Gaga's Israeli comments resurfaces

[Didymus 34,379]

7 hours ago, PartySick said:

Would actually prefer if you guys didn't argue about the rape thing please.

Both of you were reported and we decided to let it go since you're having a relatively civil discussion and you both have valid reasons backed up by official sources for your stances but this subject specifically is a bit much imo.

Where is their valid reason and credible source for repeatedly calling me a "rape apologist"?

6 hours ago, Ronlop said:

 I don't see why you'd dismiss eyewitness accounts, which are commonly relied upon in rape cases. How is that suddenly not credible enough? ... The demonization of Israelis is so insane that the assumption is that they are lying by default or are agents of the Israeli regime. Also, as @Dennis pointed out, there's additional evidence beyond just eyewitness testimony in the actual report if that's not enough for you.

I'm not sure how all of this led you to dismiss it completely, as you claimed there is "no evidence for this". Don't you find your conclusion, said with such certainty, to be quite wild given everything that's been presented thus far? Your insistence on discrediting or downplaying these allegations is appalling. 

Why is it appalling?

The UN literally admits itself in that very same report that the eyewitness testimony is remarkably inconsistent and keeps getting retracted. They explicitly call out that some of the most dramatic pieces of testimony that dominated media in October are objectively false. So, what is it? Am I discrediting or downplaying the allegations or am I just citing their own ****ing report?

What is really appalling is you saying this eyewitness testimony should be "enough" to convince people. Extremely irresponsible, given how this what now turns out to be FALSE "eyewitness testimony" has been used to justify the very invasion of Gaza. And yes, @Dennis, there is other evidence. Evidence the report itself calls circumstantial lol. So, again, what I said is accurate and represents the finding of the report. The UN hasn't "confirmed" anything except that there is reason to open a forensic investigation, something Israel is flatly denying. See the problem with that?

Until this investigation actually happens, there can be no certainty about anything, which is exactly what that report says, for god's sake. So, yes, I was correct in calling you out for spreading fake news by casually stating "mass rape" occurred on October 7th and anyone who denies that is a Hamas supporter and/or rape apologist. Tedious that I have to spell this out.

Israel has been repeatedly exposed for lying and even planting fake evidence to demonize Gazans and justify their genocidal actions. Again, the crucial source for that New York Times piece that was laughably posted here as "credible" revealed she was pressured into giving a false testimony. So... what is more reasonable? Believe Israel's curated side of the story or join the UN's call to open an independent investigation, which Israel is refusing, just like they're refusing to investigate just as credible sexual assault risks of their own forces?

Let's qoute another UN official:

"So far as the government of Israel is concerned, we have not only seen a lack of cooperation, but active obstruction of our efforts to receive evidence from Israeli witnesses and victims to the events that occurred in southern Israel [on October 7h.]." (https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/un-commission-accuses-israel-obstructing-oct-7-probe-2024-04-16/)

Israel's predictable response: the UN commission is antisemitic, so they're not capable of doing their job.

You're honestly asking us to dismiss the need for an open investigation and to just run with the fact that Israelis wouldn't lie about what happened? Crazy.

Right, that’ll be my last post (here) on this. We all had our say after the mod checked us so let that be it. I would’ve respected the question in itself but not when people are calling me “rape apologists” what the actual ****. Y’all are crazy.

Edited May 13 by Didymus

[Didymus 34,379]

Lemme also remind everyone that Palestine is a member of the ICC and has welcomed and celebrated investigations into Hamas' war crimes and possible arrests. There is no conflict between supporting Palestine and seeking justice for innocent Israeli lives. Don't let anyone try to convince you otherwise. It's a propaganda tactic that is decades old.

Meanwhile, Israel is not a member of the ICC and actively bars investigations into what already have been shown to be war crimes and international law violations. As a UN member they're even refusing UN officials to do their job. This is why it's so important to support the call for Palestine to become a full UN member. It's not hard to identify who is being the biggest obstacle to getting rid of Hamas and ending this bs.

So, yes, Gaga could perfectly take a stand against Israel for this and other reasons without ignoring Israeli civilians (who are protesting against Netanyhu anyway). I hope she will soon.

Edited May 13 by Didymus

[Ronlop 6,882]

4 hours ago, Didymus said:

The UN literally admits itself in that very same report that the eyewitness testimony is remarkably inconsistent and keeps getting retracted. They explicitly call out that some of the most dramatic pieces of testimony that dominated media in October are objectively false. So, what is it? Am I discrediting or downplaying the allegations or am I just citing their own ****ing report?

