No Longer David:*The State of Israel As Goliath

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Human Rights Watch calls Israels attacks on hospital with white phosphorous war crimes.

They can call it a 'Tuna on rye with chips', but that doesn't make it so.

Yes, it does make it so.

Israels attacks on hospitals and UN shelters and civilian homes with white phosphorous were war crimes.

They, HRW, are a human rights organization who knows how to apply intl law, that is their job.

You, on the other hand, are just an ignorant uneducated Zionist poster on a discussion board with absolutely no expertise in intl law and are qualified to form no legal opinions about the matter.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Gaza film shows white phosphorus from alleged Israeli attack

Palestinians try to put out burning chemical banned as a weapon under United Nations convention*

Monday 19 January 2009

Gaza film shows white phosphorus from alleged Israeli attack | World news | theguardian.com

There are two films/videos made by Fida Qishta one can view from the link in the article.

Fida is a camerawoman working for the International Solidarity Movement, a non-governmental organisation operating in Gaza.

The film/videos were shot on Wednesday 14 January in Khoza'a, east of Khan Younis, in the south of the Gaza Strip.

The second film reveals the impact of the white phosphorus on the human body and a 5 yr old boy is shown in a Gaza hospital receiving treatment for burns to his back and right arm which a doctor explains were caused by the chemical, white phosphorous, which appears to have eaten into his flesh in several places.

"Amnesty International said today that Israel has committed a war crime by using phosphorous over Gaza's densely populated residential neighbourhoods. The human rights organisation also said they had fresh evidence of its use."

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Israel accused of indiscriminate phosphorus use in Gaza

Human Rights Watch report claims Israel committed war crimes in its use of air-burst white phosphorus artillery shells

Wednesday 25 March 200912.00 EDT

Human Rights Watch reveals extent of Israel's phosphorus use in Gaza | World news | theguardian.com

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

The 71 pg report provides witness accounts of the devastation white phosphorus munitions had on civilians and civilian property in Gaza.

Human Rights Watch researchers immediately after hostilities ended located spent shells, canister liners, and dozens of burnt felt wedges containing white phosphorus on city streets, apartment roofs, residential courtyards, and at a UN school.

The report also presents ballistics evidence, photographs, and satellite imagery.

Rain of Fire | Human Rights Watch

 

[Kondor3]

"You, on the other hand, are just an ignorant uneducated Zionist poster on a discussion board with absolutely no expertise in intl law and are qualified to form no legal opinions about the matter."

And there are other NPOs, far less biased and bringing far fewer preconceived notions to the table, who can render a far more objective finding than the self-appointed, self-pronounced, unilateral, unchallenged kangaroo court outputs that you have been citing here.

Unlike you, I make no pretense at competency in International Law in a War Crimes context.

The difference being, I will happily admit my deficiencies in this regard, whereas you will not.

AI is merely one voice in a veritable chorus which are entitled to stipulate in this matter.

Their word is not the last word, nor even the most objective and impartial one.

Faux superiority complex... pffffttt... a day late and a dollar short, insofar as today's work is concerned, most certainly.

 

[Kondor3]

The 71 pg report provides witness accounts of the devastation white phosphorus munitions had on civilians and civilian property in Gaza.

Human Rights Watch researchers immediately after hostilities ended located spent shells, canister liners, and dozens of burnt felt wedges containing white phosphorus on city streets, apartment roofs, residential courtyards, and at a UN school.

The report also presents ballistics evidence, photographs, and satellite imagery.

Rain of Fire | Human Rights Watch

I thought you were talking about White Phosphorous used against a hospital; not 'all over Gaza'.

Where's the case for Willy-Pete on top of a hospital?

You're not talking about that single WP shell that fell on top of al-Quds, are you?

Hell, the Israelis fessed-up to that one and disciplined the operative commander for allowing it to happen.

One shell fell on the hospital... and there is probable cause to suspect that it was a guidance problem.

If it were intentional, there would have been a rain of such shells; dozens or scores.

With nothing more than glaze over the rubble and lots of grease running-off the cooked-down patients.

That wasn't a war crime.

Hell, that may even have been mechanical failure.

Or any of a half-dozen equally innocuous possibilities.

No matter how many Amnesty International amateur weapons-forensics bumpkins and preconceived notions come crawling out of the woodwork.

One stray shell... pffffttt... for a minute there, I thought you actually had something.

 

[Kondor3]

Israel accused of indiscriminate phosphorus use in Gaza. Human Rights Watch report claims Israel committed war crimes in its use of air-burst white phosphorus artillery shells.

Cooked-down some Bad-Guys, did they?

I'll bet they were wishing, as they were roasting, that they had not fired those rockets, eh?

