Current WAR CRIMES Israel - Hamas - Hizbullah - Houthis

[ZEV]

As stated, I pulled the tweet from a news article and provided the link.

Why do you keep making stuff up?

Is it an algorythm focussed determination on your past browsing history that determines which news articles you might like and engage with?

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Highlighting the false and inaccurate report of ttp's by the author and highlighting his clearly anti-semitic view of his other posts.

Why, do you support falsehoods?

Also a comparison to his world views and Ghost Patrol's.

Yeah it's super weak, as I thought.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Is it an algorythm focussed determination on your past browsing history that determines which news articles you might like and engage with?

You can't even spell algorithm, so I doubt you even know what one is.

 

[Jazny]

I've never blindly believed any of those things and am on the record saying so. To deny rape and sexualized mutilation, is a step too far.

You seem overly focused on this element of the October 7 attacks, you keep bringing it up. If I go back through the thread I'm sure to find it's you doing it the most and I have to wonder why.

Please read the articles he quote mines. He is so dishonest on this topic. I can send you the full Haaretz article if you haven't read it already and can't bypass the paywall. No way can you read that article and still claim no evidence. I can send you as much info as you need, this topic of rape denial does not belong in this thread, he can make a thread on the conspiracy board.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Please read the articles he quote mines. He is so dishonest on this topic. I can send you the full Haaretz article if you haven't read it already and can't bypass the paywall. No way can you read that article and still claim no evidence. I can send you as much info as you need, this topic of rape denial does not belong in this thread, he can make a thread on the conspiracy board.

Am happy to address the rest of the articles as well. The articles themselves of course say the sexual violence is confirmed and has happened. I'm trying to get to the basis for that declaration.

The parts I have quoted are the parts that worry me. Why would the articles include this information if it was wrong?

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

At this point it seems this is going to be taboo for a decade or so, so I'm happy to remove the post.

 

[Festerz]

Jews are being torn apart. If my sister were alive, even we wouldn’t be talking

It is becoming harder and harder for Jews like me to support Israel, given the scale of its vengeance for the October 7 atrocity.

www.theage.com.au

(Yes the article's behind a paywall but not to hard to find for free if you can't spend a couple of bucks on a trial subscription. As I keep saying, ignorance costs nothing, being informed costs a little more)

Because these words in particular are relevant to this thread and the even worse (in terms of ignorant and bigoted partisanship) that we are seeing in the SRP International Politics thread on this war:

We, Jews of the post-Nazi era, are less safe now than we have ever been and that’s been made even worse by fools on social media who develop instant expertise. Netanyahu has made it tougher for Jews in the diaspora. Parmeter (Ian Parmeter - ANU Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies) is not Jewish but says there is no question the appalling pictures of Gaza we see on television each night make it harder for Jews, even those not in Israel.

Yet Netanyahu will continue with his campaign both to boost his security credentials and to re-establish himself with the Israeli electorate, after all the strategic failures of October 7.

Maybe that’s working in Israel, but it’s not working here. It fuels antisemitism because people still can’t separate Jews from the actions of Israel, done in the name of Zionism. And the number of self-appointed experts with no kin in the game – or even basic knowledge about the region – is exhausting and dispiriting. And let’s not forget ignorant social media influencers, though I would like to.

 

[jason_recliner]

While sexual violence no doubt occurred on 7 October, claims of the worst most deplorable atrocities, published and parroted all the way up to Creepy Jo, were later shown to be made up. You have to ask yourself why Israel felt the need to lie about almost unimaginably horrific atrocities when plenty of real atrocities had actually occurred. My opinion is that it was to 'temper' the world's reactions to the Israeli atrocities and war crimes that were about to start, and even allow some people to justify in their heads those atrocities.

 

[Kurve]

Please read the articles he quote mines. He is so dishonest on this topic. I can send you the full Haaretz article if you haven't read it already and can't bypass the paywall. No way can you read that article and still claim no evidence. I can send you as much info as you need, this topic of rape denial does not belong in this thread, he can make a thread on the conspiracy board.

