The framework that has been laid out by negotiators says that during a first six-week pause in the fighting, Hamas should release 40 of the remaining hostages, including all the women as well as sick and elderly men. In exchange, hundreds of Palestinian prisoners would be released from Israeli prisons.
Hamas has told international mediators – which include Qatar and Egypt - it does not have 40 living hostages who match those criteria for release, both sources said.
CNN’s record of the conditions of the hostages also suggests there are fewer than 40 living hostages who meet the proposed criteria.
Hamas just hasn't been taking civilian noncombatants as hostages like Israel has been doing.
Most hostages are combatants, and that doesn't meet the details for this requirement
The majority of the almost 100 hostages who remain alive are believed to be male IDF soldiers or men of military reserve age.
Hamas just hasn't been taking civilian noncombatants as hostages like Israel has been doing.
Totally untrue
Where are Hamas getting them?
Like, do you think this is an actual war where both sides attack each other's territories?
Seriously, at what point in the last six months would Hamas have captured non combatants?
I am not here to give Israel a W, but Hamas still has a number of civilian captives from the original October 7 attack. Just not as many surviving as was assumed.
According to Israel's own figures, there are 90 or so living hostages and 30 or so bodies still held by Hamas IIRC. Apparently most of the 90 survivors are non-civilians, based on what Hamas is saying, but some of them still are.
According to Israel’s own figures,
But not according to anyone else's...
Israel has been flattening the entire area, they can't keep track of how many they kill, regardless of what country they're from.
But the article OP linked even says there aren't 40 noncombatants left....
CNN’s record of the conditions of the hostages also suggests there are fewer than 40 living hostages who meet the proposed criteria.
I'm not sure what you're not understanding about this.
Or why you're listening to Israel still
But the article OP linked even says there aren't 40 noncombatants left....
Right, I acknowledged that. It's just that no one knows who specifically is counted in the alive vs dead hostage statistics. It wouldn't surprise me if Israel purposefully set a number of civilians that they knew had likely already died, knowing that Hamas would not be able to comply with the request, to justify continuing the conflict.
According to Israel’s own figures
Therein lies the problem.
I would say take it with a grain of salt, but there's enough international scrutiny that I would say the list of missing is probably reliable enough. People in Israel are still protesting the Israeli government about that very frequently. Not everyone missing from October 7th has been returned, alive or dead. Many probably buried beneath rubble from IDF attacks, to be honest, since several were already confirmed killed by "friendly" fire.
Edit: to add, it is worth noting that Hamas is not the only group that participated in Oct 7 and took hostages. There are likely other hostages that they cannot account for because they were taken by other groups.
The hostages were taken on October 7th of last year. Try to keepup.
And they've been repeatedly bombed for the past several months, try to keep up.
Again, your own article says CNN knows there aren't 40 hostages left that aren't noncombatants.
Israel keeps taking civilians hostage, so they have enough.
Since 10/7 the only Israelis Hamas interacts with are combatants. They literally don't have enough hostages left for this deal, which is likely how the deal arrived at that number.
It's something that literally is impossible to comply with, and Israel gets to blame Hamas.
This ain't complicated bub. Your own source agrees with me.
You only addressed half the statement. They are not saying that Israel doesn't take civilian hostages. They are questioning the claim that Hamas doesn't take civilian hostages. Follow the thread please.
Is there any evidence that Hamas has taken new hostages since October 7th? Because AFAIK there isn't.
A temporal attribute has not been included in this statement:
Hamas just hasn’t been taking civilian noncombatants as hostages like Israel has been doing.
But you have added a temporal qualifier:
taken new hostages since October 7th
I think maybe that's where the disconnect is? I don't know. I don't know who or what you're arguing against.
No you are changing the statement yourself. The statement is
Hamas just hasn’t been taking civilian noncombatants as hostages like Israel has been doing.
Israel is widely kidnapping mostly innocent civilians whereas Hamas very much targeted military for kidnapping.
This is as obvious as the lower than 2/3 civilian casualty rate for Hamas whereas israel has a far higher civilian casualty rate.
Sources? Do I even want your sources at this point....last time I asked for evidence you gave me a verbal statement by the prime minister and that was good enough in your book. You really don't need much convincing when the evidence aligns with your bias, do you?
Last time you got a source you denied reality and pretended that "no that doesn't count". I'm not sure why you are bringing this up it only makes you look bad.
The final death toll from the attack is now thought to be 695 Israeli civilians, including 36 children, as well as 373 security forces and 71 foreigners, giving a total of 1,139.
I'm realizing that either your intentionally ignoring what I'm saying or English is not your first language.
Your standard of evidence was a quote by Benjamin Netanyahu
For honest people one off quotes do not constitute evidence.
So yes: I reject your standard for proof because it is very low
The temporal qualifier is inherent in the grammar of the statement. Perhaps you didn't notice it?
In English, the present perfect continuous has/hasn't been taking implies a frequent and repeated action since a fixed time in the past - in this case, presumably, the start of the current conflict until now.
Since Hamas only took civilian hostages on one occasion, i.e. October 7th, and not again since, it is not true to say that Hamas "has been taking hostages". They took hostages. Once.
