this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

World News

38506 readers
2696 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The Israeli government insists that Hamas formally sanctioned sexual assault on October 7, 2023. But investigators say the evidence does not stand up to scrutiny. Catherine Philp and Gabrielle Weiniger report on eight months of claim and counter-claim

Talk of rape began circulating almost before the massacres themselves were over. Much of it came from what Patten would later call “non-professionals” who supplied “inaccurate and unreliable forensic interpretations” of what they found, creating an instant but flawed narrative about what had taken place.

Meanwhile, the political establishment has opened a fresh battle with the UN over what the Patten report didn’t say: that sexual violence was beyond reasonable doubt, systematic, widespread and ordered and perpetrated by Hamas. Israeli advocates for the female survivors are now warning that the country’s refusal to co-operate with a full and legal investigation, which the carefully worded report was not, threatens the prospect of ever finding out the full truth about the sexual violence of October 7 and delivering justice for its victims.

It was not a legal investigation, Patten explained, as Israel had not allowed one: that mandate could only be fulfilled by the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, which Israel has refused to work with since its inception. She hoped that would change.

Patten made it clear there was sufficient evidence of acts of sexual violence to merit full and proper investigation and expressed her shock at the brutality of the violence. The report also confirmed Israeli authorities were unable to provide much of the evidence that political leaders had insisted existed. In all the Hamas video footage Patten’s team had watched and all the photographs they had seen, there were no depictions of rape. We hired a leading Israeli dark-web researcher to look for evidence of those images, including footage deleted from public sources. None could be found.

Archive link

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The overwhelming majority of all armies of all time have weaponized rape. As I understand it Israel is doing the same damned thing. There are no good guys in this fucking war, only monsters and victims.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Israel is doing it. Hamas is not doing it.

[–] Belastend@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No, they are just causing genital mutilation and genital wounds consistent with rape but since we have no video proof, you can't say they used rape in a systematic way. They have sexually abused victim or caused immense damage to their genitals, that is confirmed by the very report that also denies systemic rape.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

they are just causing genital mutilation and genital wounds consistent with rape

Having your pelsvis broken because a grenade exploded is not what most people associate with rape. Except ZAKA of course. I take it you are citing their expert analysis? Let's see what the article has to say about it

Talk of rape began circulating almost before the massacres themselves were over. Much of it came from what Patten would later call “non-professionals” who supplied “inaccurate and unreliable forensic interpretations” of what they found, creating an instant but flawed narrative about what had taken place.

Among the first responders on October 7 was Zaka, an ultra-orthodox volunteer force. Zaka members are not trained in forensics, nor were they directed to do any more than retrieve remains from what was still an active battle zone. The decision to send them in has come under heavy assault in the Israeli media, including from military officers who believe if they had been deployed, forensics might have been preserved.

Orit Sulitzeanu, the executive director of ARCCI, notes the volunteers’ lack of familiarity with the women’s bodies they were finding and their tendency to focus on injuries they believed pointed to sexual violence, such as smashed pelvises and gunshot wounds to sex organs, ignoring other injuries that muddied the picture.

“They are all religious guys; most of them are ultra-religious. They never saw a woman except their wife,” Sulitzeanu says. “So to see all these bodies, how did they deal with that?”

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

“They are all religious guys; most of them are ultra-religious. They never saw a woman except their wife,” Sulitzeanu says. “So to see all these bodies, how did they deal with that?”

From the report, II(b):

"The mission team was led by the SRSG-SVC with the support of a technical team comprised of nine staff members with relevant expertise drawn from the United Nations system. The technical team included a principal human rights officer that acted as its head; a police expert in criminal investigation; a judicial affairs officer; two sexual and gender-based violence investigators skilled in the safe and ethical interviewing of survivors/victims and witnesses of sexual violence crimes; a forensic pathologist; a digital and open-source information analyst; and two political affairs officers. For certain segments of the visit, the mission team was accompanied by a public information officer. Logistical and security support for the mission was provided by the UN Country Team based in Jerusalem."

Actually, part of the report dealt with debunking not only Israeli government lies which I already talked about, but also some conclusions which were drawn potentially in perfectly good faith by earlier investigators who weren't experts. Maybe some of those people were ultra-religious guys who had never seen anyone but their wives naked, or maybe not, but it doesn't really have bearing on "debunking" the report. As far as I know.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Those israeli government lies were already debunked. The UN report was not needed as journalists found that the mentioned corpses did not exist.