I was referring more specifically to the claims of 40 beheaded babies and babies dangling on a clothesline that I ultimately was not convinced by, if it didn't sound credible in the first place.

Aside, I have done the research and would never personally jump out to deny sexualized violence and mutilations on October 7.

 

[Kurve]

While sexual violence no doubt occurred on 7 October, claims of the worst most deplorable atrocities, published and parroted all the way up to Creepy Jo, were later shown to be made up. You have to ask yourself why Israel felt the need to lie about almost unimaginably horrific atrocities when plenty of real atrocities had actually occurred. My opinion is that it was to 'temper' the world's reactions to the Israeli atrocities and war crimes that were about to start, and even allow some people to justify in their heads those atrocities.

I don't know why those at the top thought it okay to repeat the 40 beheaded babies claims and babies dangling from clotheslines. It was stupid.

 

[Jazny]

I was referring more specifically to the claims of 40 beheaded babies and babies dangling on a clothesline that I ultimately was not convinced by, if it didn't sound credible in the first place.

Yes and neither was I because you shouldn't jump to conclusions based on reports coming from breaking news stories... unless you like being wrong a lot.

These stories were not fabricated by Israeli police or government and seemed to organically come from false reports on the ground in the wake of a massacre. An IDF spokesperson said early on he couldn't corroborate that claim. This is a very important distinction that people fail to mention when they bring this up as though its evidence that other things claimed officially by Israel are also false. There is a big difference between confused reports from first responders or witnesses to an atrocity and the government and other organisations falsifying information deliberately to make Hamas seem a bit worse than they actually are.

The parts I have quoted are the parts that worry me. Why would the articles include this information if it was wrong?

Here is the problem. Let's say an article gives you reasons 1,2,3,4,5,6,7, and 8 to believe that X occurred, and the article even concluded that X occurred. But the article also gives reasons 1 & 2 where they couldn't find evidence for X occuring in a particular area or situtation. Then someone comes along and picks out reasons 1 & 2 from the article to form a larger narrative that X didn't happen at all while ignoring every reason to believe it did. It is very dishonest. I think you are smart enough to consciously know you are doing this. It's not that reasons 1 & 2 are necessarliy wrong, it's that the truth of reasons 1 & 2 doesn't falsify the truths of all the other reasons. If you form a whole narrative based on cherry picked parts of stories or reports, of course you can make it seem like X didn't happen to anyone who only reads what you say about it.

It's also a sensitive topic for many people. If there is actual evidence of Israel fabricating this narrative then it's fair, but if all you are doing is looking for tiny holes in the publicly known evidence, while ignoring everything else and casting aspersions on victims, witnesses, organisations that are set up to support victims, first responders I think it's pretty poor and doesn't belong here.

 

[PenskeFile]

While sexual violence no doubt occurred on 7 October, claims of the worst most deplorable atrocities, published and parroted all the way up to Creepy Jo, were later shown to be made up. You have to ask yourself why Israel felt the need to lie about almost unimaginably horrific atrocities when plenty of real atrocities had actually occurred. My opinion is that it was to 'temper' the world's reactions to the Israeli atrocities and war crimes that were about to start, and even allow some people to justify in their heads those atrocities.

Absolutely, it was all about manufactured consent for what they were about to unleash on them to dehumanise the Palestinians as subhuman animals. They tend to go back to successful tactics from previous campaigns. We had the Nayirah scandal that helped sell the gulf war, so they gave the 40 beheaded babies story to sell this slaughter.

 

[Jazny]

Again, this wasn't "Israel" fabricating stories. The 40 beheaded babies story came organically from Nicole Zedeck who was reporting on the situation in the wake of October 7th. You can tell how distressed she is when you watch the video. It's a chaotic scene and obviously distressing. She reports a commander tells her that 40 babies were killed. Separately she is told by soldiers that babies had their heads cut off. She reports this and this seems to be wear the "40 beheaded babies" comes from. It wasn't some conspiracy from Israeli government to lie about an atrocity. It was a false report from the ground in the confusion of the event.

