Israeli Attacks Gaza Strip, Killing 200+
- Thread starter kaliforniacatio
- Start date
One-sided politics ...
Yes, you can blame Israel for the invasion of Gaza just like you can blame the US for the invasion of Iraq. But at some point, you can't just unilaterally blame either for the death of civilians.
In Iraq, much like Vietnam before, most of the atrocities were carried on by Iraqis on Iraqis, just like Vietnamese on Vietnamese, when it came to civilian casualties. The cruelty and inconsideration for civilians rests squarely on the shoulders of the Iraqis, like Vietnamese before. There have always been isolated incidents where Americans "lost it" and they are always exposed (although some would argue the punishment wasn't just, I'll concede that). But were and are today grossly rare compared to what goes on with countryman/woman against countryman/woman in a total disrespect of fellow citizen's lives.
Yes, you can blame the US for violence and the military actions. But at some point, using the US as an excuse for everything is quite the "scapegoat" for a people who value their own, fellow countrymen's and women's lives less than -- ironically -- the "invading" Americans do for them. That's just sad, and it's why many views just don't apply. Americans honestly try to protect the lives of civilians, especially those that are not of American citizenship, far more than they are given credit for -- and using both Vietnam and Iraq as an example, sadly more than their own do.
The same crap happened with the Hezabolla in Lebanon and is now happening with Hamas in Gaza. The fighters honestly give far less of a shit about their own countrymen than Israel does. It was always in Israel's best interest to see the Democracy in Lebanon succeed and that's why they held off as long as they could. Same deal in Gaza, it is in Israel's best interest to see the Palestinian state succeed.
Unfortunately, although Lebanon is willing to work with Israel, the Hezabolla have their own, separate agenda based on terror. Likewise, the EU, UN, US and Israel have set very simple, real goals for the Palestine state to be accepted as a peer, but a portion of their own population continues to use terror tactics, including against their own people. Everyone does a great disservice to peace to keep blaming Israel, and ignoring the real problem inside of Palestine, just like Lebanon.
The W. administration put the blame on Israel for 5 years, from 2001-2005, and forced them to grant land and other concessions. Unfortunately, that just made it easier for these militants to strike deeper into Israel. If you're ignoring that fact, then you're ignoring history. This is where the phrase "bleeding heart" comes from, because it plays right into the real, horrific agenda that the Hezabolla and Hama play. Israel and the US are tired of it, and every concession is another advantage for Hezabolla and Hamas.
Sadly at the expense of their own countrymen and women. The world needs to fucking wake up to that fact. I'm really tired of the "bleeding heart" bullshit, because it only causes more death and violence. Hamas, like Hezabolla before, are given a "blank check" to kill as they see fit. Unfortunately, much of it is purposeful negligence and, in some cases, murder of their own citizens.
The thing that always gets to me about Moyer is that he can be grossly one-sided.
Yes, you can blame Israel for the invasion of Gaza just like you can blame the US for the invasion of Iraq. But at some point, you can't just unilaterally blame either for the death of civilians.
In Iraq, much like Vietnam before, most of the atrocities were carried on by Iraqis on Iraqis, just like Vietnamese on Vietnamese, when it came to civilian casualties. The cruelty and inconsideration for civilians rests squarely on the shoulders of the Iraqis, like Vietnamese before. There have always been isolated incidents where Americans "lost it" and they are always exposed (although some would argue the punishment wasn't just, I'll concede that). But were and are today grossly rare compared to what goes on with countryman/woman against countryman/woman in a total disrespect of fellow citizen's lives.
Yes, you can blame the US for violence and the military actions. But at some point, using the US as an excuse for everything is quite the "scapegoat" for a people who value their own, fellow countrymen's and women's lives less than -- ironically -- the "invading" Americans do for them. That's just sad, and it's why many views just don't apply. Americans honestly try to protect the lives of civilians, especially those that are not of American citizenship, far more than they are given credit for -- and using both Vietnam and Iraq as an example, sadly more than their own do.
The same crap happened with the Hezabolla in Lebanon and is now happening with Hamas in Gaza. The fighters honestly give far less of a shit about their own countrymen than Israel does. It was always in Israel's best interest to see the Democracy in Lebanon succeed and that's why they held off as long as they could. Same deal in Gaza, it is in Israel's best interest to see the Palestinian state succeed.
Unfortunately, although Lebanon is willing to work with Israel, the Hezabolla have their own, separate agenda based on terror. Likewise, the EU, UN, US and Israel have set very simple, real goals for the Palestine state to be accepted as a peer, but a portion of their own population continues to use terror tactics, including against their own people. Everyone does a great disservice to peace to keep blaming Israel, and ignoring the real problem inside of Palestine, just like Lebanon.
The W. administration put the blame on Israel for 5 years, from 2001-2005, and forced them to grant land and other concessions. Unfortunately, that just made it easier for these militants to strike deeper into Israel. If you're ignoring that fact, then you're ignoring history. This is where the phrase "bleeding heart" comes from, because it plays right into the real, horrific agenda that the Hezabolla and Hama play. Israel and the US are tired of it, and every concession is another advantage for Hezabolla and Hamas.
Sadly at the expense of their own countrymen and women. The world needs to fucking wake up to that fact. I'm really tired of the "bleeding heart" bullshit, because it only causes more death and violence. Hamas, like Hezabolla before, are given a "blank check" to kill as they see fit. Unfortunately, much of it is purposeful negligence and, in some cases, murder of their own citizens.
GabberMan
Closed Account
Here's a link to whole interview:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=BI8AyL9Xtpc&feature=channel_page
This issue is still crucial.
Philbert
Banned
First post-ceasefire Palestinian gun, mortar fire from Gaza Tuesday
January 20, 2009, 8:41 PM (GMT+02:00)
Israeli patrols along the Israel-Gaza border fence came under fire from Gaza three times Tuesday, Jan. 20, two days after the Gaza ceasefire was declared first by Israel then Hamas. Eight mortar rounds fired across the border next. No one was hurt in these attacks. Israel responded with air strikes against the mortar squads.
