No Israeli meme has, during this latest onslaught on Gaza, been more potent in justifying the slaughter of hundreds of innocent civilians than the "human shield" one.

Hamas is, according to incessant Israeli propaganda -

1. deliberately stockpiling and firing rockets from dense civilian areas

2. ordering civilians not to leave the areas that Israel is targeting.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/23/world/meast/human-shields-mideast-controversy/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/24/gaza-hamas-fighters-military-bases-guerrilla-war-civilians-israel-idf

To summarise both articles - both claims are utterly baseless

Israel has not presented a shred of proof for either. About the only relevant piece of evidence that has come to light is that stockpiles were found in an abandoned UN school. I repeat - hamas stockpiled weapons in a UN run school which was already abandoned.

As for Hamas ordering civilians to stay in targeted neighbourhoods - from the Guardian article:


Quote:

These claims have not been backed up by independent reporting from international journalists covering the war from Gaza. Instead, dispatches from the ground have presented complex reasons why some residents did not evacuate from Shujai'iya and other areas targeted by the IDF. Many said nowhere in Gaza was safe, so they saw little point in abandoning their homes. Others cited worries about not knowing the identities of people who would be their new neighbours; they could be evacuating a familiar neighbourhood for one that was a militant stronghold and others were simply too terrified to go out on the streets. Many media reports said there was no evidence of coercion by Hamas.

To end off, lets examine the concept of hypocricy...

The only known use of human shields in the history of this conflict was by Israel during the second intifada (started in 2000). Israel has acknowledged this, so don't even bother trying to dispute this.

The Israeli supreme court banned the practice in 2005, but the practice by the IDF has been widely reported as recently as Operation Cast Lead in 2008-9 - read more

examples of brave Israeli soldiers employing human shields:

http://palestinechronicle.com/uploads/1256368345israel_human_shields.jpg

http://www.palestineremembered.com/images/dailymail_humanshield.jpg

Yes, G, but I think you’ll find that Israel is entirely justified in using children as human shields, etc, because these people are Muslims.

Don’t deny it, Muselman: you started it.

Yes, but there's one thing I can't work out:

If Hamas and all the other Palestinian terrorists are all for slaughtering their own people, why did the IDF think using human shields was a good idea?  :D

That’s a hard one. If anyone can work it out though, it’s Y.

He’ll know for sure.

That kid was just getting a lift to school because his donkey broke down, nothing more

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 1:22am:

No Israeli meme has, during this latest onslaught on Gaza, been more potent in justifying the slaughter of hundreds of innocent civilians than the "human shield" one. Hamas is, according to incessant Israeli propaganda - 1. deliberately stockpiling and firing rockets from dense civilian areas 2. ordering civilians not to leave the areas that Israel is targeting. http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/23/world/meast/human-shields-mideast-controversy/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/24/gaza-hamas-fighters-military-bases-guerrilla-war-civilians-israel-idf To summarise both articles - both claims are utterly baseless Israel has not presented a shred of proof for either. About the only relevant piece of evidence that has come to light is that stockpiles were found in an abandoned UN school. I repeat - hamas stockpiled weapons in a UN run school which was already abandoned. As for Hamas ordering civilians to stay in targeted neighbourhoods - from the Guardian article: Quote: These claims have not been backed up by independent reporting from international journalists covering the war from Gaza. Instead, dispatches from the ground have presented complex reasons why some residents did not evacuate from Shujai'iya and other areas targeted by the IDF. Many said nowhere in Gaza was safe, so they saw little point in abandoning their homes. Others cited worries about not knowing the identities of people who would be their new neighbours; they could be evacuating a familiar neighbourhood for one that was a militant stronghold and others were simply too terrified to go out on the streets. Many media reports said there was no evidence of coercion by Hamas. To end off, lets examine the concept of hypocricy... The only known use of human shields in the history of this conflict was by Israel during the second intifada (started in 2000). Israel has acknowledged this, so don't even bother trying to dispute this. The Israeli supreme court banned the practice in 2005, but the practice by the IDF has been widely reported as recently as Operation Cast Lead in 2008-9 - read more examples of brave Israeli soldiers employing human shields: http://palestinechronicle.com/uploads/1256368345israel_human_shields.jpg http://www.palestineremembered.com/images/dailymail_humanshield.jpg

Your first mistake is using the Guardian newspaper as a reference, and a photo of a boy picked up by border forces for throwing rocks at the Israeli's however the headlines states the Israeli's were using him as a human shield.
Given the vehicle is a jeep, I would have thought the bonnet is an appropriate place to keep him secure at the time.
Your references suck.

