Indeependent
Diamond Member
- Nov 19, 2013
- 73,633
- 28,515
- 2,250
Concerning the 2nd image, Are you blind or stupid or both?
How Israel Used Its Own Civilians as Human Shields While Assaulting Gaza
- Thread starter Billo_Really
- Start date
Concerning the 2nd image, Are you blind or stupid or both?
docmauser1
Gold Member
- Oct 8, 2010
- 7,274
- 698
- 190
Drivel.
WillReadmore
Gold Member
- Nov 25, 2013
- 1,330
- 110
- 130
OR, you could try to answer the question.
This question is central to progress in this dispute. It goes to why this war started, and it is a key issue in how it could be brought to an end.
Can you answer the question?
Another pallywood production if you look at the footage. No evidence of any shots being fired from the IDF, just superimposed sounds. At 1:12 in the footage shows a bird resting on a stump as a shot is heard, the bird does not move which is against their natural instincts. So were is the hard evidence of the IDF shooting at these farmers ?
Last edited by a moderator:
Indeependent
Diamond Member
- Nov 19, 2013
- 73,633
- 28,515
- 2,250
You are blind to the religious intolerance of Islam.
The Middle East conflict is NOT Israel/Jordanians.
The Middle East conflict is Muslims murdering each other over God knows what.
The conflict in Egypt has NOTHING to do with Israel.
The conflict in Lebanon has NOTHING to do with Israel.
The conflict in Syria has NOTHING to do with Israel.
The conflict in Iraq has NOTHING to do with Israel.
The conflict in Iran has NOTHING to do with Israel.
The ever brewing feeling of discontent in Saudi Arabia has NOTHING to do with Israel.
And if you are a Muslim, you MUST disagree with these facts.
RoccoR
Gold Member
Billo_Really, et al,
Point - Counterpoint, the discussion continues.
Well, I interpret it as thoughts on re-settlement relative to the action in the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, in taking or modifying the property rights pursuant to the exercise of its sovereignty.
As a matter of state policy, relative to the statement by General Moshe Dayan, it seems to me that he was speaking to the impact of the various military outcomes in contemporary times. It would absolutely absurd of me to deny that his description was anything but accurate. After all, the dominant population in the region was Arab for more than a thousand years.
I cannot even speak to what David Ben-Gurion must have been thinking. I honestly cannot justify his comment in that I don't really understand the man, his personal feelings, or the context in which the he was applying the comment. David Ben-Gurion died in 1973, and last held official office in 1963 (next week is his birthday). I'm not sure when that statement was made and which Arab Palestinians he may have been addressing. I'm not the right man to explain the context.
You have this partly wrong. First, the Geneva Convention says that it is a punishable to commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, or serious acts of espionage and sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offenses which have caused the death of one or more persons; it is not me. It is the Rule of Law. A resistance movement must accept the consequences of its actions.
There is little question that there are Devil's Advocates that can adequately make the case that an "armed struggle" is warranted on behalf of the Arab Palestinian people. But I am just as convinced that no such "armed struggle" justification would ever include the targeting of unarmed noncombatants, the use of suicide bombing, indiscriminate fire, piracy, hijackings, and massacres that we would constitute today as terrorism.
And just as important (in this discussion) is the fact that "armed struggle" (since you made the analogy) - even for the Jews in Poland, would have not been proper if the targets were other than clear military objectives.
The difference between the Jews in Poland and the Arab Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip is that the Jews in Poland were earmarked for certain death. Conversely, the Arab Palestinian (West Bank and Gaza Strip), is in no way earmarked for certain death. The Israelis have not established "Death Camps" or anything of the sort. The Israelis are not rounding-up Arab Palestinians and shipping them off for extermination.
The Israel has the absolute right to control its borders, just as any country does. Just as the Palestinian claim when they say: "Palestinian Ambassador to the United States Maen Rashid Areikat reiterated his call to create a Jew-free Palestinian state."
The Arab Palestinians present, at the moment and for the last 47 years (as you say), a clear and present danger to the Israel state and its people. Similarly, it would appear, the Egyptians have a common belief; and so would it seem Jordan (after its experience with the Fedayeen).
Well, technically, the State of Palestine has only been occupied by Israel since 1988 (a quarter century). But I get your meaning.
