60+ Journalism Profs Demand Investigation into Controversial NYT Article Alleging Oct. 7 Mass Rape

[Uncle Joe]

A group of more than 60 journalism professors has written to The New York Times calling on the paper to commission an independent review of its report that members of Hamas committed widespread sexual violence on October 7. Numerous media outlets, as well as some of the paper’s own staff, have raised questions about the December 28 article headlined “Screams Without Words,” reported in part by a freelance Israeli journalist who had liked multiple posts on social media advocating for violence against Palestinians. The Times has even published subsequent reporting undercutting some of the key elements of the article, which was used by Israeli leaders and Western allies as justification for the brutal military campaign in Gaza that had already killed tens of thousands of Palestinians up to that point. “It was very troubling to professors of journalism to see such a shoddy article be published without a retraction or an investigation,” says Rutgers media studies professor Deepa Kumar, one of the signatories, author of Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire. She also says that as an academic, she is troubled by the mainstream media’s depiction of student encampments as places of hate and violence. “For those of us who have been to these encampments, we know that the atmosphere there is peaceful until the police show up and start to create chaos. … These are fantastic spaces of learning.”

Transcript: https://www.democracynow.org/2024/5/8...

Democracy Now! is an independent global news hour that airs on over 1,500 TV and radio stations Monday through Friday. Watch our livestream at democracynow.org Mondays to Fridays 8-9 a.m. ET.

[nocoincidences]

1. What dumbasses.

Watch Screams before Silence.

Disgusting people.

[JohnSJ]

2. Calling the survivors and victims liars is a disgrace is despicable. It only highlights what an hamas

apologist-putin outlet Democracy NOT is.

Blaming the U.S. for Russia attacking Ukraine, calling the victims of Oct 7 liars, F**K them, and f**k democracy now.

They claim they are independent.
independent implies objective, and democracy NOT has NEVER BEEN OBJECTIVE

It is a propaganda network, in the same way as faux is

Does Democracy NOT ever interview an opposing view point?

How many of those professors celebrated what happened October 7?

https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/some-us-professors-praise-hamass-october-7-terror-attacks#:~:text=That%20includes%20a%20number%20of,they%20should%20be%20physically%20assaulted.

[madaboutharry]

7. I call it "We Hate Democracy Now!"

Democracy Now and its Queen Bee Amy Goodman hate America and all things western. Calling Democracy Now a propaganda network is being charitable.

[JohnSJ]

8. +++

[TeamProg]

12. What's wrong with an investigation? If you want the truth to come out, I see nothing wrong with it.

It is only those who might be afraid of the truth that would fear an investigation of this sort, right?

[revmclaren]

14. Simple question.

Would it be OK to investigate the women in all rapes of women in the United States to 'prove the truth'?

Or is it that the proof of innocents of admitted murderers and rapists of Israelis (hamas filmed and laughed about it) is somehow different.

Simple question.

[TeamProg]

17. It's not the "women" who would be investigated, it's the facts behind the STORIES. See the difference?

[revmclaren]

20. Rape is rape.

I saw the videos. I saw the pictures.

People not calling the terrorists rapists and murderers have their own agendas...in mine and millions of other opinions out there.

Trying to find excuses for rapists is evil.

[madaboutharry]

16. #ME TOO UNLESS YOU'RE A JEW.

https://www.metoo-unlessurajew.com

[Behind the Aegis]

29. yup

[Chakaconcarne]

22. It would be worthwhile to investigate and for the NYT to substantiate their sources...

I don't see the issue and would put this to rest? We should want that, I would think?

[TeamProg]

25. +++

[SunSeeker]

37. It is shameful to assert there are no sources for this, after a mountain of evidence has been compiled.

[SunSeeker]

36. Here's an hour's worth of sources for you.

https://www.screamsbeforesilence.com/

To deny that Hamas committed systematic rape on October 7, at this late date, after all the evidence that has been compiled, is akin to holocaust denial.