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

White phosphorous was used extensively in Gaza and these attacks with chemical weapons on hospitals and UN shelters and homes were all war crimes, as addressed by human rights groups.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

More Israeli war crimes in Cast Lead

"White Flag Deaths"


"In one case documented in the report, on January 7 in eastern Jabalya, two women and three children from the family of Khalid ‘Abd Rabbo were standing in front of their home after an Israeli soldier ordered them outside - at least three of them holding pieces of white cloth - when a soldier near a tank opened fire, killing two girls, ages 2 and 7, and wounding the third girl and their grandmother."

Israel: Investigate ?White Flag' Shootings of Gaza Civilians | Human Rights Watch

 

[Hollie]

Human Rights Watch calls Israels attacks on hospital with white phosphorous war crimes.

They can call it a 'Tuna on rye with chips', but that doesn't make it so.

Yes, it does make it so.

Israels attacks on hospitals and UN shelters and civilian homes with white phosphorous were war crimes.

They, HRW, are a human rights organization who knows how to apply intl law, that is their job.

You, on the other hand, are just an ignorant uneducated Zionist poster on a discussion board with absolutely no expertise in intl law and are qualified to form no legal opinions about the matter.

What Sherri can't bring herself to acknowledge is that her islamist co-religionists use civilian infrastructure to conduct war.

Sherri whines and seethes about alleged breeches of international law yet she never can address that the fact that her islamist heroes conduct war in full violation of Geneva Convention standards.

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

Israel killed 1400 in Gaza, most of them were civilians unlawfully targeted.

That is what human rights groups document in their reports.

The IDF tallied 709 Hamas and affiliated militant deaths. The Hamas Interior Minister Fathi Hamad stated that up to 750 Palestinian militants and policemen were killed.[251][356] In addition, 295–720 (or 740—PMoH[357]) civilians were killed in the conflict. Ten Israeli soldiers were killed, along with three civilians.[358]

Difficulties in ascertaining an accurate Palestinian casualty count have been attributed to a number of factors. It was reported that Hamas fighters had been ordered not to wear military uniforms during the fighting.[134][283] Israeli-Arab journalist Khaled Abu Toameh wrote in The Jerusalem Post that this practice led to the over-counting of civilian casualties and under-counting Hamas military casualties, as Palestinian casualties arrived at hospitals without weapons or any other signs revealing they were fighters.[359] Further difficulties were met with due to differing definitions of who should be counted as a combatant, and the lack of access to the conflict zone by independent media or human rights workers due to Israel's strict blockade of the borders before, during, and after the conflict.[360]

Gaza War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And still Hamas kept firing rockets into Israel after that war, so got their butts kicked in another war.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

Whereas the IDF used phosphorous legitimately to light up areas as as smoke cover, the enemy fired 17 phosphorous rockets INDISCRIMINATELY into Israel. Not a lot of people know that.

Palestinian militants fired a phosphorus rocket at Israel for the first time yesterday, one of 17 fired into Israel as fighting entered its 19th day. The phosphorus rocket exploded in an open field in the western Negev. No injuries or damage were reported.

Hamas launches first phosphorus rocket at Negev; no injuries reported Israel News | Haaretz

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

What is made perfectly clear by the human rights groups is the fact that violations of international law by one side occur does not justify violations of international law by the other side.

This specific principle is illustrated by Amnesty when they say Palestinian rocket attacks do not justify Israels unlawful targeting of civilians. The indiscriminate rocket attacks are war crimes that killed noone. The unlawful attacks on civilians and civilian objects by Israel are war crimes that killed hundreds.

The point I make is the fact Palestinians may have violated international laws does not justify Israels violations and every unlawful killing of Israel carried out by Israel is a killing Israel is 100% accountable for under principles of international law.

A specific example. Amnesty found Israel used civilians as human shields and Hamas did not. Amnesty points out even if one side uses civilians as human shields, this does not justify unlawful targeting of civilians by the other side.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Wikipedia is not a credible source, children as young as 10 in schools in the US are not allowed to cite it because of its lack of credibility.

There are no provisions in The Geneva Convention that make combatants failure to wear uniforms war crimes.

Further, the rules of Occupation clearly provide the key to distinquishing between persons with a protected status as civilians is whether the person was a participant in the hostilities when attacked.

Hamas civilian police officers were unlawfully targeted hy Israel, hundreds were unlawfully killed In attacks targeting municipal police stations and attacks targeting graduating police officers.

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

Wikipedia is not a credible source, children as young as 10 in schools in the US are not allowed to cite it because of its lack of credibility.

There are no provisions in The Geneva Convention that make combatants failure to wear uniforms war crimes.

Further, the rules of Occupation clearly provide the key to distinquishing between persons with a protected status as civilians is whether the person was a participant in the hostilities when attacked.

