Israel’s leadership is pushing the allegations that Hamas fighters raped Israeli women during the October 7 attacks for its own political objectives while the government’s ongoing refusal to allow the United Nations to conduct a full investigation into the matter threatens to hinder any evidence, advocates have warned.

  • mozz
    link
    fedilink
    67 months ago

    I said I wasn’t going to indefinitely play the game of you saying total bullshit and me citing sources for why it’s wrong, because going back and forth with it too many times usually isn’t a good use of time, but for some reason this one irritated me all afresh.

    I(17) from the report, page 5: “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.”

    • @LinkerbaanOP
      link
      English
      -7
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Tell me what that information is. Surely you have evidence to present.

      • mozz
        link
        fedilink
        57 months ago

        Since I already cited a few entries out of the UN report to you, I’m gonna make this one into one of those “exercise for the reader” type of things. Like teaching a man to fish. In what entry in the table of contents to the report do you think the answer to this question might be contained?

        I realize you will have to read most of the whole first page of the document to find it, but I believe in you. Hold your focus. Persevere.

        • @LinkerbaanOP
          link
          English
          -4
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          You didn’t cite any evidence you just posted the summary.

          What information is used to come to those conclusions in the summary? It’s in the report surely you’ve read it right?

          • mozz
            link
            fedilink
            37 months ago

            I sent you a link to the full report. Maybe that needs to be the first part of your challenge then: Finding the link to the report, and then finding the table of contents, and then identifying which entry in the table of contents might contain the answer to your question.

            Do you really not want to take on the challenge of finding it? I am trying to help you become more capable with sources and verification procedures. I wasn’t expecting finding the report that I sent the link to to be the hard part, but I honestly don’t think any part of it should be altogether super-challenging.

            • @LinkerbaanOP
              link
              English
              -37 months ago

              I already read the report and stated what is in it. You are the person claiming differently so link the part where they had anything other than witnesses to present.

              • mozz
                link
                fedilink
                17 months ago

                What page of the report did you read that dealt with hostages?

                Not that I don’t believe you; I just have forgotten, and I want you to remind me so I can reference it really quick so we can continue the conversation.

                • @LinkerbaanOP
                  link
                  English
                  -37 months ago

                  Can you cite the evidence or are you going to keep asking questions about page numbers?

                  • mozz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    37 months ago

                    I’m gonna quit being a sarcastic dickhead for a second to take this question seriously.

                    I already gave citations of evidence – a link to the report with some criticisms of what the article was saying was literally my first comment here, and then after that, I responded to questions usually with page numbers or section citations or quotations (examples here, here, and here).

                    But that made absolutely no difference to how you reacted. You continued to make 100% wrong claims about what was in the report, and didn’t react substantively to the demonstrations that what you were already saying were wrong.

                    As I said, I don’t feel like simply continuing that cycle of me providing citations and you continuing to blandly argue wildly wrong things like this. I decided to try a different tactic of asking you about the citations, providing enough hints that you should easily be able to find them in the report you claim to have read. I’m actually pretty happy with it, since it breaks the cycle of “duck season” “rabbit season” “duck season” and so on, and throws it into sharp relief when you’re pointedly ignoring some kind of evidence that disproves your case.

                    Honestly, I’m happy with the result so far. I think it’s a lot more effective at highlighting the fact that you’re not actually interested in looking up information, or checking these wild claims you’re making against some kind of objective basis.

                    So. Are you sure you don’t feel like looking in the table of contents of the link I sent you, and locating the specific section which might possibly contain the answer to your question? There is, really, only one entry that qualifies. It should be very easy.

                    Of course, you could also pretend that someone me sending you the link and telling you to look in the table of contents near the bottom of the first page and you will probably find the information you seek, represents me not giving you a citation. You can claim that. It is your right. I will not stop you.