Amnesty: Israel violated laws of war in Gaza

[Scurrilous]

<snip>

"Israel repeatedly violated the laws of war during its assault on Gaza last winter, a new report from Amnesty International charges.

"Israeli forces repeatedly breached the laws of war, including by carrying out direct attacks on civilians and civilian buildings and attacks targeting Palestinian militants that caused a disproportionate toll among civilians," the group said in its annual report on the state of human rights worldwide.

The report comes less than a week before a UN fact-finding mission arrives in Israel and Gaza to investigate allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The report notes, however, Israel’s stated rationale for the war, which was to stop Palestinian armed groups from launching "rockets," actually home-made projectiles fashioned from sewer pipes, from Gaza.

"In 2008, seven Israeli civilians were killed by these mostly homemade, indiscriminate rockets or in other attacks by Palestinians from Gaza; three Israeli civilians were killed during the three-week conflict that began on 27 December."

By its count, "1,400 Palestinians were killed" in the three week Israeli bombardment, "including some 300 children, and some 5,000 were wounded."

more

[sellitman]

1. According to Amnesty Israel should of let their people live under the threat of Missles.

Fuck that shit.

[Sezu]

2. I see the UN is refusing to investigate Sri Lankin

war crimes. Wonder if AI has a horse in that race too.

[LeftishBrit]

6. Yes, as a matter of fact AI does have a horse in that race

www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/un-human-rights-council-should-tackle-sri-lanka-crisis-20090522

www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=18205 -

www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LM127626.htm

www.canada.com/news/call+Lanka+crimes+investigation/1631521/story.html -

[Ken Burch]

87. Amnesty is not responsible for what the UN does.

And Sri Lanka has nothing to do with this.

[shira]

88. ken, do you disagree with the UNHRC praising Sri Lanka and calling off warcrimes investigations.....

...for its killing and brutalization of tens of thousands of innocent civilians? Does that upset or disappoint you?

Also, look at my post #85 below. What do you have to say about it?

ETA: also see my #93 below to see what Amnesty wrote about the UNHRC decision not to investigate Sri Lanka.

[Ken Burch]

101. I think what the Sri Lankan government did to the Tamils was horrible

Going back to the establishment of a Sinhalese-supramacist constitution in the 1950's.

But it's inappropriate to throw out these other situations and the responses people have to them as hoops those you disagree with should have to jump through in order to prove they aren't "anti-Israel"(which to you is indistinguishable from being an antisemite, but which we both know actually isn't.)

[shira]

102. so if it was horrible, you must be upset with the UNHRC praising Sri Lanka

Do you agree that the UNHRC's decision to investigate Israel and praise Sri Lanka reeks of an atrocious double-standard?

[Ken Burch]

105. I don't agree that that decision, which is not one I'd have taken, automatically discredits

The UN's decision to investigate Israel. And it's simply wrong to assume that the UN only takes policy decisions you disagree with concerning Israel because of "antisemitism". The UN is not driven by hatred of Jews.

[bemildred]

108. It's simple enough, they were right about Gaza and wrong about Sri Lanka.

I don't know why this has to be groveled over. If they are a flawed organization, then they can certainly make mistakes.

[Ken Burch]

109. Well put, bemildred.

It's time to get past this "you have to fix everything else in the world before you're allowed to say anything about the I/P situation" meme.

We don't subsidize any of those other wars and any of those other injustices through massive foreign aid payments.

[bemildred]

111. Well I think what was done in Sri Lanka was an atrocity.

On the other hand, LTTE and the asshole that ran it were as nasty a bunch of fuckers and you can find anywhere.

But that has diddly-squat to do with Gaza, unless you want to get into compare and contrast for the methods used and so on.

[Ken Burch]

112. Agreed. The LTTE were insane. And in the end, they did far more harm

to the Tamil cause than they could ever have done good. But now that they've been crushed, there's a very real question as to whether Tamils will ever have a chance for getting out from under the Sinhalese boot.

[shira]

114. the UNHRC is more than a flawed organization....consider the majority of its voting bloc

"Council members Cuba, Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, China and others — all states with their own spotty records on human rights — voted for both the resolution condemning Israel and the one praising Sri Lanka. Cuba — that paragon of rights defence — even moved to stop EU amendments to the Sri Lankan resolution that would have at least called on Colombo to permit relief workers into the Tamil war zone and pressured both sides to end their violence...

...Accusing Israel of human rights violations, though, seems to be the foremost reason many countries seek seats on the council — that and using their positions to shield their own human rights records from scrutiny."

http://tamilnational.com/news-flash/1220-the-uns-double-standard-on-israel-and-sri-lanka-.html

nothing to be upset over, right? so long as Israel is beyond disproportionately singled out?

[bemildred]

118. LOL.

I said nothing about their quality as an organization, I just said they were right about Gaza and wrong about Sri Lanka. That means I agreed with you one out of two times. But do I get any gratitude? Noooo ...
:popcorn::popcorn:

[shira]

119. so the composition of the UNHRC is irrelevant?

check it out for yourself, 47 member nations.

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/membership.htm

the deck is stacked so that they make wrong decisions more than just half the time.

when's the last time this organization called for warcrimes or human rights investigations in Russia, Pakistan, or China?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Council#Accusations_of_bias_against_Israel

check the above out.

[bemildred]

120. It is not relevant to my opinion about what happened in Gaza and Sri Lanka.

Why are you defending their relevance and attacking it at the same time? They are obviously a toolish organization, but that has nothing to do with whether they are right or not about any particular issue. One ought not judge issues by who favors or opposes them, one ought to judge them on the merits as one sees them. It smacks of ad hominem and all that. Gaza and the recent war in Sri Lanka had striking similarities, and it is a great failure of UNHRC not to treat them in equivalent ways.

[shira]

121. so let's argue the merits - assume everything Israel is accused of is 100% true, for argument sake

A little background...

"As of January 24, 2008, Israel had been condemned 15 times in less than two years. The UN Human Rights Council, like its predecessor the UN Human Rights Commission, has been criticized by some Western countries for its fixation on Israel while ignoring the actions of neighboring states. This has lead to accusations of the organization being anti-Israeli.<23> By April 2007, the Council had passed nine resolutions condemning Israel, the only country which it had specifically condemned.<24><25> Toward Sudan, another country with human rights abuses as documented by the Council's working groups, it has expressed "deep concern."<24>"

...

