5 farmers injured by Israeli fire in Gaza

[sealadaigh]

i know how you got the term. it is a stupid term. they are the IDF and they are known as the IDF by the world.

And in the West Bank, they are legally defined as the "occupational power", according to international law, the UN and rulings by the Israeli Supreme Court.

i object\t to the term being used because it serves no purpose. u have no problem talkihng about the occupation.

Omitting that term after 45 years, is inferring there is no occupation at all. And that is not only a severe injustice towards the Palestinian's, it's not factually correct or legally defined.

Why wouldn't it be appropriate? If you want to know what's going on in a certain area, there is no better source than the people who live and work in that area. Incidently, I read your links and they're not two sources, nor are they Haaretz or the NYT. It's the same article at both sites and the source is Reuters. Which is an international, non-biased, non-aligned media outlet, that I use as well.

If the Palestinian Information Center is not a good source, then why does your source say the same thing? Both articles said 5 people were shot. So where's the weakness? I'll tell you where it is, it's on the Reuters page and it's what they didn't say.

Do you see what is being omitted in this discussion? Why was no one questioning what right Israel has controlling any area that isn't Israel's? They have no legal authority whatsoever to deem anything off limits on the Palestinian side of the fence. The Pals have every legal right in the world, to walk up to that fence and paint it with graffiti, if they so deem. What do you think West Germany's response would be to East Germany trying to do what the Israeli's are doing now along the Berlin Wall? And the West German side of that wall, is covered in graffiti.

I know Reuters is neutral, but still they left out a very important point in this whole issue, which does play a role in preventing any progress from being made.

No one is trying to take your rights away and I would hope you'd comment on things you object to. I'm just saying for me, I object to "what" is being said, not "who" is saying it.

i thinki there is plenty of evidence without using sites such as that and i think the use of such sites gives the impression, albeit a mistaken impression, that you are making arguments ffrom a weak position.

If that is what you believe, I'm fine with it. I don't argue against what anyone believes. People are free to believe whatever they want to believe. But I do draw the line when they try to push those beliefs as "facts", without any evidence to back it up. And if you cannot prove it is a "weak" position using those sites, it is not a fact. And in this particular case, since both sites said the same thing, that is prima facia evidence the site is not weak (on this issue). Maybe on other issues, they are, but not this time.

but go ahead. you ave just lost me. enjoy yourselves.

That's unfortunate. I thought we were having a pretty decent conversation on a very volatile subject that is a "hot button" for a lot of people. Being able to discuss difficult, complex issues without getting all emotional, is a good thing. As we just showed.

try to pay attention. i am saying that the name for the IDF is the "IDF". maybe you would show me any UN paper that calls them the "IOF" or iternational court or any foreign government that refers to them as the "IOF".

as for "If you want to know what's going on in a certain area, there is no better source than the people who live and work in that area.", israelis live and work in the area, and that nincludes the IDF. are you even suggesting to me that they are a creditible source. they say the shootings were alright. i think the IDF is biased.

the fact of the matter is that the least reliable sources are those from people directly involved.

i have no idea what discussion you think you were having, but the only discussion i was having was about creditable sources.

go reread what i said. where did i ever say that the palestinians did not have a right to go up to the fence. don't try to put words in my mouth.

 

[sealadaigh]

another headline from "The Palestinian Information Center".

"Zio-Nazi group attacks academics critical of Israel "

Zio-Nazi group attacks academics critical of Israel

talk to me?

personally, if i have a mainstream israeli paper talking about a breach in the cease fire by the IDF. i am going to use that rather than tri to make my points using a propaganda sheet that uses terms like the "IOF" and "Zio-nazi".

I think you are being picayune. How many MSM articles have you seen where Hamas was mentioned without throwing in the terrorist name calling thing?

And besides the author of your link, Khalid Amayreh, is op ed not news. In this article he was reiterating what he had heard from other sources.

Many intellectuals around the world have compared the Israeli approach toward the Palestinians with the Nazi policies in Europe.

Last month, the famous German poet Guenter Grass described Israel as the most dangerous state in the world.

Even liberal Jewish intellectuals made Zionist-Nazi analogies on several occasions. However, such criticisms have utterly failed to redirect Israel toward peace and civility as the Israeli Jewish society continues to drift toward Jewish fascism and jingoism.

I find that the Palestinian Information Center is better than the MSM in accuracy and name calling. Of course it is way better than Israel's many propaganda organizations.

the IDF shot the farmers. the IOF did not shoot the farmers because there is no such thing as the IOF.

if i were a zionist, i am going to have an easier time arguing against a palestinian propaganda paper that refers to the IDF as the "IOF" than i am arguing against a mainstream israeli paper that reports it as news. as a pro=palestinian, why would i supply them with that kind of ammunition.

 

[P F Tinmore]

another headline from "The Palestinian Information Center".

