Accident – Death – Obituary News :
The Intercept’s investigation into the Times article has raised significant questions about the reporting and credibility of the claims made by the paramedic and the accuracy of the details presented in the story. The rejection of the Times article by the Kibbutz Be’eri spokesperson adds to the skepticism surrounding the original reporting.
As the controversy continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how the New York Times will address the discrepancies and respond to the criticism of its reporting on the October 7 attacks. The credibility of the paper and its journalists is on the line as the public demands transparency and accountability in the wake of these serious allegations.
For more information on this developing story, stay tuned to The Intercept for updates and further investigation into the claims made by the New York Times regarding sexual violence on October 7.
Neighbors of the two girls killed — who were sisters, 13 and 16 — said their bodies had been found alone, separated from the rest of their family. This tragic incident has left the community in shock and mourning.
The Israeli military allowed a paramedic to speak with reporters on the condition of anonymity due to his service in an elite unit. The paramedic provided details of the gruesome scene, stating that the girls were found between the safe room and the dining room, having been shot. The grandparents of the girls traveled from Britain to the kibbutz to view the home where the incident occurred and to meet with neighbors, family members, and officials.
Contradictory accounts of the incident have emerged, with the grandparents describing a different scenario than what was initially reported. They claimed that the girls were found cuddled together, with their mother trying to protect them. This conflicting information has added to the confusion surrounding the tragedy.
Months before the incident was reported in the media, the family had already given interviews offering details that contradicted the later depiction of events. The family members shared that Palestinian fighters had entered their home, broken into the safe room, and killed the mother and daughters. The bodies of the girls were identified through dental records and DNA tests, as one of the girls was initially reported missing.
Despite the various testimonies and accounts provided by witnesses and family members, the truth about what happened remains unclear. One family member expressed uncertainty about the details surrounding the girls’ deaths and emphasized the need for concrete information.
Reports of sexual violence during the attacks have also surfaced, with a paramedic claiming to have witnessed evidence of sexual assault on the girls. However, these claims have been met with skepticism, as inconsistencies in the paramedic’s statements have been noted.
The incident has sparked controversy and raised questions about the accuracy of the information being reported. Conflicting narratives from different sources have made it challenging to determine the exact circumstances surrounding the tragic deaths of the two young girls. Israeli special forces paramedic, referred to as “G,” recently described the harrowing aftermath of the brutal rape and execution of two Israeli girls at Kibbutz Be’eri during the October 7 Massacre. The paramedic’s account of the tragic events shed light on the heinous crimes committed on that fateful day.
The paramedic’s chilling recollection of the events was shared by journalist Levy on Twitter, sparking widespread interest in the case. Levy’s subsequent post invited media outlets to reach out for interviews with the paramedic to uncover more details about the horrors he witnessed in the kibbutzim. The paramedic’s interview on CNN further underscored the severity of the situation, confirming the presence of the two girls at Kibbutz Be’eri during the massacre.
Investigative efforts led by journalist Schwartz revealed the paramedic’s consistent narrative across various media platforms. Schwartz’s determination to verify the details of the story highlighted the organized nature of the sexual violence that occurred on October 7. The lack of corroborating witnesses from the kibbutzim raised suspicions about the systematic nature of the crimes.
The United Nations Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict, Pramila Patten, recently reported evidence of sexual violence during the coordinated attack by Hamas and other armed groups. The report indicated instances of rape and gang-rape at multiple locations, including the Nova music festival site, Road 232, and Kibbutz Re’im. While the mission team was unable to establish sexual violence at Kibbutz Be’eri, the call for a full investigation underscored the severity of the situation.
Amidst media coverage and UN reports, the Times’ handling of the case drew scrutiny for its portrayal of the alleged assaults at Kibbutz Be’eri. Conflicting details and single-sourced assertions from the paramedic raised questions about the accuracy of the reporting. The controversy surrounding the Times’ coverage intensified following revelations about the reporter’s social media activity and questions about the reporting process.
The family members of the victims, including Lianne, a British citizen, have been vocal in pressuring governments to address the situation and secure the release of the girls’ father, believed to be held hostage in Gaza. The lack of clarity in the Times’ coverage and inconsistencies in the reporting process have sparked public outrage and calls for accountability.
As the investigation into the October 7 Massacre continues, the paramedic’s firsthand account and the UN report serve as crucial pieces of evidence in uncovering the truth behind the brutal crimes committed on that tragic day. The need for a thorough investigation and accountability for the perpetrators remains paramount in seeking justice for the victims and their families.
The New York Times Faces Backlash Over Leak Investigation
Recently, The New York Times found itself embroiled in controversy once again, but this time it wasn’t due to the content of its reporting. Instead, the paper’s masthead came under fire for launching a highly unusual leak investigation, sparking outrage among its staff and the journalism community.
Unusual Leak Investigation Sparks Criticism
Unlike previous incidents where the paper responded by reviewing its reporting practices, the focus this time was on identifying the source of leaked information. The Times union condemned the probe for racially profiling journalists with Middle Eastern and North African backgrounds, as well as targeting reporters who had used proper channels to voice concerns about the reporting.
Times Editor Defends Investigation
In response to the mounting criticism, Times Executive Editor Joe Kahn defended the internal probe in a companywide email. He argued that the investigation was warranted because the whistleblowers had disclosed details about an unpublished episode of “The Daily.” However, many within the organization disagreed, pointing out that the issue at hand was not about what the Times didn’t publish, but rather about the quality of the reporting that was published.
Whistleblowers Speak Out
According to sources within the Times, the decision to leak information was a last resort for individuals who felt that there were no other effective avenues to address serious concerns about journalistic integrity. Attempting to silence those who raised valid criticisms, they argued, only served to deflect attention from the real issue at hand – a failure in journalistic standards.
In conclusion, the fallout from the leak investigation at The New York Times serves as a reminder of the importance of fostering a workplace culture that encourages transparency and open dialogue. By addressing concerns in a constructive manner, news organizations can uphold their commitment to delivering accurate and ethical journalism.
.