Military sources report the Palestinian attacks began shortly after the withdrawal of small Israeli units, left at vantage points for a few hours to guard against renewed Palestinian rocket launches. The bulk of the Israeli army left the Gaza Strip earlier this week.
Jerusalem may be expected to decide on military restraint this time, although past experience with Hamas has shown that a single firing to test Israel's response is usually the harbinger of a general assault.
As in the past, Hamas may pin the blame on a fringe group. In fact, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine announced in Damascus that it was not a party to the Hamas ceasefire and its members would continue to fight Israel.
US-Egyptian Red Sea ships hunt for Iranian ship carrying 60 tons of arms for Hamas
January 20, 2009, 11:23 AM (GMT+02:00)
US and Egyptian warships were scouring the Gulf of Aden and Red Sea Tuesday, Jan. 20 to waylay an Iranian freighter carrying scores of heavy rockets for delivery to Hamas. DEBKAfile's exclusive sources report they were acting on intelligence that a ship loaded with an estimated 60 tons of arms to replenish Hamas' depleted war stocks had set out from the Iranian Persian Gulf port of Bandar Abbas on Jan. 17.
Our sources reveal that the arms-smuggling vessel started its voyage as the Iran-Hedayat and changed its name in mid sea to Famagustus registered to Panama. The captain was ordered by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards to unload its cargo at a smugglers cove on the southeastern coast of Sinai opposite the Gulf of Suez, to be picked up by armed Bedouin gangs and moved to El Arish in northern Sinai. From there the contraband rockets were to be slipped gradually into the Gaza Strip.
The cargo consists of 50 Iranian Fajr rockets whose range is 50-75 km, scores of heavy Grad rockets, new, improved launchers whose angle of fire can be precisely adjusted, tons of high-quality explosives, submachine guns, rifles and pistols and armor-piercing missiles and shells (of types used successfully by Hizballah against Israeli tanks in 2006).
The shipment, the largest Tehran has ever consigned to the Palestinian Hamas in Gaza, includes also a large number of anti-personnel and anti-vehicle mines, equipment for assembling roadside bombs and advanced communications and night vision gear.
(The Palestinian Karin-A arms smuggling ship intercepted by Israel naval commandoes seven years ago carried 50 tons of arms for Fatah).
The Iranian ship aroused suspicions when Western spy satellites and surveillance stations spotted its change of registration after entering the Sea of Oman. Closer observation identified the cargo as a huge arms shipment.
January 20, 2009, 8:41 PM (GMT+02:00)
Israeli patrols along the Israel-Gaza border fence came under fire from Gaza three times Tuesday, Jan. 20, two days after the Gaza ceasefire was declared first by Israel then Hamas. Eight mortar rounds fired across the border next. No one was hurt in these attacks. Israel responded with air strikes against the mortar squads.
Military sources report the Palestinian attacks began shortly after the withdrawal of small Israeli units, left at vantage points for a few hours to guard against renewed Palestinian rocket launches. The bulk of the Israeli army left the Gaza Strip earlier this week.
Jerusalem may be expected to decide on military restraint this time, although past experience with Hamas has shown that a single firing to test Israel's response is usually the harbinger of a general assault.
As in the past, Hamas may pin the blame on a fringe group. In fact, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine announced in Damascus that it was not a party to the Hamas ceasefire and its members would continue to fight Israel.
US-Egyptian Red Sea ships hunt for Iranian ship carrying 60 tons of arms for Hamas
January 20, 2009, 11:23 AM (GMT+02:00)
US and Egyptian warships were scouring the Gulf of Aden and Red Sea Tuesday, Jan. 20 to waylay an Iranian freighter carrying scores of heavy rockets for delivery to Hamas. DEBKAfile's exclusive sources report they were acting on intelligence that a ship loaded with an estimated 60 tons of arms to replenish Hamas' depleted war stocks had set out from the Iranian Persian Gulf port of Bandar Abbas on Jan. 17.
Our sources reveal that the arms-smuggling vessel started its voyage as the Iran-Hedayat and changed its name in mid sea to Famagustus registered to Panama. The captain was ordered by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards to unload its cargo at a smugglers cove on the southeastern coast of Sinai opposite the Gulf of Suez, to be picked up by armed Bedouin gangs and moved to El Arish in northern Sinai. From there the contraband rockets were to be slipped gradually into the Gaza Strip.
The cargo consists of 50 Iranian Fajr rockets whose range is 50-75 km, scores of heavy Grad rockets, new, improved launchers whose angle of fire can be precisely adjusted, tons of high-quality explosives, submachine guns, rifles and pistols and armor-piercing missiles and shells (of types used successfully by Hizballah against Israeli tanks in 2006).
The shipment, the largest Tehran has ever consigned to the Palestinian Hamas in Gaza, includes also a large number of anti-personnel and anti-vehicle mines, equipment for assembling roadside bombs and advanced communications and night vision gear.
(The Palestinian Karin-A arms smuggling ship intercepted by Israel naval commandoes seven years ago carried 50 tons of arms for Fatah).
The Iranian ship aroused suspicions when Western spy satellites and surveillance stations spotted its change of registration after entering the Sea of Oman. Closer observation identified the cargo as a huge arms shipment.
Philbert
Banned
Just thought I'd throw this in the thread; I get tired of seeing posts consisting of blue lines (What, Google left the building?) and various other tactics used to make wild claims and fake history. Since almost no one has a real interest in this subject outside of a general piling on of Israel when the fighting was engaged, I expect this thread will slip to page 16 real fast.
[Article]
Every time Israel seeks to defend its civilians against terrorist attacks, it is accused of war crimes by various United Nations agencies, hard left academics and some in the media. It is a totally phony charge concocted as part of Hamas' strategy -- supported by many on the hard left -- to delegitimate and demonize the Jewish state. Israel is the only democracy in the world ever accused of war crimes when it fights a defensive war to protect its civilians.
Israel has killed far fewer civilians than any other country in the world that has faced comparable threats.
This is remarkable, especially in light of the fact that Israel has killed far fewer civilians than any other country in the world that has faced comparable threats. In the most recent war in Gaza fewer than a thousand civilians -- even by Hamas' skewed count -- have been killed. This, despite the fact that no one can now deny that Hamas had employed a deliberate policy of using children, schools, mosques, apartment buildings and other civilian areas as shields from behind which to launch its deadly anti-personnel rockets. The Israeli Air Force has produced unchallengeable video evidence of this Hamas war crime.
