Hello from Israel
Comments
-
no, if you read the news you'll discover that for all the week there has been israeli military raids in gaza. Abut the west bank: not true. if you read more carefully you'll discover that the withdrew from gaza correspondent to an enlargment to the colonies in the west bank. You can find articles about this, for example, in The Guardian (go on and find the references by yourself, please)dayan wrote:Israel pulled out of all of Gaza, and was working towards pulling out of most of the West Bank as well if the current violence hadn't derailed those plans.
third geneva convention: right for detainees is continuously violated due to torture on palestinians in isreali jails. Fourth geneva convention: rights in bellum: continuously violated every time a civilian is killed by a member of a regular army. It is violated also when civilian homes are destroyed by bulldozers.dayan wrote:As for the bulldozers, they are a tool, and in and of themselves not illegal. Please quote to me where it says in international law that destroying a home is in every circumstance illegal.
Thank you for the list of resolutions, but again you still have not quoted from international law (geneva conventions for example).www.amnesty.org
www.amnesty.org.uk0 -
Byrnzie wrote:The Israelis were warned 10 times by the U.N observers before they were blown to smithereens. Shiraz has posted a link whih he believes justifies the murder of the 4 U.N observers, as it states that Hizbollah were using the observers as human shields. If that's is justified, then surely that means - if we are assuming any moral equivalency here? - that Hizbollah are perfectly justified in targeting Israeli civilians?
I don't follow. If Israel accidentally kills UN soldiers because they were trying to hit terrorists using those soldiers as shields, then Hezbollah is justified in killing civilians? How is this in any way logical? The Israeli army operates from outside Israeli civilian areas so that Israeli civilians will not be hurt due to their presence.0 -
Puck78 wrote:no, if you read the news you'll discover that for all the week there has been israeli military raids in gaza. Abut the west bank: not true. if you read more carefully you'll discover that the withdrew from gaza correspondent to an enlargment to the colonies in the west bank. You can find articles about this, for example, in The Guardian (go on and find the references by yourself, please)
third geneva convention: right for detainees is continuously violated due to torture on palestinians in isreali jails. Fourth geneva convention: rights in bellum: continuously violated every time a civilian is killed by a member of a regular army. It is violated also when civilian homes are destroyed by bulldozers.
I'm well aware that the IDF has been operating in Gaza for the last few weeks. I'm living in Israel at the moment so please don't presume to lecture me on what is and is not going on. The IDF is in Gaza because despite the fact that Israel pulled all of its settlers and soldiers out of Gaza a year ago Palestinian terrorist continued to fire rockets at Israel from Gaza and raided Israel to kill and capture Israeli soldiers. The IDF presence in Gaza is not an occupation. It is a limited incursion meant to fight terrorists who continued to attack Israel even after they had lost the Israeli occupation as an excuse.
As for torture in Israeli jails, this is patently untrue. The Israeli supreme court has gone farther than almost any other court in the world in banning torture. Even extreme shaking of prisoners is prohibited. This is a published court opinion. And as for civilians killed by the IDF, again, it is only prohibited to target civilians, not to kill civilians while targeting military personel or equipment.0 -
with this statement you've lost any credibility. Also people like shiraz will agree with me.dayan wrote:As for torture in Israeli jails, this is patently untrue. The Israeli supreme court has gone farther than almost any other court in the world in banning torture. Even extreme shaking of prisoners is prohibited. This is a published court opinion. And as for civilians killed by the IDF, again, it is only prohibited to target civilians, not to kill civilians while targeting military personel or equipment.www.amnesty.org
www.amnesty.org.uk0 -
Puck78 wrote:with this statement you've lost any credibility. Also people like shiraz will agree with me.
I don't know. He's right about the suprime court ruling, but I'm not naive and I'm positive that some of the detainees are going through illegal investigations (as like in many other countries, including the US and the UK).
About the other part of his statement ("it is only prohibited to target civilians, not to kill civilians while targeting military personel or equipment"): It is always wrong to kill civilians. I think he meant in terms of court laws, if a civilian is killed because he ended up being in the "fire-line" (=was't there in the first place"), then it is not considered to be illegal. Forcing a civilian to act as a human shield or killing / physically hurting a civilian while there's no "fire-line", is illegal.
