Trending Topics:

Writing about what should be done to girls in the dark is incitement to sexual assault — Shany Littman to Ben Caspit

on 27 Comments

Below is my translation of a 7-minute debate between Israeli writers about the case of 16-year-old Ahed Tamimi slapping an occupying soldier in Nabi Saleh on December 15. The debate took place on the Maariv-owned Radio 103 FM two days ago (Hebrew).

Ben Caspit, the journalist who suggested that “in the case of the [Tamimi] girls, we should exact a price at some other opportunity, in the dark, without witnesses and cameras” last week, is debating with Shany Littman, who wrote an article in response (Haaretz, Hebrew) titled “Did Ben Caspit’s hand tremble when he wrote these lines”. 

The debate occurs on Caspit’s own turf – Maariv, in more than one sense. The moderator, rightwing politician Arye Eldad, is squarely on Caspit’s side and repeatedly interjects against Littman, who is actually being grilled by the two for daring to suggest that Caspit’s words may have had sexual connotations. Caspit activates what is known as ‘gaslighting’, saying to her that she [and everyone who had the same connotation] is a sexual pervert herself, and that she has a “dirty mind”. When Littman says that “I want that the state of Israel act in a fair and just manner, and that it doesn’t attempt, as was hinted in this article, to hide its actions,” Caspit answers “It’s a bit sick, what you are suggesting, I swear to you.”

Both Caspit and Eldad are bewildered that Littman mentions the occupation. Eldad interjects: “Where occupation? What’s the occupation? How did we get to the occupation?” Caspit says that “it’s not at all the subject, don’t talk to me now about the occupation,” Eldad says “I don’t understand how we got to the occupation,” and Caspit concludes, “Arye, there’s no occupation”.

Eldad ends the debate reaffirming: “By the way – there’s no occupation,” to which Caspit answers: “There’s no occupation”.

Caspit, the supposed center-leftist, furthermore refers in passing to the occupation as the “so-called occupation”, echoing US Ambassador David Friedman (a supporter of illegal settlements) who spoke of an “alleged occupation” four months ago, and who has more recently asked diplomats to stop using the word ‘occupation’, following an Israeli Hasbara attempt to erase the term from discourse and public awareness, as I reported last year. Caspit and Eldad’s line follows this trend, of blurring or eliminating the overall paradigm of military occupation which Littman seeks to address.

The rest of it speaks for itself, and requires no further comment.


Debate: ”Ben Caspit VS Haaretz article” – radio 103, 28th December 2017

Ben Caspit, Shany Littman, hosted by Arye Eldad

Caspit: I’m sorry to be promoting this, but a couple of hours ago, an article from your hand went up, where you ask, “did the hand of Ben Caspit tremble when he wrote these lines”, referring to one of my sentences in an article which I wrote in Maariv 8 days ago apropos Ahed Tamimi… What, for God’s sake, did you mean?

Littman: I thought that you wanted to answer me about the question which was posed towards you in the article, whether your hand trembled…

Eldad: (Interjects) By the way, I, as a doctor, saw him writing – it didn’t tremble.

Caspit: You didn’t see me!

Littman: So everything was stable, ok…

Caspit: Arye Eldad is a liar. This article was written in the night, I believe, in Maariv…

Eldad: But you also spoke about this. There came a policeman that we had at the opening of the program, and you said the same things…

Caspit: Yes, if Mrs. Littman would bother to call a colleague before she defames him, she would have gotten the links that I had sent to her colleague, and would realize that she has written nonsense. But I have not come up here in order to explain myself – you are the one being interviewed.

Littman: You [in plural] invited…you [singular] wanted to speak with me…

Caspit: Right, so I am asking what is the meaning of “did my hand tremble”?

Littman: So, I wondered, you know, when I read a sentence such as “in the case of the girls, the price should be exacted in another opportunity, in the dark, where there are no witnesses and cameras”, to me, you know, it makes me shiver within. I think it’s a horrible sentence, and the thickness of the words “girls”, “in the dark”, “without witnesses and cameras” is something that causes me to shiver. It hints of a very frightening violence.

Eldad: Maybe I want to explain something here. There was a discussion between Ben and me… [turns to Caspit] I don’t believe that I am defending you!

Caspit: No, it’s not good for me if you defend me!

