this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2024
40 points (69.6% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3151 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

U.S. Vice President's remarks come amid allegations from Israel's critics that claims of sexual and gender-based violence were either fabricated or exaggerated in order to provide justification for its military response in Gaza

Speaking at an event dedicated to raising awareness on conflict-related sexual violence, including the airing of Sheryl Sandberg's "Screams Before Silence" documentary, "On October 7, Hamas committed horrific acts of sexual violence," Harris said.

Her remarks come amid steady criticism from Israel's critics on the left that claims of sexual and gender-based violence were either fabricated or exaggerated in order to provide justification for its military response in Gaza following October 7.

"In the days after October 7, I saw images of bloodied Israeli women abducted," she continued. "Hamas committed rape and gang rape at the Nova music festival, and women's bodies were found naked from the waist down, hands tied behind their back and shot in the head."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

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):

V. Legal Analysis

  1. The Commission found that acts of sexual violence were committed on 7 October in Israel, including at the Nova festival, on road 232, at Nahal Oz military base and kibbutzim Re’im, Nir Oz and Kfar Aza.

VI. Conclusions

  1. The Commission identified patterns indicative of sexual violence in several locations and concludes that Israeli women were disproportionally subjected to these crimes. The attack on 7 October enabled perpetrators to commit SGBV and this violence was not isolated but perpetrated in similar ways in several locations and by multiple Palestinian perpetrators. The Commission did not find credible evidence, however, that militants received orders to commit sexual violence and so it was unable to make conclusions on this issue. However, inflammatory language and disbelief around sexual violence, observed with both parties, risks silencing and discrediting survivors, further exacerbating trauma and stigmatization.

... 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.