On 29 November 2006, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan criticised the Human Rights Council for "disproportionate focus on violations by Israel" while neglecting other parts of the world such as Darfur, which had what he termed "graver" crises.<32><33>

Annan reiterated this position in his formal address on 8 December 2006 (International Human Rights Day). Annan argued that the Commission should not have a "disproportionate focus on violations by Israel. Not that Israel should be given a free pass. Absolutely not. But the Council should give the same attention to grave violations committed by other states as well."<34>

On 20 June 2007, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon issued a statement that read: "The Secretary-General is disappointed at the council's decision to single out only one specific regional item given the range and scope of allegations of human rights violations throughout the world."<35> The European Union, Canada and the United States were also critical of the Council's focus on Israeli violations."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Council#Accusations_of_bias_against_Israel

So to be perfectly clear, even if every complaint filed by the UNHRC against Israel is 100% true, the damage done by neglecting other and bigger human rights issues elsewhere around the globe makes this disproportionate focus on Israel worth it? It's not exactly one right for every wrong, is it?

[bemildred]

122. Yawn. Do you even read what I write?

We agree, how can we argue?

[shira]

123. cool, we agree! well, maybe...

so given the extraordinary bias of this toolish org, you trust that the present Gaza investigation will be fair - and that the final report will be credible?

[bemildred]

124. We can't tell until it comes out, can we? nt

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sabbat hunter]

4. I notice that

They do not refer to Hamas and IJ to what they really are, terror groups. Also they do not mention that these groups fired their rockets from civilian area, which is also a war crime, to use human shields.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

5. But, hey, they're only an independent, impartial human rights group.

The Israeli government is a much more reliable, unbiased source, right?

[shira]

7. AI is not impartial when it comes to I/P

By entirely omitting Hamas' despicable and deliberate strategy of using Palestinians as human shields from their report, AI is guaranteeing that this disgusting strategy will be utilized again in future conflicts against Israel. Anyone who claims to care about Palestinians cannot be happy that AI is doing nothing to protect Palestinians from their Jihadi masters.

AI was also guilty of virtually ignoring Hezbollah's use of Lebanese civilians as human shields (for the same reason - b/c mentioning this destroys their claims against the IDF). Rather than learn from the Lebanon 2006 experience and stand up for civilian pawns of terrorist militias, AI decided once again to throw Arab civilians under the bus.

Perhaps AI believes in the Arab cause against Israel. But that doesn't excuse them for allowing Hamas and Hezbollah to get away with horrendous warcrimes against their own people - and therefore make some bogus case against the IDF for "deliberately" targetting civilians (in fact, the civilian/combatant kill ratio in Gaza was around 1:1, better than any other Western nation during conflict in modern times).

AI is a total disgrace.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

8. It depends how you look at it.

I see Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the UN, the World Bank, most of the world's governments, various news organs etc reporting on and condemning Israel's behaviour, and assume that Israel must be behaving badly.

You see Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the UN, the World Bank, most of the world's governments, various news organs etc reporting on and condemning Israel's behaviour, and assume that Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the UN, the World Bank, most of the world's governments, various news organs etc are biased against Israel.

[shira]

10. that is one sorry response

This is what AI chooses not to condemn in their latest libel against Israel...

Hamas using civilian shields
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Drv_bCeYvg0

Watch above first before moving on to these...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0wJXf2nt4Y&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHhs9ihSmbU&feature=PlayList&p=13CDFC69E1856079&index=38
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9IL86T6Nc8&feature=channel
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Hamas+war+against+Israel/Video_civilians_military_goals_Jan+2009.htm
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Hamas+war+against+Israel/Hamas+exploitation+of+civilians+as+human+shields+-+Photographic+evidence.htm
http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/hamas_e052.pdf

...now what say you?

Nothing to see, report, condemn there?

Is AI really doing its job?

[LeftishBrit]

11. I know of one group that don't think AI is doing its job...

http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90777/90854/6590712.html

[shira]

13. In AI's condemnations of Israel, where do they mention civilian casualties being the result of Hamas

use of civilian shields? Are we to believe that never happens and all civilian casualties in Gaza are the result of the IDF deliberately targeting them? Because that's what it appears AI is claiming.

Where can I find AI spending as much time and effort (as they do on Israel) reporting and condemning Hamas human shields?

Maybe it's not such a big deal after all and this is why there isn't much to find on the topic by AI?



----------

LB,
Please look at the first link (youtube) in my post #10 and then tell me if you think AI is doing its job to protect Palestinian human rights.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

12. It has to be false to be a libel.

AI has issued other reports, condemning other things, including Palestinian terrorism (see the link LeftishBrit posted).

The thing that this report is about, however, is Israel's crimes.

[shira]

14. it's propaganda.....lying by omission

"...Subtitled "The state of the world's human rights," the report states that the Gaza smuggling tunnels are used to move food and fuel, but does not mention arms smuggling.

NGO Monitor also accused Amnesty of not giving context when it blames Israel for the plight of Gazans who are denied access to Israel hospitals. The report uses four examples of Palestinians who died after being denied entry to Israel, without mentioning the large number of Palestinians treated in Israeli hospitals...."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1243346492782

[shira]

16. Donald, you still there?

Tell me, as bad as you believe Israel to be - how much worse is AI for ensuring not only that Palestinian suffering is maximized due to Hamas' cynical use of human shields, but that it continues virtually unchallenged in the press and the UN?

Say what you will about Israel, but it appears AI absolutely loathes Palestinians far, far more by remaining silent on the issue of human shields. They're allowing Hamas to use Palestinians as their pawns in their "struggle" against Israel.

AI has power that can be used to influence (UN, through the press, etc..) and they're declining to stand up for Palestinians against Hamas (and 3 years ago Lebanese shields against Hezbollah). Like the worst, far RW haters of Israel (such as Pat Buchanon and David Duke) they not only hate the Jewish state, they don't mind Palestinian suffering being maximized (they certainly won't lift a finger to help the situation). Like far RW'ers who have a fake concern for human rights, AI is proving to be no better than them (actually worse since they have power to at least do something about it).

How does this make you feel about AI?

Are you not outraged by AI?

[shaayecanaan]

17. Was there ever a dead Arab that wasnt a human shield? nt

[Shaktimaan]

20. yes. np

[Violet_Crumble]

25. You wouldn't think so from reading this forum n/t

[shira]

22. so human shields of Hamas don't get human rights according to AI, and that's okay with you?

and the UN recently decided not to even investigate human shield usage in the Sri Lanka conflict.

How about a couple cheers for AI and the UN for doing such a stellar job?

Progressives should be so proud of their efforts!

:eyes:

[Ken Burch]

113. You just want everyone to agree with your fixation on "defeating Hamas"

as if that's all that matters, or as if the "shields" are all that matters.

There would be no Hamas and no shields if Israel had done the sane thing and started negotiating with the PLO in the Seventies, when it was still in control of the situation and when it still had the ability to make a peace deal "stick".

This has all been about the Israeli government(a government, shira, that you have got to accept is not on the side of the Israeli people and merely cries crocodile tears about their suffering)being determined to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state by any means necessary. Even Rabin refused to use the word "Palestinian state" in his negotiations with a declining and physically unwell Arafat, though he(like all the other Israeli leaders)knew that peace required accepting Palestinian self-determination.

