17 I.D.F. soldiers on rape charges

[cemertyone]

Well its nice to see the I.D.F. maintaining there high moral values.

" At least 17 soldiers and five civilians are under investigation for the rape of an 11 year old girl at an Israeli air base. A spokesman for the Israeli Army told the local press that the incident Seriously deviates from appropriare behavioural norms and values.
The girl, who cannot be named for legal reasons, told investigaters that she agreed to sex,but Israeli law states that an under 16 can not legally engage in consensual sex and the men are expected to be charged with rape.
The case marks a new low for the military, once one of Israel`s most revered institutions, which has been tarnished in recent years by cases of financial corruption and sexual misconduct....

 

[moono]

which has been tarnished in recent years by cases of financial corruption and sexual misconduct....

Not to mention cold-blooded and premeditated murder and infanticide.

 

[astronaut]

What is the relevance of this, apart from attempting to dehumanize the Israelis?

 

[T & P]

It's not dehumanasing the Israelis- if anything, it'd be the IDF.

And whereas you might think the thread is a bit gratuitous, the fact remains there are people out there who actually claim/believe the IDF is a decent, trustworthy, force for good entity instead of the child-murdering sadistic fucking butchers they are.

So any information that helps see everyone the truth about that despicable death squad organisation is both welcome and necessary IMO.

 

[cemertyone]

What is the relevance of this, apart from attempting to dehumanize the Israelis?

Well seeing as many posters who come here like to proclaim the " Moral superiorty " of the I.D.F. its nice to show some perspective that they are not the little angels that the apoligists of the army maintain they are....
Why does the act of 17 rapist soldiers not appall you rather than the post itself. In what way does it du-humanise Israeli`s per say as a group (as you imply)? . How could i de-humanise 17 grown men who have repeatedly raped a 14 year old girl. I think they de-humanize themselves by that act all by their selves..don`t you?

 

[astronaut]

Why does the act of 17 rapist soldiers not appall you rather than the post itself.

Oh, it appalls me, don't make any mistake about that.

But this sort of thing happens all the time, all over the world, and no-one makes much about it.

They should make a fuss about it, but not because of who did it, as is the case here.

How could i de-humanise 17 grown men who have repeatedly raped a 14 year old girl.

It seems to be a case of statutory rape, not a gang rape -- there is a big difference.

Also, knowing Israeli girls as I do, it might not be hard to confuse a 14 year old for a 16 year old -- Israeli girls tend to mature sooner than British girls, for instance -- I once had a 12 year old girl chasing me, when I was 19, but I thought she was 16 -- nothing happened, but it was an easy mistake to make.

 

[cemertyone]

it might not be hard to confuse a 14 year old for a 16 year old -- Israeli girls tend to mature sooner than British girls, for instance --

I find asking them oh "Excuse me, just how old are you then?"...usually works for me.

 

[astronaut]

I find asking them oh "Excuse me, just how old are you then?"...usually works for me.

Maybe, but not everyone is as enlightened as that.

 

[tangentlama]

What is the relevance of this, apart from attempting to dehumanize the Israelis?

Dehumanising is when someone calls another human, an insect, a cockcroach, an infestation etc.

Rape is a very human failing. Nothing dehumanising to discuss the crimes of soldiers. Some soldiers in every nation rape. It's a nasty aspect of soldierhood that has always gone hand in hand with living under martial law.

 

[tangentlama]

In fact, if anyone can find me a society/tribe/nation that does not rape, I'll be surprised to find them wearing clothes...

 

[astronaut]

Just received an update about this -- the soldiers in question are cooks and warehouse workers -- so they are likely to be from very low socio-economic background, very poorly educated, etc.

 

[spring-peeper]

Just received an update about this -- the soldiers in question are cooks and warehouse workers -- so they are likely to be from very low socio-economic background, very poorly educated, etc.

... and this means that it's OK?

 

[astronaut]

... and this means that it's OK?

Which part of what I wrote implied that it was OK?

 

[vimto]

Just received an update about this -- the soldiers in question are cooks and warehouse workers -- so they are likely to be from very low socio-economic background, very poorly educated, etc.

How much of a complete cunt are you?

 

[Genghis Cohen]

How much of a complete cunt are you?

The qualifier 'complete' would suggest that the poster is infact 100% cunt.

 

[moono]

I have to disagree, I'm sorry. It is simply not possible for Dumpties to be 100% anything

Except Dumpty.

 

[astronaut]

How much of a complete cunt are you?

What sort of nasty prick are you? Who the fuck are you?

Are you defending them because they are from a lower socio-economic group?

Power to the people -- freedom to rape and pillage -- because they're poor and uneducated? Right? I understand you completely.

 

[ViolentPanda]

What sort of nasty prick are you? Who the fuck are you?

Are you defending them because they are from a lower socio-economic group?

He's questioning your apparently unthinking assumption, as evidenced in your post # 11 which said " Just received an update about this -- the soldiers in question are cooks and warehouse workers -- so they are likely to be from very low socio-economic background, very poorly educated, etc.", that such crimes are more likely to be committed by such people because of their socio-economic status.

If that isn't what you meant then you should have taken a damn sight more care with your language.

Power to the people -- freedom to rape and pillage -- because they're poor and uneducated? Right? I understand you completely.

If that's what you believe he said then you understand very little.

 

[astronaut]

He's questioning your apparently unthinking assumption, as evidenced in your post # 11 which said " Just received an update about this -- the soldiers in question are cooks and warehouse workers -- so they are likely to be from very low socio-economic background, very poorly educated, etc.", that such crimes are more likely to be committed by such people because of their socio-economic status.

