Two of the three victims specifically singled out by the New York Times in a marquee exposé published in December, which alleged that Hamas had deliberately weaponized sexual violence during the October 7 attacks, were not in fact victims of sexual assault, according to the spokesperson for the Kibbutz Be’eri, which the Times identified as the location of the attack.

The Times article described three alleged victims of sexual assault for whom it reported specific biographical information. One, known as the “woman in the black dress,” was Gal Abdush. Some of her family members have contested the claims made by the Times. The other two alleged victims were unnamed teenage sisters from Kibbutz Be’eri whose precise ages were listed in the New York Times, making it possible to identify them.

When asked about the claims made by the New York Times, Paikin independently raised their name. “You’re talking about the Sharabi girls?” she said. “No, they just — they were shot. I’m saying ‘just,’ but they were shot and were not subjected to sexual abuse.” Paikin also disputed the graphic and highly detailed claims of the Israeli special forces paramedic who served as the source for the allegation, which was published in the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, and other media outlets. “It’s not true,” she told The Intercept, referring to the paramedic’s claims about the girls. “They were not sexually abused.”

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      You can keep screaming it over and over. Consider coming with evidence. People tend to take you more seriously when you do that.

      What’s that, there’s no evidence?

      • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        There is eyewitness evidence, which you ignore as usual.

        But it’s interesting to see that you think the UN is not a credible source. No doubt you’ll still keep quoting them when it serves your needs

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          No it’s literally Zaka and the discredited paramedic.

          The UN employee got questioned by Journalists today and it’s just the same stuff from this NYT article.

          A complete embaressment

          • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            The UN team did way more than that. It “conducted 33 meetings with Israeli representatives, examining more than 5,000 photographic images and 50 hours of video footage. It conducted 34 confidential interviews including with survivors and witnesses of the 7 October attacks, released hostages, first responders and others.”

            • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Yes you just mentioned Zaka in there.

              And after reviewing the footage the UN found zero evidence of rape.

              • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Wrong, they “found that there are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred in multiple locations, including rape and gang rape in at least three locations in southern Israel.”

                Just repeating “Zaka” over and over won’t make evidence disappear, as much as you wish it would.