Israel, on the other hand, have been taking Palestinian civilians captive, repeatedly, since October 7th. That's the difference.
You're inferring the start point for the perfect continuous and assigning Oct 7; I'm assigning the start point to be the overall conflict in a broader context. I'm being charitable. I might be wrong, but I can't read OPs mind so I'm being charitable.
In that case, they would have used the present simple, "Hamas don't take hostages", but they didn't.
I think you simply misunderstood the original statement.
I could be wrong. I'm happy to take the L. Not a hill I want to die on.
Article is way better than the headline...
Hamas just hasn't been taking civilian noncombatants as hostages like Israel has been doing.
Most hostages are combatants, and that doesn't meet the details for this requirement
Totally untrue
Where are Hamas getting them?
Like, do you think this is an actual war where both sides attack each other's territories?
Seriously, at what point in the last six months would Hamas have captured non combatants?
I am not here to give Israel a W, but Hamas still has a number of civilian captives from the original October 7 attack. Just not as many surviving as was assumed.
According to Israel's own figures, there are 90 or so living hostages and 30 or so bodies still held by Hamas IIRC. Apparently most of the 90 survivors are non-civilians, based on what Hamas is saying, but some of them still are.
But not according to anyone else's...
Israel has been flattening the entire area, they can't keep track of how many they kill, regardless of what country they're from.
But the article OP linked even says there aren't 40 noncombatants left....
I'm not sure what you're not understanding about this.
Or why you're listening to Israel still
Right, I acknowledged that. It's just that no one knows who specifically is counted in the alive vs dead hostage statistics. It wouldn't surprise me if Israel purposefully set a number of civilians that they knew had likely already died, knowing that Hamas would not be able to comply with the request, to justify continuing the conflict.
Therein lies the problem.
I would say take it with a grain of salt, but there's enough international scrutiny that I would say the list of missing is probably reliable enough. People in Israel are still protesting the Israeli government about that very frequently. Not everyone missing from October 7th has been returned, alive or dead. Many probably buried beneath rubble from IDF attacks, to be honest, since several were already confirmed killed by "friendly" fire.
Edit: to add, it is worth noting that Hamas is not the only group that participated in Oct 7 and took hostages. There are likely other hostages that they cannot account for because they were taken by other groups.
The hostages were taken on October 7th of last year. Try to keepup.
And they've been repeatedly bombed for the past several months, try to keep up.
I have...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_prisoner_exchange
Again, your own article says CNN knows there aren't 40 hostages left that aren't noncombatants.
Israel keeps taking civilians hostage, so they have enough.
Since 10/7 the only Israelis Hamas interacts with are combatants. They literally don't have enough hostages left for this deal, which is likely how the deal arrived at that number.
It's something that literally is impossible to comply with, and Israel gets to blame Hamas.
This ain't complicated bub. Your own source agrees with me.
You should read it
Oh, it's true alright:
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/11/israel-opt-horrifying-cases-of-torture-and-degrading-treatment-of-palestinian-detainees-amid-spike-in-arbitrary-arrests/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67600015
You only addressed half the statement. They are not saying that Israel doesn't take civilian hostages. They are questioning the claim that Hamas doesn't take civilian hostages. Follow the thread please.
Is there any evidence that Hamas has taken new hostages since October 7th? Because AFAIK there isn't.
A temporal attribute has not been included in this statement:
But you have added a temporal qualifier:
I think maybe that's where the disconnect is? I don't know. I don't know who or what you're arguing against.
No you are changing the statement yourself. The statement is
Israel is widely kidnapping mostly innocent civilians whereas Hamas very much targeted military for kidnapping.
This is as obvious as the lower than 2/3 civilian casualty rate for Hamas whereas israel has a far higher civilian casualty rate.
Sources? Do I even want your sources at this point....last time I asked for evidence you gave me a verbal statement by the prime minister and that was good enough in your book. You really don't need much convincing when the evidence aligns with your bias, do you?
Last time you got a source you denied reality and pretended that "no that doesn't count". I'm not sure why you are bringing this up it only makes you look bad.
Israel social security data reveals true picture of Oct 7 deaths
I'm realizing that either your intentionally ignoring what I'm saying or English is not your first language.
Your standard of evidence was a quote by Benjamin Netanyahu
For honest people one off quotes do not constitute evidence.
So yes: I reject your standard for proof because it is very low
The temporal qualifier is inherent in the grammar of the statement. Perhaps you didn't notice it?
In English, the present perfect continuous has/hasn't been taking implies a frequent and repeated action since a fixed time in the past - in this case, presumably, the start of the current conflict until now.
Since Hamas only took civilian hostages on one occasion, i.e. October 7th, and not again since, it is not true to say that Hamas "has been taking hostages". They took hostages. Once.
Israel, on the other hand, have been taking Palestinian civilians captive, repeatedly, since October 7th. That's the difference.
You're inferring the start point for the perfect continuous and assigning Oct 7; I'm assigning the start point to be the overall conflict in a broader context. I'm being charitable. I might be wrong, but I can't read OPs mind so I'm being charitable.
In that case, they would have used the present simple, "Hamas don't take hostages", but they didn't.
I think you simply misunderstood the original statement.
I could be wrong. I'm happy to take the L. Not a hill I want to die on.