Moraley,every death of an innocent civilian is wrong.0 -
he's right about the supreme court ruling, but it is full of Israeli lawyers allowed in prisons keeping on giving witeness accounts of torture going on.shiraz wrote:I don't know. He's right about the suprime court ruling, but I'm not naive and I'm positive that some of the detainees are going through illegal investigations (as like in many other countries, including the US and the UK).www.amnesty.org
www.amnesty.org.uk0 -
shiraz wrote:I don't know. He's right about the suprime court ruling, but I'm not naive and I'm positive that some of the detainees are going through illegal investigations (as like in many other countries, including the US and the UK).
About the other part of his statement ("it is only prohibited to target civilians, not to kill civilians while targeting military personel or equipment"): It is always wrong to kill civilians. I think he meant in terms of court laws, if a civilian is killed because he ended up being in the "fire-line" (=was't there in the first place"), then it is not considered to be illegal. Forcing a civilian to act as a human shield or killing / physically hurting a civilian while there's no "fire-line", is illegal.
Moraley,every death of an innocent civilian is wrong.
That is exactly what I meant. Of course I do not condone the killing of civilians. I was simply saying that from a legal standpoint not every civilian death is the same and the intent matters.0 -
Puck78 wrote:he's right about the supreme court ruling, but it is full of Israeli lawyers allowed in prisons keeping on giving witeness accounts of torture going on.
I will concede that this is probably correct. However, in many cases I do not doubt that those engaging in some degree of torture are acting out of a desire to prevent a terrorist attack that they believe to be imminent. In this instance there, known as the ticking bomb scenario, there are many legal opinions that suggest that torture may be allowable. DO NOT MISTAKE ME FOR SAYING THAT TORTURE IS THEREFORE OK. I am only saying that one may be able to understand why someone might torture another if he felt that by doing so he would be saving lives. I am also sure that torture does indeed occur that does not fit this description, and this is entirely unacceptable. However, to suggest that this is the norm in terms of Israel's treatment of prisoners, or that torture is Israeli state policy, is wrong and libelous.0 -
I am sitting in my apartment in Jerusalem right now watching the news as I write this. The Israeli news just screened a video taken by the Israeli air force showing missiles being fired from right outside the building in Qana that Israel just bombed in which 57 people were killed. The video clearly shows the missiles being fired and the terrorists then retreating into the building. I do not mean for this to be a dismissal of the tragedy of the deaths of all the people who were in that building, but I remember someone saying that Israel was hitting targets that had no relation to Hezbollah, and that Hezbollah avoids civilian areas. This video proves this to be false.0
-
shiraz wrote:Ahmm... China. They've been accupiong Tibet for years. Syria, they are oocuping Lebanon for years by taking control of the Lebanese govt, killing their opposers (like prime minister Hariri) and supplying weapons for the Hizbullah during the past years. Sudan is preforming a massacre on its civilians (there's a civilian war out there, in case you haven't heard, a nation is being destroyed). Saudi Arabia holds one of the world's biggest Al Qaida base, where 15 out of the 19 terroristd went to perform 9/11. North Korea is performing a political slaughter against regime opposers. Its like a mini-holocaust, people are dying in gas chambers and having chemical experiments on their bodies while scientists are taking notes. they are also killing few-days old babies, raping, imprisoning, torturing and performing public executions. I could go on and on, but I think you're geting the point.
*edit: that proves the only thing you Do know is posting Chomsky articals about the mid-east and memorize them by heart. Nothing else comes across if you think North Korea is moraly better than Israel.
So your tying to justify the actions of the Israeli government and military? Why? Who does it benefit? Do you think that Israelis will be safer as a result of their aggression against their neighbours? Israel has now incurred the wrath of all of it's neighbours and faces a fresh onslaught of terrorism against it's civilians.
And by the way, what does it mean to say that I 'think North Korea is morally better than Israel'? That statement is meaningless, and has nothing to do with morality. We were talking about international law, which you don't believe in.0 -
shiraz wrote:God forbid! We've already doing bad things, no more please.