Chicken lips - do you think the civilian casualties are justified? You and I have had sensible talks about sensitive topics before, so I hope you know I am not baiting you. I'm generally interested to know if you think these deaths are okay.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 7:31am:

Chicken lips - do you think the civilian casualties are justified? You and I have had sensible talks about sensitive topics before, so I hope you know I am not baiting you. I'm generally interested to know if you think these deaths are okay.

Annie,

"....do you think the civilian casualties are justified?"

Jihadists do.

See my next post in this thread.


Google;
"There Can Be No End to Jihad"

Why all this concern for a handful of the most pampered spoilt rotten fat little , poorly parented brats.
Why the gazillions of $$$$ that are wasted on them by the UN . When they show no appreciation.
Why not spend a tiny fraction of that waste on the estimated 5 million kids starving to death in south Sudanese wars.
I'll tell you why.
Because western media and international hand wringers have OCD on this issue.

I have respect for the Taliban, courageous fighters.
I have respect for the 9/11 pilots. They had more guts then most.
I have zero respect for bored Palestinians who get a buzz out of playing this real life game of skirmish when most of those shedding blood aren't the hot head rabble .
And as for the Egyptian aid tunnels being cut off , the Egyptians despise Hamas, which is a Muslim brotherhood gang. The Jordanians, the Saudis, they look at the Palestinians as scumbags, they don't want them in their lands. They are lucky the Jews give them some sort of work prospects

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 1:37am:

Yes, but there's one thing I can't work out: If Hamas and all the other Palestinian terrorists are all for slaughtering their own people, why did the IDF think using human shields was a good idea?  :D

Could it be - because Western media crews are recording the incident ?




Are Palestinian terrorists moslem terrorists at all concerned for the life of - a - single Palestinian child ?

In my estimation, NOT AT ALL.


AND HERE IS SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FROM AN ISLAMIC 'AUTHORITY';


Quote:

There Can Be No End to Jihad' Islamist Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, in an exclusive interview, discusses the rationale for 9/11, the Christians he most respects, and the Jesus he defends. posted 11/05/2007 ....Any weapons are legitimate in jihad. Even animals may be used as "suicide bombers"! It is not restricted by target—even Muslims or children, if used by the enemy as human shields, can be killed. ....Killing women and children never was and never will be part of the jihad in Islam, whether that be the women or children of the Muslims or non-Muslims. So if Chechen mujahedeen killed women and children in Beslan, I would condemn it. The children of non-Muslims, such as those at Beslan, who die in such circumstances go to Paradise. ....Women and children [i.e. boys under 15] or Muslims are not legitimate targets—nor are any noncombatants [clergy, disabled, insane, elderly, etc.]. Not even Israeli children or women, unless they serve in the military, which most do, or live in properties taken from dispossessed Palestinians (Muslim or Christian), which virtually all do. However, if children are killed, the fault lies with the adult occupiers who brought them into a battlefield situation.

Google;
"There Can Be No End to Jihad"





SO THE QUESTION MUST BE ASKED;
If Palestinian terrorists moslem terrorists do not value the life of a moslem child [who is being used as a human shield], then why don't they shoot him ?



WHY, do the Palestinian terrorists moslem terrorists tend not to attack the IDF, if there is a Palestinian human shield situated beside the IDF ?


THERE IS ONE OBVIOUS REASON.


It is because it would be very, very bad PR [PR which is being produced for Western audiences] if moslem terrorists were - publicly - seen to shoot their own children.

The Palestinian terrorists know that it would 'not be a good look' to - publicly - shoot their own children - especially when the incident is being recorded by independent international media, who are filming the incident.

It is known by all, that Palestinian combatants want to present themselves - to the Western media and to Western audiences - as the victims of Israeli violence.

Not as killers - of their own children.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 7:31am:

Chicken lips - do you think the civilian casualties are justified? You and I have had sensible talks about sensitive topics before, so I hope you know I am not baiting you. I'm generally interested to know if you think these deaths are okay.

