Microsoft blocks Israel’s use of its tech in mass surveillance of Palestinians

The issue that people have with Israel's actions is the death of civilians, not the death of Hamas, the widely recognised terrorist. I believe it also to be true that the IDF do not want to kill civilians, and that their target is only Hamas.

In which case, is it prudent to remove the IDF's ability to successfully target the correct people? Precise military intelligence is absolutely necessary for minimising civilian casualties.

> I believe it also to be true that the IDF do not want to kill civilians, and that their target is only Hamas.

I think it’s this second assertion that relies on facts not in evidence. Previous Guardian reporting on IDF use of compute for targeting indicated they were using it to increase, not decrease, the number of approved targets.

Israel claims that they “don’t want to kill civilians” but historically have not substantially changed course when the killings became grotesquely excessive. It’s also arguably true that they have never even sincerely investigated any issues.

Israel just gets more aggressive in the murder and bombing.

[edited to remove snark] there is a ton of evidence to the contrary, that the killing of civilians is intentional and systematic. that's why the ICC (finally) determined it is a genocide.

The ICC did no such thing, you're probably thinking of the ICJ, which also did no such thing according to one of the judges that ruled on that decision:

“I’m glad I have a chance to address that because the court’s test for deciding whether to impose measures uses the idea of plausibility. But the test is the plausibility of the rights that are asserted by the applicant, in this case South Africa” she told the BBC show HARDtalk.

“The court decided that the Palestinians had a plausible right to be protected from genocide and that South Africa had the right to present that claim in the court,” Donoghue said. “It then looked at the facts as well. But it did not decide—and this is something where I’m correcting what’s often said in the media—it didn’t decide that the claim of genocide was plausible.”

“It did emphasize in the order that there was a risk of irreparable harm to the Palestinian right to be protected from genocide,” she added. “But the shorthand that often appears, which is that there’s a plausible case of genocide, isn’t what the court decided.”

Donoghue’s term on the bench expired a few days after the court delivered its initial ruling on Jan. 26.

https://www.jns.org/former-top-hague-judge-media-wrong-to-re...

Evidence indicates the intention is to kill indiscriminately, hence the genocide determinations.

It is interesting to me that all this sweat and tears are spent deliberating over the use of a word in faraway courts while all of us can see with our eyes the horrors Palestinians are subjected to by the occupying IDF. "We didn't say there was a genocide! We acknowledged the plausibility of the possibility that potentially maybe an investigation might perhaps occur into the possibility of maybe Palestinians being able to experience a genocide by someone."

It reminds me of a conversation I had with an Israeli a few weeks back. He asked me, "if what Israel is doing is so bad, why does nobody stop it?"

A great question. I don't know. And the bodies of children continue to pile up.

Quantity doesn't correlate with accuracy. OP's point was that surely having more intelligence means you are more accurate and thus less collateral damage.

> Precise military intelligence is absolutely necessary for minimising civilian casualties.

Whatever they've been doing on that front doesn't seem to be working so far...

If you want to redefine genocide to mean "a very bad thing" then go ahead, but doing so would hollow out the term.

There's nothing stopping people from discussing the events in Gaza as a tragedy and a war crime, but activists are intent on attaching the word genocide to this. Referring to it as a genocide has become a litmus test to be considered pro-Palestinian.

The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem determined that it is a genocide in a report released September 16: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-c...

Their source for deaths in Gaza is "CNN via IDF" but reading that article, it's actually an interview re: a specifically unconfirmed report from another news agency. Mixing that with data produced with very specific methodology, like they've done with the NIH data they're also using, seems like a bit of a faux pas.

Reent, published, actual figures (instead of ambiguously attributed early ones) show that they'd be up at the top end of the graph they've produced, not the bottom. https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2025/aug/21...

Exactly. And an increase in accurate targets would lead to the faster removal of Hamas, and the process of repair can begin faster.

> I know this will be unpopular, but I'm just repeating what I've heard from the Israeli side [..]

It's war, this is the unfortunate truth and why we try to avoid war. Nobody really ends up winning in this.

> This doesn't justify killing civilians, but what do you do when civilians kill you?

Then point at which a civilian picks up a weapon to operate alongside Hamas, they have become Hamas and are no longer civilians.

> It's a nasty situation no matter which side you look at it from.