The only new information from the UN report was that israel did not have the video, photo and forensic evidence they claimed to have.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] arymandias@feddit.de 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

They should have asked Annalena Baerbock she has seen the videos.

Out of curiosity, if this is ever legally recognized as a genocide, is there anything human-rights law or international law says about people knowingly spreading lies in support of it?

Edit: And will she be just as vigilant about Israel systematically raping prisoners as a form of torture (something for which there actually exists multiple sources).

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

What a video in that article

Journalist: Can you confirm that you have seen video evidence of rape? The israeli government claims there is none

German official: are you saying that you don't believe the government of israel?! Shame on you!

Journalist: No you said you saw footage of it and the israeli government says it does not exist

German official: Rape denier! Rape denier!

Yep that sums it up

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] speaker_hat@lemmy.one 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Pramila Patten, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict stated that:

“It was a catalogue of the most extreme and inhumane forms of killing, torture and other horrors,” including sexual violence.

https://press.un.org/en/2024/sc15621.doc.htm

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

It was not a legal investigation, Patten explained, as Israel had not allowed one:

Not sure why you keep citing a report that has no legal base. The only thing Patten concludes is that there is grounds to do a real investigation.

Who keeps blocking the real UN rape investigations again? Oh right, israel

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Hello!

This article is a masterclass in slant. It's not attempting to cast any doubt on whether the report shows evidence that Hamas was and still is doing a bunch of sexual assault (to which the answer is pretty clearly yes.) Instead, it does some extensive hand-wringing over related but debatable questions, so as to create out of thin air an aura of controversy and flawed reporting where none exists.

Instead of asking:

  • Did Hamas rape anybody?

They ask:

  • Did this investigation find evidence that Hamas formally sanctioned sexual assault by its troops? (which is a separate question from, did it happen, but even whether the official sanction happened at all is pretty irrelevant as compared with whether the rape happened)
  • Was the investigation a legal investigation? Or just a team of experts gathering evidence and interviewing witnesses as they visited the sites where assaults were alleged to have taken place and then presenting their findings?
  • Did anyone find videos of Hamas raping people on the dark web?

It's a bunch of crap. The UN's press release summarizes the report that this article concerns pretty comprehensively, although the full report is also very accessible if you want to see some details or skip to some particular section of their conclusions and see exactly what they were and how they conducted their investigation and what they did and didn't find.

From the report:

"Based on the information gathered by the mission team from multiple and independent sources, there are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred during the 7 October attacks in multiple locations across Gaza periphery, including rape and gang rape, in at least three locations."

"With respect to hostages, the mission team found clear and convincing information that some have been subjected to various forms of conflict-related sexual violence including rape and sexualized torture and sexualized cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and it also has reasonable grounds to believe that such violence may be ongoing."

That's the important part. Creating an artificial debate couched in slanted language over, was this a legal investigation or some other type of investigation, or were we able to find a Hamas fighter who was willing to confirm to a UN investigative team that his commander said it was okay if he did some raping, is a bunch of crap.

(That's separate from the issue of this person I've never heard of, saying that making false claims of rape would cause the Israeli government to work harder to release the hostages. That doesn't make a ton of sense to me and the rest of the article is so explicitly propagandist that I'm highly skeptical.)

Hey @Linkerbaan@lemmy.world - I asked you for some details on your argument that Hamas couldn't have been raping anybody because that one released hostage didn't look pregnant. Do you want to restart that conversation?

I'm also happy to cite the evidence for anything I'm saying here or anything you want to ask about; I got tired of doing it after the first three times, the last time you posted basically this same article, but this is a whole new thread, so if you want to try just claiming confidently again that some particular things aren't in the report, I'm happy to show you where they are in the report.

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I get what you’re saying but I’m pretty sure it matters in international law for additional charges against Hamas leadership. There’s, tragically, sexual violence in basically every conflict, and individuals who do it have committed a crime for sure. But proving it’s systematic and used as a tactic would make higher ups in Hamas guilty of (even more) war crimes.

So, it is important for prosecuting Hamas leadership that there be a proper, legal investigation and that it be proven to be either knowingly allowed or (even worse) ordered as a tactic.

