regevdl Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 your words: Why excuse arabs for making a stupid decision in an election and not holding them to the same standards of accountability as jews? Because they are ....non-white? You see this alot with liberals...regarding colored people as subhuman not able to be held accountable at the same moral-standards with regard to choices they make. It would be nice if the moral standard metric was the same for both cases... not seeing much of it here though. (so again, quote me on where I excused them for making a bad decision, I am just stating the events and possible cause/effect that leads us to war today). your words: dont see how making shit up about IDL or siding with HAMAS suiciders is helpfull. The person (making the claim ONE of the vid is invalid) wich is i think total bullshit claim, is the same one making shit up on how bad IDF is because kids cant get acces to (literal quote)"toys","books", (seriously) during a warzone! your words: because i like facts instead of siding with sick islamist, your words: only a daft person would twist historical fact and call HAMAS was a (your quote) "peacefull" organisation when it was elected by the palastinian people. The UNITED NATIONS allows...Israel does not. If Israel did not ban them...the UN would not have to be involved in this issue and it's still extremely limited and difficult for them to have access to these things. I absolutely did not call them a peaceful organization. post a screen shot of where I am quoted saying that Hamas is a peaceful organization. You could have easily fact checked before posting videos instead of after. So 'drama' people like me don't have to point out and then you can repeatedly state you care about facts but check them only after mistakes are noticed. Usually fact check means checking them BEFORE passing the information along. But what do I know? >>You made a false claim the children were not combatants, they were used as such. rectification accepted. The argument (and the title of video you posted )was children as human shields. I don't recall even discussing children as 'combatants' either yes or no. Ok....so if the video shows them pulling the wire, then they need to title it as such and not the human-shield title. Silly immature drama,..i checked immediatly and posted a correction, thats not being dishonest , thats being factual. Normal people have difficulty differentiating between all the various kinds of islamic evil, so a singlular mistake is understandable. Why not check before you post it? Isn't that caring about facts so you don't mistakenly pass something that is non factual or misrepresented? I never said anyone lied, I just posted it was inaccurate and not Hamas until more facts could be given. I never said you were dishonest. I understand and even mentioned SEVERAL times that of COURSE it's almost impossible for people to know from these videos who, where, when and why we need to check before hand very carfully before we pass them along. That's not a personal attack, it's just how it is and if you read back, I mentioned that several times. I never said the blog was a lie or dishonest, just asked to provide more evidence. In any case, you can also look up Palestinian blogs. Afterall they are the ones that live with Hamas. Israelis do not have first hand access to Hamas in the society, yet seem to blog about them, which is fine....of course, they can write about what they know and I don't think it's intentionally lying but it would give a more accurate and full picture by also investating what Palestinians are saying about Hamas as well. that's all. Why only see what Israelis say about a two-sided issue and call everything factual? Even if the same answers result, at least all sides were looked at.
