quote:

---

Israeli forces today attacked the northern Gaza Strip with a series of air strikes and artillery fire, killing at least nine Palestinians, including six civilians who had been enjoying a family picnic at the beach.
The Israeli army said its attacks targeted areas used by Palestinian militants to fire homemade rockets at Israel. However, one artillery strike appeared to go dramatically off course.

The shells struck a large crowd at a beachside picnic, killing six people and wounding more than 30 others, the Palestinian health minister, Bassem Naim, said. A woman and two young children, six months old and 18 months old, were among the dead, medical officials said. All of the dead were believed to be related.

The barrage scattered body parts along the beach, destroyed a tent and sent bloody sheets flying into the air. A panicked crowd quickly gathered, screaming and running around in confusion.

---

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1794304,00.html

[ 22 June 2006: Message edited by: josh ]

"Hamas vows to end truce" watch / listen to BBC news

Once the link appears click on the Hamas link on the right side.

NOT ONE Canadian news service showed the footage of an Isreali gunboat just offshore (proving that this was no "accident").

Israel deserves absolutely no pass on this type of state sponsored terrorism. Unfortunately no one in our media (or apparently any of our current parties) ever has the courage to speak the truth. Look what they've done to both Sid Ryan and Svend Robinson.

It's always the same bad Palestinians / good Israleis crap.

[ 09 June 2006: Message edited by: a lonely worker ]

The Palestinians did actually vote Hamas into power so what the hell did they think was going to happen - like a better sewer system and more lights?

1. The Arab terrorists strike at Jewish civilians.
2. Israel retaliates.
3. Finally there is a mishap and Arab civilians get killed.
4. Then, the international community is up in arms and Israel is pressured to stop or reduce its anti-terror efforts.
5. Then, the Arab terrorists strike at Israeli civilians again.
6. And so on, and so on...

If we if we look at it from a different perspective:

1. The Jewish terrorists steal your land, kill your children, and destroy your crops.
2. You retaliate.
3. Jewish citizens are killed.
4. Then the international community is up in arms and you are pressured to accept Jewish terrorism, the death of your children, the loss of your land and water, and your humilation and abuse.
5. Then the Jewish terrorists strike at you again taking more of your land and killing more of your children, and pushing you into open air concentration camps.
6. And so on, and so on...

Israel took the land in the first place because they were attacked- remember?

quote:

---

Originally posted by scribblet:
Israel took the land in the first place because they were attacked- remember?

---

quote:

---

Israel took the land in the first place because they were attacked- remember?

---

Really? What Palestinian attacked "Israel" that forced them to massacre and cleanse Palestinians and then maintain a brutal occupation and with an ongoing theft of land and resources?

quote:

---

What about the loss of Israel lives when terrorists attack - they don't matter. Now who's racist.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

You say they don't matter. I didn't. Neither did anyone else. Part of establishing a racist pyschology is establishing a victim mentality.

---

You didn't voice it, but it is also ommitted, I rarely see anyone voice concern when Israel is attacked and innocents killed. So lets quit the racist crap.

The first really large assaults on Israel began on Jan 9, '48, when approximately 1,000 Arabs attacked Jewish communities in north Pal.

In the first phase of the war, lasting from November 29, 1947 until April 1, 1948, the Palestinian Arabs took the offensive, with help from volunteers from neighbouring countries.

n May 4, 1948, the Arab Legion attacked Kfar Etzion. The defenders drove them back, but the Legion returned a week later. After two days, the ill-equipped and outnumbered settlers were overwhelmed. Many defenders were massacred after they had surrendered. This was prior to the invasion by the regular Arab armies that followed Israel's declaration of independence.

The UN blamed the Arabs for the violence. The UN Palestine Commission was never permitted by the Arabs or British to go to Palestine to implement the resolution. On February 16, 1948, the Commission reported to the Security Council:

Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein.

