Israeli soldiers' "cold blooded murder" of Gaza's civilians

[loaded32]

Evidence that would 'stand up'. Accusations are not evidence.

You don't seem to remember, or you convienently forget, that in the past hamas has kidnapped aid workers and journalists in Gaza. Egypt also refused to let journalists in through their borders.

You quite conveniently seem to forget a great many things my friend. I bequest you to go through the archives if you may and read some of the confimed post investigative reports.....lets take Qana, 1996 for instance...now what would you like to say about the Qana Report ?

[turdsl]

I have never in the past supported Hamas, but the murder of 300 children and the fire power that we saw on television night after night with our own eyes changed my mind, what a terrible deed.

[Lloyd-Apjohn]

I have never in the past supported Hamas, but the murder of 300 children and the fire power that we saw on television night after night with our own eyes changed my mind, what a terrible deed.

Of course it was terrible - as terrible as Israeli children terrified in shelters or Hamas children and their mothers being forcefully used as human shields by Hamas men who run off and leave them to their fate having fired their rockets at the IDF.

Just because Israel is able to defend itself does not mean that it shouldn't.

The answer to this issue lies fully with Hamas and Fatah and Hezbulloh and maybe now that the extreme sides are in power in Palestine and now in Israel - just as happened in the North - this will focus the mind.

Hamas need to get to the public realisation that Israel is a fact whether they like it or not - just like it finally dawned on the SF/IRA that part of Ulster is a part of the UK like it or not and that they can never defeat the UK government - they can plant bombs and kill people and knee cap people and run drugs and protection rackets - which SF/IRA are still doing - but they will never militarily defeat the UK government - as has been proven.

Hamas can fire rockets and kidnap soldiers and force young people and women and special needs people to carry bombs into cafes with Israeli civilians and murder those people but that doesn't alter the fact that there is a state of Israel. In turn Israel can bomb Gaza back to stone age in about 30 minutes as many times as it has to and the whole cycle continues.

Even now - Hamas is more focused on getting weapons in through the tunnels than food or aid. That tells you what you need to know about them. They have no interest in peace.

I don't know what the ultimate outcome will be - whether it takes another 50 years or 100 years or 1 year but it's either going to be everyone in one state living together which is unlikely as every outcome so far has to involve Jews leaving any Arab land again proving Arabs do not want to live in peace with their Jewish neighbours. Or everyone in two states living side by side in peave but either option involves the Arabs acknowledging the state of Israel exists. If for no other reason than setting up a new state requires the old state of Israel to officially sign itself out of exsisitance and it can't do that if it never existed and how can the Palestinians agree to set up a new state with a state they say doesn't exist!

[yanshuf]

draiocht:

Everytime you are presented with anything here, that remotely calls into question Israel's actions in Gaza, you dismiss it as, you say, it stems from organisations with an "anti Israel agenda".

So Human Rights Watch, the UN, and an independent newspaper investigation - all are tarred as being somehow anti-Israeli.

It really doesn't matter what I present here - you will continue to use your lazy "they're all out to get us" argument.

For a nation so interested in presenting the unvarnished evidence, it's really quite surprising that Israel kept international journalists out of Gaza for the duration of the war.

I emphasized what is not an accusation but a current fact. The UN has outcast Israel in some forums, that are ruled by Islamo-fascist and leftist anti-democratic states like Lybia, Sudan, Saudi-Arabia, Iran, Malaysia, Pakistan etc, who see Israel as their main target.

Next:
Human Rights Watch:

Human Rights Watch in 2005: Political Bias Against Israel Continues Despite Wider Middle East Focus

A highly politicised language against Israel is a common thing in their reports, and after the Lebanon War they deserved their criticism:
HRW receives unprecedented public criticism for its attacks on Israeli actions in Lebanon

The bottom line is that they are not independent, as they claim to be, neither is AI!

Regarding the Guardian, it's like Ha'aretz. When I want to know what the Arabs say I read Ha'aretz, cause it's considered a fifth column in Israel. The Guardian's approach to the Arab Israeli conflict is one-sided and subjected to some unethoical journalistic work, and altogether it shouts far left and Anti-Israel bias (covering Antisemitism, of course).

It really doesn't matter what I present here - you will continue to use your lazy "they're all out to get us" argument.

I can't protect everything that the IDF does, and if you show me they targeted children, not tossing numbers, but that they targeted children and killed them intentionally, I would definitely be in favour of indicting them, as criminals.

But until now the only thing people here do is accuse Israel in hearsay accusations, and trying to delegitimize protection of civilians as an unlawful war, and I won't give a helpful hand to such anti-Israeli posts.

