Israel does not target civilians?

Status
Not open for further replies.
montelatici, et al,

Sya and think what you will.

Jews that do the right thing are often forced to recant after speaking the truth. Ariel Toaff, another noted Jewish professor was forced to recant a complete historical work. It is somewhat like the Inquisition for Jews that dare speak the truth.

Spouting additional propaganda just further cheapens your contributions, if that is possible. You are just trying (and failing) to defend the indefensible.
(COMMENT)

It is not proaganda when the founder of the HRW says something different.

Both are perspectives. People get to choose.

Most Respectfully,
R

No, one is a neutral, despite being a member of the Jewish religion and stated the truth, while the other was also a Jew who was put under tremendous pressure to recant what he knows was the truth. Sort of like Galileo. He recanted, but the laws of physics did not change.
 
montelatici, et al,

Don't mistake this for international law; it is not. Don't mistake this for being related to the Geneva Convention, it is not. I'm not even sure it is a real UN Document.

It is not listed under the UN Index for Declarations and Conventions Contained in GA Resolutions.
It is not listed under the UN Index for UN Actions to Counter Terrorism. (Declarations)
It is not listed under the UN Index for UN Actions to Counter Terrorism. (Resolutions)
It is not mentioned under the Security Council Actions to Counter Terrorism. (Security Council Actions)
It is not mentioned under the UN Index for UN Actions to Counter Terrorism. (International Legal Instruments)

When I run a general search for "Geneva Declaration on Terrorism" I get:

Declarations - United Nations Action to Counter Terrorism
2003 Declaration on the issue of combating terrorism (2003) S/RES/1377 (2001) 12 January 2001 (...) Declaration on the issue of combating terrorism(2001) A/RES/51/210 (1997) 16 January 1997 Declaration to (...) Supplement the 1994 Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International TerrorismA/RES/49/60 (1995) 17
Language: ENG
Score: 7.18 - Declarations - United Nations Action to Counter Terrorism
THE GENEVA DECLARATION ON TERRORISM
UN General Assembly Doc. A/42/307, 29 May 1987, Annex
Geneva, 21 March 1987​


"II. NATIONAL LIBERATION MOVEMENTS

As repeatedly recognized by the United Nations General Assembly, peoples who are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination have the right to use force to accomplish their objectives within the framework of international humanitarian law. Such lawful uses of force must not be confused with acts of international terrorism. Thus, it would be legally impermissible to treat members of national liberation movements in the Caribbean Basin, Central America, Namibia, Northern Ireland, the Pacific Islands, Palestine, and South Africa, among others, as if they were common criminals. Rather, national liberation fighters should be treated as combatants subject to the laws and customs of warfare and to the international laws of humanitarian armed conflict as evidenced, for example, by the 1907 Hague Regulations, the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949, and their Additional Protocol I of 1977. Hence, national liberation fighters would be held to the same standards of belligerent conduct that are applicable to soldiers fighting in an international armed conflict. Thus, when a liberation fighter is captured by a belligerent state, he should not be tried as a criminal, but would be treated as a prisoner of war. He could be interned for the duration of the conflict, or released upon condition of a pledge to refrain from further participation in hostilities, or traded in a prisoner of war exchange. In the event such a national liberation fighter is found in a neutral state, he should not be subjected to extradition to the belligerent state."

THE GENEVA DECLARATION ON TERRORISM
(COMMENT)

If, you apply the Hague Regulation, the Fourth Geneva Convention and the Additional Protocols to this ---- then nothing I've said is affected by anything in the "questionable document" in any way, shape or form. In fact, it would suggest that the Palestinian is even more in violation.

A liberation fighter must meet all the criteria that a normal conventional soldier must meet. And, they are still subject to Article 68 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. But I don't believe this Declaration on Terrorism ever went into force.

In any event, this does not change the condition or present a prima facie case that Israel has a policy to target civilians.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
Last edited:
You are hilarious.

The UN reports are about the empty schools (closed for the summer) used to store arms. The usual propaganda by the Zionist owned American press. There were no kids to be used as human shields. The rest is Zionist propaganda.

Give it up.
I didn't know the Daily Mail newspaper in the United Kingdom was "Zionist propaganda"? :cuckoo:

Which part of this article is Zionist propaganda?

dailymail.co.uk
Hamas DID use schools and hospitals in Gaza Strip as 'human shields'
By Matthew Blake for MailOnline and Associated Press


Hamas appeared to admit using human shields to fire rockets into Israel for the first time today, but refused to accept responsibility for the slaughter of hundreds of innocent Palestinians killed in retaliatory airstrikes.

In a veiled confession that comes two weeks after the end of the Gaza war, a senior Hamas official said the group's fighters had no choice but to use residential areas from which to launch missiles into their neighbour's territory.

But while Ghazi Hamad claimed they took safeguards to keep people away from the violence, he admitted 'mistakes were made', blaming Israel's heavy-handed response for the deaths of civilians.