Yes. But a peaceful solution was almost impossible once Hamas performed their October 7 attack. The other day the UN members agreed to recognise Palestine as a state, and now the only thing left on Hamas' manifesto is the complete destruction of Israel [1]. I suspect Israel is not inclined to negotiate on that demand.

[1] https://www.dni.gov/nctc/terrorist_groups/hamas.html

I would be interested to read the evidence for myself if you have sources?

The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry (COI) is not a legal body, which would be the sort of body that is able to make a genocide determination. It also does not speak on behalf of the UN, given that it an independent commission of inquiry.

I am curious to see what the ICJ ruling in South Africa's case will be. That would be an actual legal body charged with making a genocide determination.

Again, prior reporting on the IDF’s computational efforts do not indicate that less collateral damage was a driver - quite the contrary, the algorithm was being used to pad out targeting lists: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/03/israel-gaza-ai...

You’re describing what ought to be, not what currently is.

It is a genocide. They are targeting civilians.

It is the IDF and Israel governments explicit goal, as stated by high up government officials and leaders, to eradicate all Palestians in Gaza. A cursory view into their own Hebrew media make this abundantly clear.

They are committing a genocide in both word and deed.

It is not a lie. It is so extreme that it has merited its own Wikipedia page [0], but don't trust that, read the citations. Leaders[1] statements[2] have been chronicled calling for genocide. It is happening in both word and action.

Resisting an occupying force is not genocide.

[1] https://amnesty.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Amnesty-Intern...

[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20250916081026/https://www.ohchr...

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intent_and_incitement_in_the_G...

Hamas is quite open about their desire to increase civilian casualties by deliberately using civilians as human shields(which is of course a war crime). It's clearly part of their overall strategy.

A few government officials have said this. No one part of the War Cabinet has said this and it is definitely NOT the explicitly goal of the IDF.

This is entirely made up.

the only thing that those numbers mean it's how many of dead combatants IDF can identify/name.

if somebody killed holding RPG, he doesn't become civilian just because IDF doesn't know his name

> issue that people have with Israel's actions is the death of civilians, not the death of Hamas

Would note that this issue has sufficiently polarised that there are thoughtful people in e.g. New York who think it’s an atrocity for even Hamas fighters to be killed. (Same as there are folks who think every Palestinian is safely presumed a terrorist until proved innocent.)

Proof? Or just what is convenient for you to believe?

If anything, quite the opposite. Think about this logically - why the need for expensive surveillance if your chief goal was to annihilate a population?

It's quite clear which group has genocidal intent, there's a Wikipedia page [0] for that as well. Groups like Hamas are quite open about their genocidal intentions, they even detail those desires in their charter [1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_genocide_in_the...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Hamas_charter

hey, man - I understand this is a stressful time for you. but you're not doing your people any favors by denying the suffering your government is causing. in fact, the bold faced unapologetic nature of these atrocities is why people are talking about sanctions (which is also likely why MS made this move - to avoid being caught up in sanctions)

A 1:1 to 2:1 civilian to combatant ratio is reported by John Spencer, urban war researcher and chair at the Modern War Institute.

Spencer has said it will take years of research to confirm this ratio and how it was achieved. He considers it important to understand because the typical ratio in urban wars, including wars the U.S. has prosecuted, exceeds 6 innocent civilians killed per enemy combatant killed. Some urban wars see 12 innocent civilians killed per combatant killed.

I think all of these ratios are horrifying. A low ratio can't be considered either good or exculpatory, as to whether violations of international humanitarian law have occurred. Civilians always bear a disproportionate impact in all urban wars. The case studies that have been completed are worth reading.

https://mwi.westpoint.edu/urban-warfare-project/urban-warfar...

Inconvenient truth is that anyone who remained in Gaza, in active IDF ops area, is not a civilian. Civilians left these areas, or at least asked to leave many, many times. Unless it's a little child that's not capable of lifting a firearm, this person is Hamas at this point.

If you have better way to differentiate, I will happily pass it to IDF. Don't forget to mention about the last time you risked your own life.

It's already been linked in the thread

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intent_and_incitement_in_the...

>I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel. Everything is closed. We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly.

You can easily find telegram channels that show what regular Israeli soldiers are up to, they post it themselves like they're proud of it. Take a look at it and see what you think then.

> I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip.