The Arabs actually took responsibility for starting the war. Jamal Husseini told the Security Council on April 16, 1948:

The representative of the Jewish Agency told us yesterday that they were not the attackers, that the Arabs had begun the fighting. We did not deny this. We told the whole world that we were going to fight.
The United States, the Soviet Union and most other states recognized Israel soon after it declared independence on May 14, 1948, and immediately indicted the Arabs for their aggression. The U.S. urged a resolution charging the Arabs with breach of the peace.

and on it goes...

It has to end sometime, the Palestinians/Hamas have to accept Israel's existence and they have to want peace. It is up to them to stop attacking, if they do, hostilities will cease.

Israel often responds with too much force, but hey, if you were continually under attack what would you do.

quote:

---

Originally posted by scribblet:
Is is sad, but you do know if the terrorists were not shooting off Kassams (or whatever) Israel would not be retaliating, and no ones picnic would have been disturbed.

---

It is not sad, these are intentional retaliations.

99.9% chance this was no accident, just Israel perssonel operating beyond the guidelines of IDF SOP. But why should they not since the only IDF soldiers convicted of murder was an Arab Bedouin sargent, other IDF soldier get a slap on the wrist.

How racist is that anyway? It is so blatant, what is sad is your contiuned defence of the indefesible.

This plus the killing of the Fateh Security chief appointed by Hamas, indicate a patern of continued provocation, and destablization.

As for the Quassam rockets, these have killed, I think about three Israelis in 5 years. In reatliation Israel has killed hundereds of Palestinians, many as innocent as these picknickers.

Appologists for Israel had better snap to it, and come down hard on the IDF for this type of thing, otherwise what little credibility they have remaining will be evaporated.

[ 10 June 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

So lets quit the racist crap.

---

Yes, I wish you would. The racist crap begins when you make excuses for the taking of innocent lives that are non-Jewish but then reject those same excuses when the lives lost are Jewish or, as you say, Israeli.

In this case, the victims were some kids on the beach. No doubt the killers will find some new victims on the other 'side' in short order. Then, in retaliation, the other killers will create some more victims.

quote:

---

So lets quit the racist crap.

---

And this is how the assholes are perpetuated. Any time you have two boneheads yelling at each other it is inevitable that one or the other, or some friend of one or the other, grabs a weapon and the mayhem begins.

The greatest failings of human beings everywhere is our arrogance and righteousness.

quote:

---

Originally posted by arborman:
I hate that anyone dies in that sad war with no end. There is not a good or a bad side - there are only killers and victims.

In this case, the victims were some kids on the beach. No doubt the killers will find some new victims on the other 'side' in short order. Then, in retaliation, the other killers will create some more victims.

And people in here will pick sides, which is stupid when neither side is justified in killing innocents.

---

quote:

---

And this is how the assholes are perpetuated. Any time you have two boneheads yelling at each other it is inevitable that one or the other, or some friend of one or the other, grabs a weapon and the mayhem begins.

---

The Israel/Palestinian conflict is, at its core, a dispute over land and resources. The claim over these resources are neither legal nor custom but devine right (or protection against history repeating itself according to secularists). By virtue of that the conflict is necessarily sectarian. So long as it is sectarian it remains a conflict between cultures.

quote:

---

"Don't leave me alone."

With those parting words, and amid a sea of tears from thousands of mourners, 7-year-old Huda Ghalya bade farewell on Saturday to her mother, father and three siblings killed when a sunny day on the beach turned into the child's darkest day.

The five family members were among seven Palestinians who died when an explosion tore through the beach in northern Gaza on Friday as Israeli artillery shelled the coastal area used by militants to fire rockets into Israel.

She was swimming when her family died yards away onshore.

"Father, father, forgive me," Huda cried as she kneeled to kiss her father's face at the stark cemetery in the northern Gaza town of Beit Lahiya.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by a lonely worker:

NOT ONE Canadian news service showed the footage of an Isreali gunboat just offshore (proving that this was no "accident").

