Latest Breaking News

that your main points/claims were in your view the absurdity of using the ratio of number of Palestinians killed to the number of meals served is real low and thus it strains credulity that the IDF would come up with such a plan if they are trying to maximize Palestinian deaths. A second main point or claim you make is it is absurd in your view to believe that the IDF was using the free food offered to Palestinians as bait to kill more Palestinians at a certain location, as to use your words there are logistical problems in doing that to maximum effect, as referenced by your claim that there were kills half a mile away.

However, when you write, "Even if accounts of the ubiquitous "local health officials and witnesses" are to be taken for granted as god's honest truth. . .", you are making a minor point or claim that it is at best uncertain or at most doubtful that such accounts can be trusted. Even if implies doubt or at least uncertainty. At least that's how I see it. And so i asked you what source do you trust, which you didn't address, because you are making other points rendering any answer of no consequence to your 2 main points or claims. But it is only natural when one reads your post to wonder what sources you trust given your uncertainty or doubt of the accuracy of such reports of these slaughters, even if it is just a minor point or claim.

But to get to one of your main points, you state that the article gives a ratio of number of Palestinians killed to the number of meals served is "one death per 10,000" meals served and then you proceed to use that "absurd" ratio to argue against claims you view as absurd, that the IDF would take a such a course of action given its low kill ratio. But the denominator in this ratio strikes me as off and faulty and misleading, given that each and every hungry Palestinian wasn't just having one meal out of every 10,000 that were served but probably had to go back numerous times to be fed sufficiently. If I and someone go out for dinner and we are each served 5 entrees and I eat 3 of them and my companion eats 2, and then I am struck dead by an IDF bomb while my companion lives to tell the tale, then 1 person died out of the 5 entrees that were served, (a 20% ratio) but there were only 2 people there at that restaurant and one died out of 2 (a 50% ratio), well, I think you should begin to see how faulty using number of meals served as a denominator. Given the uncertainty of the denominator, I don't think you can employ this ratio to argue that it is absurd that the IDF would come up with such a plan, given how little carnage it would yield, because this ratio gives you no clearcut evidence of how many were slaughtered per number of unique individuals who have eaten at such food distribution centers.