Eldad: There was a discussion between Ben and me. I said ‘this event should not have ended without this girl having been handcuffed inside the patrol vehicle’. And he said ‘No way, to do this in front of the cameras, and cause damage – for what? – Arrests are done at night!’

Caspit: Shany, I’ll tell you why I think your article is…

Littman: I am not sure that I disagree with what Arye Eldad just said, and I think that it may be…you know, if the soldiers are already there, and the whole world sees that they are there (I don’t think they should be there, but that’s another question), if the confrontation occurs in daylight, why pass the confrontation over to dark basements?

Caspit: What dark basements? Shany, what you have done, again, if you had made a call, as is customary in our profession…

Littman: But you published an article! You didn’t write this between us, this was not a secret exchange between you and me, right?

Caspit: But the fact is that the article was published on Monday, and during the whole week that passed nobody bothered to do anything with it, until they started defaming me abroad, all kinds of BDS [Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions] people, and New Israel Fund and the like, and I’m saying, Now, Shany, now [comes] my defense statement.

Littman: OK.

Caspit: The whole article [Caspit’s], its whole narrative is super-leftist, you couldn’t write it better (or maybe you could). ‘The power of restraint’, that is the headline. And there I write a lot, until one arrives at that sentence that you refer to, that it was wrong…that one should have given a medal of honor to the officer who restrained himself… that any attempt to stop her in front of cameras, where everyone there is making provocations and screaming, would have ended badly… I go from there to Gaza, and I say that in Gaza it’s the same situation – that because of nonsense we could be pulled into a war that no one knows how you get out of – and that’s my narrative, and my meaning with “in the dark” was that the arrest has to be (and I know, I’ve done reserve duty in my life, I’ve done [military] service, also as a journalist) – IDF comes at night, with policewomen rather than policemen because she’s a woman (or girl), [and] arrests her quietly. Now, where can I prove to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that this was my meaning? Because the next day the sun came up, and there was a program here, the day the article was published, and in the meanwhile she was arrested in the night. On the whole program, I am praising what happened, including a bad policeman…

Littman: But what did we gain, what did we gain from her being arrested? Let’s put aside the violent situations you described…

Eldad: [interjects] That all of the Israel-haters have apparently not reached their [point of] satisfaction.

Littman: What did we gain from her being arrested in the night and not the day? So, what– no one knows she got arrested? No one knows that there’s an occupation, that she has soldiers in her backyard?

Eldad: [interjecting] Where occupation? What’s the occupation? How did we get to the occupation?

Littman: [continues] How does this help Israel’s image, or the case itself?

Caspit: But it’s not at all the subject. Don’t talk to me now about the occupation…

Littman: But you speak about Hasbara. You use words of Hasbara.

Caspit: No, no, no, no, I’m not, I’m not speaking…the occupation now…

Eldad: I don’t understand how we got to the occupation.

Caspit: Arye, there’s no occupation, I’m sorry…

Littman: Yes, it’s really interesting: how did we actually get to the occupation?

Caspit: Shany, listen, you’re trying to incite. The occupation is not the subject. I did not write an article about the occupation. You know my position regarding the ‘so-called’ ‘occupation’. I’m somewhere in the center, I’m dying to get rid of the [occupied] territories, if I [only] had someone to give them to with the knowing that there would then be peace and that everything will be OK…. I wrote the article against the television broadcasts of Monday, and there was the dilemma – no one was in doubt, besides a few folks in Haaretz, that whoever slaps an officer, has to be arrested and questioned.

Littman: So let her be arrested and questioned the moment she does it. Why not arrest her the moment she slaps him?

Caspit: No, because her mother was there, her sister was there, and another 30 guys are waiting for a provocation, cameras would have been pulled out, the soldiers would have been beaten, they would give beatings, we don’t know who might be killed, what shaming would have come out of that, how would that have looked?

Eldad: [overdubbing Littman who tries to answer] But that’s what Shany Littman wants.

Caspit: [joining Eldad’s overdubbing] It’s apparently what she wants.

Littman: But I’m asking…

Eldad: [interjecting]: You want the State of Israel to be defamed down to dust…

Littman: No, I want that the state of Israel…

Eldad: [overdubs] in order to prove that we are occupiers.