[ 09 June 2006: Message edited by: a lonely worker ]

---

Palestinian Media Watch (which i know many here do not lend much credence) is saying the footage is fake:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pearson:
Why is it that the Canadian government has cut off aid to Hamas because they won't reject violence but we continue to support the government of Israel - who clearly does not reject violence either.

---

Possibly because the stance the Harpercrites take on foreign policy is fundamentally vicious, immoral and designed to increase human suffering. Really, cutting off all aide to Hamas, even humanitarian aide -- that's "Christian"? When Hamas ran on the same law & order platform the Canadian conservatives took.

quote:

---

Palestinian Media Watch (which i know many here do not lend much credence) is saying the footage is fake

---

Joel, the footage I am referring to was on the BBC Worldservice's newscast that day. The reporter was talking on the baech and behind her was an Israeli gunboat. She mentioned it and the cameraman zoomed the lens and there was no mistaking this ship was just off shore. There were no stock footage shots of missiles or binocular peering sailors (which I agree would just be cheap stunts). This was genuine.

On the CBC news that day Adrienne Arsenault (I think it was her) was reporting from the exact same spot on the beach. Again, the gunboat could be clearly seen but no note was made of it's presence in the broadcast. On the CTV news that night, they conveniently narrowed the view of the beach to ensure no sea views could be seen.

Listen, I know that whenever this conflict is mentioned the positions solidify into "saint versus demon" very quickly between both sides. I think it's time that the truth come out and if it means this time it was Israel who is to blame, then report it and not hide behind some fear of being labelled names.

I understand there is now a formal investigation into this slaughter but unfortunately the only ones who will hear about it will be the muslim media who will just have their suspicions re-confirmed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by a lonely worker:
Joel Goldenberg wrote:

Joel, the footage I am referring to was on the BBC Worldservice's newscast that day. The reporter was talking on the baech and behind her was an Israeli gunboat. She mentioned it and the cameraman zoomed the lens and there was no mistaking this ship was just off shore. There were no stock footage shots of missiles or binocular peering sailors (which I agree would just be cheap stunts). This was genuine.

On the CBC news that day Adrienne Arsenault (I think it was her) was reporting from the exact same spot on the beach. Again, the gunboat could be clearly seen but no note was made of it's presence in the broadcast. On the CTV news that night, they conveniently narrowed the view of the beach to ensure no sea views could be seen.

Listen, I know that whenever this conflict is mentioned the positions solidify into "saint versus demon" very quickly between both sides. I think it's time that the truth come out and if it means this time it was Israel who is to blame, then report it and not hide behind some fear of being labelled names.

I understand there is now a formal investigation into this slaughter but unfortunately the only ones who will hear about it will be the muslim media who will just have their suspicions re-confirmed.

It's time we stopped the propoganda and started reporting the TRUE facts, instead of leaving it to the underground media to show what is being hidden from the average viewer (gunboats and all).

---

I'd strongly recommend checking out:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/13/mideast.probe/index.html

It's starting to look like the only involvement Israel had was "instigating" militants to plant mines on the beach.

quote:

---

But Human Rights Watch said its investigation of the incident came up with opposite conclusions in almost every case.

The group said most of the injuries to the dead were to the head and torso. A Human Rights Watch spokesman said that would be consistent with an incoming shell, not a bomb buried in the ground.

Human Rights Watch also said the crater was consistent with a 155 mm artillery shell.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by a lonely worker:
Lagnaf, from the same article you posted:

So let's see ... the Israeli military (IDF) is saying a mine while Human Rights Watch is saying a shell and offers forensic proof for this. You don't think the IDF has ANY political motivations for their findings?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by a lonely worker:
Lagnaf, from the same article you posted:

So let's see ... the Israeli military (IDF) is saying a mine while Human Rights Watch is saying a shell and offers forensic proof for this. You don't think the IDF has ANY political motivations for their findings?

---

No more than the Human Rights Watch group has.

It's quite amazing that so many people here are condemning the branding the "Toronto 17" as terrorists based on media reports, yet media is being used as the basis for condemning Israel of slaughter.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagnaf:

No more than the Human Rights Watch group has.

It's quite amazing that so many people here are condemning the branding the "Toronto 17" as terrorists based on media reports, yet media is being used as the basis for condemning Israel of slaughter.

Fucking hypocrites.

---

I call Bullshit. HRW isn't "the media" for one, and since you're suggesting they have a political motivation to lie, perhaps you could tell us what that is in this case. Maybe they're antisemitic, or something?

On your second "point", your entire defense of the IDF rests on an article in CNN.

Personally I'm not "condemning" Israel for anything based solely on media reports, nor will I exonerate them based on the findings of their in-house propaganda unit. But, considering the way they've handled "unfortunate accidents" in the past, and the general disdain with which they treat innocent Palestinian bystanders in the territories, I think a little bit of scepticism about their motives is in order. I could catalogue the cover-ups, light-sentences, and downright dirty lies they've employed in the past to mask their "mistakes" but really, it shouldn't be necessary at this point for anyone with a modicum of intelligence.

They admit they were shelling, they admit they can't account for one of the shells, and yet they claim to a certainty that it couldn't possibly have landed on that beach. If you're so bloody sure... Then there's the completely unsubstantiated claim about mining, and that HAMAS apparently managed to slip in an get a bunch of mines out of there in time for the press, HRW, and the crowd that probably gathered to get in and wander around safely. No mention of how on a heavily-travelled beach somehow only one mine managed to be triggered before this supposed removal. Riiiight...

[ 13 June 2006: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagnaf:

It's quite amazing that so many people here are condemning the branding the "Toronto 17" as terrorists based on media reports, yet media is being used as the basis for condemning Israel of slaughter.

---

Yeah, what's up with this anti-Israel hysteria? It's not as if Israel goes around lobbing shells in Gaza every day. I need to see judicial proof -- in front of a court of law -- before I'll believe a story as wild as this one. And anyways, the Israeli Army has denied responsibility. What more could anyone want?

Well, duh. If it's a choice of bread or bullets, where do you think Hamas will spend the aid money? I've just read a report on the rapidly rising cost of armaments, partially due to the escalating tensions between Hamas and Fatah. Guess there's a bidding war on the supply.

She was swimming when her family died yards away onshore.

I was immediately uneasy with that footage, but it was only on the second viewing that it came together. Her hair looked dry or at least nearly dry and she had on dry clothing. I can imagine her hair not getting wet, but who stops to change into dry clothing on hearing a massive explosion? And what's up with throwing herself into the sand a short distance from the body of her 'father'? Don't know about you, but I'd be throwing my arms around him, touching his face etc. And the father himself looked in easy repose. I didn't get the sense that he had suffered shrapnel injuries or lost limbs.

I've no doubt the gunboats were there; the BBC footage proves that. However, it seems this slaughter was perpetrated by the Palestinians themselves, even if that was not the intent.

I go with this, too. I'm sure many on this board would dismiss it, but I've seen too much 'Paliwood' footage that shows how staged many of these 'news of the world' scenes really are. And why was the film crew with it's more sophisticated camera immediately at the scene? That wasn't a hand-held family video camera.

A Human Rights Watch spokesman said that would be consistent with an incoming shell, not a bomb buried in the ground.

You call that 'forensic evidence'. Unless a shell landed DIRECTLY on your noggin, all blast would come from the ground up. These are contact detonation shells that explode on impact. Whether from the front, side or back it doesn't matter. The blast, shrapnel and debris from a shell would take the same general track as a mine - except for the person who stepped directly on one.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Infocus:
Really, cutting off all aide to Hamas, even humanitarian aide

Well, duh. If it's a choice of bread or bullets, where do you think Hamas will spend the aid money?

---

Actually, Hamas has been one of the primary providers of social infrastructure in the Occupied Territories of Palestine for a long time. Most of their time and energy is spent on "bread". I know, I know, that doesn't satisfy the image of them as bloodthirsty terrorists frothing at the mouth at the thought of slaughtering a few Jews...

quote:

---

Her hair looked dry or at least nearly dry and she had on dry clothing. I can imagine her hair not getting wet, but who stops to change into dry clothing on hearing a massive explosion?

---

Stand out in the June Gaza sun lately? It'll dry your hair rather quickly. Nevermind that the Palestinians -- as primitive as I'm sure you think they are -- have come into possession of Western technological marvels for drying the hair: they're called "towels". As for her clothes, why would they be wet if she didn't swim in them? Perhaps she put them on before the cameras filmed her. Modesty and all....

quote:

---

You call that 'forensic evidence'. Unless a shell landed DIRECTLY on your noggin, all blast would come from the ground up.

---

There's a heap of difference in the angle of contact of a shell exploding some feet away upon contact with the ground and something exploding directly underneath you. Turn your attention to various websites about mine victims and you'll note that a very large proportion lose their legs. "Blast" or "Plate" style mines almost always injure the leg or foot for obvious reasons. "Bounding" or "Fragmentary" mines are designed to shoot up in the air and explode, however, they require a triggering device that sits above the surface and is visually detectable. If it were of the fragmentary type, it sure makes you wonder how these people would manage to play in a heavily-mined area (which is what the IDF are claiming) without noticing. Moreover, this still doesn't explain why Hamas would mine a busy beach. Gaza is not big, and that beach gets a lot of traffic. But, I guess they just got lucky that their mine blew up at exactly the same time as an Israeli boat was firing off mortar rounds into the area.

The IDF have admitted to shelling from close by. They have admitted that they cannot account for all of their shells (like they went out and actually found the rest one at a time :rolleyes and HRW (whose reputation is far more credible than the IDF) have been to the scene and essentially affirmed what witnesses are saying. The IDF hasn't been to the scene, and their entire claim rests on unnamed "sources" and conjecture about the possible landing points of their shells. But we're supposed to believe that Hamas set the whole thing up with the compliance of HRW, some media types with their sophisticated cameras, and so on.

Must be a great big antisemitic conspiracy afoot...

[ 14 June 2006: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagnaf:
Fucking hypocrites.

---

quote:

---

The British newspaper The Independent on Wednesday quoted a former Pentagon "battle damage expert," who visited the site of the incident, as saying that "all the evidence points" to a "155mm Israeli land-based artillery shell" as the cause of the blast.

According to the report, Marc Garlasco also called for an independent inquiry into the deaths, saying that physical evidence, including shell fragments, shrapnel and the type of injuries "made Israeli shelling easily the likeliest cause."

---

[ 14 June 2006: Message edited by: Bobolink ]

[ 14 June 2006: Message edited by: Bobolink ]

quote:

---

You people are worse than the Israel did 9/11 crowd

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by worker_drone:

Sorry...which people? Sounds like a broadside smear of babblers to me!!!!

---

Well no, worker_drone, it was perfectly obvious to me that cueball was not referring to babblers at all, but rather (correctly) "smearing" the kind of conspiracy concoction which goes like this:

quote:

---

I was immediately uneasy with that footage, but it was only on the second viewing that it came together. Her hair looked dry or at least nearly dry and she had on dry clothing. I can imagine her hair not getting wet, but who stops to change into dry clothing on hearing a massive explosion? And what's up with throwing herself into the sand a short distance from the body of her 'father'? Don't know about you, but I'd be throwing my arms around him, touching his face etc. And the father himself looked in easy repose. I didn't get the sense that he had suffered shrapnel injuries or lost limbs.

---

(lagnaf)

quote:

---

It's quite amazing that so many people here are condemning the branding the "Toronto 17" as terrorists based on media reports, yet media is being used as the basis for condemning Israel of slaughter.

---

And (again lagnaf):

quote:

---

It's starting to look like the only involvement Israel had was "instigating" militants to plant mines on the beach.

I've no doubt the gunboats were there; the BBC footage proves that. However, it seems this slaughter was perpetrated by the Palestinians themselves, even if that was not the intent.

---

And (Joel_Goldenberg):

quote:

---

Palestinian Authority TV has been repeatedly broadcasting a falsified video clip of the events surrounding the deaths of seven family members on the Gaza beach on Friday. In an attempt to blame Israel's navy for the deaths, PA TV took unrelated video of an Israeli missile boat firing at Gaza earlier in the day and edited them into the scenes, creating the impression Israeli responsibility.

---

Etc.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagnaf:
so many people here

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
[QB]Well, worker_drone, you're right, that would have made cueball's post much more specific. But I think he said "you people" because there were several people spewing similar manure, e.g.:

(lagnaf)
QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by worker_drone:
You say there were "several" people but only gave examples of two. Does two equal "several"?

---

You are cute:

Lagnaf + Joel_Goldenberg + Infocus = 3 = several.

quote:

---

Originally posted by worker_drone:
Or just ban me.

---

Don't ban him/her. Make her/him stay! Why should we be the only ones who suffer the slings and arrows of political debate?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Infocus:
Really, cutting off all aide to Hamas, even humanitarian aide

Well, duh. If it's a choice of bread or bullets, where do you think Hamas will spend the aid money? I've just read a report on the rapidly rising cost of armaments, partially due to the escalating tensions between Hamas and Fatah. Guess there's a bidding war on the supply.

---

You completely misread my post! Even the bit you quoted.

Hamas didn't cut off humanitarian aide -- the Conservative Party of Canada cut off ALL aide to Palestine after the election of Hamas.

quote:

---

Hamas didn't cut off humanitarian aide -- the Conservative Party of Canada cut off ALL aide to Palestine after the election of Hamas

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:

You are cute:

Lagnaf + Joel_Goldenberg + Infocus = 3 = several.

Watch out, or I'll make it 4!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joel_Goldenberg:

So you have info that the footage the PA specifically broadcast was accurate?

---

I'm sure it's at least as accurate as the IDF's "investigation"....[cough]...cover-up...[cough]...into the incident.

The only important question is whether or not the people were killed by an Israeli artillery shell. Though I'm sure it would suit someone's agenda to shift the focus away from that and talk about media shortcomings.

This is what HRW has so far: HRW - Israel: Investigate Gaza Beach Killings

[ 15 June 2006: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bobolink:
Just as a side note, if the explosion was caused by a 155 mm shell, it had to have been fired by the Israeli field artillery. The IDF Navy has no warships capable of mounting a 155 mm gun. In fact the only warship in the world capable of mounting 155 mm guns is the Almirante Grau (De Ruyter class) of the Peruvian Navy. In fact the Almirante Grau is the last gun cruiser in service anywhere in the world.

[ 14 June 2006: Message edited by: Bobolink ]

[ 14 June 2006: Message edited by: Bobolink ]

---

You're right. The presence of the gunship is not directly related to the shelling. The IDF has admitted they were shelling with 155mm guns within the timeframe when the deaths occurred. They have also admitted that they cannot account for the landing site of one of their shells. Preliminary investigations suggest that the crater is of the appropriate size for a 155mm shell.

Going by the official IDF version, I guess that other shell defied gravity and just never came down...

[ 15 June 2006: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]

Considering Hamas etal Pal. terrorists who consistently train and use children as homicide bombers, consistently murder innocent people while hiding behind civilians, I'd lean towards Hamas actually being the perpetrator in this. We may never know, as we know they cleaned up the area afterward - then again - they might magically produce some 'evidence' that is all of a sudden found.

While I agree that Israel could use more restraint when defending itself, howabout getting the terrorists to quit operating from densely populated civilian areas and using civilians as human shields.

quote:

---

Originally posted by scribblet:
[QB]I'd say that it doesn't matter really to many people whether or not Israel actually did it - they would be guilty.

---

Is a nice point, and likely true, but then you continue with this piece of hypocrisy:

quote:

---

Considering Hamas etal Pal. terrorists who consistently train and use children as homicide bombers, consistently murder innocent people while hiding behind civilians, I'd lean towards Hamas actually being the perpetrator in this.

---

Which is precisely the kind of blanket condemnation you abhor above. Nevermind that the evidence so far suggests nothing of the sort, we wouldn't want that to destroy the omminous picture you've painted of Hamas blowing up their own people.

Secondly, the idea that they "hide behind civilians" is laughable. Have you been to Gaza? There isn't exactly a whole heap of open space so that two armies could line-up single file and take pot shots at each other. Insurgencies are "of the people", this isn't "regular" warfare; such warfare has gone the way of the dodo - hell, there was little of it left even in WWII. Warfare now takes places largely in populated areas.

However, international law remains staunch on this: the primary honus is on the perpetrator of an action to ensure the safety of civilians from the results of those actions. Israel cannot legally or morally duck their respnsibility for the deaths and injuries caused by their actions (47 deaths and over 1000 injuries from Israeli shelling in the past 2 years) whether they are "defensive" or "offensive" in nature. Moreover, the provisions in international law which do deal with using civilians as shields do not pertain to irregular forces slipping into the crowds because that's where they live but to the deliberate use of civilians as a shield by - say - firing from inside a school full of students during a specific engagement. That is, if Hamas fires off a Qassam rocket from a civilian area today, Israel can't fire shells into civilian areas a week from now and claim that Hamas "hid behind civilians". It doesn't wash.

quote:

---

We may never know, as we know they cleaned up the area afterward - then again - they might magically produce some 'evidence' that is all of a sudden found.

---

We know this? What do we know about them "cleaning up"? From the HRW report, it would appear that there is still plenty of evidence left on which a full impartial investigation could be based. Something other than the typical IDF whitewash.

quote:

---

While I agree that Israel could use more restraint when defending itself, howabout getting the terrorists to quit operating from densely populated civilian areas and using civilians as human shields.

---

You've not been to Gaza, I see. IDF soldiers also go home to their families, and have a large presence in and around the illegal settlements in the West Bank. Does that mean they're "hiding behind civilians" too?

quote:

---

Israel isn't going to sit back and turn the other cheek while they are continually shelled. There were over 100 Kassam attacks last weekend alone.

---

After a long unilateral ceasefire. Why the fresh wave of attacks? Moreover, how many were killed or injured in those attacks?

Even still, here you get close to admitting the equivalency of these actions. We're dealing with two sides, both committing violent acts, but you seem to think that only one side should be responsible for civilians and therein lies the moral paucity of your position.

[ 15 June 2006: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by scribblet:

While I agree that Israel could use more restraint when defending itself, howabout getting the terrorists to quit operating from densely populated civilian areas and using civilians as human shields.

Israel isn't going to sit back and turn the other cheek while they are continually shelled. There were over 100 Kassam attacks last weekend alone.

---

Interesting new thread just opened on suicide bombings and targetted assassinations. Makes the useful point that both 'sides' are locked into a cycle of irrational behavior which fails brilliantly in advancing either side's rational goals.

As in, it's self-destructive behaviour. On both sides.

Anyway. Back into the trenches....re: urging the terrurists to stop operating from 'densely populated civilian areas', well, Dribblet, given the population density of the bantustans that constitute the as yet unrecognized, landlocked sovereign state of Palestine, they'd have to go to Israel to find less populous land.

Why don't we set them up with a few billion worth of real war toys on a big chunk o'land, how about some of Sharon's vast estates, he don't need'em no more, and they can sort it out with the IDF like real men; I'm sure it's frustrating for adolescent Palestinians to be pissing about with such pathetic arms against soft targets like wimmin an chuldrin.

As for 'civilians as human shields'...well, I don't know. As far as I can tell an entire family has just been wiped out on a beach, save one child, by Israeli shelling - and you come up with this? Pathological?

Anyway, not that it matters, but the IDF have the human shield thing sewn up, google it.

As far as these Kassam rockets, well, what IS the body count in, say, the last two years from this high tech shock and awe onslaught for which the Palestinians have paid in so much blood? They'd be better off heaving rocks over the new wall.

Once again: what IS the body count from all these 'Kassam rockets'?

I'm sorry, can you speak up? I CANT HEAR YOU!

Also, no mensh of the Hamas 16 month unilateral ceasefire which as far as I can tell, the IDF never saw fit to honour. Nor of the civilian body count from the recent increased IDF provocations in the face of said ceasefire, in an attempt to bait Hamas into more stupidity. Successfully. Clever bastards. Well done. Medals all round.

quote:

---

Originally posted by worker_drone:
This is not quite true. They cut off all aid directly to Hamas, but continue to send aid to Palestinians through the UN and other agencies.

---

Are you sure about this? The first statement in reaction to the Hamas election was made by Peter MacKay who stated that aid would be cut to Hamas but maintained for humanitarian concerns. Harper then spanked him and his next pronouncement was no aide to Palestine.

[ 17 June 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
Funny what a little racism can convince you of.

---

quote:

---

Three children – 6-year-old Muhammad Roka, a 5-year-old girl and 16-year-old Bilal al-Hizi, were killed Tuesday evening as the Israel Air Force attempted to assassinate a group belonging to the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades in the Jabalya refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip, the al-Shifa Hospital Director Dr. Jumaa al-Saka told Ynet.

The Israel Defense Forces expressed its regret "if civilians not involved in terror activities were hurt in the operation," adding that "responsibility lays on the terror organizations and on the Hamas government."

Another 15 people were wounded in the strike, including two group activists who were in the car and sustained serious wounds

---

quote:

---

Witnesses said today that Mrs Ahmed, a 37-year-old teacher, was killed on Wednesday night during a meal to celebrate the homecoming of her brother from Saudi Arabia after a four-year absence.

A rocket aimed at a car carrying militants of the Popular Resistance Committees crashed through the thin asbestos roof of the poor Ahmed family’s home, 20m (60ft) from the apparent target, killing both of them. Another nine-months pregnant woman was critically injured.

"I was eating when all of a sudden an Israeli missile came inside my house. Stones started falling on our heads. I didn’t know what had hit me," said Abdel Kader Ahmed, 57, their surviving brother

---

quote:

---

"There is no moral equivalence between Palestinian terrorist attacks on Israel and Israeli army operations, because the army does not intend to hurt innocents." (Olmert)

---

A distinction without a difference: "My murder is prettier than your murder".

With both Israeli rocket attacks/shelling/etc. and suicide bombings (note there hasn't been one for awhile but Olmert still calls them into the picture) the victims' lives are devalued and become instrumentalised to the Big Cause. Our legal tradition recognises a state of mind called depraved, or extreme, indifference. When actions show a wanton disregard for the value of human life and/or a wilful disregard of their deadly potential this is considered equal to intent. Murders of this kind are still murders.

In the article, where Kofi Annan refers to "proportionality" he is referring to Article 8(b)(iv) of the Rome Statute which is, roughly speaking, the equivalent of the notion of "depraved indifference" in the laws of war. Specifically, the law defines improportionate acts as:

quote:

---

Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated.

---

Personally, I think that lobbing rockets into densely populated urban areas qualifies. But I suppose to Olmert one dead "terrorist" is worth at least a couple of dead Palestinians. That's the "new math" for you...

[ 22 June 2006: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]

"In a robust defence of his armed forces Mr Olmert later said he was more concerned with defending Israeli citizens in border towns threatened by Palestinian rockets.

"I am deeply sorry for the residents of Gaza, but the lives, security and well-being of the residents of Sderot is even more important.," he said in a speech in Jerusalem."