This is why I say a number of times to be wary of reports on breaking news. There is false information around almost every breaking news story. It doesn't have to be a deliberate lie either.

Unverified reports of ‘40 babies beheaded’ in Israel-Hamas war inflame social media

No photo evidence had been made public as of Thursday morning corroborating claims that babies had been beheaded. Israel has published photos of dead infants after the terror attack.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[jason_recliner]

Again, this wasn't "Israel" fabricating stories. The 40 beheaded babies story came organically from Nicole Zedeck who was reporting on the situation in the wake of October 7th. You can tell how distressed she is when you watch the video. It's a chaotic scene and obviously distressing. She reports a commander tells her that 40 babies were killed. Separately she is told by soldiers that babies had their heads cut off. She reports this and this seems to be wear the "40 beheaded babies" comes from. It wasn't some conspiracy from Israeli government to lie about an atrocity. It was a false report from the ground in the confusion of the event.

This is why I say a number of times to be wary of reports on breaking news. There is false information around almost every breaking news story. It doesn't have to be a deliberate lie either.
View attachment 2137910

Unverified reports of ‘40 babies beheaded’ in Israel-Hamas war inflame social media

No photo evidence had been made public as of Thursday morning corroborating claims that babies had been beheaded. Israel has published photos of dead infants after the terror attack.

www.nbcnews.com

No, it goes beyond that. There was some orthodox-looking group/charity - sort of quango-ish - that did some of the first responding. One of their senior officials got up in front of a mic at a press conference and lied about atrocities, and then Nuttin' Yahoo ran with it, as did Creepy. IDF / Israel government certainly did not push back/dispute.

 

[Kurve]

No, it goes beyond that. There was some orthodox-looking group/charity - sort of quango-ish - that did some of the first responding. One of their senior officials got up in front of a mic at a press conference and lied about atrocities, and then Nuttin' Yahoo ran with it, as did Creepy. IDF / Israel government certainly did not push back/dispute.

They were ZAKA, a disaster recovery and rescue organisation of volunteers who all looked to be in their senior years. Probably overwhelmed.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

New, more humane leadership and those currently in power tried for war crimes. Tough ask, I know. Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney and co got away with it. Unfortunately, so will they.

No, not what do you want to happen to the leaders. To Israel, the country. The sovereign democratic nation fighting to survive against seven fronts of terrorist militias under the sponsorship of Iran, a theocracy.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

No, not what do you want to happen to the leaders. To Israel, the country. The sovereign democratic nation fighting to survive against seven fronts of terrorist militias under the sponsorship of Iran, a theocracy.

Israel is far right apartheid regime. Apartheid is not democracy.

https://www.btselem.org/publications/202210_not_a_vibrant_democracy_this_is_apartheid

 

[ZEV]

Israel is far right apartheid regime. Apartheid is not democracy.

https://www.btselem.org/publications/202210_not_a_vibrant_democracy_this_is_apartheid

 

[jason_recliner]

Some of the most outrageous and egregious lies were made in separate interviews while on site. There's a TRT video that collates much of that footage but as it's Turkish propaganda I won't post it here.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

View attachment 2137977

Screenshot, no source.

'trust me bro' - ZEV

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Yes and neither was I because you shouldn't jump to conclusions based on reports coming from breaking news stories... unless you like being wrong a lot.

These stories were not fabricated by Israeli police or government and seemed to organically come from false reports on the ground in the wake of a massacre. An IDF spokesperson said early on he couldn't corroborate that claim. This is a very important distinction that people fail to mention when they bring this up as though its evidence that other things claimed officially by Israel are also false. There is a big difference between confused reports from first responders or witnesses to an atrocity and the government and other organisations falsifying information deliberately to make Hamas seem a bit worse than they actually are.

Ah look I could point to so many stories that were repeated and propagated by official sources as we all know, once that happens it's an uphil battle to put the cork back in. I was not really making this argument, I shouldnt have referenced those.

I agree that these stories did not stem from some sort of coordinated disinformation campaign, I don't think that either.