Littman: I want that the state of Israel act in a fair and just manner, and that it doesn’t attempt, as was hinted in this article, to hide its actions in ways…

Caspit: It’s a bit sick, what you are suggesting, I swear to you. What is “to try to hide”? I was…I was speaking about a practical matter. No one is in doubt, really, except the extreme left, that whoever slaps an officer has to be arrested. The question is whether you do it…

Littman: OK, but they didn’t arrest her at the point.

Caspit: No, the military makes arrests each night. I thought that it’s necessary to let the situation against the camera to calm down, to let everyone calm down, and then to decide if one wants to arrest, to come in the night, with policewomen (there were no policewomen there), to do it in a way that would not cause violence, that’s all. You and your friends have turned me into a sexual pervert, to someone who speaks about the rape of girls, and I think that you are mentally ill and that you are sexual perverts…

Littman: OK…

Caspit: If you can at all come to conceive a sexual connotation regarding that sentence, and sever it from everything that was [written] before and after. End of defense statement.

Littman: OK, if that’s how you see it…

Caspit: It’s not [just] how I see it, I can prove it. Listen to the program the day after and you’ll understand it.

Littman: I think that as a journalist, as a person who is sensitive to words, as a person whose profession is words, I think you could have…this is what I wrote, and this is what I meant to say, that I think you could have weighed your words better.

Caspit: Mrs. Littman, you mentioned also the sexual connotation…

Littman: True, true…

Caspit: Apparently it is you who has a dirty mind, not me…

Littman: So, it’s possible I have a dirty mind…

Caspit: Apparently so.

Littman: I think I was not the only one who read it so.

Eldad: [interjecting] No, she doesn’t have a dirty mind, she knows that defamation, that a claim of sexual harassment nowadays works, passes anywhere. You can sell anything with sexual harassment.

Caspit: [commenting under Eldad’s words] Yes, I have preached for the rape of Ahed Tamimi…

Littman: I think we have reached a stage, where one needs to be more sensitive also to that. When you speak about girls and about things that need to be done to them in the dark, it’s not something that should just pass without comment.

Caspit: But, but… [if] you would phone me, and clarify this with me…only if I was a Palestinian! But it’s Ben Caspit, so you’re not sensitive. But my time is up, I have to go to this…Thank you for speaking with us.

Eldad: Many thanks!

Littman: Thank you, it was fun.

Eldad: Many thanks. By the way – there’s no occupation.

Caspit: There’s no occupation.


I have referred to both articles in my second installment on Caspit. It appears that Haaretz has taken down Littman’s article. I have written to Haaretz editorial earlier today in request of clarification this morning, and have received response from chief editor Aluf Benn, that “a slightly updated version of Littman’s article will be online soon”. At the point of publishing the article has come up again. 

H/T Ofer Neiman


Jonathan Ofir

Israeli musician, conductor and blogger / writer based in Denmark.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

27 Responses

  1. Marnie on December 28, 2017, 12:13 pm

    She should have slapped both of them for insulting her intelligence. #me too

  2. eljay on December 28, 2017, 12:58 pm

    Caspit and Eldad make a fine pair of dirtbags. Or maybe sleazeballs.

  3. Ossinev on December 28, 2017, 1:45 pm

    “in the case of the [Tamimi] girls, we should exact a price at some other opportunity, in the dark, without witnesses and cameras”

    The old adage “if it looks like duck etc” applies here. This sort of comment in a civilised Western society would find the author being investigated for paedophilia. Apparently in Zioland it would suggest paedophilia is not an offence under Zio Martial Law. What an opportunity for those with this particular brand of depravity. An open invitation to the least moral in society – come and serve in the most moral (sick) army in the world. Lots of opportunities to indulge your favourite hobby in the non – occupied West Bank.

    What is truly grotesque is that this revolting piece of garbage does not face up to the stark reality of what he said and at least try some sort of apology. No instead as with most brainwashed cowardly Zios he turns on Littman ( who is quietly stating the blindingly obvious ) and guess what as with most BZios attempts to portray himself as the victim.

    On the plus side Ahed`s case will hopefully open significantly more eyes to the barbarism which is being inflicted on Palestinian children by the IOF under the direction of their war criminal politicians.

    • Misterioso on December 29, 2017, 2:42 pm


      Video: ‘Stone Cold Justice’ on Israel’s torture of Palestinian children

      “A film produced by a group of Australian journalists has sparked an international outcry against Israel after it explicitly detailed Tel Aviv’s use of torture against Palestinian children.

