Yossi says "During war there are no civilians"
fuck
Posts: 4,069
It's no surprise that the IDF is responsible for so many indiscriminate killings of civilians, whether Palestinian, Lebanese or international, with quotes like this. I mean, check this out. An Israeli is released early from prison after killing an innocent British activist who was shot in the head: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/se ... m-hurndall.
This is standard practice for the Israeli military- that is, kill and get away with it; in 2005, "an Israeli army officer who fired the entire magazine of his automatic rifle into a 13-year-old Palestinian girl and then said he would have done the same even if she had been three years old" was acquitted of all charges filed against him.... http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/nov/16/israel2
And now this:
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/op ... 65366.html
"During war there are no civilians," that’s what “Yossi,” an Israeli military (IDF) training unit leader simply stated during a round of questioning on day two of the Rachel Corrie trials, held in Haifa’s District Court earlier this week. “When you write a [protocol] manual, that manual is for war,” he added.
For the human rights activists and friends and family of Rachel Corrie sitting in the courtroom, this open admission of an Israeli policy of indiscrimination towards civilians -- Palestinian or foreign -- created an audible gasp.
Yet, put into context, this policy comes as no surprise. The Israeli military’s track record of insouciance towards the killings of Palestinians, from the 1948 massacre of Deir Yassin in Jerusalem to the 2008-2009 attacks on Gaza that killed upwards of 1400 men, women and children, has illustrated that not only is this an entrenched operational framework but rarely has it been challenged until recently.
Rachel Corrie, the young American peace activist from Olympia, Washington, was crushed to death by a Caterpillar D9-R bulldozer, as she and other members of the nonviolent International Solidarity Movement attempted to protect a Palestinian home from imminent demolition on March 16, 2003 in Rafah, Gaza Strip. Corrie has since become a symbol of Palestinian solidarity as her family continues to fight for justice in her name.
Her parents, Cindy and Craig Corrie, filed a civil lawsuit against the State of Israel for Rachel’s unlawful killing -- what they allege was an intentional act -- and this round of testimonies called by the State’s defense team follows the Corries’ witness testimonies last March. The Corries’ lawsuit charges the State with recklessness and a failure to take appropriate measures to protect human life, actions that violate both Israeli and international laws.
Witnesses insisted that the bulldozer driver couldn’t see Rachel Corrie from his perch. The State attorneys called three witnesses to the stand on Sunday and Monday to prove that the killing was unintentional and took place in an area designated as a “closed military zone.” Falling under the definition of an Act of War, their argument sought to absolve the soldiers of liability under Israeli law.
The Rachel Corrie trials focus on one incident, one moment, one death, one family’s grief. However it’s important to include the context within which the Israeli military operated on that day in March of 2003 in order to properly understand the gravity of the trial and the reverberations seven and a half years later.
Yossi, the military training leader, described the area where Corrie was killed as an “active war zone.” The State’s defense argues the same. Yet what was happening in Rafah that was so important to Corrie that she confronted a 4-meter high armored bulldozer in the first place?
According to statistics from Human Rights Watch, Israel had been expanding its so-called “buffer zone” at the southern Gaza border after the breakout of the second Palestinian intifada in late 2000. “By late 2002,” reports HRW, “after the destruction of several hundred houses in Rafah, the IDF began building an eight meter high metal wall along the border.”
The area that Israel designates as its buffer zone has since enveloped nearly 35% of agricultural land, according to an August 2010 report published by the United Nation’s Office of the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). OCHA says that this policy has affected 113,000 Palestinians inside the Gaza strip over the last ten years as their farms, homes, and villages were intentionally erased from the map.
Rachel Corrie’s nonviolent action -- standing in front of the bulldozer in direct confrontation to this project -- cost her her life.
The home Rachel Corrie died trying to protect was razed, along with hundreds of others. The Gaza Strip remains a sealed ghetto. And countless Palestinian families have not seen justice waged in their favor after the deaths of their loved ones.
In 2005, an arrest warrant was issued against Major General Doron Almog -- a senior soldier in charge of Israel’s Southern Command -- by a British court related to the destruction of 59 homes in Rafah in
2002 under his authority. He was warned before boarding a flight to the UK that he could be arrested upon arrival, and canceled his trip.
Related to the Rachel Corrie case, Maj. Almog gave a direct order to the team of internal investigators to cut the investigations short, according to Israeli army documents obtained by Israeli daily Haaretz.
This indicates that the impunity of Israeli soldiers and policy-makers can -- and will -- be challenged in a court of law. And when the trials continue next month, the Corries will be back in the courtroom in anticipation of a long-sought justice for their daughter.
This is standard practice for the Israeli military- that is, kill and get away with it; in 2005, "an Israeli army officer who fired the entire magazine of his automatic rifle into a 13-year-old Palestinian girl and then said he would have done the same even if she had been three years old" was acquitted of all charges filed against him.... http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/nov/16/israel2
And now this:
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/op ... 65366.html
"During war there are no civilians," that’s what “Yossi,” an Israeli military (IDF) training unit leader simply stated during a round of questioning on day two of the Rachel Corrie trials, held in Haifa’s District Court earlier this week. “When you write a [protocol] manual, that manual is for war,” he added.