What is really appalling is you saying this eyewitness testimony should be "enough" to convince people. Extremely irresponsible, given how this what now turns out to be FALSE "eyewitness testimony" has been used to justify the very invasion of Gaza.

In the report, there were two allegations regarding Kibutz Re'im that were deemed inconsistent. Just two. How does this suggest that there is no evidence of sexual violence associated with the Hamas attack at all?

The report explicitly states that the majority of eyewitnesses were considered credible. Additionally, the digital evidence was verified to be authentic and unaltered. Furthermore, there was circumstantial evidence, such as the presence of mostly women compared to men who were discovered naked and bound to structures in at least three locations, indicating instances of sexual violence. As stated in the report, the limited forensic evidence is due to "both the large number of casualties and the "dispersed crime scenes in a context of persistent hostilities". And again, the UN's overall conclusion from the entire report is that there are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred on Oct 7th. Why are you treating their report as a complete retraction of every allegation, suggesting that the entire incident was baseless and fabricated, when that is never once implied? 

In another UN report documenting sexual violence during the Russian invasion of Ukraine, findings were derived from witnesses and sources meeting the "reasonable grounds to believe" standard of proof. The report relied on 108 allegations, of which 23 were verified, while the remaining could not be verified, with some even found to be false.  Source

The major difference lies in the fact that in this report, 18 victims were purportedly murdered after being raped, whereas in Israel, the majority of victims were killed and thus unable to testify. And despite the OHCHR recognizing the difficulties in thoroughly assessing the extent of sexual violence violations in the case of Ukraine similar to Israel, and even though these allegations were also evaluated under the "reasonable grounds to believe" standard of proof, they did not face skepticism from anyone.

So this unfair treatment of the Israeli report proves that there's this odd tendency to defend Hamas at any cost, portraying them in a more favorable light than they deserve while perpetuating this weird narrative of Israeli people fabricating everything.

Nobody is suggesting that further investigation is unnecessary. However, there's a distinction between advocating for additional investigation and outright rejecting the conclusion reached, which was that there is enough evidence that shows that there were several incidents of rape during the October 7th attacks. Not sure why you would want to dismiss that and draw a definitive conclusion from everything presented so far with an assertive "there's no evidence." If that isn't denial, then what is? 

Edited May 13 by Ronlop

[Didymus 34,379]

Dude...

Stop.

For people who still care: read the report and PM me if you wanna discuss.

https://news.un.org/en/sites/news.un.org.en/files/atoms/files/Mission_report_of_SRSG_SVC_to_Israel-oWB_29Jan_14_feb_2024.pdf

Read especially how "reasonable grounds to believe" is defined against "clear and convincing" and "beyond a reasonable doubt".

Verify the fact that the only type of evidence used for October 7th is defined as "circumstantial", a term defined inside the report as being inconclusive.

Read also how the report explicitly rejects Israel's claim of direct evidence of sexual violence existing or having existed in the past.

Note that the report denies being able to identify Hamas as the perpretators, and that a reliable investigation can only be carried out by relevant UN bodies (who are currently denied access to survivors and eyewitnesses, as I mentioned above).

And, for the love of God, remember that the "credible" eyewitnesses include first responders who have been exposed (even by this report) to have made up lies about what they found at the October 7th sites.

Also, Google Yasmin Porat and Hadas Dagan, whose October 7th survivor testimony proved (as reported by Israeli media before Israel initiated its official press censorship campaign) that Israel's reconstruction of events that day, no matter how detailed, is extremely unreliable and careless towards Israeli civilians.

Edited May 13 by Didymus

[misha4ever 1,166]

I agree those comments were in bad taste, the invasion, brainwashing, and war was already on for years by then, but in her defense, most people weren't aware of the real damage, and most of them thought Israel wasn't doing anything wrong.

[David Ward 8,414]

On 5/11/2024 at 12:47 PM, Obobo said:

Great…let’s push traffic on a fairly irrelevant video. I swear Gaga’s biggest enemy isn’t her but us…

I opted out of posting this on a public page or forum. Instead, I posted it to "Gaga Thoughts" where only members can view this section and can be discussed in a safe and semi-private environment. 

