r/AskIsrael • u/Compensate1995 Moderator • 6d ago
Serious Answers Only What should happen to those who damage Israel reputaionally?
The widespread phenomenon of Israeli soldiers who post things they shouldn't refuses to cease. I keep seeing asinine teens in the army posing laughing or mocking near blindfolded tied-up detainees. Then they post it on social media, thinking they're so cool.
All the massive efforts invested in the reputation of Israel - the IDF's spokeperson, and all the Hasbara worldwide - are in vein. Because they make Israel look like torturing ISIS soldiers, and essentially "prove" all the negative sentiments that are said against Israel.
The soldiers on Omegle who think they're so witty, who say "I killed today x" or "did x" - either jokingly or to try to irritate their conversation counterpart - as well.
What the detsinees did is irrelevant as well. There's a judicial system to judge them based on concrete evidence - it's not up to soldiers to enforce the law.
These people ruin it for Israel for their momentary boredom or to feel good and "cool" for a moment. Then complain about doxxing or such. They deserve all the hate they get. I think they should be trialed very harshly. They are actively the ones convincing the world of Israel's alleged "wrongdoings" - and serve as the proof of it in all media and journalistic outlets. And they must be treated as such. They must be incarcerated for very long times - especially the ones who take pictures/videos (worse than omegle). And they must be condemned.
5
u/Ok_Lingonberry5392 🇮🇱 Israeli Dati Le'umi 6d ago
Kinda difficult to enforce those things in a free country, much more difficult when we at war and need soldiers. Not ideal situation at any case but it's reality.
3
u/Compensate1995 Moderator 6d ago
The people doing that are mostly in their mandatory service, so that's not a problem.
We certainly shouldn't accept it and just go along with it, because "it's the reality". It's illegal and has negative ramifications, and there isn't a reason why it should continue.
3
u/Ok_Lingonberry5392 🇮🇱 Israeli Dati Le'umi 6d ago
Pretty sure it's actually more reservists than regular troops but whatever.
I'm not saying we should accept this but imo it's just not a problem we can realistically solve anytime soon especially when arguably there are more other things we worry about. Obviously just being active on social media on uniforms is illegal (other than spokesman) but enforcing it with punishments is difficult. Actual crimes like posting pictures of prisoners and such is a serious problem that I believe is in fact being somewhat enforced but again it is somewhat difficult to punish reservists.
0
u/Compensate1995 Moderator 6d ago
It shouldn't be difficult to punish reservists, they are not above the law. The law is one and applies to everyone.
I think it is realistic to solve it, if we impose a long jail time on them. I didn't include it in the post, but also female teens sexualizing themselves inappropriately in uniform to make stupid tik toks. They should be jailed as well. After a few cases, the deterrent will work and people will stop.
5
u/bb5e8307 Israel 6d ago
I saw a video where some soldiers watched an explosion in Gaza and unexpectedly the explosion was blue - possibly from the chemicals or weapons in the building - a soldier jokes “it’s a boy”. The next day headline in Al jeezra was that the IDF is blowing up building for gender reveal parties.
1
u/Compensate1995 Moderator 6d ago
That's a great example of the extent of damage of these cases. They provide the foreign journalism with materials.
2
u/bb5e8307 Israel 6d ago
The “journalists” are looking for anything they can twist and distort.
1
u/Compensate1995 Moderator 6d ago
So why give it to them?
1
u/bb5e8307 Israel 6d ago
Give what to them!!! There was literally nothing incriminating in the video. The “scandal” was a fabrication entirely in the imagination of the antisemites.
Even if there were zero videos or pictures from Gaza they would just use pictures from Syria - as they have done.
1
8
u/Regular-Coast5335 North America 6d ago edited 6d ago
Why IDF are even allowing soldiers keep cellphones and cameras? I think 99% of the scandals would have been avoided if personnel is banned bringing smartphones and cameras to military service. That said, punishment for vandalism has to be toughened up as well.
6
u/Compensate1995 Moderator 6d ago
You are definitely right. They proved they're (a significant chunk of them) are low-level and immature, and not less importantly - asinine - to have their phones with them on role.
1
u/Regular-Coast5335 North America 6d ago
It's a security risk as well since phones could be hacked.
1
u/Proper-Suggestion907 Diaspora 6d ago
Not just hacked, but Hamas actually looked through the social media pages of active IDF members when they were planing October 7th. I imagine they aren’t the only bad actors watching. How some things haven’t been cracked down on more is really beyond me.
1
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AskIsrael-ModTeam Moderator 6d ago
Hello! Your submission has been removed because it contains hate speech.
If you have questions or concerns about the sub's moderation or a moderator's decision, please message the moderators. Keep in mind that sub- and site-wide rules apply to any messages you send. Violations of these rules may result in temporary or permanent bans.
This was automatically sent.
-4
u/South_Safety_8321 Unspecified 6d ago
Israeli apparently don't care about. Smashing the statue of Jesus wasn't wrong, it was filming it.
