Worth noting: > In a phone call leaked by the Tehran Times

It's a recorded audio file, not an opinion or hearsay, so I don't think the leaking organization matters.

Would you feel better if an anonymous user uploaded it to Reddit/Twitter/Tiktok?

NYT, WaPo, etc would disclose whether they had been able to verify the source or authenticity of the recording in some way.

A state-controlled newspaper in an autocratic county? It could be something they did verify as true and just happens to align with their agenda - or it could be nonsense and they know it. Or they couldn't just shrugged and said "makes the US look bad, run it."

I think most people don't appreciate the levels of internal review and fact-checking that go on when a national paper in the US ends up with a big story in its lap.

> NYT, WaPo, etc would disclose whether they had been able to verify the source or authenticity

Oh yeah, like the verification of their stories of the oven babies

If anything, this whole ordeal has shown that all media is at some level censored and controlled by special interests behind the scenes

We’ve been living in a post-truth world for a long time, way before AI

Who lived in a world with no lies, Adam?

Great point. Ever since we’ve had language, we’ve had lies

My comment just points to the naïveté of thinking that somehow big media are big sources of unbiased truth that we can all trust

NYT, WaPo, etc aren't very likely to publish it. It'd be in the same bucket as Jeff Epstein - politically toxic and the majors aren't going to take the lead drawing attention to it even if it is plausible. Facts would need to be in the public sphere for a while and gaining traction before they pick it up.

It might be the Iranians making stuff up, although realistically that sort of activity is what should be expected without any leaks at all. It has been obvious since around 2016 that the corporate media doesn't have the ability to single-handily dominate the narrative any more and that will impact national security propaganda because, you know, what military would be stupid enough to leave that sort of messaging to chance?

> Schwartz said as much in an interview with Israeli Army Radio on December 31. “The New York Times said, ‘Let’s do an investigation into sexual violence’ — it was more a case of them having to convince me,” she said. Her host cut her off: “It was a proposal of The New York Times, the entire thing?”

> The bigger scandal may be the reporting itself, the process that allowed it into print, and the life-altering impact the reporting had for thousands of Palestinians whose deaths were justified by the alleged systematic sexual violence orchestrated by Hamas the paper claimed to have exposed

https://theintercept.com/2024/02/28/new-york-times-anat-schw...

Surely the NYT would verify, right?

And of course the WaPo has no conflicts of interest being owned by Bezos either

I would.

10 years ago, no. Today? An audiofile is really easy to make with or even just a couple people in a studio.

It's also really easy for Greenblatt to issue a denial.

That is, of course, unless it is true.

A denial wouldnt necessarily indicate that it is false (he has every reason to deny it, but lying is a risk) but the lack of a denial is very strong evidence that it is, in fact, true.

There is a very low cost to denying lies, so the absence of a denial (unlike its presence) is a very good indicator.

"No rumour is true until it's categorically denied" -- Otto Von Bismarck.

> There is a very low cost to denying lies.

So people can just lie.

See: Clinton and Lewinski, the Profumo affair, Russian troop buildup on the Ukraine border 2022, Russian attacks on Ukraine 2014+, claims by NSA execs prior to the Snowden leaks, etc.

I don't doubt he said it, because I think it's pretty plain to see it's a correct analysis - antisemitism is rife with the new generation to a degree that, to me at least, is quite scary. I just think it's quite instructive that a hostile state is trying to use this to sow discord.

There's an extent to which that word was used to mean criticism of the previous administration's foreign policy. Politicians are generally not known for their honor, and will try to hide behind anything, no matter how sacrosanct.

> antisemitism is rife with the new generation

Is there an example one could provide of this which shows members of the new generation criticizing Jewish people for being Jewish? Surely it wouldn’t be examples of people voicing criticism of the actions of people who happen to be Jewish.

Oh sweetheart. Just search twitter for “jews”.

Yeah but what was the prevalence of anti-Israeli sentiment prior to the 40k civilian massacre?

I wasn’t even paying attention to the news one day and CNN was casually interviewing a Palestinian father holding a dead baby corpse in his hands, with the head covered in a blood soaked bag. On CNN, at 10am.

You don’t have to be particularly impressionable to be affected by this.

History is going to be unmerciful in its documenting of this, no one is going to forget the sin here.