The Israeli government is NOT "the Israeli people".

"The Israeli people" are not "The Jews".

And criticism of the first is not an attack on the third.

[shira]

115. amazing......it's not so much a fixation against Hamas as it is protecting decent Pal'ns...

...who'd rather not be Hamas' unwilling shields in their ongoing, jihadi war-mongering efforts against Israel.

Why aren't you upset that the major human rights organizations aren't calling out Hamas for using Palestinians as shields in their own homes, schools, mosques, hospitals, etc.?

You want civilian casualties to go up or down? By keeping silent WRT Hamas' human shield policy, you're basically guaranteeing that civilian casualties will be higher than they should be in future battles between Hamas and Israel.

[Ken Burch]

116. It's impossible to stop Hamas from doing that through denunciation

And it's especially impossible for the IDF to stop it through war.

The way to stop it is to stop creating the conditions that built Hamas. Hamas emerged because the Palestinians were still being denied a state and because the PA was continually humiliated and discredited through the arrogance of the Israeli government and the IDF.

[shira]

117. well, at least you're trying so thanks for that, but.......

you're practically advocating for major human rights organizations to do or say NOTHING at all since it probably won't stop Hamas.

Taking that to it's logical and absurd extreme, major human rights organizations should just leave Cuba, Saudi Arabia, China, Sri Lanka, the Congo, and Sudan the hell alone!

What about the victims of all these fanatical regimes, Ken? Isn't it worth standing up for them and at least trying, by all legal and moral means possible?

Don't Palestinian victims of Hamas, in your opinion, deserve at least that much?

Or since major human rights organizations are ineffective and incompetent against non-western nations, maybe they should focus the majority of their condemnations on western nations like Israel? Forget the victims...focus mainly on the alleged western oppressors, right?

[Ken Burch]

126. You aren't talking about denouncing Hamas out of sincere concern for Palestinian human rights

If you cared about human rights for Palestinians, you would never call for the Occupation to continue.

You are going on and on about "human shields" because you want everyone to back the Israeli government's military policies.

None of the other cases you mentioned involved using human rights to justify military intervention or military subjugation of a people.

[shira]

127. now you've made yourself very clear, Ken

as long as the occupation/settlements remain, you are not at all concerned about the major human rights organizations coming down hard on Hamas in order to help/save Palestinians, and therefore as long as you're concerned, the major human rights organizations should remain silent and whatever happens, happens. There's no sense "standing up" for Palestinian victims of Hamas human-shield policy.....Hamas won't listen anyway, so there's no point. Palestinians only have human rights so long as Israel is violating them, not Hamas. If the occupation/settlements remain another 40 years and women and children are used in combat, or summoned to rooftops as shields, or Palestinian homes, schools, hospitals, and mosques are used for military purposes - you won't mind if major human rights organizations and the media remain silent....so long as the focus is kept on Israel.

Or do I still misunderstand you?

[Ken Burch]

128. If you actually cared about Palestinians you'd oppose the Occupation

You know perfectly well that no one can stop Hamas from doing anything as long as the Occupation remains in place. You've NEVER cared about Palestinians. If you did, you'd back a Palestinian state in all the West Bank and Gaza, because that's the only kind of Palestinian state that can be viable.

No military subjugation of a people can ever free that people.

[shira]

129. so I was right about you? I'm asking because you aren't denying it.

As for me, I want the occupation to end. But your solution is to replace one occupation with another foreign occupation (like NATO). How does that end the occupation, Ken?

I back a Palestinian state in the W.Bank and Gaza. I don't know of a better option.

You say I don't care for Palestinians, but I'm the only one between the two of us calling for the UN and human rights orgs to do their job and stand up for Palestinians against their oppressive leadership. If human rights orgs and the media confronted Hamas and put some pressure on them to reform, Palestinians could then be treated better by their govt (which they could elect freely under no threats or pressure), they'd have more civil rights, jobs, homes for the refugees within Gaza and the W.Bank (wouldn't that be nice), and there'd be a MUCH, MUCH greater chance for real, enduring peace.

[Ken Burch]

130. I mentioned neutral peacekeepers as one approach

In order to avoid it being said that I wanted the place to fall into chaos(which I didn't anyway, but you'd have said it).

And your "concern" is basically tied to your fixation with "crushing Hamas". Look, I don't like Hamas either, but the way to make them irrelevant is to remove the factors that built their support. You act as if there was no reason for Palestinians to back Hamas. There were reasons(mainly, the fact that the Fatah-led PA was corrupt, that it had failed utterly at getting a Palestinian state, and that Hamas in opposition had built a strong social service network). The other thing that needs to happen for Hamas to be made irrelevant is for Marwan Barghouti, who could beat them in a general election, from Israeli custody. Yes, the man has done things that people don't do in civilian life, but so has everyone else that has any support in the Palestinian community(and so will have most people who enter Israeli politics after a long career in the IDF. War is like that).

My objection is the insistence on "stopping Hamas" and "denouncing Hamas" and "this, that and the other thing and so's your old man Hamas" when treated in isolation. That is an approach that can't possibly work. It's like saying apartheid had to stay in place because some antiapartheid types killed collaborators(as did the French and other occupied European countries after World War II).

[shira]

131. which neutral peacekeepers will try to stop Hamas rockets and suicide bombers?

Only something like NATO could ensure Israeli security - Shakti went over this with you, and even they probably wouldn't want to be as committed as the IDF to Israeli security. Any other "peace-keeping" neutral force would just act as ineffective and inept as the UN in Lebanon with Hezbollah. Israel would never agree to that kind of suicide.

As I said earlier, Hamas isn't even the biggest obstacle. Palestinians lacked civil rights, homes (end to refugee camps), their own economy, etc.. under Arafat leadership. It makes more sense to first build a civil secular society within Gaza and the W.Bank rather than "hope" with some kind of blind faith that such a situation will result once Palestinians have their own nation (which will only fail under the leadership they've had going back to Mufti al Hussayni).

I'm not sure why I'm continuing with you, Ken.....if it were up to you, Palestinians would remain political pawns of Hamas and regional Arab leadership for several more generations b/c you don't give a rip that no outside organizations are committed to the actual well-being (and human rights) of Palestinians oppressed by their own leadership.

The following should enrage you:

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=52&x_article=960

Sadly, no one besides Israel was committed to seeing the refugee problem within the territories end decades ago. Ironic, isn't it? And you pretend the UN, the UNHRC, UNWRA, etc.. are legitimate "progressive" orgs holding "progressive" positions against Israel.

[Ken Burch]

132. The creation of the PA was meant to lead to the building of that "civil society"

The return of the IDF to the West Bank prevented the PA from achieving anything like civil society, and destroyed support among Palestinians for people like Hanan Ashrawi, people YOU should have been supporting(but people who were denounced as essentially closet jihadis by the Israeli right-as if EVERY Palestinian wears a bomb!)