jacbot Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 ...Why not check before you post it? Isn't that caring about facts so you don't mistakenly pass something that is non factual or misrepresented?... No!!, depending on the source i am going to assume it is valid, untill otherwise proven incorrect, no malicieous intent here., fact remains,.., a bunch a kids/toddlers pulled a wire firing a morter granade,... and human shielding is just basic Modus O in that region when it comes to sick islmaic wacko jihadist. This has nothing to do with Isreal conflict, you see this in conflicts between muslims aswell. ==> http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1300&dat=19840323&id=3kFVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=g5UDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2276,1118583 ...quote me on where I excused them for making a bad decision,... , here is your quote, note the bold: ... I hear a lot of people say, 'they [=palistinians, note from me] allowed this, they voted for them [=Hamas, note from me], etc'. it's like saying the jews voted for hitler and alllowed him to carry out atrocities. it's absurd. Hamas was not as radicalized back then. Nuff Said! 2
regevdl Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 Oopsy...you forgot to copy/paste this: I am not excusing Arabs for making bad decisions anymore than I am excusing ISrael for participating in that bad decision anymore than I am excusing the US for their bad policies and decisions. I don't think 1800 civilians should die and more than 10,000 injured on a 'bad election decision'. That means universally that should be applied to AMericans for the illegal Iraq war, no? that was US war crime terrorism and illegal occupation that we voted for since we voted for Bush or he won by a majority. So I should agree that millions of American civilians should lose their lives to pay for their error? AGain, I am not saying you are doing anything maliciously... we are just discussing here, no? Bin LAden also wasnt' radicalized but the CIA hired him, encouraged radicalization. 9/11 occured. The US gvt mistake. Not mine. I sure as hell didn't support covertly radicalizing Islam or supporting Bin Laden. I nor any civilian should have to die for that. Americans voted for Bush, he illegally invaded Iraq, I didn't vote for Bush or support the war and no....no one should have to die for that bad decision. It doesn't excuse Bush's crimes or those idiots who voted for him. Just so I understand, 'depending on the source'---you don't fact check until it's proved otherwise? So how do you sort out the sources you DO use if you don't fact check what they write? Like, what makes you choose the blogger over another blogger if you do not fact check or test their credibility? Is this acceptable in society? Media? So media should post and air anything and everything and wait for people to come after to correct them and we will sit and wait and trust that they will go back and correct all the mistakes? Seems like a lot of double work. Shouldn't we all practice fact checking before we pass on information? My impression was that you believed the videos you posted were of hamas and continued your points on that belief. fine. you called my points B.S. but I only shared by observations on why I don't think it's Hamas but not ignoring that Hamas Is a terror organization up to no good.. you don't have to believe my points. Then you came back after I pointed out a few things (and after you called my claims B.S.) stating that you 'fact checked' and admitted the discrepancy and now the subject isn't about Israel but about jihadists in general. clever. Wouldn't it save a lot of time, confusion and energy to just fact check before and decide if you want to talk about jihad or a specific conflict? But you posted these two videos on a thread that is specifically discussing the Israeli /Palestinian conflict and now you are saying this discussion is really about conflicts between muslims and is not about Israel etc....when you are posting these things on a thread specifically discussing the Israeli conflict and posted two videos referencing Hamas. So by all means, move the goal posts as much as you would like.
Marius C. Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 No, depending on the source I am going to assume it is valid, until otherwise proven incorrect... [with some minor corrections] So you provided us with two videos that you call proof that Hamas uses children as human shields. One of those videos was already disproved as being Syrian rebels. Now, if you check the other video you posted, there is a comment that claims that the Arabic spoken in that clip is also a Syrian dialect. I am not an Arabic linguist, so I cannot verify this. So the validity of this comment remains uncertain. But the issue has been raised, which makes this clip only partially credible, until someone can confirm or disprove the dialect. But as we stand right now, you have provided a clip with a completely inaccurate title and description (read: false propaganda), and another clip whose authenticity is currently being debated. This significantly tips the state of this debate against your proof of Hamas using children as human shields. At this point, unless you were biased, you should either be seriously doubting the validity of these sources (and, personally, I would start questioning the validity of other sources as well, seeing I have just been blatantly lied to), or post more proof to support your argument that Hamas uses children as human shields (preferably ensuring that the clips do have sound and the Arabic spoken can be discerned, as this is clearly a good way to disprove false propaganda). But you have done neither of this, you have deviated from the topic, and you are now having a he-said-she-said argument with regevdl. If Hamas is regularly using children as human shields in Gaza, you should definitely be able to produce proof of this. If Israel with all its advanced military and surveillance capabilities cannot produce such video evidence to support their claims, then I'm going to dismiss this as false propaganda. As for the Hamas combatants, with regards to this issue: they are innocent until proven guilty. 2 1
