Rapes in Israel Gaza.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most of us with common sense do not believe this ridiculous story.

This post sums up my thoughts.

Much has been written about
@NickKristof
's latest NYT opinion column over the past 24 hours, most of it focusing on the specific claims and their sourcing, but what I think deserves most attention is something broader: how this kind of journalism, whatever its intentions, ultimately makes accountability harder to achieve rather than easier, and harms the very people it claims to champion.

The principle that Israeli abuses should be investigated and condemned is not in dispute, and nobody serious is arguing otherwise. Israel is not above scrutiny, and in fact it operates under more intense international scrutiny than almost any country on earth, routinely held to standards applied nowhere else.

The problem here is something different entirely: the complete collapse of evidentiary standards the moment Israel is the subject.

This piece reads less like rigorous reporting and more like a catalogue of hearsay, unverifiable allegations, and activist claims stitched together into a sweeping moral indictment. Its sourcing leans heavily on Euro Med Human Rights Monitor, an organisation repeatedly criticised over extremist ties, disinformation, and deeply questionable methodology, yet treated throughout as a credible authority while its leadership openly engages in pro Hamas propaganda on X.

Worse, the same ecosystem of activists and self appointed “experts” that amplifies Euro Med’s claims online increasingly feeds narratives into more established organisations and media outlets, laundering deeply contested allegations into the appearance of institutional credibility.

The most severe claims are anonymous, uncorroborated, and presented in the emotional register of established fact rather than allegation, despite lacking meaningful evidentiary backing. Yet Kristof largely adopts them without serious scrutiny, publishing the piece in the Opinion section because even the already diminished evidentiary standards often applied to reporting on the Israeli Palestinian conflict would likely not suffice for it to pass as straight news reporting.

This approach doesn't strengthen accountability, it actively destroys it. When every allegation is immediately inflated into systematic rape and "standard operating procedure" before any serious verification, genuine investigation becomes harder rather than easier.

Real abuses, if they occurred, get buried beneath maximalist narratives so extreme that large portions of the public simply stop trusting any of it, and the people who actually suffered pay that price.

It also alienates the vast majority of Israelis and Jews worldwide, including the many who are perfectly capable of criticising Israeli policy and supporting investigations into misconduct, but who understandably recoil when accusations begin resembling modernised blood libels dressed up as human rights reporting. The framing matters enormously, and so does proportionality, and so does evidence.

Nor does any of this serve Palestinians. Atrocity inflation entrenches both sides deeper into defensive tribalism, and every dubious claim amplified by a prestigious outlet makes legitimate criticism easier to dismiss when it actually matters.

The timing compounds everything. On a day when documented reporting on Hamas sexual violence was again circulating, the NYT chose to run an opinion column built substantially on unverifiable anonymous testimony asserting that Israelis are conducting systemic rape campaigns, not as a rigorously evidenced investigative report but as an opinion piece with the imprimatur of the paper of record.

Kristof is not a naive bystander in any of this. In 2014 he used the full credibility of the NYT to repeatedly platform Somaly Mam, a Cambodian anti-trafficking activist whose harrowing personal story he championed across multiple columns, until it emerged that her backstory was substantially fabricated and he was forced to issue a public correction. When challenged this time around on his sourcing, corroboration, and methodology, he defaulted to bad faith engagement on social media rather than addressing the underlying concerns seriously.

It is the same pattern, playing out again in a different context. Real journalism requires skepticism, corroboration, and restraint applied consistently regardless of the subject, and when those standards disappear the moment Israel is involved, what remains is not human rights reporting but narrative activism wearing a journalist's costume that does far more harm than good to everyone it claims to serve.

pot meet kettle

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone in the world loathes Zionists and they have exposed who they really are to the world- violent psychopaths with no empathy. There is no going back. International pariahs. I am loving every second of it.

It's going to get worse because these type of atrocities are the tip of the iceberg.

This has been going on for decades (well before the creation of Israel) and many in the zionist regime see no issue weaponizing sick twisted degenerate sex to degrade entire populations (including in the West) and individuals.

As for rape and trained dogs, there have been countless videos of this happening to men, woman and children since mobile phones had single digit megapixel cameras.

Remember Israel is one of the few countries that harbors pedophiles from extradition and makes little effort to prosecute them within Israel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of us with common sense do not believe this ridiculous story.

This post sums up my thoughts.