"Zio-Nazi group attacks academics critical of Israel "

Zio-Nazi group attacks academics critical of Israel

talk to me?

personally, if i have a mainstream israeli paper talking about a breach in the cease fire by the IDF. i am going to use that rather than tri to make my points using a propaganda sheet that uses terms like the "IOF" and "Zio-nazi".

I think you are being picayune. How many MSM articles have you seen where Hamas was mentioned without throwing in the terrorist name calling thing?

And besides the author of your link, Khalid Amayreh, is op ed not news. In this article he was reiterating what he had heard from other sources.

Many intellectuals around the world have compared the Israeli approach toward the Palestinians with the Nazi policies in Europe.

Last month, the famous German poet Guenter Grass described Israel as the most dangerous state in the world.

Even liberal Jewish intellectuals made Zionist-Nazi analogies on several occasions. However, such criticisms have utterly failed to redirect Israel toward peace and civility as the Israeli Jewish society continues to drift toward Jewish fascism and jingoism.

I find that the Palestinian Information Center is better than the MSM in accuracy and name calling. Of course it is way better than Israel's many propaganda organizations.

the IDF shot the farmers. the IOF did not shoot the farmers because there is no such thing as the IOF.

if i were a zionist, i am going to have an easier time arguing against a palestinian propaganda paper that refers to the IDF as the "IOF" than i am arguing against a mainstream israeli paper that reports it as news. as a pro=palestinian, why would i supply them with that kind of ammunition.

You are only the second person in three years (maybe the third) to bring up IOF and he only mentioned it once. It has not really been an issue. I am not going to give up an otherwise reliable source over a non issue.

The biggest complaint is that it is not "mainstream." However, the MSM has been complicit in misleading the public on this conflict. Perhaps that is why Israel supporters prefer the MSM.

 

[sealadaigh]

I think you are being picayune. How many MSM articles have you seen where Hamas was mentioned without throwing in the terrorist name calling thing?

And besides the author of your link, Khalid Amayreh, is op ed not news. In this article he was reiterating what he had heard from other sources.



I find that the Palestinian Information Center is better than the MSM in accuracy and name calling. Of course it is way better than Israel's many propaganda organizations.

the IDF shot the farmers. the IOF did not shoot the farmers because there is no such thing as the IOF.

if i were a zionist, i am going to have an easier time arguing against a palestinian propaganda paper that refers to the IDF as the "IOF" than i am arguing against a mainstream israeli paper that reports it as news. as a pro=palestinian, why would i supply them with that kind of ammunition.

You are only the second person in three years (maybe the third) to bring up IOF and he only mentioned it once. It has not really been an issue. I am not going to give up an otherwise reliable source over a non issue.

The biggest complaint is that it is not "mainstream." However, the MSM has been complicit in misleading the public on this conflict. Perhaps that is why Israel supporters prefer the MSM.

i mention it to indicate the bias of the paper. they also say zio-nazis.

the mainstream media confines its editorialising generally to the editorial pagees. they are also more guilty of omission rather than commission.

if you (pl) want to open the door to "son of hamas" as some sort of authoritative source, well, it does seem that the same arguments that you are making in favour of the PIC apply. i do not want to open that door.

there is absolutely no need for us to go that route. about the only purpose using IOF achieves is preaching to the choir.

 

[Jos]

If a foreign Army is occupying a territory, they are not defending it, therefor the IDF is in this case the IOF

 

[Billo_Really]

try to pay attention. i am saying that the name for the IDF is the "IDF".

No one is arguing that, so why do you keep repeating it? What I'm saying, is referring to them as an "occupational force", is not the same thing as calling the Pals terrorists. One is consistant with the legal definition of their presence in the OPT per international law, the other is conditional, depending on who you're talking about.

maybe you would show me any UN paper that calls them the "IOF" or iternational court or any foreign government that refers to them as the "IOF".

The exact wording they use is "occupational power". Here's the legal definition of what constitutes an "occupation".

Under IHL, there is occupation when a State exercises an unconsented-to effective control over a territory on which it has no sovereign title. Article 42 of The Hague Regulations of 1907 defines occupation as follows: “Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.”

Under occupation law, the occupying power does not acquire sovereignty over the occupied territory and is required to respect the existing laws and institutions of the occupied territory as far as possible. It is presumed that occupation will be temporary and that the occupying power shall preserve the status quo ante in the occupied territory.

So if one wants to be really PC about this, the term is "occupational power". As far as I'm concerned, "power" and "force" are interchangable.

as for "If you want to know what's going on in a certain area, there is no better source than the people who live and work in that area.", israelis live and work in the area, and that nincludes the IDF. are you even suggesting to me that they are a creditible source. they say the shootings were alright. i think the IDF is biased.

