The UN ‘expert on violence against women and girls’ has been slammed for failing to look at a female October 7th survivor as she confronted her for denying Hamas’s rapes after she detailed her own sexual abuse at the hands of the terrorist group. The Mail has more.
Ilana Gritzewsky testified at the UN Human Rights Council’s 62nd session on Tuesday and offered an emotional account of the trauma Hamas inflicted on her when she was held as a hostage.
“On October 7th, terrorists stormed our Kibbutz, murdering, kidnapping and burning,” Gritzewsky said. “They touched me and sexually abused me.”
Gritzewsky, who was brought to the floor by watchdog nongovernmental organisation UN Watch, added that she had been sexually assaulted by at least seven Hamas terrorists.
She then turned her attention to Reem Alsalem, the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls, referencing a previous report she had written.
“Ms Alsalem, you say there was no evidence of sexual violence on October 7th,” Gritzewsky said. “I am standing here today, not as a report, not as a statistic. I am a woman who survived. I am the living proof of sexual violence by Hamas.”
She added: “When I and other Israeli women begged not to be raped, why were you silent? Please look at me. Do you believe us now? Will you apologise?”
Alsalem looked nonplussed by the stirring testimony, pursing her lips and slightly bobbing her head as Gritzewsky finished her grueling account.
Gritzewsky began her testimony by referencing Alsalem’s report about violence against women before asking her: “Why is there no mention of Hamas?”
She said she had been “beaten and mutilated before blacking out”.
“I woke up half naked with seven terrorists standing over me, not knowing what happened to me in those lost moments,” Gritzewsky added.
Worth reading in full.
Why must Jewish women beg to be believed, asks Brendan O’Neill in the Spectator.
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The UN woman has an Arab name. Possibly Egyptian. I can see why she is contemptuous of the Israeli women’s claims. The UN woman is a muhammadan working foe the wider Ummah. And the UN has been captured on behalf of the Muhammadan world. So they ignore any attacks on Israel or the west.
Time to withdraw from the UN. A bunch of Islamo-communist, racist (anti white) scumbags, in my opinion.
Totally agree! 100%
Totally agree here! 100%
Can we talk about the UN Agenda 2030 with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals that rule every aspect of our lives? The UN is not stupid- we are. Why is every discussion on this power-grab shut down or ignored?
UN = assortment of losers and grifters floating in a sea of pus and corruption.
It was built on the ruins of the failed League of Nations. It’s never a good idea to build on failure.
Time to shut it down.
It wasn’t done by the well organised Hamas.
When they broke out from their concentration camp ordinary Palestinians also broke out and inflicted decades of resentment against any Israelis they came across, female IDF or not.
Hamas needed hostages for exchange, and many hostages say they were well looked after by Hamas.
There’s not been many pro Isrl genocidal articles of late nor have there been many The Don done great/Iran terrorist murderers pieces either.
Maybe nobody cares that the US (and us by the way – I happen to know our Special Forces Divers are out there) are getting spanked by someone who can look after themselves for a change.
Bit disappointing really – I’ve missed all the downticks.
It would be an interesting experiment if DS did a trial, say, for one week, and got rid of the 👍👎 function. It’s my theory that there would be more posts as a result because it would encourage dialogue and debate. This is because I think many people are lazy, cowardly or both and they hide behind the thumbs and use them as a substitute for stringing a sentence together by way of response to other posters, plus, I’m convinced many self-censor and don’t contribute their own thoughts if they feel their opinion wouldn’t be popular with others. I think there’s a lot of conformity and self-policing goes on on this site with people ( especially women ) not wanting to upset the applecart and they won’t comment unless they can be assured their post will be positively received by the majority, which is crazy when you think about it because they’re all just words on a screen posted by strangers you’re never going to meet, at the end of the day, but that’s group dynamics for you.
Hiding behind little thumbs in lieu of active participation and contributing to a discussion does not encourage discourse, and there’s already a… Read more »
I agree. There’s a good chance it would encourage replies. There’s nothing wrong with a different approach from the standard for commenting. Be worth a try.
Oh dear, I’ve given you a thumbs 👍. Your comments and thoughts are always rational. But I find it painful to post from my phone without the benefit of a mouse and chance to deliberate and correct.
Interesting comment.
I give out plenty of upticks, as a sign of agreement or maybe finding humour in a particular post. Maybe even for having the bravery to say it, whatever.
I very rarely give a downtick, because people are entitled to their opinions, and I see a downtick as a form of name-calling. Someone has to post something quite obnoxious or make a total ar$e of themselves for me to downtick.
What’s interesting is that on Twitter, which i get is a completely different animal to this site, there’s only a ‘like’ function. There’s no 👎. Therefore, you see loads of differing opinions in the comments section, though I don’t know if this would be the case anyway, even with a 👎 button. That’s why I suggested DS trial it even for a short time, just to see if it made any difference in terms of people commenting and feeling more confident in bringing alternative views to the table, if they can be assured there won’t be some mega pile-on of 👎👎. There’s many a time I’ve had loads of those yet not one single person bothered to comment and state why they disagreed with me. Where is the value in that? Where is the reasoned debate/discourse? As far as the psychology goes, such behaviour is interesting to me because how can people state they are pro-free speech and then not partake in the communication type that’s available and respond using words? Their behaviour is paradoxical and it makes people come across as frauds or hypocrites in this regard. Just look at the example above: the ratio of 👎 to written… Read more »
I replied to something a while ago, no one took notice of what I said, just the way I said it, which was
apparently “a word salad”.
So I doffed my cap, tugged my forelock and don’t bother replying now.
Doh!
That’s a shame, but I would be interested in what you have to say, no matter how you happen to come across ( you’ve surely noticed many posters have their own typical communication style based on their individual personality types ), and I appreciate people bothering to participate in discussions in the first place. As I’ve said above: it’s the ”free speech for me but not for thee” types I have problems with, who seem rather intolerant of people with differing opinions that are unapologetic in airing them.
Remember: the whole point is to share our diverse views, not people-please. Or that’s how it ought to be, anyhow. Pandering to the majority is for losers. 🙂
I must admit that initially I thought GHF might be being sarcastic. His theory has all the credibility of a ‘dog ate my homework’ story.
If you really believe that utter BS, then I have a rather nice bridge I can let you have at a bargain price…
Concentration camp? The Islamo-communist propaganda machine has captured you well.
They killed 85 of the hostages, you RETARD. Including infants.
At least 10% of the survivors, men and women, reported sexual assault.
“Concentration camp”. Another blood libel. With its own elected government, a border with Egypt, and a sea front, markets, restaurants… If it is a prison and they ‘broke out’ why did they go back in? Duh.