It is an issue that a lot of the stories and testimony re CRSV come from those exact same confused and overhwelmed volunteers.

Here is the problem. Let's say an article gives you reasons 1,2,3,4,5,6,7, and 8 to believe that X occurred, and the article even concluded that X occurred. But the article also gives reasons 1 & 2 where they couldn't find evidence for X occuring in a particular area or situtation. Then someone comes along and picks out reasons 1 & 2 from the article to form a larger narrative that X didn't happen at all while ignoring every reason to believe it did. It is very dishonest. I think you are smart enough to consciously know you are doing this. It's not that reasons 1 & 2 are necessarliy wrong, it's that the truth of reasons 1 & 2 doesn't falsify the truths of all the other reasons. If you form a whole narrative based on cherry picked parts of stories or reports, of course you can make it seem like X didn't happen to anyone who only reads what you say about it.

Yes, agreed. I can't really cover every angle, it's just a footy forum. As above though - when you look at 1,2,3,4,5,6 and find 1,2 are based on another news item with loose sourcing, 3 & 4 are from 3rd hand accounts, 5 & 6 were Zaka errors, you kinda rely on 7 & 8 to corroborate those events. There's not a whole lot in 1-6, 7 & 8 are the meat.

It's also a sensitive topic for many people. If there is actual evidence of Israel fabricating this narrative then it's fair, but if all you are doing is looking for tiny holes in the publicly known evidence, while ignoring everything else and casting aspersions on victims, witnesses, organisations that are set up to support victims, first responders I think it's pretty poor and doesn't belong here.

I'm hardly doing all that.

I don't know why those at the top thought it okay to repeat the 40 beheaded babies claims and babies dangling from clotheslines. It was stupid.

I should not have mentioned those. I'm not using these as some sort of proof or evidence that all/most stories are fabricated, I can't stand that.

I was asking what you were referring to in your post re denial.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

They were ZAKA, a disaster recovery and rescue organisation of volunteers who all looked to be in their senior years. Probably overwhelmed.

Why were Zaka unleashed while trained IDF combat specialists were told to wait for over a week?

It doesn't make any sense. These guys had no idea what they were doing.

Death and donations: Did the volunteer group handling the October 7 dead exploit its role?

***

www.haaretz.com

 

[Zidane98]

Screenshot, no source.

'trust me bro' - ZEV

Notable that once again that you can't address the actual content of the post.

Selling of land to Jews in Palestine is against the law

Palestinian sentenced to life for selling land to Israelis

The man was found guilty of violating a penal code from 1960 that bans the sale of land to a foreign country.

www.aljazeera.com

It is not against the law for anyone of any faith to purchase land in Israel.


If you bothered to do your research you would know the other ones are mostly correct, too.


Then again you are the person that posted the lie that Israel does not separate IDF casualties from citizen casualties in their death statistics which absolutely was a lie despite the "trust me bro -GP".

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Notable that once again that you can't address the actual content of the post.

Selling of land to Jews in Palestine is against the law

Palestinian sentenced to life for selling land to Israelis

The man was found guilty of violating a penal code from 1960 that bans the sale of land to a foreign country.

www.aljazeera.com

It is not against the law for anyone of any faith to purchase land in Israel.


If you bothered to do your research you would know the other ones are mostly correct, too.


Then again you are the person that posted the lie that Israel does not separate IDF casualties from citizen casualties in their death statistics which absolutely was a lie despite the "trust me bro -GP".

So you quote a law that applies to all foreign countries and pretend it only applies to Jews?



Very disappointing, ZEV.

why won't you reveal your hasbara source for the screenshot?

 

[Zidane98]

So you quote a law that applies to all foreign countries and pretend it only applies to Jews?

View attachment 2138072

Very disappointing, ZEV.

This is what you hang your hat on? Lol.

Palestinian land laws - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Most notably, these laws prohibit Palestinians from selling any Palestinian-owned lands to "any man or judicial body corporation of Israeli citizenship, living in Israel or acting on its behalf"


Of course this has never been raised as an apartheid measure by yourself, one can only imagine the reason why....