I want to give a demonstration of how the media, in this particular case the New York Times, fabricates and launders genocidal atrocity propaganda intentionally.
This really does epitomize the depravity of the Western media class.
In its piece on the latest UN report the New York Times uses the term "sexual violence" 10 times. Let's see how they use it to carefully construct a propaganda lie as a way of laundering their own "mass rape" hoax, even though they have to begrudgingly admit later in the piece, for the first time they have done so, that the UN report actually debunks it.
This refers to their use of the term "sexual violence" that is the most relevant and should have come right at the beginning of the piece, or at least right after the first time it is used. Instead it's buried in a section over halfway through the article, where it correctly notes that the UN report was unable to corroborate "claims of rape, sexualized torture and genital mutilation reported in the media."
Of course they don't say that these "news media reports" includes their own "mass rape" hoax articles, including notoriously the Jeffrey "I don't do evidence, I do stories" Gettleman, Adam Sella the food blogger straight of college, and Anat Schwartz the genocidal maniac who served in Israel military intelligence piece "Screams Without Words", which amazingly still has not been retracted after it has been totally destroyed, once again by this latest UN report as they themselves have to admit while burying it so that no one will notice.
I noticed.
In that same section, which again comes late in the article after the term has already been used multiple times, it uses it just once to say the report also "accused Israel" of sexual violence against Palestinians.
Notice the insertion of that phrase: "accused Israel". There is no "accused Hamas" right in the paragraph before that. No, for Hamas the report "says it". Not accused, not alleges it, no, it says it, as if it's a Pure Fact. For Israel it's just a random vague allegation and accusation. Ignore it, it means nothing.
So then we are left with 8 other times the NYT piece uses the term "sexual violence". 6 of them are at the very beginning of the article, one in the subheading, prominently displayed right under the headline, deploying it as a stated fact about Hamas on October 7.
Note again the lack of "accused Hamas", while it says "accused Israel" in the sentence right after. Again, for Israel everything is just an vague allegation to the New York Times and the media class, but everything you say about Palestinians is pure unadulterated fact. Literally from the same report. Astonishing depravity.
But then notice also: No mention of sexual violence by Israel against Palestinians in the subheading, even though the report goes into extensive detail about that, and it is much more damning than what it says about Hamas, because for Israel the report concludes that it actually is deliberate, systematic and planned, and extends to long before October 7 and the ongoing Gaza genocide, and actually does include sexualized torture
I detailed the findings of the report regarding systematic and planned Israeli sexual violence against Palestinian babies, girls, boys, women and men here:
But the New York Times doesn't find that worthy of mentioning in its subheading, or in the entirety of the article, aside from the aforementioned quick nod to it as an vague general "accusation" over halfway through the piece which 0.01% of people read.
No details. No harrowing emotionally manipulative descriptions like they do for the sexual violence claims about Hamas, which are prominently displayed from the sub-heading down to the entire beginning of the article, comprising the 6 other uses of the term "sexual violence".
So the New York Times reader has to go to over halfway through the article before it finally sees the statement that the report could not corroborate claims of rape, sexualized torture of genital mutilation. Again, 99.9% of people who see this piece by the NYT and just read the headline and subheading think that the report actually proved the "mass rape" hoax, when it explicitly does the opposite as the NYT itself had to admit but only buried late in the piece so that no one would read it.
Finally the two other uses of the phrase "sexual violence" are in the conclusion of the piece, where it says that Hamas denied it, and Israel also denied it and said it was horrible and terrible that they dared equate Moral Holy Saintly Israel to those dirty sub-human filthy Palestinians with regard to sexual violence.
This is how the New York Times and the media class fabricate propaganda under the pretense of doing "journalism" and "getting the facts right". Through omission, emphasis and de-emphasis, ordering of claims (in headlines and subheadings, buried late in the piece), presenting as fact versus presenting as allegation, they distort reality and turn it into a mangled propaganda construct.
And they know they're doing this, it's all intentional, and that is what makes them so depraved and vile. They are conscious liars, and the better you are able to distort and lie and fabricate propaganda, the more you get rewarded in the prestige media class.
This really does epitomize the depravity of the Western media class.
In its piece on the latest UN report the New York Times uses the term "sexual violence" 10 times. Let's see how they use it to carefully construct a propaganda lie as a way of laundering their own "mass rape" hoax, even though they have to begrudgingly admit later in the piece, for the first time they have done so, that the UN report actually debunks it.
This refers to their use of the term "sexual violence" that is the most relevant and should have come right at the beginning of the piece, or at least right after the first time it is used. Instead it's buried in a section over halfway through the article, where it correctly notes that the UN report was unable to corroborate "claims of rape, sexualized torture and genital mutilation reported in the media."
