NYT hatchet job on the IDF and Abu Akleh

The New York Times published an editorial on June 3 that broadly implied that Israel purposefully murdered Shireen Abu Akleh by cherry picking facts (and highlighting a truly stupid statement by Israeli military spokesperson Ran Kochav.)

After noting that the Palestinians blame Israel and Israel admits that there is a chance that it was Israeli fire that killed her, and quoting CNN's bogus "investigation" that ignored crucial facts and trusted "eyewitnesses" who are anything but reliable, the "Paper of Record" implies that Israel wanted to silence Abu Akleh:

The Palestinian Authority, Israel and the United States would do well to agree on an independent investigator to determine who shot Ms. Abu Akleh and establish whether she was a target because of her work as a journalist.   

It is nothing short of slanderous to say that Israel intentionally murdered Abu Akleh. I've already described in detail how, when all the evidence is viewed, it is highly likely that she was killed by Palestinian fire. The only people with guns who were close enough to Abu Akleh to have fired the shots consistent with the audio forensics evidence were Palestinian terrorists - both a group caught on video to the southeast of Abu Akleh and those who the very witnesses to her death falsely identified as Israeli snipers in buildings, who were in fact Palestinian snipers. (Israel had no snipers in buildings; Israeli snipers use different bullets, and other witnesses identified the snipers as Palestinian "Shebab.")

I will add one more piece of evidence to show how utterly incompetent the media and other investigators have been in the reporting of the events around Abu Akleh's death.

The NYT says:

CNN and other news organizations have begun their own investigations. After reviewing video footage, witnesses’ accounts and audio forensic analysis of the gunshots, CNN reported that the evidence suggested that “Abu Akleh was shot dead in a targeted attack by Israeli forces.” The witnesses and videos, it said, provided new evidence “that there was no active combat nor any Palestinian militants near Abu Akleh in the moments leading up to her death.”

Note the implication - that there is no doubt that Israel killed her, but Israel is lying by saying that there was active combat or militants near Abu Akleh before her death.

If she was killed by Palestinian militants, there doesn't have to have been any active combat, does there?  But even this is wrong. One can count many gunshots in the minutes before Abu Akleh's death.

In the very video that includes the gunshots that killed her, there are other gunshots heard in the minutes beforehand. And, as mentioned, we have both eyewitness and video evidence of militants in the area, closer than the IDF was.

In my next post, I will show even more such evidence of snipers on a rooftop that were much closer to Abu Akleh - not her shooters, because they are too close, but further proof that the CNN/Bellingcat investigations either inadvertently or purposefully ignored evidence available on the morning of May 11.

CNN and the other "investigations" knowingly ignored the presence of multiple Palestinian militants all over the area. They blame the IDF based on this airbrushing of the facts. The New York Times happily goes along with this facade of the IDF being the only group with guns remotely close enough to have the audio signature to have shot her, and this is 100% false and falsified.

---

---

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon! Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.  Read all about it here!