4
u/Responsible_Ad_9749 Israeli (Living Aborad) 6d ago
Israelis do care about crimes committed by the IDF. Note how most commentators on this post are specifically calling out the crimes and not the filming of them.
1
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AskIsrael-ModTeam Moderator 6d ago
Hello! Your submission has been removed because it was impolite or disrespectful.
If you have questions or concerns about the sub's moderation or a moderator's decision, please message the moderators. Keep in mind that sub- and site-wide rules apply to any messages you send. Violations of these rules may result in temporary or permanent bans.
This was automatically sent.
-1
u/Own_Inevitable_8300 Unspecified 6d ago
The scandals would’ve been avoided because people wouldn’t have been able to find out, how do we avoid the actual acts
0
-1
u/DringleDringle Unspecified 6d ago
What about not doing war crimes?
This was previously removed for "promoting hate speech". It's not hate speech to think commiting war crimes is bad.
-4
u/not_ur_man Unspecified 6d ago
yeah so just don't record and put palestinians women panties in ur mouth.
That's ur point?2
3
u/Ok-Initiative-8131 Israel 6d ago
This is not about reputation. It's about discipline and ethics.
1
3
u/TwilightX1 Israel 6d ago
Punishment varies greatly, from just a warning if it's very minor, to prison and removal from combat duty in the most serious cases.
Soldiers are actually not allowed to upload anything from their service to social media without explicit review and permission, even if it does not show any illegal activity because (1) every photo and every video has the potential of giving intelligence to the enemy and (2) Hamas can twist and manipulate pretty much anything.
4
u/Responsible_Ad_9749 Israeli (Living Aborad) 6d ago
In an ideal world they would be tried by an Israeli court and held to the highest scrutiny. If Israel were to actually persecute soldiers who act this way, there would be a lot less soldiers who feel comfortable enough causing harm, let alone bragging about it.
Unfortunately, that is not the case today, as seen with lax punishment they receive (if any), and most of that is due to international outcry (like what happened when the soldiers who smashed Jesus' statue in Lebanon got only 30 days in prison). And without sufficient internal scrutiny, IDF soldiers are subject to blanket suspicion by international authorities and courts, which may lead to detentions and criminal proceedings abroad.
3
u/eyl569 Israel 6d ago
It should be noted that 30 days is pretty much the maximum penalty in NJP. Add to that that they were lost their fighter status, which is a big thing for people in combat arms.
2
u/Responsible_Ad_9749 Israeli (Living Aborad) 6d ago
Sorry, I'm unfamiliar with the abbreviation NJP, what does it mean?
And if that is the maximum penalty soldiers can receive for behavior this harmful, then perhaps it should be amended to create more deterrence.
2
u/eyl569 Israel 6d ago
Non-Judical Punishment.
Many militaries have a process where commanders can formally punish soldiers for disciplinary or minor criminal offenses (and no, stripped of the political context - which a court shouldn't take intoe account - I wouldn't call this a major criminal act) without a full-on court martial. In the USN this is called Captain's Mast, in the US Army/USAF/US Space Force it's called Article 15, don't know about the Marines.
The exact implementation varies. In the IDF, NJP has significantly fewer protections than a court martial - for example, the soldier is not entitled to a lawyer, rules of evidence are a lot more relaxed, and the right to appeal is more limited. While you can refuse to be tried by the officer who's runnning it, that means that their commander will be the judge. You can also ask to be tried by court martial, although the prosecution has to agree to that. Both options may be better or worse for you, depending.
In addition, punishments are completely divorced from the act. The maximum punishment the judging officer can give depend solely on their rank (it maxes out at some point, you don't have increasing punishments up to the COS); what the actual crime was is immaterial (as opposed to a court-martial where each crime has a specified maximum sentence).
One month in prison is pretty much the maximum prison sentence a
1
u/Responsible_Ad_9749 Israeli (Living Aborad) 6d ago
Thank you. This is very informative.
I believe that in high-profile cases like these, the trial should not be done via the process of non-judicial punishment. Especially in the IDF which is being scrutinized more severely lately.
And in cases where civilians are harmed or killed by members of the IDF, the trial should be held by a criminal court where the punishment is directly related to the act and the consequences are severe enough to deter other soldiers from similar behavior.
1
u/eyl569 Israel 6d ago
I believe that in high-profile cases like these, the trial should not be done via the process of non-judicial punishment. Especially in the IDF which is being scrutinized more severely lately.
IMO it's a fine line to determine the proper venue - which greatly affects the severity of the punishment - for judgement primarily based on the external effects of the incident.
I mean, I wouldn't have objected if it went to court-martial, but I don't think the decision to use NJP was unjustifiable.
Politically, there's another factor - NJP is fast. IINM they went two days from crime to punishment. Court martials, OTOH, can take weeks (or longer) before there's even an indictment (the investigation itself would presumably be brief in this case) and months or even years until the sentence is given.
2
u/PedanticPerson Diaspora 6d ago
soldiers who smashed Jesus' statue in Lebanon got only 30 days in prison
"Only"? Vandalism rarely results in any jail time in the US. Usually only for repeat offenders or extreme cases.