jacbot Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 Oopsy...you forgot to copy/paste this: I am not excusing Arabs [sNIP] ....That means universally that should be applied to AMericans for the illegal Iraq war, no? that was US war crime terrorism and illegal occupation that we voted for since we voted for Bush or he won by a majority. So I should agree that millions of American civilians should lose their lives to pay for their error? I didnt forget to copy jack didly...,and yes Americans voters (at the time 75% were in favor of invasion) are fully culpabable for invading Iraq.., everyone with a freakin brain knew Saddam had jack diddly to do with 9-11. The "ich habe es nicht gewust" didnt work for the Germans and doenst work for the Americans aswell. Start taking some god-damn responsibility for your actions! You stated clearly that blaming the palastinians for voting for Hamas was the same as blaming German jews for voting for Hitler,.,..which shows total incompetant statement because Hitler never got more then 33% of the vote. (and dont try that "he got 95%" because that wasnt muliparty and Germany was a nazi-ruled-oneparty on the last election nov 1933). But i keep repeating myself, since you try to sell the same fake 25dollar bill over and over again. If Hamas is regularly using children as human shields in Gaza, you should definitely be able to produce proof of this. If Israel with all its advanced military and surveillance capabilities cannot produce such video evidence to support their claims, then I'm going to dismiss this as false propaganda. As for the Hamas combatants, with regards to this issue: they are innocent until proven guilty. Hey Marius,.., i guess united Nations is lying about he whole "human shield" thing too he? http://www.unrwa.org/newsroom/press-releases/unrwa-condemns-placement-rockets-second-time-one-its-schools UNRWA (united nations relief and work agency) Condemns Placement of Rockets, for a Second Time, in One of Its Schools Gaza Today, in the course of the regular inspection of its premises, UNRWA discovered rockets hidden in a vacant school in the Gaza Strip. As soon as the rockets were discovered, UNRWA staff were withdrawn from the premises, and so we are unable to confirm the precise number of rockets. The school is situated between two other UNRWA schools that currently each accommodate 1,500 internally displaced persons. UNRWA strongly and unequivocally condemns the group or groups responsible for this flagrant violation of the inviolability of its premises under international law. The Agency immediately informed the relevant parties and is pursuing all possible measures for the removal of the objects in order to preserve the safety and security of the school. UNRWA will launch a comprehensive investigation into the circumstances surrounding this incident. UNRWA has reinforced and continues to implement its robust procedures to maintain the neutrality of all its premises, including a strict no-weapons policy and regular inspections of its installations, to ensure they are only used for humanitarian purposes. Palestinian civilians in Gaza rely on UNRWA to provide humanitarian assistance and shelter. At all times, and especially during escalations of violence, the sanctity and integrity of UN installations must be respected. Background Information UNRWA is a United Nations agency established by the General Assembly in 1949 and is mandated to provide assistance and protection to a population of some 5 million registered Palestine refugees. Its mission is to help Palestine refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, West Bank and the Gaza Strip to achieve their full potential in human development, pending a just solution to their plight. UNRWA’s services encompass education, health care, relief and social services, camp infrastructure and improvement, and microfinance. Financial support to UNRWA has not kept pace with an increased demand for services caused by growing numbers of registered refugees, expanding need, and deepening poverty. As a result, the Agency's General Fund (GF), supporting UNRWA’s core activities and 97 per cent reliant on voluntary contributions, has begun each year with a large projected deficit.
JohnH. Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 UNRWA discovered rockets hidden in a vacant school in the Gaza Strip. As soon as the rockets were discovered, UNRWA staff were withdrawn from the premises A humanless human-shield?
Marius C. Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 I was about to post that, JohnH. I also wouldn't be surprised if this is the same UN school in Rafah that the Israel Defense Forces bombed on August 3rd. But this is only speculation.
jacbot Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 Bin LAden also wasnt' radicalized :laugh: Oh god,..., You dont live in Europe do you, if you do,.,are you one of Lord Chaimberlain descendants? Bin Ladin was raised in Saudi Arabia (SA abolished slavery in 1968, under western pressure) in a family of one husband and 40 wives ,.., you cant be raised in a culture that openly beheads gays publicly on friday's... advocates sex with 1 year olds,.., and other wahabist twisted crap and expect NOT to become a total twisted mentally fuckup. I have no idea if the CIA recruited him, you have evidence of this? A humanless human-shield? Proof that HAMAS has no problem using civilian space (schools, etc) as weapon storage facilities.