In regards to this, it is simply a matter of Article 68. If you conduct hostile activity against the "Occupation Force" then you are subject to the consequences.
There is very little to argue here. "Arab Palestinian terrorist activities have become legendary." It is what it is!
I agree, an "An occupational force does not have sovereignty." That doesn't mean that under international law the "Occupation Force" does not have the responsibility for law and order. If the Gaza Strip" IS, as you complain, under Israeli Occupation, then there is no change between the status of forces when the most recent incursion occurred. An "Occupation Force" must have "effective control." And, it is a requirement under the Geneva and Hague Conventions that:
Nor have I. But it needs to be clear, that if you support HAMAS, you support a terrorist organization; whether or not your support is active of passive. If you vote to elect HAMAS as a government, you have voted to install a government that supports terrorism.
If you provide any property, tangible or intangible, or service, including currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel , and transportation to HAMAS or its terrorist associates --- THEN you have provided material support to a terrorist organization.
Of course in this discussion group, we ALL advocate for a peaceful solution.
Most Respectfully,
R
Point - Counterpoint, the discussion continues.
(COMMENT)
Well, I interpret it as thoughts on re-settlement relative to the action in the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, in taking or modifying the property rights pursuant to the exercise of its sovereignty.
As a matter of state policy, relative to the statement by General Moshe Dayan, it seems to me that he was speaking to the impact of the various military outcomes in contemporary times. It would absolutely absurd of me to deny that his description was anything but accurate. After all, the dominant population in the region was Arab for more than a thousand years.
I cannot even speak to what David Ben-Gurion must have been thinking. I honestly cannot justify his comment in that I don't really understand the man, his personal feelings, or the context in which the he was applying the comment. David Ben-Gurion died in 1973, and last held official office in 1963 (next week is his birthday). I'm not sure when that statement was made and which Arab Palestinians he may have been addressing. I'm not the right man to explain the context.
(COMMENT)
You have this partly wrong. First, the Geneva Convention says that it is a punishable to commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, or serious acts of espionage and sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offenses which have caused the death of one or more persons; it is not me. It is the Rule of Law. A resistance movement must accept the consequences of its actions.
There is little question that there are Devil's Advocates that can adequately make the case that an "armed struggle" is warranted on behalf of the Arab Palestinian people. But I am just as convinced that no such "armed struggle" justification would ever include the targeting of unarmed noncombatants, the use of suicide bombing, indiscriminate fire, piracy, hijackings, and massacres that we would constitute today as terrorism.
And just as important (in this discussion) is the fact that "armed struggle" (since you made the analogy) - even for the Jews in Poland, would have not been proper if the targets were other than clear military objectives.
The difference between the Jews in Poland and the Arab Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip is that the Jews in Poland were earmarked for certain death. Conversely, the Arab Palestinian (West Bank and Gaza Strip), is in no way earmarked for certain death. The Israelis have not established "Death Camps" or anything of the sort. The Israelis are not rounding-up Arab Palestinians and shipping them off for extermination.
(COMMENT)
The Israel has the absolute right to control its borders, just as any country does. Just as the Palestinian claim when they say: "Palestinian Ambassador to the United States Maen Rashid Areikat reiterated his call to create a Jew-free Palestinian state."
The Arab Palestinians present, at the moment and for the last 47 years (as you say), a clear and present danger to the Israel state and its people. Similarly, it would appear, the Egyptians have a common belief; and so would it seem Jordan (after its experience with the Fedayeen).
- - why can't Gazan's travel abroad without first getting travel visas from Israel?
- As I explained previously, Gaza is held under a triumvirate: HAMAS, the Brigades and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. It is the equivalent of a State sponsor for terrorism. What country accepts a visa issued by a state sponsor for terrorism?
- - why can't they fish, without getting shot at?
- The prohibition is not on fishing, but the danger they would present if HAMAS and terrorist cohorts were to be granted open access to the sea.
- - why can't they farm, without getting shot at?
- This is a security proximity feature to prevent direct contact with the security barrier. It is not a prohibition on farming, but the potential for exploitation by Hostile Arab Palestinians.
- - why can't they move freely about in the West Bank, without going through some 500 checkpoints and roadblocks?
- Straight-up security awareness.
- - why can't they have free and fair elections, without getting punished by economic blockades and sieges?