Just to take one comparison, consider the recent wars waged by Russia against Chechnya. In these wars Russian troops have killed tens of thousands of Chechnyan civilians, some of them willfully, at close range and in cold blood. Yet those radical academics who scream bloody murder against Israel (particularly in England) have never called for war crime tribunals to be convened against Russia. Nor have they called for war crime charges to be filed against any other of the many countries that routinely kill civilians, not in an effort to stop enemy terrorists, but just because it is part of their policy.
Nor did we see the Nuremburg-type rallies that were directed against Israel when hundreds of thousands of civilians were being murdered in Rwanda, in Darfur and in other parts of the world. These bigoted hate-fests are reserved for Israel.
The accusation of war crimes is nothing more than a tactic selectively invoked by Israel's enemies. Those who cry "war crime" against Israel don't generally care about war crimes, as such, indeed they often support them when engaged in by countries they like. What these people care about, and all they seem to care about, is Israel. Whatever Israel does is wrong regardless of the fact that so many other countries do worse.
When I raised this concern in a recent debate, my opponent accused me of changing the subject. He said we are talking about Israel now, not Chechnya or Darfur. This reminded me of a famous exchange between Harvard's racist president, Abbott Lawrence Lowell, and the great American judge Leonard Hand. Lowell announced that he wanted to reduce the number of Jews at Harvard, because, "Jews cheat." Judge Hand replied that "Christians also cheat." Lowell responded, "You're changing the subject. We are talking about Jews."
If Israel were ever to be charged with "war crimes," that would mark the end of international human rights law as a neutral arbitrator of conduct.
Well, you can't just talk about Jews. Nor can you just talk about the Jewish state. Any discussion of war crimes must be comparative and contextual. If Russia did not commit war crimes when its soldiers massacred tens of thousands of Chechnyans (not even in a defensive war) then on what basis could Israel be accused of accidentally killing a far fewer number of human shields in an effort to protect its civilians? What are the standards? Why are they not being applied equally or selectively? Can human rights endure in the face of such unequal and selective application? These are the questions the international community should be debating, not whether Israel, and Israel alone, violated the norms of that vaguest of notions called "international law" or the "law of war."
If Israel, and Israel alone among democracies fighting defensive wars, were ever to be charged with "war crimes," that would mark the end of international human rights law as a neutral arbitrator of conduct. Any international tribunal that were to charge Israel, having not charged the many nations that have done far worse, will lose any remaining legitimacy among fair-minded people of good will,
If the laws of war in particular, and international human rights in general, are to endure, they must be applied to nations in order of the seriousness of the violations, not in order of the political unpopularity of the nations. If the law of war were applied in this manner, Israel would be among the last, and certainly not the first, charged.
Alan M. Dershowitz
Felix Frankfurter professor of law
Harvard Law School
[Article]
Every time Israel seeks to defend its civilians against terrorist attacks, it is accused of war crimes by various United Nations agencies, hard left academics and some in the media. It is a totally phony charge concocted as part of Hamas' strategy -- supported by many on the hard left -- to delegitimate and demonize the Jewish state. Israel is the only democracy in the world ever accused of war crimes when it fights a defensive war to protect its civilians.
Israel has killed far fewer civilians than any other country in the world that has faced comparable threats.
This is remarkable, especially in light of the fact that Israel has killed far fewer civilians than any other country in the world that has faced comparable threats. In the most recent war in Gaza fewer than a thousand civilians -- even by Hamas' skewed count -- have been killed. This, despite the fact that no one can now deny that Hamas had employed a deliberate policy of using children, schools, mosques, apartment buildings and other civilian areas as shields from behind which to launch its deadly anti-personnel rockets. The Israeli Air Force has produced unchallengeable video evidence of this Hamas war crime.
Just to take one comparison, consider the recent wars waged by Russia against Chechnya. In these wars Russian troops have killed tens of thousands of Chechnyan civilians, some of them willfully, at close range and in cold blood. Yet those radical academics who scream bloody murder against Israel (particularly in England) have never called for war crime tribunals to be convened against Russia. Nor have they called for war crime charges to be filed against any other of the many countries that routinely kill civilians, not in an effort to stop enemy terrorists, but just because it is part of their policy.
Nor did we see the Nuremburg-type rallies that were directed against Israel when hundreds of thousands of civilians were being murdered in Rwanda, in Darfur and in other parts of the world. These bigoted hate-fests are reserved for Israel.
The accusation of war crimes is nothing more than a tactic selectively invoked by Israel's enemies. Those who cry "war crime" against Israel don't generally care about war crimes, as such, indeed they often support them when engaged in by countries they like. What these people care about, and all they seem to care about, is Israel. Whatever Israel does is wrong regardless of the fact that so many other countries do worse.
When I raised this concern in a recent debate, my opponent accused me of changing the subject. He said we are talking about Israel now, not Chechnya or Darfur. This reminded me of a famous exchange between Harvard's racist president, Abbott Lawrence Lowell, and the great American judge Leonard Hand. Lowell announced that he wanted to reduce the number of Jews at Harvard, because, "Jews cheat." Judge Hand replied that "Christians also cheat." Lowell responded, "You're changing the subject. We are talking about Jews."
If Israel were ever to be charged with "war crimes," that would mark the end of international human rights law as a neutral arbitrator of conduct.
Well, you can't just talk about Jews. Nor can you just talk about the Jewish state. Any discussion of war crimes must be comparative and contextual. If Russia did not commit war crimes when its soldiers massacred tens of thousands of Chechnyans (not even in a defensive war) then on what basis could Israel be accused of accidentally killing a far fewer number of human shields in an effort to protect its civilians? What are the standards? Why are they not being applied equally or selectively? Can human rights endure in the face of such unequal and selective application? These are the questions the international community should be debating, not whether Israel, and Israel alone, violated the norms of that vaguest of notions called "international law" or the "law of war."
