Dr. Brian L. Cox
2/ Widespread #legaldisinformation tactic appears in headline of this story (pic 1). It's common rhetorical tool I refer to as "condemnation by innuendo." In colloquial, conversational form, it goes something like this: "We're not outright saying X conduct violates int'l law. We're just saying it could do so." Or, in an equally common related tactic, "We're just saying this conduct 'raises questions' about lawfulness." (pic 2 is headline that uses this alternative version of rhetorical tactic for @nytimes story about @IDF attack on WCK convoy). This, of course, is misleading - deliberately so - because the innuendo utilized to suggest something could be unlawful or that X conduct raises questions about unlawfulness is designed to create that appearance even if source material in no way actually demonstrates unlawfulness. Just raising suspicion is enough here - while audience is left to fill in blanks (usually with no actual professional qualification to do so) about (un)"lawfulness" of conduct described in story.