Obviously, Hamas and Israel have both committed enough war crimes already that the senior leadership will likely be found guilty of something at The Hague (if ever arrested). But properly accounting for all of the war crimes is important for both justice and history.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I mean, sure. Modern international law defines it as a war crime if you're not preventing your troops from raping as any kind of common occurrence, which is obviously how it should be defined, but is actually pretty recent that it works that way.

But yes I agree, we could probably charge the commanders with more if we could prove that they were explicitly approving of it. Honestly, thinking of taking half the Israeli cabinet and all of the Hamas leadership to the Hague just makes me sad because of how unlikely it is to happen. But yes that would be a great if that could happen and is obviously the right answer if you look at what either of them have done (and are still doing.)

My point was, it's not like the lack of proof that it was approved by the leadership makes it this kind of "gotcha" like OP's article makes it out to be, by cleverly adjusting the language to slip phrases like "does not stand up to scrutiny" in there without technically lying and trying to say that Hamas didn't rape lots and lots and lots of people. That's why I say it's a skillfully deceptive article; it's honestly pretty impressive how it's put together, in a sick sort of rape-apologist type of way.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (6 children)

Once again do explain why israel is blocking the UN investigation? Surely if it would reflect negatively upon Hamas israel would cooperate with it.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I am unsure why you keep pushing this myth that the Patten report counts as evidence. It does not. Patten herself says it does not count as legal evidence. This post makes it very clear that the Patten report does not qualify as evidence

You have dodged every question the last time around and you keep dodging the question. You want to quote the parts of the report you like and ignore the parts of the report that debunk the entire report.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I just all of a sudden remembered why I had stopped talking with you about this. 🥲

Patten herself says it does not count as legal evidence. This post makes it very clear that the Patten report does not qualify as evidence

Like I said before, "Creating an artificial debate couched in slanted language over, was this a legal investigation or some other type of investigation" etc etc

You have dodged every question the last time around and you keep dodging the question.

Hey fun! I have some questions which you didn't answer last time around. This is sort of bordering on senseless bickering which helps no one, but sure, I'm happy to repeat the questions you avoided answering in the last thread:

  • Where in the report did you find information about how the hostages were treated? You claimed to have read the UN report, and then made specific claims about what it said -- where in the report did you find the information you were claiming?
  • You made an assertion is that one woman rescued from captivity who doesn't look "very pregnant" has some bearing on whether her or any other women are being raped in custody. Can you tell me more about the logic, why this would follow? I mean I follow the basic premise that "pregnant hostage = rape", I'm just having trouble accepting the contrapositive. Can you explain more?

I actually just asked you that second one, but you dodged it. Want to address it?

(Oh, actually -- third question: "ignore the parts of the report that debunk the entire report." What parts of the report are there that debunk the entire report? Can you explain what you mean here? Like cite the part of the report that you're saying debunks the entire report, and what it says that would debunk the entire report?)

And, like I said, I'm happy to address any question you wanna ask. I thought about citing some times before when I did it with citations and all multiple times, and then you ignored the answers and continued insisting counterfactual things about the report, but maybe that's just getting into the weeds. And likewise, citing the times I asked you a question over and over again and you didn't want to answer it. I think just, ask your question, and I'm happy to answer without dodging.

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Dude, when an article or comment disagrees with @Linkerbaan@lemmy.world they are suddenly Nancy Drew tearing apart every word in the most detailed class in forensic analysis; however, if something agrees with their narrative opinion blog posts are just fine.

I've stopped engaging with their arguments because it's clear this is only a team sports type of online game. The truth is not particularly relevant to this person.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Yeah I had this sort of sudden moment of clarity just now like dude WTF am I thinking investing this level of time and energy into this person

I think a certain amount of debunking was productive but I think the back and forth is sufficient to speak for itself and I've had a chance to quote enough sections of the report to show what's going on, at this point.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

What exactly are you debunking? You didn't even read the report as you have yet to quote the evidence in it.

If you did read the report you'd find out why the UN isn't claiming there was any rape on oct7 and you'll never hear Antonio Gueterres say it.

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I had this moment of realization when they came out the gate and accused me of Zionism or defending Israel-none of which I care for. In fact I find the actions of Israel despicable in this conflict. It was then that it became clear @Linkerbaan@lemmy.world is more here for the team sports aspect of it rather than having a factual discussion to determine the truth of the matter. Right now the conversation is so diluted not much on the conflict can be discussed here because the team sports value has taken precedence over anything else, and personally I'm tired of playing team sports.