If Israel, and Israel alone among democracies fighting defensive wars, were ever to be charged with "war crimes," that would mark the end of international human rights law as a neutral arbitrator of conduct. Any international tribunal that were to charge Israel, having not charged the many nations that have done far worse, will lose any remaining legitimacy among fair-minded people of good will,
If the laws of war in particular, and international human rights in general, are to endure, they must be applied to nations in order of the seriousness of the violations, not in order of the political unpopularity of the nations. If the law of war were applied in this manner, Israel would be among the last, and certainly not the first, charged.
Alan M. Dershowitz
Felix Frankfurter professor of law
Harvard Law School
No I'm not quoting any member.
But one BBC reporter's recall of history is an eye-opener.
The Birth of Israel. by Tim Llewellyn.
So Israel was built upon terrorism, terrorism used by the Zionist groups against the natural habitant of Israel. Forcing out and displacing people who had the right-of-way, may not be at the same scale as in Germany, none the less compareable.
May I humbly ask, if the red Indians today join forces and try to reclaim their land from the invaders, will that be wrong? As some time back they were forcibly uprooted from their home?
The history is always written by the conqueror and it over looks the plight of the conquered.
But one BBC reporter's recall of history is an eye-opener.
The Birth of Israel. by Tim Llewellyn.
Emphasis added
So Israel was built upon terrorism, terrorism used by the Zionist groups against the natural habitant of Israel. Forcing out and displacing people who had the right-of-way, may not be at the same scale as in Germany, none the less compareable.
May I humbly ask, if the red Indians today join forces and try to reclaim their land from the invaders, will that be wrong? As some time back they were forcibly uprooted from their home?
The history is always written by the conqueror and it over looks the plight of the conquered.
Philbert
Banned
(Keeping in mind that the turks and Arabs fought and supported Germany during the war, and the Jews fought for Britain and other Allied forces, where is the fairness in this attitude that the Jewish fighters were sneaky boys that used the British military to get experience for terrorism?)
Israel was not built on terrorism, but from labor and sweat of thousands of farmers and doctors, children and mothers all working under difficult circumstances.
Not to mention the main efforts of Chaim Weizman, Ben Gurion, and all the other diplomatic efforts done to bring about a Jewish state by diplomacy and legislation, the largest part of the equation.
There were atrocities committed by the British against these people, bringing about the Irgun, etc, who were the last effort of a desperate people to save thousands from Nazi extermination.
The actual amount of "terror" was very small. and was never directed at civilians but against the British military.
Keeping in mind that the British allowed the Arabs access to guns and military equipment, but allowed no arms to enter Palestine going to equip the Jewish immigrants, I would say that the Jews (most of whom were survivors of Buchenvald, Auschwitz, Warsaw, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau...there were so many, I won't list them all) showed restraint towards a ruling power that sent whole shiploads of refugees back to Germany where entire groups of adult men, women, and all children were murdered by the numbers in German death camps.
Most acts of terror were directed at the same govt (military ruler) that was busy keeping the entire subcontinent of India subjugated with murder and brutal treatment, and if you must pick out specific acts by the most extreme group of Jewish fighters it would seem only fair to put it in context.
Here's an article describing the Brit methodology when dealing with the more angry Arabs in Palestine...
How the British Fought Terror
January 8, 2009 | Eli E. Hertz
This is dedicated to Mr. Tony Blair, the Quartet's envoy to the Middle East, and to Mr. Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister for the United Kingdom.
Hypocrisy at its best
By Rafael Medoff, April 22, 2002, The Jerusalem Post - "Demolishing the homes of Arab civilians ... Shooting handcuffed prisoners... Forcing local Arabs to test areas where mines may have been planted..."
These sound like the sort of accusations made by British and other European officials concerning Israel's recent actions in Jenin. In fact, they are descriptions from official British documents concerning the methods used by the British authorities to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in Jenin and elsewhere in 1938.
The documents were declassified by London in 1989. They provide details of the British Mandatory government's response to the assassination of a British district commissioner by a Palestinian Arab terrorist in Jenin in the summer of 1938.
Even after the suspected assassin was captured (and then shot dead while allegedly trying to escape), the British authorities decided that "a large portion of the town should be blown up" as punishment. On August 25 of that year, a British convoy brought 4,200 kilos of explosives to Jenin for that purpose.
In the Jenin operation and on other occasions, local Arabs were forced to drive "mine-sweeping taxis" ahead of British vehicles in areas where Palestinian Arab terrorists were believed to have planted mines, in order "to reduce [British] landmine casualties."
The British authorities frequently used these and similar methods to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in the late 1930s.
BRITISH forces responded to the presence of terrorists in the Arab village of Miar, north of Haifa, by blowing up house after house in October 1938.
"When the troops left, there was little else remaining of the once-busy village except a pile of mangled masonry," The New York Times reported.
The declassified documents refer to an incident in Jaffa in which a handcuffed prisoner was shot by the British police.
Under Emergency Regulation 19b, the British Mandate government could demolish any house located in a village where terrorists resided, even if that particular house had no direct connection to terrorist activity. Mandate official Hugh Foot later recalled: "When we thought that a village was harboring rebels, we'd go there and mark one of the large houses. Then, if an incident was traced to that village, we'd blow up the house we'd marked."
The High Commissioner for Palestine, Harold MacMichael, defended the practice: "The provision is drastic, but the situation has demanded drastic powers."
MacMichael was furious over what he called the "grossly exaggerated accusations" that England's critics were circulating concerning British anti-terror tactics in Palestine. Arab allegations that British soldiers gouged out the eyes of Arab prisoners were quoted prominently in the Nazi German press and elsewhere.
The declassified documents also record discussions among officials of the Colonial Office concerning the rightness or wrongness of the anti-terror methods used in Palestine. Lord Dufferin remarked: "British lives are being lost and I don't think that we, from the security of Whitehall, can protest squeamishly about measures taken by the men in the frontline."
Sir John Shuckburgh defended the tactics on the grounds that the British were confronted "not with a chivalrous opponent playing the game according to the rules, but with gangsters and murderers."
There were many differences between British policy in the 1930s and Israeli policy today, but one stands out - the British, faced with a level of Palestinian Arab terrorism considerably less lethal than that which Israel faces today, utilized anti-terror methods considerably harsher than those used by Israeli forces.