Of course they don't say that these "news media reports" includes their own "mass rape" hoax articles, including notoriously the Jeffrey "I don't do evidence, I do stories" Gettleman, Adam Sella the food blogger straight of college, and Anat Schwartz the genocidal maniac who served in Israel military intelligence piece "Screams Without Words", which amazingly still has not been retracted after it has been totally destroyed, once again by this latest UN report as they themselves have to admit while burying it so that no one will notice.
I noticed.
In that same section, which again comes late in the article after the term has already been used multiple times, it uses it just once to say the report also "accused Israel" of sexual violence against Palestinians.
Notice the insertion of that phrase: "accused Israel". There is no "accused Hamas" right in the paragraph before that. No, for Hamas the report "says it". Not accused, not alleges it, no, it says it, as if it's a Pure Fact. For Israel it's just a random vague allegation and accusation. Ignore it, it means nothing.
So then we are left with 8 other times the NYT piece uses the term "sexual violence". 6 of them are at the very beginning of the article, one in the subheading, prominently displayed right under the headline, deploying it as a stated fact about Hamas on October 7.
Note again the lack of "accused Hamas", while it says "accused Israel" in the sentence right after. Again, for Israel everything is just an vague allegation to the New York Times and the media class, but everything you say about Palestinians is pure unadulterated fact. Literally from the same report. Astonishing depravity.
But then notice also: No mention of sexual violence by Israel against Palestinians in the subheading, even though the report goes into extensive detail about that, and it is much more damning than what it says about Hamas, because for Israel the report concludes that it actually is deliberate, systematic and planned, and extends to long before October 7 and the ongoing Gaza genocide, and actually does include sexualized torture
I detailed the findings of the report regarding systematic and planned Israeli sexual violence against Palestinian babies, girls, boys, women and men here:
But the New York Times doesn't find that worthy of mentioning in its subheading, or in the entirety of the article, aside from the aforementioned quick nod to it as an vague general "accusation" over halfway through the piece which 0.01% of people read.
No details. No harrowing emotionally manipulative descriptions like they do for the sexual violence claims about Hamas, which are prominently displayed from the sub-heading down to the entire beginning of the article, comprising the 6 other uses of the term "sexual violence".
So the New York Times reader has to go to over halfway through the article before it finally sees the statement that the report could not corroborate claims of rape, sexualized torture of genital mutilation. Again, 99.9% of people who see this piece by the NYT and just read the headline and subheading think that the report actually proved the "mass rape" hoax, when it explicitly does the opposite as the NYT itself had to admit but only buried late in the piece so that no one would read it.
Finally the two other uses of the phrase "sexual violence" are in the conclusion of the piece, where it says that Hamas denied it, and Israel also denied it and said it was horrible and terrible that they dared equate Moral Holy Saintly Israel to those dirty sub-human filthy Palestinians with regard to sexual violence.
This is how the New York Times and the media class fabricate propaganda under the pretense of doing "journalism" and "getting the facts right". Through omission, emphasis and de-emphasis, ordering of claims (in headlines and subheadings, buried late in the piece), presenting as fact versus presenting as allegation, they distort reality and turn it into a mangled propaganda construct.
And they know they're doing this, it's all intentional, and that is what makes them so depraved and vile. They are conscious liars, and the better you are able to distort and lie and fabricate propaganda, the more you get rewarded in the prestige media class.
https://x.com/zei_squirrel/status/1801214011825901607
hey @ErikaSolomon, as you can see I read your latest NYT piece on the UN report in great detail.
Can you please explain why there is no discussion at all of the extensive detailed and quite harrowing documentation of what the report says is actual systematic and planned Israeli sexual violence against Palestinian girls, boys, women and men?
I assume you read the report before you wrote this article about it, so you must have read all that extensive documentation of Israeli troops and civilians sexually assaulting, beating, torturing, mutilating Palestinian children, women and men, right?
You read the report, so surely you must have read those parts.
Why is there no mention of that at all, zero, while you do discuss in detail the report's accusations of sexual violence against Hamas, which the report notes, as you yourself later correctly say over halfway through the piece, was not systematic or planned, unlike for Israel? Also, why did you not say that the report concludes that for Israel it was actually systematic and planned, and extends to before October 7 and the ongoing Gaza genocide, to the entire history of the occupation.
Don't you think that's maybe worth a mention? A sentence? You detail the claims about Hamas, so why not add that for Israel?
And why in that section did you use the term "accused" for Israeli sexual violence by the report, but for Hamas in the paragraph preceding, you say the report "says it", as a fact. Why accusation for one, and fact for the other.
That's strange to me. Can you explain that choice?
Can you also please explain why since the report's conclusions about Israel sexual violence against Palestinian children, women and men is much worse than what it says about October 7, you did not include any mention of it in the subheading of your article, while you did include it for Hamas?