Marius C. Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 That's like using your shed to store weaponry while you're away on vacation and you claiming that I used you as a human shield. You do realize that this is ridiculous, right?
jacbot Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 That's like using your shed to store weaponry while you're away on vacation and you claiming that I used you as a human shield. You do realize that this is ridiculous, right? a UN school is not a shed owned by HAMAS,., and HAMAS is not on vacation either. What they do is blur on purpose the distinction between what is civilan space and what is not. Luckily there were no kids at the time in this school, and obviously the building was still planned to be used as it was discovered by UN personel who came on the premise.. and the IDL obviously didnt know about the weapons stash, schools are not the first place you look, so the tactical advantage for HAMAS is clear.
JohnH. Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 Proof that HAMAS has no problem using civilian space (schools, etc) as weapon storage facilities. Now you're moving the goal posts. You weren't asked to provide evidence of Hamas using civilian space to store weapons, you were asked to provide evidence for your claim that they use humans as shields. A vacant building is not a human. 1 2
Marius C. Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 You missed my analogy by a mile... You are an innocent civilian, who owns a house with a shed, and who is, at the time of this analogy, gone on vacation. I am Hamas, and I decide to use your shed to store weaponry, temporarily, knowing that you are on vacation, and thus not home or in your shed (unless people vacation in their sheds). How exactly did I use you as a human shield by storing these weapons in your shed while you were gone? Your clip has absolutely nothing to do with the UN finding rockets in the vacant school or with my analogy. Surely, since this is such a common occurrence in Gaza -- that it got almost 1900 civilians killed so far, out of which 430 were children, and many more thousands were injured -- there has to be better evidence of this than a vacant UN school used as a weapons cache, no? 1 1
JohnH. Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 As it just so happens, I managed to find this document published on Wikileaks stating: "Individual Palestinians also testified to IDF abuses such as looting, beatings, vandalism of property and the use of the local population as human shields. But by far the strongest reverbration in Israel was that created by the Israeli organization "Breaking the Silence", which collected testimony from 26 unnamed IDF soldiers. All of the soldiers had been involved in Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip, and testified to instances where Gazans were used as human shields, incendiary phosphorous shells were fired over civilian population areas, and other examples of excessive firepower that caused unnecessary fatalities and destruction of property." 1 1
regevdl Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 Now you're moving the goal posts. You weren't asked to provide evidence of Hamas using civilian space to store weapons, you were asked to provide evidence for your claim that they use humans as shields. A vacant building is not a human. I mentioned the same thing...moving the goal posts. I feel trolled. In any event, he clearly stated that he does not fact check before he posts anything. He deems everything (depending on the source) valid until proven otherwise correct. So. take that for what you will. Best of luck. :laugh: Oh god,..., You dont live in Europe do you, if you do,.,are you one of Lord Chaimberlain descendants? Bin Ladin was raised in Saudi Arabia (SA abolished slavery in 1968, under western pressure) in a family of one husband and 40 wives ,.., you cant be raised in a culture that openly beheads gays publicly on friday's... advocates sex with 1 year olds,.., and other wahabist twisted crap and expect NOT to become a total twisted mentally fuckup. I have no idea if the CIA recruited him, you have evidence of this? Proof that HAMAS has no problem using civilian space (schools, etc) as weapon storage facilities. CIA encouragaed the level of radicalism we see. Were there some