Evidence: This photo, shows the Gaza City neighborhood of Sheikh Radwan where it says Hamas used four rocket launch sites sitting next to a cluster of schools and nearby residences.

Increasingly, the discussion is not about whether the Hamas rockets were fired from civilian areas, but exactly how close they were to the actual buildings.

'The Israelis kept saying rockets were fired from schools or hospitals when in fact they were fired 200 or 300 meters (yards) away. Still, there were some mistakes made and they were quickly dealt with,' Hamad told The Associated Press, offering the first acknowledgment by a Hamas official that, in some cases, militants fired rockets from or near residential areas or civilian facilities.

The questions lie at the heart of a brewing international legal confrontation: Did Hamas deliberately and systematically fire rockets at Israel from homes, hospitals and schools in the hope that Israel would be deterred from retaliating, as Israel claims?

Ahead of a U.N. investigation, the Israeli military has released reams of evidence, including satellite photos and aerial footage, to support its claims that it acted responsibly and attempted to minimize Palestinian casualties. It asserts that Hamas made no effort to disguise its attempt to maximize Israeli civilian casualties.

Throughout the war, the Israeli air force compiled dozens of video clips showing alleged wrongdoing by Hamas, an Islamic militant group sworn to Israel's destruction.

These videos, many of them posted on YouTube, appear to show rockets flying out of residential neighborhoods, cemeteries, schoolyards and mosque courtyards. There are also images of weapons caches purportedly uncovered inside mosques, and tunnels allegedly used by militants to scurry between homes, mosques and buildings.

'Hamas' excuses are outrageous, misleading and contrary to the evidence supplied by the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) and the reality documented by international journalists on the ground in Gaza,' said Lt. Col. Peter Lerner, an Israeli military spokesman.

Confession: In a veiled confession that comes two weeks after the end of the Gaza war, a senior Hamas official today said the group's fighters had no choice but to use residential areas from which to launch missiles into their neighbour's territory

But a black-and-white satellite image released by the Israeli military illustrates the difficulties in proving the point. The army says the image, taken of the Gaza City neighborhood of Sheikh Radwan, shows four rocket launch sites sitting next to a cluster of schools and a nearby residential neighborhood.

Such images, it says, are evidence that Hamas used built-up areas for cover - and carelessly exposed civilians to danger in Israeli retaliatory strikes. However, the image itself is grainy and shows no clear signs of rocket activity, though rocket launchers are often hidden underground. The army refused to say how it had made its conclusions.

A visit to the area this week found three separate military sites - possibly training grounds - slightly larger than football fields located close to the state schools.

The sites are mostly concealed from street view by barriers made of corrugated iron, but one bore the sign of Hamas' military wing, al-Qassam Brigades, while another bore the sign of the Islamic Jihad, a militant group allied with Hamas. The bases were deserted. Visible from the outside were human cutout figures and what appeared to be exercise hurdles.

There were no overt signs of rocket launchers or craters in the ground outside, though dirt appeared to have been disturbed either by some sort of blast or the work of heavy military-type trucks. There were pieces of mangled concrete scattered on the ground. The school buildings appeared untouched.

Hamas tightly restricts access to such facilities, and it was impossible for photographers to enter the sites. Israel confirmed the area was targeted in airstrikes.

Another location that identified as a rocket-launching site is in northern Gaza around the newly built Indonesian hospital. Immediately to the north of the two-story hospital and across the road to the west are two Hamas military facilities. Both stand in close proximity to residential homes. The hospital stands intact, while nothing is visible from inside the bases.

During 50 days of fighting, many observers witnessed rocket launches from what appeared to be urban areas. One piece of video footage distributed by the AP, for instance, captured a launch in downtown Gaza City that took place in a lot next to a mosque and an office of the Hamas prime minister. Both buildings were badly damaged in subsequent Israeli airstrikes.

There was other evidence of Hamas having used civilian facilities: Early in the conflict, the U.N. agency that cares for Palestinian refugees announced that it discovered weapons stored in its schools as they stood empty during the summer.

'I don't think there's any doubt urban areas were used to launch rockets from in the Gaza Strip,' said Bill Van Esveld, a senior researcher at Human Rights Watch.

'Yes, Hamas and others may have used civilians as human shields, but was that consistent and widespread?' said Sami Abdel-Shafi, a Palestinian-American who represents the Carter Center in Gaza. 'The question is whether Israel's response was proportionate.'

The war erupted on July 8 when Israel launched a massive aerial bombardment of Gaza in response to weeks of heavy rocket fire by Hamas and other Gaza-based militant groups - part of an escalation that began with the killing by a Hamas cell of three Israeli teens in the West Bank.

The Israeli army says Hamas fired almost 4,000 rockets at Israel, including 600 from close to schools, mosques and other civilian facilities, and scores of mortar shells. Israel carried out some 5,000 airstrikes, in addition to using powerful artillery and gunship fire.

Israel disputes the makeup of the Palestinian casualty figures, saying that nearly half the dead were militants.

