# data[].attributes.body
Sari, Aurel. "Israeli - Hamas 2023 Symposium - Facts Matter: Assessing the Al- Ahli Hospital Incident" Articles of War, 19 October, 2023, lieber.westpoint.edu/facts-matter-assessing-al-ahli-hospital-incident/. Accessed 8 May, 2024.

# data[].attributes.body
Toler, Aric, et al. "A Close Look at Some Key Evidence in the Gaza Hospital Blast" The New York Times, 24 October, 2023. nytimes.com/2023/10/24/world/middleeast/gaza-hospital-israel-hamas-video.html. Accessed 8 May, 2024.

# data[].attributes.body
Third Committee Condemns Brutal Bombing of Gaza Hospital, Enforced Displacement of Palestinian Citizens, Emphasizes Urgent Need for Unimpeded Humanitarian Aid. United Nations, 18 October, 2023. press.un.org/en/2023/gashc4386.doc.htm.

# data[].attributes.headline
The perspective/ bias within this article is...

# data[].attributes.subject
The perspective/ bias within this article is...

# data[].attributes.body
According to my bias worksheet, the following elements of this article display bias towards neither sides because it strictly stays factual and have support on both sides. The image choice leaned more towards a Palestinian bias but the word choice throughout the article is being very clear and supporting Israeli perspective.

# data[].attributes.headline
The perspective/bias within this article is...

# data[].attributes.subject
The perspective/bias within this article is...

# data[].attributes.body
In analyzing this source for bias, the use of images, word choice, and headlines demonstrated that this article was bias towards Israel. This is because the word choice claims it was an explosion, malfunctioned rockets, and that israel has been "blamed". The headline is very eyecatching by saying "A Close Look at Some Key Evidence in the Gaza Hospital Blast". by using the word evidence its saying that this is factual information and is very reliable, and using the word blast keeps it more nuetral than the word bombing or explosion. Lastly, in the very beginning it starts off with the rocket blasting then falling, Israeli people are claiming it was a Palestinian rocket that broke and malfunctioned cauing an explosion on the hospital.

# data[].attributes.headline
United Nations- Brutal bombing of Gaza hospital

# data[].attributes.subject
United Nations- Brutal bombing of Gaza hospital

# data[].attributes.headline
The perspective/bias within this article is... 

# data[].attributes.subject
The perspective/bias within this article is... 

# data[].attributes.body
While using my bias worksheet notes, I discovered this website is focused on the Palestinian perspective due to the use of language and bias by headline. The author of this website is unclear but the website is from the United Nations. We previously learned that the United Nations passed the resolution 181 for the Jewish people to come into Palestine yet they used vulgar language against the Israeli people. They even claimed that "Israel has not spared a single Palestinian family in Gaza".

# data[].attributes.body
The potential audience is anyone who was effected or blamed for the bombing as well as those who are investing in the truth and nothing but the truth.

# data[].attributes.body
The potential audience is Israeli citizens who feel they are being blamed and targeted for the explosion, as well as anyone who is invested on hearing both sides of the story to see what alines with each other and whether or not to believe whose fault it is with the evidence given.

# data[].attributes.body
The potential audience for this source is the effected Palestinian people and others who are supporters of Palestine. The United Nations wrote this document with clear intent to show their support for Palestine and portray Israel's physical and mental abuse towards the Palestinian families.

# data[].attributes.body
The central claims are that 500 people were killed in the hospital where the explosion occurred and both Palestinians and Israeli's are denying responsibility on who caused this incident.

# data[].attributes.body
The central claims are that is was not Israel's fault and that the truth must be shared. The evidence is claiming that it was a Palestinian rocket that had malfunctioned and exploded on the hospital. Israeli people are truly enraged how everyone is blaming then for this incident.

