In various articles that I have read on the current Gaza conflict, I have read a number of people say things like, “I’d didn’t see any human shields.”
There is a pretense in what has become a common strain in public logic, that the ‘real’ veracity of evidence is based on first person observation. While first person observation may be part of the evidence process, in fact, it can be an extremely slippery slope to stand on, just ask any trial lawyer. The point is, that evidence always exists in context to the issue at hand, it does not stand on its’s own. Without anything more than one witness to an event, you have no way of verifying that the witness is telling the truth.
For years people believed the sun went round the earth, because that’s what they saw. The sun came up, the sun went down, as it still does. In like manner, saying that the Gaza tunnels we’re not built for terrorism because the only images you have are of their use in combat is just simple ignorance as you have nothing to corroborate what your saying. Simple sight provides you with no idea as to their intent and use by others.
Without any other evidence, accusation is no proof of guilt.