Hamas also has been sharply criticized for launching rockets aimed at Israeli cities and towns. Israel says its own civilian death toll would have been much higher had it not been for its rocket defenses.
 
montelatici, et al,

Don't mistake this for international law; it is not. Don't mistake this for being related to the Geneva Convention, it is not. I'm not even sure it is a real UN Document.

It is not listed under the UN Index for Declarations and Conventions Contained in GA Resolutions.
It is not listed under the UN Index for UN Actions to Counter Terrorism. (Declarations)
It is not listed under the UN Index for UN Actions to Counter Terrorism. (Resolutions)
It is not mentioned under the Security Council Actions to Counter Terrorism. (Security Council Actions)
It is not mentioned under the UN Index for UN Actions to Counter Terrorism. (International Legal Instruments)

When I run a general search for "Geneva Declaration on Terrorism" I get:

Declarations - United Nations Action to Counter Terrorism
2003 Declaration on the issue of combating terrorism (2003) S/RES/1377 (2001) 12 January 2001 (...) Declaration on the issue of combating terrorism(2001) A/RES/51/210 (1997) 16 January 1997 Declaration to (...) Supplement the 1994 Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International TerrorismA/RES/49/60 (1995) 17
Language: ENG
Score: 7.18 - Declarations - United Nations Action to Counter Terrorism
THE GENEVA DECLARATION ON TERRORISM
UN General Assembly Doc. A/42/307, 29 May 1987, Annex
Geneva, 21 March 1987​


"II. NATIONAL LIBERATION MOVEMENTS

As repeatedly recognized by the United Nations General Assembly, peoples who are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination have the right to use force to accomplish their objectives within the framework of international humanitarian law. Such lawful uses of force must not be confused with acts of international terrorism. Thus, it would be legally impermissible to treat members of national liberation movements in the Caribbean Basin, Central America, Namibia, Northern Ireland, the Pacific Islands, Palestine, and South Africa, among others, as if they were common criminals. Rather, national liberation fighters should be treated as combatants subject to the laws and customs of warfare and to the international laws of humanitarian armed conflict as evidenced, for example, by the 1907 Hague Regulations, the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949, and their Additional Protocol I of 1977. Hence, national liberation fighters would be held to the same standards of belligerent conduct that are applicable to soldiers fighting in an international armed conflict. Thus, when a liberation fighter is captured by a belligerent state, he should not be tried as a criminal, but would be treated as a prisoner of war. He could be interned for the duration of the conflict, or released upon condition of a pledge to refrain from further participation in hostilities, or traded in a prisoner of war exchange. In the event such a national liberation fighter is found in a neutral state, he should not be subjected to extradition to the belligerent state."

THE GENEVA DECLARATION ON TERRORISM
(COMMENT)

If, you apply the Hague Regulation, the Fourth Geneva Convention and the Additional Protocols to this ---- then nothing I've said is affected by anything in the "questionable document" in any way, shape or form. In fact, it would suggest that the Palestinian is even more in violation.

A liberation fighter must meet all the criteria that a normal conventional soldier must meet. And, they are still subject to Article 68 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. But I don't believe this Declaration on Terrorism ever went into force.

In any event, this does not change the condition or present a prima facie case that Israel has a policy to target civilians.

Most Respectfully,
R
OMG OMG OMG. Are we witnessing yet another attempt at propagating a total lie and falsehood in favor of Palestinian terrorists?! What a friggin surprise!
 
The Geneva Convention documents are available on the UN website and says the same thing.

Article 1(4) of the First Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 POW status now extends to members of an organized group fighting “against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination”

There is a policy of targeting civilians.

Dahiyah Doctrine
 
Well if "Washington's Bullshit Blog" said it, then by golly it must be true!

and now, time for some truth:

The word "truth" is not apposite when used in conjunction with Rupert Murdoch owned newspapers, more accurately right-wing propaganda.

Blog it may be, but it quotes material from "Yedioth Ahronoth", Israel’s most-read newspaper, amongst other sources.
 
You are hilarious.

The UN reports are about the empty schools (closed for the summer) used to store arms. The usual propaganda by the Zionist owned American press. There were no kids to be used as human shields. The rest is Zionist propaganda.

Give it up.
I didn't know the Daily Mail newspaper in the United Kingdom was "Zionist propaganda"? :cuckoo:

Which part of this article is Zionist propaganda?

dailymail.co.uk
Hamas DID use schools and hospitals in Gaza Strip as 'human shields'
By Matthew Blake for MailOnline and Associated Press


Hamas appeared to admit using human shields to fire rockets into Israel for the first time today, but refused to accept responsibility for the slaughter of hundreds of innocent Palestinians killed in retaliatory airstrikes.

In a veiled confession that comes two weeks after the end of the Gaza war, a senior Hamas official said the group's fighters had no choice but to use residential areas from which to launch missiles into their neighbour's territory.