You can't seriously suggest that civil society could be constructed while the Occupation remains in place? Nobody in the history of the planet ever created a civil society for themselves while another country's soldiers walked their streets and invaded their homes.

The Occupation makes positive change impossible. Nothing humane can happen while it continues. No Occupied country anywhere ever made itself better while occupied. And the worst of this is, you are basically asking Palestinians to regard Israelis as "their betters", as masters to be pleased, as the standard to which Palestinians must measure up.
That's not only imperialist, its paternalistic.

[shira]

133. occupied Japan proves you wrong.

[Ken Burch]

134. OK...troops engaged in ACTIVE combat....

Nobody was being harassed by the U.S. troops occupying Japan. Nobody was being forced to stand in line for hours at roadblocks. Nobody's home was being bulldozed. And the troops weren't standing by as American "settlers" uprooted Japanese orchards and shipped them to California. Those troops imposed no repression on Japan whatsoever.

That's not the situation here and you know it.

[shira]

135. well then, when Israel eased the occupation b/w 1995-2002, the situation should have been more

conducive towards peace since the PA had far more control. No checkpoints, no wall/barrier. But Intifada 2 broke out instead.

try again.

then there's Gaza 2005.

[bemildred]

23. Sure, they can be "militants" or they can be "human shields".

Occasionally, they can be "unfortunate collateral damage that everything possible was done to avoid", but that category bleeds over into the "human shields".

[Ken Burch]

110. Even if the "human shields" meme were true, it doesn't automatically justify or excuse

everything the IDF has ever done in these wars.

Face it, shira, the IDF is the dominant force and the Israeli government has most, if not all, of the real power in this dispute.

And the Israeli government doesn't care that it's arrogance is endangering the Israeli people. The Israeli government, unlike the Israeli people, just wants the war to go on and on because it doesn't ever want to change.

You have got to stop trusting Israeli politicians. They're just like politicians anywhere else.

[sellitman]

9. Bingo!

You nailed it.

[shira]

15. apparently, human shields don't have human rights

so AI is doing a marvelous job.

:eyes:

and of course, Israel is still not allowed to defend itself.

[Ken Burch]

136. There was never any chance that OCL could stop the use of "humsn shields"

It's simply impossible to support human rights and defend current Israeli security policies.

[shira]

137. so let's get this straight

Hamas fires about 300 rockets into Israel during Xmas week 2008.

According to you, Israel is supposed to just "take it" and not defend itself, but even if it defends itself and invades you are okay with Amnesty ignoring Hamas' human shield battle strategy.

Israel can decide whether to ALLOW Hamas rocket-launchers and weapons to be fired from densely populated areas - maybe from schoolyards or mosques - or Israel can do something about it, knowing some civilians will be killed in the process.

Nice choice, huh? But completely irrelevant to Annesty. You're okay with Hamas playing ducks and drakes with Pal'n women and children, and no one like Amnesty standing up against such warcrimes?

[shaayecanaan]

29. Dingus!

You failed it.

[Alamuti Lotus]

18. this must be one of those times when "international law" is irrelevant

By its count, "1,400 Palestinians were killed" in the three week Israeli bombardment, "including some 300 children, and some 5,000 were wounded."

Yes, but reportedly several of the IDF soldiers suffered serious shock and other anguish from being forced to carry out those bombardments. Let's show some proper perspective here.

[shira]

21. 1400 killed by whose account? oh yeah, Amnesty accepted PCHR's bogus count

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=270897&mesg_id=274151

at least 286 "civilians" on PCHR's trusty list turned out to be combatants, making the civilian/combatant ratio in reality around 1:1, but it sure sounds better to claim Israel just up and murdered 1100 1200 over 1400 Palestinians, doesn't it?

[azurnoir]

27. LOL again post the list Shira but you can't can you

it comes from a website not allowed on DU which allows a pretty progressive range of websites oh ya you try to circumvent this by posting a link to a link to the list and you want this taken seriously?
But please do keep trying or will you once again post an NPR article about an exIDF and Israeli intelligence officer trying to discredit PCHR, the article does not back up his claims

[shira]

31. aren't you interested in facts?

Why did you first claim that the links here...

http://www.jewishblogging.com/blog.php?bid=188568

...did not work for you and that you needed a "better" link?

The links did work for you, didn't they? But you said they didn't. Tsk, tsk.

Anyone here could clink on the first few links at jewishblogging to see that PCHR's report is complete bullshit.

But you're not really interested in the actual facts, are you? The question is why.

Or do they teach that "facts don't matter" at the anti-zionist training programs?

[azurnoir]

35. First I did claim they did not work because they did not

then I went to read more which did the very fact that this the link directly to the complete list can not be posted on DU speaks for it self

as to anti zionist training programs the only "training" I have had is right here dear, and over the years I learned much most of it quite disturbing to put it mildly.

[shira]

36. those links at JewishBlogging still work for me

Did you click any of those links to find ANY of the PCHR list to be questionable?

[azurnoir]

40. I do not find PCHR questionable

I do find your sources to be however and yes I did check the links EOZ and invite anyone to do so

[shira]

43. let's look at the very 1st two links, ok? I'm curious why you do not find PCHR questionable

#60 (on PCHR list) Ramadan Ahmed Ibrahim Abu Kheir
http://www.almoltaqa.ps/english/showthread.php?t=10158

#62 (on PCHR list) Ahmed Hani Ahmed Qannou'a
http://www.almoltaqa.ps/english/showthread.php?t=10183

And that's just 2 out of 286 "civilians" found to actually be combatants.

But you still do not find PCHR to be questionable?

[azurnoir]

45. Shira sell what ever crap you want

march along posting every link if you want be my guest the source of those can not be posted here end of story but please continue to cheat and end run around that fact the source is too questionable in some manner to be posted here, post all 286 of them if it makes you feel better, you can excuse all the death in Gaza you want because that is your purpose to minimize and make Palestinian death acceptable so go for it, I for one do not believe you or NGO monitor or Jewish blogging or EOZ a few here do so have a pile on party about blood libel, hatred of Israel or what ever turns your crank, but you are the one excusing death at least as long as its Palestinian, not me does it matter to you that they are dead or just making their deaths at Israels hands look somehow OK?

BTW really who are you trying to persuade me or lurkers who may read this? My better is on the latter and here is a link to NGO Monitors oh so convincing article

http://blog.ngo-monitor.org/un/eu-funded-pchr-aids-arab-league-in-lawfare-missiongives-hamas-a-free-pass/

[shira]

46. so the 2 links (#60, #62 on PCHR's list) do not call into question PCHR's credibility in your view

maybe you think EOZ or NGO Monitor "made all this up"?

[azurnoir]

48. Nope it does not

and I do consider the source(s) both are dedicated to disseminating proIsraeli propaganda.