Israel was not built on terrorism, but from labor and sweat of thousands of farmers and doctors, children and mothers all working under difficult circumstances.
Not to mention the main efforts of Chaim Weizman, Ben Gurion, and all the other diplomatic efforts done to bring about a Jewish state by diplomacy and legislation, the largest part of the equation.
There were atrocities committed by the British against these people, bringing about the Irgun, etc, who were the last effort of a desperate people to save thousands from Nazi extermination.
The actual amount of "terror" was very small. and was never directed at civilians but against the British military.
Keeping in mind that the British allowed the Arabs access to guns and military equipment, but allowed no arms to enter Palestine going to equip the Jewish immigrants, I would say that the Jews (most of whom were survivors of Buchenvald, Auschwitz, Warsaw, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau...there were so many, I won't list them all) showed restraint towards a ruling power that sent whole shiploads of refugees back to Germany where entire groups of adult men, women, and all children were murdered by the numbers in German death camps.
Most acts of terror were directed at the same govt (military ruler) that was busy keeping the entire subcontinent of India subjugated with murder and brutal treatment, and if you must pick out specific acts by the most extreme group of Jewish fighters it would seem only fair to put it in context.
Here's an article describing the Brit methodology when dealing with the more angry Arabs in Palestine...
How the British Fought Terror
January 8, 2009 | Eli E. Hertz
This is dedicated to Mr. Tony Blair, the Quartet's envoy to the Middle East, and to Mr. Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister for the United Kingdom.
Hypocrisy at its best
By Rafael Medoff, April 22, 2002, The Jerusalem Post - "Demolishing the homes of Arab civilians ... Shooting handcuffed prisoners... Forcing local Arabs to test areas where mines may have been planted..."
These sound like the sort of accusations made by British and other European officials concerning Israel's recent actions in Jenin. In fact, they are descriptions from official British documents concerning the methods used by the British authorities to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in Jenin and elsewhere in 1938.
The documents were declassified by London in 1989. They provide details of the British Mandatory government's response to the assassination of a British district commissioner by a Palestinian Arab terrorist in Jenin in the summer of 1938.
Even after the suspected assassin was captured (and then shot dead while allegedly trying to escape), the British authorities decided that "a large portion of the town should be blown up" as punishment. On August 25 of that year, a British convoy brought 4,200 kilos of explosives to Jenin for that purpose.
In the Jenin operation and on other occasions, local Arabs were forced to drive "mine-sweeping taxis" ahead of British vehicles in areas where Palestinian Arab terrorists were believed to have planted mines, in order "to reduce [British] landmine casualties."
The British authorities frequently used these and similar methods to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in the late 1930s.
BRITISH forces responded to the presence of terrorists in the Arab village of Miar, north of Haifa, by blowing up house after house in October 1938.
"When the troops left, there was little else remaining of the once-busy village except a pile of mangled masonry," The New York Times reported.
The declassified documents refer to an incident in Jaffa in which a handcuffed prisoner was shot by the British police.
Under Emergency Regulation 19b, the British Mandate government could demolish any house located in a village where terrorists resided, even if that particular house had no direct connection to terrorist activity. Mandate official Hugh Foot later recalled: "When we thought that a village was harboring rebels, we'd go there and mark one of the large houses. Then, if an incident was traced to that village, we'd blow up the house we'd marked."
The High Commissioner for Palestine, Harold MacMichael, defended the practice: "The provision is drastic, but the situation has demanded drastic powers."
MacMichael was furious over what he called the "grossly exaggerated accusations" that England's critics were circulating concerning British anti-terror tactics in Palestine. Arab allegations that British soldiers gouged out the eyes of Arab prisoners were quoted prominently in the Nazi German press and elsewhere.
The declassified documents also record discussions among officials of the Colonial Office concerning the rightness or wrongness of the anti-terror methods used in Palestine. Lord Dufferin remarked: "British lives are being lost and I don't think that we, from the security of Whitehall, can protest squeamishly about measures taken by the men in the frontline."
Sir John Shuckburgh defended the tactics on the grounds that the British were confronted "not with a chivalrous opponent playing the game according to the rules, but with gangsters and murderers."
There were many differences between British policy in the 1930s and Israeli policy today, but one stands out - the British, faced with a level of Palestinian Arab terrorism considerably less lethal than that which Israel faces today, utilized anti-terror methods considerably harsher than those used by Israeli forces.
Philbert is it really necessary for you to post your propaganda on here? The world knows what happened, and has been happening for decades, so please stop this incessant role of victimization in an attempt to justify the actions of the rogue terrorist nation known as Israel.
Philbert
Banned
Propaganda isn't what I post, Mr. Aryan Nation.
Ya got information to refute what I say, post it. I use facts and experience to formulate my thoughts; most of what you post is rumor, slanted anti Americanism, and simple minded generalizations.
Since I am an American, living here and born here, I post information relevant to the discussion. Are you suggesting I am an Isreali operative, posting state issued propaganda to further the Israeli Lobby's interests?
I may be assuming a lot here, but you've never been in combat or in the military, have you? Sitting at home full of random opinions and surfing the net for adventure?
Your posts reflect a single-minded mindset not built from any life experience, but from snippets of internet opinion and generalizations.
You have a problem with my take on reality...show me the money.:clown:
Ya got information to refute what I say, post it. I use facts and experience to formulate my thoughts; most of what you post is rumor, slanted anti Americanism, and simple minded generalizations.
Since I am an American, living here and born here, I post information relevant to the discussion. Are you suggesting I am an Isreali operative, posting state issued propaganda to further the Israeli Lobby's interests?
I may be assuming a lot here, but you've never been in combat or in the military, have you? Sitting at home full of random opinions and surfing the net for adventure?
Your posts reflect a single-minded mindset not built from any life experience, but from snippets of internet opinion and generalizations.
You have a problem with my take on reality...show me the money.:clown:
The thread is called "Israeli Attacks Gaza Strip, Killing 200+", not "post your bogus articles on the history of the Jewish struggle for a homeland".