      “The film, titled ‘Stone Cold Justice’ documents how Palestinian children, who have been arrested and detained by Israeli forces, are subjected to physical abuse, torture and forced into false confessions and pushed into gathering intelligence on Palestinian activists. Australia’s foreign minister Julie Bishop has spoken out against Israeli’s use of torture stating that ‘I am deeply concerned by allegations of the mistreatment of Palestinian children,’ Israel’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor has described the human rights abuses documented in the film as ‘intolerable.’ But rights groups have slammed this statement, saying that the Israelis are doing nothing to change Tel Aviv’s policy to torture Palestinian children.

      “Last year a report by the United Nations International Emergency Children’s Fund or UNICEF concluded that Palestinian children are often targeted in night arrests and raids of their homes, threatened with death and subjected to physical violence, solitary confinement and sexual assault. The film Stone Cold Justice has sparked an international outcry about Israel’s treatment of children in Israeli jails. However, rights groups have criticized Tel Aviv for not doing anything to create a policy that protects Palestinian children against arbitrary arrest and torture.”

      “Precarious Childhood: Arrests of Jerusalemite Children”

      “This film addresses the process of arrest, interrogation, and the policy of house arrest and their effects on children. The film provides accounts of children who were arrested in order to highlight a larger policy of persecution and targeting of Palestinian children in Jerusalem.”

  4. Citizen on December 28, 2017, 4:23 pm

    There’s no occupation; then what were the soldiers doing at her house? If someone threw stones previously, what were they throwing at–if there’s no occupation? And why did the boy get shot, her relative? What were they doing in her yard?

    • Talkback on December 29, 2017, 4:47 am

      In the US if a tresspasser represents a threat to life and there is no other plausible way of protecting yourself or other innocent individuals then you may even shoot him, no?

  5. ritzl on December 28, 2017, 6:35 pm

    Does Caspit have any daughters?

    I guess maybe a better question is, would it matter?

    Or maybe he does and this is just an unguarded glimpse into the dark netherworld of Caspit family discipline.

  6. Ossinev on December 29, 2017, 7:25 am


    Perhaps more like an unguarded glimpse into the dark netherworld of Caspit`s own predilections ?

  7. echinococcus on December 29, 2017, 8:19 am

    Meanwhile, the ultra-modern, progressive, non-theocratic, gay-friendly, non-obscurantist nay rationalist Bastion of Western Civilization against the infiltrating unwashed Muslim hordes and light unto all nations, through its Government Minister, established the newest and official policy to supplement its theft of water from the Palestinians:

    Ayatullah Minister of Cultivation led a massive rain prayer.

    Not a joke.

    • Kay24 on December 29, 2017, 10:15 am

      They do not need to pray that hard, the can always steal the water from the poor Palestinians, like they do, and leave them with contaminated water. What next? Rain dance?

      • Mooser on December 29, 2017, 1:58 pm

        “What next? Rain dance?”

        What ever happened to hitting a rock with a stick? I thought that was sure-fire hydrology in Zion.

  8. Ossinev on December 29, 2017, 10:22 am


    If this keeps up they will have to build lots more altars and sacrifice a whole flock of goats.

  9. Misterioso on December 29, 2017, 3:02 pm

    Beginning in early 1948, rape and the threat of rape were used extensively by Zionist forces as a means of forcing Palestinians to flee from their lands and properties.

    In 2004, when asked by Ha’aretz journalist Ari Shavit what new information his just completed revised version of The Birth of the Palestinian Problem would provide, historian Benny Morris, an ardent Zionist, replied: “It is based on many documents that were not available to me when I wrote the original book, most of them from the Israel Defense Forces Archives. What the new material shows is that there were far more Israeli acts of massacre than I had previously thought. To my surprise, there were also many cases of rape. In the months of April-May 1948, units of the Haganah were given operational orders that stated explicitly that they were to uproot the villagers, expel them and destroy the villages themselves.” (Ha’aretz, January 9, 2004)

    To cite just a few examples of rape;
    Regarding the massacre at Deir Yassin on April 9/48: “… survivor, Safiyeh Attiyah, saw one man open his pants and leap on her. `I screamed’ she said, ‘but around me the other women were being raped, too. Some of the men were so anxious to get our earrings they ripped our ears to pull them off faster’.” (Quoted by Dr. Alfred Lilienthal, The Zionist Connection, p.154)

