes them lose their credibility.

Going back to the original topic, if you are willing to take Haaretz's word for everything although they were wrong in this article by saying only one baby died despite the fact that there are pictures and videos of several dead babies burnt and not, then there is no reason not to take Yossi's Landau word if he was wrong by saying that there were 20 burnt and tied children in Be'eri (but there were definitely burnt children in Be'eri according to this article just not 20 children and not tied https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/rj4bsuz46) and plus he was actually at the crime scene and saw most of the bodies unlike Haaretz.

Tikatan (talk) 19:02, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for leaving a message at my talk page, I've missed your reply here.

@Tikatan, I'd suggest taking one step back and clearly explaining what you propose to add or change in the article. If it's to add more details about the atrocities, they should be reliably sourced. I would suggest to use regular media outlets (like mako and ynet) rather than Hamas-massacre.net since it's unclear who runs it and it could be challenged as a self-published source. It may be reliable, but we'd need some confirmation from other sources that this is indeed the case.

Regarding the "two piles of ten children each were tied to the back, burnt to death" claim, Haaretz explicitly calls it "incorrect." So we have two options: either we mention it and then say that it turned out to be incorrect, or we remove it from the article altogether. The October 15 Israel Hayom article quotes David Landau saying that there were children with their hands cuffed, rather than stating it as fact. Considering that his other early reports turned out to be incorrect, it's better to find more recent sources that confirm it. Alaexis_¿question? 07:37, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

There is a Twitter post by Israel's official account promoting Hamas-Massacre.net

https://twitter.com/Israel/status/1720088273664811259

There's also this article In The Jerusalem Post

https://m.jpost.com/israel-news/article-771522

And this article In Business Day

https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/life/2023-12-05-worst-massacre-of-jews-since-the-holocaust-still-not-enough-for-some/

I believe it's enough to make it reliable for you, although for me maybe because I'm Israeli and can speak Hebrew it was easier to me to know it's reliable because I could see all the ZAKA bags and emblems in the background, I could see the Hebrew Language signs in the streets, I could recognise the sidewalks and kibbutzim, I could hear and understand the Hebrew that was spoken in videos of Israelis hiding and in the videos of testimonies as well, and I also remembered that I saw some of those videos on Telegram channels back in October 7th to be better informed on what exactly happened , so scrolling through the site I understood that its entire purpose is to put all the proof we have about the massacre in one single place.

And there other sources about handcuffed children in Be'eri first one is from Haaretz Hebrew version,

https://www.haaretz.co.il/news/politics/2023-10-09/ty-article-live/0000018b-1148-dcc2-a99b-1559609d0000 scroll down a bit until you find a mini article by Michael Hauser Tov who says and quotes Netanyahu that there were handcuffed children who were executed in Be'eri, I'm not sure if it's okay to use what a Prime Minister says as a source but if not then there is another source which is basically a YouTube video by The Economic Times which features IDF spokesman Jonathan Concricus saying starting in minute 2:37 that "I think we can now say with relative confidence that this unfortunately what happened in Be'eri, this is what Hamas did to Israeli Civilians - there waw bodies scattered everywhere mutilated, women and children that were handcuffed and shot executed, houses torched and burned and people who were either burned inside or suffocated those that Hamas couldn't get in and forced them out - those were the scenes in kibbutz Be'eri. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeolZzOIznM

Tikatan (talk) 19:06, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Israel isnt a reliable source either, and regardless per WP:A/I/PIA accounts must be extended confirmed to participate in these discussions. The reason for that restriction is demonstrated here, in which patiently explaining why outdated sources that have since been debunked should not be regurgitated as though it were the current understanding of the facts has not shown any indication of guiding a well-intentioned (and I have no doubt you are well-intentioned for the record) towards a better understanding of our policies. Please, if you would like to edit about this topic, work in other areas of the encyclopedia so that you can understand policies like WP:NPOV and WP:RS and WP:AGEMATTERS and WP:V and so on. nableezy - 20:04, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

@Tikatan, you didn't answer my question "what [do] you propose to add or change in the article"? You can use the following template (the content is just an example).

