Israel says Hamas weaponised rape. Does the evidence add up?
Israel says Hamas weaponised rape. Does the evidence add up?
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
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.
Israel has been anally raping Palestinians with electric rods and electrocuting them to death.
Hey this comment is getting reported for misinformation. Can you link please provide a source for this information?
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.
I hope you ban the people reporting misinformation for false reports.
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?
Palestinians ‘beaten and sexually assaulted’ at Israeli detention centres, UN report claims
Israel’s use of rape against Palestinian detainees from Gaza exposed
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
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.
-
There are no evidences for it, so until there are, it didn't happen
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.
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).
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Thanks for the details and the evidences
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.
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.
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.
Israel is doing it. Hamas is not doing it.
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.
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.
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
The only thing Patten concludes is
that "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" and that "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"
All military conflicts weaponize rape. There are horrible people everywhere.
This is true but it it's a little misleading. All militaries commit some instances of rape just because they are made of humans, but there's a massive spectrum in terms of the scale and tolerance level for it, dependent on the nature of the army.
Modern international law says that it's a war crime if you as leadership aren't enforcing discipline to prevent your troops from committing sexual violence, which is how it should be.
Yeah thats why I changed my mind on the comment lol, I didn't want it to sound like I was downplaying the issue