Your sources are all from pro Israel and Zionist conspiracy theorist rags like Debka. Seriously...
"US-Egyptian Red Sea ships hunt for Iranian ship carrying 60 tons of arms for Hamas"
:rofl2:
Let me know how that story develops there Philbert.
Oh I am a racist neo-nazi? Where did you get that from? :thefinger
Furthermore, Alan Dershowitz? :rofl:
He has already been thoroughly discredited and shunned by the overwhelming majority of credible intellectuals. His work is nothing but plagiarized Zionist propaganda. I can see why he's such a big part of your 'reality'. :thumbsup:
Your sources are all from pro Israel and Zionist conspiracy theorist rags like Debka. Seriously...
"US-Egyptian Red Sea ships hunt for Iranian ship carrying 60 tons of arms for Hamas"
:rofl2:
Let me know how that story develops there Philbert.
Oh I am a racist neo-nazi? Where did you get that from? :thefinger
Furthermore, Alan Dershowitz? :rofl:
He has already been thoroughly discredited and shunned by the overwhelming majority of credible intellectuals. His work is nothing but plagiarized Zionist propaganda. I can see why he's such a big part of your 'reality'. :thumbsup:
Last edited by a moderator:
Here is a the 60 minutes special from last night.
Its mostly about the west bank.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWN_CaRUkJE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLqkgPZNqLY&feature=channel_page
Its mostly about the west bank.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWN_CaRUkJE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLqkgPZNqLY&feature=channel_page
This is a great point. I was waiting for it. I have read about it. And nobody has even answered the question. How did the Israelis get that land in the first place?
It was mainly by force, like it or not. So when I hear people make excuses for them, with out even mentioning the struggles of the Palestinians(to balance it out) who were there before the Zionists movement, Its just frustrating. Its amazing the hypocrisy of some people.
Re: One-sided politics ...
You made a comment about how the "bleeding heart", so called, causes more death. Yet you forget that this recent outbreak in violence has been one of the bloodiest periods of this war. 1330 Palestinians and 13 Israelis. And Im willing to bet that the philosophy behind that attack was far from "bleeding heart."
I'm willing to bet you didn't even watch and think about both vids I posted.
You made a comment about how the "bleeding heart", so called, causes more death. Yet you forget that this recent outbreak in violence has been one of the bloodiest periods of this war. 1330 Palestinians and 13 Israelis. And Im willing to bet that the philosophy behind that attack was far from "bleeding heart."
Philbert
Banned
Iranian arms ship intercepted by US warship has sealed secret holdsDEBKAfile Exclusive Report
January 25, 2009, 9:15 PM (GMT+02:00)
Iranian freighter for smuggling arms to Hamas
"The Iranian ship boarded by a US Navy Coast Guard team on the Red Sea last week before it could smuggle arms to Hamas is now disclosed by DEBKAfile's military sources to have tried to trick the search team by enclosing its rocket cargo in secret compartments behind layers of steel. Furthermore, our sources reveal, the US has not yet found a harbor in the region for carrying out a thorough search.
The Cypriot-flagged Iranian freighter Nochegorsk was intercepted last week by the new US Combined Task Force 151 in the Bab al-Mandeb Straits. Its presence in the Red Sea was first revealed by DEBKAfile on Jan. 20. For this article click HERE.
The Americans decided not to give the Israeli Navy a chance to seize the vessel and tow it to Eilat for fear of a Tehran ultimatum to Jerusalem, followed by Iranian attacks on Israeli naval craft patrolling the Gulf of Aden and Red Sea.
Iran maintains two warships in those waters to guard its shipping against Somali pirates as well as a military presence in the Eritrean port of Assab. The arms smuggling ship was first reported escorted out of the Suez Canal Saturday night, Jan. 23, after which Washington imposed a blackout on the incident. It is now moored at an Egyptian Red Sea port at the entrance to the Gulf of Suez.
But the US and Egyptian governments are in a fix. To break the Iranian ship's holds open and expose the rockets destined for Hamas, the facilities of a sizeable port are needed. It would have to be Egyptian because the other coastal nations - Eritrea, Sudan and Somalia - are hostile or controlled by pirates. Both the US and Egypt are hesitant about precipitating a full-blown armed confrontation with Iran. The timing is wrong for the new Barack Obama administration, which is set on smoothing relations with Tehran through diplomatic engagement. Cairo has just launched a campaign to limit Tehran's aggressive drive in the Middle East but does not want a premature clash.
DEBKAfile's Iranian sources disclose that the ship's captain had orders not to resist an American boarding team but impede a close look at its freight. The Navy Coast Guard searchers first found a large amount of ordnance and explosives in the ship's hold, which the Iranian captain claimed were necessary for securing Iranian freighters heading from the Red Sea to the Suez Canal. But then, the US searchers using metal detectors perceived welded steel compartments packed with more hardware concealed at the bottom of the hull.
The option of towing it to a Persian Gulf port for an intensive search was rejected because the Gulf emirates hosting US bases were almost certain to shy away from involvement in the affair. Moreover, Tehran would be close enough to mount a naval commando operation to scuttle the ship before it was searched.
Our military sources estimate that eventually the US government may decide to let the Iranian arms ship sail through the Suez Canal out to the Mediterranean for lack of other options."
So, you get accurate information from where...? Al Jazeera? How do you vette your information sources...do you have visions or something else?
Only one of my sources is Debka; I have human intel and personal experience to make my judgements. You have ...?
Your anti-semetic slant is very obvious, from your sarcasm towards any Jewish source of information, to your rabid anti-Israel bias.
Can you quote from some of those intellectuals you revere so much how A. Dershowitz has been discredited? Just a name or two, and an article where he has been discredited and caught recycling Zionist propagana. You seem so sure of this there must be some footprints somewhere.
Other than Stormfront News, or Al Jazeera.
I hear the usual Islamic Jihadi slant in your take on things, like you believe anything negative about the USA or Israel.
I mean...anyone caught using the internet to download porn or just visiting FreeOnes would result in execution or crucifiction in Gaza...Sh'ria law is in control there, and everyone on this site would be found guilty of crimes against Islam.