But while Ghazi Hamad claimed they took safeguards to keep people away from the violence, he admitted 'mistakes were made', blaming Israel's heavy-handed response for the deaths of civilians.

Evidence: This photo, shows the Gaza City neighborhood of Sheikh Radwan where it says Hamas used four rocket launch sites sitting next to a cluster of schools and nearby residences.

Increasingly, the discussion is not about whether the Hamas rockets were fired from civilian areas, but exactly how close they were to the actual buildings.

'The Israelis kept saying rockets were fired from schools or hospitals when in fact they were fired 200 or 300 meters (yards) away. Still, there were some mistakes made and they were quickly dealt with,' Hamad told The Associated Press, offering the first acknowledgment by a Hamas official that, in some cases, militants fired rockets from or near residential areas or civilian facilities.

The questions lie at the heart of a brewing international legal confrontation: Did Hamas deliberately and systematically fire rockets at Israel from homes, hospitals and schools in the hope that Israel would be deterred from retaliating, as Israel claims?

Ahead of a U.N. investigation, the Israeli military has released reams of evidence, including satellite photos and aerial footage, to support its claims that it acted responsibly and attempted to minimize Palestinian casualties. It asserts that Hamas made no effort to disguise its attempt to maximize Israeli civilian casualties.

Throughout the war, the Israeli air force compiled dozens of video clips showing alleged wrongdoing by Hamas, an Islamic militant group sworn to Israel's destruction.

These videos, many of them posted on YouTube, appear to show rockets flying out of residential neighborhoods, cemeteries, schoolyards and mosque courtyards. There are also images of weapons caches purportedly uncovered inside mosques, and tunnels allegedly used by militants to scurry between homes, mosques and buildings.

'Hamas' excuses are outrageous, misleading and contrary to the evidence supplied by the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) and the reality documented by international journalists on the ground in Gaza,' said Lt. Col. Peter Lerner, an Israeli military spokesman.

Confession: In a veiled confession that comes two weeks after the end of the Gaza war, a senior Hamas official today said the group's fighters had no choice but to use residential areas from which to launch missiles into their neighbour's territory

But a black-and-white satellite image released by the Israeli military illustrates the difficulties in proving the point. The army says the image, taken of the Gaza City neighborhood of Sheikh Radwan, shows four rocket launch sites sitting next to a cluster of schools and a nearby residential neighborhood.

Such images, it says, are evidence that Hamas used built-up areas for cover - and carelessly exposed civilians to danger in Israeli retaliatory strikes. However, the image itself is grainy and shows no clear signs of rocket activity, though rocket launchers are often hidden underground. The army refused to say how it had made its conclusions.

A visit to the area this week found three separate military sites - possibly training grounds - slightly larger than football fields located close to the state schools.

The sites are mostly concealed from street view by barriers made of corrugated iron, but one bore the sign of Hamas' military wing, al-Qassam Brigades, while another bore the sign of the Islamic Jihad, a militant group allied with Hamas. The bases were deserted. Visible from the outside were human cutout figures and what appeared to be exercise hurdles.

There were no overt signs of rocket launchers or craters in the ground outside, though dirt appeared to have been disturbed either by some sort of blast or the work of heavy military-type trucks. There were pieces of mangled concrete scattered on the ground. The school buildings appeared untouched.

Hamas tightly restricts access to such facilities, and it was impossible for photographers to enter the sites. Israel confirmed the area was targeted in airstrikes.

Another location that identified as a rocket-launching site is in northern Gaza around the newly built Indonesian hospital. Immediately to the north of the two-story hospital and across the road to the west are two Hamas military facilities. Both stand in close proximity to residential homes. The hospital stands intact, while nothing is visible from inside the bases.

During 50 days of fighting, many observers witnessed rocket launches from what appeared to be urban areas. One piece of video footage distributed by the AP, for instance, captured a launch in downtown Gaza City that took place in a lot next to a mosque and an office of the Hamas prime minister. Both buildings were badly damaged in subsequent Israeli airstrikes.

There was other evidence of Hamas having used civilian facilities: Early in the conflict, the U.N. agency that cares for Palestinian refugees announced that it discovered weapons stored in its schools as they stood empty during the summer.

'I don't think there's any doubt urban areas were used to launch rockets from in the Gaza Strip,' said Bill Van Esveld, a senior researcher at Human Rights Watch.

'Yes, Hamas and others may have used civilians as human shields, but was that consistent and widespread?' said Sami Abdel-Shafi, a Palestinian-American who represents the Carter Center in Gaza. 'The question is whether Israel's response was proportionate.'

The war erupted on July 8 when Israel launched a massive aerial bombardment of Gaza in response to weeks of heavy rocket fire by Hamas and other Gaza-based militant groups - part of an escalation that began with the killing by a Hamas cell of three Israeli teens in the West Bank.

The Israeli army says Hamas fired almost 4,000 rockets at Israel, including 600 from close to schools, mosques and other civilian facilities, and scores of mortar shells. Israel carried out some 5,000 airstrikes, in addition to using powerful artillery and gunship fire.

