ashar

joined 1 year ago
[–] ashar@infosec.pub 2 points 2 weeks ago

The last civil war didn't quite totally destroy the country. Let us try again.

[–] ashar@infosec.pub 37 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The 40,000 killed statistic is reliable in that the killed persons name, identity number etc are reported to MoH officials and recorded by them, and the dead are seen by the officials. However the figure is a small subset of the actual number dead. 200,000 to 300,000 dead in Gaza in the past year is a conservative estimate.

[–] ashar@infosec.pub 2 points 3 weeks ago

The Economist had a good (probably unintentional) illustration of this.

[–] ashar@infosec.pub 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The killing according to the Gaza Ministry of Health statistics seems to be slowing down, but this is because the MoH is maintaining a very high bar for recording the deaths. The attacks on the population is continuing at what seems to be the same rate.

from: https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/how-gaza-health-ministry-counts-dead "The Ministry of Health is committed to registering only those who reach its hospitals or other emergency medical care facilities in the Gaza Strip. Consequently, the number of martyrs announced by the ministry does not necessarily represent the total number of casualties but only those that have been officially documented."

Given that state of the hospitals is dire (they have all been bombed and attacked), the slow down in recording of deaths correlates with and is due to the destruction of the MoH and general civilian infrastructure. The reduction in rate of killing recorded does not align with the rate of actual killing.

[–] ashar@infosec.pub 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Also, have you ever wondered why South Africa of all countries brought the case to the ICJ? Probably because they are deeply offended by the Israeli apartheid and they are even more against genocide?

Do you think it has anything to do with the fact that they entertained Hamas leaders as visiting dignitaries a month before they submitted the case? Um, yes. Why would they not do this?

Ah, you classify Hamas as a terrorist organisation.... Since South Africa regards Hamas to be a resistance movement (and this is the position of most of the world), coordinating with them would be sensible.

[–] ashar@infosec.pub 4 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Sir, your president is quoted in the genocide case (South Africa vs Israel) as one of the inciters to genocide.

 

An analysis of the MoH methodology, the exacerbating challenges it faces as the war continues, and estimates from independent researchers and humanitarian

https://dataactivists.org/estimating_death_toll_of_war_on_gaza/

[–] ashar@infosec.pub 10 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I wonder why Israel does not allow journalists into Gaza and has killed more than 170 Palestinian journalists?

 

An analysis of the Gaza MoH methodology, the exacerbating challenges it faces as the war continues, and estimates from independent researchers and humanitarian organisations.

[–] ashar@infosec.pub 13 points 4 weeks ago

See Brexit. That was to leave but same principle.

[–] ashar@infosec.pub 3 points 4 weeks ago

Are you actually saying that Sinwar's strategy paid off?

[–] ashar@infosec.pub 1 points 4 weeks ago

No, it would be war squared.

Or maybe war(war());

[–] ashar@infosec.pub 8 points 1 month ago

This is sort of report you get from a reporter under military censorship.

[–] ashar@infosec.pub 3 points 1 month ago

What sort of army does not fight against an invading force? Is this why Hezbollah exists?

 

The Israeli military on Saturday entered the compound of the Holy Family Catholic Parish in Gaza, shooting at anyone leaving the church.

The victims are an elderly woman and her daughter who rushed out of the building to rescue her mother. Israel has justified the attack, claiming the presence of a missile launcher in the parish.

 

A ddep dive review of the Reddit user interface by Peter Ramsay

#UX

 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 17 CFR Parts 229, 232, 239, 240, and 249 [Release Nos. 33-11216; 34-97989; File No. S7-09-22] RIN 3235-AM89

Cybersecurity Risk Management, Strategy, Governance, and Incident Disclosure AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is adopting new rules to enhance and standardize disclosures regarding cybersecurity risk management, strategy, governance, and incidents by public companies that are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Specifically, we are adopting amendments to require current disclosure about material cybersecurity incidents. We are also adopting rules requiring periodic disclosures about a registrant’s processes to assess, identify, and manage material cybersecurity risks, management’s role in assessing and managing material cybersecurity risks, and the board of directors’ oversight of cybersecurity risks. Lastly, the final rules require the cybersecurity disclosures to be presented in Inline eXtensible Business Reporting Language (“Inline XBRL”). DATES: Effective date: The amendments are effective [INSERT DATE 30 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]

view more: next ›