On October 7, a tragic event unfolded that has left many questioning what really happened on that fateful day. Recent reports and investigations have shed light on the devastating death toll and raised concerns about the actions of the Israeli military. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz revealed that a police investigation found that Israeli military helicopters not only targeted terrorists but also inadvertently struck some festivalgoers at the Re’im Music festival, resulting in a significant loss of life.
Additionally, Max Blumenthal, editor of The Grayzone, an independent American news website known for its controversial content, published an investigative report suggesting that the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) were also responsible for the deaths of numerous Israeli civilians. Blumenthal’s report combined testimonies from Israeli Apache helicopter pilots, accounts from Israeli survivors, and an analysis of photographs from the scene. These photos, which depicted damaged kibbutz houses and vehicles at the music festival, raised questions about the nature of the attack and the overall death count.
The death toll for October 7 stands at 1,200 for Israelis, a number which was revised down from the initially reported 1,400 by Israeli authorities. Tragically, Palestinian deaths from the same attack total at least 20,000, according to the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor.
Despite the passage of nearly two months since the incident, many unanswered questions remain, fueling a divisive discourse surrounding the Israel-Hamas conflict. The notion that Israel may have played a role in the high death toll has only further deepened the divide amongst people. The recent Haaretz report seems to lend credence to these concerns.
It is crucial to delve deeper into the events of October 7, as these details were used to justify Israel’s military campaign against Hamas throughout October. The impact of the attack and its gruesome details solidified unwavering support from Israel’s Western allies. Unfortunately, it also intensified tensions and rhetoric, with calls for actions such as taking out Hamas and flattening Gaza.
A recent interview between Max Blumenthal and Chris Hedges, a former foreign correspondent at The New York Times, further analyzed the events of October 7. Blumenthal pointed out the similarities between the photos of the music festival aftermath and scenes from Gaza following Israeli air strikes. These images depict the kind of damage typically caused by Apache helicopters, rather than gunmen armed with AK47s. Given that Israel did utilize Apache helicopters during the attack, these observations raise significant questions.
Blumenthal also highlighted Israeli UN ambassador Gilad Erdan’s appearance at the United Nations on October 26. During his speech, Erdan displayed a QR code captioned Scan to see Hamas’ atrocities, while accusing them of being animals. When scanned, the code revealed disturbing images of burned and dismembered bodies. Such gruesome damage to human bodies aligns with the impact of Hellfire missiles, a method employed by the Israeli army in the past. Curiously, these images were later deleted.
The possibility of the Hannibal Directive being utilized on October 7 has also emerged. According to Yehuda Shaul, a former Israeli infantry combat soldier and co-founder of Israeli NGO Breaking the Silence, the IDF is instructed to open fire without constraints to prevent abductions, even if it means risking the life of a captive soldier. The Hannibal Directive allows soldiers to use force not only against abductors but also targets junctions, roads, highways, and other potential routes that captors may take. Some analysts now believe that this directive may have been employed during the October 7 attack.
The directive’s underlying principle is that a dead soldier is preferable to a captive one, sending a message to the Israeli public that no cost will be spared to secure the release of captured soldiers. However, understanding this mindset raises questions about the potential implications for Israeli civilians. If a dead soldier is better than a captive one rhetoric exists, could it also apply to civilian casualties?
As the investigation into the events of October 7 continues, it is clear that there are numerous aspects that require further examination. The facts and details surrounding the incident have been used to justify military actions and fuel the conflict’s intensification. In order to achieve a comprehensive understanding and address the concerns raised, a renewed focus on what truly transpired on that day is imperative.
However, it is crucial to approach the subject with nuance and sensitivity, considering the lives and suffering of all individuals affected by this tragedy. By examining the available evidence and engaging in open dialogue, it may be possible to gain a clearer understanding of what really happened, foster reconciliation, and work towards preventing further loss of life and destruction.