Israel disputes the makeup of the Palestinian casualty figures, saying that nearly half the dead were militants.

Hamas also has been sharply criticized for launching rockets aimed at Israeli cities and towns. Israel says its own civilian death toll would have been much higher had it not been for its rocket defenses.

Instead of the propaganda let's read what the UN actually said.

"In his letter Ban also hit out at Palestinian militant groups for putting some UN schools in Gaza at risk by hiding weapons in three locations that were not being used as shelters."

Israel responsible for Gaza strikes on UN schools and shelters, inquiry finds

No where does the UN say that the resistance used human shields. It's just your propaganda as usual.
 
Well if "Washington's Bullshit Blog" said it, then by golly it must be true!

and now, time for some truth:

The word "truth" is not apposite when used in conjunction with Rupert Murdoch owned newspapers, more accurately right-wing propaganda.

Blog it may be, but it quotes material from "Yedioth Ahronoth", Israel’s most-read newspaper, amongst other sources.

Blogs don't count. Next?!
 
I didn't know the Daily Mail newspaper in the United Kingdom was "Zionist propaganda"?

It's a right-wing tabloid that supports Zionist Israel and the Tory party, see...you learn something new every day. Happy to help. :)
 
You are hilarious.

The UN reports are about the empty schools (closed for the summer) used to store arms. The usual propaganda by the Zionist owned American press. There were no kids to be used as human shields. The rest is Zionist propaganda.

Give it up.
I didn't know the Daily Mail newspaper in the United Kingdom was "Zionist propaganda"? :cuckoo:

Which part of this article is Zionist propaganda?

dailymail.co.uk
Hamas DID use schools and hospitals in Gaza Strip as 'human shields'
By Matthew Blake for MailOnline and Associated Press


Hamas appeared to admit using human shields to fire rockets into Israel for the first time today, but refused to accept responsibility for the slaughter of hundreds of innocent Palestinians killed in retaliatory airstrikes.

In a veiled confession that comes two weeks after the end of the Gaza war, a senior Hamas official said the group's fighters had no choice but to use residential areas from which to launch missiles into their neighbour's territory.

But while Ghazi Hamad claimed they took safeguards to keep people away from the violence, he admitted 'mistakes were made', blaming Israel's heavy-handed response for the deaths of civilians.

Evidence: This photo, shows the Gaza City neighborhood of Sheikh Radwan where it says Hamas used four rocket launch sites sitting next to a cluster of schools and nearby residences.

Increasingly, the discussion is not about whether the Hamas rockets were fired from civilian areas, but exactly how close they were to the actual buildings.

'The Israelis kept saying rockets were fired from schools or hospitals when in fact they were fired 200 or 300 meters (yards) away. Still, there were some mistakes made and they were quickly dealt with,' Hamad told The Associated Press, offering the first acknowledgment by a Hamas official that, in some cases, militants fired rockets from or near residential areas or civilian facilities.

The questions lie at the heart of a brewing international legal confrontation: Did Hamas deliberately and systematically fire rockets at Israel from homes, hospitals and schools in the hope that Israel would be deterred from retaliating, as Israel claims?

Ahead of a U.N. investigation, the Israeli military has released reams of evidence, including satellite photos and aerial footage, to support its claims that it acted responsibly and attempted to minimize Palestinian casualties. It asserts that Hamas made no effort to disguise its attempt to maximize Israeli civilian casualties.

Throughout the war, the Israeli air force compiled dozens of video clips showing alleged wrongdoing by Hamas, an Islamic militant group sworn to Israel's destruction.

These videos, many of them posted on YouTube, appear to show rockets flying out of residential neighborhoods, cemeteries, schoolyards and mosque courtyards. There are also images of weapons caches purportedly uncovered inside mosques, and tunnels allegedly used by militants to scurry between homes, mosques and buildings.

'Hamas' excuses are outrageous, misleading and contrary to the evidence supplied by the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) and the reality documented by international journalists on the ground in Gaza,' said Lt. Col. Peter Lerner, an Israeli military spokesman.

Confession: In a veiled confession that comes two weeks after the end of the Gaza war, a senior Hamas official today said the group's fighters had no choice but to use residential areas from which to launch missiles into their neighbour's territory

But a black-and-white satellite image released by the Israeli military illustrates the difficulties in proving the point. The army says the image, taken of the Gaza City neighborhood of Sheikh Radwan, shows four rocket launch sites sitting next to a cluster of schools and a nearby residential neighborhood.

Such images, it says, are evidence that Hamas used built-up areas for cover - and carelessly exposed civilians to danger in Israeli retaliatory strikes. However, the image itself is grainy and shows no clear signs of rocket activity, though rocket launchers are often hidden underground. The army refused to say how it had made its conclusions.

A visit to the area this week found three separate military sites - possibly training grounds - slightly larger than football fields located close to the state schools.

