The Israeli human rights group B’Tselem has published a major new report documenting how the Israeli prison system has become “a network of torture camps,” where physical, psychological and sexual abuse of Palestinian prisoners is normalized and routine. The report, titled “Welcome to Hell,” collects the testimony of 55 Palestinians who were detained by Israeli authorities since October 7 and later released, almost all without charges. This comes as a group of U.N. experts condemned the widespread torture of Palestinians and as Israel’s Channel 12 News aired shocking footage of Israeli soldiers sexually abusing a prisoner at the Sde Teiman army base, where thousands of detainees from Gaza are held. Sarit Michaeli, the international advocacy lead for B’Tselem, says the abuse in Israeli prisons is “systemic, ongoing and state-sanctioned,” reflecting the cruelty and thirst for revenge among a growing number of Israelis. “They would like to have a completely open field in terms of what they can do to Palestinians,” says Michaeli.

The Israeli human rights group B’Tselem has published a major new report documenting how the Israeli prison system has become “a network of torture camps,” where physical, psychological and sexual abuse of Palestinian prisoners is normalized and routine.

The report, titled “Welcome to Hell,” collects the testimony of 55 Palestinians who were detained by Israeli authorities since October 7 and later released, almost all without charges. This comes as a group of U.N. experts condemned the widespread torture of Palestinians and as Israel’s Channel 12 News aired shocking footage of Israeli soldiers sexually abusing a prisoner at the Sde Teiman army base, where thousands of detainees from Gaza are held.

Sarit Michaeli, the international advocacy lead for B’Tselem, says the abuse in Israeli prisons is “systemic, ongoing and state-sanctioned,” reflecting the cruelty and thirst for revenge among a growing number of Israelis. “They would like to have a completely open field in terms of what they can do to Palestinians,” says Michaeli.

You can find the full report of testimonies here

    • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      3 months ago

      Have you actually read the corresponding section in Chapter 1. Quote:

      Kimura said he decided to visit Africa because “the African continent is still seen in the same way as the colonial period … As a first step, Japan should show the right attitude from an international moral standpoint.” But he also states that another aim of the visit was to soften the criticism of Japan from other African countries for actively trading with South Africa, a racist country at the time.

      Have you any idea how many countries traded with South Africa at that time? Not exactly the same thing but here’s a map of SA’s diplomatic ties 1974. Plenty of African states, say Madagascar or the Congo, were happy to take South African money. What does anything of that have to do with the status of Zainichi a whole 50 years later?

      • Snowflake@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        0·
        3 months ago

        Yes I read it all. It shows a pattern for Japan which openly embraces apartheid up to recent times. They support that crap. Just like the congo did. In fact the congo like Japan was also an apartheid during those relations.

        • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
          0·
          3 months ago

          Circling all the way back to the beginning: If they currently support that crap, why did Abe get slammed for proposing Apartheid?

          It really does seem like you have made up your mind about the Japanese and are trying very hard to scrape together whimsy excuses for your bigotry.

          …and seriously. Congo. As in back then still named Zaire. Did I miss something was Mobutu white or something. Are you just making shit up.

            • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
              0·
              3 months ago

              Quote:

              The Japanese government has overtly and covertly tried to distance itself from Sono

              Also, again, Abe:

              One possible reason the Japanese mainstream media is reluctant to criticize Sono and the Sankei newspaper is due to the fact that Prime Minister Abe makes it a habit to regularly wine and dine the top executives of Japan’s media groups, often at the same time—usually before major political announcements or decisions—creating a cozy relationship that makes criticizing him or those close to him particularly awkward or difficult in Japanese culture.

              Politics in Japan are strange, they’re a proper democracy but also de facto a one-party state. Abe is dead, in more than one way.

              And I mean – this is what you have? Random people say stuff and you elevate it to state policy and social sentiment? Then, I guess, all Canadians want first nation people in boarding schools, all Germans want to ethnically cleanse the country of immigrant blood, all French want to re-colonise Algeria, all Koreans want state-mandated girlfriends, the list is fucking endless.

              • Snowflake@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                0·
                3 months ago

                This is not random people, that was a top advisors of the country.

                One possible reason the Japanese mainstream media is reluctant to criticize…

                However you justify it and make jokes. Don’t forget they also did kill 600k Koreans then pretty much enslave them for cheap labor. Waaaay more than Israel killed Hamas-Palestinians and civilian casualties.

                Several well-publicized examples of hate speech targeting these Korean ethnic schools have been recorded. In December 2009, January 2010, and March 2010, anti-Korean activists staged three demonstrations chanting abusive slogans, such as “children of spies,” via loudspeakers against a Korean primary school in Kyoto. They claimed that the school illegally used a nearby park as a playground for more than fifty years. The school did in fact use the park, but with permission from Kyoto City and the local residents’ association. After the rallies, the ultra-rightists uploaded videos of the demonstrations online. Since the demonstrations and the social media posting of the incidents severely traumatized the students, teachers, and parents, the school filed a lawsuit in 2010. The lower court ruled in its favor.

                Random people say stuff and you elevate it to state policy and social sentiment?

                Such a nice social sentiment /s