The Article from this post does also not suggest this to be entirely unknown information:
NAZA builds on revelations first published by the Israeli-Palestinian publication +972 Magazine, the Hebrew-language outlet Local Call and the Guardian between 2023 and 2025.
I appreciate your criticism. And I knew this would come up. But didn’t want to address it in my initial comment. I lose focus enough as it is.
But one reason documentation of these events is so important is the truth that “one day, everyone will have always been against this”. We are reaching that point of history and no one has been made to answer for the crimes. These outlets want you to believe they have always been covering this fairly. That is why they covered everything, buried the leads, and filled their coverage with justification and doubt for the crimes of Israel.
While it’s true the guardian covered this at the time, they did so in a very “but Hamas” and “Israel denies” manner that was very much manufacturing consent for the genocide at the time. It was more meant to create a defensive and doubt inducing coverage of the reports than it was to expose the crimes.
The Washington Post, the new York times, and the Guardian have been doing this type of coverage since the genocide began.
It’s why the article you linked is very focused on what became the fake separation of Microsoft from Israel later. Microsoft made a big show of “cutting of access to unit 8200” in late 2025. Which, was essentially just Microsoft handing over its cloud infrastructure to Israel and allowing it to be run independently from Microsoft infrastructure. Continuing to provide everything they needed; while introducing a false separation that continues to this day.
Read the guardian article for yourself. It is still covered with “activist say” and “some are accusing” and leaving the conclusion up to the reader. When that is not the job of investigative reporting or a news outlet. The job is to provide the statements and INVESTIGATE THEIR VALIDITY. And during the genocide and to this day. News outlets are incapable of calling a spade a spade when it comes to Israel. And more and more so, as Israel becomes unpopular, the companies and American politicians that supported and funded this genocide, will use this type of “we reported” defense to let them off the hook for what they justified at the time. We can’t let that happen.
I don’t think this part of your comment is fair.
The 972-article you provided even links bach to this Guardian article as one of its sources: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/23/israeli-military-gaza-war-microsoft .
The Article from this post does also not suggest this to be entirely unknown information:
I appreciate your criticism. And I knew this would come up. But didn’t want to address it in my initial comment. I lose focus enough as it is.
But one reason documentation of these events is so important is the truth that “one day, everyone will have always been against this”. We are reaching that point of history and no one has been made to answer for the crimes. These outlets want you to believe they have always been covering this fairly. That is why they covered everything, buried the leads, and filled their coverage with justification and doubt for the crimes of Israel.
While it’s true the guardian covered this at the time, they did so in a very “but Hamas” and “Israel denies” manner that was very much manufacturing consent for the genocide at the time. It was more meant to create a defensive and doubt inducing coverage of the reports than it was to expose the crimes.
The Washington Post, the new York times, and the Guardian have been doing this type of coverage since the genocide began.
It’s why the article you linked is very focused on what became the fake separation of Microsoft from Israel later. Microsoft made a big show of “cutting of access to unit 8200” in late 2025. Which, was essentially just Microsoft handing over its cloud infrastructure to Israel and allowing it to be run independently from Microsoft infrastructure. Continuing to provide everything they needed; while introducing a false separation that continues to this day.
Read the guardian article for yourself. It is still covered with “activist say” and “some are accusing” and leaving the conclusion up to the reader. When that is not the job of investigative reporting or a news outlet. The job is to provide the statements and INVESTIGATE THEIR VALIDITY. And during the genocide and to this day. News outlets are incapable of calling a spade a spade when it comes to Israel. And more and more so, as Israel becomes unpopular, the companies and American politicians that supported and funded this genocide, will use this type of “we reported” defense to let them off the hook for what they justified at the time. We can’t let that happen.