twisted forms of islam back then. Absolutely, but the US gvt considered Bin Laden in the 80s a FREEDOM Fighter. So that was sloppy speech and mental leap on my part. That according to the US in the 80s, Bin Laden was NOT considered radical. I hope that clears things up on where I was taking my point. In the end, sir, i appreciate the back and forth but your increasing hostile language is really unpleasant. Cursing and making wild accusations. "take some g.d.' responsibilities for your actions... what does this even mean? I have never used a human shield, fired a weapon or killed anyone or voted for any killling or maiming, I speak out when everyone else is silent. You do not know me or my activism against my government etc. So good luck with everything. 1
Marius C. Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 ... the US government considered Bin Laden in the 80's a freedom fighter. ... according to the US in the 80's, Bin Laden was not considered radical. [with a few minor corrections] This is precisely why I do not sign up to the "terrorist" labeling of various organizations or armies. A terrorist organization nowadays is any organization or state that does not submit to or has the courage to stand up to the United States or its close allies' political agenda. As George W. Bush clearly stated: "either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists". There's no option of being in between, or not associated with any of the two groups. It is like the drug of choice. One day it is legal; the next day it's illegal; a decade later it might be legal again. There are videos of Blackwater (or whatever they are named nowadays) driving into and shooting at civilian vehicles in Iraq, without any reasonable motive, opening fire at civilians without being threatened, and investigations about the murdering numerous civilians. What makes Blackwater not a terrorist organization -- the US government sanctioning of it? 1
J-William Posted August 6, 2014 Posted August 6, 2014 a little perspective on the Israeli strategy of retaliation from a Reddit question. http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/298q8z/how_effective_was_the_german_strategy_of/ How effective was this strategy? Did it actually lead to a noticeable drop in partisan activity due to a reduced willingness to help from the population? Or did it cause a second effect of hate-filled citizens joining the ranks of the resistance? __________ There was no widespread, significant resistance in Denmark prior to 1943 ... After 1943 resistance sharply increased with sabotage actions on infrastructure and industrial targets that supplied the Wehrmacht, murders of informants and so on. This led to arbitrary German reprisals, such as massacres on random civilians, murders of celebrities and bombings, which led to an increased resistance amongst the general population and a ramping up of violence. Perhaps the most famous example of violent reprisals as an effective strategy was Lidice, a Bohemian town murdered as collective punishment for the killing of the acting Reichprotektor, Reinhard Heydrich. On June 10th 1942 the entire adult (15+) male population of Lidice was massacred and the women and children sent to concentration camps. After Lidice there was no significant resistance in Bohemia. The massacre also figured heavily in the Danish government's thoughts regarding resistance, though I do not know to what degree it influenced other countries. In conclusion, violent collective punishment for partisan attacks had largely counterproductive effects, increasing resistance to German occupation, with the curious exception of Lidice. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable about Czechoslovachia during the war can inform us as to why? So, perhaps if Israel systematically recreates Lidice for every urban center in Gaza... then someday they might stop the resistance? I'm just gonna go ahead and throw out a laundry list of similarities to german occupation, for the record: Germans no doubt felt they were defending themselves when commiting massacres claimed that they had historical right to the land they invaded claimed a mission from god claimed that the people they killed were lesser barbaric people did, or would have claimed that the resistance was using human shields and were terrorists.
