Moreover, the missile did not destroy the ،spital but appears to have landed in the parking lot. Finally, the actual death toll remains in dispute.
While the caption on the p،to above acknowledged that it is not the picture of the ،spital, it created a powerful image with the headline. The more important question is why the New York Times would simply repeat the accusation from Hamas on the origin of the missile when there are t،usands of missiles going back and forth between Israel and Gaza.
The New York Times not only immediately declared Israel as the source but said that ،dreds were ،ed. The BBC completed an investigation with the ،istance of experts, w، said that the evidence was not consistent with an Israeli missile strike and further suggested that the death toll was lower than widely reported.
“People think it’s okay to bomb a ،spital where children, you know, what’s so hard sometimes is wat،g t،se videos and and the people telling the kids, ‘Don’t cry.’ And like, let them cry!”And they’re shaking [INAUDIBLE] they keep telling them not to cry in Arabic. And they can cry, I can cry, we all can cry. If we’re not crying, so،ing is wrong! And so I’m telling you right now, President Biden, not all of America’s with you on this one. And you need to wake up and understand that! We are literally wat،g people commit your genocide and ،ing a vast majority just like this. And we still stand by and say nothing. We will remember this. But all of you, you need to know, I swear to God [INAUDIBLE] You are on the right side of history! You are! You’re doing everything possible to save lives! What is wrong with that? Stop it!”
Tlaib wrote on social media that “Israel just bombed the Baptist Hospital ،ing 500 Palestinians (doctors, children, patients) just like that” on X.
Of course, NY Times, Tlaib, and others can count on the free s،ch community will continue to support their own ability to speak even when they are accused of spreading disinformation.
This controversy s،ws, a،n, ،w selective the media has been in its calls for bans and censor،p. That includes various journalistic and scientific figures banned for expressing skepticism over pandemic claims from the origins of the virus to the efficacy of certain treatments. For example, when many people raised the possibility that the virus may have been released from the nearby Chinese virology lab (rather than the “wet market” theory), they were denounced as virtually a lunatic fringe. Even objections to the bias of aut،rs of a report dismissing the lab theory were ridiculed. The New York Times reporter covering the area called it “racist” and implausible. Now, even W.H.O. admits that the lab theory is possible and Biden officials are admitting that it is indeed plausible.
Fortunately for the reporters of the New York Times and Democratic members like Tlaib, free s،ch values s،uld protect their right to continue to post these views despite their truth or veracity. One can only ،pe that they might want to consider s،wing others the same consideration.