World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
This is the UN report which found strong evidence that widespread rape occurred during the October 7th attack, as well as debunking one or two particular claims that Israel was putting forth which got published in the news.
This is a press release from the UN about it.
For some reason, the couple of lies Israel told about sexual violence became the entire story, overshadowing the much larger truth about sexual violence by Hamas fighters. Most of the infamous NYT story was true.
Just because Israel is actively engaging in a genocide and are committing atrocities 10 times worse than whatever’s coming back to them doesn’t automatically mean that claims of atrocity by Hamas are automatically false.
The same as one rotten apple spoils the whole barrel, one lie taints the whole Israeli claim of rape.
Lesson to be learned here is don't fucking lie to embellish a story to get the world on your side.
The UN report found there is no evidence aside from unverifiable "witness testimonies." She did confirm that israel had no forensic, video or photo evidence. It all hangs on israeli witnesses which have previously lied. When 10 israeli "witnesses" lie to manufacture rape propaganda there is no reason to believe the 11th.
There is no reason that Pramilla Patten should have classified those israeli provited witnesses are 'credible'.
The NYT article is completely debunked there is nothing left standing from it. You are straight up spreading propaganda by claiming it holds weight. The reason israel invited Patten to begin with was because the NYT article fell apart.
The claim about NYT is irrelevant too as israel claiming in its interview with BBC that it had video evidence and that there were survivors of rape. Both which are not confirmed fake.
That is the exact opposite of what the UN report did. Did you actually read it, or if not where did you get all this information you're telling me?
The executive summary is only a few pages and breaks down a high level of what they found pretty well, and then you can skip to particular sections to see more detail. Pages 4 and 5 have a pretty good high-level overview of which allegations in which locations they believe they gathered reasonable grounds to believe, which allegations they believed they debunked, and which ones they weren't able to verify or debunk one way or another. Warning, it's slightly graphic.
In particular, they pretty immediately debunked some of the Israeli governments' accounts which got repeated early on in the media, actually specifically by comparing them against evidence and by doing their own interviews where they were able.
If this was true the UN would be saying Hamas raped people. But alas, the UN does not say that.
Instead the UN calls for an investigation like the post says. Wonder why that is...
Aha! We have arrived at the point of Never Play Defense. Someone simply observing the flow of the conversation, who doesn't take a look at the report and compare it against what you're saying it says, could be mistaken for thinking this is a vigorous debate between roughly equally justified points of view, or differing interpretations which are both roughly grounded in reality, or something else which isn't you talking purely out of your ass and me giving factual citations for why you're wrong. Kudos! Not sure what else you could do, but you're playing it well.
I'll do one more round, sure. It's not a fun game for me to play indefinitely, but:
I(12), page 4: "Based on the information gathered by the mission team from multiple and independent sources, there are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred during the 7 October attacks in multiple locations across Gaza periphery, including rape and gang rape, in at least three locations."
I(13), page 4: "At the Nova music festival and its surroundings, there are reasonable grounds to believe that multiple incidents of sexual violence took place with victims being subjected to rape and/or gang rape and then killed or killed while being raped."
If you're going to imply that civilians unrelated to Hamas might have done it, and it wasn't part of Hamas's attack -- as the OP article, hilariously, does -- then sure, you can, if you want.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Never Play Defense
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Strange the UN does not claim Hamas raped anyone care to explain why that is?
Do mention what information is gathered. It is stated in the report.
I think I'm comfortable with the reasons I've already laid out so far with citations for why what's in the OP article and what you're saying about it is crap.
I'm gonna take a page from "Never Play Defense." What do you think about this?
I think the official IDF translator lied about translations and you are reposting their propagandanda.
This was quite a scandal a little while back. Even Reuters censored the subtitles on the video because they said it was wrong. Of course anyone can use a translator these days and find out that the subtitles are propaganda.
Consider doing fact checking before posting.
Since you abandoned this line of conversation, I posted the article (in a non paywalled version) if you're interested in resurrecting it.
I am somewhat anticipating that me posting it will be interpreted as Zionism, so you may be in good company if you want to head over to the comments and start yelling at me that I am a bad person for being opposed to this particular type of rape, because of who the victims are.
(2/2 - this is the rest of the article I pasted as the "1/2" section of the comment)
(1/2)
Here, I'll repost the full article, which of course does no such thing as relying on a single IDF translation as its sole and only source, and instead actually deals at length with what the word means, how it was recently resurrected, and what it does and doesn't imply about any official sanction from Hamas leadership.
I am not surprised that you want to replace this kind of detailed analysis with a simple and pithy oversimplification, since any detailed analysis will expose the truth that you're openly defending rape.
Stop posting IDF propaganda this is getting embarrassing.
If your evidence for Hamas raping people is not being able to use google translate we are done talking.
My evidence for Hamas raping people is the UN report I already posted which talks about all the evidence for Hamas raping people. We're talking about something different, which is Hamas fighters using a word which is explicitly associated with rape (and a pretty in depth explanation of what it does and doesn't imply.)
Isn't "Never Play Defense" fun? I can switch to a new accusation, if you decide to change your mind and continue the conversation.
Strange can you explain explain why the UN doesn't say Hamas raped people if your 'UN Report" contains evidence.
Surely they wouldn't need to call for an investigation first.
That's actually a fairly reasonable question, which I know you asked a couple times already, which I haven't addressed.