# data[].attributes.body
The central claims are that Palestinians are in serious danger and are suffering daily but the brutal physical and mental abuse from the Israeli people. Furthermore, Urgent aid and care is needed for the Palestinian people and they need help from neighboring countries.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Third Committee Condemns Brutal Bombing of Gaza Hospital, Enforced Displacement of Palestinian Civilians, Emphasizes Urgent Need for Unimpeded Humanitarian Aid | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Yesterday’s attack on the Al-Ahli Hospital in Gaza, which resulted in hundreds of civilian deaths, is a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law, delegates told the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) today, as they also engaged in a series of interactive dialogues on the right to education, cultural rights and the impact of climate change on persons with albinism.

# data[].attributes.body
"The observer for the State of Palestine said that, for 11 days, the world has witnessed epic human suffering, with Israel brutally killing over 3,000 people in the Gaza Strip - over half being women and children" (United Nations).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Regardless of who ultimately bears responsibility for the explosion at the Al-Ahli Hospital, the loss of innocent life is awful. That much should be common ground. Yet the incident also underlines that facts matter. While it may be tempting to allocate blame in response to the suffering playing out on our TV screens and our social media feeds, rushing to conclusions and throwing around allegations of war crimes or worse without at least a reasonably firm understanding of the facts does not help. Get the facts, identify the law, assess. In that order.

The importance of this point may be illustrated with a brief overview of how different factual scenarios lead to dramatically different legal outcomes under the customary rules of the law of armed conflict, which apply both to Israel and to Palestinian armed groups. Consider the following hypothetical scenarios.
Possible Scenarios Scenario One
The IDF deliberately attacked the Al-Ahli Hospital without the latter qualifying as a military objective. Civilian hospitals are civilian objects that enjoy special protection under the law of armed conflict and must be respected and protected at all times. , and the medical personnel inside a hospital and in its vicinity also enjoy protection. Carrying out a deliberate attack directly against a civilian hospital and protected persons would be an that also amounts to a wounded and sick . It cannot be justified. indiscriminate attack
Scenario Two Scenario Three
The IDF conducted an attack against a military objective located in the vicinity of the Al-Ahli Hospital, rather than the hospital itself, and caused harm to the hospital incidentally. If the IDF expected its attack to cause such incidental harm, it would have had to comply with the proportionality rule, ensuring that the expected level of civilian harm was not excessive in relation to the military advantage anticipated. If the IDF did not expect the hospital to suffer any harm, or expected significantly lower levels of injury or damage than actually occurred, this would raise the question whether it took all feasible precautions to avoid, and in any event to minimize, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects. For instance, did those who planned and carried out the attack base their decisions on the information from all sources available to them at the relevant time?
Scenario Four
A weapon used by the IDF in an attack against another target malfunctioned and hit the hospital unintentionally. Here too the question is whether the IDF complied with the precautionary duty to avoid, and in any event to minimize, incidental civilian harm. If it was reasonably foreseeable and likely that a weapon might hit the hospital by accident, then all feasible steps had to be taken to avoid, or at least minimize, the eventuality of incidental civilian harm.
Scenario Five Scenario Six
Hamas or another Palestinian armed group fired a missile at a target located in Israel, the missile was intercepted by the IDF and the debris fell onto the Al-Ahli Hospital. As far as the Palestinian armed group is concerned, its obligation not to carry out indiscriminate attacks, as discussed in the previous scenario, is engaged. As far as the IDF is concerned, if it was reasonably foreseeable and likely that intercepting the missile would cause civilian harm, its precautionary duty to take all feasible steps to avoid, or at least minimize, such harm was engaged.

The bottom line is that witnessing tragedies such as the death of civilians on one side does not necessarily allow us to conclude, without more, that the other side failed to comply with its legal obligations.
Back to reality
Now that more of the relevant facts have come to light, where does this leave us? As noted earlier, it seems that the explosion at the Al-Ahli Hospital was caused by the malfunctioning of a rocket fired by Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). The legal implications were sketched out in Scenario Five above. A few more points are worth adding.