- There again, it is not a matter of a prohibition on elections. It is the fact that the Arab Palestinian openly elected the equivalent of a state sponsor of terrorism. The people advocated a regime that openly sponsors terrorism, and pledged their support to a government that is backed by terrorists.
(COMMENT)
Well, technically, the State of Palestine has only been occupied by Israel since 1988 (a quarter century). But I get your meaning.
In regards to this, it is simply a matter of Article 68. If you conduct hostile activity against the "Occupation Force" then you are subject to the consequences.
(COMMENT)
There is very little to argue here. "Arab Palestinian terrorist activities have become legendary." It is what it is!
[*](COMMENT)
I agree, an "An occupational force does not have sovereignty." That doesn't mean that under international law the "Occupation Force" does not have the responsibility for law and order. If the Gaza Strip" IS, as you complain, under Israeli Occupation, then there is no change between the status of forces when the most recent incursion occurred. An "Occupation Force" must have "effective control." And, it is a requirement under the Geneva and Hague Conventions that:
EXCERPT: LEGISLATION UNDER ARTICLE 43 OF THE HAGUE REGULATIONS: BELLIGERENT OCCUPATION AND PEACEBUILDING said:
(COMMENT)
Nor have I. But it needs to be clear, that if you support HAMAS, you support a terrorist organization; whether or not your support is active of passive. If you vote to elect HAMAS as a government, you have voted to install a government that supports terrorism.
If you provide any property, tangible or intangible, or service, including currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel , and transportation to HAMAS or its terrorist associates --- THEN you have provided material support to a terrorist organization.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights said:
Of course in this discussion group, we ALL advocate for a peaceful solution.
Most Respectfully,
R
WillReadmore
Gold Member
- Nov 25, 2013
- 1,330
- 110
- 130
You are just deflecting. I asked a CENTRAL QUESTION regarding THIS war.
Can you answer the question?
Our objective should be to marginalize Hamas, with it finally going away.
What Israel did was to marginalize Abbas, punish the collective citizens of Gaza and West Bank, and commit an act of war on Gaza (the embargo).
WHY?
We were winning! Hamas gave up office to the unity government!
So, ANSWER THE QUESTION!
WillReadmore
Gold Member
- Nov 25, 2013
- 1,330
- 110
- 130
Do you seriously see that as justification for the collective punishment of the citizens of Gaza to the extent of blocking exports, denying travel, preventing fishing for food, devastating the economy, blocking imports of food, fuel, electricity, medicine, etc.???
Let's note that Israel has been unwilling to state anything Gaza could possibly do that would end this 8 years long assault. Recently, we even saw Hamas give up authority to the unity government, and even THAT action caused Israel to increase it's collective punishment in several ways.
We need Hamas reduced - no doubt about that. But, Israel's actions have been cleraly oriented to marginalizing Abbas and the unity government - making Hamas the central figure. Again - WHY?
RoccoR
Gold Member
WillReadmore, et al,
I'm not at all sure that these questions are central to the issue.
Most Respectfully,
R
I'm not at all sure that these questions are central to the issue.
(COMMENT)
- Our objective should be to marginalize Hamas, with it finally going away.
- HAMAS is a designated terrorist organization. Any day is a good day to detect, exploit and neutralize a terrorist organization or any element providing a terrorist organization material support. Pursuant to (A/RES/60/288) Measures to prevent and combat terrorism:
- To cooperate fully in the fight against terrorism, in accordance with our obligations under international law, in order to find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or provides safe havens;
- To ensure the apprehension and prosecution or extradition of perpetrators of terrorist acts, in accordance with the relevant provisions of national and international law, in particular human rights law, refugee law and international humanitarian law. We will endeavour to conclude and implement to that effect mutual judicial assistance and extradition agreements and to strengthen cooperation between law enforcement agencies;
- To cooperate fully in the fight against terrorism, in accordance with our obligations under international law, in order to find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or provides safe havens;
- HAMAS is a designated terrorist organization. Any day is a good day to detect, exploit and neutralize a terrorist organization or any element providing a terrorist organization material support. Pursuant to (A/RES/60/288) Measures to prevent and combat terrorism:
- What Israel did was to marginalize Abbas, punish the collective citizens of Gaza and West Bank, and commit an act of war on Gaza (the embargo).
