-2
Why the Guardian's 'Hamas mass rape' story doesn't pass the sniff test
(jonathancook.substack.com)
this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2024
-2 points (0.0% liked)
World News
32282 readers
890 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This article seems like a whole lot of speculation.
If you're referring to the article that this is written about, then yes. The burden of evidence is on those making the accusations. In this case, the IOF is accusing Hamas of rape without any evidence. The MSM is acting as a mouthpiece of the IOF, by reprinting their statement without any due diligence.
No evidence?
Relying on video footage, photographs, GPS data from mobile phones and interviews with more than 150 people, including witnesses, medical personnel, soldiers and rape counselors, The Times identified at least seven locations where Israeli women and girls appear to have been sexually assaulted or mutilated.
Police Superintendent Dudi Katz said officers have collected more than 1,000 statements and more than 60,000 video clips related to the attacks that include accounts from people who reported seeing women raped.
No quote for this one, my phone doesn't seem to like copying from it. Suffice to say it claims evidence.
I'm not claiming these sources (all of which, but especially the third one, rely on other, specified sources) are necessarily trustworthy, etc. But evidence is absolutely being claimed.
Every one of these sources is a dead end. They all point to other news articles that make similar baseless claims or webinars on YouTube (?!). Or worse, they cite themselves as evidence.
[...]
Yeah. Claiming there's evidence and actually providing evidence for such claims are completely different. That's the whole point.