You said:
In light of the recent pager bombings orchestrated by Israel, how is Israel any different from the Unabomber?
What we know about the Hezbollah device explosions
4 days ago
Matt Murphy
BBC News
Joe Tidy
Cyber Correspondent
Watch how the Hezbollah exploding pagers attack unfolded
At least 32 people, including two children, were killed and thousands more injured, many seriously, after communication devices, some used by the armed group Hezbollah, dramatically exploded across Lebanon on Tuesday and Wednesday.
In the latest round of blasts on Wednesday, exploding walkie-talkies killed 20 and injured at least 450 people, according to Lebanon's health ministry.
The explosions occurred in the vicinity of a large crowd that had gathered for the funerals of four victims of Tuesday's simultaneous pager blasts, which killed at least 12 people and injured nearly 3,000.
BBC teams in the city reported chaotic scenes in which ambulances struggled to reach the injured, while locals became suspicious of anyone using a phone.
The explosions deepened unease in Lebanese society, coming a day after the apparently similar and highly sophisticated attack targeting thousands of pagers used by Hezbollah members.
The militant group blamed its adversary, Israel. Israeli officials have so far declined to comment.
Two firms based in Taiwan and Hungary accused in media reports of manufacturing the pagers have both denied responsibility, with the Taiwanese government saying the different parts of the pagers were not from Taiwan.
"The components are low-end IC (integrated circuits) and batteries, I can say with certainty they were not made in Taiwan," Economy Minister Kuo Jyh-huei said.
A Japanese company which apparently makes the walkie-talkies said it stopped producing that model 10 years ago.
Here is what we know so far.
How did the attacks unfold?
The first round of blasts began in Lebanon's capital Beirut and several other areas of the country at about 15:30 local time (13:30 BST) on Tuesday.
Witnesses reported seeing smoke coming from people's pockets, before seeing small explosions that sounded like fireworks and gunshots.
Citing US officials, the New York Times said that the pagers received messages that appeared to be coming from Hezbollah's leadership before detonating. The messages instead appeared to trigger the devices, the outlet reported.
Explosions continued for around an hour after the initial blasts, the Reuters news agency reported.
Soon after, scores of people began arriving at hospitals across Lebanon, with witnesses reporting mass confusion in emergency departments.
Similar scenes played out across the country in another round of blasts on Wednesday, at around 17:00 local time (15:00 BST).
Reports suggest it was walkie-talkies that were blown up, devices that were purchased by Hezbollah five months ago, according to a security source speaking to Reuters news agency.
At least one explosion was close to a funeral being held in Beirut for some of the victims of Tuesday's attack, creating panic among those near the procession.
Twenty people have been killed and at least 450 injured, according to Lebanon's health ministry.
Follow live updates on this story
Video captures Beirut skyline as devices explode across city
From Taiwan to Hungary, a complex picture emerges of the pagers' origins
No electronic equipment considered safe after Lebanon device attacks
Hezbollah and its conflict with Israel explained
What do we know about the devices?
Details about the walkie-talkies detonated in Wednesday's explosions are still coming to light.
Footage shot in the aftermath showed destroyed devices bearing the brand Icom, a Japanese company. A statement from the firm describes the IC-V82 model as a handheld radio which was exported to the Middle East from 2004 to 2014 and has not been shipped since then.
Icom said production on that model stopped 10 years ago. The manufacturing of the batteries has also stopped, it says.
The company says it is not possible to confirm whether the IC-V82s that exploded in yesterday's attacks were shipped directly from Icom, or via a distributor. It said any products for overseas markets were sold only to the firm’s authorised distributors.
But the models may not even be from Icom.
Earlier, a sales executive at the US subsidiary of Icom told AP news agency that the devices which exploded in Lebanon appeared to be a knock-off product – adding it was easy to find counterfeit versions of the product online.
The pagers that exploded on Tuesday were a new brand that the group had not used before, one Hezbollah operative told AP. A Lebanese security official told Reuters that around 5,000 pagers were brought into the country about five months ago.
Graphic showing how the Hezbollah pagers may have detonated as the result of a message sent to the device
Labels seen on fragments of exploded pagers point to a pager model called the Rugged Pager AR-924. But its Taiwanese manufacturer Gold Apollo has denied any involvement with the explosions. When the BBC visited Gold Apollo on Wednesday local police were searching the company's offices, inspecting documents and questioning staff.