Best of luck.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Thanks for your opinion guy that claims israel is not an Apartheid state.

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I've told you multiple times I'm ok calling it an apartheid state. This is like the 3rd or 4th time now. Go back to playing team sports now.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don't think it's team sports. I think it's one of two things:

  1. Sometimes people just have a kind of pathology where they like to argue on the internet, because it's satisfying, and they have to "win" or present as a winner in every conversation, and so facts and reality (even demonstrable reality like what the other person said or what the primary sources say) sort of have to bend to what would let them "win" by making some claim or accusation.
  2. I looked over Linkerbaan's user a little bit and it has a little bit of a singular focus on Democrats and Biden ("Democrats are just Republicans these days" "Biden is actively violating Leahy law" "Trump isn't much different than any generic Republican"). Aside from picking crazypants arguments about Hamas not raping anybody, the only other real trend to their comments is domestic politics with a don't-vote-for-Democrats-fellow-leftists flavor that seems oddly familiar.

I initially thought they were way too committed and energetic about this stance they're taking about the UN report, to be any kind of shill, but now I'm less sure. They're certainly posting with a level of energy and aggressiveness that makes a lot more sense if it's their job, and usually people who have come by their counterfactual opinions organically have some kind of structure built up in their head for why it makes sense to them (Like they would say the UN report is crazy and biased and can't be trusted for some reason -- they wouldn't just insist for 2 days that it says a huge variety of very specific things that it doesn't say, and then just not address it on any level when someone points out the contradiction while continuing to go HAM on arguing about it. The second one sounds more like disinformation poster behavior to me.)

I don't really know. They don't act like most shills (or who I believe to be shills) that I have encountered. Like if you just looked at their comments arguing about Hamas, you probably wouldn't predict that their other singular area of focus in comments would be Biden and the Democrats. But the more that I look back over the conversation + take a look over their user, the more it makes sense to me as an explanation.

(Oooh... I just looked a little further; they also use the phrase "blue MAGA," and if you look back past the current conversation there's a lot more of a focus on Biden and Democrats and quite a concerted effort to link Israel's policies to Biden. The plot thickens.)

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah that's a good assessment. It's the aggressive and highly energetic and/or frenetic level to it that is particularly odd.

I've had lots of discussions or disagreements on this platform with various people, but the vitriolic nature of their comments indicates either a) very young person b) aesthetic / team sports argumentation for the sake of argumentation. Like arguing for the sake of arguing. Can be fun for some people I guess.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah. For me the really notable factor is the weirdness of the disconnect. Like if you look at the person's claims and study the flow of the conversation back and forth, it starts to become really obvious that they don't actually have factual belief in the things they are saying. But they still want to continue the conversation and invest a bunch of energy into it. Like, a lot, over a long period of time.

So... why? There aren't too many plausible explanations for those two things in combination, and then coming alongside "blue MAGA" and Democrats this and Biden that, it all of a sudden clicks into focus and it all makes sense. Now that I'm looking at it more, I'm pretty sold on shilling being the explanation.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Antonio Gueterres, the head of the UN certainly doesn't believe the things you are saying.

Israel fumes as UN secretary-general leaves Hamas off sexual violence blacklist

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Cool! I love the "Never Play Defense" game, and would be happy to bring some other random assertion into the mix to counterbalance your random new assertion. But, I have exhausted the amount of effort I want to expend on this right now. Another day, sure; feel free to reach out any time.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

You keep bringing up the same stale points debunked a million times in every thread. Even in the post it's mentioned the Patten report is not a proper investigation.

You're the one that doesn't want to defend the fact that the UN doesn't acknowledge the Patten report as evidence.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If you are really hankering that badly to continue the pointless back-and-forth, I should be able to provide you with something, just not right now. I will get back to you though. I have an idea that I think can keep you busy for more or less as much time as you want to spend on it.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

We're in an article that spent money on a dark web expert to dig up any rape evidence and still didn't find any.

The Israeli government insists that Hamas formally sanctioned sexual assault on October 7, 2023 . But investigators say the evidence does not stand up to scrutiny. Catherine Philp and Gabrielle Weiniger report on eight months of claim and counter-claim

We hired a leading Israeli dark-web researcher to look for evidence of those images, including footage deleted from public sources. None could be found.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If only those fools from the UN team had spent their money on that, instead of a team of experts in sexual assault who then toured the affected areas and interviewed all those people and reviewed forensic evidence. The answers were on the dark web the whole time. Everyone knows the first thing you learn in Hamas is how to use Tor Browser. Now that you say it that way, it’s completely obvious.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Which forensic rape evidence was found? You're bringing it up so surely you mean to imply there's forensic evidence of rape in the UN report?