The sites are mostly concealed from street view by barriers made of corrugated iron, but one bore the sign of Hamas' military wing, al-Qassam Brigades, while another bore the sign of the Islamic Jihad, a militant group allied with Hamas. The bases were deserted. Visible from the outside were human cutout figures and what appeared to be exercise hurdles.

There were no overt signs of rocket launchers or craters in the ground outside, though dirt appeared to have been disturbed either by some sort of blast or the work of heavy military-type trucks. There were pieces of mangled concrete scattered on the ground. The school buildings appeared untouched.

Hamas tightly restricts access to such facilities, and it was impossible for photographers to enter the sites. Israel confirmed the area was targeted in airstrikes.

Another location that identified as a rocket-launching site is in northern Gaza around the newly built Indonesian hospital. Immediately to the north of the two-story hospital and across the road to the west are two Hamas military facilities. Both stand in close proximity to residential homes. The hospital stands intact, while nothing is visible from inside the bases.

During 50 days of fighting, many observers witnessed rocket launches from what appeared to be urban areas. One piece of video footage distributed by the AP, for instance, captured a launch in downtown Gaza City that took place in a lot next to a mosque and an office of the Hamas prime minister. Both buildings were badly damaged in subsequent Israeli airstrikes.

There was other evidence of Hamas having used civilian facilities: Early in the conflict, the U.N. agency that cares for Palestinian refugees announced that it discovered weapons stored in its schools as they stood empty during the summer.

'I don't think there's any doubt urban areas were used to launch rockets from in the Gaza Strip,' said Bill Van Esveld, a senior researcher at Human Rights Watch.

'Yes, Hamas and others may have used civilians as human shields, but was that consistent and widespread?' said Sami Abdel-Shafi, a Palestinian-American who represents the Carter Center in Gaza. 'The question is whether Israel's response was proportionate.'

The war erupted on July 8 when Israel launched a massive aerial bombardment of Gaza in response to weeks of heavy rocket fire by Hamas and other Gaza-based militant groups - part of an escalation that began with the killing by a Hamas cell of three Israeli teens in the West Bank.

The Israeli army says Hamas fired almost 4,000 rockets at Israel, including 600 from close to schools, mosques and other civilian facilities, and scores of mortar shells. Israel carried out some 5,000 airstrikes, in addition to using powerful artillery and gunship fire.

Israel disputes the makeup of the Palestinian casualty figures, saying that nearly half the dead were militants.

Hamas also has been sharply criticized for launching rockets aimed at Israeli cities and towns. Israel says its own civilian death toll would have been much higher had it not been for its rocket defenses.

Instead of the propaganda let's read what the UN actually said.

"In his letter Ban also hit out at Palestinian militant groups for putting some UN schools in Gaza at risk by hiding weapons in three locations that were not being used as shelters."

Israel responsible for Gaza strikes on UN schools and shelters, inquiry finds

No where does the UN say that the resistance used human shields. It's just your propaganda as usual.

So a school is an acceptable place to store rockets? Good to know.
But here the animals are shooting from behind hospitals and hotels:

Finnish TV Reporter at Gaza’s Al Shifa Hospital: ‘It’s True That Rockets Are Launched Here From the Gazan Side Into Israel’ (VIDEO)

Indian TV Reporter Films Hamas Assembling, Launching Missiles From Residential Area Outside Hotel Minutes Before Cease-Fire (VIDEO)
 
I didn't know the Daily Mail newspaper in the United Kingdom was "Zionist propaganda"?

It's a right-wing tabloid that supports Zionist Israel and the Tory party, see...you learn something new every day. Happy to help. :)
Right wing tabloid? Hamas' violations and crimes were well documented left, right, and center!
 
Telawood Productions.

Some tidbits from the complete report linked below that demonstrate the amount and level of propaganda believed by the Zionist bunch here:

".....the (UN) commission observes that during the period under examination, the tunnels were only used to conduct attacks directed at IDF positions in Israel in the vicinity of the Green Line, which are legitimate military targets. A resident of a kibbutz located 1.7 km from Gaza told the commission, “We hear that tunnels are mostly to harm soldiers but that doesn’t stop families from being afraid”."

111. The IDF carried out more than 6 000 airstrikes in Gaza during the 2014 Operation[1], from the first day throughout the Operation. These included targeted attacks on residential and other buildings. As a result, according to the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), during the 2014 hostilities, 142 Palestinian families had three or more members killed in the same incident owing to the destruction of residential buildings, "

In many of the cases examined by the commission, as well as in incidents reported by local and international organizations, there is little or no information as to how residential buildings, which are prima facie civilian objects immune from attack, came to be regarded as legitimate military objectives.

The commission notes that this obligation is not absolute and that even if there are areas that are not residential, Gaza’s small size and its population density makes it particularly difficult for armed groups always to comply with these requirements. The ICRC Commentary on Additional Protocol I notes that several delegations of the Diplomatic Conference commented that for densely populated countries, the requirement to avoid locating military objectives within densely populated areas would be difficult to apply.





