this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2024
145 points (100.0% liked)

World News

47660 readers
2232 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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 [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]

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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
145
Israel says Hamas weaponised rape. Does the evidence add up? (www.thetimes.com)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
79 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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
[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Israel has been anally raping Palestinians with electric rods and electrocuting them to death.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hey this comment is getting reported for misinformation. Can you link please provide a source for this information?

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

A leaked draft of the UNRWA report detailed an interview that gave a similar account. It cited a 41-year-old detainee who said that interrogators “made me sit on something like a hot metal stick and it felt like fire,” and also said that another detainee “died after they put the electric stick up” his anus.

https://archive.is/pY54n

I hope you ban the people reporting misinformation for false reports.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

To any zionist who's found their way into this comments section. Do you think that Israeli soldiers and leadership should be judged for the sexual assault of Palestinians with the same severity as Hamas members who committed, allowed or promoted sexual violence against their captured prisoners? Who should conduct the appropriate investigation and trial?

UN experts demand investigation into claims Israeli forces killed, raped and sexually assaulted Palestinian women and girls

Palestinians ‘beaten and sexually assaulted’ at Israeli detention centres, UN report claims

Israel’s use of rape against Palestinian detainees from Gaza exposed

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not a Zionist by any means, but happy to answer in case it's directed in my direction

Do you think that Israeli soldiers and leadership should be judged for the sexual assault of Palestinians with the same severity as Hamas members who committed, allowed or promoted sexual violence against their captured prisoners?

Yes. (Actually more severity for a couple of different reasons.)

This is the type of question that's super easy to answer. Yes, anyone on any side who is raping should be punished. That's, honestly, my whole point in getting all up in arms about "let's not worry about that rape because of which side is doing it" narratives like OP's.

Who should conduct the appropriate investigation and trial?

The ICC

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

in case it’s directed in my direction

I mean zionists specifically because I see some from time to time justifying the extreme damage Israel has committed against civilians, some making a lot of effort to paint Hamas as a bunch of barbarians to further support that position. I only remember seeing you in this thread, and from your posts in it, you don't seem to be doing that.

That’s, honestly, my whole point in getting all up in arms about “let’s not worry about that rape because of which side is doing it” narratives like OP’s.

Bit off-topic in this comment chain (it would fit yours better) but: whenever I've seen someone or an organization pushing positions such as OP's article, there are a few valid reasons:

  • Some media did rush to claim sexual violence far before they had any evidence of it, especially soon after the 7th of October, which should be scrutinized.

  • There are differences between: A) Sexual violence committed by an individual or a few, B) That violence being tolerated by their superiors, and C) That violence being supported by their superiors. This distinction is important, since a very large organization having monsters in its ranks isn't statistically strange (and modern, well-run organizations make sure to punish those monsters and bringing them to one form of justice or another), but that organization not taking measures against those monsters or even promoting their behavior is far more serious.

  • Plenty of media has ignored and continues to ignore the previous differences, and now that there is evidence of A, they use it to claim C.

  • Those bad journalistic practices get used to promote violence against innocent Palestinians and support jingoistic horror.

Personally, I had no doubt that there would be monsters in Hamas who would abuse the prisoners in their captivity, but the organization itself has an interest in making sure that the prisoners who make it out alive say that they were treated humanely (as we've seen with some of them). Attacking civilians and taking them hostage is already really terrible to start with, but noting what's being done out of logical political goals and what's being done out of sheer sadism is important. If we compare Hamas with the Israeli government and army, we do currently already have evidence that the latter do at the very least tolerate abuse of Palestinian prisoners, apparently with gleeful support from much of Israel since they celebrate that violence by sharing it in social media.

Could there be people taking positions aesthetically close to mine who are, however, defending them in bad faith, as they just want to shield Hamas? There must be some, but the environment is heated enough that anyone who doesn't take a nuanced enough position is going to be called out sooner than later. Although figuring out the most reasonable positions is far more important, in my view.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Some media did rush to claim sexual violence far before they had any evidence of it, especially soon after the 7th of October, which should be scrutinized.