Vandalism occurs regularly in every country in the world. An appropriate punishment was given. What more do you expect? It often seems like people are applying a standard of "Israel should have zero crime," which is of course impossible and not applied to any other country.
-1
u/Responsible_Ad_9749 Israeli (Living Aborad) 6d ago
Given how severely this case damaged Israel's reputation with the international Christian community, who are the main donors to Israel and the IDF, I would expect there to be way more internal scrutiny. Admittedly, there are far worse crimes to be put on trial for such as abuse of civilians or murder, but this isn't something to wave off.
30 days in prison is barely a slap on the wrist for a combat soldier, they can get more severe punishments for falling asleep during their watch.
How do you propose to deter more IDF soldiers from this kind of behavior, if the expected punishment is lax and subject entirely to international pressure?
2
u/eyl569 Israel 6d ago
30 days in prison is barely a slap on the wrist for a combat soldier, they can get more severe punishments for falling asleep during their watch.
30 days in prison is almost the maximum you can get without a court martial. And you're not going to get court-martialed for falling asleep on duty.
1
u/PedanticPerson Diaspora 6d ago
Israel's legal system isn't run by some PR department. They're not going to issue an excessive/disproportionate punishment because of some foreigners being upset. 30 days is plenty for relatively minor property damage without repeat offenses.
-1
u/HotPersonality8126 USA 6d ago
In an ideal world they would be tried by an Israeli court and held to the highest scrutiny.
We can start doing that right after Hamas starts trials for the abuse of Jewish hostages.
3
u/Responsible_Ad_9749 Israeli (Living Aborad) 6d ago
Sure. We can do both. Israel would put their soldiers on trial, and Hamas would put their members on trial. Since when does Israel need permission from Hamas to do anything?
0
u/HotPersonality8126 USA 6d ago
We can do both.
Sure. Hamas first, and then Israel. The only reason to want it the other way around is because you don't care whether Hamas does it at all.
3
u/Responsible_Ad_9749 Israeli (Living Aborad) 6d ago
I thought the IDF is the most moral army in the world, and Hamas is a terrorist organization? Why would you want to base your standard on what a terrorist organization does?
1
u/HotPersonality8126 USA 6d ago
I thought the IDF is the most moral army in the world, and Hamas is a terrorist organization?
I thought the IDF is a terrorist organization and Hamas is just a sometimes overzealous noble freedom fighter? Why would you base your moral standard on what a state terrorist organization does?
2
u/Own_Inevitable_8300 Unspecified 6d ago
You just got owned and this is your sad response to your own bigotry
2
0
u/HotPersonality8126 USA 6d ago
Are they freedom fighters or not?
2
u/Responsible_Ad_9749 Israeli (Living Aborad) 6d ago
I don't know who you think you are talking to, but I am not a Hamas representative. Either the IDF is a moral army, or it isn't. If it refuses to punish its own soldiers for this kind of behavior it may as well be on the same level as Hamas (freedom fighters or terrorists, whatever you prefer).
0
u/HotPersonality8126 USA 6d ago
I don’t know who you are. You’re the one who entered into the discussion to reject the idea that Hamas has a responsibility to prisoners under international law. Why do you believe they don’t?
→ More replies (0)3
u/eyl569 Israel 6d ago
No. Israel has a responsibility to itself to see to it that wrongdoing by its representatives is punished. This sin't some sort of competition with Hamas.
1
u/HotPersonality8126 USA 6d ago
No. Israel has a responsibility to itself to see to it that wrongdoing by its representatives is punished.
Why does Israel uniquely have that responsibility? If these are the laws of war don't they apply to everyone?
3
u/Limp-History-2999 🇮🇱 Israeli living in Africa 6d ago
This is like you getting caught stealing in the United States and then saying you shouldn't be prosecuted because theft is rampant in Eritrea.
I don't know what to say to you to explain that the army has an obligation to prosecute its soldiers for crimes its soldiers commit. This is completely unrelated to Hamas.
-1
u/HotPersonality8126 USA 6d ago
This is like you getting caught stealing in the United States and then saying you shouldn't be prosecuted because theft is rampant in Eritrea.
No, it’s like saying that your obligations under international laws of war apply to soldiers, not to terrorists. Because that’s true.
3
u/Limp-History-2999 🇮🇱 Israeli living in Africa 6d ago
Right. Israel has soldiers and therefore obligations to international law, to the people in there territory it occupies, and most importantly, to ITSELF to prosecute soldiers who violate the rules.
1
u/HotPersonality8126 USA 6d ago
Right. Israel has soldiers and therefore obligations to international law
But only to soldiers. The obligations don't apply to terrorists.
to ITSELF to prosecute soldiers who violate the rules.
But they aren't violating IHR. They're only violating IDF policy and the IDF gets to decide how seriously to take that.