And there we have another demagogic person in the board. Sure, go on. THAT will end the violence circle, right?
You love using the word 'demagogic' Shiraz. Can you please explain to me how you are not demagogic? i.e, appealing to the popular prejudices, fears, and expectations of the public — typically via impassioned rhetoric and propaganda, and often using nationalistic or populist themes.0 -
Byrnzie wrote:So your tying to justify the actions of the Israeli government and military? Why? Who does it benefit? Do you think that Israelis will be safer as a result of their aggression against their neighbours? Israel has now incurred the wrath of all of it's neighbours and faces a fresh onslaught of terrorism against it's civilians.
And by the way, what does it mean to say that I 'think North Korea is morally better than Israel'? That statement is meaningless, and has nothing to do with morality. We were talking about international law, which you don't believe in.
To begin with you quoted Shiraz, but I am the one who doesn't believe in international law. Will Israel be safer because of this? Yes. Don't fool yourself into thinking Israel didn't already face constant terrorism, or that Israel's neighbors didn't already hate Israel. The sad fact is that Israel was forced into its current actions. Do you think Israelis really want to be sending their children back into Lebanon? Of course not! But to not respond to repeated unprovoked aggression would have meant that every enemy of Israel would have learned the lesson that you can kill Israelis without any consequences. Israel's use of force is tragic, but necessary if Israel is ever to reestablish any sort of deterence vis a vis its neighbors.0 -
dayan wrote:I don't follow. If Israel accidentally kills UN soldiers because they were trying to hit terrorists using those soldiers as shields, then Hezbollah is justified in killing civilians? How is this in any way logical? The Israeli army operates from outside Israeli civilian areas so that Israeli civilians will not be hurt due to their presence.
I didn't say that Israel accidentally killed U.N soldiers. I said that Israel deliberately killed U.N observers.
And your statement that the Israeli military operates outside of it's own civilian areas when bulldozing homes, shooting 9 year old children in the head for throwing stones at their tanks, and firing missiles into residential buildings and refugee camps is plainly ridiculous.0 -
Byrnzie wrote:So your tying to justify the actions of the Israeli government and military? Why? Who does it benefit? Do you think that Israelis will be safer as a result of their aggression against their neighbours? Israel has now incurred the wrath of all of it's neighbours and faces a fresh onslaught of terrorism against it's civilians.
And by the way, what does it mean to say that I 'think North Korea is morally better than Israel'? That statement is meaningless, and has nothing to do with morality. We were talking about international law, which you don't believe in.Byrnzie wrote:You mention China, Saudi Arabia, Syria, North Korea, Sudan as being worse than Israel in their conduct. Which of the above countries is currently engaged in an illegal military occupation? Which of the above countries uses Caterpillar bulldozers - supplied by the U.S - which have the sole use of demolishing homes - a clear breach of international law? I could go on, and on....
I just responded to that paragraph, cause clearly you didn't know what you were talking about when you wrote it, and its not the first time you are saying things without even bother to check yourself first - nothing else.0 -
dayan wrote:To begin with you quoted Shiraz, but I am the one who doesn't believe in international law. Will Israel be safer because of this? Yes. Don't fool yourself into thinking Israel didn't already face constant terrorism, or that Israel's neighbors didn't already hate Israel. The sad fact is that Israel was forced into its current actions. Do you think Israelis really want to be sending their children back into Lebanon? Of course not! But to not respond to repeated unprovoked aggression would have meant that every enemy of Israel would have learned the lesson that you can kill Israelis without any consequences. Israel's use of force is tragic, but necessary if Israel is ever to reestablish any sort of deterence vis a vis its neighbors.
O.k, so if we are adherring to any type of mral equivalency here then it is logical to assume that for Palestinians to not respond to repeated unprovoked aggression from Israel means that every Israeli would have learned the lesson that you can kill Palestinians without any consequences?
You say that Israel was forced into its current actions? Really? And was Israel forced into re-occupying Gaza and administering massive destruction and loss of life? It seems like you are saying that Israel is constantly being forced into the tragic act of having to terrorize it's neighbours. If the U.S hadn't singulary vetoed every U/N resolution for the past 38 years offering a two state solution to this crises then perhaps this ongoing tragedy could have been avoided.0 -
Byrnzie wrote:I didn't say that Israel accidentally killed U.N soldiers. I said that Israel deliberately killed U.N observers.
