Rape testimonies… How did Israel’s narrative collapse in front of the New York Times? | news

The latest opinion article, published by journalist Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times, caused a resounding shock in political and media circles. It not only lifted the lid on violent crimes in Israeli prisons, but also revealed the strategy of obfuscation practiced by Israel.

Instead of discussing the horrific crimes, the Israeli diplomatic and media machine resorted to launching a counterattack, aiming to assassinate the character of the writer and the victims, in an attempt to obscure the facts under the guise of the term “blood libel.”

Christoph’s message and call for denunciation

Christoph began revealing what was hidden through a blog post in which he prefaced his article, and through which he sent a message calling for agreement to condemn rape without regard to any political position on the Middle East.

In his blog, he referred to the difficulties he faced in convincing victims to speak, after being threatened with death or rape again if any testimony was given.

Despite this intimidation, some of them found the courage to talk about horrific details, such as the presence of a man who was raped three times in one day, and a young woman who was forced to strip naked by guards at the beginning of each guard shift, and another who was threatened to publish pictures of her assault to blackmail her into working with intelligence, along with children who faced similar violations.

Silence in the face of crimes… Details of the report

Under the title “The Silence That Faces the Rape of Palestinians,” the report was based on interviews with 14 victims, to confirm that violence has become a systematic policy in prisons. The most prominent things documented by the report can be summarized in the following points:

• Sami Al-Saei’s testimony: The journalist was beaten and stripped of his clothes, before an attempt was made to insert a rubber baton into his anus, then a “carrot” was used to assault him, while the guards laughed, and the scene was filmed, while he was subjected to painful physical harassment by a female guard.
• Farmer’s punishment: There is a prisoner who was raped with a metal baton three times in one day, the third time as direct punishment after asking for pen and paper to write a complaint.
• Dog assault: The report documented the testimony of a journalist from Gaza in which he confirmed that he was stripped of his clothes while he was tied up and blindfolded, then a police dog was directed to brutally assault him, amid soldiers laughing and the scene being documented by cameras.
• Targeting women and children: The report mentioned reports documenting attacks on women, including a woman who was tied to a metal table and assaulted for two full days and photographed to blackmail her. He touched on the testimonies of children whose exposure to blatant violations was documented by Save the Children.
• Olmert’s testimony: The report featured a comment by former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who confirmed that he was not surprised, and stated categorically that there are war crimes committed every day.

The Israeli response…an attempt to silence and escape forward

These horrific testimonies terrified the Israeli authorities, who immediately moved to activate the silencing plan and change the course of the debate.

The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement attacking the newspaper and the writer, and described the report as representing the worst “blood libel” in the history of modern journalism.

The Foreign Ministry considered that the report distorts reality and turns the victim into an accused, claiming that publishing these testimonies is part of a false campaign to put Israel on the United Nations blacklist.

The matter was not limited to official statements, but accounts affiliated with lobbying circles, such as the HonestReporting organization and the Israel War Room account, mobilized to launch a campaign aimed at attacking the credibility of witnesses.

The plan included digging up previous political publications by the journalist Al-Saee and other victims, to claim that their positions negate the reality of what they were exposed to.

Some American journalists, such as David Shuster, volunteered to support this narrative, as he claimed that there were discussions within the newspaper to withdraw the article, and he tried to mock the testimony of dog attacks, claiming that dogs do not have the anatomical ability to do this, with the aim of completely emptying the testimonies of their content.

Falling masks and double standards

These Israeli attempts collided with a solid wall of rejection in journalistic and human rights circles, which dismantled the narrative of skepticism and clearly revealed double standards.

In the face of the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s denial, a group of journalists and writers responded by relying on reports and interviews issued by Israeli human rights organizations confirming the occurrence of sexual attacks against Palestinian prisoners.

In this context, the writer (Assal Rad) shared on her account a screenshot from a report by the Israeli organization “B’Tselem”, documenting the occurrence of such crimes, to serve as a conclusive response refuting the claims of Israeli officials.

Media personality Piers Morgan came out to express his shock in brief words, describing what happened as horrific, shameful, and scandalous behavior.

In a categorical response to Israel’s use of the term “blood libel,” activist Mahmoud Khalil mocked this excessive consumption of the word, pointing out that Israel describes the decisions of the International Court of Justice and the reports of the United Nations and Amnesty International as a libel, making it appear as if it is the only entity that does not lie, while facing trial on charges of genocide.

The Sturgeon’s Law account questioned the sources, and raised a question about the logic of denying 14 of the victims the writer spoke to personally, in addition to ignoring the reports of independent organizations.

For his part, reporter Ryan Grim confirmed that the number of witnesses to the use of dogs in attacks exceeds the ability to ignore, and explained that the barbarity of these violations makes those who narrate them seem illogical due to their ugliness, but they constitute a documented fact.

Here, the angle of double standards emerged explicitly in the comment of journalist Sanaa Saeed, who criticized the blatant contradiction in the American press, and explained that the word of the Israeli official is taken as fact without any evidence, while the Palestinian demands that he provide every detail possible to prove that he was subjected to violence.

She drew attention to the fact that the newspaper published its investigation into the October 7 allegations as an official investigation, while it placed the report on violations against Palestinians in the opinion section.

This is the same proposition adopted by Legal Director Jenin Younes, who expressed her frustration with this dual world, where real attacks on Palestinians are ignored for years, while rumors spread by the perpetrators of genocide are spread without any scrutiny.

In conclusion, these responses culminated in CARE’s call for action to stop American funding for these violations, stressing that no party should be allowed to commit these horrific crimes while ensuring impunity.