The Israeli government made up some crazy imaginary shit that they had been victims of, because that's in their DNA at this point, and some people in the press believed them who should have known better. But also, there was a flood of victims of the attack who came back saying they had been raped. That infamous NYT story consists of a whole bunch of accurate information and then a couple made up stories from Israel's government, and for some reason everyone remembers it as all made up or a rush to judgement or whatever, when the main thrust of the article was true (as validated by the later in-depth UN investigation which found a shitload of evidence of systemic rape whether sanctioned or otherwise.)

There are differences between: A) Sexual violence committed by an individual or a few, B) That violence being tolerated by their superiors, and C) That violence being supported by their superiors. This distinction is important, since a very large organization having monsters in its ranks isn't statistically strange (and modern, well-run organizations make sure to punish those monsters and bringing them to one form of justice or another), but that organization not taking measures against those monsters or even promoting their behavior is far more serious.

I... more or less agree with this. I think you might be understating the scale of Hamas's sexual violence or the degree to which it's sanctioned by their leadership. But yes, Israel's in more of a position of power, and they're more organized about it; I agree. I honestly don't even want to compare the degree of cruelty involved on the two sides because what's the point; they're both horrible.

Personally, I had no doubt that there would be monsters in Hamas who would abuse the prisoners in their captivity, but the organization itself has an interest in making sure that the prisoners who make it out alive say that they were treated humanely (as we've seen with some of them). Attacking civilians and taking them hostage is already really terrible to start with, but noting what's being done out of logical political goals and what's being done out of sheer sadism is important.

I think you should read the UN report, if you have not. I'm not aware of any attempt at treating the prisoners, or deceased victims of the violence before they died, humanely. From the organization or the individuals. Do you have a source for this, like interviews with hostages where they said they were treated humanely, or something? What's in the UN report describes the exact opposite of that.

I wouldn't try to excuse Hamas just because their root cause is just. Israel specifically props up Hamas and funds them because they are the most violent and corrupt faction in Palestine, and they will do monstrous things which can then be used to "justify" Israel's crimes which it wanted to do anyway.

Although figuring out the most reasonable positions is far more important, in my view.

Honestly, like I say, to me it's not super complicated. Punish the guilty (which in large part means stop shielding Israel from prosecution for their crimes; certainly no one is making much of any attempt to shield Palestine from the consequences of Hamas's crimes.) How to do that and how to arrive at peace is complex, but "is this war crime that whatever people did, a war crime" is a lot simpler: The answer is yes.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think you should read the UN report, if you have not

I'll give it a look later. You linked it in this thread, correct?

Do you have a source for this, like interviews with hostages where they said they were treated humanely, or something?

From the first few weeks of the conflict:

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/freed-israeli-hostage-says-she-was-well-treated-after-initial-violence-2023-10-24/

From her words, it looked like the conditions were terrible, but they made efforts to try and minimize the harm. It's likely that the treatment they gave the hostages varied wildly.

Honestly, like I say, to me it’s not super complicated. Punish the guilty (which in large part means stop shielding Israel from prosecution for their crimes; certainly no one is making much of any attempt to shield Palestine from the consequences of Hamas’s crimes.) How to do that and how to arrive at peace is complex, but “is this war crime that whatever people did, a war crime” is a lot simpler: The answer is yes.

Agreed with everything here.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I'll give it a look later. You linked it in this thread, correct?

Yeah. This is their press release with the quick summary, and this is the full report.

From her words, it looked like the conditions were terrible, but they made efforts to try and minimize the harm. It's likely that the treatment they gave the hostages varied wildly.

Yeah, agreed. I'd imagine there's a lot of variability.

The report talks about what they found interviewing returned hostages on page 18:

  1. The mission team reviewed incidents of alleged sexual violence related to hostages in Gaza. Based on the first-hand accounts of released hostages, the mission team received clear and convincing information that sexual violence, including rape, sexualized torture, and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment occurred against some women and children during their time in captivity and has reasonable grounds to believe that this violence may be ongoing.

