politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
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.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Because some people such as Sheryl Sandberg appear to not be able to make it to the relevant pages of the report and feel the need to spread the lie that Hamas raped people on October 7. I figured that you would also have appreciated the part with the red border around it as it might have been difficult to find as you previously suggested that Hamas raped women which the UN report very disproves.
Your other report is not relevant as it is not investigative. I am unsure why you keep linking it.
Hamas tying up women becomes a lot less relevant when looking at the fact that they have also tied up males. In fact you'd almost think they were tying up people to take them hostage.
Do you have some kind of superpower that involves looking at documents and seeing only the parts of them that you want to see
I'm not interested in a back-and-forth, but as one last comment, I'll quote excerpts from the lengthier of the reports:
You have been informed multiple times that your UN report is not investigative or has any legal implication whereas the one I linked is.
Furthermore the investigative report very clearly states there is no evidence. Only testimonies. You could have read that in the first line of the image I posted. It appears however you are more interested in pushing a narrative that has already been debunked.
Testimonies are evidence. That's why prosecutors call witnesses to the stand.
In fact testimonies are often preferred over non-testimonial evidence, aka "circumstantial evidence".
The UN obtained testimonial evidence and circumstantial evidence of sexual violence:
And then the UN came to the legal conclusion there's no evidence of rape.
That's completely false.
It's literally written in the UN investigation. It's highlighted even in the image I posted.
That's not what they said.
Read it more closely. This is literally in the same report:
I know I said I wouldn't get drawn into the back and forth. I really don't want to. 🥲
But I just wanna posit a little thought experiment:
"Hang on -- were you the one sneaking into the shop after hours and fucking the stuffed animals?"
"There's no hard evidence of that! Not that exists in a fully accredited legal document! The follow-up report completely discredited the
I'm still -- completely seriously -- wanting to know what report you are even citing in these screenshots. Like I say, I found a random .doc somewhere that is clearly a draft version of that same document, but it wasn't even immediately clear to me what it was or when it was produced. And, why you say it supersedes the SRSG-SVC report instead of the other way around.
You are not legally obligated to defend fake israeli rape accusations against Hamas. You can choose not to copy paste already debunked articles and ripping paragraphs out of context. Yet you seem too entrenched in your beliefs to admit that.
Instead of objectively looking at the situation from both sides you have made zero effort to ever consider that Hamas did not rape anyone. As if it is an impossible reality.
Okay, so you don't feel like revealing where you are getting the screenshots or what that report is. Got it. I was just curious in case I had missed something. Carry on.
The first screenshot is from here
The second is from here
If you read both reports instead of cherry-picking quotes out of context, you'll find they both conclude that Hamas sexually assaulted Israeli women.
Got it. So it makes sense now -- reading it now it looks there were two reports, one with a general overview of war crimes of all types committed by all sides during the conflict, and one much more in depth with a particular focus on sexual violence committed by Hamas. And, of course, there's not any contradiction between the two or sense in which the one that's an overview invalidates the one that's more specific and detailed. E.g. the overview one says among other things (placed in among of course an absolutely massive list of crimes by Israel):
... which agrees in literally every particular with the Patten report, including the conclusions it reached and which conclusions it didn't reach (or stopped short of or said it wasn't attempting to analyze.)
I mean, I wasn't really in any doubt that what Linkerbaan was saying was a bunch of made up crap, but I am glad to be able to understand the context of the two reports and what actually happened.
It's the UN report detailing israeli and Hamas war crimes. Surely you are able to find a report by typing a sentence of it in google.
The report does find evidence that israel is systematically raping Palestinians by the way.
It just can't find evidence for Hamas raping israelis. Wonder why...