[shira]

49. so you believe #60 and #62 on the PCHR list are rightly labeled "civilians" rather than combatants?

[azurnoir]

50. Yes quite possibly n/t

[shira]

51. wow.....just wow. Is that just a statement of faith?

[azurnoir]

52. No it's statement of having clicked the links n/t

[shira]

53. and those links showing they were combatants just weren't so convincing?

[azurnoir]

64. No not really

but if you wish to "believe" be my guest, I have absolutely no wish to change your mind and as I have said anyone can click

[shira]

65. right, not really.....probably some zionist ploy anyway

wouldn't want anything to interfere with your demonization of Israel. It would be like taking away your favorite toy, can't have that, can we?

just curious - what amount of evidence would you need in order to persuade you that PCHR is full of shit?

[azurnoir]

66. Confirmation from the UN n/t

[shira]

67. you mean the same UN that praised Sri Lanka for slaughtering 7000 civilians the 1st four months ...

... of this year?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/28/sri-lanka-un-war-crimes-investigation

You trust the UN to confirm that PCHR is full of shit, when they not only refuse to do an inquiry on Sri Lanka but actually praise the leadership for killing 7000 civilians in the first quarter of this year alone?

Are you serious?

[azurnoir]

68. The government of Sri Lanka won

which is why quote from the article

Sri Lanka's human rights minister, Mahinda Samarasinghe, said: "This is a strong endorsement of our president's efforts to rout terrorism, and the successful handling of the world's biggest hostage crisis.

"This is a clear message that the international community is behind Sri Lanka."

The war or occupation/siege is far from over as it relates to the I/P conflict and Israel is not the government in Gaza this is not a civil war unlike Sri Lanka do you understand those differences?

[shira]

70. lol

yeah, I understand that 7000 civilians in Sri Lanka don't have the same human rights as 700 civilians in Gaza, according to the UN.

I understand that's all fine and dandy with you - no one holding their murderers to account - that's fine to someone who purports to "care" like yourself.

I understand quite well how so-called "progressives" are so quick to throw away their progressive principles in order to keep the demonization campaign against Israel going.

:puke:

[azurnoir]

92. Nope I guess you do not understand the difference between

a civil war and a an siege by a foreign power or is that you still consider Gaza to Israeli territory? but as one oh sooooo concerned about Sri Lanka I am surprised that you do not post on threads about that, why is that Shira?

As I posted the reasons the UN decided not to investigate what purpose and who's good would indicting the government of Sri Lanka or whatever remains of the Tamil Tigers do? it is not a matter of throwing away principles, but the dust has not yet settled from a protracted bloody civil war, do you really wish to stir it up again? I believe that in the future there will be an investigation but right now there are far more pressing concerns

But as usual you try to to make some campaign against Israel with the implication of antisemitism that would naturally to some go along with that

[shira]

93. come on AZ, even Amnesty ripped the UNHRC...

"The Human Rights Council established a fact-finding mission which will now look at violations of international human rights and humanitarian law by both sides in Gaza. By not establishing a similar fact-finding mission for Sri Lanka, the Human Rights Council has demonstrated deplorable selectivity and double standards."

http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/sri-lanka-un-must-publicize-civilian-casualty-figures-20090529

[azurnoir]

94. Well the next time you whine about AI remember this one

and that is what this thread was about AI, but it has been more than 5 months since the end of OLC which was an attack by a foreign government upon the people of Gaza not a civil war and I agree there should be pressure to investigate and force the government to allow aid and humanitarian needs in to the camps in Sri Lanka

[shira]

95. well, AI is guilty itself of deplorable selectivity and double-standards when it comes to...

...turning a blind eye to Hamas trampling Palestinian human rights.

But like Sri Lankan civilians, human rights are only invoked when Israelis are the perceived oppressors.

Too bad the victims of Sri Lanka and Hamas aren't instead victims of Israelis, huh? Then people might 'care'.

[azurnoir]

97. Hamas slams AI report over crimes in Gaza

Hamas group slammed Wednesday an Amnesty International (AI) report which accused the movement of committing crimes in Gaza Strip where the movement has been ruling since June 2007

Fawzi Barhoum, a spokesman of Palestinian Islamic Hamas movement in Gaza said that the Amnesty International report "is unfair and a false accusation against Hamas movement and the government"

Amnesty International accused Hamas movement and its militants as well as members of deposed Hamas government police of executing civilians, shooting dozens of people in their knees and torturing many others.

The report published testimonies of people were shot in their knees, some of them belong to Hamas' rival, and moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah movement.

Barhoum said "all these positions and stories published in the report are illusory and very well-fabricated by the media", adding that "the organization only listens to one part and hasn't listened to the other."

Hamas took over Gaza Strip by force in June 2007 following weeks of heavy fighting with rival Fatah militants. The fighting ended after Hamas drove out Abbas' security forces from the enclave.

"This report is directly hurting Hamas reputation. Instead of just focusing on accusing Hamas, they should document the awful crimes of the massacres committed during the unfair war on our people" he added.

Meanwhile, Hamas’ Barhoum called on Amnesty International "to collect evidences and quote real witnesses from the ground and present those documents to the international courts to sue the Israeli occupation for its crimes."

http://news.egypt.com/en/200902115450/news/middle-east/hamas-slams-ai-report-over-crimes-in-gaza.html

[shira]

98. and AI cannot be bothered to report on Hamas child combatants, women and children summoned to...

...rooftops targeted by the IAF for bombing, weapons stored and fired from or near schools, mosques, hospitals, and densely populated civilian neighborhoods, using civilian ambulances for military purposes.....?

those warcrimes and human rights violations don't really count, right?

[azurnoir]

99. Richard Goldstone is in Gaza now

so we will find out, but as far as the rest of statements those are claims of the Israeli government are they not? Were the civilians summoned to rooftops forced to save their homes? seems last we heard from you on that it was as a claim that it was proof that IOF was the most moral army on earth. if it is proven true AI will comment on it

ETA additional reporting from AI on Hamas and OCL

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE21/001/2009/en/9f979519-f762-11dd-8fd7-f57af21896e1/mde210012009en.pdf

but there is nothing in the report that would exonerate Israel

[shira]

100. "but there is nothing in the report that would exonerate Israel"

right!

and that's the point, isn't it?

that's why AI, HRW, the UNHRC, etc... refuse to stand up for Palestinian human rights violations by Hamas.

as for women and children summoned to rooftops as shields, click on the links that say "view clip":
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Hamas+war+against+Israel/Hamas+exploitation+of+civilians+as+human+shields+-+Photographic+evidence.htm

Even HRW had one rare moment of weakness and condemned Hamas for encouraging - and not discouraging - civilians standing on rooftops of IDF military targets.

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2006/12/15/human-rights-watch-statement-our-november-22-press-release

AI couldn't be bothered to do the same.