The use of weapons that are indiscriminate by nature and the conduct of attacks that are indiscriminate because they are not directed at a specific military objective is prohibited whether or not they succeed in hitting their original target. In other words, the fact that the PIJ rocket disintegrated before it reached Israel does not transform what was an indiscriminate weapon and an indiscriminate attack into discriminate ones; the launch of the rocket was a violation of the law of armed conflict on these grounds, notwithstanding its malfunction.

A party to the conflict must also give effective advance warning of attacks which may affect the civilian population, unless circumstances do not permit. If PIJ failed to give such a warning ahead of its rocket attack, this too was in breach of the law of armed conflict. Finally, if PIJ located the military objectives used in the attack within or near , and it would have been feasible to avoid doing so, it committed yet another breach. densely populated areas
Concluding Remarks
Experience teaches us that compliance with the rules of war is patchy and that respect for the law runs deeper with some belligerents than others. The longer the current round of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict continues, the more violations we are likely to witness. It is vital, both in the interest of the rule of law and for the sake of those caught up in the hostilities, that we demand compliance and call out violations-but we have to get the facts and the law right.

***
Dr. Aurel Sari is an Associate Professor of Public International Law at the University of Exeter and a Fellow of Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe.
Photo credit: Unsplash

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Israel - Hamas 2023 Symposium - Facts Matter: Assessing the Al-Ahli Hospital Incident - Lieber Institute West Point

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The recent explosion at Al-Ahli Arab Hospital underlines that facts matter, as different factual scenarios lead to different legal outcomes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Close Look at Some Key Evidence in the Gaza Hospital Blast

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A widely cited missile video does not shed light on what happened, a Times analysis concludes.

# data[].attributes.body
"Hamas has not produced a remnant of an Israeli munition or any physical evidence to back up its claim that Israel is responsible" (Toler).

# data[].attributes.body
"regardless of who ultimately bears responsibility for the explosion at the Al - Ahli Hospital, the loss of innocent life is awful. That much should be common ground. Yet the incident also underlines that facts matter" (Sari).

# data[].attributes.body
Majority of the people are supporting Palestinian people due to the fact that Israeli people invaded then killed thousands of innocent people, but the Israeli perspective is using important words to show their side such as "facts", "Malfunction", and "blame" to portray how they have been framed and blamed while they are claiming it was a Palestinian rocket malfunction.

# data[].attributes.body
By opening up your mind to look at multiple different perspectives and thoroughly identifying every aspect that could give a sense of bias or propaganda, we can gain a stronger understanding of the varying narratives present. Headlines, images, and word choice can easily persuade the audience as well as give off a potential bias towards a specific topic. In order to have a strong comprehension on a topic you need to look deeper into the text, note who the author is, what their claim or argument is, and use critical thinking to search for potential biases. For instance, in my research project I was required to find three perspectives on the same topic, the Al-Ahli Hospital bombing. In the Palestinian perspective they used strong word choice such as bombing and genocide, quotes from press conferences or even other countries leaders, and statistics like the number of deaths to get their point across. There was a clear preference for the Palestinian citizens in the article and the author made their argument very clear (United Nations). On the contrary, The Arab perspective used a more subtle tone and videos showing the blast prior to landing on the hospital. Their claim was that the Israeli people have been framed and people refuse to hear their side of the story because they have been portrayed as targeted and blamed due to their previous actions (Toler). This proves that it is required to not just read one article because you never fully hear the true story until you’ve heard both perspectives and as shown above both articles have very different views on the explosion. Lastly the neutral perspective has to be fully aware of the word choice and imagery to stay as unbiased as possible. Not only do they have to use neutral language but they also need to give information from both sides. For example the neutral perspective article I chose gives support towards both sides but claims “facts matter” (Sari). By using the words facts and statistics that give people a sense of confidence in their knowledge it opens up their mind to have the capability to get a better understanding of the bigger picture and not feel required to bias towards a group due to their flashier or bolder article. Therefore, in order to gain a strong understanding on a topic you need to thoroughly identify every possible bias and open your mind to every narrative given.