jacbot Posted August 7, 2014 Posted August 7, 2014 Now you're moving the goal posts. You weren't asked to provide evidence of Hamas using civilian space to store weapons, you were asked to provide evidence for your claim that they use humans as shields. A vacant building is not a human. No goal post has been moved, one can easily make the argument HAMAS uses Gaza strip as a human shield as all fighting puprosly occurs in civilian areas for maximum casualty effect. =============================== CIA encouragaed the level of radicalism we see. Were there some twisted forms of islam back then. MO: Hamas not (so) radical?, Ben Ladin not (so) radical? Islam not so radical? and if islam became this way,.., it beez CIA fault. We see this narcissistic selfhate and blame with a lot of white liberals in my former country,.., actually its not selfhate at all, its just a silly attempt of morally taking the high ground and show off how "enlightened" someone is by sucking up to some brown-colored nazis , leftist satisfying some silly race-fettish,..,while in the meantime not realy caring about the victims of pedofilia, rape, forced marriages,.., slavery..... Who cares about the victims right? for lefties freedom is only for white uberaryans ...... so Lets excuse islam some more, so we can look good at cocktail parties. CIA has caused a lot of bad things,.., but implementing shit-ria law (pun intended) is not one of them. Revisiosm debunked: CIA funded the mujahidin,.., these composed of several groups.., after the victory against the Russian, Saudi Arabia (suprise suprise) funded Ben Ladins (as he was also from SA) faction while US funding against the more moderate groups dried up (no Sovjets to fight). In 1996, after a long civil war in Afghanstan, Al Quada, took control of the capital. ================= This is precisely why I do not sign up to the "terrorist" labeling of various organizations or armies. A terrorist organization nowadays is any organization or state that does not submit to or has the courage to stand up to the United States or its close allies' political agenda. Just because on nation state (ruled by idiots voted in by idiots) lies about what is "north" or has a silly compass,.. doenst mean the magnetic northpole doesnt actually exist. Translation: The fact that the US mislabels terrorist (well they are smart to mislabel only a few to make it believable) doesnt mean terrorist dont exist! And yes it will take some more work yourself finding out for yourslef what is what,....., just doing nothing and not willing to think or refusing to make a choice is also a strategy. Pick your poisen. ================================= As it just so happens, I managed to find this document published on Wikileaks stating: [sNIP] Oh wait,...,so this is factual? Funny how a mere internet posting about an accusation is now considered factual. Does the high standard of photgraphic proof ( looting etc) apply here aswell as with human shielding? In any case it seems the IDF will investigate it, and what if the soldiers are individually found guilty looting,.., doesnt that speak for the selfcleansing ability of the IDF? Can i file a complaint with HAMAS about the use of human shields? also in light of the fact that even HAMAS commanders support the use of Human shields in combat situations
Marius C. Posted August 7, 2014 Posted August 7, 2014 Just because on nation state (ruled by idiots, voted in by idiots) lies about what is "north" or has a silly compass, doesn't mean the magnetic north doesn't actually exist. ... And yes, it will take some more work finding out for yourself what is what. Doing nothing and not willing to think or refusing to make a choice is also a strategy. [with the usual corrections added] You're right. And since I am engaged in this conversation with you, and you are so certain that Hamas is a terrorist organization, and that it uses human shields, I assume that you have done your research and due diligence and are now able to provide me with the massive amount of proof that convinced you of your conclusion. Yet so far, all we have received from you were tainted, repackaged videos that had nothing to do with Hamas in Gaza, a story about a vacant school used to store rockets, an instructional video about what human shielding is (as if we were unfamiliar with the term and were arguing about something else), and now a picture of two kids being hanged on a fence -- by who could be their father -- doing it as a prank (by all means I agree that this is bad parenting), and very likely a Jew (based on his name) claiming that it is Hamas using children as human shields. And the irony was just a few lines below that... Oh wait. So this is factual? Funny how a mere Internet posting about an accusation is now considered factual. [corrected] What John posted was an official leaked cable from mid-2009. If a leaked, official, classified document does not convince you of its authenticity, then how can you believe what you are reading or seeing from your "sources", which we have already determined to be propagandist liars? Also, note that the cable was dated July 2009 -- that is more than 5 years ago. Have you ever heard anything about this in the mainstream media, both Western or Israeli? I doubt that such an investigation would take longer than 5 years. So no, it does not speak for the self-cleansing ability of the IDF; but it might speak for their PR ability... Look, if you want to believe in something, then by all means, go ahead. We are not here to stop you. But do not claim that it is empirical or true until you are able to prove it to anyone beyond the shadow of a doubt. If you want to believe that a green leprechaun follows you around, go ahead! But don't expect us to also see it or believe in something you chose to believe in without proof, while pushing away all the people that were telling you that there is no leprechaun.