For some additional context this initial complete siege lasted for roughly two weeks.

You're right, Gaza was not occupied. It was an open-air prison where people are not allowed to enter or leave, aid was severely restricted, and the IDF adopted a policy of "mowing the grass" which was to cull the population periodically. That's worse, but I'm not sure that's the point you were trying to make.

And if you're only other point is to accuse me of something I never said about an event that was debunked several times, whereas the actual kidnapping and burning of Palestinian babies, women, children, and men is well documented and still ongoing, I think that's all we need to know.

>Civilians left these areas, or at least asked to leave many, many times.

Where to?

Hind Rajab ,literally a child, was brutally killed when fleeing their home, after being asked of course. The ambulance which came to rescue was blown up by the ITF. The Whole world has seen it all, ITF proudly displays it. Maybe it is time to update the Hasbara points.

>Don't forget to mention about the last time you risked your own life.

Why? ITF certainly risks many children's life, just for sport often.

Well, I guess it would be equally unpopular to the Israelis to hear that the global majority and the Palestinians consider Israel as oppressors and occupiers, and Hamas as freedom fighters. And as one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist, it also brings focus into another interesting point - only certain western countries have designated Hamas as terrorists, while the rest of the world doesn't agree with that designation because, well Israel is a settler-occupier. Leave Hamas aside - is anyone here, whatever be your nationality, surprised that every Palestinian (including those in West Bank) is ready to fight (violently or non-violently) for their freedom, for their independence, when the Israelis are hell bent on oppressing them (by treating them as second class citizens), killing them or chasing them away from their homeland?

Remember, Israel has already colonised all of Palestine, for many decades now. They have the choice to integrate the Palestinians into their society, and make them equal citizens. Instead, they chose not to, because the religious fundamentalists right-wing in Israel, who have captured power of all Israeli institutions, don't want a secular state - they want Jewish state with a Jewish majority. That is why Israel chose to create an Apartheid society where the Palestinians are treated as worse than second-class citizens, to make them react violently and use that as an excuse to steal more of their land. That is why this genocide is happening under the Israeli-right - to turn the Palestinians into a small minority group that will not be a threat to a future "Jewish" state.

>why the need for expensive surveillance if your chief goal was to annihilate a population

A question suited for ITF and Netanyahu maybe? Ask them spend less. He gets to prolong this Genocide, then he gets to stay out of trial for his previous crimes. Maybe ITF is not in a hurry.

Would you accept it even if it was shown? Or would you go on with adjacents to say how it is not evidence? Get new points from the ITF. Maybe hold them to the a fraction of accountability that you throw around.

To be fair, the UN working group that declared it genocide was completely precise in how they defined it and the criteria they used. Totally fair to disagree either with the existence of that working group, their definition of genocide, or with the facts they cite as evidence, but to pretend it’s just a bunch internet activists playing rhetorical tricks is clearly subterfuge.

We all know that's a lie. Israel has murdered the negotiators most interested in giving the hostages back. Qatar was the most recent miss, but they got Haniyeh in Iran and he was a known moderate (in the Overton window of Hamas)

> We are fighting human animals

What else do you call people who rape and murder civilians, then parade their dead bodies around to cheering crowds?

Hamas will never have any sympathy from most people who watched the October 7 attack footage.

> I believe it also to be true that the IDF do not want to kill civilians

They should probably stop shooting them then.

hasn't the death toll surpassed the number of hamas members?

  > You're right, Gaza was not occupied. It was an open-air prison where people are not allowed to enter or leave, aid was severely restricted,

You can pin that as much on Egypt, an Arab and Muslim state, as you can on Israel.

> and the IDF adopted a policy of "mowing the grass" which was to cull the population periodically. That's worse, but I'm not sure that's the point you were trying to make.

I've heard the phrase mowing the grass. It clearly referred to the Hamas leadership. You can make up interpretations all you want, but I read the sources in both Hebrew (כן, אני מדבר עברית) and Arabic (وانا بحكي عربي كمان). I know exactly what was said, and what was meant. It's usually very clear.

> And if you're only other point is to accuse me of something I never said about an event that was debunked several times, whereas the actual kidnapping and burning of Palestinian babies, women, children, and men is well documented and still ongoing, I think that's all we need to know.