Much has been written about
@NickKristof
's latest NYT opinion column over the past 24 hours, most of it focusing on the specific claims and their sourcing, but what I think deserves most attention is something broader: how this kind of journalism, whatever its intentions, ultimately makes accountability harder to achieve rather than easier, and harms the very people it claims to champion.

The principle that Israeli abuses should be investigated and condemned is not in dispute, and nobody serious is arguing otherwise. Israel is not above scrutiny, and in fact it operates under more intense international scrutiny than almost any country on earth, routinely held to standards applied nowhere else.

The problem here is something different entirely: the complete collapse of evidentiary standards the moment Israel is the subject.

This piece reads less like rigorous reporting and more like a catalogue of hearsay, unverifiable allegations, and activist claims stitched together into a sweeping moral indictment. Its sourcing leans heavily on Euro Med Human Rights Monitor, an organisation repeatedly criticised over extremist ties, disinformation, and deeply questionable methodology, yet treated throughout as a credible authority while its leadership openly engages in pro Hamas propaganda on X.

Worse, the same ecosystem of activists and self appointed “experts” that amplifies Euro Med’s claims online increasingly feeds narratives into more established organisations and media outlets, laundering deeply contested allegations into the appearance of institutional credibility.

The most severe claims are anonymous, uncorroborated, and presented in the emotional register of established fact rather than allegation, despite lacking meaningful evidentiary backing. Yet Kristof largely adopts them without serious scrutiny, publishing the piece in the Opinion section because even the already diminished evidentiary standards often applied to reporting on the Israeli Palestinian conflict would likely not suffice for it to pass as straight news reporting.

This approach doesn't strengthen accountability, it actively destroys it. When every allegation is immediately inflated into systematic rape and "standard operating procedure" before any serious verification, genuine investigation becomes harder rather than easier.

Real abuses, if they occurred, get buried beneath maximalist narratives so extreme that large portions of the public simply stop trusting any of it, and the people who actually suffered pay that price.

It also alienates the vast majority of Israelis and Jews worldwide, including the many who are perfectly capable of criticising Israeli policy and supporting investigations into misconduct, but who understandably recoil when accusations begin resembling modernised blood libels dressed up as human rights reporting. The framing matters enormously, and so does proportionality, and so does evidence.

Nor does any of this serve Palestinians. Atrocity inflation entrenches both sides deeper into defensive tribalism, and every dubious claim amplified by a prestigious outlet makes legitimate criticism easier to dismiss when it actually matters.

The timing compounds everything. On a day when documented reporting on Hamas sexual violence was again circulating, the NYT chose to run an opinion column built substantially on unverifiable anonymous testimony asserting that Israelis are conducting systemic rape campaigns, not as a rigorously evidenced investigative report but as an opinion piece with the imprimatur of the paper of record.

Kristof is not a naive bystander in any of this. In 2014 he used the full credibility of the NYT to repeatedly platform Somaly Mam, a Cambodian anti-trafficking activist whose harrowing personal story he championed across multiple columns, until it emerged that her backstory was substantially fabricated and he was forced to issue a public correction. When challenged this time around on his sourcing, corroboration, and methodology, he defaulted to bad faith engagement on social media rather than addressing the underlying concerns seriously.

It is the same pattern, playing out again in a different context. Real journalism requires skepticism, corroboration, and restraint applied consistently regardless of the subject, and when those standards disappear the moment Israel is involved, what remains is not human rights reporting but narrative activism wearing a journalist's costume that does far more harm than good to everyone it claims to serve.

pot meet kettle

?? Did we read the same article? And the one I posted up thread about the West Bank rape that was an article and not an opinion piece? If Israel is honestly concerned there is not enough journalist integrity here why don’t they let journalist into Gaza to report? Pot meet kettle yet again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of us with common sense do not believe this ridiculous story.

This post sums up my thoughts.

Much has been written about
@NickKristof
's latest NYT opinion column over the past 24 hours, most of it focusing on the specific claims and their sourcing, but what I think deserves most attention is something broader: how this kind of journalism, whatever its intentions, ultimately makes accountability harder to achieve rather than easier, and harms the very people it claims to champion.

The principle that Israeli abuses should be investigated and condemned is not in dispute, and nobody serious is arguing otherwise. Israel is not above scrutiny, and in fact it operates under more intense international scrutiny than almost any country on earth, routinely held to standards applied nowhere else.

The problem here is something different entirely: the complete collapse of evidentiary standards the moment Israel is the subject.