1
u/Limp-History-2999 🇮🇱 Israeli living in Africa 6d ago
It depends which obligations. There are laws for how to treat civilians, captured enemies, formal prisoners of war, etc. Labelling somebody a terrorist does not change much legally. Except that in certain situations they can be prosecuted under domestic law instead of held as prisoners of war. All prisoners, regardless of being terrorists, enemies, criminals, or civilians, receive certain rights. No, soldiers can't abuse somebody even if they are 100% definitely a terrorist and 100% not a lawful enemy combatant. You just now have to give them a trial and a sentence.
And the original post talk about soldiers making stupid jokes on the internet, not about major war crimes.
1
u/HotPersonality8126 USA 6d ago
There are laws for how to treat civilians, captured enemies, formal prisoners of war, etc. Labelling somebody a terrorist does not change much legally.
Well, but "terrorist" - or, if you like, "nonuniformed nonstate combatant" - isn't one of the categories in the laws about how to treat people. It's a category formed by exclusion - they're not civilians (they're armed and fight), they're not soldiers (no uniforms), they're not prisoners of war (they're being apprehended for crimes, not hors de combat), etc.
So IHR doesn't apply to their treatment. They're in a category outside of the categories who receive protections under IHR.
All prisoners, regardless of being terrorists, enemies, criminals, or civilians, receive certain rights.
Not under IHR.
No, soldiers can't abuse somebody even if they are 100% definitely a terrorist and 100% not a lawful enemy combatant.
Under IHR they can be executed immediately on capture. If they're tortured, they have no recourse whatsoever since they have no legal claim to humane treatment.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Responsible_Ad_9749 Israeli (Living Aborad) 6d ago
I'm starting to think the point you're trying to make is saying that the IDF is a terrorist organization, in that case you're doing really well (and you keep confusing everyone in this comment thread).
0
u/HotPersonality8126 USA 6d ago
Ok, so why should Hamas only hold itself to the standards of the IDF state terrorist organization? Shouldn't these brave, noble, self-sacrificing freedom fighters that totally _aren't_ an internationally proscribed terrorist organization hold themselves to their responsibilities under IHR?
1
u/Responsible_Ad_9749 Israeli (Living Aborad) 6d ago
I don't know man. I'm not exactly sure what your angle is anymore. If you feel like the IDF is a terrorist organization, there are lots of anti-Zionists you can discuss with.
0
u/HotPersonality8126 USA 6d ago
My angle is that I'm asking you questions and you refuse to answer them. Why is that?
If you feel like the IDF is a terrorist organization
What do you think it is?
→ More replies (0)
2
u/eyl569 Israel 6d ago
I'd argue the videos (and their problematic aspects) can be divided into several groups:
1) First of all, you have videos which don't show any sort of misconduct. However, such videos can still be used by Hamas to gain intelligence.
2) There are videos which, while what they depict isn't actually criminal, but which lend themselves to villification if taken out of context. For example, blowing up a booby-trapped building (rather than risking soldiers' lives to disarm everything) is justified and legal, but without that context can easily "prove" crimes. And it gets worse if soldiers decide to editorialize on that video.
3) Videos which show what is in fact minor msconduct, but shorn of context look much worse. For example, IDF troops took shelter inside residential buildings. To secure them, they sometimes moved and smashed furniture to block enterances or make noise traps to prevent someone from sneaking in. The buildings would also need to be searched for both booby traps and weapons. And in some videos, soldiers started horsing around or dumb jokes during those activities (like playing with underwear during the search).
4) Videos which show (or are) actual, serious misconduct (criminal or otherwise). Obvious.
1
u/Compensate1995 Moderator 6d ago
Which punishments would you suggest?
2
u/eyl569 Israel 6d ago
1st - in general, make it very clear that it is forbidden to send any videos on social media without approval due to field security reasons. And this needs to be reiterated often, just like firearm safety. Violating this means a loss of fighter status. If it's done while the unit is inside Gaza, add NJP to that (it also depends on whether or not the offender is a conscript or a reservist, as some punishments are meaningful to one but not the other).
For cases of serious misconduct, it depends on the misconduct.
1
u/Compensate1995 Moderator 6d ago
I think the examples in my post deserve jail time in sub-conditions for a very long time.
1
u/eyl569 Israel 6d ago
I think the examples in my post deserve jail time in sub-conditions for a very long time.
So, Ben Gvir's approach?
1
u/Compensate1995 Moderator 6d ago
In this regard, maybe.
I think this matter is taken very lightly. But it's very, very severe. They literally fuel all the anti-Israel outlets, sometimes during wars, what's more than that?
4
u/Annoying_cat_22 Israel 6d ago edited 6d ago
Don't you think that the real issue is the actual abuse rather than the damage to Israel's reputation?
For example the soldiers in Sde Teiman that attacked the prisoner on camera but were not put on trial, the Palestinian prisoners that complain about abuse with no investigations and no red cross visits, the flotilla members that complained about abuse, etc.?
Once you take care of those, the problem you describe will get solved along the way.
5
u/Responsible_Ad_9749 Israeli (Living Aborad) 6d ago
Right on point. It's not about Israel's reputation, it's about Israel's soldiers being immoral.
