Sounds like it was the BBC that had omitted the context in the original headline. If anything this highlights how wild it is that Reddit titles still can’t be edited
The only reason I can think of for that rule is to prevent people from posting something that's very agreeable and then changing it to something terrible once it has thousands of upvotes, and making it look like many people support the terrible statement.
Not even mods can do this in Reddit, though. Seems like an unreasonable restriction.
If only there was a system that logged every moderator action into a public page that everybody can see. Maybe we can call it "modlog" or something like that.
Despite the BBC their extreme pro-Israel bias they never report these titles without sneakily shoving the claim on a third party so they can absolve themselves of their lies.
According to web archive this is the first title but it had been taken a while after the fact.
I mean, it’s pretty standard for newsrooms to report who is making a claim. I read Reuters stories all the time that quote TASS (Russian news agency) without verifying the veracity of the report. I can’t recall a time the reports didn’t say something akin to “Reuters cannot verify the accuracy of the claim at this time”
Def not cool of the BBC to originally bury the source of the claim in the headline though. Thats bad reporting.
"Hamas has denied its forces committed sexual violence against women or mistreated female hostages.
However, a UN mission concluded in March 2024 that there were "reasonable grounds" to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred during the 7 October attack in multiple locations, including rape and gang rape, and that there was "convincing information" that hostages had been subjected to sexual violence, including rape and sexualised torture."
Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1mz8gxzg82o
That's really, really fuckin' suspicious. If the sexual violence was systematic, the way that the Israeli gov't claims, how is it that not even one person is willing to personally talk about it with a UN team?
This is not a mandated UN mission. Simply a visit from a propagandist. It is like calling statements from Francesca Albanese "undeniable evidence."
But even the Patten report, no matter how much it tried to obscure it, concluded there was no evidence of any rape except "anonymous witnesses". Which it did not verify because Israel blocked it. Patten is literally repeating statements the IDF and Israeli newspapers. Nothing more.
Im sure it happened and thats fucking horrible, but what Israel (and the headline) is claiming, is that it was everywhere and part of hamas orders. In reality, according to the number of verifiable reports, it was no more than rape cases in every other invasion elsewhere.
Its infinitely unlikely that there were zero rape cases. Where there is war and men, there is rape. This has been true for thousands of years. Its just nowhere near as big of a widespread issue as Israel makes it out to be.
Rape does not happen during a raid. It happens after a raid. The notion that men will raid a place and start raping people while helicopters are shooting at them is ludicrously stupid.
If any rape had happened it would have happened to captives. Which it did not. Because Hamas is not a genocidal rape cult like the IDF.
Screaming rape about Hamas is straight blood libel against Palestinians.
You see, the entire world is against Israel, so if anyone but Israel says something about Israel it's a lie. Except when it's something good, they make an exception for the rare instance this happens
lol I just got banned for commenting in this thread. Not sure what I even said but presumably for criticizing the IDF’s war crimes. The mods there are unhinged.
Worldnews is the most astroturfed pro-Israel subreddit in the entire site. Anything that talks about Israel-Palestine has hundreds of Mossad trolls working overtime. The only time you'll see a post in Worldnews being anti-Israel is if the thing being talked about is so damn egregious that the trolls can't brute force positivity on it. Like the time when someone revealed Israel was using AI to target people and that it was acceptable to kill 100 civilians to get rid of one senior Hamas member.
I got a ban from there after being confronted by a /pol/ troll. One of the ones that attacks things they don't like as being Indian. They said something about them needing to be genocided. I called them a nazi. That was the reason for the ban.
So that's why I'm pretty sure the mods of subreddit are basically /pol/. I think that whole subreddit is a front for controlling narratives.
The original 1988 Hamas covenant, which has never been revoked officially, literally quotes a Muslim scholar?
Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory).
Sounds like it was the BBC that had omitted the context in the original headline. If anything this highlights how wild it is that Reddit titles still can’t be edited
The only reason I can think of for that rule is to prevent people from posting something that's very agreeable and then changing it to something terrible once it has thousands of upvotes, and making it look like many people support the terrible statement.
Not even mods can do this in Reddit, though. Seems like an unreasonable restriction.
If only there was a system that logged every moderator action into a public page that everybody can see. Maybe we can call it "modlog" or something like that.
Impossible!
I mean people do that in comments anyway.
Only let the OP add new title candidates, but then use reddit voting to select the replacement?
Probably still game-able, though
Despite the BBC their extreme pro-Israel bias they never report these titles without sneakily shoving the claim on a third party so they can absolve themselves of their lies.