This piece reads less like rigorous reporting and more like a catalogue of hearsay, unverifiable allegations, and activist claims stitched together into a sweeping moral indictment. Its sourcing leans heavily on Euro Med Human Rights Monitor, an organisation repeatedly criticised over extremist ties, disinformation, and deeply questionable methodology, yet treated throughout as a credible authority while its leadership openly engages in pro Hamas propaganda on X.

Worse, the same ecosystem of activists and self appointed “experts” that amplifies Euro Med’s claims online increasingly feeds narratives into more established organisations and media outlets, laundering deeply contested allegations into the appearance of institutional credibility.

The most severe claims are anonymous, uncorroborated, and presented in the emotional register of established fact rather than allegation, despite lacking meaningful evidentiary backing. Yet Kristof largely adopts them without serious scrutiny, publishing the piece in the Opinion section because even the already diminished evidentiary standards often applied to reporting on the Israeli Palestinian conflict would likely not suffice for it to pass as straight news reporting.

This approach doesn't strengthen accountability, it actively destroys it. When every allegation is immediately inflated into systematic rape and "standard operating procedure" before any serious verification, genuine investigation becomes harder rather than easier.

Real abuses, if they occurred, get buried beneath maximalist narratives so extreme that large portions of the public simply stop trusting any of it, and the people who actually suffered pay that price.

It also alienates the vast majority of Israelis and Jews worldwide, including the many who are perfectly capable of criticising Israeli policy and supporting investigations into misconduct, but who understandably recoil when accusations begin resembling modernised blood libels dressed up as human rights reporting. The framing matters enormously, and so does proportionality, and so does evidence.

Nor does any of this serve Palestinians. Atrocity inflation entrenches both sides deeper into defensive tribalism, and every dubious claim amplified by a prestigious outlet makes legitimate criticism easier to dismiss when it actually matters.

The timing compounds everything. On a day when documented reporting on Hamas sexual violence was again circulating, the NYT chose to run an opinion column built substantially on unverifiable anonymous testimony asserting that Israelis are conducting systemic rape campaigns, not as a rigorously evidenced investigative report but as an opinion piece with the imprimatur of the paper of record.

Kristof is not a naive bystander in any of this. In 2014 he used the full credibility of the NYT to repeatedly platform Somaly Mam, a Cambodian anti-trafficking activist whose harrowing personal story he championed across multiple columns, until it emerged that her backstory was substantially fabricated and he was forced to issue a public correction. When challenged this time around on his sourcing, corroboration, and methodology, he defaulted to bad faith engagement on social media rather than addressing the underlying concerns seriously.

It is the same pattern, playing out again in a different context. Real journalism requires skepticism, corroboration, and restraint applied consistently regardless of the subject, and when those standards disappear the moment Israel is involved, what remains is not human rights reporting but narrative activism wearing a journalist's costume that does far more harm than good to everyone it claims to serve.

pot meet kettle

Did we seriously let things get so far out of control with letting Jewish voices control the ME narrative that this guy trashing Kristof’s reporting is unaware that his conflict of interest disqualifies him altogether?

[Anonymous]

So now Zionists are holding Pro-rape protests in front of the NYT building. These lunatics truly believe they should be allowed to get away w/ slaughtering and raping Palestinians with impunity.

Funny how they had no problem w/ the NYT publishing that complete BULLSH*T "Screams without Words" by some IDF monster.

These rapists and baby-killers have less than no credibility at this point. Absolutely disgusting display on the same day as remembering the NAKBA.

Why didn't the genocidal maniacs demand a partition of GERMANY instead of acting like they were owed Palestine where they have no connection at all. That's evident in the fact that Argentina and Madagascar were also considered "promised" by some realtor in the sky.

[Anonymous]

https://www.aljazeera.com/video/newsfeed/2024/8/13/israeli-protesters-rally-for-the-right-to-rape-prisoners

Israeli's in Israel were out in the 10s of thousands protesting the most recent arrests of 5 soldiers being arrested for the "repeated stabbing of a Palestinian prisoners rectum with a wood object" and wanting the soldiers released and charges dropped. Israeli military later dropped all charges even though video came out showing it and Israeli Doctors reports on the man backed everything up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of us with common sense do not believe this ridiculous story.

This post sums up my thoughts.

Much has been written about
@NickKristof
's latest NYT opinion column over the past 24 hours, most of it focusing on the specific claims and their sourcing, but what I think deserves most attention is something broader: how this kind of journalism, whatever its intentions, ultimately makes accountability harder to achieve rather than easier, and harms the very people it claims to champion.