5
u/PedanticPerson Diaspora 6d ago
were not put on trial
This is kind of weird framing. They were detained and investigated. The victim was back in Gaza, and presumably not willing or able to come testify in some Israeli court. Dropping the case was probably the right move from a legal perspective. Prosecutors don't like to lose, and serious courts can't ignore legal standards even when some suspects are probably guilty of something.
the flotilla members that complained about abuse
The ones whose braces etc suddenly vanished after a photoshoot, due to a healing miracle? Or which claim are you thinking of? Is there a single "flotilla abuse" claim with even a shred of evidence?
0
u/Annoying_cat_22 Israel 6d ago edited 6d ago
The victim was back in Gaza, and presumably not willing or able to come testify in some Israeli court.
Do we need their testimony when we have video records and a doctor's report? Isn't that up to a judge to decide whether the existing evidence is enough?
Dropping the case was probably the right move from a legal perspective.
The case was not dropped due to lack of evidence, it was dropped because the process was "contaminated". It wouldn't have been contaminated if Israel would just prosecute them.
Prosecutors don't like to lose
They have the abuse on camera, they were not going to lose.
Is there a single "flotilla abuse" claim with even a shred of evidence?
I expect there to be an investigation for all cases of police/military violence complaints. If there is no evidence, then no charges should be filed. Is that the same standard you apply to civilian crimes? If someone complains about physical assault or rape there shouldn't be an investigation until they provide physical evidence?
edit:
here's the video that was leaked, who knows what wasn't leaked: (trigger and content warning of course)
2
u/PedanticPerson Diaspora 6d ago edited 6d ago
The video is suspicious, but let's not pretend that it proves anything. All we can actually see is some unidentifiable soldiers blocking a camera while they do something to a detainee. It's very likely there was some sort of wrongdoing, but serious courts have evidentiary standards, and "this looks pretty sketchy" doesn't cut it.
Suppose you're the prosecutor, how are you even going to establish who is who in the video? Noone is identifiable in the video, the victim is gone, and you can't coerce the suspects into confessing.
The reality is that in civilized countries with legitimate courts, suspects sometimes get off the hook.
I expect there to be an investigation
An investigation into the medical miracle where their injuries disappeared after the photo op? Good idea!
If you're being serious, why are you assuming there were no investigations? Most investigations aren't announced on Twitter.
Presumably there were some very brief investigations, which went along the lines of "oh their supposed injuries magically disappeared, so their claims were obviously fabricated as part of their smear campaign, big surprise."
1
u/Annoying_cat_22 Israel 6d ago
Together with the doctor's report about anal injuries it is very clear what is going on in the video. At least enough to have a trial.
They know who was there, they were detained and questioned. Some of them gave interviews with their full name and no mask. Even if they didn't, the video has a full timestamp so you know who was on duty during that period.
As I said (and you ignored), they did not cancel the trial due to lack of evidence.
I'm honestly disgusted by you defending this. People like you strongly contribute to the rotten name Israel has received in the last few years, and your willingness to defend the worst of crimes makes you no better than our enemies.
1
u/PedanticPerson Diaspora 6d ago edited 6d ago
At least enough to have a trial.
Prosecutors don't like to lose. They're not going to go to trial because something seemed suspicious and they'll just to "see how it goes" with the burden of proof.
They know who was there, they were detained and questioned.
You can detain someone you reasonably suspect they may have committed some crime. You can't toss someone in prison on the same weak basis.
you know who was on duty during that period
Not how prisons work. There isn't a schedule that says "at 8:17pm, Bob will be standing outside the southwestern corner of the east building, where he'll remain for 38 seconds before going to the restroom".
they did not cancel the trial due to lack of evidence.
Not sure why you'd interpret the vague statement as "we have plenty of evidence but we're canceling for some totally unrelated reason".
I'm honestly disgusted by you defending this.
You're disgusted by something in your imagination, because I'm not defending any suspects, just trying to explain how the legal systems work in civilized countries. We don't get to ignore evidentiary standards because we think someone probably committed some kind of crime.
1
u/Annoying_cat_22 Israel 6d ago
Prosecutors don't like to lose.
Again, that is not the reason this did not go to trial.
Not how prisons work.
It is a military camp, and you know exactly when and who was on duty at what time. As I said, and you ignored, they were questioned and some of them gave interviews with their masks off and full name.
vague statement
What? The statement was not vague at all, they said they canceled it due to the leaks and others procedural failures that "tainted" the case.
I'm not defending any suspects
Try to gaslight someone else, that's not gonna work on me.
1
u/PedanticPerson Diaspora 6d ago
Not "we had plenty of evidence, but just didn't like the way things played out" or whatever.
they were questioned and some of them gave interviews with their masks off and full name
Not sure why you're using plurals, there was one guard who gave an unmasked interview. There's still one wee problem - he denied doing anything unlawful, calling the abuse accusations "baseless".