    Many survivors of Deir Yassin fled to the neighbouring village of Silwan where on 14 April, they were visited and interviewed by a British officer accompanied by a doctor, a nurse and a translator. The investigators were very patient and understanding while questioning the women who were in a state of shock and very reluctant to discuss what had happened to them. The interrogating officer, Assistant Inspector General Richard Catling concluded: “There is no doubt that many sexual atrocities were committed by the attacking Jews. Many young girls were raped and later slaughtered. Old women were also molested.” (Quoted by Michael Palumbo, The Palestinian Catastrophe, p. 54)

    When Jewish troops occupied the village of Safsaf in the Upper Galilee, on 29 October 1948, they encountered no resistance whatsoever, only white flags of surrender. The residents were ordered to assemble in the central square and according to one of them, Um Shaladah al-Saliah, while they were lining up “…the soldiers ordered four girls to accompany them to the well to fetch water for the villagers. But the young women never got to the well. ‘Instead, they took them to our empty houses and raped them. [Then,] about seventy of our young men were blind-folded and shot to death, one after the other, in front of us’.” (Michael Palumbo, The Palestinian Catastrophe, p. 167-68)

    Um Shaladah al-Saliah ‘s account was confirmed by Yosef Nahmani, then director of the Jewish National Fund office in Eastern Galilee, whose diary record for 6 November 1948 reads: “In Safsaf, after…the inhabitants had raised a white flag, the [soldiers] collected and separated the men and women, tied the hands of fifty-sixty fellahin [farmers] and shot and killed them and buried them in a pit. Also, they raped several women….” (Benny Morris, “Falsifying the Record,” Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. XXIV, Number 3, Spring 1995, p.55)

    Notes taken by Aharon Cohen during a November 11, 1948 meeting of the Political Committee of Mapam (United Workers Party) provide further proof of the atrocities committed by Israeli soldiers in Safsaf: “…52 [Arab] men [were] tied together with a rope, pushed down a well and shot. 10 killed. Women pleaded for mercy, cases of rape…. A girl of 14 raped. Another four killed. Rings [cut off?] with knives.” (Benny Morris, “Falsifying the Record,” Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. XXIV, No. 3, Spring 1995, p. 60)

    • Jon66 on December 29, 2017, 5:22 pm

      Rape is a war crime and should never be condoned and should always be prosecuted. But how do these stats compare to other modern armies? Is this higher than the US occupation or Germany?

      • annie on December 29, 2017, 6:48 pm

        Rape is a war crime and should never be condoned and should always be prosecuted.

        sounds like a throwaway line jon. is that all you’ve got to say? besides, wrt israel it’s irrelevant. none of those soldiers were punished nor would they be today given it’s condoned in religious texts… isn’t it? and what war crime does israel ever admit to? so your denunciation is rather a moot point.

        is this higher than the US occupation or Germany?

        do you mean the 7 year allied occupation of germany 1945-52?

      • Jon66 on December 29, 2017, 7:52 pm

        “After the fighting moved on to German soil, there was a good deal of rape by combat troops and those immediately following them. The incidence varied between unit and unit according to the attitude of the commanding officer. In some cases offenders were identified, tried by court martial, and punished. The army legal branch was reticent, but admitted that for brutal or perverted sexual offences against German women, some soldiers had been shot – particularly if they happened to be Negroes. Yet I know for a fact that many women were raped by white Americans. No action was taken against the culprits. In one sector a report went round that a certain very distinguished army commander made the wisecrack, ‘Copulation without conversation does not constitute fraternisation.'[57]”
        “As in the eastern sector of the occupation, the number of rapes peaked in 1945, but a high rate of violence against the German and Austrian populations by the Americans lasted at least into the first half of 1946, with five cases of dead German women found in American barracks in May and June 1946 alone.[55]”
        Rape is a horrible war crime. America apparently didn’t prosecute its white GIs either.
        That’s not an excuse for acts of the Israelis, but it needs to be understood in comparison.

      • Talkback on December 30, 2017, 2:45 am

        Jon s: “Rape is a war crime and should never be condoned and should always be prosecuted. But how do these stats compare to other modern armies? Is this higher than the US occupation or Germany?”

        Jon s is not into condoning rape. He is into racist relativization. He desperately hopes that other occupiers have raped more females.