The principle that Israeli abuses should be investigated and condemned is not in dispute, and nobody serious is arguing otherwise. Israel is not above scrutiny, and in fact it operates under more intense international scrutiny than almost any country on earth, routinely held to standards applied nowhere else.

The problem here is something different entirely: the complete collapse of evidentiary standards the moment Israel is the subject.

This piece reads less like rigorous reporting and more like a catalogue of hearsay, unverifiable allegations, and activist claims stitched together into a sweeping moral indictment. Its sourcing leans heavily on Euro Med Human Rights Monitor, an organisation repeatedly criticised over extremist ties, disinformation, and deeply questionable methodology, yet treated throughout as a credible authority while its leadership openly engages in pro Hamas propaganda on X.

Worse, the same ecosystem of activists and self appointed “experts” that amplifies Euro Med’s claims online increasingly feeds narratives into more established organisations and media outlets, laundering deeply contested allegations into the appearance of institutional credibility.

The most severe claims are anonymous, uncorroborated, and presented in the emotional register of established fact rather than allegation, despite lacking meaningful evidentiary backing. Yet Kristof largely adopts them without serious scrutiny, publishing the piece in the Opinion section because even the already diminished evidentiary standards often applied to reporting on the Israeli Palestinian conflict would likely not suffice for it to pass as straight news reporting.

This approach doesn't strengthen accountability, it actively destroys it. When every allegation is immediately inflated into systematic rape and "standard operating procedure" before any serious verification, genuine investigation becomes harder rather than easier.

Real abuses, if they occurred, get buried beneath maximalist narratives so extreme that large portions of the public simply stop trusting any of it, and the people who actually suffered pay that price.

It also alienates the vast majority of Israelis and Jews worldwide, including the many who are perfectly capable of criticising Israeli policy and supporting investigations into misconduct, but who understandably recoil when accusations begin resembling modernised blood libels dressed up as human rights reporting. The framing matters enormously, and so does proportionality, and so does evidence.

Nor does any of this serve Palestinians. Atrocity inflation entrenches both sides deeper into defensive tribalism, and every dubious claim amplified by a prestigious outlet makes legitimate criticism easier to dismiss when it actually matters.

The timing compounds everything. On a day when documented reporting on Hamas sexual violence was again circulating, the NYT chose to run an opinion column built substantially on unverifiable anonymous testimony asserting that Israelis are conducting systemic rape campaigns, not as a rigorously evidenced investigative report but as an opinion piece with the imprimatur of the paper of record.

Kristof is not a naive bystander in any of this. In 2014 he used the full credibility of the NYT to repeatedly platform Somaly Mam, a Cambodian anti-trafficking activist whose harrowing personal story he championed across multiple columns, until it emerged that her backstory was substantially fabricated and he was forced to issue a public correction. When challenged this time around on his sourcing, corroboration, and methodology, he defaulted to bad faith engagement on social media rather than addressing the underlying concerns seriously.

It is the same pattern, playing out again in a different context. Real journalism requires skepticism, corroboration, and restraint applied consistently regardless of the subject, and when those standards disappear the moment Israel is involved, what remains is not human rights reporting but narrative activism wearing a journalist's costume that does far more harm than good to everyone it claims to serve.

pot meet kettle

?? Did we read the same article? And the one I posted up thread about the West Bank rape that was an article and not an opinion piece? If Israel is honestly concerned there is not enough journalist integrity here why don’t they let journalist into Gaza to report? Pot meet kettle yet again.

You will never get an answer as to why they won't let journalists (who weren't killed by them) into Gaza. We all know why. These psychos have spent years spreading lies about Palestinians with no pushback. Meanwhile, we've been subjected to propaganda which has been proven propaganda and they have nothing to say. They genuinely believe pp are stupid as hell. They're so bad at defending Israel because they got use no one ever questioning a single thing Israel ever did, so now they blackmail, intimidate and play victim to silence everyone. We're supposed to take their "evidence" seriously despite the evidence being laughably bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://x.com/i/status/2055047885671027127

Large groups of Israeli supporters protesting outside the NYT. They are more upset at the organization for publishing the story than they are at the soldiers who perpetrated the crimes. It almost gives the pro rape protest vibes like they had in Israel.