Hamas civilian police officers were unlawfully targeted hy Israel, hundreds were unlawfully killed In attacks targeting municipal police stations and attacks targeting graduating police officers.

Source for Wikipedia not being a credible source in US schools?

I couldn't care if combatants were wearing pink frilly tutus. If there are combatants then they are legitimate targets.

 

[Hollie]

Wikipedia is not a credible source, children as young as 10 in schools in the US are not allowed to cite it because of its lack of credibility.

There are no provisions in The Geneva Convention that make combatants failure to wear uniforms war crimes.

Further, the rules of Occupation clearly provide the key to distinquishing between persons with a protected status as civilians is whether the person was a participant in the hostilities when attacked.

Hamas civilian police officers were unlawfully targeted hy Israel, hundreds were unlawfully killed In attacks targeting municipal police stations and attacks targeting graduating police officers.

Excusing islamist terrorists as a way of promoting your Joooooo hatreds is a huge fail. Acts of war perpetrated by islamist terrorists will be met as such.

 

[Hollie]

What is made perfectly clear by the human rights groups is the fact that violations of international law by one side occur does not justify violations of international law by the other side.

This specific principle is illustrated by Amnesty when they say Palestinian rocket attacks do not justify Israels unlawful targeting of civilians. The indiscriminate rocket attacks are war crimes that killed noone. The unlawful attacks on civilians and civilian objects by Israel are war crimes that killed hundreds.

The point I make is the fact Palestinians may have violated international laws does not justify Israels violations and every unlawful killing of Israel carried out by Israel is a killing Israel is 100% accountable for under principles of international law.

A specific example. Amnesty found Israel used civilians as human shields and Hamas did not. Amnesty points out even if one side uses civilians as human shields, this does not justify unlawful targeting of civilians by the other side.

The above is more of your appalling stupidity. Israel does not specifically target civilians.

Your islamist co-religionists wage war from civilian areas which puts civilians and civilian infrastructure at risk.

You and those like you can whine and seethe all you wish about "legalities". When Israel is subject to acts of war from islamist terrorists, there will be a response.

It's remarkable that people such as you cheer on the deaths of "Palestinian" arabs because it appeals to some lurid Death Cult fantasy you embrace.

 

[Hollie]

More proof of Israel?s restraint | National Post

The 17-page report, (Re: Operation Pillar of Defense –ed.) released last week, provides a detailed breakdown of the seven-day conflict between Israel and Hamas. It documents the military actions, and casualties, of both sides. And it concludes that the missile that killed the young child was, in fact, a Hamas rocket. It apparently malfunctioned and crashed into Gaza on its way to Israel, after being launched by Hamas from a position near the family home — itself a violation of international law. (The report also concludes that another child killed in the fighting, whose body was shown in public being kissed by the visiting Egyptian prime minister and senior Hamas officials, was also killed by errant Hamas fire.)

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

More proof of Israel?s restraint | National Post

The 17-page report, (Re: Operation Pillar of Defense –ed.) released last week, provides a detailed breakdown of the seven-day conflict between Israel and Hamas. It documents the military actions, and casualties, of both sides. And it concludes that the missile that killed the young child was, in fact, a Hamas rocket. It apparently malfunctioned and crashed into Gaza on its way to Israel, after being launched by Hamas from a position near the family home — itself a violation of international law. (The report also concludes that another child killed in the fighting, whose body was shown in public being kissed by the visiting Egyptian prime minister and senior Hamas officials, was also killed by errant Hamas fire.)

See Sherri? As they say, you learn something new every day, and today you have learned this.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Amnesty investigated human rights abuses of Cast Lead and found Israel used Palestinian civilians as human shields, but found no evidence Hamas or other Palestinian groups used Palestinian civilians as human shields.

"Amnesty International, for its part, did not find evidence that Hamas or other Palestinian
groups violated the laws of war to the extent repeatedly alleged by Israel. In particular, it
found no evidence that Hamas or other fighters directed the movement of civilians to shield
military objectives from attacks. "

Here, they address Israel's use of Palestinian civilians as human shields.

"By contrast, Amnesty International did find that Israeli forces on several occasions during Operation “Cast Lead” forced Palestinian civilians to serve
as “human shields”. "

And they point out, the use of human shields by one side does not absolve the other side from their obligations owed to the civilian population, to not unlawfully target civilians and civilian objects.

"In any event, international humanitarian law makes clear that use of
“human shields” by one party does not release the attacking party from its legal obligations
with respect to civilians."

This discussion appears in Amnestys Report 22 Days Of Death And Destruction

Paragraph 4.2.2


http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/a...a74-4853-860f-0563725e633a/mde150152009en.pdf