Taiwan pager maker stunned by link to Lebanon attacks
The founder, Hsu Ching-Kuang, said his company had signed an agreement with a Hungarian-based company - BAC - to manufacture the devices and use his company's name. He added that money transfers from them had been "very strange", without elaborating.
BBC Verify has accessed BAC’s company records, which reveal it was first incorporated in 2022.
Its CEO Cristiana Bársony-Arcidiacono told NBC that she knew nothing about the explosions. “I don’t make the pagers. I am just the intermediate. I think you got it wrong," she said.
The Hungarian government said the company had "no manufacturing or operational site" in the country.
What prompted the pager attack?
Unnamed US and Israeli officials told Axios that detonating the pagers all at once was initially planned as the opening move in an "all-out" offensive against Hezbollah. But in recent days Israel became concerned Hezbollah had become aware of the plan - so they were set off early.
Israeli officials have not commented on the allegations, but most analysts agree that it seems likely it is behind the attack.
Prof Simon Mabon, chair in International Relations at Lancaster University, told the BBC: "We know that Israel has a precedent of using technology to track its target" - but he called the scale of this attack "unprecedented".
Lina Khatib, from the UK-based Chatham House, said the attack suggested that Israel has "deeply" infiltrated Hezbollah's "communications network".
In its statement accusing Israel of being behind the attacks, Hezbollah said it held the country "fully responsible for this criminal aggression that also targeted civilians".
Map of confirmed explosions in Lebanon and Syria
Why does Hezbollah use pagers?
Hezbollah has relied heavily on pagers as a low-tech means of communications to try to evade location-tracking by Israel. Pagers are wireless telecommunications devices that receive and display alphanumeric or voice messages.
They are much harder to track than mobile phones, which have long since been abandoned as simply too vulnerable, as Israel’s assassination of the Hamas bomb-maker Yahya Ayyash demonstrated as long ago as 1996, when his phone exploded in his hand.
In February, Hassan Nasrallah directed Hezbollah fighters to get rid of their phones, saying they had been infiltrated by Israeli intelligence. He told his forces to break, bury or lock their phones in an iron box.
Experts now say the directive, issued during a live televised address, may have forewarned Israeli intelligence operatives that the group would be seeking a new - likely lower tech - method of communications.
What is known about the victims of Tuesday's attack?
A source close to Hezbollah told AFP news agency that two of those killed in Tuesday's attack were the sons of two Hezbollah MPs. They also said the daughter of a Hezbollah member was killed.
Among the injured was Iran's ambassador to Lebanon, Mojtaba Amani. Reports in Iranian media said his injuries were minor.
Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah was not hurt in the explosions, Reuters reported quoting a source.
Lebanese Public Health Minister Firass Abiad said damage to the hands and face made up the majority of injuries.
The victims presenting to emergency rooms were a variety of ages, from the old to the very young, some wearing civilian clothes, he told the BBC's Newshour programme.
Outside of Lebanon, 14 people were injured in similar blasts in neighbouring Syria, according to UK-based campaign group the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.
Will the Hezbollah-Israel conflict escalate?
Hezbollah is allied with Israel's arch-nemesis in the region, Iran. The group is part of Tehran's Axis of Resistance and has been engaged in a low-level war with Israel for months, frequently exchanging rocket and missile fire across Israel's northern border. Entire communities have been displaced from both sides.
The blasts came just hours after Israel's security cabinet made the safe return of residents to the north of the country an official war goal.
While visiting an Israeli airbase on Wednesday, Defence Minister Yoav Gallant said the country was "opening a new phase in the war" and and the "centre of gravity is shifting to the north through the diversion of resources and forces".
Despite the ongoing tensions, observers say that until now both sides have aimed to contain hostilities without crossing the line into full-scale war. But there are fears that the situation could spiral out of control.
Additional reporting by Frances Mao
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT
The recent explosions involving devices associated with Hezbollah have raised significant concerns and questions. Here’s a summary of what we know:
Incident Overview: The explosions began on Tuesday and continued into Wednesday, resulting in at least 32 fatalities, including two children, and injuring thousands. The initial blasts involved pagers used by Hezbollah, followed by walkie-talkie explosions during a funeral for some of the victims.
Device Details:
The pagers, reportedly detonated via messages sent to them, were identified as a new model not previously used by Hezbollah.
The walkie-talkies involved in the later explosions were from a model discontinued a decade ago, leading to speculation about possible counterfeit products.
There are conflicting accounts regarding the manufacturers of these devices, with companies from Taiwan and Hungary denying responsibility.