Anyone who knows the sort of people who are cooks and warehouse workers in the IDF will know exactly what I'm talking about.

If you don't know that sort of person, then you're in no position to comment.

That means you vimto.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Anyone who knows the sort of people who are cooks and warehouse workers in the IDF will know exactly what I'm talking about.

If you don't know that sort of person, then you're in no position to comment.

Bollocks.

Let's address this point by point:

1) YOU expressed a value-laden opinion as to the nature of "cooks and warehouse workers" belonging to the IDF.
2) That opinion denigrated such people en masse as capable of the crime mentioned by the OP, by nature of their socio-economic status.
3) You are further attampting to defend your opinion by claiming your prejudices regarding this socio-economic group, their educational status and morality by claiming that their nature is widely known and acknowledged by "anyone who knows the sort of people...".

Yet again you've been shown up as an opinionated sectarian masquerading as a neutral, and yet again you don't have the balls to admit it, instead relying on a formulaic reply invoking the "you couldn't possibly understand" defence.

 

[astronaut]

Bollocks.

Have you ever served in the IDF?

Have you ever been on an IDF base?

Do you know anything about the IDF, other than the check posts, etc.?

If you can answer yes to any of these, then you will have met the sort of people I am talking about.

If not, then you are in no position to comment.

 

[siarc]

If you can answer yes to any of these, then you will have met the sort of people I am talking about.

arabs?

 

[astronaut]

arabs?

No, don't be daft.

I mean Israeli chavs, or arsim.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Have you ever served in the IDF?

Have you ever been on an IDF base?

No, I preferred to serve my country rather than my religion, so I spent time serving on British army bases.

Do you know anything about the IDF, other than the check posts, etc.?

I know what I've been told by relatives who've served in the IDF.

If you can answer yes to any of these, then you will have met the sort of people I am talking about.

From what I've been able to establish, the IDF uses military personnel and external labour, and that the external labour is "vetted" before being allowed to work on military property. Pretty much the same system as the British army uses.
I find it difficult to believe that if your opinion of these people whose status you imply to be that almost of untermenschen is at all accurate, that anyone, let alone the military, would sanction employing them.

What I do believe is that you're some kind of snob with an agenda.

If not, then you are in no position to comment.

I'm in a perfect position to comment. I've been told one thing, you're telling me another. Who should I believe; members of my own family, or an arrogant pacifist with an agenda?

 

[astronaut]

From what I've been able to establish, the IDF uses military personnel and external labour, and that the external labour is "vetted" before being allowed to work on military property. Pretty much the same system as the British army uses.

They use a combination of conscripts who are unfit/surplus for combat duty, NCOs who are basically unfit/surplus conscripts who sign on for keva (permenant army), and external laborers who are locals and probably vetted.

I find it difficult to believe that if your opinion of these people whose status you imply to be that almost of untermenschen is at all accurate, that anyone, let alone the military, would sanction employing them.

If you need low cost labor, who do you hire?

Even Herzl admitted that a Jewish state would entail Jewish criminals.

What I do believe is that you're some kind of snob with an agenda.

Yes to being a snob, no to having an agenda.

 

[siarc]

Even Herzl admitted that a Jewish state would entail Jewish criminals

!

that's an incredibly arrogant statement (or a paraphrase thereof, i'd like to see the original)

 

[astronaut]

!

that's an incredibly arrogant statement (or a paraphrase thereof, i'd like to see the original)

That's what he said. What's so arrogant about it? If anything, it was incredibly naive.

 

[siarc]

the arrogance would be the notion that a jewish nation would assumedly be stratified and would have to create its own 'chavs' (to use your lovely term)

however a cursory glance at his writings suggests he would hardly have said such a thing

'How much this story reveals! A new life can regenerate even criminals, and we have a proportionately small number of these. Some interesting statistics on this point are worth reading, entitled "The Criminality of Jews in Germany," by Dr. P. Nathan, of Berlin, who was commissioned by the "Society for Defense against Anti-Semitism" to make a collection of statistics based on official returns. It is true that this pamphlet, which teems with figures, has been prompted, as many another "defence," by the error that Anti-Semitism can be refuted by reasonable arguments. We are probably disliked as much for our gifts as we are for our faults.'

from his 1896 page turner the jewish state

if anything it seems he was unduly preoccupied with trying to refute a myth of jewish nefariousness, yet hardly so naive as to think any people could be immune to criminality in some form

/endeth cavilling

 

[astronaut]

the arrogance would be the notion that a jewish nation would assumedly be stratified and would have to create its own 'chavs' (to use your lovely term)

I guess he was a realist -- society is stratified, even those (or especially those) that attempt otherwise.

however a cursory glance at his writings suggests he would hardly have said such a thing

He might not have said those exact words (although I have a feeling he did in another book). He did say in the Jewish State:

It will be inferred, as a matter of course, from previous remarks, that we shall deliver up Jewish criminals more readily than any other State would do, till the time comes when we can enforce our penal code on the same principles as every other civilized nation does. There will therefore be a period of transition, during which we shall receive our criminals only after they have suffered due penalties. But, having made amends, they will be received without any restrictions whatever, for our criminals also must enter upon a new life.

Which is fairly explicit acceptance that there would be Jewish criminals.

from his 1896 page turner

LOL. I tried to read it once -- it was about the most tedious thing I've ever come across -- his other book (Tel Aviv) is even worse.

 

[moono]

ViolentPanda;

Yet again you've been shown up as an opinionated sectarian masquerading as a neutral,

A barf in dweebs clothing ? Shame !