Other than that, if there really was a meaning to your high moral stand, then you'd be discussing the Hamas terrorist methods, and if it really hurt you that children were killed, you'd show conscience in saying something about the Hamas indoctrinating children as martyrs.

My expectations (just for the record) are low.

[MMR]

I have been away for the past week, just popping in and watching this thread go up and down, some good points being made, some insults hurled around, etc.

I know I said this on some post on some thread but I will say it again -

*the principle of proportionality in the laws of war was definitely breached in January. Eight or ten or whatever small number of pathetic Hamas rockets over the course of a year, countered with the deaths of over a thousand people and their infrastructure in tatters, is NOT an example of proportionality.

*the principle of discrimination in targetting was also breached. Now read carefully, please, Yanshuf and L'Chaim: the IDF claims about 700 of those killed were Hamas militants. Now, is the IDF saying they identified them as such BEFORE they killed them? If so, if they had the capacity to identify over 700 people are Hamas supporters BEFORE they killed, they should have also had the capacity to discriminate between THEM and civilians. Ah, but if they did not know that 700 of those killed really could be considered to be Hamas militants until AFTER they killed them, then that would not show that they practiced discrimination in targetting. Moreover, what is their criteria for considering someone to be a Hamas militant?

*the fact that they would not allow seasoned reporters in left them wide open for the very criticism you see on this and other discussion boards. The IDF has brought this criticism on themselves. They went in, they knew they were going to be criticized for this, and yet they went and did it anyway and now expect everyone to believe them. That is utter nonsense.

*Your unwavering and unquestioning support for and loyalty to the IDF and absolutely everything and anything they did just smacks of you being politically propogandized rather than using reason and sound judgement. How and why can you defend something that you did not see yourself, and where there is some evidence which really would make many people hesitate before giving unwavering support. As for claiming that anyone questioning the IDF as being anti-Israeli, have you read the words of your outgoing Foreign Minister in today's Jerusalem Post? Or perhaps, since she is a woman and does not have the rough background of your incoming Foreign Minister (who will make things much worse in the region, I promise, and especially for Israelis), she doesn't count anyway?

I guess you two think the world of Avigdor?

[Geckko]

Straight Yes/No question for you then - Are you saying that John Ging, head of the UN Relief Agency, is lying through his teeth and making up the Israeli attack on his compound and that the images transmitted at the time were somehow "staged" ?

I'll answer that one.

Yes. He was lying through his teeth. He might have believed it - because he wanted to beleive it. But it was still lying, a falsehood of a heinous nature for someone supposedly doing humanitarian work under the auspices of the UN.

[Geckko]

I was not supporting allegations - I was posting a valid news item which has been covered all over the planet.

Also, your assertion that the NYT has withdrawn its support is erroneous - the paper has merely reported that the IDF has refuted the claims and closed their brief investigation.

Strangely, the Israeli government is resisting calls for an independent investigation into the allegations.



Israel says claims over civilian killings 'exaggerated' - The Irish Times - Tue, Mar 31, 2009

Just repeating the rumour. Right.

So why are you shifting your ground? It's your thread, stop digressing and keep to the subject you posted:

Two specific claims of "cold blooded murder". You authored the title. Let's talk about it.

[draiocht23]

Just repeating the rumour. Right.

So why are you shifting your ground? It's your thread, stop digressing and keep to the subject you posted:

Two specific claims of "cold blooded murder". You authored the title. Let's talk about it.

I'm not shifting ground at all - if Israel was to conduct an independent investigation which exonerated the IDF's conduct in Gaza than maybe I, and many more, would be more inclined to believe Ehud Barak's claim that it's "the most moral army in the world".

I suppose you have no problem with the use of white phosphorus, in densely populated areas, either?

[draiocht23]

The bottom line is that they are not independent, as they claim to be, neither is AI!

Ok, so you claim that Human Rights Watch, and the UN, are not independent. So lets look at the links you provided -

Human Rights Watch in 2005: Political Bias Against Israel Continues Despite Wider Middle East Focus

HRW receives unprecedented public criticism for its attacks on Israeli actions in Lebanon

Both these articles come from NGO Monitor which was founded by the Wechsler Family Foundation and recieves major support from Newt Becker.

The WFF was founded as

Israel's growth and survival are dependent on its winning the war of ideas. The challenges that Israel faces today are not only military. They extend to the United Nations, the mass media, foreign universities, and non-governmental organizations. In many cases, the assault on Israel is aimed at its very legitimacy as a Jewish state.
A direct by-product of the attacks on Israel is a clearly detectable rise in anti-Semitism, especially in Europe. In this environment, what is needed is not just better public relations, but also a rigorous analysis of the issues being exploited by Israel’s adversaries who question Israel’s legal rights. In response, the Jerusalem Center seeks to present Israel’s case and to highlight the challenges of Islamic extremism and global anti-Semitism.