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Why would I need to tell you? You've read the report, you said, so you would know what is and isn't in it.

A sarcastic response occurred to me, so I let it out, but I'm not interested in continuing the lengthy dishonest exchange where you cosplay as someone who's "winning" (for reasons I still don't really understand.) The interaction is done from my side.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

There's a new UN report out. Some interesting reading material for you maybe.

But they did find rape evidence.... of israel raping Palestinians.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Second message portion (2/2). This is the recommendations. If you want to keep talking with me, you can start with this section, answering some of the unanswered questions and following the recommendations on how you can engage more productively in the conversation. If you're open to doing that, then sure! Let's rap.


Chapter 4: Recommendations

Section 4.1: Questions for Linkerbaan to Address

  • Substantive Responses to Specific Questions:

    • Provide direct answers to the specific questions posed by @mozz, particularly about the details of the UN report and the logic behind Linkerbaan's assertions regarding the treatment of hostages.
  • Clarification of Evidence Claims:

    • Clarify which parts of the UN report allegedly debunk the entire report and explain how these sections invalidate the report's findings.
  • Address Misrepresentation Concerns:

    • Respond to accusations of misrepresentation by either substantiating claims with concrete evidence or acknowledging any inaccuracies in previous statements.

Section 4.2: Steps for Productive Engagement

  • Engage with Nuanced Points:

    • Engage directly with the nuanced points and specific queries raised by other users to foster a more informed and balanced discussion.
  • Provide Clear Citations:

    • When making claims about the UN report or other sources, provide clear citations and quotes to support these claims and allow for transparent verification by other participants.
  • Acknowledge Other Viewpoints:

    • Demonstrate a willingness to acknowledge and consider other viewpoints, even when they conflict with personal beliefs, to facilitate a more respectful and constructive dialogue.

This structured report aims to objectively assess the engagement of Linkerbaan in the specified comment chain, highlighting areas of evasion, misrepresentation, and providing constructive recommendations for future discussions.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If you don't want to engage on a subject consider not replying to a thread. One can't make false rape accusations and then be upset when they get debunked.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Why are you rejecting my good faith efforts to help you with productively engaging in the conversation

I typed up a whole report just for you Linkerbaan

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Which forensic evidence was it again? Couldn't find it in your response.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I hope I have at least brought some entertainment to your working day. Have a good one

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Thanks you too mate see you in the next post.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You don't appear to be very okay with it seeing how people calling out israel is a very sensitive subject.

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Thanks for your assessment of what appears ok and what doesn't. Your discernment and insight is always top notch!

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Thanks it's not that difficult to discern reality from Zionist lies though.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You keep failing to answer why israel is blocking the official UN investigation. Pasting the same wall of text over and over again.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I had a feeling you wouldn't want to answer my questions. All good.

I don't think it's a good use of my time to just keep dealing with you indefinitely for any amount of Gish Galloping you feel like doing -- I did offer to answer your questions without dodging, though, so:

You keep failing to answer why israel is blocking the official UN investigation.

Two answers:

  • I talked about this here, giving one level of answer, and asking you for some details which could inform a little more complete answer depending on what you're even claiming had happened
  • UN investigators already concluded in Patten's report that there was quite a bit of rape during the October 7th attack and of hostages, notwithstanding your pretense that it didn't conclude that, or wasn't a "legal" investigation and that invalidates it, or that it contained no new information, or other wildly counterfactual things.

Honestly, dude, don't you feel bad about this? A whole bunch of innocent people got raped and are continuing to be raped, and you're over here standing up for the people who did it, trying to spread propaganda implying that it didn't happen, by twisting language around to say well the report that concluded that it happened wasn't a legal investigation, or some other weird little constructions, to obfuscate the very clear evidence which we've already talked about.

My question is, why? Why are you taking that stance? Aren't you against rape, whether or not the investigation that concluded that it happened was a legal investigation or not? I would think that's a pretty easy moral test to pass.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Same wall of text every time. Why is israel blocking the UN investigation?

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Thread here

I had a feeling you would not be eager to engage with the question of why you are working so vigorously to defend rape

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›