jacbot Posted August 7, 2014 Posted August 7, 2014 What John posted was an official leaked cable from mid-2009. If a leaked, official, classified document does not convince you of its authenticity, then how can you believe what you are reading or seeing from your "sources", which we have already determined to be propagandist liars? , the complaint-documents are real but only list accusations to be investigated ., the documents do in itself not prove the accusations are factual, do they? -- It would be nice if the same level of standards of proof (photographic evidence of IDF soldiers stealing?) would be applied to your claims aswell, because we all know that if rampant robbery was going on with IDF combatants,..photos would be all over the internet.. (oh wait...)... I am not saying it didnt happen in this perticular case..,..., could very well be the case. but since you are so gung ho on proof, well, lets have it. The selfcleansing factor of IDF is that a process like this even exist to file these accusations,..., HAMAS i am sure has the same process on their side aswell (..oh wait.....). and very likely a Jew (based on his name) You just made the claim his etnicity/race is a deciding factor in his credibility. .......Seriously. you are so certain that Hamas is a terrorist organization. ok.., you convinced me, Hamas is NOT a terrorist organisation staffed with islamic wackjobs,.... I am wondering who is firing rockets blindly into Jewish cities.., maybe its the green lprechauns you speak of ======= I'm just gonna go ahead and throw out a laundry list of similarities to german occupation, My father lived under german occupation as an orphan (he was 13-18 yo from 1940-1945)) The occupation force was (comparetivly) benevilant towards indigineous Western Europeans, Nordics.. (compared to what nazis did in Ukraine, Russia, and Eastern Europe in general, aka slave camps, mass starvation etc) Slavic races were considered inferior and were targetted for eventual extermination, I can assure you right now if (in an alternative universe where Germans would have won and occupied ME) , Hamas tried the same shit with nazi-Germany as they are doing now with Israel, the region would have been totally depopulated. tantivly Comparing Israel with Germany 1940-1945 is total nonsense. 1
JohnH. Posted August 7, 2014 Posted August 7, 2014 What is your goal here? We've been pretty clear that random, unverified videos and tweets are not sufficient forms of evidence. Clearly, you have been convinced by something that Hamas has been using humans as shields. What specific piece of evidence was it that made you take that position? 1 1
jpahmad Posted August 7, 2014 Posted August 7, 2014 In all honesty, what is the point of this thread?
regevdl Posted August 7, 2014 Posted August 7, 2014 This is precisely why I do not sign up to the "terrorist" labeling of various organizations or armies.A terrorist organization nowadays is any organization or state that does not submit to or has the courage to stand up to the United States or its close allies' political agenda. As George W. Bush clearly stated: "either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists". There's no option of being in between, or not associated with any of the two groups. It is like the drug of choice. One day it is legal; the next day it's illegal; a decade later it might be legal again.There are videos of Blackwater (or whatever they are named nowadays) driving into and shooting at civilian vehicles in Iraq, without any reasonable motive, opening fire at civilians without being threatened, and investigations about the murdering numerous civilians. What makes Blackwater not a terrorist organization -- the US government sanctioning of it?I second that.
JamesP Posted August 7, 2014 Posted August 7, 2014 If you spank your kids, and you stop because you genuinely realize that you were wrong (not because they got big enough to fight back), it will be difficult. It may even be war, depending how brutal you were. Can you really not expect there to be a violent response when you remove your oppressive boot from their throats? Treat them as human beings. Israel is clearly the more powerful in this multi-generational war, especially with the backing of US foreign aid. If the Palestinians back down, what's to stop Israel from following through to completion on its genocide? No. Israel must back down. The US foreign aid must stop. Stop enabling abusers. Maybe then they'll have a chance at survival if the tables ever are turned against them. The very title of this topic is dishonest: "The morality of human shields and dealing with hostile borders." You cannot reasonably take the possibility of human shields in isolation. To do so is to treat the Palestinians as hanging off of a flagpole.