- What Israel did, in connection to the Occupation (arguable) is NOT collective punishment. It was an attempt by Israel to fulfill Article 64 of the Geneva Convention:
- Without exhausting the concept Article 64 allows for suspension or repeal of existing laws and the enactment of new legislation in three exceptional situations:
(i) the need of the Occupying Power to remove any direct threat to its security and to maintain safe lines of communication,
(ii) the duty of the Occupying Power to discharge its duties under the Geneva Convention, and
(iii) the necessity to ensure the “orderly government” of the occupied territory.
- What Israel did, in connection to the Occupation (arguable) is NOT collective punishment. It was an attempt by Israel to fulfill Article 64 of the Geneva Convention:
- We were winning! Hamas gave up office to the unity government!
- Did HAMAS actually give-up control? The actual demonstration of this is not visible. As an example, the recent 72 Hour ceasefire required, not the "Unity Government" but the authority of HAMAS, and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. There was not real "Unity Government." Similarly, HAMAS is holding in abeyance, its approval for the Unity Government to proceed with ICC acceptance processes.
Most Respectfully,
R
RoccoR
Gold Member
WillReadmore, et al,
This is actually a very keystone question. It revolves around the concept of accepting the consequence for their actions; or do the Gazians actually have the competence to acknowledge the action and accept the consequences.
This is a matter of competence. I suggest that the Gazian would they (themselves) hold argue that they were collectively competent and accountable.
Most Respectfully,
R
This is actually a very keystone question. It revolves around the concept of accepting the consequence for their actions; or do the Gazians actually have the competence to acknowledge the action and accept the consequences.
(COMMENT)
- The Gazians acted as a unified people and together elected HAMAS, a known terrorist organization with terrorist associations in close support, as their government. They made the decision collectively; should their be any reason they should not accept the consequences collectively?
'VERSUS'
- The inverse is, that the Gazians acted as a unified people by lending material support directly into the hands of a terrorist organization, but they are not held accountable as they are a "collective" without any responsibility for their action; should there be any reason otherwise?
This is a matter of competence. I suggest that the Gazian would they (themselves) hold argue that they were collectively competent and accountable.
Most Respectfully,
R
WillReadmore
Gold Member
- Nov 25, 2013
- 1,330
- 110
- 130
You dodged answering the question.
First, you added the bad side of Hamas - fine. That was assumed in my question. But, I suppose you have to keep saying that.
Your last ("The actual demonstration of this is not visible") I find rude and disgusting.
Hamas acceded to the unity government and was immediately attacked with an act of war as a response.
Not only that, but Israel is preventing the unity government from acting inside Gaza. Abbas can't even travel there.
Turning that into a claim that they didn't do enough is ... what do YOU think I should call that kind of response?
How about just answering my question?
Why did Netanyahu attack the people of Gaza and the people of West Bank when Hamas acceded to the unity government?
RoccoR
Gold Member
et al,
Is this accurate?
(SIDEBAR)
"Throughout the day the following humanitarian aid was transferred from Israel into Gaza through the Sufa, Kerem Shalom and Erez Crossings with the coordination of the Gaza District Coordination and Liaison Office: 676 tons of sugar, 637 tons of straw, 375 tons of animal feed, 191 tons of fruits, 159 tons of salt, 116,000 liters of cooking oil, 79 tons of bananas, 71,000 liters of milk, 36 tons of rice, 36 tons of tea, 33 tons of meat, 21,000 liters of hypochlorite (a water purifier), 20 tons of coffee, 20 tons of cocoa, 14 tons of milk powder, 5 tons of medical equipment for babies and 10 tons of diapers, 4 tons of reproductive eggs and 5kg of medical equipment and 8433 vaccines."
Most Respectfully,
R
Is this accurate?
(SIDEBAR)
"Throughout the day the following humanitarian aid was transferred from Israel into Gaza through the Sufa, Kerem Shalom and Erez Crossings with the coordination of the Gaza District Coordination and Liaison Office: 676 tons of sugar, 637 tons of straw, 375 tons of animal feed, 191 tons of fruits, 159 tons of salt, 116,000 liters of cooking oil, 79 tons of bananas, 71,000 liters of milk, 36 tons of rice, 36 tons of tea, 33 tons of meat, 21,000 liters of hypochlorite (a water purifier), 20 tons of coffee, 20 tons of cocoa, 14 tons of milk powder, 5 tons of medical equipment for babies and 10 tons of diapers, 4 tons of reproductive eggs and 5kg of medical equipment and 8433 vaccines."