I know you are not baiting me Annie, and I never would have thought so.
The civilian casualties are never ever justified, however I am increasingly saddened by the total inevitability of the situation.
The moment Hamas started firing long range rockets into Israel the week before invasion reaching northern cities and towns left the Israeli's with no choice whatsoever other than to go in to Gaza to destroy Hamas.
Hamas is sworn to the killing of Jews and the total destruction of Israel, meaning there is no room left for negotiation.
They simply want the Jews dead.
The Israeli Jews are under no illusion that should Hamas prevail, the world will sit back and witness another Holocaust, and the Israeli's truly believe they can expect no assistance from the UN in this case and can only count on themselves to protect their people.
And Israel can have a ceasefire for as long as they like as many times as they like, Hamas will continue to attack regardless.
Israel wants to meet peace with peace, however is prepared to meet war with war.
And the mixture of total urban warfare coupled with Hamas being totally ingratiated into Palestinian society having no soldiers barracks to live in, means there will be automatically increased civilian casualties despite any attempt by the Israeli's to minimise casualties through various means.
Hamas has been found time and time again to be using schools, hospitals and areas close to UN buildings to launch attacks into Israel making them legitimate targets of war.
The UN has been found to be good at talking but dreadfully poor in action.
Logic would suggest the Bluecaps should be kept in Gaza to keep the terrorists in check, however the experience in southern Lebanon before the 2006 invasion against Hezbollah demonstrated the UN's total incapability in stopping the terrorists ability to re-arm themselves as we saw.
The Bluecaps were left cowering in their barracks in fear for their lives leaving the terrorists to go about their business, and we could expect the same in Gaza should foreign troops ever be stationed there.
Hamas pushed the Israeli's too far this time, and the Israeli government and IDF are now totally committed to ripping out Hamas from Palestinian society 'root and branch'.
This can only mean one thing.
More civilian casualties.

Quote:

These claims have not been backed up by independent reporting from international journalists covering the war from Gaza. Instead, dispatches from the ground have presented complex reasons why some residents did not evacuate from Shujai'iya and other areas targeted by the IDF. Many said nowhere in Gaza was safe, so they saw little point in abandoning their homes. Others cited worries about not knowing the identities of people who would be their new neighbours; they could be evacuating a familiar neighbourhood for one that was a militant stronghold and others were simply too terrified to go out on the streets. Many media reports said there was no evidence of coercion by Hamas.

And this proves Hamas is not using densely populated areas?

Gandalf, you yourself recently claimed that a 2 year old casualty of Israel was in fact killed by a Palestinian rocket fired from within a densely populated urban area that misfired and went into the house in front. The child topped the list of civilian casualties being blamed on Israel at the time and being posted widely on this forum.

The fact is Hamas is outgunned. They are militarily inferior by orders of magnitude. The only way they can keep it up is by hiding behind their mother's skirts and relying on Israel keeping the moral high ground. They actually want the Palestinian casualties, because that is what keeps the Muslims angry and supporting Hamas (Abu actually explained his support for this line of thinking in one of his more chilling moments). They would rather they all die than admit defeat. If Hamas ever faced off against Israel without hiding behind their mothers skirts, they would be wiped out in about three and a half seconds and everyone would move on.

It takes an elaborate exercise in ignoring reality to analyse it any other way.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 8:55am:

..... The UN has been found to be good at talking but dreadfully poor in action. Logic would suggest the Bluecaps should be kept in Gaza to keep the terrorists in check, however the experience in southern Lebanon before the 2006 invasion against Hezbollah demonstrated the UN's total incapability in stopping the terrorists ability to re-arm themselves as we saw. The Bluecaps were left cowering in their barracks in fear for their lives leaving the terrorists to go about their business, and we could expect the same in Gaza should foreign troops ever be stationed there.

If the UN deployed 'Bluecaps' in Gaza, these UN 'peacekeepers' [sic] [or monitors of a truce, or as UN monitors, trying to prevent Hamas from rearming/resupplying its military capabilities - UNDER COVER OF A 'TRUCE'!] would merely become human shields for Hamas.

As you say chicken,        in the same way that the UN 'peacekeepers' the UN truce monitors became human shields for Hezbolla, in southern Lebanon.

Yadda wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 9:20am:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 8:55am: ..... The UN has been found to be good at talking but dreadfully poor in action. Logic would suggest the Bluecaps should be kept in Gaza to keep the terrorists in check, however the experience in southern Lebanon before the 2006 invasion against Hezbollah demonstrated the UN's total incapability in stopping the terrorists ability to re-arm themselves as we saw. The Bluecaps were left cowering in their barracks in fear for their lives leaving the terrorists to go about their business, and we could expect the same in Gaza should foreign troops ever be stationed there. If the UN deployed 'Bluecaps' in Gaza, these UN 'peacekeepers' [sic] [or monitors of a truce, or as UN monitors, trying to prevent Hamas from rearming/resupplying its military capabilities - UNDER COVER OF A 'TRUCE'!] would merely become human shields for Hamas. As you say chicken,        in the same way that the UN 'peacekeepers' the UN truce monitors became human shields for Hezbolla, in southern Lebanon.

In southern Lebanon, weren't the UN truce monitors forced to simply evacuate their positions - because of Israeli incoming bombardments, in response to Hezbolla violations ?