Marius C. Posted August 7, 2014 Posted August 7, 2014 The complaint documents are real, but only list accusations to be investigated. The documents do not prove the accusations are factual, do they? [due corrections applied] In order to reach a level as high as that -- to have foreign communications in between governments regarding it -- you most likely have to have some evidence other than word-of-mouth. Just because you are not privy to that information (but chances are you would be with a proper FOIA, or its Israeli equivalent, request), it does not mean that evidence does not exist to support the claims. As for the "self-cleansing factor" of the IDF, I have not seen a press release or even a tweet from the IDF about that investigation, whether or not it stood up to scrutiny. Just the simple fact that they are investigating such misconduct. Instead, all of their press releases and tweets are either dehumanizing Palestinians or patting themselves on the back for their operations. And all the while, the IDF's use of white phosphorous bombs in the 2009 attacks against Gaza, for which there is photographic evidence and which broke International and Humanitarian Law, does not get mentioned anywhere anymore. You just made the claim that his ethnicity/race is a deciding factor in his credibility. [minor corrections] I did. The main question is why wouldn't you take his claims with a grain of salt? Especially when the image you are seeing could be of anything, including a father punishing his sons (which, again, is something I do not condone). Statistically speaking, Israelis and Jews are more likely to be subjected to anti-Palestinian propaganda -- and spread it -- than every other ethnicity on the planet. In order to have an entire country accept the attacks that have been carried out against Palestinians, where almost 2000 civilians were killed and almost 500 of them being children, the target must be dehumanized by the media. So statistically speaking, they should be the ones whose claims should be scrutinized more. I did not say to not listen to any Israeli or Jew speaking of the matter because he is lying. I said that such strong claims with such vague evidence should be taken with a grain of salt. I am wondering who is firing rockets blindly into Jewish cities. I would worry more about who is shelling children playing soccer on a beach, in what the IDF called a targeted attack, more than the blind firing of rockets. At least when you aim at someone, you get to decide whether or not to pull the trigger. And you see who you are aiming at.
jpahmad Posted August 7, 2014 Posted August 7, 2014 If you spank your kids, and you stop because you genuinely realize that you were wrong (not because they got big enough to fight back), it will be difficult. It may even be war, depending how brutal you were. Can you really not expect there to be a violent response when you remove your oppressive boot from their throats? I think a better analogy would be: "If you spank one of your kids, and you stop because you genuinely realize that you were wrong, they may get angry and decide to attack your other kid who looked like they were telling daddy to do it in the first place."
JamesP Posted August 8, 2014 Posted August 8, 2014 I think a better analogy would be: "If you spank one of your kids, and you stop because you genuinely realize that you were wrong, they may get angry and decide to attack your other kid who looked like they were telling daddy to do it in the first place." Your amendment does not reflect the power disparity between the two. I also pointed this out immediately after the part you quoted. This is why I chose parent and child (which is certainly a greater power disparity by far). Siblings are far more equal in power, which doesn't map to Israel vs. the Palestinians.
jpahmad Posted August 8, 2014 Posted August 8, 2014 Your amendment does not reflect the power disparity between the two. I also pointed this out immediately after the part you quoted. This is why I chose parent and child (which is certainly a greater power disparity by far). Siblings are far more equal in power, which doesn't map to Israel vs. the Palestinians. There is still a power disparity in my amendment. Daddy (Israel with all of it's power) abuses a child (Palestinian people which includes literally Palestinian children) and in return the abused child (Palestinian people) lash out by killing another child (innocent Israeli civilians including Israeli children.) The catch here is that the original perpetrator, the Israeli government and soldiers, unfortunately never feel the retaliation. They get away while it's the civilians who take the backlash. I am making a separation between the Israel government and the Israeli people. Now, you might say that the Israeli people are culpable for what their government does. But, certainly the Israeli children are not.
Recommended Posts