Alaexis_¿question? 21:19, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

In this article it is written that: "Haaretz later found the claim (of Yossi Landau) regarding the tied children was erroneus" so the way I see it it basically means that because Haaretz "debunked" Yossi Landau's claim regarding the 20 burnt tied children in Be'eri (which according to this article and this article there were burnt children in Be'eri just not tied or 20) it means there were no tied murdered children in Be'eri. So I want you to add that there were tied murdered children in Be'eri and that Yossi Landau wasn't all wrong, that's why I want to ask you if the YouTube video that I sent of The Economic Times featuring IDF spokesman Jonathan Conricus confirming there were tied or more correct to say handcuffed murdered children in Be'eri a good enough source?because if yes it confirms the article in its current form is inaccurate, so I propose that you'll use the Economic Times YouTube video as a source and add: But, although Haaretz said that the claim was erroneus, IDF spokesman Jonathan Conricus confirmed there were indeed tied, better to say handcuffed children in Kibbutz Be'eri and this part is a recommendation: additionally, according to i24news (this article) there were also indeed burnt children in Kibbutz Be'eri. You can change the wording if you wish to, since I'm not the best at explaining honestly. I hope you understood.

Tikatan (talk) 00:03, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

i24 is the original source of the 40 dead babies lie, it is silly to try to keep using them. nableezy - 00:13, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

And? Haaretz had a lot of incorrect reports as well, I actually pointed out 2 incorrect reports from Haaretz in one of my other comments to you - if you don't remember you're welcome to go back and read again.

But just in order there won't be a pointless fight between us about that, here are other sources

I added 2 Haaretz articles because if you think that Haaretz is 100% reliable you will 100% trust those articles, amirite?

Tikatan (talk) 02:18, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

The problem with that is that you want to say that these bodies were incinerated by Hamas when there is reporting on Israeli tanks firing on Israeli homes as well. See for example Haaretz. nableezy - 03:14, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh great we went from the stage of denial to the stage of blaming, from denying there were even burnt bodies to begin with to blaming Israel for burning their own citizens... Reminds me of the classic "ummm but akshally it wAs the jEwS wHo dId tHe HoLoCaUSt tO gAiN tHE wOrLDs' sYmPaTHy. Also you are making it very clear you did not read any article that I sent because if you did, you would see that it is written that Hamas burned homes they couldn't get into thus making everyone inside burn alive and after Hamas killed and mutilated and raped bodies they burned them, Hamas-Massacre.net has a lot of proof, here is one of them...

Graphic Warning

Notice the ZAKA bodybag? you know the blue and white bag with the זק"א ZAKA acronym written on it in Hebrew? the one that you were supposed to see if you actually looked at pictures and videos on that site because it is enough proof those pictures and videos were taken in Israel?

Huh no? Well not surprising

(And you maybe won't also deny that babies were beheaded and burnt because unfortunately pictures and videos of that with ZAKA bags in the background are there as well)

I gave you an Haaretz article that said that Hamas burned homes with people inside and you gave me an Haaretz article that says Israeli tanks fired at homes without knowing if there are civilians inside or not, apart from the fact it literally says in the article that no civilian was harmed and the tanks "only" shot the home entrances, and only the terrorists were killed, there was a similar article by Haaretz that said that a police helicopter killed Nova partygoers which was proven by the Israeli Police to be false because the first helicopter arrived only in 11:12 AM which was almost 5 hours after the Hamas massacre has begun, and if you thought of mentioning "Hannibal Directive" then sorry to sadden you, but first it was actually canceled in 2016 by the chief of general staff Eisenkot, which means that since 2016 Hannibal Directive doesn't exist and is basically illegal, and second thing even if it still existed it talks about shooting when a kidnapping is still happening i.e. when Hamas terrorists were in the middle of taking Israelis to Gaza, and not when those Israelis already became hostages, third thing is that the Hannibal Directive talks only about soldiers and not civilians, fourth thing is that in 2011 it was changed so that it wouldn't be allowed to shoot if the mean is to kill the kidnapped soldier because "....with the understanding that the value of the kidnapped's life is higher than the price of the kidnapping"

So the Hannibal Directive basically talks about being allowed if a kidnapping is STILL happening to shoot at a soldier ONLY but not in way that endangers their life and risks killing them, and that Directive was also cancelled in 2016... So make of all this information that I'm sure you never heard about about what you will.

source

So.... If you choose to believe the Israeli Police then there was no tanks as well since it means Haaretz was proven to lie before with the helicopters, and you said that you don't believe ZAKA because they lied a lot or whatever so it would be kinda hypocritical for you to not act the same with Haaretz.

But - if you choose to believe Haaretz which means that you believe there were tanks shooting at homes then it still means Israel didn't kill its own citizens because it's also written that only terrorists died in the end and the tanks "only" shot the home entrances as I said before, but you know what - let's say the tanks DID accidentally kill Israelis then there is still enough proof that Hamas burnt Israelis themselves in all the articles I gave you.