[1] Israel, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, IDF Conduct of Operations during the 2014 Gaza Conflict, p. 38 available at: http://mfa.gov.il/ProtectiveEdge/Documents/IDFConduct.pdf, accessed on 30 May 2015.

[2] OCHA, Fragmented Lives, Humanitarian Overview 2014, March 2015, p. 6.






Here is the UN report, no indication that your propaganda videos are consistent with the facts. The first part confirms that Gaza is legally occupied by Israel under international law.

Report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry on the 2014 Gaza Conflict

"26. The Occupied Palestinian Territory is comprised of the West Bank, including East-Jerusalem and the Gaza strip. The Government of Israel adopts the position that since it withdrew its troops and settlers from Gaza in 2005 during the “disengagement”, it no longer has effective control over what happens in Gaza and thus can no longer be considered as an occupying power under international law.[1] The commission agrees that the exercise of ‘effective control’ test is the correct standard to use in determining whether a State is the occupying power over a given territory, but notes that the continuous presence of soldiers on the ground is only one criterion to be used in determining effective control.

27. International law does not require the continuous presence of troops of the occupying forces in all areas of a territory, in order for it to be considered as being occupied. In the Naletelic case, the ICTY held that the law of occupation also applies in areas where a state possesses the “capacity to send troops within a reasonable time to make its power felt.”[2] The size of Gaza and the fact that it is almost completely surrounded by Israel facilitates the ability for Israel to make its presence felt.[3] This principle was confirmed by the United States Military Tribunal at Nuremberg which stated:

It is clear that the German Armed Forces were able to maintain control of Greece and Yugoslavia until they evacuated them in the fall of 1944. While it is true that the partisans were able to control sections of these countries at various times, it is established that the Germans could at any time they desired assume physical control of any part of the country. The control of the resistance forces was temporary only and not such as would deprive the German Armed Forces of its status of an occupant.[4]

28. This analysis also applies to the Occupied Palestinian Territory which is considered a single territorial unit by the international community,[5] and by Israel in the Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza, which recognized the West Bank and Gaza as a single territorial unit.[6]

29. In addition to its capacity to send troops to make its presence felt, Israel continues to exercise effective control of the Gaza Strip through other means. According to the Interim agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, Israel maintains the control of Gaza’s airspace and maritime areas, and any activity in these areas is subject to the approval of Israel. The facts since the 2005 disengagement, among them the continuous patrolling of the territorial sea adjacent to Gaza by the Israeli Navy and constant surveillance flights of IDF aircraft, in particular remotely piloted aircraft, demonstrate the continued exclusive control by Israel of Gaza’s airspace and maritime areas which -- with the exception of limited fishing activities -- Palestinians are not allowed to use. Since 2000, the IDF has also continuously enforced a no-go zone of varying width inside Gaza along the Green Line fence. Even in periods during which no active hostilities are occurring, the IDF regularly conducts operations in that zone,[7] such as land levelling. Israel regulates the local monetary market, which is based on the Israeli currency and has controls on the custom duties.[8] Under the Gaza Reconstruction Mechanism, Israel continues to exert a high degree of control over the construction industry in Gaza. Drawings of large scale public and private sector projects, as well as the planned quantities of construction material required, must be approved by the Government of Israel.[9] Israel also controls the Palestinian population registry, which is common to both the West Bank and Gaza, and Palestinian ID-cards can only be issued or modified with Israeli approval.[10] Israel also regulates all crossings allowing access to and from Gaza. While it is true that the Rafah crossing is governed by Egypt, Israel still exercises a large degree of control, as only Palestinians holding passports are allowed to cross, and passports can only be issued to people featuring on the Israeli generated population registry.

30. The commission concludes that Israel has maintained effective control of the Gaza Strip within the meaning of Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations. The assessment that Gaza continues to be occupied by Israel is shared by the international community as articulated by the General Assembly and has been reaffirmed by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC).[11]

31. In view of the 2005 disengagement, Israel’s obligations under occupation law are consistent with the level of control it exercises,[12]and the rules of treaty and customary law of occupation by which it is bound remain those that are relevant to the functions that Israel continues to exercise as an occupying power.[13]

32. The commission takes note that the State of Palestine, on 2 April 2014, acceded to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and the Additional Protocols I and II on the protection of victims of international armed conflicts and non-international armed conflicts and the Fourth Hague Convention on the War on Land and its annexed Regulations of 1907. In early January 2015 the State of Palestine acceded to Additional Protocol III to the 1949 Geneva Conventions; to the Convention prohibiting Certain Conventional Weapons of 1980 and its Protocols I and III, and to the Convention on Cluster Munitions of 2008.

33. Israel and the Palestinian armed groups that are parties to the conflict are bound alike by the relevant rules of customary international law. These rules are relevant both to the treatment of civilians and persons hors de combat as well as to the conduct of hostilities. The commission recognizes the complexity of determining customary rules of international law and therefore referred to analyses of custom by international tribunals as well as to the Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law,[14] the contents of which it considers as indicative of the existence of customary norms.[15]......."

