First, there are two parties here that could prove something. Meta itself, or the Israeli government. Second, you write: > [...] their choice not to use this

First, there are two parties here that could prove something. Meta itself, or the Israeli government. Second, you write: > [...] their choice not to use this data to defend themselves (i.e. by not showing that the posts were in fact harmful or inciting violence, etc) lends credence to the allegations. This article is from yesterday. I don't think it's fair to call not responding a "choice", surely you would expect it to take some time to actually respond. I might have missed it in the article, but did they reach out to the Israeli government or to Meta to ask for a response (as is normal journalistic practice)? Third, it's possible that some of the material is things that cannot be publicized. I have no idea if this is the case (and I personally doubt it's the majority of takedown requests), but if, for example, some of the requests were to remove e.g. images of abused Israeli hostages, bodies, etc, this might be material that they won't release, because the whole idea is to stop spread of such images. Of course, they can still describe the purpose of the various takedown requests.