I'm not sure the IDF has confirmed who was killed, but even so the article goes much further than that. That it was a bad shoot, that the car was stationary, that no warnings were given, that the family did nothing to prompt it, that the IDF weren't legitimately mistaken, that the kid's injury is from the incident, that this kid was even there, that they spent 50+ rounds, that the kid who died has special needs. And more. You can literally just read the article and extract the facts. Those are uncomfirmed save by anecdote.

I selectively chose skepticism about... the specific article we are on a thread talking about

I'm not sure being a pseudointellectual (if that's what he is) would make him evil, would it?

I've seen his 'antichrist' talk as part of headlines out of context and to be honest assumed that this is a rhetorical/hyperbolic device, rather than a literal thing. Is your claim that he actually literally thinks someone is the antichrist? So far he just seems to be someone with a bent against degrowthers?

Is there a specific quote or position that makes him _evil_? Rather than just ill-informed or with an unpopular political opinion? Like he might just believe in tech growth at all costs because he really does think it will benefit everyone, or he might pretend to think that because he thinks it will benefit him at the expense of everyone else. It's hard to tell from what you've provided so far.

I haven't sided with the IDF account, I've said you're overstating the number of facts that "both sides agree on" as a proxy for what's verifiable.

Sorry, I just don't buy the coached words of a 12 year old as categorically truthful. If anything, ethnic cleansing would be a more statistical and thus verifiable claim than the literal anecdote of a child.