Israel is in the forefront of internet development, chip research, tech of all kinds, and you can be on FreeOnes if you want...no crime there. What part of the Dark Ages do you like best...the enslavement of women or the complete lack of personal freedom? Maybe the part where you are sentenced to death for converting from Islam to any other religion?
I know who I support...the enlightened West, which includes Israel; not the 15th century philosophies of the Jihadis.
When was the last jetliner hijacked by Israelis and hostages beaten to death? Or Israeli commandos capturing and killing Jordanian Olympic atheletes?
How often do the Israelis fly jets into office buildings, targeting and killing thousands of just civilians?
You have obviously chosen the side of the people who will kill you if you speak out too much...ask Salmon Rushdi how great the Islamic culture is.
Good luck with your heroes...you'll love living under Sh'ria.
Wainkerr99
Closed Account
They murder, torture and hound Christians too, in Eritrea, well, Muslim countries. And China.
Ai. What group of people sit down and deliberate how they can do harm like this? The solution is still open - to let the children play. But even that is hard. Israel has its work cut out with that one.
Ai. What group of people sit down and deliberate how they can do harm like this? The solution is still open - to let the children play. But even that is hard. Israel has its work cut out with that one.
The point is the first claim 60 tons of arms. Then the next article seems to state that they found a few rockets that were hidden within their cargo. There's a big difference between 60 tons of arms, and a few rockets, and that's even considering that the story is true. Since it can't be verified, and given Debka's Zionist agenda, I will have no choice but to believe it as nothing but fabricated 'intelligence'.
In reality nothing can be verified unless you witness it first hand, or believe what someone elses story is. What I believe is based upon what would be considered intersubjective truth. Of course in the end people will believe whatever they want, such is the case with people like you.
Oh and Al Jazeera? I don't think I have sourced them at any time, but their coverage is accurate as far as I'm concerned.
Ok. Considered that Debka is known to have a Zionist agenda, and is located in Israel, yet they are your main source of information? That seems strange to me for someone who is after the truth to even consider such a 'news' agency.
It may come as a shock to you, but being against the Israeli government does not make you anti-Semitic. If I am against the French government, does that mean I am somehow anti-Francophone? Put in whatever country you like, and ask yourself the same question. Even orthodox Jews believe that Israel is an illegal state. Zionists took Judaism and turned it into a nationalistic policy, which is entirely against the teachings of Judaism.
Stormfront and Al Jazeera? Mr. Aryan Nations? You have a problem man.
If you want to I can send you links to all of this, it has nothing to do with the thread.
Ok yeah. It's not about picking sides. And in no way are suicide bombers representative of every follower of Islam, just like not every Jew is the head of a central bank looking to enslave the world through usury. Try using some of that "human intel and personal experience".
Philbert
Banned
Very weak rebuttal; as I thought.
Very simplistic statements; backtracking from strong declaration to maybes and simplistic weasel-outs like " in no way are suicide bombers representative of every follower of Islam"...no rational thinker would see any large group, however mainstream to the group, as representitive of "every" member. There were disidents in Nazi Germany who worked to save Gypsies, Catholics, Jews, homosexuals, and whoever from the vast majority of active and passive German citizens who either actively supported the Nazi agenda of race purification or were complacent participants. Of course they would later mostly claim no responsibility for the actions of a "few" that they enabled by their various levels of participation. Just like every Muslim who supports and enables the core radical group of Jihadis found throughout the Islamic world.
Finding a detail here and there and disecting it to the Nth degree is an action of denial; the long and obvious pattern of cultural war being waged by forces of regression against the forces of progression is easily discerned by anyone who cares to see it.
Since the years of wealth transfer has enabled the Jihadis to spread their efforts much more effectively and to devastating effect, you have become an enabler through fear or ignorance; either produces the same effect.
CNN extolls the Jihadi cause to keep their moneymakers (reporters) able to work in the Middle East; one too many accurate reports on the brutality and repression of daily life in Gaza, Saudi, Iran, or any Islamic paradise, and reporters would be featured in new beheading videos all over the net. There would be only Al Jazeera left to give us the news. Bernard Shaw's posts from Baghdad before and during the Iraq conflict gave us a taste of how lame officially approved (by the local censors) news can be.
When the next terror strike goes down, and it will, I can only hope someone close to you is a victim. Then, come on FreeOnes with your support of the Islamic cause and tell us how you can understand why Israel is such a horrendous group of terrorists, and the Jihadis are just trying to do what they can.
By the way...I have only visited Debka 3 times the past few months, but I enjoy the inside sources they make use of. Israeli intel sources, from ex-intel and current military to news sources abroad, I can vette what I read and while the slant can go either way (as is normal when any human being reports on what they see) the info is not the fluff most news services (Reuters, AP, CNN, ABC, etc) give us in sugared versions.
Very simplistic statements; backtracking from strong declaration to maybes and simplistic weasel-outs like " in no way are suicide bombers representative of every follower of Islam"...no rational thinker would see any large group, however mainstream to the group, as representitive of "every" member. There were disidents in Nazi Germany who worked to save Gypsies, Catholics, Jews, homosexuals, and whoever from the vast majority of active and passive German citizens who either actively supported the Nazi agenda of race purification or were complacent participants. Of course they would later mostly claim no responsibility for the actions of a "few" that they enabled by their various levels of participation. Just like every Muslim who supports and enables the core radical group of Jihadis found throughout the Islamic world.
Finding a detail here and there and disecting it to the Nth degree is an action of denial; the long and obvious pattern of cultural war being waged by forces of regression against the forces of progression is easily discerned by anyone who cares to see it.
Since the years of wealth transfer has enabled the Jihadis to spread their efforts much more effectively and to devastating effect, you have become an enabler through fear or ignorance; either produces the same effect.
CNN extolls the Jihadi cause to keep their moneymakers (reporters) able to work in the Middle East; one too many accurate reports on the brutality and repression of daily life in Gaza, Saudi, Iran, or any Islamic paradise, and reporters would be featured in new beheading videos all over the net. There would be only Al Jazeera left to give us the news. Bernard Shaw's posts from Baghdad before and during the Iraq conflict gave us a taste of how lame officially approved (by the local censors) news can be.