That’s just bonkers. The Palestinians I heard from after 10/7 all started their statements with “what Hamas did on 10/7 was horrific” and the. They would go on to defend their people. Why can’t Osraeli supporters do the same of at least acknowledging a truth? Without starting from acknowledgement there will never be peace. Which maybe that is their end game - I use to buy into just thinking that they reacted because they feared for their existence.but I’m starting to believe it much more manipulative than that.

That your starting point is STILL Oct 7, is why you're just pathetic. *Oct 6* was already the deadliest year for Palestinian children in the WEST BANK where there is no Hamas, so why isn't that the excuse for why Oct 7 happened? What wasn't any day the Israelis raped or killed thousands of Palestinians BEFORE Oct 7 not considered the starting point?

That's why Israel is the most hated country in the world. Because most ppl have actually educated themselves on when they started raping and killing Palestinians, where as you childishly cling to "It started Oct 7"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://x.com/i/status/2055047885671027127

Large groups of Israeli supporters protesting outside the NYT. They are more upset at the organization for publishing the story than they are at the soldiers who perpetrated the crimes. It almost gives the pro rape protest vibes like they had in Israel.

That’s just bonkers. The Palestinians I heard from after 10/7 all started their statements with “what Hamas did on 10/7 was horrific” and the. They would go on to defend their people. Why can’t Osraeli supporters do the same of at least acknowledging a truth? Without starting from acknowledgement there will never be peace. Which maybe that is their end game - I use to buy into just thinking that they reacted because they feared for their existence.but I’m starting to believe it much more manipulative than that.

Spare us! Many Palestinians *applauded* the Hamas rampage. And so did their blinkered supporters, included esteemed college professors like the Cornell academic who called it "exhilarating."

Just so I'm clear: Israelis are allowed to set up chairs to watch Gaza get bombed and treat it like a sport (in 2014), allowed to celebrate their rapists on TV. They're allowed to vote for savages who kill Palestinians. They're allowed to call for genocide because of ONE day in Oct, but you expect Palestinians to weep over the monsters who stole everything from them and were partying outside their concentration camp?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone in the world loathes Zionists and they have exposed who they really are to the world- violent psychopaths with no empathy. There is no going back. International pariahs. I am loving every second of it.

Don’t worry people hate Palestine just as much.

Palestinians aren't the reason free speech is dead in the west.

Palestinians aren't the reason hundreds of billions of dollars are gone from the US.

Palestinians aren't the ones pushing America into wars based on lies

Palestinians haven't turned Congress into their b**ch

Palestinians haven't done a f***ing thing to the world. They were the ones who paid for the sins of the west. Get it through your head: The ones killing them were rejects who brought terrorism to Palestine. If Europe genuinely loved Jews, they would've immediately forced Germany to give up land for what *they* did. Instead, we have Euro govt filth pretending to be all in love w/ Israel when it's actually intimidation and blackmail and making sure their former residents never come back to Europe.

[Anonymous]

Israel vs the Nytimes.

Never thought I’d see the day

[Anonymous]

OP, your headline is incorrect. The rape victims Kristoff spoke with are in the West Bank, so the scum on here who constantly talk about "Khamas" should STFU. They don't have "Khamas" to point to for why their f***ing precious demons were raping men, women and children from the West Bank.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, your headline is incorrect. The rape victims Kristoff spoke with are in the West Bank, so the scum on here who constantly talk about "Khamas" should STFU. They don't have "Khamas" to point to for why their f***ing precious demons were raping men, women and children from the West Bank.

+1

(and thank you for not backing down from this lying Zionist weirdo who keeps reporting posts and trying to convince everyone that there’s only one poster outraged by Israel’s policies and actions)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Israel vs the Nytimes.

Never thought I’d see the day

Here’s hoping this internecine battle results in drastic reform or mutual destruction since both have been at the center of Zionism’s propaganda campaign of evil over the past 80 years.

[Anonymous]

Mehdi Hasan asked an Israeli lawyer if he was shocked by the NYT's piece on Israeli soldiers raping Palestinian detainees.

His answer? 'Of course not.'

Not because it's false. Because it's old news. Al Jazeera reported it in 2024. He testified about it in 2025. B'Tselem issued reports. Even Israel's own public defender wrote about the torture.

Rape by dogs. Women shackled to metal tables for two days. Men raped three times-after being hospitalized. Children threatened with sexual abuse.

Palestinians have been saying this for years. So what's new? Nothing. Except the New York Times finally published it.

Congrats to the Zionists for now importing Israel's "right to rape" protest to America.