[Imustaskforhelp]

> Not flagging, but also not upvoting. One, it’s an ambiguous archive link

This wasn't the case with the previous post that I mentioned yet it got flagged

? . Two, I’m not getting the sense that the source is unbiased [1]. For a contentious topic, I want to form my opinions—and hear those of fellow HN users—around rock-solid sourcing.

When the post had gotten flagged/ I had thought of giving another link like msn (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/gaza-toddler-released-f...) and this is a bit more in-depth (https://www.msn.com/en-us/war-and-conflicts/military/palesti...)

But I found no articles as thorough as this one. I don't believe as to if anything is factually wrong

Also oops, yea I had just the link of archive.org and not the proper link (https://web.archive.org/web/20260328122756/https://www.middl...)

I am editing this for that, thank you for suggesting this!

Edit: I can't edit the hackernews post, I am a bit sorry then to hackernews community for just sharing the archive.org link but I had accidentally pasted just the archive link instead, a bit sorry about that, perhaps moderators (if they wish) can change to this particular link or if someone wants to read it: https://web.archive.org/web/20260328122756/https://www.middl...

[JumpCrisscross]

> I found no articles as thorough as this one. I don't believe as to if anything is factually wrong

Did a physician ever evaluate the child? And were the neighbours’ accounts that the child was unharmed when handed over by the father to the IDF independently verified?

Torturing a toddler wouldn’t be out of character for the IDF right now. But just because something is believable doesn’t mean it’s true. The fact that nobody else is reporting on this should be cause for pause.

[gibbitz]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/gaza-to...

There are details here including quotations from an unnamed doctor. If feel you can't trust the media credentials of the Independent, you could contact them for the identity of the unnamed doctor (who they are likely protecting based on the nature of the conflict) and ask them directly.

[dang]

The doctor is named in the article now, perhaps as part of a later edit.

Since people are questioning the objectivity of the other domain, we'll use this link you found for the merged thread. I'll put the original link in the top text.

[gibbitz]

Did you investigate it? If someone posted that Claude code created a new language that was typesafe and 50% more efficient for LLM coding and 20% faster for a human to review without any details about the language, would you not look it up?

No knock on you directly, just an observation about the attitude in our culture. If this is true a child was tortured, if it's false someone is lying and needs to be outed (with facts) so they are not trusted. Neither one is good but is no one looking into it?

[JumpCrisscross]

> Did you investigate it?

Nope. Rejecting a source doesn’t mean I am obligated to investigate it. As I said, whether this is true or not doesn’t seem particularly politically relevant. It would be interesting to know. But purely for curiosity, not because I think it will have practical effects.