You don't? You sure about that? You post links to their articles on a regular basis.
Are you really not aware of the UN report released in March?
This Is Different
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
Are you really not aware of the UN report released in March?
Which is it? Do you want to know if Mondoweiss reported on the UN report, which is what you first asked, or do you want to know if I know about the UN report, which I have commented on practically since the day it was released?
Lol, how about both, Dodge?
You've commented on the UN report practically since the day it was released? Really? In this thread you posted:
The UN report differs significantly from what you're claiming. In fact, here's a quote from it:
12. 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. Across the various locations of the 7 October attacks, the mission team found that several fully naked or partially naked bodies from the waist down were recovered – mostly women – with hands tied and shot multiple times, often in the head. Although circumstantial, such a pattern of undressing and restraining of victims may be indicative of some forms of sexual violence.
Why do you guys keep feeding the troll. He has made his point , you guys made your points. He will never understand and you will definitely not understand his point because he doesn't.
3 rapes do not constitute mass rapes. And for the record I do not deny, and have ever denied that any rape occurred; in fact I have said many times it would be unlikely that no rapes occurred. I have asked for evidence that mass rapes occurred and to this point none has been provided. You can take that any way you want. I take it that Israel misled the public in an attempt to get people willing to accept genocide in revenge. Which is what it appears you have been willing to accept. The woman in charge of the investigation was interviewed and said her team watched thousands of videos and pictures and did not see evidence of even one rape. The film you linked to was evidence enough, for me at least, to recognize that there was multiple sexual violence, and I have said so. You seem determined to get me to admit there was intentional mass rapes as a war tactic, which I am more than willing to do as soon as there is evidence it occurred. Your highlighted sentence segment is not evidence.
Last edited:
So what does constitute a mass rape in your mind? Gang rape implies more than one person raped a single person. Is it 5? 10? 500? What's your threshold?
You claimed the UN said there was not evidence of rape. You were of course incorrect as usual. None of the other rambling erases that fact.
Where's the fun in that. Can't speak for others but this is purely entertainment for me.
I don't know what constitutes mass rape, but I do know that 3 out of thousands of people is not it. The accusation is the Hamas fighters were given explicit instructions to chase down and rape as many women as they found. There is no evidence of that. It seems to infuriate you that you can't provide the evidence. I would have thought you would have been a little relieved. It's almost as if you wish it had happened so you could prove it. That's kinda sick, Medic.
You don't know what constitutes mass rape in your own mind but whatever Hamas did wasn't it? Wow, just wow.
BTW, the UN report didn't say 3 people. It said evidence of rapes and gang rapes in 3 locations. I guess you'll do whatever you can to try to minimize reality though. It's what apologists do.
Okay, so how many rapes does the UN report say took place in those three locations? You sentence segment doesn't say.
I thought you said you were familiar with the report. You made the claim that the UN found no evidence of "even one rape" despite the UN report clearly saying otherwise. Surely you aren't just talking out of your ass again.
How many rapes does it take for it to be mass rape in your mind, Dodge? You've clearly said three people isn't mass rape. Would four be mass rape? 10? 50?
I said I'm familiar with the interview with the woman in charge of the team making the report. She made the interview when the Israel lobby jumped on the report pretending it proved they wern't lying after, all and said she needed to clarify what the report said. You're trying too hard to win an argument, Medic, not have a civil conversation. I guess you're still smarting from the time you humiliated yourself another time you tried too hard to win an argument.
I don't have a number that would decribe "mass rape" out of thousands of combatants. I'm sorry if that disappoints you. But what I do think is if there was mass rape we would know about it seven months after the incident. The "mass rape" clique has been absent in providing actual numbers, or even estimates for that matter. I asked you once, let me ask again: how many rapes does the UN report say there were? The idea that Hamas terrorists tied women to a tree, stripped them from the waist down and shot them in the face or the vagina is sickeningly disgusting. Too gruesome to contemplate. But it seems to me if the women had been raped there would be forensic evidence saying so. And maybe there is forensic evidence saying so, I just havn't seen it or heard about it. Have You?
You are a pacifist who has promoted pro-Jihad sources. That's the definition of contradiction.
Please point to those pro-Jihad sources I have promoted and explain what makes them “pro-Jihad,” in what way I have promoted them, and mainly tell me what you mean by “pro-Jihad.”
No problem. I'm not digging up quotes of you stating you are a pacifist, as you don't seem to dispute that.