For the human rights activists and friends and family of Rachel Corrie sitting in the courtroom, this open admission of an Israeli policy of indiscrimination towards civilians -- Palestinian or foreign -- created an audible gasp.
Yet, put into context, this policy comes as no surprise. The Israeli military’s track record of insouciance towards the killings of Palestinians, from the 1948 massacre of Deir Yassin in Jerusalem to the 2008-2009 attacks on Gaza that killed upwards of 1400 men, women and children, has illustrated that not only is this an entrenched operational framework but rarely has it been challenged until recently.
Rachel Corrie, the young American peace activist from Olympia, Washington, was crushed to death by a Caterpillar D9-R bulldozer, as she and other members of the nonviolent International Solidarity Movement attempted to protect a Palestinian home from imminent demolition on March 16, 2003 in Rafah, Gaza Strip. Corrie has since become a symbol of Palestinian solidarity as her family continues to fight for justice in her name.
Her parents, Cindy and Craig Corrie, filed a civil lawsuit against the State of Israel for Rachel’s unlawful killing -- what they allege was an intentional act -- and this round of testimonies called by the State’s defense team follows the Corries’ witness testimonies last March. The Corries’ lawsuit charges the State with recklessness and a failure to take appropriate measures to protect human life, actions that violate both Israeli and international laws.
Witnesses insisted that the bulldozer driver couldn’t see Rachel Corrie from his perch. The State attorneys called three witnesses to the stand on Sunday and Monday to prove that the killing was unintentional and took place in an area designated as a “closed military zone.” Falling under the definition of an Act of War, their argument sought to absolve the soldiers of liability under Israeli law.
The Rachel Corrie trials focus on one incident, one moment, one death, one family’s grief. However it’s important to include the context within which the Israeli military operated on that day in March of 2003 in order to properly understand the gravity of the trial and the reverberations seven and a half years later.
Yossi, the military training leader, described the area where Corrie was killed as an “active war zone.” The State’s defense argues the same. Yet what was happening in Rafah that was so important to Corrie that she confronted a 4-meter high armored bulldozer in the first place?
According to statistics from Human Rights Watch, Israel had been expanding its so-called “buffer zone” at the southern Gaza border after the breakout of the second Palestinian intifada in late 2000. “By late 2002,” reports HRW, “after the destruction of several hundred houses in Rafah, the IDF began building an eight meter high metal wall along the border.”
The area that Israel designates as its buffer zone has since enveloped nearly 35% of agricultural land, according to an August 2010 report published by the United Nation’s Office of the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). OCHA says that this policy has affected 113,000 Palestinians inside the Gaza strip over the last ten years as their farms, homes, and villages were intentionally erased from the map.
Rachel Corrie’s nonviolent action -- standing in front of the bulldozer in direct confrontation to this project -- cost her her life.
The home Rachel Corrie died trying to protect was razed, along with hundreds of others. The Gaza Strip remains a sealed ghetto. And countless Palestinian families have not seen justice waged in their favor after the deaths of their loved ones.
In 2005, an arrest warrant was issued against Major General Doron Almog -- a senior soldier in charge of Israel’s Southern Command -- by a British court related to the destruction of 59 homes in Rafah in
2002 under his authority. He was warned before boarding a flight to the UK that he could be arrested upon arrival, and canceled his trip.
Related to the Rachel Corrie case, Maj. Almog gave a direct order to the team of internal investigators to cut the investigations short, according to Israeli army documents obtained by Israeli daily Haaretz.
This indicates that the impunity of Israeli soldiers and policy-makers can -- and will -- be challenged in a court of law. And when the trials continue next month, the Corries will be back in the courtroom in anticipation of a long-sought justice for their daughter.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
"during war there are no civilians".
it explains a lot.
fuck man, what do you say to the sniper taking aim at the little kids....he is being trained to treat them like combatants. or the planes dropping bombs....
and the US is funding that.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Why not be honest? You get off by trying to rouse people with your thinly-veiled anti-semetic comments.
There is nothing more cowardly then being an anonymous Internet bigot.
anyone who participates in the Israel/Palestine threads is fully aware that the Yosi from the message board is not in the IDF :roll:
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
do you actually have something to say on the article the OP posted?
instead you resort to the unfounded anti-semetic remark. that word gets thrown around oh to often when people don't have anything else to say. so they attack the person. the only reason you call antisemetism here is to take focus off the subject being discussed to try and end discussion about Israel.
you have noting else to say. you can't dispute _outlaws post, so you attack him.
pathetic.
I was just asking because that's what I thought when I saw the thread title (that it was the guy on this board who said this - not that the guy on this board is in the IDF). But if outlaw said it was a mistake, I believe him.
I didn't mean to detract from the point of the thread.
There is nothing more cowardly then being an anonymous Internet bigot.[/quote]
do you actually have something to say on the article the OP posted?
instead you resort to the unfounded anti-semetic remark. that word gets thrown around oh to often when people don't have anything else to say. so they attack the person. the only reason you call antisemetism here is to take focus off the subject being discussed to try and end discussion about Israel.
you have noting else to say. you can't dispute _outlaws post, so you attack him.
pathetic.[/quote]
Wow! Did Yoda teach you how to read people?
Assess yourself, you should.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I guess thats that's the price to pay with civilization.. Do you take your chances with the stupid decisions of other humans or take your chances with mother nature?
Mother nature is much less merciful. There wouldn't be 7 billion of us under her care, but I'm not sure if I agree with some of civilization's decisions.
i'm not so sure if it worked since i have never done that before... :oops:
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
anyway, please stop derailing this thread.
it only worked in the above post and when someone quotes that post.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Hail, Hail!!!
second...sad,but true..."during war there are no civilians"indeed..ill say as i say very often
"in war and love everything allowed"
when usa bomb serbia ,when usa bomb irak,there was civilians on the ground..when russia bomb chechenia,
when.when.when..is a nonstop talking..
when its a war ,a bombing. someone loose his life,someone else his child,his brother,his dad,e.t.c
thats the fuckin problem and not what a military said..
if you dont know it,ill tell you cos i know from first hand..military trained to win the wars..with any cost
sad..but true
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
After the verdict, Iman's father, Samir al-Hams, said the army never intended to hold the soldier accountable.
"They did not charge him with Iman's murder, only with small offences, and now they say he is innocent of those even though he shot my daughter so many times," he said. "This was the cold-blooded murder of a girl. The soldier murdered her once and the court has murdered her again. What is the message? They are telling their soldiers to kill Palestinian children."
...Israeli army officer who fired the entire magazine of his automatic rifle into a 13-year-old Palestinian girl and then said he would have done the same even if she had been three years old was acquitted on all charges by a military court yesterday.....
...the army's initial investigation concluded that the captain had "not acted unethically".
17 bullets in a girl's body - at close range. Not acted unethically.... Disgusting.
Poor child,pity the parents who have to suffer through this. Sadly they are not the only ones.
That may be true... but, it doesn't mean it is right.
For example, in order to get one sniper off the roof of an apartment building... is it fair game to drop a couple of 500 pound bombs from the wings of an F-16 that levels the building in order to kill him? I admit... it is effective. But, does that justify the deaths of people hiding in their bedrooms, trying to avoid the firefight?
The 30mm gun of an Apache Longbow can dispatch of the sniper just as well. So, not anything goes.
The military... especially a military tasked in an occupational force, cannot apply the same rules as an army engaged with another uniformed army. Which is WHY our leaders need to put in the hard work and long hours to decide whether or not to engage in a war. War is the last resort... not the initial option. We need to understand this, as a people, so we don't place our soldiers in predicaments of limited engagement that may cost them their lives.
Hail, Hail!!!
really Rita..how sad are those threads..and the frikin thing is that we are talking and comment from the safety
of our offices,houses.e.t.c....can you imagine to be infront of that action...sometimes i think that someone who is a cool,calm guy can be in a minute a monster and shoot in cold blood if he is in the zone of war
ok ,im not talking for the murderer that shoot that girl 17 times..but im thinking that im here safe and try to judge with my logic something i read..i really dont know what im going to do,if im in a war zone.feel fear for my life ,last week i loose a relative from a bombing and see an enemy in 3 metres..and i have a gun..
i cant tell you for sure how ill act..and here comes the training i was talking in the fotila threads..
special forces and military trained for act ..they way they told them to do
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
sorry but i disagree with your statement that in war there are no civilians. thats horseshit . noncombatants are civilians. my 4 year old granddaughter is a civilian. as i would hope ALL children would be. how can you say otherwise. and to say everything is allowed in war is just ridiculous. raping women is allowed is it??? killing children is allowed is it??? taking potshots at people going about their day is allowed is it??? to all that i say BULLSHIT.
and we know the military is trained to kill in order to win their stupid wars. but that doesnt mean killing innocents. and if it does then fuck you all who give this order and all who carry it out.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
go tell that to Rachel Corrie, Iman al-Hams, and Tom Hurndall's parents.
one was a child who's only crime was being born in Gaza. two were human rights activisits.
read the OP.
tell me why someone shouldn't have to explain to Rachel Corries parents why their daughter died. they are hoping for truth, justice and accountability. they deserve at least that. Rachel deserves at least that.
why is that too much to ask in a supposedly civilized society?
it shouldn't be.
So does that absolve all 'war crimes'? All is fair game in the name of 'war'?
people have the guns kill others..earth isnt an angels land..
so that statement of that asshole unfortuntly is true...wrong but true
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
he just pushes the button. say that out loud dimitris.
the fact that people die for no reason is bad enough. but for them to die by the hand of someone so dissociated from the result of their actions is just beyond words. war is bullshit. and it is not any measure of a civilised society. have we always had war? yes we have. can we see a better way? it appears we cant. and this is what draws my ire. i want to know why with all the resources we have... with the so called progress weve made... with our protestations that we are a civilise people... why do we still resort to such measures.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say