Allegations Against Israel: Hezbollah has accused Israel of orchestrating these attacks, claiming that it was a "criminal aggression." While Israeli officials have not confirmed involvement, unnamed US and Israeli sources suggested that the attacks were part of a larger offensive plan against Hezbollah.
Impact on Civilians: The blasts have created widespread panic and chaos, complicating emergency response efforts and raising suspicions among the public towards anyone using communication devices.
Broader Context: This incident fits into the ongoing conflict between Hezbollah and Israel, which has been characterized by a series of retaliatory strikes and military exchanges. The explosions represent a significant escalation in tactics, potentially indicating deeper infiltration of Hezbollah's communication networks by Israeli intelligence.
Victims: Among the deceased are individuals closely linked to Hezbollah, including family members of its MPs. Notable injuries included Iran's ambassador to Lebanon, but Hezbollah's leader, Hassan Nasrallah, was reported safe.
The situation remains fluid, with fears of further escalation in the conflict as both sides navigate this precarious moment.
You said:
In light of the recent pager bombings orchestrated by Israel, how is Israel any different from the Unabomber?
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT
Drawing a comparison between Israel's actions in the recent pager bombings and the Unabomber involves examining motives, methods, and broader contexts. Here are some points of differentiation and similarity:
Differences:
Motivation:
Israel: Actions taken by the Israeli state are often framed within the context of national security, counter-terrorism, and military strategy against perceived threats. The bombings aimed to disrupt Hezbollah's communication capabilities, which Israel views as necessary to protect its citizens from attacks.
Unabomber: Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber, motivated his bombings by a radical critique of modern society, particularly technology. His aim was to incite fear and provoke a societal reconsideration of technological advancement and its impact on human freedom.
Targets:
Israel: The bombings targeted communication devices associated with a specific militant group (Hezbollah), which is engaged in conflict with Israel. Although civilians were harmed, the intent was primarily focused on disrupting Hezbollah operations.
Unabomber: The Unabomber targeted individuals across various fields, including academia and technology, often without regard for their direct involvement in any conflict, aiming for broad societal disruption rather than targeting a specific group.
Political and Legal Standing:
Israel: Actions are conducted under the auspices of a recognized state, often with justifications rooted in international law and self-defense, despite controversies surrounding such justifications.
Unabomber: Kaczynski operated as a domestic terrorist outside any legal framework, carrying out his actions independently and without state sanction.
Similarities:
Use of Explosive Devices:
Both involved the use of explosive devices to achieve their aims, employing technology to inflict harm and instill fear.
Targeting Communication:
The bombings disrupted communication methods, whether it was Hezbollah’s pagers or Kaczynski’s general targeting of technological infrastructure.
Public Fear and Chaos:
Both actions resulted in widespread panic and chaos, causing fear within the targeted populations.
Conclusion:
While there are some superficial similarities in their use of explosive devices and the resulting chaos, the fundamental differences in motivation, targets, political legitimacy, and broader implications reveal distinct operational frameworks and ethical considerations. The context of state-sanctioned military actions versus individual acts of domestic terrorism highlights the complexity in comparing Israel's military strategies with the actions of the Unabomber.
You said:
Well, Theodore John Kaczynski viewed scientists as terrorists.
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT
That's a critical perspective and one that underscores the complexity of Kaczynski's ideology. Here are some points that explore his views on scientists and technology, and how they relate to the broader context of terrorism and violence:
Kaczynski’s Perspective on Scientists
Labeling Scientists as Terrorists:
Kaczynski viewed scientists as complicit in the technological system that he believed was destroying human freedom and the environment. In his manifesto, "Industrial Society and Its Future," he argued that scientists, through their contributions to technological advancement, perpetuate systems of oppression and violence, making them analogous to terrorists in their effects on society.
Critique of Technology:
He believed that technology leads to alienation, social disruption, and ultimately, a loss of individual autonomy. Kaczynski saw the pursuit of scientific progress as prioritizing efficiency and control over human well-being, thus viewing scientists as responsible for creating a dangerous world.
Radical Methods:
His violent methods were meant to provoke a societal awakening to the dangers of technological dependence. By inflicting harm, he sought to challenge the status quo and force society to confront the consequences of unchecked scientific advancement.
Broader Context of Violence and Terrorism
Defining Terrorism:
Terrorism is often defined as the use of violence and intimidation against civilians to achieve political aims. Kaczynski's actions fit this definition, as he aimed to instill fear and provoke a reaction against technology and industrial society.
