Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I bet this is just empty threats. Imagine all the horrific things that would come out about Israel's sexual violence at discovery time if a lawsuit lawsuit went through.

I doubt they are empty threats. I hope he does sue and wins big.
This story is a work of fiction.

Israel is a work of fiction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I bet this is just empty threats. Imagine all the horrific things that would come out about Israel's sexual violence at discovery time if a lawsuit lawsuit went through.

I doubt they are empty threats. I hope he does sue and wins big.
This story is a work of fiction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I bet this is just empty threats. Imagine all the horrific things that would come out about Israel's sexual violence at discovery time if a lawsuit lawsuit went through.

I doubt they are empty threats. I hope he does sue and wins big.
This story is a work of fiction.

Anonymous wrote:The lunatics are trying to claim that dogs can’t rape as if the one holding the leash wouldn’t be the one who’s actually using the dog to penetrate. Suddenly bestiality doesn’t exist at all. It’s amazing how these demons just move the goal posts, meanwhile, Pinochet’s Chile and Nazis did it, so I guess now we can question that the Nazis did it since the very people currently claiming it’s a lie are saying Jews lied about Nazis doing it, right?

All you have to do is watch the translation of Israeli TV. These demons admit everything that they do with smiles on their faces, They’re depraved monsters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Regarding the Kristof column. Let’s put aside the dog rape stuff and focus on one additional specific example of why it was such poor and indefensible journalism. There were two named victims of sexual assault by Israeli soldiers in Kristof’s column.

One of them Issa Amro. He was detained and interrogated for 10 hours on 10/7.

The only problem? He himself put out the below video about what happened to him that day. I will link to it in this week’s newsletter. In the video, he claims his hands were tied tightly, they cursed at him, and he was hit several times. But at no point does he suggest anything even close to sexual assault.

Two weeks later, he was interviewed by ABC news. Again, no mention of sexual assault. He would later be interviewed by the Washington Post and would claim he was threatened with sexual assault (but not that it occurred). This person repeatedly talked about the events that day and never once claimed sexual assault except when it became convenient to fit Kristof’s narrative to provide evidence of a systemic problem. And no, it’s not a coincidence that this activist has done a ton of media.

Did Kristof know that there was a contemporaneous account from one of the two named alleged victims that does not claim sexual assault? Did the NYT editors know the person being cited changed their story?

Was Amro even asked why his story changed?

None of this seemed to matter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I bet this is just empty threats. Imagine all the horrific things that would come out about Israel's sexual violence at discovery time if a lawsuit lawsuit went through.

I doubt they are empty threats. I hope he does sue and wins big.
This story is a work of fiction.

Anonymous wrote:

Regarding the Kristof column. Let’s put aside the dog rape stuff and focus on one additional specific example of why it was such poor and indefensible journalism. There were two named victims of sexual assault by Israeli soldiers in Kristof’s column.

One of them Issa Amro. He was detained and interrogated for 10 hours on 10/7.

The only problem? He himself put out the below video about what happened to him that day. I will link to it in this week’s newsletter. In the video, he claims his hands were tied tightly, they cursed at him, and he was hit several times. But at no point does he suggest anything even close to sexual assault.

Two weeks later, he was interviewed by ABC news. Again, no mention of sexual assault. He would later be interviewed by the Washington Post and would claim he was threatened with sexual assault (but not that it occurred). This person repeatedly talked about the events that day and never once claimed sexual assault except when it became convenient to fit Kristof’s narrative to provide evidence of a systemic problem. And no, it’s not a coincidence that this activist has done a ton of media.

Did Kristof know that there was a contemporaneous account from one of the two named alleged victims that does not claim sexual assault? Did the NYT editors know the person being cited changed their story?

Was Amro even asked why his story changed?

None of this seemed to matter.

Anonymous wrote:

I bet this is just empty threats. Imagine all the horrific things that would come out about Israel's sexual violence at discovery time if a lawsuit lawsuit went through.