  2. Based on first-hand accounts of released hostages there are reasonable grounds to believe that female hostages were also subjected to other forms of sexual violence.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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 @[email protected] - 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.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year 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.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 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.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Israel hosted the UN investigation, both presenting to them their evidence and letting them travel around in Israel to the impacted areas, and letting them go around on their own including visiting the West Bank and meeting with Palestinian representatives.

They did make some effort, apparently, to dictate what the parameters of the investigation and report needed to be, which the report authors rejected which made the Israelis mad. Then they did the investigation and wrote their report anyway.

I honestly don't know what you mean by "blocking the UN investigation," but I suspect that it has to do with the Israeli government's non-cooperation with the investigative team at times, and rejection of a more thorough investigation, which I suspect was caused by them wanting to be able to lie without anyone investigating their lies. To me, that's a positive thing about the report and investigation, not a negative thing. If it's attempting to be objective in a way which angers Israel, including debunking some Israeli lies, then good.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Israel did not host a UN investigation. The Patten visit was not UN mandated. She was invited by israel for a propaganda tour nothing more.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Dude I don't want to just feed into the Gish Gallop indefinitely 🥲

I am curious, what exactly do you mean by Israel blocking the UN investigation? I know what the report says in section II(A) which sort of matches that description; I know they gave some resistance to the idea of investigating, but I am curious exactly what behavior you're talking about, so I can deal with what you're claiming a little more directly if I feel like investing the time into it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Then read the post you are in before jumping to defend israel. Why is israel blocking the UN investigation?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I forgot what conversation I was in 🥲

I've answered the question of why I think Israel has given resistance to the investigation in general. "I suspect was caused by them wanting to be able to lie without anyone investigating their lies" was what I said. (And, actually, I would add to that just a general hostility to the UN based on the fact that the UN keeps pointing out that they're doing war crimes and wanting to investigate IDF sexual violence and similar things the Israelis don't want.) I've asked for more details about exactly what you mean, if you want a more specific answer pertaining to some more specific behavior on Israel's part.

If you want to provide those details, I'm happy to provide that more detailed answer, and if not, I'm not sure what else I could do. I'm aware that this whole conversation is an attempt by you to pivot away from the question "did Hamas rape a bunch of people?", so I'm a little reluctant to give it any energy at all, but I did say I would answer anything you wanted to ask, so there's the answer.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (6 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.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Dude, when an article or comment disagrees with @[email protected] 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.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (35 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.

load more comments (35 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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).

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

I only read the article before, but Christ that video is shocking. He just intensionally twists the question three times, and then accuses the journalist of not doing his job for only citing two sources (the fucking Israeli government and the UN). Plus the moderator constantly interrupting the journalists while the government is just obviously lying. Staatsräson in action.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

I can't speak for that specific article but nachdenkseiten.de is usually full of shit. They spread misinformation and are nazi apologists. Please be careful with your sources and try to verify information you read online.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

Reddit was in a frenzy over the claim on October 7 itself. The major basis behind it was a video of an Israeli prisoner with what appeared to be blood on the back of her pants. The major worldnews sub banned anyone who questioned the claim. Weeks later it turned out that the blood on her bottom was because she had cut her ankle and was sitting or kneeling in the back of the truck and got it on her pants, not that she had been raped like many assumed.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year 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.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Israel is doing it. Hamas is not doing it.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hamas is not doing it.

We should send a team of expert investigators to assess forensic evidence, conduct interviews all around, and also visit with Palestinian representatives to see what they have to say about it, so that we can assess whether this is objectively true

Oh wait

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year 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.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year 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?”

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

FWIW, The Times is a center-right publication that's somewhat more factually accurate in their reporting than the New York Times is. So it's kind of a big deal for them to admit that there just isn't any evidence other than extremely suspicious claims about any widespread, systematic sexual violence.

load more comments
view more: next ›