Yeah, fair enough; it was a mistake to ask for examples, I realize that now. One could probably go to twitter and search “chemtrails” and find a lot of words written seemingly without preceding critical thought. I don’t think many people would assert that chemtrail conspiracy theories are rife with the new generation, however.

Since you didn't even want to google "gen z antisemitism", I'm not sure any evidence would appease you. I'm sure it's all conveniently dismissed as earnest commentary on the actions of Israel.

Random search result: https://time.com/6958957/growing-antisemitism-young-american...

Sure, it's an old trope to sit back and ask for examples, pretending your epistemic standard is whether someone on a forum can muster up the examples, and then when nobody does or you wave them away, you've proved that something isn't happening. You've done the investigation.

https://www.newsweek.com/gen-z-infected-antisemitism-spreadi...

Anyone who actually cares the tiniest bit about antisemitism would have the decoupling of Israel and the Jewish identity as the first order of business. Nothing comes even close.

A state consistently using Jews to excuse its actions, behavior which is validated by US policymakers, it's just orders of magnitude worse than anything else, Israel has promoted antisemitism more in a year than every other group in the last 50 years put together.

Only worth noting if Greenblatt has denied the phone call.

E.g when Russia stopped denying the presence of North Korean troops, it was pretty much cast iron proof that Ukraine's recent videos of the prisoners were not fakes.

A denial wouldnt necessarily mean it wasn't true, but the lack of a denial is very strong evidence that it is.

Whenever the Russian government denies something like you're suggesting, I take it to be an admission. I'm usually right.

You're naive and wrong.

So you’re admitting that the call was real, we should just ignore it because it’s inconvenient to your beliefs?

You shouldn't ignore it, you should listen carefully, and you should ponder why an enemy state wants it to outrage you.

They know their argument is bolstered by the truth being widely known in this case, so it benefits them to leak it.

Why is it so important to you that the truth is suppressed?

Somehow people like you always find a way to blame the Jews eyeroll - can't believe HN allows drivel like this

Please don't conflate Jewish people with this genocidal state. Thank you.

Please don't conflate the ADL, whose CEO is quoted above, with the state of Israel.

Why are you conflating Jews and Israel?

That's extremely antisemitic given that Jewish groups have been some of the most public and vocal opponents of Israel's genocidal actions.

Lol at all the 14 year olds that swallowed Iranian propaganda showing up here to prove the point

ooo what a fun game! Good guess on my age.

Now estimate the age of the International Court of justice, the United Nations, and dozens of international aid organizations who have called Israel's actions as a genocide? lol or do you consider them to be Iranian proxies too?

>Good guess on my age.

I'm on a roll. Let me guess again. You support Hamas actions on Oct 7? You do not believe there should be a Jewish state of Israel?

If so do you also support the slaughter of Jews as the founding charter of Hamas called for?

Yawn.. Same old Hasbara talking points. You guys really need to update your guide books to include some more creative talking points. These ones are overused and stale.

You seem to operate solely in terms of propaganda: iranian, russian, israeli. The inability to see beyond a few narratives and denying agency to other people make it impossible to have a conversation

It's like talking to a finite state machine that emits duckspeak

Your last two replies here were flagged (most likely for glorifying war and genocide), so you have deleted them and tried again with a softer message. Hasbara is out in force this morning!

Doubling down with more conspiracies? Have you heard Israel can control the weather too?

Israel is the only Jewish state globally, and its efforts to counter Iran-backed proxy groups have contributed to broader regional and global security. While there are some Jewish groups that dissent, they represent a minority. The majority of Americans, Israelis, and Jewish communities support Israel's actions against Hamas, Hezbollah, and other Iranian proxies.

Your 3 other posts were flagged and removed for glorifying genocide, and now you're back for a 4th attempt with a softer tone.

I already mentioned this in your other comment, but these Hasbara talking points come off like they're written by a corporate PR department and are getting stale.

Circa 1968 America:

We have a TV problem, more specifically, lots of coffins on TV problem.

Circa 2003 America:

We have TV problem, a media problem, specifically coffins all over the media problem

It’s very telling that the TT ban was not a standalone bill, but rather just one item of a bill that included $26 billion in aid for Israel, $13b for Ukraine and $8b for Taiwan