When the next terror strike goes down, and it will, I can only hope someone close to you is a victim. Then, come on FreeOnes with your support of the Islamic cause and tell us how you can understand why Israel is such a horrendous group of terrorists, and the Jihadis are just trying to do what they can.
By the way...I have only visited Debka 3 times the past few months, but I enjoy the inside sources they make use of. Israeli intel sources, from ex-intel and current military to news sources abroad, I can vette what I read and while the slant can go either way (as is normal when any human being reports on what they see) the info is not the fluff most news services (Reuters, AP, CNN, ABC, etc) give us in sugared versions.
Well quite unfortunately human beings are not a very rational species.
Western minds have been colonized by the idea that Arabs, and all adherents of Islam, are somehow subhumans that must be exterminated. This was not done by accident, this was done by people who have a stake in securing their bank accounts, and their way of life. I know how people think about this subject, and how they argue. Which you already revealed through your ludicrous accusations of bigotry.
This is yet another topic to be discussed elsewhere, but really, you have to understand the reason for 'radical Islam'. Yes there were radicals dating back to the creation of the religion, and yes many wars have been fought throughout history because of it, but the same can be said for many other religions. Jews, Muslims, and Christians have been able to live together in relative peace all over the world, and not until Western intervention and the false establishment of the state of Israel did real conflict amongst them truly begin to fester.
You would have to define what exactly progression and regression are. The East, up until around the 16th century was far more advanced than the West, and not by some small margin, but by hundreds of years. You can look at nearly every field of study, from Science, Astronomy, Mathematics, Philosophy, you name it.
Yes the West is crashing down on itself after years of exploitation, slavery, and cheap resources. Now anyone sitting on top of oil is a terrorist. They create the terrorists, and then they convince people they're coming to rape their wives and steal their sons ipod, and every beer gutted yee haw jumps in mass hysteria to kill any target they put on their televisions.
The next terror strike will happen, but don't be so convinced that it will be at the hands of a Muslim chanting Allah Akbar. The U.S. has created enemies all over the world. Hell even the great nation of 'God's chosen people' has attacked the U.S., and they're supposed to be allies. Some friends eh?
Re: One-sided politics ...
Unlike the Hezbollah who have managed to see some Israeli citizens debate over the issue, Hamas has completely succeeded in uniting most of the Israeli "hardline" views. Israeli is very sick and tired of appeasing and only getting more shit for it, with attacks that can be made closer.
I cannot emphasize enough that the "reversal" of policies in 2006-2008+ has been a direct result of how Hamas has conducted itself from 2001-2005 given Israeli concessions. That's why the Bush administration finally said, "hey, these are our terms, you can live up to them, but we're drawing the line until you do" by 2006.
And you wonder why Fatah is "back in the picture" all of the sudden. Israel is not fucking around this time. There will be no "pause" in the operations when they are commenced. They will be executed until completed. No more bullshit political non-sense. It's over. It's not going to get consideration any more and "bleeding heart outcry" isn't going to stop it.
Obama can pay lip service, but until Hamas and the Palestinian state actually stops fucking around and actually making good on very agreeable terms, it's not going to end this time around. Get used to it, and the blood is on Hamas' hands as much as Israel's, so stop fucking blaming Israel solely or trying to play "numbers games" when one side purposely uses human shields.
Instead of chastising nations with millitaries that actually follow "rules of engagement" (RoE), maybe you should chastise those -- let alone those that fight against the will of their host nation's legitimate government(s) -- that have not only have no defined RoE, but go out-of-their-way to cross the RoE of the opposing side at the expense of non-combatants.
Yes I did, but he has put forth his agendas regularly. He is not nearly as impartial as people make him out to be. His comment about "bravery" post-9/11 was rather pathetic, because of how non-combatants are treated by NATO/coalition forces versus non-coalition/terrorists, and he let that be as if it was "witty." It was not, and only exposes how shallow he can actually be or -- worse yet -- is purposely shallow for ratings.
Agreed 100%!
Unlike the Hezbollah who have managed to see some Israeli citizens debate over the issue, Hamas has completely succeeded in uniting most of the Israeli "hardline" views. Israeli is very sick and tired of appeasing and only getting more shit for it, with attacks that can be made closer.
I cannot emphasize enough that the "reversal" of policies in 2006-2008+ has been a direct result of how Hamas has conducted itself from 2001-2005 given Israeli concessions. That's why the Bush administration finally said, "hey, these are our terms, you can live up to them, but we're drawing the line until you do" by 2006.
And you wonder why Fatah is "back in the picture" all of the sudden. Israel is not fucking around this time. There will be no "pause" in the operations when they are commenced. They will be executed until completed. No more bullshit political non-sense. It's over. It's not going to get consideration any more and "bleeding heart outcry" isn't going to stop it.
Obama can pay lip service, but until Hamas and the Palestinian state actually stops fucking around and actually making good on very agreeable terms, it's not going to end this time around. Get used to it, and the blood is on Hamas' hands as much as Israel's, so stop fucking blaming Israel solely or trying to play "numbers games" when one side purposely uses human shields.
Instead of chastising nations with millitaries that actually follow "rules of engagement" (RoE), maybe you should chastise those -- let alone those that fight against the will of their host nation's legitimate government(s) -- that have not only have no defined RoE, but go out-of-their-way to cross the RoE of the opposing side at the expense of non-combatants.
My apologies, I'm a slow learner. About whom you are talking? US in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq? Russia in Chechen? Israel in Palestine?
I know, Christians are being hounded in some part of India. Why that doesn't make India a party to terrorism? And any one who will accuse so will be told, ("in our local language"), "don't ever utter it Sir, even the horse will laugh"
Did you know, as per the world history Christians were hounded by Jews first.
I don't understand what you meant, but if I correctly understand what you implied, May I ask who gave the Israel the authority to be audacious enough to be the Judge and the Jury altogether?
I'm really puzzled to observe that just for the sake of proving himself right, people are resorting to the inhuman, "eye for an eye" theory and eulogizing it. This thread is full of that.
Your dream of letting the children play - would never come to fruition, if we go on subscribing to that philosophy. In one word. Please Accept - others have the same right to live as you.
Similar threads
