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.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
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 [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
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
I call bullshit, whoever wrote this piece without questioning the validity of the witness statements needs to go back to school for journalism. Some of these claims are transparently fallacious to anyone with any medical training.
Random volunteers aren't going to be able to examine victims for sexual assault based on bruising, or lacerations found while collecting bodies. That's going to require an actual autopsy by an actual medical examiner. Also, how is a volunteer going to inspect if a body has a pelvic fracture, and what does that have to do with sexual assault? Sacral fractures are only associated with SA for a very young child, and then only at 5% of SA victims age 5 or younger.
I found it odd that they published claims from volunteers and politicians, but I have yet to hear from an actual MD that corroborates their claims.
You’re getting downvoted but the piece states “The BBC could not independently verify this account.”
One of the quotes is someone saying they didn’t see the violent attack but sexual assault just sounds different.
Any reasonable person can agree that Hamas is not good, we don’t need propaganda making them appear like complete monsters.
Yes. That is reporting. Especially in the wake of outlets jumping the gun on a lot of other aspects of this.
But if you read through the rest of the article, they reference
Even if you believe that there is a focused effort to plant government agents at every single level and with multiple aide organizations all to promote some evil conspiracy: The above is footage and images that reporters (and civilians who click the wrong links online...) have seen.
So yes, it is mostly circumstantial evidence (which, regardless of what tv lawyers say, still has validity) indicating violent trauma and tearing of clothes of women's genital regions. Combine that with the sad truth that men given guns and power and unleashed on civilian populations tend to commit rape and... there is a lot of evidence of rape.
And if you believe any of the witness and victim accounts (that were also given to non-Israeli sources) then it is truly horrific and... on par with what ISIS/ISIL do on a daily basis. Which makes sense considering the speculation that Iran is heavily involved in all of this.
From my read of the article, there are basically no victim statements because the ostensible victims are either dead or non-communicative and under psychiatric care (in which case their testimony should be kept private until they are capable of choosing to share it.)
I completely acknowledge that when people with guns are unleashed on a civilian populace, sexual assault is a frequent result. My issue is that with the willingness to publish unconfirmed accounts a lot of western media is functioning as propaganda for the hard right Israeli government.
... Your response is literally "There are just a bunch of murdered and mutilated women with signs of trauma to their genitals. Since none of them can testify, no rape happened"
Lemme guess? You play lacrosse, go to a country club, and back the blue?
Yup, you guessed it: my unwillingness to accept an oppressive police state’s presentation of events from another oppressive police state’s media wing is basically a vote for someone to the right of Pat Buchanan.
Trauma happens in war zones. Hamas at the absolute best didn’t care about civilian casualties, and likely much worse, including fighters committing sexual assault of various forms. We’ve also seen massive shifts in the narrative of how the events of October 7 played out, including evidence that a large number of civilian casualties were caused by Israeli soldiers and not by Hamas fighters as was originally claimed.
My issue with this piece is that it puts forth unconfirmed reports of horrific torture from people who admit they didn’t see it happen and admits that they have not confirmed the accounts. If they reported on video that the BBC had been able to authenticate, I wouldn’t have an issue with the narrative. But there’s been a huge amount of video people have posted that when analyzed is not from Gaza at all, or is not from October 7, so I tend to be skeptical of accounts that admit they haven’t been confirmed.