      • Jon66 on December 30, 2017, 11:09 am

        It’s bigotry to focus on the actions of one ethnic group in order to generalize about that group without understanding the incidence in other groups. Rape is a war crime. It is labeled such because it happens during wars. Israel is not unique in this respect. Israelis are humans and share the same defects as other humans. It’s perfectly acceptable to condemn the Israeli forces for war crimes committed during the 48 war, but it is bigotry to pretend that this differs from other armies of the period or that it makes a statement about the moral compass of this military, but not about the others. So, you need a comparison or directive from the leadership to assert your claim that rape was a tactic of the army and not a consequence of war as is the case in other contemporary wars.

      • annie on December 30, 2017, 12:02 pm

        It’s bigotry to focus on the actions of one ethnic group in order to generalize about that group

        how is this even relevant jon? there’s nothing in misterioso’s comment that generalizes jews or israelis. no one is making the case other warriors have not raped and pillaged. albeit, i’m not really aware of other armies claiming to be the most moral in the world – while committing unspeakable crimes. and while an entire industry has cropped up, including hundreds of museums, to dissect and study crimes perpetrated against jews, the same cannot be said about the incidences in misterioso’s comment. in fact, it seems quite the opposite, that efforts have been made to hide the atrocities carried out during the nakba.

        It’s perfectly acceptable to condemn the Israeli forces for war crimes committed during the 48 war, but it is bigotry to pretend that this differs from other armies of the period or that it makes a statement about the moral compass of this military,

        since you’re just repeating yourself, the onus is on you to show where anyone made a claim (or denial) about “other armies of the period”. it seems as though you’re bringing up this topic to distract from discussing or even recognizing what had (clearly) been covered up and hidden.

        they took them to our empty houses and raped them. [Then,] about seventy of our young men were blind-folded and shot to death, one after the other, in front of us’.”

        no comment, except to make the point these crimes are not unique? and then try to lecture us for some yet unspoken implication. and what “statement about the moral compass of this military” might you be referring, other than ‘the most moral army in the world’? do tell.

        you need a comparison or directive from the leadership to assert your claim that rape was a tactic of the army and not a consequence of war as is the case in other contemporary wars.

        what claim? the only claim being made here is yours. no one claimed these massacres and slaughters and rapes were not a consequence of war. but as for “as is the case in other contemporary wars” i am not sure that claim can be made. if your claim is that the US military routinely raped and slaughtered their way through the occupation of germany — just source that — and those (allegedly) denying it. certainly i read during the bosnian war “Serb paramilitary units, who used genocidal rape as an instrument of terror as part of their programme of ethnic cleansing.

        if this is the point you want to make, why not just list several other contemporary wars whose participants carried out these kinds of atrocities to accompany their ethnic cleansing campaigns. if it would make you feel better about the grotesque incidences carried out by jewish soldiers referenced in misterioso’s comment. by all means, we are all ears. there was Abeer in iraq, i will never forget her being raped and burned alive.

        that is your point right? to divert away from discussing the sexual crimes of israel’s founding (which btw, unlike the bosnian war, doesn’t have it’s own wiki page). wonder why??,7340,L-4827240,00.html

        IDF’s chief rabbi-to-be permits raping women in wartime

      • Talkback on December 30, 2017, 1:16 pm

        What Annie says.

      • Jon66 on December 30, 2017, 1:38 pm

        “Beginning in early 1948, rape and the threat of rape were used extensively by Zionist forces as a means of forcing Palestinians to flee from their lands and properties.”
        What evidence is there to support this statement? My point is that there is evidence of rape, which you contend has been covered up, but is apparently easily accessible in a number of history books. The rape seems to be a consequence of war, not a tactic as Mist claims. Same as other conflicts.

      • annie on December 30, 2017, 4:53 pm

        why not ask the person you’re quoting jon? besides, when i address your quotes you simply ignore them. ie: what evidence do you have misterioso brought up the topic of rape “in order to generalize about that group” or “pretend that this differs from other armies of the period ” or made a “statement about the moral compass of this military”. you’ve got some explaining to do of your own before launching into another of your question traps. first you ask something rather benignly, like “how do these stats compare to other modern armies? Is this higher than the US occupation or Germany?” and then you launch into some diatribe about bigotry based on what exactly?

        so now, after over emphasizing how israel doesn’t commit any kind of atrocities not carried out by others (la–di–da) what is your point of your question? that they are in fact more moral? anyway, it wasn’t my quote. it’s neither the sort of thing soldiers brag about nor do women, certainly in most cultures including our own, claim to be victim too. but there’s certainly enough of them who were witnesses and no exposure or accountability from gov officials or the military, so what’s gonna be? why don’t you try disproving Morris’s “many documents” that were not available to him when he wrote the original book.