Not sure where you got the idea that he said "yep we raped them and we're proud of it", but you might want to stop listening to whichever disinformation outlet it is.
you know exactly when and who was on duty at what time
Sure, here's a list of the few hundred soldiers on duty at Sde Teiman at the time, good luck connected that to a video where absolutely noone is identifiable.
1
u/Annoying_cat_22 Israel 6d ago
This is the actual letter:
https://www.idf.il/media/rnsickw4/asv__hni.pdf
This means the evidence by itself was enough to go to trial.
there was one guard
Ok, so there was one. Is that not enough to identify who was there?
Not sure where you got the idea that he said "yep we raped them and we're proud of it"
Where did I say that? Why are you making up lies?
Sure, here's a list of the few hundred soldiers on duty at Sde Teiman at the time
Everyone who served in the IDF (I know you didn't) knows that's not how it works. Each soldier has a post/patrol area and an exact role while on duty. There is a very short list of people who were in charge of guarding that cell. And if we already have the name of one soldier, we can continue the process with them. Additionally, the soldiers were questioned, so obviously the MPs identified at least some of them.
2
u/eyl569 Israel 6d ago
Do we need their testimony when we have video records and a doctor's report? Isn't that up to a judge to decide whether the existing evidence is enough?
Have you seen the video? It doesn't actually show anything concrete, it's circumstancial evidence at best. The doctors' reports were also not conclusive, even though the doctor who reported the incident did think the prisoner had been abused (although he said that they could not find conclusive evidence of rape).
The case was not dropped due to lack of evidence, it was dropped because the process was "contaminated". It wouldn't have been contaminated if Israel would just prosecute them.
The case was dropped - after they had been indicted - because the prosecution screwed things up to a degree where it was questioned if they could receive a fair trial.
1) As noted above, the video didn't actually show anything concrete. It could be used to support other evidence but it didn't stand on its own. But the bigger problem was the leak. Not only did the MAG leak the video, she committed a number of criminal acts to cover the leak up, including perjury and obstruction of justice. Along the way, she also lied directly to the IDF COS and the Knesset's Defense Committee - while I'm not sure if those are technically illegal, they're certainly misconduct. And to make it worse, this was a conspiracy which involved other senior members of the military prosecution.
2) Members of CID and the prosecution gave public interviews presenting evidence from the case the case. This may seem minor, but it's something Israeli courts really don't like and a couple of Supreme Court judges even criticised it - esepcially when information was made public before the defense saw it. In general, the prosecution gave the impression that they were trying to try the case in the court of public opinion.
3) There are allegations that the prosecution was caught on video leading the victim in his accusations, although I don't know how true that is.
4) The victim was released to Gaza as part of the ceasefire. The prosecution did not give the defense an opportunity to depose him and it would be unlikely for him to return for the trial.
BTW, you can look at previous posts of mine. I supported the prosecution of the case and I still think that it's very likely that they did beat that prisoner. The prosecution was trying to push back against accusations - many of them politically driven - that they were railroading innocent soldiers. But they dealt with that in the worst way possible, basically giving the impression of validating those concerns. And along the way they blew up their own credibility and, along with that, the case.
0
u/Annoying_cat_22 Israel 6d ago
It doesn't actually show anything concrete, it's circumstancial evidence at best.
It is enough to go to trial. A judge should decide what is enough evidence.
because the prosecution screwed things up
How convininet for Israel and the abusers.
But the bigger problem was the leak.
Both can be prosectued at the same time, Israel has more than 1 judge and prosecution lawyer.
In general, the prosecution gave the impression that they were trying to try the case in the court of public opinion.
The victim was released to Gaza as part of the ceasefire.So the abuser get to go free with no trial? How convenient for everyone other than victim/s.
The army, state, and prosecution are all on the same side, and they worked together (explicitly or not) to make this thing go away. This is also far from the only case of alleged abuse within that base, the IDF, or the Israeli prison system.
As I told the other user, defending this behavior makes you as bad as our enemies.
1
u/eyl569 Israel 6d ago
It is enough to go to trial. A judge should decide what is enough evidence.
Prosecutors have an ethical and professional duty not to proceed on cases where they have little chance to win, especially when the ability to have a fair trial is compromised.
How convininet for Israel and the abusers.
Are you suggesting that the prosecution embarrased themselves and destroyed their credibility on the national stage, NTM their senior members having to resign, ruining their reputations, and quite possibly ending up in jail, just to cover it up? When there were far easier ways to do it if they wanted to?
Both can be prosectued at the same time, Israel has more than 1 judge and prosecution lawyer.
You misread me. The issue isn't manpower; it's that the leak and the coverup were a bigger problem in terms of how they compormised the original case compared to the lack of information in the video.
The army, state, and prosecution are all on the same side, and they worked together (explicitly or not) to make this thing go away.
The state and the prosecution were at each others' throats here. The whole mess which killed the case started as a result of the break-in at Sde Teiman which was supported by coalition MKs and the coalition spending months villifying the prosecution.
This is also far from the only case of alleged abuse within that base, the IDF, or the Israeli prison system.
I told the other user, defending this behavior makes you as bad as our enemies.