I understand these topics are uncomfortable to discuss, especially when its involving our faves like Gaga, but honestly, its a discussion thats bound to happen.

[Foolofatook 79]

Never thought I'd say this but I really feel done with Gaga even though I've been a diehard fan since 2009. 

To my knowledge she's done nothing to speak out against the atrocities in Palestine and Sudan and I'm really disappointed in her.

I know people argue that celebrities should stay out of politics but at this stage it's gone beyond that. People with wealth and influential platforms need to speak up as their platforms reach a lot of people and they have power and resources. But no, they are more interested in preserving their status. 

I think the digitine movement on social media at the moment is actually a great way of expressing disapproval and it's really made me accept what I've been feeling about Gaga over the last several months.

She spent so much of her early career advocating for the LGBT community but stays silent on these current issues? I know she had her BTW charity and I give her credit for that but she constantly preaches kindness and yet is silent when that message needs to be spread more than ever? What?!

She trauma dumps on her fans about her own struggles and pain, going as far as to basically make a documentary about it but when there is an opportunity to speak up for victims of genocide? Nada.

She also has a history of working with abusers despite telling us she is a victim of SA herself. Everybody knew about R Kelly and Terry Richardson. She worked with them anyway. She worked with Jared Leto who has been accused of sexual misconduct. Has she even publicly said anything about Richy Jackson?

There's just been too many shitty decisions and flowery words but then not stepping up when she needs to. I'm so done with blindly supporting this woman because I've been a fan for so long. I'm out.

[Ronlop 6,882]

I'm only responding because I find it troubling that this form of denial on Oct 7th is being expressed here and could influence others. You don't have to respond if you don't wish but it's important for me to say my take on this.

 

21 hours ago, Didymus said:

Read especially how "reasonable grounds to believe" is defined against "clear and convincing" and "beyond a reasonable doubt".

Verify the fact that the only type of evidence used for October 7th is defined as "circumstantial", a term defined inside the report as being inconclusive.

Once again, the "reasonable grounds to believe" standard of proof has been previously used in sexual violence reports and has not encountered such significant skepticism as it has in this instance.  Source , Source , Source

"Circumstantial" implies that there is a logical inference to support the fact, but additional reasonable inferences are necessary to arrive at a definitive conclusion. It essentially indicates that the likelihood of the fact being true outweighs its likelihood of being untrue. It makes sense that this report encountered challenges in verifying the facts, particularly given the presence of burned bodies, corpse mutilation, and the ongoing treatment of the remaining survivors who weren't ready to come forward. Given everything that is presented in this report, why would one opt to believe it's more likely untrue than true? The report's conclusion clearly indicates a greater tendency towards truth than falsehood.

Again, further investigation is needed but that doesn't mean that this report didn't bring us closer to the truth than before. We shouldn't disregard the testimonies and the survivors during this process unless all the allegations are found to be false which is not the case with this report.

 

21 hours ago, Didymus said:

Note that the report denies being able to identify Hamas as the perpretators, and that a reliable investigation can only be carried out by relevant UN bodies (who are currently denied access to survivors and eyewitnesses, as I mentioned above).

The Israeli government's reluctance to approve additional UN bodies to investigate doesn't necessarily indicate they're hiding everything and fabricated it all. It could be a political move by the right-wing Israeli administration to assert dominance over the UN in order to cater to their audience and stay in power. The use of antisemitism and one-sided claims against the UN to gain points within their base was done far before the events of Oct 7th by the right parties. It's not an uncommon strategy with them. Source , Source That's a main issue with the Israeli people against Natenyahu - his tendency to prioritize the demands of his extreme-right coalition partners, even at the expense of challenging international bodies like the UN, solely to maintain his grip on power.

Both sides engage in propaganda, but you can't overlook everything that has been available so far, including all the various videos from that day, the witness testimonies which couldn't be contradicted via other information, Amit Soussana's testimony, and even Hamas' denial of attacking civilians. These elements collectively suggest way more than a mere dismissal with a blanket statement of "no evidence."

 

21 hours ago, Didymus said:

And, for the love of God, remember that the "credible" eyewitnesses include first responders who have been exposed (even by this report) to have made up lies about what they found at the October 7th sites.

You can't selectively trust the UN's reports solely when they align with your viewpoint. Are you suddenly questioning the credibility of the UN's meticulous gathering, analysis, and verification of both internal and externally obtained information? Doubting their assessments of witness reliability and credibility? Or dismissing their thorough cross-referencing to ensure the reasonableness of their conclusions?