And neither organization, of course, makes the obvious connection between these shields and civilian casualties of the IDF. To do so would be to exonnerate the IDF, and they cannot have that.

[azurnoir]

103. Exonerating Israel is your mission here n/t

[shira]

106. let's suppose that's true, okay?

but in return, human rights violations elsewhere get reported and things actually get done to help the people who need it most (maybe it could have saved thousands in Sri Lanka). Imagine Palestinian children no longer used as combatants, or Hamas no longer using hospitals and ambulances for military ops because they're too embarassed by all the negative press. Imagine that it saves lives or makes lives better for tens or hundreds of thousands.

or do you have a problem with that?

[azurnoir]

125. No I do not have a problem with that

tell me do you have a problem with Israel imprisoning these same children you care so much about?

[shira]

61. do you believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy, since you believe PCHR is credible?

[azurnoir]

69. Cute trick answering the same quote twice hours apart

but dear in my world Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are imaginary unlike PCHR, don't know about yours though

[Fozzledick]

19. Israel: Amnesty report on Gaza ignores fact Hamas are terrorists

The Foreign Ministry on Sunday lambasted Amnesty International for urging a global freeze on arms sales to Israel, calling the rights group's assessment that such weapons may have contributed to war crimes in the Gaza Strip "biased" and unprofessional.

...

In response to the report, the Foreign Minsistry said that Amnesty International "ignores the basic fact that Hamas is a terror organization" and recognized as such by Western powers. The ministry also reiterated Israel's position that it worked throughout the operation to avoid civilian casualties.

"The IDF never intentionally targeted civilians," the ministry said in its statement. "The witnesses providing the descriptions appearing in the report are interested parties and under Hamas pressure, as has been documented by many independent investigations in the international media."

The ministry added that the Amnesty report does not relate to Hamas' use of Palestinian civilians as human shields or the placement of its military posts and ammunition depots in crowded population centers.

"The international community has accepted the fact that Hamas was solely responsible for the military confrontation, but the Amnesty report is dedicated almost exclusively to the censure of Israel," the Foreign Ministry wrote in a statement.

The Foreign Ministry also took issue with what it called Amnesty's downplaying of the rocket attacks on Israeli towns from the Gaza Strip, saying the report "ignores the scale" of the some 10,000 rockets and mortars fired from Gaza over the last eight years.

It also criticizes Amnesty for not mentioning in its report that Hamas receives support from "foreign extremists" like Iran.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1066334.html

[ProgressiveProfessor]

24. Given that they only have one side's version, why would this report be given any credence?

If you do not have at least something from the other side, it is little more than a kangaroo court

[Violet_Crumble]

26. Because Israel refused to cooperate doesn't make it a kangaroo court...

A refusal to cooperate makes Israel look bad, but doesn't turn the investigation into a kangaroo court. While cooperation is preferable, the lack of it doesn't mean the resulting report would lack credence. Or do you think that all investigations that haven't had the cooperation of all parties involved are kangaroo courts with no credence?

[shira]

32. if this evidence is ignored or grossly minimized by the Goldstone team...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x276174#276200

...then it's most definitely a kangaroo court.

[Violet_Crumble]

37. Well, you better make sure you email links to all yr DU posts to Goldstone n/t

[shira]

47. says more about his commission if they haven't the first clue about all this

What's most likely is they don't give a shit what Hamas does to the Palestinians they pretend to care about - it's not that they don't know what's going on.

And that's why this commission is nothing but a despicable kangaroo court.

[Violet_Crumble]

54. Like I said, email him links to yr posts here. ...

But I'm not really sure why you insist on repeating the same ridiculous opinion over and over and over again as if you think I give a shit about yr opinions...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

33. In this case it does

There are key facts in dispute and without access to data from the IDF, a full picture can not be had. Any report under those circumstances can not be valid. For example, take a building that was destroyed internally. Hamas will claim the IDF blew it up, the IDF could claim it was booby trapped. How will you determine what really happened without both sides? Same kind of thing for WP, the air strikes, and the rumored but never proved DIME.

To follow your analogy the police can and do force some level of cooperation from suspects, fingerprints, DNA, cell phone logs etc. This commission is comparably powerless.

As to making Israel look bad, it also reflects poorly on the UN that they were unwilling to work to build a team both sides found acceptable. It also buttresses Israel's case that it is a witch hunt with a predetermined result.

If the UN was serious, they would get a mutually agreeable investigative team, without one this is nothing more than a sop to the Arab League etc.

The end game is clear. The report will be written and released. The IDF will find errors and discredit parts of it, and by extension the report as a whole. The report will go in the archives with all the others and be of no use except propaganda on both sides.

[Violet_Crumble]

38. No, it doesn't unless you believe Israel is above reproach...

There are key facts in dispute and without access to data from the IDF, a full picture can not be had.

Then Israel should cooperate and allow access to information. That way Israel doesn't look like it's hiding things...

To follow your analogy the police can and do force some level of cooperation from suspects, fingerprints, DNA, cell phone logs etc.

I wasn't even making an analogy. The UN investigates things where countries have refused to cooperate, and Israel isn't the first to refuse to cooperate. So, does that mean every other UN investigation where one of the parties has refused to cooperate is invalid?


As to making Israel look bad, it also reflects poorly on the UN that they were unwilling to work to build a team both sides found acceptable.

Uh, what exactly is the problem that Israel has with Goldstone?

But, yeah. Until the team is led by someone impartial and fair, like Mark Regev or Dore Gold, it's just going to be a witch-hunt of a kangaroo court! ;)

[ProgressiveProfessor]

39. It has nothing to do with that, it about having all facts and seeing all sides

There are key facts in dispute and without access to data from the IDF, a full picture can not be had.
Then Israel should cooperate and allow access to information. That way Israel doesn't look like it's hiding things...
Why should they? There is no legal, moral, or ethical requirement to do so, especially if Israel thinks its a sham, which it has clearly stated.

To follow your analogy the police can and do force some level of cooperation from suspects, fingerprints, DNA, cell phone logs etc.
I wasn't even making an analogy. The UN investigates things where countries have refused to cooperate, and Israel isn't the first to refuse to cooperate. So, does that mean every other UN investigation where one of the parties has refused to cooperate is invalid?
Those done under similar circumstances are certainly questionable.

As to making Israel look bad, it also reflects poorly on the UN that they were unwilling to work to build a team both sides found acceptable.
Uh, what exactly is the problem that Israel has with Goldstone?
I don't know, you will have to ask them.

But, yeah. Until the team is led by someone impartial and fair, like Mark Regev or Dore Gold, it's just going to be a witch-hunt of a kangaroo court!
Its not clear that any consultation was done, but Israel is convinced its a witch hunt. What is clear is that it will be disputed, proved wrong in some areas since they will only have the Hamas side of the story, and of no real or practical value.