If you can answer these questions I would greatly appreciate it.
Can you please explain why there is no discussion at all of the extensive detailed and quite harrowing documentation of what the report says is actual systematic and planned Israeli sexual violence against Palestinian girls, boys, women and men?
I assume you read the report before you wrote this article about it, so you must have read all that extensive documentation of Israeli troops and civilians sexually assaulting, beating, torturing, mutilating Palestinian children, women and men, right?
You read the report, so surely you must have read those parts.
Why is there no mention of that at all, zero, while you do discuss in detail the report's accusations of sexual violence against Hamas, which the report notes, as you yourself later correctly say over halfway through the piece, was not systematic or planned, unlike for Israel? Also, why did you not say that the report concludes that for Israel it was actually systematic and planned, and extends to before October 7 and the ongoing Gaza genocide, to the entire history of the occupation.
Don't you think that's maybe worth a mention? A sentence? You detail the claims about Hamas, so why not add that for Israel?
And why in that section did you use the term "accused" for Israeli sexual violence by the report, but for Hamas in the paragraph preceding, you say the report "says it", as a fact. Why accusation for one, and fact for the other.
That's strange to me. Can you explain that choice?
Can you also please explain why since the report's conclusions about Israel sexual violence against Palestinian children, women and men is much worse than what it says about October 7, you did not include any mention of it in the subheading of your article, while you did include it for Hamas?
If you can answer these questions I would greatly appreciate it.
@ErikaSolomon again, the report documents in harrowing detail the sexual violence, sexualized torture, desecration and mutilation of Palestinian girls, women, boys and men. Why no details of this in your article, and why no mention of it being systematic and planned?
https://x.com/zei_squirrel/status/1801214011825901607
hopefully Erika will respond to these what I think are very reasonable questions. Here's Chomsky giving a brief but succinct analysis of why the NYT and other outlets write how they write, from the headline to the subheadings to the articles themselves:
https://x.com/zei_squirrel/status/1719810323522224543
but at least the NYT had a section, buried late in the piece so no one would read it, accurately noting the report couldn't corroborate any claim of rape on October 7, and that claims of SGBV wasn't planned and systematic. The Guardian didn't even do that:
https://x.com/zei_squirrel/status/1801043309382537291
what the NYT and Guardian did in their pieces was the standard procedure of the entire media class btw: BBC, Reuters, AP, CNN, all of them.
No mention that the UN report said sexual violence by Israel actually is systematic and planned, and no harrowing details of the Israeli sexual violence, sexualized torture, beating, desecration and mutilation of Palestinian girls, boys, women and men.
Instead they all went with the harrowing emotionally manipulative details for October 7 claims of SGBV, intentionally omitting entirely or burying that it didn't include claims of rape, sexualized torture or genital mutilation which the report said could not be verified.
And many like the Guardian as I detailed in the previous thread I linked, when they did mention Israeli sexual violence just straight lied by saying it solely referred to "forced stripping of boys and men", erasing all the detailed documentation of sexual violence, assault, torture of girls and women and of boys and men beyond just the forced stripping. Again it includes sexualized torture, desecration and mutilation.
The BBC was by far the worst however. It didn't even give a passing mention of the Israeli sexual violence, and solely gave the emotionally manipulative selective quotes from the October 7 parts about SGVB, and of course without clarifying that it explicitly did not include rape, sexualized torture of genital mutilation.
I have said it before and I will say it again: The BBC is by far the most depraved and shameless genocidal Western propaganda rag. And of course this is why it is the most beloved by the entire Western media class, seen as the gold standard.
No mention that the UN report said sexual violence by Israel actually is systematic and planned, and no harrowing details of the Israeli sexual violence, sexualized torture, beating, desecration and mutilation of Palestinian girls, boys, women and men.
Instead they all went with the harrowing emotionally manipulative details for October 7 claims of SGBV, intentionally omitting entirely or burying that it didn't include claims of rape, sexualized torture or genital mutilation which the report said could not be verified.
And many like the Guardian as I detailed in the previous thread I linked, when they did mention Israeli sexual violence just straight lied by saying it solely referred to "forced stripping of boys and men", erasing all the detailed documentation of sexual violence, assault, torture of girls and women and of boys and men beyond just the forced stripping. Again it includes sexualized torture, desecration and mutilation.
The BBC was by far the worst however. It didn't even give a passing mention of the Israeli sexual violence, and solely gave the emotionally manipulative selective quotes from the October 7 parts about SGVB, and of course without clarifying that it explicitly did not include rape, sexualized torture of genital mutilation.
I have said it before and I will say it again: The BBC is by far the most depraved and shameless genocidal Western propaganda rag. And of course this is why it is the most beloved by the entire Western media class, seen as the gold standard.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