You did post this story:
That meets my definition of promoting that narrative. Inside that story is the following:You’ll mildly agree with some of this, mildly disagree with some and blow a gasket at some of it, but he makes a very good overall point if you’ll just listen.
(shoutout Palestinian Islamic Jihad, PFLP, Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, and the whole Axis of Resistance)
That seems pretty indisputably pro-Jihad. And thus my statement is true. You, a stated pacifist, promoted narratives published by pro-Jihad sources.
Who is PIJ? Well, just a para-military arm of the Palestinian armed forces that the US has defined as a terrorist organization and that rejects any two state solution and has publicly called for the destruction of Israel (aka Jihad).
Any other questions or confusions?
Your statement misses the point by a mile. American/white European arrogance has run its course. Shouts like that are becoming more common across the globe every day, and your idea that it is not important, that we’ve ruled the roost all your life so all we have to do is suppress those ideas like we have always done and everything will be like you’ve always known it is seriously misplaced. What white European/American Israeli’s are doing to the brown Palestinians is not resonating the way you want it, and if we don’t catch a glimpse of reality reality is going to bite us on the ass. And you can thank Israel for putting our demise over the top.
So you haven't read the report and have only seen an interview? Why would you post that the UN investigators didn't find evidence of "even one rape" if you haven't even read the report they wrote? Talking out of your ass yet again?
And you don't have a number that would describe mass rape out of thousands of combatants? Really? How can you be convinced mass rape didn't occur when you don't even know what mass rape is? Maybe I can help. You're already on recording as saying 3 doesn't meet your bar so it must be higher than that, right? I'm on record as anything more than one is a mass rape.
I have never said anything but that I saw the interview with the woman who led the investigation. Maybe she was talking out of her ass? Remember when the Supreme Court said it couldn't define pornography, but it would know it when it sees it? Well, I don't know how many rapes from several thousand attacking terrorists would constitute mass rape, but I think I'd know it when I see it. Based on the film you linked I would say there was mass sexual violence if that helps alleviate your concern. The terror those women must have felt as they were being abused and murdered must have been as horrible as rape. And while I agree with you (and agreed with you several days ago) one rape is too many and should not be countenanced, only a fool would think "anything more" than one rape constitutes mass rapes on Oct. 7., at least not in the context you are using.
Except you did. You posted this in this thread:
Did you forget about that post?
No, Dodge, actually only a fool would be a rape apologist and quibble over the numbers of rapes it takes to be considered mass rape without having a single clue what their own idea of mass rape is.
All I stated was that you are a pacifist who promotes pro-Jihad narratives, which can only be viewed as a contradiction. I didn't miss any point or have a misunderstanding. But I take it from your non-rebuttal that you don't argue my point.
No, why would I forget that post? The lady being interviewed was in charge of the investigators and spoke on their behalf. Geez, Medic, you’te trying waaay too hard to get back at me. I didn’t humiliate you. You humiliated yourself. You’re just making a fool out of yourself you’re so obsessed in trying to make me sound like something you know I am not. You’re coming off like a tv prosecutor desperately trying to save his case as it crumbles before him.
It’s not possible to argue a non-point. Without showing what pro-Jihad posts to which you refer or explaining what is pro-Jihad about them, or how I’m promoting them by linking to them, or explaining what you mean by the term pro-Jihad you are not making any point at all. Define your terms, put them in perspective of how they apply to your accusation and we can talk about it. Otherwise it just looks like you are trying to look good for your schoolyard playground buddies.
Are you really playing the "What's the term Jihad mean" defense? As for the rest of your ramble, I linked the post where you promoted a pro-Jihad narrative and why that post was pro-Jihad. I believe you even replied to it, but you were probably were so emotionally distraught from all the lost children of Gaza that you couldn't read it clearly through those misty eyes.
Excedrin migraine moments for me. Another drink please! Dan has redefined redundancy.
How embarrassing for you, Dodge. You've been reduced to nothing more than a dishonest rape apologist for a bunch of shitty terrorists. Good luck with that.
I’ve been reduced to no such thing. I don’t know if you really believe the crap you spout about me, but if you do your cognitive skills compete with that of Sleepy Joe. What I think is you reflexively work yourself into a tizzy when anyone successfully counters what you think are indisputable arguments when you make them and as a last resort call names and spread falsehoods hoping your schoolyard playmates don’t notice how innocuous your argument is. You let your emotions take over. I hope you are better able to maintain your composure when you’re on your job.
Looks like I hit the bullseye. Ooof, Dodge, not a good look for you.