[mzmolly]

18. That publication is pro-third party spoiler and always has been.

F them and their support of Hamas.

[Jim_S]

24. The paper of 'record' :-/

Did you watch the full video of Democracy Now? What is wrong with an independent investigation? Even within the ranks of their paper, there are questions about the substance of this article. One doesn’t have to look too far to see that the NYTimes is more than willing to obfuscate the truth. Remember the build-up to the Iraq invasion? How did all that work out?

[mzmolly]

40. I've seen enough of their videos

for a lifetime along with negative impact they have had on actual progress. I'm not interested in anymore of their BS propaganda.

Truth >>> https://www.screamsbeforesilence.com/

[Behind the Aegis]

30. I call it "Democracy? NO!"

[lapucelle]

31. Theocracy Now! shilling for authoritarian, extreme right wing religious fanatics.

[mzmolly]

3. Does this involve the question 'what were they wearing?'

[TwilightZone]

4. Oh, the irony.

Democracy Now seemingly accepts anything provided to them by Hamas-run organizations at face value. Their hyperfocus on only one side of the equation is exactly the kind of journalism against which they are railing.

[JohnSJ]

6. Have they ever interviewed an opposing point of view?

[JohnSJ]

5. Screams followed by silence

https://www.screamsbeforesilence.com/

[revmclaren]

10. Thank you for the link.

People need to see this. Unfortunately, I don't the think the people in the ops growing rec list will want to see the truth.

I can't believe there are actually people in this world who are trying to prove admitted terrorist murderers and rapists are not rapists.

[JohnSJ]

11. It is disgraceful.

[SunSeeker]

33. Wow. Thanks for posting that link. Hamas must be removed from the planet.

Beyond sickening.

[Progressive dog]

9. So they want us to believe that HAMAS

just came into Israel to peacefully protest. Nothing to see here. Are the Israelis who survived to be investigated by "journalists"?

[mcar]

13. This is foul

Last edited Wed May 8, 2024, 01:28 PM - Edit history (1)

The NYT article is not controversial, it is fact.

These professors seem like they would deny the Holocaust.

Disgusting.

[JohnSJ]

19. Are you saying the article is "fact"?

[mcar]

26. No, Hamas' brutality is fact

[mcar]

27. The NYT article documents facts

I've clarified my post.

[JohnSJ]

28. Thanks mcar. That is what I thought. Appreciate the clarification.

[sarisataka]

15. Funny how they never mention the livestreams and videos Hamas made of their actions

No, funny isn't the word. revolting, disgusting, revealing...

[SunSeeker]

21. So, they don't deny Hamas raped civilians, they're quibbling over what "mass" means!

OFFS

And the encampments were very much dens of hate, adopting Hamas terminology advocating for genocide of Israelis like "river to the sea" and referring to Jewish students as "Zionists."

This was at UCLA:

[BoomaofBandM]

23. I used to like some of democracy now, those days are long gone.

[Chakaconcarne]

32. DN is questioning the NYT reporting, which people here on DU do all the friggin' time

even go as far as to say the NYT is FAUX light....

I would think DN's call on the NYT to back up their reporting is completely reasonable and should receive zero push-back here?

[SunSeeker]

34. There is PLENTY of back up.

Watch this:

https://www.screamsbeforesilence.com/

[JohnSJ]

35. Except this seems to be a recurring theme, and it always is from the same groups. It doesn't matter what

the survivors, the hostages that were released said, or the videos taken by the terrorists and photos from others indicated.

I call on DN to back up their reporting.

DN is a propaganda outlet.

Anyone can call themselves a “journalist”. Fox News regurgitates a lot them, so does Russia and China, DN claims Julian Assaign is a journalist

[revmclaren]

38. As a side note, the rec list just keeps on growing

for this op. If anyone is unsure how to view it for whatever personal reasons...curiosity, screen shots, personal reminders of a dark time on DU...simply press the info button under the op an there you go.