It depends on the context of what is being said. There is no reason to automatically dismiss what a Gazan resident, or Gazan media outlet say's about who's being shot at on the land they inhabit. If you want to know what going on in Israel, ask an Israeli. But how would they know, who got shot on the other side of the border? I really don't see what the big issue is here? The Palestinain media says 5 people were shot, Reuters said 5 people were shot, Gazan doctors said they're treating 5 people for gunshot wounds and no IDF spokesperson has made any statements to the contrary. So both sources are credible!

the fact of the matter is that the least reliable sources are those from people directly involved.

That is certainly true if they have something to hide, but when you don't, why would they say something that's not true? And it's not a "matter of fact", it's a generalization that is only true depending certain conditions.

i have no idea what discussion you think you were having, but the only discussion i was having was about creditable sources.

And in that discussion, I'm saying you haven't proven the Palestinian source is not credible. Just because you don't care for certain terms they use, doesn't mean it's a propaganda website. Their use of the term "zio-nazi", is completely understandable when you consider there's a lot of similarities between how they are being treated by the Israeli's and how the nazis treated the jews.

• the constant demonization of their entire population
• treating them like they're sub-human
• treating them like they have no rights at all
• trying to purge their existance from the area
• arresting and detaining 1000's of them in Israeli prisons without charges
• denying them due process of law
• taking their land, property and lives

The target groups are different, but the hatred is the same. If some they don't like the reference to the nazis, then stop acting like them. The comparison is valid. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck....

go reread what i said. where did i ever say that the palestinians did not have a right to go up to the fence. don't try to put words in my mouth.

I didn't say you did and that wasn't the point I was making. My point was, that's the elephant in the room. This passive acceptance to Israeli actions that are obviously illegal, but no one seems to want to talk about it. Even now, you're not commenting on it. You went off on some tangent about it being an incorrect reference to something you said.

This Israeli position is obviously wrong, legally incorrect and morally ridiculous. Yet that fact doesn't seem to raise any red flags with people. By not saying anything, it's giving the impression that it's perfectly okay for someone to control property that isn't theirs. Would you think it was okay for your neighbor to control part of your property against your will? Or would you tell'em the same thing any one of us would say, in that situation? Just think how you would react to your neighbor trying to do that, then ask yourself why people are not reacting the same way to Israel deeming the area on the Pals side of the fence, a "no-go zone". When you consider the fact that they are using deadly force to maintain this position of theirs, the lack of outrage, passively supports Israeli propaganda and just exacerbates the problem even more.

All that is being asked of Israel, is to obey the law. The same laws that apply to everyone else. But they refuse to do it. They just go after everyone that criticizes them. And that's why they are considered a pariah state. They have no one to blame but themselves. End the occupation, you end the violence. Period.

 

[Billo_Really]

If a foreign Army is occupying a territory, they are not defending it, therefor the IDF is in this case the IOF

That's why an occupational force cannot claim self-defense.

There is only one solution to the problem of an occupation and that is to end it. That is not Israel's land, nor will it ever be Israeli's land. And no country on this planet, has recognized Israel's right to that land for over 45 years. Because if they did, it would be the same thing as saying it was okay for Hitler to annex Poland. And no one is going to do that.

 

[jwoodie]

Every crime has an element of motive. What is the Israeli motive for shooting peaceful farmers?

 

[sealadaigh]

Moderate wounds? From Israeli soldiers? Really? They are better shots than that! If they were shot by Israeli soldiers, they would be dead.

indeed, they are better than that, especially given that these palestinian men were much larger targets than the small children the IDF usually have in their crosshairs. and they nwere unarmed as well.

i mean, it ia not like when they invaded lebanon, were met with some minor resistance on the "israeli march to beirut", and couldn't even cross the litani river in southern lebanon. the IDF had to beg the UN for a cease fire. i guess it is understandable though. even the merkavas battle tanks were no match for the withering fire brought by kids with sling shots and farmers with rusty carbines.

 

[sealadaigh]

If a foreign Army is occupying a territory, they are not defending it, therefor the IDF is in this case the IOF

well, that is debatable obviously.

my point though is "what are you and the others trying to accomplish with these terms, particularly with their overuse or their initial use in a cconversation.

i think when a casual and impartial observer unfamiliar with the situaation in the mideast is more than likely be turned off by such a simpliffied use of the term and it opens up a door of attack from the people who are zionists.

i am just saying, let them use the emotionally evocative words like "islamofascist nazis", and "jew hater" because most casual observers are turned off by the display of that type of histrionics and see right through it. do you think their displays of antagonism and bias convince people of the rightiousness of their cause. it is all they have.

gowever, if you think the use of those words win people over, then by all means. i think it makes us look like them...desperate.

 

[sealadaigh]

Every crime has an element of motive. What is the Israeli motive for shooting peaceful farmers?

to keep them in their place and perhaps a bit of frustration on the part of the IDF with the fact that the palestinians have resisted being subjugated by a far superior military force for decades and being unwilling to give up their freedom.

i am not sure if every "crime" has a motive.