State vs. Individual Terrorism:
The distinction between Kaczynski’s individual terrorism and state-sponsored actions (like those of Israel) highlights different motivations and justifications. While Kaczynski acted independently, viewing his violence as a necessary evil for a greater cause, state actors often frame their actions as necessary for national security, despite similar outcomes in terms of fear and violence.
Philosophical Underpinnings:
Kaczynski’s philosophy reflects a radical rejection of modernity and an extreme form of anti-technological sentiment. His views position him against not only the scientific community but also against the structures of modern society, which he believed were inherently violent and oppressive.
Conclusion
Kaczynski's labeling of scientists as terrorists stems from his radical ideology that condemns technological advancement as fundamentally harmful. While his views provoke critical discussions about the ethical implications of science and technology, they also exemplify how ideological extremism can lead to justifications for violence. This contrasts with state actions, which often operate under different ethical, legal, and political frameworks, despite the potential for similar destructive outcomes.
You said:
Is Israel a state sponsor of terrorism like Iran?
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT
The designation of any state as a "sponsor of terrorism" is complex and often politically charged. Here’s a comparative analysis of Israel and Iran in this context:
Israel's Actions and Allegations
Military Operations:
Israel conducts military operations in Gaza and against Hezbollah in Lebanon, often justifying these actions as self-defense against terrorist groups. Critics argue that some of these operations lead to civilian casualties and could be viewed as acts of state terrorism.
Targeted Killings:
Israel has a policy of targeted killings of individuals it identifies as terrorist threats. While Israel claims these actions are necessary for national security, opponents argue that they violate international law and contribute to a cycle of violence.
Intelligence and Covert Operations:
Israel is known for its intelligence operations, including operations against perceived threats in various countries. Some view these as acts of aggression or terrorism, especially when civilian casualties occur.
Iran's Role as a State Sponsor of Terrorism
Support for Proxy Groups:
Iran is widely recognized as a state sponsor of terrorism, providing financial and military support to groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, and other militant organizations that have carried out attacks against Israel and Western interests.
Ideological Commitment:
Iran's leadership openly advocates for the destruction of Israel and promotes resistance against Western influence in the Middle East. This ideological stance underpins its support for various militant groups.
Regional Destabilization:
Iran's involvement in conflicts across the region, including in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, has led to widespread accusations of exacerbating violence and supporting terrorism.
Comparative Analysis
Legitimacy and Context:
Supporters of Israel argue that its military actions are legitimate responses to ongoing threats from groups that openly advocate violence against it. Conversely, Iran's support for non-state actors is often viewed as an attempt to destabilize neighboring countries and promote a militant agenda.
International Perception:
Israel is often framed in the context of a democratic state defending itself against terrorism, while Iran is classified as a rogue state due to its support for militant groups. However, these perceptions can vary significantly based on geopolitical alignments and narratives.
Double Standards:
Critics of U.S. foreign policy argue that there are double standards in how different countries are treated concerning terrorism. Actions by Israel may be framed as defensive, while Iran's support for militant groups is labeled as terrorism, despite both engaging in violent actions that impact civilians.
Conclusion
While both Israel and Iran engage in actions that have been labeled as terrorism by their opponents, the contexts and justifications for those actions are significantly different. Israel's military operations are often framed as acts of self-defense, while Iran's support for militant groups is rooted in an ideological commitment to opposition against Israel and Western powers. The designation of either state as a "sponsor of terrorism" can depend heavily on the political and ideological lens through which one views their actions.
As a LIFE LONG follower of the and born again Christian pro-Israel who has studied the Levant and Middle East and a Bible Student of over 50 years, I urge you to read some Bible scholars on this matter. Jonathan Cahn is the best, but one must know the Old and New Testament at last have more than rudimentary knowledge of the Old Testament. I have read all of his books and what is going on in the Levant has been predicted and known about for centuries. I stand with Israel in any and all events. What did Hamas and Hezbollah expect? Remember Stuxnet? What did Iran expect. Israel is fully capable of dealing w/ any of their Ancient Foes. I finished The Dragon's Prophecy by Jonathan Cahn but I was very unsettled and will be. Thankfully I won't be when the BIG ONE BLOWs. pretty sure. I am well over 65 now.. :) Lord be with you.. I need to stay off of Substack for a while now.. just too time consuming and I have to prepare to international travel and it has been a long time. :) take care.