Most Respectfully,
R
Hossfly
ZIONIST
Hamas is gone? Good riddance. Ahhhh, the sweet joys of life!
RoccoR
Gold Member
WillReadmore, et al,
(APOLOGY)
I sincerely apologize if I said anything that offended you. My intent was to address the facts as I see them.
Which direct question did I miss?
It was merely a statement of fact. There is a difference between a statement of acceptance and the actually demonstration of acceptance.
The recent military action was not based on the issue of the "Unity Government." It was based on the response to rocket and mortar fire, and the security of the nation.
Yeah, that is a security precaution. Is the point that President Abbas cannot effectively control Gaza from the West Bank?
I'm not sure I even understand this. Either it is a Unity Government with effective control, or it is not.
I'm not sure I associate any attack with the West Bank.
The Gaza Strip is being subjected to military action relative to actual security threats posed by HAMAS and its associate elements. It has virtually nothing to do with the formation of a "Unity Government" (1 June). In response to escalated rocket fire from Gaza, the IDF increased air strikes over the strip, killing at least nine Hamas members. Then on 8 July Israel announced that it has launched “Operation Protective Edge” an offensive operation, with the stated aim of neutralizing HAMAS rocket attacks from the Gaza.
Most Respectfully,
R
(APOLOGY)
I sincerely apologize if I said anything that offended you. My intent was to address the facts as I see them.
(COMMENT)
Which direct question did I miss?
(COMMENT)
It was merely a statement of fact. There is a difference between a statement of acceptance and the actually demonstration of acceptance.
(COMMENT)
The recent military action was not based on the issue of the "Unity Government." It was based on the response to rocket and mortar fire, and the security of the nation.
(COMMENT)
Yeah, that is a security precaution. Is the point that President Abbas cannot effectively control Gaza from the West Bank?
(COMMENT)
I'm not sure I even understand this. Either it is a Unity Government with effective control, or it is not.
(COMMENT)
I'm not sure I associate any attack with the West Bank.
The Gaza Strip is being subjected to military action relative to actual security threats posed by HAMAS and its associate elements. It has virtually nothing to do with the formation of a "Unity Government" (1 June). In response to escalated rocket fire from Gaza, the IDF increased air strikes over the strip, killing at least nine Hamas members. Then on 8 July Israel announced that it has launched “Operation Protective Edge” an offensive operation, with the stated aim of neutralizing HAMAS rocket attacks from the Gaza.
Most Respectfully,
R
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
- Thread starter
- #135
Just answer the ******* question! Christ!
BTW, Israel allows into Gaza, only 2600 calories per person, per day.
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
- Thread starter
- #136
Hossfly
ZIONIST
And the Gazans are getting hog fat on that diet.
Hossfly
ZIONIST
You admire a dumbass, Billo?
WillReadmore
Gold Member
- Nov 25, 2013
- 1,330
- 110
- 130
That is absolutely NOT an answer to the question.
I want to know why Israel considered it a justified response to the unified government that they perpetrated an act of war on the people of Gaza - the embargo, the confiscation of payroll of tens of thousands of citizens, the denial of fishing rights, the bulldozing of thousands of West Bank homes, etc.
Aid??? Do NOT pretend that is an answer.
Vigilante
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #140
$100 million spent on a tunnel system from Gaza to Israel..... why do that unless, they intended to infiltrate Israel, in the still of the night like the little rats they are, to kill and take Israeli hostages. Stop the payrolls so that Hamas can't TAKE a decent chunk of the peoples pay for terrorist activities. They have a 3 mile limit, anything more and it makes SMUGGLING of weapons, and war supplies much easier to enter Gaza, and since we all know these rockets are launched from private homes, mosques, schools, and hospitals, a much deeper BUFFER ZONE is needed to make the IRON DOME more effective, as there will be MORE TIME for DEFENSIVE rockets to be launched with BETTER data to intercept the SCUMBAG, ******* , DOG KILLERS MISSILES, of the ******* Palestinians from killing even one INNOCENT ISRAELI CITIZEN!
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