Israel does not deliberately target Palestinian children - there is no benefit to that. Do you know who does benefit when Palestinian children die? Hamas does. They say it clearly. If you really cared about children - Palestinian and Israeli - then you would not perpetuate the blood libel against the side that until recently went out of its way to protect children.

Can a war of self defence turn into a war of aggression?

This shouldn’t be a controversial statement. It’s well documented that Hamas utilizes this strategy by their own statements. On the Israeli side it’s much harder to determine what tactics some (military) groups utilize.

The state you are referring to literally calls Palestinians a demographic threat.

Refusing to distinguish between random Palestinians and Hamas members is literally the entire problem

I have ZERO issue with the IDF killing Hamas. That's what you do in a war. But we have ample evidence that Israel and the IDF is not making any effort to not kill random Palestinians.

They made some stupid AI algorithm to feed data into in order to generate target lists. They accepted something like 10:1 "innocent palestinian":"literal terrorist" ratios. They have no qualms about killing a 10 innocent Palestinians to kill a single Hamas terrorist

This is unacceptable.

> Refusing to distinguish between random Palestinians and Hamas members is literally the entire problem

Well, it is difficult to distinguish between the two when you’re hunting down terrorists who hide among civilians. But also, let’s not forget - the civilian population of Gaza VOTED for Hamas. In polls they still show support for Hamas even after October 7. There are videos of those civilians cheering in the streets while the naked bodies of raped / murdered women were paraded down the street by Hamas terrorists. I don’t think you can pretend “random Palestinians” are entirely innocent either.

I would say yes. The question is what definitively makes it that. So far, all I see is subjective judgment. Even in official reports, when you go deep enough in official reports from various organizations, it feels subjective.

I'm sure that it could, but this clearly hasn't happened yet. We still see lots of high-quality videos of buildings being bombed by Israel. That is possible only because Israel warns civilians away from such structures. In a war of aggression, such warnings would not happen, and such videos would not exist.

For those looking for direct sources on the findings of genocide in Gaza, here are several key reports and legal conclusions from human rights organizations, international courts, and genocide scholars:

1. UN Commission of Inquiry: Concluded that Israel has committed genocide in the Gaza Strip. * Report: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-c... * Press Conference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trUcK8hHaIA

2. Amnesty International: Concluded that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. * Statement: https://www.amnesty.org/en/petition/end-israels-genocide-aga...

3. B'Tselem (The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories): Published their conclusion that Israel is committing genocide. * Report ("Our Genocide"): https://www.btselem.org/publications/202507_our_genocide

4. International Court of Justice (ICJ): Ruled in January 2024 that it is plausible Israel's acts could violate the Genocide Convention. * Case Details: https://www.icj-cij.org/case/192

5. Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention: Issued an "Active Genocide Alert" in October 2023, warning of the high risk of genocide. * Alert: https://www.lemkininstitute.com/active-genocide-alert-1/acti...

Beyond these formal reports, it's crucial to acknowledge that this has been one of the most documented atrocities in history, often livestreamed by Palestinians on the ground. Their testimonies have been consistent from the beginning, yet they are frequently dismissed until a non-Palestinian, "human" source validates their lived experience.

Reading the article you'll see that much of the surveillance is against the West Bank population, which has nothing to do with Hamas or Oct 7.

Israel has been very effective at blurring that distinction, using that attack from Gaza as the pretext to accelerate land theft in the West Bank.

Genocide is not the same as extermination. The goal of expulsion is to obtain land. Surveillance programs facilitate ethnic cleansing by countering resistance.

It's very easy to distinguish a children from a terrorist, children are no terrorists, also, children didn't vote anybody. However, the IDF is killing thousands of children in the most horrible ways.

The answer is simple - racism, same reason the Brits gave them the land in the first place when they knew it already had brown people on it that had been living there for almost a thousand years. How many deaths did it take for most Westerners and Western governments to start caring about Ukraine and start moving towards action? Barely a handful if any. How many deaths has Israel racked up since 1948 while the self-appointed human rights arbiters of the world wring their hands and say it's just not quite genocide yet?

What part don't you understand? EVERYONE is Hamas, including the several kids that Western doctors have testified to being hit by snipers, and the little girl named Hind Rajab that they shot 300 bullets into. And the hospitals? Crawling with Hamas.

Nobody stops it because it's not worth it, for whatever you want to measure "it" by.