So, I'll give a genuine answer: The report explicitly doesn't deal with the question of who raped the Israeli women who were raped during the October 7th attack, because they were already dealing with enough evidentiary difficulties just trying to put together and say conclusively whether or not it had happened, and where, and dealing with a certain amount of dishonesty and fog-of-war among other issues that made it hard to even sort out the basics, especially with victims who are now deceased where they were dealing purely with forensic evidence. Trying to bring a standard of proof of which specific men had done it into the equation would have made their already pretty challenging task more difficult and more open to criticism, I think.
To me, that's not automatically a bad thing. It means they're being cautious and trying to have solid backing for things they are saying. I would contrast it for example with the abysmally low standard of proof that led your OP article to write things like "some reports have asserted that those acts and other reported atrocities were committed by civilians and those not affiliated with the group." Of course, it's easy to simply say that obviously it was probably unrelated civilians who raped all these women during the October 7th attack, and not Hamas, if you don't feel bound by the need to produce evidence or even answer simple questions like, "What reports? Who are you saying did the rapes, then? What the fuck are you talking about?"
You are, of course, welcome to seize onto that pretty sensible decision by the report authors and shake it back and forth like a little bad-faith terrier, as if it somehow invalidated the whole report -- for example, implying that the evidence it presents of hostages who were raped during captivity somehow leaves open the possibility that they were raped by some other, non-Hamas captors during their time as prisoners of Hamas.
Speaking of which, how's that search for the report's treatment of the prisoners who were raped in captivity coming? I can give you a couple other hints about where to find it, if you still can't find it after I sent you a link to the report, and then gave you hints about where to look in the table of contents, which page of the TOC, and the general area on the page where you might be able to find the applicable entry.
What a weird hill to die on...you don't have to defend Hamas in order to be critical of Israel. It's not one or the other Linkerbaan. Or does that break the Larp. I can't understand people like you.
Kony 2012 I guess...?
I think some people's brains are all-or-nothing. I mean, it's certainly true that whatever significant crimes against humanity Hamas is doing, Israel is doing literally 10 times worse. But some people will go from there to saying that everything Palestinian is good, even if it's a violent and corrupt organization like Hamas which is bringing only death and destruction to innocents on both sides, and accomplishing nothing at all for better conditions for the Palestinian people.
Surely the right answer is for the Palestinian people who only want to live and not get murdered or starved to death, and the Israeli people who only want to go to the music festival and not get raped or shot or kidnapped, to gang up and seize all the people on both sides who want to continue and profit off the conflict, and string them up upside-down like Mussolini, so they can die of thirst over several days in the hot desert sun. Then, the problem simplified, they can get together and work out some approximation of a peace agreement.
Surely there are a few problems with that, not least of which that the people who like continuing the war have most of the weapons and wouldn't agree to the proposal. But that makes more sense to me than picking a "right side" and defending them regardless of what horrifying thing they're doing to innocent people on the "wrong side."
Because people like @Linkerbaan@lemmy.world don't really care about any of this. It's all a larp.
I see it as the same effect as Kony 2012 was when everyone was updating their FB profile (or like when people put the rainbow flag during pride month). It's an aesthetic, nothing more. If they really cared about resolutions they would be promoting anything towards that, not constant opinion blog posts. Not constant bickering. Not this vitriolic reactionary stuff every time someone pushes back or asks questions.
It's just theatre. And it feels good.
Hey, @Linkerbaan@lemmy.world do you provide this much scrutiny when you post articles from your blog websites? Or do you reserve that charitability only for one side?
There's a thing called a "reputation". Lying about rape makes future rape claims without evidence less credible.
Sure sure. But my question was-just in case you missed it: do you submit the blog posts you spam here to the same level of scrutiny or is your charitability only extended to only one side? That's all we need to see that this is all a big larp for you
The easiest way to get rid of Linkerbaan and Hamas is to stop the genocide.
What people like @Linkerbaan@lemmy.world (and most of these Lemmy LARPers) don't understand is that I am the most on the side of Palestinians. However, I'm a solutions oriented person. I want the suffering of Palestinians to stop. Now. I don't care to larp on social media for Karma points so I don't spam news threads non-stop with junk blog opinion pieces. Their only goal is to dilute the conversation.
We all are aware the genocide is happening.
I want a ceasefire and I want to bring both sides to the table to negotiations because the Palestinian people are the ones caught in this awful situation between a proxy war for Iran and the zealotry of right wing Israeli politicians.
Yes you just deny that israel is an Apartheid. Very pro Palestine.
Buddy, I just conceded it's an apartheid state two comments away in the same thread. Now what will you say about me in order to obfuscate and muddy the conversation?
Sure, Israel/Palestine could be classified as an apartheid state. There you go. Back to the original question (3rd time): Will you extend the same charitability to articles critical of Hamas? Or does the larp not work that way? Was just curious
You were just going around saying Palestinians don't have to drive on separate roads interesting how fast you change your mind.
Not sure where I blindly quote everything Hamas says as the truth like the IDF rape accusation defenders do.
Because you constantly post opinion blog pieces on every community and they seem to not hold a candle to the slightest scrutiny, but when someone brings receipts (like UN reports) suddenly you are Nancy Drew. It's pretty obvious that you have double standards when it comes to media literacy, no?
Kony 2012
No pal, I was very precise in my language: I said within Israel there are millions of Muslims that coexist with Jews. That was in direct response to the garbage you were posting in that specific thread because you are unable to engage with more than one topic at a time --perhaps it's too difficult for you. I understand. All this larping on social media can be tiring after a while.
Kony 2012, amirite?