This investigation is a kabuki dance and the outcome is already know. It will have no impact and no one will take it seriously. Have to wonder why they are bothering.

[Violet_Crumble]

41. It has nothing to do with you thinking Israel is above reproach? Uh, okay...

You ask why Israel should cooperate with the investigation. How come you ask after you've already been told? Refusal to cooperate with the investigation makes Israel look like it's hiding something and that there is something to them having violated the laws of war (and everyone but Blind Freddy already knows that Israel committed human rights violations in Gaza). If they don't want to look guilty, they should cooperate. The reason they don't is because they can't control what the investigation reports and know that what comes out won't be yet another bit of propaganda delivered by Mark Regev...

I asked you whether you thought every other UN investigation where one of the parties has refused to cooperate is invalid. You said under similar circumstances they were. 'Under similar circumstances' sounds like a cop-out clause, so can you give me an example of another UN investigation where one of the parties involved has refused to cooperate where it's 'under similar circumstances'?

You have to be kidding. You don't know what Israel's problem is with Goldstone. Yet yr dismissing the investigation and defending Israel's whining without even knowing what they're saying? Just a bit partisan there, don't you think?


This investigation is a kabuki dance and the outcome is already know. It will have no impact and no one will take it seriously. Have to wonder why they are bothering.

Who's no-one? I wish you'd not speak on behalf of everyone. It's quite clear the devoted 'supporters' of Israel who think Israel is innocence personified think that, but don't think that most other folk are like that. I'm glad the UN is bothering, because some of us do give a shit about Palestinians in Gaza and believe that an investigation needs to happen, regardless of Israel's preference not to have what it did looked at by anyone but its own military, which is prone to lying through its teeth...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

42. Its more a case of your bias showing

There is no reason for Israel to cooperate, legal, moral or ethical. That they would refuse was obvious. No attempt has been acknowledged about trying to have a process and staff acceptable to both sides. It makes the UN look shabby and partisan. However looking bad has no penalty and no effect on the UN or Israel. The report, regardless of its content and conclusions will not change any opinions among supporters of Hamas or Israel.

Israel clearly believes that the outcome is preordained and has set it up to be refuted and discredited. This too was obvious before it began. It will be easy since without the IDF side of things errors and false claims by Hamas will be accepted as facts. After the report is published, errors in it will be pointed out casting doubt on the rest of it.

I have no doubt that both sides committed violations. Neither is above reproach. Welcome to urban combat.

I am dismissing the investigation since:
- It will not change anything, no matter what it says
- It will be shown to have errors due to lack of information from the IDF
- Any outrage that matters from the conflict is over
- No one who understands the situation will take it seriously

I'm being pragmatic. Its a kabuki dance at best.

[Violet_Crumble]

55. Bias? I'm not the one who defends just about everything Israel does...

I see. So you support any country that's going to be investigated for war crimes refusing to cooperate because there's no legal, moral or ethical reason to do so? A country that has committed war crimes can just refuse to cooperate with an investigation, and that'd be the end of it as far as yr concerned.

Why are you still claiming there was no attempt to have a process and staff acceptable to both sides when you just admitted you have no idea what Israel's objections are to Richard Goldstone?

For someone who claims to have no doubt that both sides committed violations, you seem heavily invested in doing little else but making out that any attempt to investigate what Israel did is invalid. And yr dismissing the investigation? Somehow I don't think you get to do that, but nor are you anyone who gets to decide who takes the investigation seriously and what their knowledge of the situation is....

btw, partisanship isn't pragmatism....

[shira]

63. of course it's bias

Sri Lanka last night scored a major propaganda coup when the UN human rights council praised its victory over the Tamil Tigers and refused calls to investigate allegations of war crimes by both sides in the final chapter of a bloody 25-year conflict.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/28/sri-lanka-un-war-crimes-investigation

Imagine that, the UN is not calling for a war crimes inquiry, but instead praising the killing of 7000 civilians in just the past 4 months!

So much for the UN's intentions - regarding human rights violations in I/P - having any basis in progressive virtues.

They don't give a shit about anyone's human rights - only that the Jewish State is to be demonized.

I fail to see how/why any "progressive" would choose to defend the UN's continuing demonization campaign against Israel. The Goldstone commission is nothing but a modern day witchunt.

[Violet_Crumble]

71. If yr going to obsessively reply to my posts to other people, at least read what I say...

I was talking of the bias of the poster I was replying to. As to what you think is biased or progressive, I care about as much about that as I would if Dick Cheney was telling me...

[shira]

74. your silence on the UN and AI's hypocritical and regressive bias speaks volumes

kinda hard to defend such disreputable and hateful orgs, isn't it?

why you'd wish to use them as honorable and trustworthy sources, when they are anything but progressive orgs, is beyond me.

[Violet_Crumble]

77. Sorry. We can't all be fanatical zealots n/t

[shira]

80. those who demonize Israel and don't care for Palestinians are fanatical zealots....

...who wouldn't mind if Hamas kept using Palestinians as pawns - so long as Israel takes the blame.

[Violet_Crumble]

82. What a shame we all don't care for Palestinians like you do n/t

want to see a fanatical zealot? Look in the mirror

[shira]

85. if you cared for Palestinians, you'd be at least a tad outraged at the UN, HRW, AI and media for...

..giving Hamas the green light to continue to trample Palestinian human rights (like just in case you don't know, using child and women combatants, storing, firing weapons and boobytrapping next to or in mosques, hospitals, civilian homes and schools, calling for human shields on rooftops of IDF military targets, etc.).

Anyone who really cared for Palestinians would be outraged by this.

It appears you don't want to condemn this for the simple reason that it takes a lot of blame off Israel and reframes the entire I/P situation.

I can't think of any action by Israel, ever, that is worse than continuing to let Hamas do whatever it likes to their civilian population - and applauding (what should be criminally) negligent human rights groups and the media for doing absolutely nothing to help prevent or stop it and make life better for Palestinians. Pretending all the above by Hamas doesn't go on only maximizez Palestinian suffering and ensures that it goes on much longer than it should. Nothing Israel has done compares to this despicable inaction (comparable to Europe doing nothing during the holocaust). :puke:

But yeah, ignore all the above, pretend it doesn't really happen, and attack the messenger instead.

You care. :eyes:

ps,
I wish I were totally wrong about all the above - realizing what this means internationally speaking - and would appreciate being corrected by anyone capable or willing.

[Violet_Crumble]

86. Yep, you got me pegged. I detest and hate the Palestinian people.

Only you really care for them, Shira. And I hate Jews and I'm an anti-zionist far leftist 'progressive' who yearns for the destruction of Israel. Have I left anything out, I wonder? ;)


btw, yr ps is totally delusional garbage. More than a few people on this forum have you on ignore because yr not the slightest bit rational nor are capable of understanding that bias exists on both sides when it comes to partisanship. I don't, coz it's highly entertaining to watch you flailing round pretending that yr 'discussing' things with people when all you do is deliberately misinterpret what they say and make offensive and abusive comments about other posters. Yr world is so black and white and so inflexible that having a serious discussion with someone like you would be like trying to have a serious discussion about reproductive rights with one of those freeper types who are cheering the murder of Dr Tiller...

