This article seems like a whole lot of speculation.
I really dont know what to believe any more
That’s the idea behind “articles” like these. Muddy the waters, make you doubt everything, even actual facts that have been verified. That way, you are much more vulnerable to misinformation by leveling the playing field between it and credible news.
Would it surprise you that the author of this text is a Russia apologist as well?
but its also hard to believe that the very limited window hamas had to cause maximum damage, they wasted on raping women instead.
also the guardian article mentioned said that bodies were burried quickly without performing rape tests because they didnt think rape crimes were commited at that time. So does that suggest rape victims were dressed up after rape ? Because obviously rape would be clear if you see murdered naked woman.
also the article is right when they said Israel lied before about hamas beheading babies so why should I believe them now.
So thats the reason I dont trust either side
There is unfortunately footage of sexual violence committed on October 7 out there, shared by the terrorists themselves. I would not recommend you to seek it, but it does exist. This is not fictional.
i agree that it woukd be disturbing to watch and also am no expert to validate it.
is there a reputable news agency that make reference to these footages? Say BBC or the guardian ?
The Israeli government has made a point of showing footage of all kinds of other atrocities to journalists, including the murder of small children, but they deliberately chose not to share video evidence of rape, beyond a single photograph of a victim. It appears to be treated as a taboo, perhaps for legal reasons, which has led to outright denial by some. I am disappointed by the fact that no journalists I know of have done their job and examined and verified this footage that can be found in the darkest corners of the Internet. Even many communities in those places treat it as a taboo and explicitly ban any footage of sexual violence. It is probably for the best, but again, it enables denial.
This is about as close to it as you can get, mostly witness reports and discussions of material that shows the aftermath, but not the crime itself being committed (still NSFL):
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/28/world/middleeast/oct-7-attacks-hamas-israel-sexual-violence.html
In case of paywall:
so you agree that evidence are not conclusive ? Like u cant say with absolute certainity that it did happen.
but also was it a horny hamas individual or was it systematic rape?
I can say with absolute certainty that it happened, based on the evidence I have personally seen and wish I hadn’t seen. There is no way I could come to a different conclusion, unless I deliberately wanted to deny it.
I can also say with absolute certainty that because it was so widespread this was systematic. Sexual violence was used as a weapon of terror, not just the spontaneous actions of a few individuals.
You know exactly who NOT to believe
Random morons on Lemmy
Stop huffing your own jenkum then go outside and touch the grass
If we’re going to get more of this content, should we have a separate community discrediting stories from large and/or state media sources?
One comm for state propaganda and the corporate media that repeat it, and separate, partitioned free speech zone comm for any criticism thereof?
In the second gulf war, when the State and the corporate media pushed the weapons of mass destruction narrative—which also didn’t pass the sniff test—would you have wanted any push-back on that narrative kept out of the conversation?
Stephen Colbert at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner
But, listen, let’s review the rules. Here’s how it works. The President makes decisions. He’s the decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Just put 'em through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration? You know, fiction!
We don’t have that The Guardian article posted in this community. Why are you disproving an article that required no disproving?
Media misconstrues facts, makes factually incorrect statements, and spreads biases. We already know this. This screams of picking up a piece of shit, being surprised that it’s a piece of shit, and writing an article about it. The easier solution would have been to not pick up the piece of shit.
You are going on the assumption that Cook is only talking about this one Guardian article, when what he is doing is using that article as the jumping off point to address the entirety of the Israeli State & corporate media narrative about these rapes.
Jonathan Cook is no idle media critic; he is an expert in this field.
Jonathan Cook is a British writer and a freelance journalist formerly based in Nazareth, Israel, who writes about the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.
Yeah, fair enough. Article stays up.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Stephen Colbert at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Yeah military groups never commit rampant sexual assaults
this sarcastic comment is all the proof I need.