One of the articles on the home page of WFF claims that Google Earth is

a new platform for anti-Israel progaganda

Paranoid much?

U.S. Middle East Policy-Google Earth: A New Platform for Anti-Israel Propaganda and Replacement Geography

A brief trawl through the internet reveals that Mr Becker is also a member of Stand with Us whose mission statement is -

"Ensuring that Israel's side of the story is told in communities, campuses, libraries, the media and churches through brochures, speakers, conferences, missions to Israel, and thousands of pages of Internet resources."

I don't think either of these organisations - founded to promote Israel and "win the war of ideas" - can be descried as independent.

As to your claim about the Guardian -

it's like Ha'aretz. When I want to know what the Arabs say I read Ha'aretz, cause it's considered a fifth column in Israel. The Guardian's approach to the Arab Israeli conflict is one-sided and subjected to some unethoical journalistic work, and altogether it shouts far left and Anti-Israel bias (covering Antisemitism, of course).

If you have information that their month-long investigation, which uncovered evidence of Israeli war crimes in Gaza, was in any way biased - or manufactured - you should immediately contact the Press Complaints Commission as suggesting that a newspaper has deliberately, and maliciously, impugned the repulation of a nation is a very serious allegation.

Press Complaints Commission >> Making a Complaint >> How to make a complaint

As an aside, if the Guardian is so "one-sided" with articles penned by "unethical" journalists, why does it print articles like this?

Uri Dromi: Don't jump to conclusions about Israel's alleged 'war crimes' | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

I can't protect everything that the IDF does, and if you show me they targeted children, not tossing numbers, but that they targeted children and killed them intentionally, I would definitely be in favour of indicting them, as criminals.

What about soldiers who fire live rounds at stone-throwing children?

Other than that, if there really was a meaning to your high moral stand, then you'd be discussing the Hamas terrorist methods, and if it really hurt you that children were killed, you'd show conscience in saying something about the Hamas indoctrinating children as martyrs.

My expectations (just for the record) are low.

For the record, I abhor murder - of anyone - and think the training of children as martyrs is despicable. However, Israel helps Hamas to recruit these children by dropping bombs indiscriminately in civilian areas in Gaza.

Who are children going to blame if they live with a horrifying daily reality of dead family members and friends? Their community or the ones dropping the bombs?

[yanshuf]

draiocht:

I don't think either of these organisations - founded to promote Israel and "win the war of ideas" - can be descried as independent.

Even if those organisations have a specific agenda, which I did not disregard when I gave their links to you, their reports on the failures of AI and HRW and other organisations (like Betselem) to be fair and the content itself of the reports that elaborate in details those failures, are fair, and they deal with those aspects in the said organisations that were taken as granted.

In short, the NGO monitor reveals, like it or not, the shortcomings in AI's and HRW's and other org. investigations, and shows they have agendas.

If you have information that their month-long investigation, which uncovered evidence of Israeli war crimes in Gaza, was in any way biased - or manufactured - you should immediately contact the Press Complaints Commission as suggesting that a newspaper has deliberately, and maliciously, impugned the repulation of a nation is a very serious allegation.

I, if you forgot or didn't know, an Israeli living in Israel, so this commission is non of my business, though I would certainly do my best to complain about them here.

As an aside, if the Guardian is so "one-sided" with articles penned by "unethical" journalists, why does it print articles like this?

[COLOR=#0000ff]Uri Dromi: Don't jump to conclusions about Israel's alleged 'war crimes' | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk[/COLOR]

It does this to pay lip service to the claims it's biased. As you probably figured it out, biased media is judged by an accumulative criterion, that is not by a report here and there, but by many reports in a specific period.

Now you just have to count the articles for and against Israel and make the calculations.

What about soldiers who fire live rounds at stone-throwing children?

what kind of rounds? If they shoot to kill, then it's a murderous intention, if it's not real bullets, it's a matter of policy, that should be checked, but each case should be checked for its own.

For the record, I abhor murder - of anyone - and think the training of children as martyrs is despicable. However, Israel helps Hamas to recruit these children by dropping bombs indiscriminately in civilian areas in Gaza.

Who are children going to blame if they live with a horrifying daily reality of dead family members and friends? Their community or the ones dropping the bombs?

Good. Though I believe you dislike Hamas indoctrination of children, it never really showed here, cause the only threads you and your coleagues post are against Israel.

The children, as far as I see it, could have had much better lives, if Hamas instead of orchestrating a war, had organised new dwelings, invest in health and education and build them new lives, but that won't happen, even now.