Oh and don't think of giving me the testimony of the IDF female tankist soldier who said that a panicked soldier told her to shoot at a home although he wasn't sure if there were Israelis inside, because right after she said she was told that, she said that she DIDN'T shoot because it was an Israeli community. (plus the testimony was from her fighting in Kibbutz Holit, not Be'eri so it's irrelevant to Be'eri anyway)

Plus it's kinda weird to me you choose to believe Haaretz only when they say that Israel was shooting at their own citizens or that some atrocities didn't happen - but you don't believe Haaretz when they say that Hamas burned homes with people inside hence burning them alive because they couldn't get into their homes.

Very weird.... it's almost like you have a specific agenda I wonder what is that agenda... Oh! Maybe I do know what is your agenda, Forgive me for stalking your User page but in the bottom of it I actually found a very interesting text... Here it is:

"This user supports the right of all individuals and groups to violently resist military aggression and occupation by other parties, but due to an alleged consensus he is disallowed from naming particular individuals or groups which certain administrators find to be unacceptable." We both know who are those "groups" and "individuals" . wow it's no wonder you kept protecting Hamas, playing down ZAKA and ignoring all proof and evidence I gave you during our long discussions, and it's because you are to put it simply a Hamas and Hezbollah sympathizer. Big Shame.

Since I don't wish to keep talking to a Hamas and Hezbollah sympathizer with a very "locked" agenda, I would rather stop here. Honestly I hope that one day you won't be so full of hate supporting terror groups and be able to find peace and be more positive.

Tikatan (talk) 01:49, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

P.S - forgot to put a link to how a ZAKA bodybag looks like for comparisons in case you're too lazy to look it up yourself Picture Tikatan (talk) 01:58, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the Holocaust denial quip, Ill repeat that you may not participate in this discussion and may only make edit-requests per WP:ARBPIA. Ill be leaving you the notification on your talk shortly. And despite your diatribe above, reliable sources dispute what you imagine you know. We base our articles on sources, not the imaginations of partisan editors. nableezy - 03:49, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

@Tikatan, thanks, I've added some information from the article you linked. I don't think that this should be added as a refutation of Haaretz claims. It's not - logically there is no contradiction, and chronologically both reports precede it.

Overall, the article makes it clear that atrocities were committed and even though one report turned out to be incorrect, the reader wouldn't end up thinking that the massacre didn't happen. Alaexis_¿question? 22:15, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

@Alaexis I'm sorry but I didn't quite understand what information from the sources I gave you added? I just wanted you to add that there were tied or better to say handcuffed murdered children in Be'eri per this source, and there were children burnt by Hamas in Be'eri per this source this source this source and this source, and you're right the reader wouldn't think the massacre didn't happen but they WOULD think that there were no tied murdered children and no burnt children in Be'eri which is totally wrong. This is why I'm asking you to add that there were tied and burnt children in Be'eri so the reader won't think that because of one false report there were no tied or burnt children.

Tikatan (talk) 00:59, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

We dont include later debunked claims from sources prior to the debunking. And, again, you may not participate in this discussion. nableezy - 03:52, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

The current wording is misleading, in my opinion. It does not convey the information from the references properly and fairly.‎
At the time of writing, it says:‎

Yossi Landau, regional head of the relief organisation ZAKA, stated to Sky News that around 80% of the bodies at Be'eri and Kfar Aza showed signs of torture, and that he found "two piles of ten children each were tied to the back, burnt to death" at Be'eri.[40] Haaretz later found the claim regarding the tied children was false, because the list of the dead at Be'eri only includes 9 children.[20]

With the way this is written, I think most readers will interpret it as "Landau was completely wrong (probably lying) and also 9 children died". But, going by the Haaretz article referenced, there is still a lot of truth to Landau's claim.
1. Children were murdered.
2. Children were bound.
3. Some homes were burned with people still inside.
4. It's possible that there was 20 dead bodies in one place, albeit not all of them children.
5. The article describes a case that at least the article author thinks is similar, where 13 hostages were murdered it one place including a pair of 12 year old twins.
Witnesses of crime frequently get the details seriously wrong, so I think it's possible that no one lied.
Also, I don't think Landau meant that he himself saw this (as the Wikipedia article now says). He was speaking on behalf of his organization and used the pronoun "we". And one of his personnel was really incessive that he/she saw the children piles, although he/she didn't say it was at Be'eri. Torr3 (talk) 20:55, 13 December 2023 (UTC)