And your statement that the Israeli military operates outside of it's own civilian areas when bulldozing homes, shooting 9 year old children in the head for throwing stones at their tanks, and firing missiles into residential buildings and refugee camps is plainly ridiculous.
Ok, you are saying that Israel killed UN soldiers on purpose. I won't even get into this because I think that this is ground we've already trodden. It has already been convincingly argued on this thread that Israel did not deliberately target those soldiers. If you continue to indulge in such nonsense that's your business.
Now, I didn't say anything about bulldozing houses, or shooting 9 year olds, or any of the rest of this nonsense. I said that unlike Hezbollah, and Hamas and Islamic Jihad for that matter, Israel's military takes precautions to operate away from Israeli civilians so that any fire directed at them (the IDF) will not result in accidental Israeli civilian deaths. If Hezbollah operated in the same fashion we would see far far fewer Lebanese civilian deaths. And please, stop with the ridiculous statements about alleged Israeli atrocities. If you can point to a specific case I will address that, but don't give me any more of this "the big bad blood sucking Israelis are rampaging around eating Palestinian babies" bullshit!0 -
Byrnzie wrote:You love using the word 'demagogic' Shiraz. Can you please explain to me how you are not demagogic? i.e, appealing to the popular prejudices, fears, and expectations of the public — typically via impassioned rhetoric and propaganda, and often using nationalistic or populist themes.
I love to use that word, you and many others here like to yous that method - appealing to the popular prejudices, fears, and expectations of the public, typically via impassioned rhetoric and propaganda). I'm not doing all of this stuff, though as an Israeli civilian one whould expect me to do so. I think I've always tried to see the whole picture, one-sided-black-or-white was never my way. You, on the other hand, did the the exact opposite.
do you think I'm a demagogic person? well, you're gonna have to prove it, and its gonna be hard, right puke78?0 -
shiraz wrote:I just responded to that paragraph, cause clearly you didn't know what you were talking about when you wrote it, and its not the first time you are saying things without even bother to check yourself first - nothing else.
Clearly your judgement is becoming increasingly fuzzy Shiraz. You stated that North Korea is morally worse than Israel, which is a meaningless statement. You then assume that you are right and that you have nullified my statement which pointed to Israel being one of the worst violaters of international law and human rights in the world, and a pariah in the middle east kept afloat by the U.S's power of automatic veto. Clearly you are a demagog Shiraz, and you are siding with your govenment and military rather than with those voices of reason in Israel and the rest of the world who are calling for an end to the slaughter.
However, I will not allow you to drag me into a slanging match at the risk of getting banned from the board. If you want this thread terminated, that's up to you. All I'll say is that your self righteous support of your government and military who are acting like pariahs at the moment in the face of world opinion, which is calling for an end to the disproportionate use of force by Israel, which is causing hundreds of innocent civilians to be slaughtered, makes me pity you.0 -
Byrnzie wrote:Clearly your judgement is becoming increasingly fuzzy Shiraz. You stated that North Korea is morally worse than Israel, which is a meaningless statement. You then assume that you are right and that you have nullified my statement which pointed to Israel being one of the worst violaters of international law and human rights in the world, and a pariah in the middle east kept afloat by the U.S's power of automatic veto. Clearly you are a demagog Shiraz, and you are siding with your govenment and military rather than with those voices of reason in Israel and the rest of the world who are calling for an end to the slaughter.
However, I will not allow you to drag me into a slanging match at the risk of getting banned from the board. If you want this thread terminated, that's up to you. All I'll say is that your self righteous support of your government and military who are acting like pariahs at the moment in the face of world opinion, which is calling for an end to the disproportionate use of force by Israel, which is causing hundreds of innocent civilians to be slaughtered, makes me pity you.
clearly you keep on reading what you want, not what I worte. I'm not gonna waste my time anymore responding to your posts, this is really pointless for me to write 'X' over and over again, when you insist to read it as 'Y'.
bye bye,
Shiraz.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 275 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help