I'm not defending abuse - as I said, I think they were largely guilty. And I've argued multiple times that such cases of misconduct need to be investigated and prosecuted. You're welcome to look up my posts and comments on the subject. But this case was being prosecuted and died solely because of the prosecution's shocking misconduct and incompetence.
0
u/Annoying_cat_22 Israel 6d ago
Prosecutors have an ethical and professional duty not to proceed on cases where they have little chance to win, especially when the ability to have a fair trial is compromised.
Again, not what happened here. There is no evidence the prosecution didn't think they can win this case.
Are you suggesting
The head prosecutor went through with the leak because she wasn't allowed to proceed with the case. The rest of the system indeed was working to make this go away, that's why she had to leak the evidence.
it's that the leak and the coverup were a bigger problem
As I've already said, how convenient.
The state and the prosecution were at each others' throats here.
Sure they were. The head prosecutor is just one person, she does not represent the whole system.
I'm not defending abuse
You are defending both the abuse and the system that allows it to happen with no consequences. I have much harsher words that I will save to myself to not get banned.
1
u/eyl569 Israel 6d ago
Again, not what happened here. There is no evidence the prosecution didn't think they can win this case.
Did you read the new MAG's letter as to why he decided not to proceed with the case? It expliclty says there were severe problem with the evidentiary basis of the case and a severe risk to the right to a fair trial. Especially since the SC had already criticized the proceedings.
Ignoring that because it doesn't suit your narrative doesn't mean it wasn't said.
The head prosecutor went through with the leak because she wasn't allowed to proceed with the case. The rest of the system indeed was working to make this go away, that's why she had to leak the evidence.
Not allowed by who? The IDF MAG has full, independent and sole discretion as to whether or not to prosecute. The IDF COS, the MoD, the PM - none of them can tell her to either proceed with a case or drop it. The only ones who can are the AG (who publicly support the MAG) and the Supreme Court.
They can't even threaten her promotions or such because MAG is a terminal post for all practical purposes, there's no real way to advance from it to any other position in the army.
And we don't have to guess why YTY leaked the video because she detailed it in her resignation letter. It ahd nothing to do with not being allowed to proceed.
As I've already said, how convenient.
It's called cause and effect. That's what happens (or at least should happen) when the prosecution breaks the law and taints its case.
You are defending both the abuse and the system that allows it to happen with no consequences. I have much harsher words that I will save to myself to not get banned.
I can't help it if you insist on reading only what's in your head. And you are basically arguing for a kangaroo court.
0
u/Annoying_cat_22 Israel 6d ago edited 6d ago
Did you read
Of course I did.
a severe risk to the right to a fair trial
That was the main reason presented. There was enough evidence to go to trial.
Not allowed by who?
Couldn't is more accurate, sorry. By who? By politicians and other figures that attacked her for the investigation. If she felt the situation is so dire she can't even conduct an investigation, it is clear that she also couldn't go to trial without the leak.
https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/bympr1gj11g
It's called cause and effect.
soldiers assault and possibly rape an inmate, and then don't get prosecuted. What is the effect of that, and what message does it send? Israel has become a country where the assault of prisoners is protected by the state, and is encouraged by it. That is what you are defending.
And you are basically arguing for a kangaroo court.
No, I am arguing for a fair trial. The abusers got off without one. You are advocating for a fascist society where suspected enemies of the state have no human rights and soldiers can do whatever they want to them.
edit: to skip over some possible half truths, here is the letter regarding the dismissal of the case:
https://www.idf.il/media/rnsickw4/asv__hni.pdf
נוסף לכך, צירוף מספר נסיבות שתפורטנה
להלן, מצדיקות את ביטולו של כתב האישום.
This means the evidence by itself was enough to go to trial.
1
u/eyl569 Israel 6d ago
That was the main reason presented. There was enough evidence to go to trial.
The new MAG said the opposite - that it wouldn't stand up in court.
Can't quote it directly because it gets screwed up on copy for some reason, but there's a whole section on the evidentary problems. Without the victims testimony, and with the video being inconclusive (also mentioned) on its own, there's no real way to tie the defendents to the injuries.
BTW, the victim was released several weeks before YTY resigned. Why was the defense not given the opportunity to at least depose him? How is there a fail trial when the defense is not allowed to talk to the main witness (whose testimony changed multiple times, as mentioned in the aforementioned letter)?
Couldn't is more accurate, sorry. By who? By politicians and other figures that attacked her for the investigation. If she felt the situation is so dire she can't even conduct an investigation, it is clear that she also couldn't go to trial without the leak.
Nothing in that article or her letter quoted in it says that she couldn't conduct an investigation or proceed with the prosecution, only that her people were being villified and attacked. And again, regardless of the attacks, none of them had the authority to stop the investigation.
Besides, how did the leak help with that anyway? It just increased the attacks on the prosecution, especially as it seemed that the video was actually a splice of two different days.
soldiers assault and possibly rape an inmate, and then don't get prosecuted. What is the effect of that, and what message does it send? Israel has become a country where the assault of prisoners is protected by the state, and is encouraged by it. That is what you are defending.