Even within their report, the UN explicitly delineates which allegations were deemed inconsistent (only two, according to this report), which couldn't be corroborated, and the rest had sufficient grounds to have happened. So, why would you be inclined to doubt everything based on this? 

 

21 hours ago, Didymus said:

Also, Google Yasmin Porat and Hadas Dagan, whose October 7th survivor testimony proved (as reported by Israeli media before Israel initiated its official press censorship campaign) that Israel's reconstruction of events that day, no matter how detailed, is extremely unreliable and careless towards Israeli civilians.

Oh here comes the predictable mention of the Yasmin Porat case. It's a case frequently brought up by those who deny the events of October 7th, aiming to insinuate that Israel was responsible for the majority of the casualties without any logical basis. For those unfamiliar with the case, the Israeli forces unleashed heavy gunfire on a house, resulting in the deaths of both Hamas terrorists and Israeli hostages after negotiations between the terrorists and the IDF failed. It's a story that has been covered by several prominent Israeli media outlets and is available for anyone to read. And also, it's announced to be investigated.

This narrative serves as a propaganda tool to shift blame away from Hamas and onto the Israeli forces, who admittedly failed that day but did not cause the majority of the deaths on October 7th. Responsibility for the attacks of that day lies only on the perpetrators, who filmed their actions that day —which some shockingly still label as fake—Hamas.

Edited May 14 by Ronlop

[shelby loved 381]

Unfortunately I feel like the 'backlash' is a valid reaction to 30k+ people being murdered. I blame Israel before Gaga for this one. And of course she would give that kind of quote to an Israeli news outlet. At least it isn't a quote from any serious kind of press.

[Vicixs 3,316]

You know this just made me realize…she has yet to say anything about the genocide????

[Dennis 8,391]

30 minutes ago, Grigio Guy said:

You know this just made me realize…she has yet to say anything about the genocide????

She hasn't much about Ukraine either? Other than one time she was asked about in NYYFC event? (Billie Eilish did MULTIPLE fundraiser events for Ukraine, Harry Styles waved Ukrainian flag in his concert, Dua Lipa posted about it, Coldplay and other acts dedicated songs to Ukraine etc..)

And she hasn't said anything in the days following October 7th when many celebrities were speaking out about it?

Maybe just maybe she's simply focusing on her work and doesn't feel the need to provide commentary on world events and state the obvious. Does anyone here thinks she supports war and destruction?

Edited May 15 by Dennis

[Vicixs 3,316]

31 minutes ago, Dennis said:

She hasn't much about Ukraine either? Other than one time she was asked about in NYYFC event? (Billie Eilish did MULTIPLE fundraiser events for Ukraine, Harry Styles waved Ukrainian flag in his concert, Dua Lipa posted about it, Coldplay and other acts dedicated songs to Ukraine etc..)

And she hasn't said anything in the days following October 7th when many celebrities were speaking out about it?

Maybe just maybe she's simply focusing on her work and doesn't feel the need to provide commentary on world events and state the obvious. Does anyone here thinks she supports war and destruction?

Yeah, but let’s remember we’re talking about a woman who literally called out the Russian government and told her to PUT HER IN ****ING HANDCUFFS. The same woman that rallied in front of DC and demanded PRESIDENT OF THE US Obama to get his **** together. Like???

[River 105,807]

3 minutes ago, Grigio Guy said:

Yeah, but let’s remember we’re talking about a woman who literally called out the Russian government and told her to PUT HER IN ****ING HANDCUFFS. The same woman that rallied in front of DC and demanded PRESIDENT OF THE US Obama to get his **** together. Like???

You mentioned 2 occasions when she fought for something she's passionate about - LGBTQ+ rights.

[Dennis 8,391]

3 minutes ago, Grigio Guy said:

Yeah, but let’s remember we’re talking about a woman who literally called out the Russian government and told her to PUT HER IN ****ING HANDCUFFS. The same woman that rallied in front of DC and demanded PRESIDENT OF THE US Obama to get his **** together. Like???

I'm just saying, in the last few years, she's been quiet on political issues, became more private and less active on social media. Nothing against, Palestine, Israel or Ukraine.

[Plastic Flower 3,793]

Some people need to go outside of their internet bubble.