[JohnSJ]

39. I noticed, and that in itself speaks volumes

[revmclaren]

45. I asked a question on a new Democracy Now

post by the same author. Something doesn't seem right...IMHO of course.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/132119082#post1

Let me know what you think

[Uncle Joe]

46. I posted an answer to you, didn't you read it? n/t

[revmclaren]

47. And I responded.

Still very uncomfortable for me.

May be time to repost some of the 'dark times' Democracy Now ' posts to jog memories. Especially since EarlG made it clearer that the alerting clause about not rehashing the last primary election only now means the 2020 election.

Have a great day

[Uncle Joe]

48. Post away.

I thought it was always the case of it being just the most previous primary.

You have a great day as well.

[JohnSJ]

49. Someone stating they are independent, does not mean they are objective. The only thing "independent"

means in Democracy Now's context, is that their funding is independent. It sure doesn't mean they are objective.

One thing I know is I never received an answer to a question I posted a couple of weeks ago or so.
Does Democracy Now ever interview someone with an opposing point of view?

[revmclaren]

50. I haven't found an instance. And im surfing through various archives.

One plus, if you can call it that, al Jazeera is no longer a major source of the Palestinian heath ministry information here.

[cliffside]

41. Having an independent investigation should not be unthinkable ...

and as we say nobody, including the ex on trial, should be above the law or unquestioned. That goes for the Times or DN. So why not investigate further?

Decades later we learned the true history of the coup in Iran and how it was reported at the time. The NY Times was reporting a different story back then.

Shaping one's perspective, or whatever you want to call it, is nothing new.

Scroll down to the fourth or fifth page if interested.

This was finally approved for release in 2004 ... fifty years late.

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP88-01314R000100350001-6.pdf

[SunSeeker]

42. Why don't these 60 journalists investigate it themselves?

Isn't that what journalists do? And since when are NYT journalists required to list all their sources?

I've got some sources for the intentionally blind 60. Here's descriptions of video taken by Hamas themselves of women with blood flowing from their crotches and rears: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67629181

And here's an hour's worth of sources, people who were there on 10/7: https://www.screamsbeforesilence.com/

Considering the MOUNTAIN of video, forensic and eye witness evidence of Hamas mass rapes on 10/7, to continue to cast doubt on it having happened is akin to holocaust denial. It is fucking vile.

BTW, the "journalist" Amy Goodman interviews at length in that Democracy Now video, Deepak Kumar, admits she has been a political activist for "30 years." She writes about Islamophobia and criticized the designation of Hamas as a terrorist organization. https://mronline.org/2009/01/21/behind-the-myths-about-hamas/ That is who is claiming these women weren't systematically raped.

[betsuni]

43. These "journalism professors" are disgusting. That's not journalism.

[Malmsy]

44. Suspicion of women reporting en masse about rape. But of course.

Why am I not surprised at this shit being amplified by those who see the world in binary, rather than human terms?

[Chainfire]

51. Wow! Where did the find 60+ Anti-Semite journalism professors?

Are they all Hamas?

[SunSeeker]

52. Those 60 "journalism professors" did not review the evidence of Hamas systematic rape.

It is shameful to assert there is no proof, after a mountain of evidence has been compiled. Here's an hour's worth of forensic, photo/video and eye witness evidence for you:
https://www.screamsbeforesilence.com/

Hamas paraded Shani Louk's half nude body on the back of a pickup through Gaza City on 10/7 to cheering (and spitting) crowds. Here's the video, and the picture of that gruesome scene, which won a journalism award:

And Hamas continued to rape the hostages well after 10/7. https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/03/26/middleeast/amit-soussana-israeli-hostage-hamas-sexual-assault-intl

To deny that Hamas committed systematic rape on 10/7, at this late date, after all the evidence that has been compiled, is akin to holocaust denial.

The Guardian in the UK, hardly a right wing rag, actually looked at a lot of the evidence and confirmed it points to systematic rape by Hamas.
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/18/evidence-points-to-systematic-use-of-rape-by-hamas-in-7-october-attacks