Report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry on the 2014 Gaza Conflict
 
Avoiding the obvious truth again? Pali animals do not have a "right" to shoot rockets and commit terror attacks against Israeli civilians, while hiding behind their own. And that's been well established that they do indeed do that. All these long copy and paste Pallywood propaganda blowjobs are meaningless.
 
15th post
montelatici, et al,

There is a falsehood here, a truth here, a misrepresentation of a fact, and an extremely complex argument of a moral and ethical nature here.

The Geneva Convention documents are available on the UN website and says the same thing.

Article 1(4) of the First Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 POW status now extends to members of an organized group fighting “against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination”

There is a policy of targeting civilians.

Dahiyah Doctrine
(OBSERVATION)

Ask yourself these simple questions.

Has anyone of you actually read the text of the Official Form (so-called) "Dahiya Doctrine?"
Do you personally know anyone who has read this (so-called) doctrine?

The description of the "Dahiya Doctrine" is based largely on a US Embassy Cable (OCT 2008) that essential is very short on explanation:

Maj. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot described a GOI policy to respond with indiscriminate force against Lebanon should hostilities resume.
This Dahiya Doctrine is a variation of 1991 US Doctrine:

An established principle has been that the use of force, once its necessity was determined, should be implemented through a concentration of overwhelming force. While serving as Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Colin Powell, adopted the Powell Doctrine, establishing the principle of overwhelming force as a necessary condition for waging war.
War and Military Conflicts are “the continuation of policy by other means, and the very thing which creates policy.” (General Carl von Clausewitz Prussian General Staff) GEN Clausewitz understood that the definition of war was “an act of violence intended to compel our opponent to fulfil our will.”

NOTE: What most people don't grasp is the War/Conflict differ from terrorism in that terrorism is precisely the use of random violence—especially killing force—against civilians, with the intent of spreading fear throughout a population, hoping this fear will advance a political objective (breaking the will of the opposition to continue the struggle). It is not terrorism if the overwhelming force is directed against a specific military objective, even if it generates civilian casualties.
Wars/Conflicts are fought on the basis of:
  • A state must intend to fight the war only for the sake of its just cause.
  • A state may go to war only if the decision has been made by the appropriate authorities, according to the proper process, and made public.
  • A state may resort to war only if it has exhausted all plausible, peaceful alternatives to resolving the conflict in question, in particular diplomatic negotiation.
  • A state may not resort to war if it can foresee that doing so will have no measurable impact on the situation.
  • A state must, prior to initiating a war, weigh the universal goods expected to result from it, such as securing the just cause, against the universal evils expected to result, notably casualties.
(COMMENT)

The (so-called) Dahiya Doctrine has nothing to do with the targeting of "civilians." It has everything to do with:
  • A state may not resort to war if it can foresee that doing so will have no measurable impact on the situation.
  • A state must, prior to initiating a war, weigh the consequence expected to result from the engagement (strategic or tactical, such as securing the just cause, against the recognized evils result; notably casualties.
The military force may not use weapons or methods which are “evil in themselves.” These include: mass rape campaigns; genocide or ethnic cleansing; using poison or treachery (like disguising soldiers to look like the Red Cross).

In most of the discussion here, especial in this discussion thread (Israel does not target civilians), is centrically bound to the issues of (1) genocide or ethnic cleansing --- and ---- (2) the incriminate fires which are in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.

The destruction of the civilian infrastructure of hostile regimes or opposing force, as a means of establishing deterrence against militant use of that infrastructure, or as a means of breaking the will of the opposing force by depriving the support of the general population, is not a war crime. One of the key element in the adopted Powell Doctrine asks the question: "Is the action supported by the American people?"

Neither the US Powell Doctrine or the IS Dahiya Doctrine are evil in themselves.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
Nope not a single Isrseli soldier in Gaza now. There is a blockade which has been deemed legal. No occupation and certainly not belligerent. The belligerent are the ones led by a terrorist group, not under occupation, with genocidal intentions and are constantly targeting Israeli civilians while hiding behind their own.

Hamas = ISIS of Gaza.
If Gaza isn't occupied, then why can't they leave?
 
...Hamas does not hide "behind the skirts of it woamen and children"...
The United Nations and Amnesty International say otherwise - as recently as their analysis of the Summer 2014 Gaza War...
 
Nope not a single Isrseli soldier in Gaza now. There is a blockade which has been deemed legal. No occupation and certainly not belligerent. The belligerent are the ones led by a terrorist group, not under occupation, with genocidal intentions and are constantly targeting Israeli civilians while hiding behind their own.

Hamas = ISIS of Gaza.
If Gaza isn't occupied, then why can't they leave?
Containment is different than occupation.

The Israelis merely keep your barbarian Neanderthals outside the gates...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom