|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 7:22 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Big Bird at long last has something to say in reply to me that doesn't require me putting on a bib:
| Quote: |
| I have no sympathy for Israel's position when it comes to this occupation, which is just one long extended land grab. |
Oh, really? Then if this is the aim, why leave in the first place? You do recall that Israel made the choice to leave Gaza some time ago? And if you actually believe they want to return now that Hamas is firmly in control, then why not do it sooner?
| Quote: |
| I feel sorry for individual Israelis, and felt sickened by the suicide bombings that took place a few years ago. However, I think the victims of those attrocities were as much the victims of their own government as they were victims of Palestinians, sacrificed to the continued land grab in the West Bank.. |
Are you reading talking points from Al-Jazeera again? C'mon, the same should then be said of the Gazans suffering at the hands of Hamas. Once again there's no consistency in your concern, which makes your motives if not your arguments highly suspect.
| Quote: |
| You can not be surprised, when you are occupying another people, when they try to rise up and violently resist. |
Uh, so what's Hamas' excuse? And for that matter, what is Hizbollah's excuse firing rockets recently? You just can't bring yourself to admit that they instigate violence, foment unrest, and resolve to wipe Israel off the map, can you? And why not? Because then you'd have to adopt an entirely different mindset? My but how deep-seated prejudice manages to justify itself. And your concern for Israelis rings hollow as a result, exposing you to charges of anti-Semitism which, perhaps undeserved in the end, are increasingly justified.
In short, you just don't get it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
But seeing as you are so outraged by the use of children as shields, why are you not up in arms about the IDF's regular use of children as human shields? It's common practice in Gaza right now for IDF troops to take over a residence, and not allow the terrified family to leave. That's a use of children as human shields, yet I don't hear you getting worked up about it. |
Source please...from a mainstream news outlet like I provided. |
Many mainstream news outlets have carried this story, but I'll take the press release from Amnesty International
| Quote: |
Amnesty International said today that both Israeli soldiers and Palestinian fighters are endangering the lives of Palestinian civilians � including by using them as human shields.
�Our sources in Gaza report that Israeli soldiers have entered and taken up positions in a number of Palestinian homes, forcing families to stay in a ground floor room while they use the rest of their house as a military base and sniperf position,� said Malcolm Smart, Amnesty International�s Middle East and North Africa Programme. �This clearly increases the risk to the Palestinian families concerned and means they are effectively being used as human shields.� |
If you go on to read the full report you will also find this:
| Quote: |
Israeli forces have bombed civilian homes and other buildings, arguing that they had been used as cover by gunmen firing at Israeli targets, although Palestinian fighters usually vacate the areas as soon as they have fired.
�The Israeli army is well-aware that Palestinian gunmen usually leave the area after having fired and that any reprisal attack against these homes will in most cases cause harm to civilians -- not gunmen.� |
So according to this, the IDF has been deliberately killing civillians knowing full well that gunmen they claim to be targetting have long since left the scene. And sadly in fact there are many eye-witness reports coming out suggesting this unsavory practice has been happening regularly in the past few days. |
AI doesn't cut it with me. TIME, The Economist, BBC, Newsweek...all these are reputable news organizations with more or less reliable fact-checkers. Many governments and companies have criticized AI for selection bias and ideological bias. The U.S, South Korea, and Israel are just three of the many. Also companies like Total have also pointed this out. Where there's smoke, there's usually fire.
Furthermore this press release is not backed up by any cited source or other evidence. This would not constitute proof in a court of law in the Western world and doesn't here either. |
It's been reported in plenty of mainstream sources, here it is in the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7818122.stm
The IDF's use of Palestinians as human shields is very well documented. It was finally outlawed by Israeli courts in 2005, however the practice still continues, although it is not used as frequently as it was prior to the court ruling.
Pay attention long enough and you will continue to find reports of its use in the Israeli media from time to time (if your own very particular state of 'impartiality' allows you to do such a thing, of course). Every now and then they get caught by an Israeli Human Rights Group, or by a sneaky foreign journalist and there's a bit of a hooha, but Palestinians report that it is a regular occurance that IDF soldiers are rarely called to account for.
Here an Israeli mentions it in an article I was just reading:
| Quote: |
Ben Mocha is hardly a pacifist or anti-Israeli. He grew up in a Jewish orthodox family, attended a religious school, and served full-time in one of Israel's elite combat parachute units.
He says he joined the Israeli army believing he would be fighting "terror organisations". He found himself suppressing Palestinian aspirations for freedom and putting down protests of Palestinian farmers "against the incontinent theft of their lands". He also saw abuses, such as Israeli troops sending Palestinian women and children into houses to ensure they were not booby-trapped, and using civilians as human shields. |
'We are creating suicide bombers from the sons of the dead' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ManintheMiddle wrote: |
Big Bird at long last has something to say in reply to me that doesn't require me putting on a bib:
| Quote: |
| I have no sympathy for Israel's position when it comes to this occupation, which is just one long extended land grab. |
Oh, really? Then if this is the aim, why leave in the first place? You do recall that Israel made the choice to leave Gaza some time ago? And if you actually believe they want to return now that Hamas is firmly in control, then why not do it sooner? |
They don't want Gaza. Even Sharon (a fervent supporter of a Greater Israel) finally recognised that keeping Gaza would mean holding onto 1.5 million arabs - not good when the Israeli right are pulling their hair out wondering how to deal with the demographic timebomb, whereby Arabs are already outnumbering Jews if you include both the Gaza and the West Bank as well as Israel. There are currently 5.4 million Jews and 5.5 million Arabs. Give back Gaza and the problem is partly remedied in that you then have 5.4 million Jews versus 4 million Arabs. Sharon also recognised that he could sell it as a great concession on behalf of Israel - which might go some way to helping Israel maintain control the West Bank, or large parts of it. I'm not aware that reoccupying Gaza has any popular support within Israel, and it's generally spoken of as a possible 'down side' of any attempt to rid Gaza of Hamas.
| Man on a Mission wrote: |
| Quote: |
| I feel sorry for individual Israelis, and felt sickened by the suicide bombings that took place a few years ago. However, I think the victims of those attrocities were as much the victims of their own government as they were victims of Palestinians, sacrificed to the continued land grab in the West Bank.. |
Are you reading talking points from Al-Jazeera again? C'mon, the same should then be said of the Gazans suffering at the hands of Hamas. Once again there's no consistency in your concern, which makes your motives if not your arguments highly suspect. |
No, it's an asymmetrical power relationship. Israel is entirely responsible for her actions in Gaza. She is not resisting a powerful occupier. Hamas are not occupying Tel Aviv, nor do they have the 4th largest army in the world, nor do they have the most powerful ally in the world. Your logic is like a slice of swiss cheese.
| Man in a Muddle wrote: |
| Quote: |
| You can not be surprised, when you are occupying another people, when they try to rise up and violently resist. |
Uh, so what's Hamas' excuse? And for that matter, what is Hizbollah's excuse firing rockets recently? You just can't bring yourself to admit that they instigate violence, foment unrest, and resolve to wipe Israel off the map, can you? And why not? Because then you'd have to adopt an entirely different mindset? My but how deep-seated prejudice manages to justify itself. And your concern for Israelis rings hollow as a result, exposing you to charges of anti-Semitism which, perhaps undeserved in the end, are increasingly justified. |
You're not keeping abreast of events, are you? Hizbollah didn't fire any rockets recently. According to Britain's The Independent, the rockets fired from Lebanon were the responsibility of a little ragtag group with a longwinded name: The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine�General Command.
Your own very 'deep-seated prejudice' does not allow you to countenance that Israel doesn't need to behave so violently, and that this war is entirely unnecessary. You yourself would need to 'adopt an entirely different mindset' to enable you to begin to countenance that the Palestinians have legitimate grievences, and that Israel (as an entity) is not as interested in making a lasting peace as she is in consolidating her hold over large parts of the West Bank. I've never seen you express any real sympathy or concern for Palestinians and I doubt you have the imagination to feel any.
| The Sanctimonious One wrote: |
| In short, you just don't get it. |
No, you don't get it. But Ben Mocha (an Israeli reservist) gets it:
| Quote: |
"I am not a pacifist. I recognise the necessity of Israel to have a strong defensive army but I'm no longer going to play a part in 40 years of occupation. I told the army I will report for training so that I can always be ready to defend Israel, but attacking Gaza and perpetuating occupation is not defending Israel."
...
He is disturbed that most of the Israeli public and much of the media is blind to the fact that hundreds of Palestinians have been cut to pieces by Israeli fire power. "In the long run, it's not a war of defence. We are creating a thousand suicide bombers for the future from the brothers of the dead, the sons of the dead ... in the long term, we are creating more terror. You can't separate the war in Gaza from the fact that the Palestinian nation is under occupation for more than 40 years. I'm not justifying Hamas firing rockets but we Israelis should first look at what we are doing." |
And No'em Levna (a first lieutenant in the Israeli army) gets it:
| Quote: |
| "Killing innocent civilians cannot be justified," he said. "Nothing justifies this kind of killing. It is Israeli arrogance based on logic. It's saying, 'if we hit more, everything will be okay'. But the hatred and anger we are planting in Gaza will rebound on us." |
Courage to Refuse (an organisation of brave resisters) gets it:
| Quote: |
| "The brutal, unprecedented violence in Gaza is shocking. The false hope that this kind of violence will bring security to Israelis is all the more dangerous. We cannot stand aside while hundreds of civilians are being butchered by the IDF [Israel Defence Force] |
[I call the resisters brave, because an Israeli friend once explained how great the life consequences are for a man who refuses to serve in the IDF. It will greatly limit his opportunities even in the civillian world, possibly for the rest of his life. He himself disagreed with their stance, but had great respect for conscientious objecters knowing the sacrifice they were making].
'We are creating suicide bombers from the sons of the dead'
Uri Dan (an Israeli living is Sderot) gets it:
| Quote: |
| "In Sderot and in the area around Gaza, the suffering from rockets is great but it has no proportion at all to what is happening to the Palestinians," he said. "We live next to the Palestinians and we will have to continue living with them. You should live with your fellow human being as a neighbour, not as a wolf. |
Naomika Zion (another Israeli in Sderot) gets it:
| Quote: |
"I'm in an emotional storm," she said. Perhaps the most poignant moment for her came when she had an email from a nine-year-old Palestinian girl, saying, "Help us, don't you understand we are human beings too".
Ms Zion opposed the war from its outset. She believes it was Israel broke the ceasefire with a 4 November army raid into Gaza. This week she wrote an article on Israel's popular Y-net website entitled "Not in my name", claiming Israelis have lost their ability to see the other side and feel empathy, and that the "monolithic" militaristic public and media discourse is a greater threat to the country than Qassam rockets. "It was tough to write this, but I said to myself I am ready to pay the price of social isolation, but not of fear. I assume most people think I'm a traitor." |
Plea to stop war from victims of rocket salvoes
And many other people get it - but sadly not you.
You hint rather loudly at my supposed anti-semitism (and how ugly of you), perhaps because it is the only way you can continue to ignore my reasoning and justify your own views without acknowledging your own deep prejudices? To object to Israel's occupation and treatment of Palestinians does not require one to object to Israel itself. It amazes me how many Americans seem to struggle with this basic concept. I guess it's the crazy 'with us or against us' logic at play. In the same way that I object to Israel's occupation of the West Bank, and not have a prejudice against ordinary Israelis, I can object to Britain's shameful participation in Iraq, but not have a prejudice against Britons. Think about it a little more, and you might start to see the logic of it!
My apologies to those Americans who do not suffer from this strange affiction of 'logic-deficit' whereby opposition to the occupation = hatred of Jews. It's just that it seems mostly a perculiarly American thought process, in my experience.
It does occur to me though, that you yourself probably have a deep-seated prejudice against Arabs, and you may therefore assume that I have an ugly motivation that mirrors your own. You're not much of a philosopher, at any rate.
The other possibility is that you understand very well how the accusation of anti-semitism can be used to muzzle debate, and are wielding it rather desperately in order to compensate for your poor ability to debate the subject. How pitiful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jandar
Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
The ceasefire is coming, I expect it will be a unilateral decision by Israel.
I expect the rockets to continue from Hamas.
I expect Israel to withdraw in 3 days.
I expect Israel to re-enter in 6 days.
I hope I am wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
samcheokguy
Joined: 02 Nov 2008
Location: Samcheok G-do
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I'd like to see a anti-islamist popular arab uprising in the near east...oh WAIT they already HAD one, and the West screwed it up. The Baath Party was anti-islamic at conception. And Lebanon had freakin neo-nazis (the falange) but no, you have to be not only anti-islamic but PRO-Israel/West as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 3:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
But seeing as you are so outraged by the use of children as shields, why are you not up in arms about the IDF's regular use of children as human shields? It's common practice in Gaza right now for IDF troops to take over a residence, and not allow the terrified family to leave. That's a use of children as human shields, yet I don't hear you getting worked up about it. |
Source please...from a mainstream news outlet like I provided. |
Many mainstream news outlets have carried this story, but I'll take the press release from Amnesty International
| Quote: |
Amnesty International said today that both Israeli soldiers and Palestinian fighters are endangering the lives of Palestinian civilians � including by using them as human shields.
�Our sources in Gaza report that Israeli soldiers have entered and taken up positions in a number of Palestinian homes, forcing families to stay in a ground floor room while they use the rest of their house as a military base and sniperf position,� said Malcolm Smart, Amnesty International�s Middle East and North Africa Programme. �This clearly increases the risk to the Palestinian families concerned and means they are effectively being used as human shields.� |
If you go on to read the full report you will also find this:
| Quote: |
Israeli forces have bombed civilian homes and other buildings, arguing that they had been used as cover by gunmen firing at Israeli targets, although Palestinian fighters usually vacate the areas as soon as they have fired.
�The Israeli army is well-aware that Palestinian gunmen usually leave the area after having fired and that any reprisal attack against these homes will in most cases cause harm to civilians -- not gunmen.� |
So according to this, the IDF has been deliberately killing civillians knowing full well that gunmen they claim to be targetting have long since left the scene. And sadly in fact there are many eye-witness reports coming out suggesting this unsavory practice has been happening regularly in the past few days. |
AI doesn't cut it with me. TIME, The Economist, BBC, Newsweek...all these are reputable news organizations with more or less reliable fact-checkers. Many governments and companies have criticized AI for selection bias and ideological bias. The U.S, South Korea, and Israel are just three of the many. Also companies like Total have also pointed this out. Where there's smoke, there's usually fire.
Furthermore this press release is not backed up by any cited source or other evidence. This would not constitute proof in a court of law in the Western world and doesn't here either. |
It's been reported in plenty of mainstream sources, here it is in the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7818122.stm
And you are doing it AGAIN. The BBC is simply quoting AI. Can you NOT find one major news outlet that does NOT use AI as a source? Their own reporters would do for a start or someone else's. But here the BBC is simply taking Amnesty International's word for it. And I suspect that most other news organizations that have run a similar story are also relying on this ONE source that has been accused of bias multiple times by multiple governments and companies. Hmm...?
] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
But seeing as you are so outraged by the use of children as shields, why are you not up in arms about the IDF's regular use of children as human shields? It's common practice in Gaza right now for IDF troops to take over a residence, and not allow the terrified family to leave. That's a use of children as human shields, yet I don't hear you getting worked up about it. |
Source please...from a mainstream news outlet like I provided. |
Many mainstream news outlets have carried this story, but I'll take the press release from Amnesty International
| Quote: |
Amnesty International said today that both Israeli soldiers and Palestinian fighters are endangering the lives of Palestinian civilians � including by using them as human shields.
�Our sources in Gaza report that Israeli soldiers have entered and taken up positions in a number of Palestinian homes, forcing families to stay in a ground floor room while they use the rest of their house as a military base and sniperf position,� said Malcolm Smart, Amnesty International�s Middle East and North Africa Programme. �This clearly increases the risk to the Palestinian families concerned and means they are effectively being used as human shields.� |
If you go on to read the full report you will also find this:
| Quote: |
Israeli forces have bombed civilian homes and other buildings, arguing that they had been used as cover by gunmen firing at Israeli targets, although Palestinian fighters usually vacate the areas as soon as they have fired.
�The Israeli army is well-aware that Palestinian gunmen usually leave the area after having fired and that any reprisal attack against these homes will in most cases cause harm to civilians -- not gunmen.� |
So according to this, the IDF has been deliberately killing civillians knowing full well that gunmen they claim to be targetting have long since left the scene. And sadly in fact there are many eye-witness reports coming out suggesting this unsavory practice has been happening regularly in the past few days. |
AI doesn't cut it with me. TIME, The Economist, BBC, Newsweek...all these are reputable news organizations with more or less reliable fact-checkers. Many governments and companies have criticized AI for selection bias and ideological bias. The U.S, South Korea, and Israel are just three of the many. Also companies like Total have also pointed this out. Where there's smoke, there's usually fire.
Furthermore this press release is not backed up by any cited source or other evidence. This would not constitute proof in a court of law in the Western world and doesn't here either. |
It's been reported in plenty of mainstream sources, here it is in the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7818122.stm
And you are doing it AGAIN. The BBC is simply quoting AI. Can you NOT find one major news outlet that does NOT use AI as a source? Their own reporters would do for a start or someone else's. But here the BBC is simply taking Amnesty International's word for it. And I suspect that most other news organizations that have run a similar story are also relying on this ONE source that has been accused of bias multiple times by multiple governments and companies. Hmm...?
] |
|
Unlike you, who thinks that Amnesty International just make up stuff for kicks, the BBC recognises that Amnesty International is a serious organisation that has to be very careful about what it says. An organisation with the international standing of Amnesty International has to err on the side of caution, and it would be very unlikely that they would be making this sh!t up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
But seeing as you are so outraged by the use of children as shields, why are you not up in arms about the IDF's regular use of children as human shields? It's common practice in Gaza right now for IDF troops to take over a residence, and not allow the terrified family to leave. That's a use of children as human shields, yet I don't hear you getting worked up about it. |
Source please...from a mainstream news outlet like I provided. |
Many mainstream news outlets have carried this story, but I'll take the press release from Amnesty International
| Quote: |
Amnesty International said today that both Israeli soldiers and Palestinian fighters are endangering the lives of Palestinian civilians � including by using them as human shields.
�Our sources in Gaza report that Israeli soldiers have entered and taken up positions in a number of Palestinian homes, forcing families to stay in a ground floor room while they use the rest of their house as a military base and sniperf position,� said Malcolm Smart, Amnesty International�s Middle East and North Africa Programme. �This clearly increases the risk to the Palestinian families concerned and means they are effectively being used as human shields.� |
If you go on to read the full report you will also find this:
| Quote: |
Israeli forces have bombed civilian homes and other buildings, arguing that they had been used as cover by gunmen firing at Israeli targets, although Palestinian fighters usually vacate the areas as soon as they have fired.
�The Israeli army is well-aware that Palestinian gunmen usually leave the area after having fired and that any reprisal attack against these homes will in most cases cause harm to civilians -- not gunmen.� |
So according to this, the IDF has been deliberately killing civillians knowing full well that gunmen they claim to be targetting have long since left the scene. And sadly in fact there are many eye-witness reports coming out suggesting this unsavory practice has been happening regularly in the past few days. |
AI doesn't cut it with me. TIME, The Economist, BBC, Newsweek...all these are reputable news organizations with more or less reliable fact-checkers. Many governments and companies have criticized AI for selection bias and ideological bias. The U.S, South Korea, and Israel are just three of the many. Also companies like Total have also pointed this out. Where there's smoke, there's usually fire.
Furthermore this press release is not backed up by any cited source or other evidence. This would not constitute proof in a court of law in the Western world and doesn't here either. |
It's been reported in plenty of mainstream sources, here it is in the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7818122.stm
And you are doing it AGAIN. The BBC is simply quoting AI. Can you NOT find one major news outlet that does NOT use AI as a source? Their own reporters would do for a start or someone else's. But here the BBC is simply taking Amnesty International's word for it. And I suspect that most other news organizations that have run a similar story are also relying on this ONE source that has been accused of bias multiple times by multiple governments and companies. Hmm...?
] |
|
Unlike you, who thinks that Amnesty International just make up stuff for kicks, the BBC recognises that Amnesty International is a serious organisation that has to be very careful about what it says. An organisation with the international standing of Amnesty International has to err on the side of caution, and it would be very unlikely that they would be making this sh!t up. |
Actually, I agree with Big Bird here. Amnesty Int'l has a good reputation that's well-deserved. Better than the BBC or the NYTimes, anyway.
Amnesty Int'l and Human Rights Watch don't have any incentives to make up disgusting facts about Israeli conduct. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
Actually, I agree with Big Bird here. Amnesty Int'l has a good reputation that's well-deserved. Better than the BBC or the NYTimes, anyway.
Amnesty Int'l and Human Rights Watch don't have any incentives to make up disgusting facts about Israeli conduct. |
Watch it, boy. Next thing you know, you'll be an apologist for Hamas.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
But seeing as you are so outraged by the use of children as shields, why are you not up in arms about the IDF's regular use of children as human shields? It's common practice in Gaza right now for IDF troops to take over a residence, and not allow the terrified family to leave. That's a use of children as human shields, yet I don't hear you getting worked up about it. |
Source please...from a mainstream news outlet like I provided. |
Many mainstream news outlets have carried this story, but I'll take the press release from Amnesty International
| Quote: |
Amnesty International said today that both Israeli soldiers and Palestinian fighters are endangering the lives of Palestinian civilians � including by using them as human shields.
�Our sources in Gaza report that Israeli soldiers have entered and taken up positions in a number of Palestinian homes, forcing families to stay in a ground floor room while they use the rest of their house as a military base and sniperf position,� said Malcolm Smart, Amnesty International�s Middle East and North Africa Programme. �This clearly increases the risk to the Palestinian families concerned and means they are effectively being used as human shields.� |
If you go on to read the full report you will also find this:
| Quote: |
Israeli forces have bombed civilian homes and other buildings, arguing that they had been used as cover by gunmen firing at Israeli targets, although Palestinian fighters usually vacate the areas as soon as they have fired.
�The Israeli army is well-aware that Palestinian gunmen usually leave the area after having fired and that any reprisal attack against these homes will in most cases cause harm to civilians -- not gunmen.� |
So according to this, the IDF has been deliberately killing civillians knowing full well that gunmen they claim to be targetting have long since left the scene. And sadly in fact there are many eye-witness reports coming out suggesting this unsavory practice has been happening regularly in the past few days. |
AI doesn't cut it with me. TIME, The Economist, BBC, Newsweek...all these are reputable news organizations with more or less reliable fact-checkers. Many governments and companies have criticized AI for selection bias and ideological bias. The U.S, South Korea, and Israel are just three of the many. Also companies like Total have also pointed this out. Where there's smoke, there's usually fire.
Furthermore this press release is not backed up by any cited source or other evidence. This would not constitute proof in a court of law in the Western world and doesn't here either. |
It's been reported in plenty of mainstream sources, here it is in the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7818122.stm
And you are doing it AGAIN. The BBC is simply quoting AI. Can you NOT find one major news outlet that does NOT use AI as a source? Their own reporters would do for a start or someone else's. But here the BBC is simply taking Amnesty International's word for it. And I suspect that most other news organizations that have run a similar story are also relying on this ONE source that has been accused of bias multiple times by multiple governments and companies. Hmm...?
] |
|
Unlike you, who thinks that Amnesty International just make up stuff for kicks, the BBC recognises that Amnesty International is a serious organisation that has to be very careful about what it says. An organisation with the international standing of Amnesty International has to err on the side of caution, and it would be very unlikely that they would be making this sh!t up. |
That used to be the case about Amnesty until they began to say that Gitmo was a gulag. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
Actually, I agree with Big Bird here. Amnesty Int'l has a good reputation that's well-deserved. Better than the BBC or the NYTimes, anyway.
Amnesty Int'l and Human Rights Watch don't have any incentives to make up disgusting facts about Israeli conduct. |
Then how would you answer this person?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-dershowitz/amnesty-international-b_b_28257.html
He even has a law professor David Bernstein refuting some of Amnesty's charges
As he points out if we had been expected to adhere to Israel's expected standards we might well have lost WWII. No firebombing of Germany, no atom bomb dropping on Japan...and the list goes on.
He also states that Amnesty blames rapes and honour killings (by Palestinian men against Palestinian women) on the Israeli occupation.
Now if that doesn't show an anti-Israeli stance I don't know what does.
As for Human Rights Watch...see what he says about them in the first paragraph. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dude, dershowitz? DERSHOWITZ? TUM, come on. Honestly. DERSHOWITZ.
What's next? A piece by Nettanyahu? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joo reminded Big Bird:
| Quote: |
| That used to be the case about Amnesty until they began to say that Gitmo was a gulag. |
Oh, please don't disrupt her head-in-the-clouds impression of Amnesty International. Peaceniks like her (even if they only engage in one-sided lamentation) are always suckers for AI.
Big Bird is now chirping a different song:
| Quote: |
| They don't want Gaza. |
but earlier chirped:
| Quote: |
| I have no sympathy for Israel's position when it comes to this occupation, which is just one long extended land grab. |
So what "land grab" are you referring to, pray tell? The West Bank? Come, come, the Israeli government has already recognized in principle that it should be part of an eventual Palestinian state, something Arafat had the chance to get before his own little land grab in Jerusalem.
| Quote: |
| No, it's an asymmetrical power relationship. Israel is entirely responsible for her actions in Gaza. |
I see. So the fact that Hamas deliberately hides among civilians and occupies mosques and schools from which to shoot at the IDF does not in the least make them partly responsible for the latter's actions? You have a nice double standard to your logic. But you're forgiven, I suppose, because birds can't coordinate their straight-ahead vision.
| Quote: |
| Hamas are not occupying Tel Aviv, |
True, but they would sorely like to--or at least shell it.
| Quote: |
| According to Britain's The Independent, the rockets fired from Lebanon were the responsibility of a little ragtag group with a longwinded name: |
That might well be but initial reports suggested otherwise. And at the end of the day, they are likely supported in their efforts by Hizbollah. Regardless, the fact that Hamas has rearmed--and reportedly has more munitions than before the 2006 invasion--makes it at least incumbent on us to ask why. You keep a-breast of events, I'll lend both of my ears.
| Quote: |
| Your own very 'deep-seated prejudice' does not allow you to countenance that Israel doesn't need to behave so violently, and that this war is entirely unnecessary. |
Wrong again; this war was necessary because Hamas is not open to negotiating in good faith, another essential point you overlook.
| Quote: |
| Palestinians have legitimate grievences, and that Israel (as an entity) is not as interested in making a lasting peace as she is in consolidating her hold over large parts of the West Bank |
Most balanced observers of the ongoing conflict would argue that the Palestinian people have at least as many grievances against their own leadership (i.e. Hamas militancy and Fatah corruption) as they do against Israel. But wait: the majority of Israelis agree with you. They want peace too. And if you're so cock-sure that the Israelis want to keep the West Bank, why were so many settlers forcibly removed? Or were those just staged events in your cynical view of things?
| Quote: |
| I've never seen you express any real sympathy or concern for Palestinians and I doubt you have the imagination to feel any. |
This is simply untrue. If you bothered to actually read ALL my posts on several threads since this current crisis began, you'd see that in fact I have. And the Israeli government has publicly gone on record as regretting the loss of civilian life on more than one occasion and from more than one agency.
But, pray tell, where are similar overtures of concern from the leadership of Hamas? That is more revealing than you care to admit.
| Quote: |
| No, you don't get it. But Ben Mocha (an Israeli reservist) gets it: |
Anyone can gather anecdotal evidence for a point of view, but it doesn't entitle one to extrapolate to an entire group, such as the IDF, from that. And if anything, your enumeration only goes to show that dissent and concern and an abiding sense of decency exists within the Israeli ranks and is also permitted.
Where are similar concerns expressed in the press by Hamas fighters? Oh, I forgot, they'd loose their heads even if they did.
Hell, even Al-Jazeera has found civic groups within Israel--including one of the border settlements--who lament the loss of civilian life in Gaza.
But, shucks, no such luck reporting on similar groups of Palestinian citizens by this network. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2009 5:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="ManintheMiddle"]Joo reminded Big Bird:
| Quote: |
| That used to be the case about Amnesty until they began to say that Gitmo was a gulag. |
Oh, please don't disrupt her head-in-the-clouds impression of Amnesty International. Peaceniks like her (even if they only engage in one-sided lamentation) are always suckers for AI.
Big Bird is now chirping a different song:
| Quote: |
| They don't want Gaza. |
but earlier chirped:
| Quote: |
| I have no sympathy for Israel's position when it comes to this occupation, which is just one long extended land grab. |
MIM: So what "land grab" are you referring to, pray tell? The West Bank? Come, come, the Israeli government has already recognized in principle that it should be part of an eventual Palestinian state, something Arafat had the chance to get before his own little land grab in Jerusalem.
Adventurer:Israel has not stopped building settlements. Settlements are land grabs. They have been expanding and expanding and expanded under Rabin, Peres, Sharon, Netanyahu etc.... Your statement that it should be part of a state seems to legitimize the building of settlements in violation of international law. One of the major settlement blocs basically separates Jerusalem from Bethlehem in many areas, and has led to the taking of land from Palestinian Christians and Muslims. That land grab, man. Arafat was not in position to engage in a land grab. What are you talking about?
MIM:I see. So the fact that Hamas deliberately hides among civilians and occupies mosques and schools from which to shoot at the IDF does not in the least make them partly responsible for the latter's actions? You have a nice double standard to your logic. But you're forgiven, I suppose, because birds can't coordinate their straight-ahead vision.
Adventurer: We have only allegations that Hamas hid behind civilians. Hamas lives in Gaza the same the French resistance lived in France, the Polish resistance lived in Poland, the Russians lived in Moscow.
The claim about human shields is rather questionable and has been used in Lebanon and Palestine to justify high death tolls by the state of Israel, and you are doing the same. You have to prove that Hamas has intentionally kept Palestinians against their will right next to them which would qualify as a human shield. It is possible this occured. At any rate, Israel's own supreme court has said that the IDF has used Palestinians as human shields. I think you are thinking of when Hamas men fire at soldiers in their cities and then Israel in response to sniper fire uses 155 mm tank shells and then levels houses with civilians in them. This is a way to justify war crimes. I know both Hamas and Israel have been accused of this to some extent by HRW, if I recall correctly.
MIM:Wrong again; this war was necessary because Hamas is not open to negotiating in good faith, another essential point you overlook.
Adventurer: Netanyahu said before that he doesn't recognize Oslo.
Barak told the Syrians that they could forget continuing negotiations where Rabin left off. Is this good faith negotiations as compared to Hamas's good negotiations? If Israel was acting in good faith when it comes to negotiations which it is clear it was not, then why make a big deal if Hamas allegedly did not? Let's go to the facts. Hamas said it would not recognize the state of Israel.
It would allow the Palestinians in a referendum to do so and for Abbas to negotiate with them, and they would recognize a Palestinian state on the borders before the 67 war.
When was Hamas negotiated with for it negotiate in good faith or bad faith? Israel has not attempted to engage Hamas.
Israel was supposed to open the crossings as part of the negotiated cease-fire that Carter negotiated. Did Israel honor its obligations regarding that issue. No, since there only enough trucks going in to stop a human catastrophe. That was not honoring its said obligations.
Furthermore, the building of settlements didn't violate Oslo, as Shlomo Ben Ami said, but it violated the spirit of Oslo. You seem to let Israel off the hook on everything? Why?
MMI:Most balanced observers of the ongoing conflict would argue that the Palestinian people have at least as many grievances against their own leadership (i.e. Hamas militancy and Fatah corruption) as they do against Israel. But wait: the majority of Israelis agree with you. They want peace too. And if you're so cock-sure that the Israelis want to keep the West Bank, why were so many settlers forcibly removed? Or were those just staged events in your cynical view of things?
Adventurer: Balanced according to your view. Israel has removed settlements. That is correct, but you should understand why.
Israel has annexed a lot of land, and it has kept major settlements that have a lot of people to connect to roads in Israel and keep away from major Palestinian population centers. That's why it was doing. Dov Weisglass basically said this:
Widespread opposition remains to the Gaza settlement evacuation
A top Israeli official has claimed that Ariel Sharon's Gaza withdrawal plan was deliberately formulated to block peace negotiations with Yasser Arafat.
"The significance of the plan is the freezing of the peace process," Dov Weisglass told Haaretz newspaper, adding the US had given its backing.