Israel-Palestine used to be really important, because it was a surrogate conflict for Western vs Arab control of the Middle East, and what that is really about is of course oil.

The Arab-Israeli wars of the 1950s/1960s were direct conflicts, but it became apparent that the West wouldn't let Israel lose because Israel represents the latent threat of Western invasion if the Arabs ever really turned off the oil spigot.

So the Palestinians became the thorn for the Middle East to keep Israel at bay, so you get strange bedfellows of Iran and Qatar (Sunni and Shiite) funding them, and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

But a funny thing happened over 75 years of relative stability of borders and global trade: the status quo established itself, oil price and supply was managed and stabilized, security agreements established and backed up (with the Iraq invasion of Kuwait). Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Israel in fact are effectively allies against Iran and Turkey.

And the US has its own supply of oil with Dakota shale oil. A FUCKTON of it. So strangely, the Arabian peninsula isn't afraid of the US. They are afraid of Iran and Turkey. And who has the best army to counteract Iran and Turkey?

Israel.

The Palestinians don't have a geopolitical use anymore. The Palestinians used to number around 400,000. Now? They number 4,000,000. That is ... not good. The Palestinians have no economy, and rely almost entirely on external aid. So the scope of a humanitarian burden on Arab sponsors has risen from 400,000 people to 4,000,000 people. AGAIN: the humanitarian burden has risen by a factor of 10, while their geopolitical value has DECREASED, almost evaporated.

And that is without the decreasing value of oil from EVs/alt energy and the long term specter of global warming.

That is NOT GOOD for the Palestinians.

Kid, civilians die in war zones, that's sad truth about world that you was born into. It sucks that this child was killed. Nobody in IDF or in any other army wants to kill civilians and children, btw unlike Hamas pigs that openly bragged about it, and benefit from every single civilian death in this conflict.

> Why

Because there's no shortage of armchair operators that know better how to make split second decisions in combat. Also, they never do anything wrong because they never happen to be in situation where you have to decide between bad and worse.

It's so weird how people think the casualty rate in Gaza is high, it's actually incredibly low, virtually no other army in the world could achieve such a low collateral damage rate in urban warfare against guerillas.

The killings are not only direct hits with bullets. They are also blocking food, medicine and healthcare. Noone can survive without food. The goal is not to kill hamas, that was just the excuse, it is to clear the ground for new settlements.

I think the total reported deaths from food issues - as reported by Hamas mind you - are in the 1,000 range. Which is still a very small number for a war zone.

> The goal is not to kill hamas, that was just the excuse, it is to clear the ground for new settlements.

Israel has explicitly stated that this is NOT the goal, are you in a position to change their policy or something? I don't get how you think you can determine their goals for them, unless you are a member of their government (are you?).

Your stated goal doesn't even make any sense - why would they even need to "clear ground" in the first place? Just go live in those houses. And if you mean "kill people", then why are the deaths so low?

Maybe that applied then but does it apply now? Each of their soldiers wear cameras. They see it in hd anytime their soldiers shooting women, old men, children. I guess only their snipers are getting away with dropping civilians constantly (as many British and American doctors are testifying they saw in gazan hospitals). And on top of this their drones target with visual data. So they see that too.

I think in this war the IDF has a very very good idea of how many civilians they killed. At some point it indicates that they have set targets they are striving to meet before the world stops them.

are you referring to "UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory"? Their report came out 10 days ago. This has been referred to as a genocide far longer than that

where from you got idea that each soldier wears camera ? from ukraine ? it's definitely not case in Israel.

doctors in hospital testify to something that they didn't see happening ?

and none from what you wrote contradicts that article/whatever parent posted is misleading

> why the need for expensive surveillance if your chief goal was to annihilate a population?

Gaza has long been a showroom and R&D space for technologies of oppression. Field proven platforms sell.

People say Hamas is inherently genocidal. Some believe the state of Israel to be inherently genocidal. I’m not responding to those claims. The thread was discussing the recent UN report, and that was the context of my comment.

I watch independent news from official sources, not an american news source.

The 1000 civilians dead were in connection to food distribution. That number should be 0 even in a war zone.

Israel has been taking over palestinian villages for a very long time, murdering the inhabitants. The government is fueling the hate. They aren't even affraid to say it out aloud. I have seen several reports where they are calling for genocide.