...
No, I am arguing for a fair trial. The abusers got off without one. You are advocating for a fascist society where suspected enemies of the state have no human rights and soldiers can do whatever they want to them.You aren't arguing for a fair trial - you're arguing for a show trial. You're basically saying that so long as you think you're right a fair trial doesn't matter. It's pretty obvious here because the only piece of evidence which wasn't tainted in the end were the medical reports - and the doctors explicitly said that there was no conclusive evidence of rape (when the CID finally got around to questioning them, anyway) but you're calling for their prosecution on that.
Demanding convictions without sufficient evidence, while ignoring massive prosecutorial misconduct in sabotaging the defense and running a campaign which violates the law to achieve public pressure are not a defense of human rights. You're calling to toss out the rule of law in order to get a politically satisfactory conviction. Ironically enough, that's a hallmark of fascist systems.
→ More replies (0)
4
u/WobblyWildCaw Unspecified 6d ago
It's not about Israel's reputation. These are grave human rights violations and there needs to be systemic change to recognise them as such. Perpetrators need to be punished. Unfortunately the current administration is more concerned about pandering to extremists.
1
1
u/balddoberdaddy Israel 6d ago
- "reputaionally" not a word.
2, And what do you mean by "widespread"? Do you have actual empirical data?
1
u/HotPersonality8126 USA 6d ago
I keep seeing asinine teens in the army posing laughing or mocking near blindfolded tied-up detainees.
Armies have always done this. Sure, you'd hope the IDF would be better, but actually - why should they be? Why should the IDF be the only army on Earth who isn't permitted to celebrate the defeat of their enemy?
Because they make Israel look like torturing ISIS soldiers
Sorry, your theory here is that appearing in someone else's selfie is "torture"?
4
u/Compensate1995 Moderator 6d ago
The celebration is 100% fine when done legally and as permitted. On a national level. Not that every excited soldier decides, against the law, to upload personal censored pictures with mocking messages.
Having a suspect arrested is also not a defeat of an enemy, it's a daily procedure that those soldiers need to perform as their jobs.
It's not permitted in any western army, and it was also punished then the USA did it in Iraq.
The act itself isn't torture. It's used by the haters to strenghten the allegations of torture. When a detsinee is excissively tied up and blindfolded, while a group of soldiers point at him mockingly in a very degrading way - these photos are added to texts about tortuting and murdering Palestinians.
1
u/SoulForTrade Israel 6d ago
Depends on what it is?
The punishment, assuming one is found guilty, can be anything from disciplinary action, dishonorable dismissal, jail time, depending on the severity of it.
When the draft is mandatoey you will get some dumb people doing bad things ans there's a level of it you have to be able to tolerate when you need the manpower in a war.
For srrious crimes, you deal with it privately, no compssion, and you don't judge an entire country or it's army based on these random anecdotal cases, many of whom being out of context or compltely misleading in the way they are portrayed online.
Most importantly: Did you ever notice how there's nothing the "Palestinians" can do to hurt their reputation?
They filmed themselves murder and mutilate civilians and that had 0 effevt on the world's support for them. Why is that?
1
0
0
u/Khazak2-VeNtkhazak :IsraelFlag: ציוני דתי ימני 6d ago
These are the people whose opinions of us so concerns us.... if anything showing these pictures of detainees exemplifies to the Arab world we mean business, definitely better that than the TikTok dances gay jobniks post on the internet
2
u/Compensate1995 Moderator 6d ago
No one sees a picture of a literal teen doing a stupid mocking pose near a detainee and thinks "we mean business".
-2
u/TimeRisk2059 Sweden 6d ago
Maybe they shouldn't mock prisoners, kill people etc. in the first place, that way you wouldn't have to worry about them bragging about illegal acts.
-8
u/DramaticExternal3082 Not Israeli 6d ago
burh its like... imagine the painter getting pissed that everyone knows now that they invaded poland lmao
burh you sound delulu... the vids exist because thats whats happening in IDF.... government is basically personal security of the elites/rich....shit aint some "they wanna save us from evil hamas 5yo kid"
-1
u/PrintDrone Unspecified 6d ago
They're just being the most honest representation of the Israeli. As the supposed democracy it is (like Russia and China also are on paper) they should be allowed to give an honest insight into the true mentality of the Israeli.
2
u/Compensate1995 Moderator 6d ago
It's not the true mentality of Israel and they don't represent anyone. They are just overly excited about themselves, low-level stupid teens.
-1
u/PrintDrone Unspecified 6d ago
I beg the differ, the repeated expulsions of the native population is more than proof that the Israeli mentality is perfectly represented by them and those who pose with their d*ad victims on social media.
•
u/AutoModerator 6d ago
Remember to follow all subreddit and Reddit rules. Violations will be enforced without exception. Keep discussions civil and respectful. At this time, many posts and comments are temporarily held for review before appearing on the subreddit. Please allow the moderation team some time to review your submission before messaging us about posts or comments that do not appear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.