      • Jon66 on December 30, 2017, 8:48 pm

        I was responding to Mist when you jumped in.
        Once again, my point in asking the question was to see if Mist had any reason for believing his assertion that the Israeli army was using rape as a tactic.

      • annie on December 31, 2017, 2:56 pm

        oh, sorry for jumping in jon. i thought the question you asked mist was “how do these stats compare to other modern armies? Is this higher than the US occupation or Germany?” the question you asked at December 30, 2017, 1:38 pm, after quoting mist; “What evidence is there to support this statement?” was prefaced by my name “Annie,” so i thought you were asking me. i’ll just shut up for the time being!

  10. MHughes976 on December 30, 2017, 4:35 am

    I think that it’s important to emphasise Littman’s point that even if we accept C’s disavowal of sexual threats he is still wrong to talk of the price being paid at night. If at all possible law enforcement should be done in the light and with witnesses and it should not be regarded as exacting a price but as making it possible to find out whether a price should be exacted, whether there is any defence or even excuse. The whole idea is to stand for law rather than violence, for reason rather than passion, for decency rather than savagery. So price paid at night is a sinister phrase. In the end it isn’t possible for an armed organisation to represent these things before the world if it is constantly suppressing an unarmed population where it has no political support.

  11. inbound39 on December 30, 2017, 6:09 pm

    Caspit exposes the fact he has no masculinity and operates in a childish spiteful manner. Rape is Rape no matter who does it. True males have no need to force women to have sex thus denigrating the women and themselves. Human beings acting healthily control their emotions and cravings. Taking charge of oneself when engaging with others is a sign of maturity and proves we are in fact above animals.

  12. JLewisDickerson on December 31, 2017, 2:55 pm

    At the risk of being thought to indulge in non sequiturs, I feel compelled to mention something that recently occurred to me. I will try to keep it short, and I hope you will see some relevance to the debate between Ben Caspit and Shany Littman (or, at least, the IP issue more generally)

    As I recall President George W. Bush famously said that “They [i.e., the Saudi men (mostly) who attacked us on 9/11] hate(d) us for our freedoms”. When he said that, I very much doubted it was the reason for the attack. I could certainly understand how people who live under a repressive regime like that of the Saudis, could have envied the freedoms they thought we had. But, if that had been their motivation, it seemed more likely they would have tried to strike out against the government of Saudi Arabia. Consequently, I have pondered the question of why “they” attacked us on 9/11 ever since.

    Only quite recently did I arrive at a causal connection more logical/credible than the one suggested by Bush. I heard/read years ago that the Arabs prefer to use brown sugar in their coffee, and I adopted that preference myself. Regular sugar is about half the price of brown sugar, so I get by with the regular sugar and/or sucralose most of the time. But, when I get a new shipment of coffee from Allegro, I pick up a couple of bags of ‘the good stuff’ to sweeten it with. If I am correct in my understanding that most Arabs use brown sugar in their coffee (as opposed to the refined white sugar made standard by the British Empire), I believe that may well account for their having attacked us on 9/11. Simply put, the men (mostly Saudis) attacked us on 9/11 as a consequence of their long-term use of ‘brown sugar’ to sweeten their coffee. Today, this might also help explain the behavior of Mad Crown Prince MBS of Saudi Arabia.

    “Brown Sugar” was recorded in 1969 in the Muscle Shoals [Alabama] studios.
    It was written by Keith Richards and Mick Jagger.
    Keith, in his book Life on Jagger’s lyrics writing process:
    “They started running down Brown Sugar the first night, but they didn’t get a take. I watched Mick write the lyrics. It took him maybe forty-five minutes; it was disgusting. He wrote it down as fast as he could move his hand. I’d never seen anything like it. He had one of those yellow legal pads, and he’d write a verse a page, just write a verse and then turn the page, and when he had three pages filled, they started to cut it. It was amazing!”

Leave a Reply