Palestinian statehood, refugees and the status of Jerusalem had effectively been dropped off the agenda, he said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3720176.stm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2009 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ManintheMiddle wrote: |
Joo reminded Big Bird:
| Quote: |
| That used to be the case about Amnesty until they began to say that Gitmo was a gulag. |
Oh, please don't disrupt her head-in-the-clouds impression of Amnesty International. Peaceniks like her (even if they only engage in one-sided lamentation) are always suckers for AI. |
I know I know. Gitmo was just a wonderful holiday camp, with the inmates living in 5 star accomodation. American soldiers waiting on them hand and foot. One big love in.
| The increasingly silly Hawain cop wrote: |
Big Bird is now chirping a different song:
| Quote: |
| They don't want Gaza. |
but earlier chirped:
| Quote: |
| I have no sympathy for Israel's position when it comes to this occupation, which is just one long extended land grab. |
|
Sometimes you talk like an idiot, Steve. You don't even follow my position (which I have stated here many times) but instead you continually invent my position (as well as my sympathies and prejudices). I haven't changed my position at all. You are (deliberately?) taking me out of context. At no time have I suggested that Israel was trying to grab back the Gaza. I have said (many times) that Israel is deliberately stalling the peace progress in order to tighten its grip on large part of the West Bank...that Israel's leaders put grabbing land as their first priority and making peace as their distant second.
| Quote: |
| So what "land grab" are you referring to, pray tell? The West Bank? Come, come, the Israeli government has already recognized in principle that it should be part of an eventual Palestinian state, something Arafat had the chance to get before his own little land grab in Jerusalem. |
Jee, Steve. Talking to you is rather like banging ones head against a brick wall at times. Why are there now 250,000 settlers living in the West Bank? Are they all just having a little holiday? Why are Palestinian homes continually bulldozed down and nice new Israeli homes and shopping malls erected in their place? Why has the 'security wall' been built deep in Palestinian territory? Have you seen a map of the West Bank lately? One that marks the territory in which Palestinians
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| No, it's an asymmetrical power relationship. Israel is entirely responsible for her actions in Gaza. |
I see. So the fact that Hamas deliberately hides among civilians and occupies mosques and schools from which to shoot at the IDF does not in the least make them partly responsible for the latter's actions? You have a nice double standard to your logic. But you're forgiven, I suppose, because birds can't coordinate their straight-ahead vision. |
|
Of course they're surrounded by civilians. Did you want them to put up their headquarters in a big field with a target painted on the roof to help the IDF better aim their missile? This is a stupid criticism. It's a good job you were not running the French Resistance. You' d have dressed your men up in uniforms that said "Shoot me" and given the co-ordinates of every meeting place to the Nazis. Guerilla resistance fighters don't have the luxury of a well equipped airforce to fight away enemy pilots who are trying to bomb their positions. I doubt you'd make the same criticisms of Israelis if the tables were turned and it was they who were fighting a guerrilla war against the 4th strongest military in the world. This particular criticism is just silly and juvenile.
| Quote: |
| Most balanced observers of the ongoing conflict would argue that the Palestinian people have at least as many grievances against their own leadership (i.e. Hamas militancy and Fatah corruption) as they do against Israel. But wait: the majority of Israelis agree with you. They want peace too. And if you're so cock-sure that the Israelis want to keep the West Bank, why were so many settlers forcibly removed? Or were those just staged events in your cynical view of things? |
All populations have legitimate greivances against their leaders. Israel did it's best to help with the corruption of Fatah, and Hamas militancy is the inevitable result of a 41 year occupation.
And since when were settlers forcibly removed from the West Bank. Please give dates and locations; I'm very interested to know the details of this.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| I've never seen you express any real sympathy or concern for Palestinians and I doubt you have the imagination to feel any. |
This is simply untrue. If you bothered to actually read ALL my posts on several threads since this current crisis began, you'd see that in fact I have. And the Israeli government has publicly gone on record as regretting the loss of civilian life on more than one occasion and from more than one agency. |
The sympathy is worthless and useless to the 1200 dead and the thousands more wounded and the thousands more having to deal with dead and wounded family members. Especially as they knew damn well their tactics would result in such horrific carnage. But apparantly, killing 410 children is OK if you say you are very sorry afterwards.
| Quote: |
| But, pray tell, where are similar overtures of concern from the leadership of Hamas? That is more revealing than you care to admit. |
Absolute sillyness Stevie. Hamas are supposed to say sorry for killing a handful of Israelis when their people are being brutalised in the most terrible manner?
I can't reply anymore today, I've run out of time. But I'm sorry I don't have a debating partner who has even the most basic factual understanding of this conflict and is instead only able to debate as a misinformed smart Alec, constantly maligning his opposition and getting his facts wrong.
Last edited by Big_Bird on Sun Jan 18, 2009 5:50 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
