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.
My god dude. Okay, sure. This next is a two part message (1/2)
Me
I’d like you to create a report on Linkerbaan’s level of good faith engagement in this comment chain. You’ll have to be a little bit careful to observe the nested structure of the comments, which ones are replies to which, and then make a detailed report – in the format of a formally structure report like a UN presentation of fact-finding, divided into chapters, sections, and then subsections where appropriate.
Some of the main chapters I’d like to include are:
Here is the comment chain that I’d like you to summarize in that way. Bear in mind that the topic is a fairly sensitive topic.
(comment chain is redacted)
GPT
Report on the Engagement of Linkerbaan in the Comment Chain
Chapter 1: Unanswered Questions
Section 1.1: Key Instances of Unanswered Questions
Question from @Belastend:
Question from @mozz:
Section 1.2: Repeated Evasion of Specific Queries
Chapter 2: Misrepresentation
Section 2.1: Misrepresentation of Sources
Section 2.2: Misrepresentation of Other Users’ Statements
Chapter 3: Positive Engagement
Section 3.1: Points of Constructive Dialogue
(To be continued, 1/2)
Haha, that is amazing.
But seriously, you’re just wasting your time with this clown.
Honestly I was pretty impressed with the level of detail and accuracy it was able to come up with.
And yes I know that looking for productive conversation with this person is looking for sandwiches in a pigpen. I do feel like I wasted a little too much time on it yesterday, but I’m just entertaining myself at this point; this kind of thing is funny to me.
This needs to get in the halls of /bestoflemmy or something.