According to web archive this is the first title but it had been taken a while after the fact.
https://web.archive.org/web/20250708132132/https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1mz8gxzg82o
I mean, it’s pretty standard for newsrooms to report who is making a claim. I read Reuters stories all the time that quote TASS (Russian news agency) without verifying the veracity of the report. I can’t recall a time the reports didn’t say something akin to “Reuters cannot verify the accuracy of the claim at this time”
Def not cool of the BBC to originally bury the source of the claim in the headline though. Thats bad reporting.
"Hamas has denied its forces committed sexual violence against women or mistreated female hostages.
However, a UN mission concluded in March 2024 that there were "reasonable grounds" to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred during the 7 October attack in multiple locations, including rape and gang rape, and that there was "convincing information" that hostages had been subjected to sexual violence, including rape and sexualised torture." Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1mz8gxzg82o
One really, really important caveat here is that, The report said that "despite concerted efforts to encourage" victims to come forward, the team was unable to interview any of them. The UN mission was able to review reports, photos, and videos all provided by the Israeli gov't, but couldn't find a single victim willing to go on the record.
That's really, really fuckin' suspicious. If the sexual violence was systematic, the way that the Israeli gov't claims, how is it that not even one person is willing to personally talk about it with a UN team?
Why would any Israeli ever consent to talking to a UN team which is blatantly anti-Semitic, anti Israeli and pro Hamas exactly?
The UN is extremely pro Israel. It is desperate to confirm the Israeli rape hoax.
So, UN experts then. Seems more trustworthy than Israeli experts.
Why link to the UK state media outlet, rather than directly to the UN report?
This is not a mandated UN mission. Simply a visit from a propagandist. It is like calling statements from Francesca Albanese "undeniable evidence."
But even the Patten report, no matter how much it tried to obscure it, concluded there was no evidence of any rape except "anonymous witnesses". Which it did not verify because Israel blocked it. Patten is literally repeating statements the IDF and Israeli newspapers. Nothing more.
Im sure it happened and thats fucking horrible, but what Israel (and the headline) is claiming, is that it was everywhere and part of hamas orders. In reality, according to the number of verifiable reports, it was no more than rape cases in every other invasion elsewhere.
Its infinitely unlikely that there were zero rape cases. Where there is war and men, there is rape. This has been true for thousands of years. Its just nowhere near as big of a widespread issue as Israel makes it out to be.
Rape does not happen during a raid. It happens after a raid. The notion that men will raid a place and start raping people while helicopters are shooting at them is ludicrously stupid.
If any rape had happened it would have happened to captives. Which it did not. Because Hamas is not a genocidal rape cult like the IDF.
Screaming rape about Hamas is straight blood libel against Palestinians.
Believe all women, except when it’s Jewish women, who I hate. /s
Tell me a name of a woman who claims she was raped.
You see, the entire world is against Israel, so if anyone but Israel says something about Israel it's a lie. Except when it's something good, they make an exception for the rare instance this happens
Israeli experts in using sexual violence as a genocidal strategy, eh?
lol I just got banned for commenting in this thread. Not sure what I even said but presumably for criticizing the IDF’s war crimes. The mods there are unhinged.
Worldnews is the most astroturfed pro-Israel subreddit in the entire site. Anything that talks about Israel-Palestine has hundreds of Mossad trolls working overtime. The only time you'll see a post in Worldnews being anti-Israel is if the thing being talked about is so damn egregious that the trolls can't brute force positivity on it. Like the time when someone revealed Israel was using AI to target people and that it was acceptable to kill 100 civilians to get rid of one senior Hamas member.
World news is quite pro Israel.
I got a ban from there after being confronted by a /pol/ troll. One of the ones that attacks things they don't like as being Indian. They said something about them needing to be genocided. I called them a nazi. That was the reason for the ban.
So that's why I'm pretty sure the mods of subreddit are basically /pol/. I think that whole subreddit is a front for controlling narratives.
Am I the only one who wonder about a Hamas "genocidal" strategy? That they wish they could kill all Israelis, no doubt, but "genocidal strategy"?
Are we supposed to believe they thought they would get all Israelis on Oct 7th or something??
Maybe you should have some doubts, given that these kind of claims are circulated by Israel to manufacture consent
They do not with to kill all Israelis. Where did you get this ridiculous claim from?
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp
The original 1988 Hamas covenant, which has never been revoked officially, literally quotes a Muslim scholar?
Are these the same word or are these different words?
Usage of the word "obliteration" denotes images of peaceful protests and systematic dismantling in you?
Yes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_7_attacks?wprov=sfla1
Much peaceful.
Which one came first? The peaceful protest or the violent resistance against occupation?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba
I think there is a small typo in this title of about six letters