nytimes.com
www.nytimes.com

The Israeli government did not tamper with the Hezbollah devices that exploded, defense and intelligence officials say. It manufactured them as part of an elaborate ruse.

In Lebanon, as Israel picked off senior Hezbollah commandos with targeted assassinations, their leader came to a conclusion: If Israel was going high-tech, Hezbollah would go low. It was clear, a distressed Hezbollah chief, Hassan Nasrallah, said, that Israel was using cellphone networks to pinpoint the locations of his operatives.

. . .

Israeli intelligence officials saw an opportunity.

Even before Mr. Nasrallah decided to expand pager usage, Israel had put into motion a plan to establish a shell company that would pose as an international pager producer.

By all appearances, B.A.C. Consulting was a Hungary-based company that was under contract to produce the devices on behalf of a Taiwanese company, Gold Apollo. In fact, it was part of an Israeli front, according to three intelligence officers briefed on the operation. They said at least two other shell companies were created as well to mask the real identities of the people creating the pagers: Israeli intelligence officers.

MBFC
Archive

  • AllNewTypeFaceEnglish
    933·
    2 months ago

    Everyone targeted was a member of an internationally recognised terrorist organisation, and there was no reason for non-members to ever have the pagers. There are questions about rules of engagement, but one thing this operation wasn’t technically is terrorism.

    • Mrkawfee@lemmy.worldEnglish
      276·
      2 months ago

      These devices exploded in public places without regard for collateral damage to civilians. It is yet another war crime by Israel in addition to being an act of terror.

      Also it’s just not true that everyone was a member of Hezbollah. These devices are used by medical staff in hospitals. Israel has form in targeting doctors and hospitals.

      • GBU_28@lemm.eeEnglish
        63·
        2 months ago

        I’m not defending it, but how is this different than targeted strikes with gps guided weapons, including the katanabomb? That also has collateral damage.

        One can suggest the west is engaged in terrorism in that way too, and I personally believe such strikes only create more terrorists.

        But clearly most of the global community agrees with certain targeted strikes on terrorists. This is just a particular flavor of it, and is another shitty feature of the modern “war on terror”.

        Another comment said that this is just going to further the violence for another decade (among the other shit Israel is up to) and I agree that the conflict IS the point.

        It fucking sucks.

        • AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.worldEnglish
          4·
          2 months ago

          People are pretty universal in their condemnation of American attacks that kill civilians, that’s why we see the names of those people less, Trump made that change. Biden rolled back those changes finally, but you’re not gonna believe some of the new rules, stuff like stop fucking drone striking civilians you sociopaths: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/01/us/biden-drone-strikes.html

          So yeah, America is both complicit in and has been (maybe still is) a sponsor of terror in many situations. And if one of those people affected by America in that way were to somehow get a bunch of cell phone bombs on GI’s hips while they were out with their families, to those people it might be justified while I would still call it terrorism.

          • GBU_28@lemm.eeEnglish
            2·
            2 months ago

            The point is half the planet “accepts” drone strikes of terrorists, on the justification that those terrorists are “conducting war” where ever they are.

            Note I am not holding this opinion, I’m describing it.

            I would assume Israel is riding along the same idea.

            Again, not my idea.

            • AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.worldEnglish
              22·
              2 months ago

              I get what you’re saying, but my point is it’s not really accepted. It’s actually an incredibly controversial process that has recently been updated in the US to include not targeting civilians specifically.

              Totally respect it’s not your idea, I’m just pointing out that I think it’s much more complicated when you involve civilian collateral damage, which is actually terrorism in a mask with an overcoat.

              • GBU_28@lemm.eeEnglish
                3·
                2 months ago

                Yes agree. It’s just that in some shape or form, western countries have been hunting terrorists and accepting (an amount) of collateral damage, for decades. It’s seen as “warfare”. I think we can assume Israel, in this case, thinks it’s aligned with global norms with the beeper method.

                I think it’s a whole lot grayer than that

    • Sanctus@lemmy.worldEnglish
      123·
      2 months ago

      Did you ask Fatima, the 10 year old girl killed in the explosions, if it was terrorism? Or would you just tell her she should not have had that pager? Fucken heartless statement right here.

      • chakan2@lemmy.worldEnglish
        411·
        2 months ago

        Did you ask the 1000 or so civilians that were raped and murdered for start this round of aggression of they’re ok with being raped and murdered?

    • SmilingSolaris@lemmy.worldEnglish
      123·
      2 months ago

      You cannot target with an explosive detonated at random. Lemme detonate a bomb next to your kid on a bus and see how you fucking feel when I tell you he was collateral and untargetted. See if that makes you feel better.