It is the NYT, and the Israeli government and their supporters have lawyers on call, so "appears to contradict Israeli account" is the wording the BBC ran with, too.
If a video recorded by a Palestinian killed by Israel and Israel's evidence-free claim about the Palestinian's killing are in contradiction, the Western journalist is incapable of saying that Israel lies.
What is it that has taken you aback (if you don't mind my asking. It's not exactly clear to me whether it is the crime or how NYT summarized the video)
We are approaching the Exonerative Tense Singularity, where we are at risk of never being able to place the blame for bad things on the people who did them rather than the victims ever again.
Comments
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4g2z103nqxo
Shame for all those civilians running into bullets, though.
If a video recorded by a Palestinian killed by Israel and Israel's evidence-free claim about the Palestinian's killing are in contradiction, the Western journalist is incapable of saying that Israel lies.
It's a war crime.
It's because the video shows that what Israel claimed was a complete lie and NYT can't make itself to write that.
Full video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lczq10K1iew
https://bsky.app/profile/thejournal.ie/post/3lm2ztgsgqu2d
In that one "Israeli troops are believed to have opened fire on them" when Israel has admitted that they did that.
There's no reason for obfuscation. Yet the article does it.
Video shows Israel lied about its killing of Gaza aid workers.