[shira]

89. "...bias exists on both sides when it comes to partisanship"

so "partisan bias" is your explanation for Amnesty, HRW, and the UNHRC ignoring Hamas human rights violations and war crimes against Palestinians?

[Violet_Crumble]

90. Obviously that word 'both sides' was invisible to you....

Here's what I said: 'More than a few people on this forum have you on ignore because yr not the slightest bit rational nor are capable of understanding that bias exists on both sides when it comes to partisanship.'

Not complicated at all. You run round screeching accusations of bias at anything and everything that criticises Israel, yet then turn around and act as though any site or group that 'supports' Israel isn't biased. Just as blinded and one-sided as you claiming yr objective on the I/P issue, which yr clearly not...

[shira]

91. okay, I thought you were explaining the way HRW, AI, UNHRC, media ignore Hamas human shields

[Violet_Crumble]

104. huh? I was pointing out yr unwillingness to see bias on both sides

Yr the one who seems to think yr explaining something about AI. Personally I'm not into trying to decipher yr obsessed rantings so maybe you should go trywith someone who is

[shira]

44. "some of us do give a shit about Palestinians in Gaza"........oh yeah, which ones?

If that's true, anyone who "gives a shit" about Palestinians in Gaza should be pretty angry that this....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Drv_bCeYvg0

....is virtually ignored by so-called human rights orgs like AI, HRW, and commissions like the UNHRC, and that by continuing to ignore this, these so-called human rights orgs are giving Hamas a green light to keep doing it in the future.

I have yet to see one post, not even one, by any of the most vocal "pro-Palestinian" contingent here which shows they actually "give a shit" about Hamas trying to maximize Palestinian civilian casualties in the event Israel strikes at Hamas, or outrage at the fact that their favorite human rights orgs that blast Israel are not at all motivated to do anything about this issue.

[Violet_Crumble]

56. Well, yr definately not one...

Take yr obsession about Hamas and human shields somewhere else and stop bothering me with this crap...

[shira]

57. you're obviously not one

yeah...you really 'give a shit' about Palestinians, Violet.

:eyes:

this issue is strong proof that the anti-Israel brigade is only focused on demonizing Israel, even at the expense of innocent Palestinians.

Sick.

[Violet_Crumble]

58. Of course, I must remember that caring about them means supporting them being bombed & oppressed n/t

[shira]

59. I must remember that in order to show support for Palestinians, I only have to demonize Israel n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

72. More like you only have to demonise Palestinians n/t

[shira]

75. just their leadership that victimizes them....not that you care about what Hamas does to Palstinins

[Violet_Crumble]

78. Yep coz Israel cares so much for Palestinians

[shira]

79. more than those who loathe Palestinians so much that they don't care if Palestinians.....

suffer endlessly under Hamas.

[Violet_Crumble]

83. clearly anyone who critices Israel loathes palestinians

thanks for clearing that up

[shira]

96. there's a big difference between criticism and demonization of Israel

when the same 'criticism' isn't applied towards Hamas WRT their trampling Palestinian human rights, that should trouble any true liberal or progressive. The fact that it doesn't seem to get a rise out of those 'critics' makes it appear their 'concern' for Palestinians is fake.

[Violet_Crumble]

107. for most of us, yes. But not for ones like you n/t

[shira]

60. UN rejects call for Sri Lankan war crimes inquiry - what's 7000 dead civilians in last 4 months?

the fruits of anti-zionist hatred........all in the name of supporting Palestinians, ya know!

Sri Lanka last night scored a major propaganda coup when the UN human rights council praised its victory over the Tamil Tigers and refused calls to investigate allegations of war crimes by both sides in the final chapter of a bloody 25-year conflict.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/28/sri-lanka-un-war-crimes-investigation

Imagine that, the UN not calling for a war crimes inquiry, but instead praising the killing of 7000 civilians in just the past 4 months!

Must remember to repeat to myself that the Goldstone commission is legit.....they really care, really they do...the UN gives a shit about Palestinians!

:eyes:

[Violet_Crumble]

73. Sri Lanka's got nothing to do with the Palestinians....

Goodness, but you trot out some incredible garbage....

[shira]

76. shows that the UN you trust for the Goldstone commission is a biased, regressive organization only

good for demonizing Israel in the context of I/P while allowing other human rights to be trampled elsewhere (even WRT Palestinians by Hamas).

the fact that you are unable to defend the despicable actions of the UN or AI that you respect and use as your primary sources against Israel speaks volumes, dear.......not that I understand why a "progressive" like yourself would even wish to stand up for such disreputable orgs.

[Violet_Crumble]

81. the only thing showing is complete lunacy on yr part

how fucking insane and irrational it is to do what you did and make out the Palestinians have something to do with Sri Lanka.

defend what against whom? As I've explained many times, don't twist my refusal to get onto debates with abusive trolls who misrepresent my beliefs into not wanting to discuss things with rational folk who aren't abusive and who don't misrepresent what I say or call me a liar. and quit it with the pathetic accusations that I'm not left wing. One second yr accusing me of being far left, the next accusing me of not being LW at all. Maybe this routine of yrs impresses yr fellow zealots, but it just reminds me of one of those creepy, sleazy guys at the pub who won't leave you alone no matter how many times you tell them they're creepy, sleazy and drunk and that you don't want to talk to them.

[azurnoir]

28. So are we to assume AI along with HRW, the UN and according

to some here Gush Shalom and B'Tselem as members of a vast global antisemitic conspiracy, I say antisemitic rather than antiIsraeli because Israel's insistence on being called the Jewish State makes criticism antisemitic or so we should now believe

[Shaktimaan]

30. OK, I'll bite.

Who told you that we should now believe because Israel calls itself the Jewish state any criticism should be considered anti-semitism? You said it was someone here. So... who?

Because I gotta tell you, that sounds like one of those crazy accusations some people make as a means of discrediting anyone who doesn't agree with their own views. So I'm very interested in learning who actually said it.

[azurnoir]

34. Look around here Shakti

look at this thread for instance, there are some posters that will parse almost any criticism of Israel even with regard to the settlements as antisemitic, a few days ago there was a regular poster who accused the entire progressive wing of the Democratic party of being "anti Jewish and anti capitalist" that translates to antisemitic and communist, the comment may have been deleted but ......

[shira]

62. you didn't cite an example for Shakti

still waiting...

[azurnoir]

84. Nope I didn't but I shall assume Shakti can read

perhaps you do not give him that credit