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 8:55am:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 7:31am: Chicken lips - do you think the civilian casualties are justified? You and I have had sensible talks about sensitive topics before, so I hope you know I am not baiting you. I'm generally interested to know if you think these deaths are okay. I know you are not baiting me Annie, and I never would have thought so. The civilian casualties are never ever justified, however I am increasingly saddened by the total inevitability of the situation. The moment Hamas started firing long range rockets into Israel the week before invasion reaching northern cities and towns left the Israeli's with no choice whatsoever other than to go in to Gaza to destroy Hamas. Hamas is sworn to the killing of Jews and the total destruction of Israel, meaning there is no room left for negotiation. They simply want the Jews dead. The Israeli Jews are under no illusion that should Hamas prevail, the world will sit back and witness another Holocaust, and the Israeli's truly believe they can expect no assistance from the UN in this case and can only count on themselves to protect their people. And Israel can have a ceasefire for as long as they like as many times as they like, Hamas will continue to attack regardless. Israel wants to meet peace with peace, however is prepared to meet war with war. And the mixture of total urban warfare coupled with Hamas being totally ingratiated into Palestinian society having no soldiers barracks to live in, means there will be automatically increased civilian casualties despite any attempt by the Israeli's to minimise casualties through various means. Hamas has been found time and time again to be using schools, hospitals and areas close to UN buildings to launch attacks into Israel making them legitimate targets of war. The UN has been found to be good at talking but dreadfully poor in action. Logic would suggest the Bluecaps should be kept in Gaza to keep the terrorists in check, however the experience in southern Lebanon before the 2006 invasion against Hezbollah demonstrated the UN's total incapability in stopping the terrorists ability to re-arm themselves as we saw. The Bluecaps were left cowering in their barracks in fear for their lives leaving the terrorists to go about their business, and we could expect the same in Gaza should foreign troops ever be stationed there. Hamas pushed the Israeli's too far this time, and the Israeli government and IDF are now totally committed to ripping out Hamas from Palestinian society 'root and branch'. This can only mean one thing. More civilian casualties.

Thank you for that. I appreciate it. I think we both know that we have differing views on this conflict, but I agree about the increasing inevitability of yet more tragedy and how deeply saddening it is. I don't even know what's happening anymore - I can't bear to watch the news.

May it be over as soon as possible. Another point on which I'm sure we agree :)

freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 8:57am:

The fact is Hamas is outgunned. They are militarily inferior by orders of magnitude. The only way they can keep it up is by hiding behind their mother's skirts and relying on Israel keeping the moral high ground.

You've got to be joking.

There is no moral high ground in this conflict. None.


Quote:

They actually want the Palestinian casualties, because that is what keeps the Muslims angry and supporting Hamas (Abu actually explained his support for this line of thinking in one of his more chilling moments). [...] It takes an elaborate exercise in ignoring reality to analyse it any other way.

Palestinians elected Hamas because they implemented programs for healthcare, education and other basic essentials, even with their limited resources. The overwhelming majority of their budget was used for these. That's why Palestinians supported Hamas.

Quote:

You've got to be joking. There is no moral high ground in this conflict. None.

They are relying on Israel not stooping as low. They are relying on Israel not deliberately firing on civilians, as Hamas does. They are relying on the human shields working, otherwise they would not rely on human shields. If Israel applied the same policy as Hamas with it's far greater firepower, all the palestinians would be dead. Every single one. Hamas relies on their unwillingness to do so. They rely on Israel taking the higher moral ground. That is the only reason they are willing and able to prolong such a one sided conflict, with themselves as the losers.

You are making the logical fallacy of assuming because the Palestinians are losing, they must somehow have a moral claim.


Quote:

Palestinians elected Hamas because they implemented programs for healthcare, education and other basic essentials, even with their limited resources. The overwhelming majority of their budget was used for these. That's why Palestinians supported Hamas.

I was referring to Hamas. Hamas wants the ongoing suffering, because that validates further conflict. Hamas is milking the misery of the Palestinians to further their political agenda. Abu shares their view, and the chilling logic that ongoing death and destruction is a good thing, even if it is Muslims dying, because a glorious Muslim victory and the destruction of Israel is inevitable.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 10:55am:

Palestinians elected Hamas because they implemented programs for healthcare, education and other basic essentials, even with their limited resources. The overwhelming majority of their budget was used for these. That's why Palestinians supported Hamas.

Yeah, because of the unjust Zionist blockade of Gaza, and because of the limited resources available to Hamas they have only launched 1,000's of rockets against Israel,         instead of 10,000's of rockets.     :P

Poor Hamas!!!

They just can't get their hands on enough 'resources' - to help the impoverished Gazan people - because of the Zionist blockade of Gaza.         :P


Poor Hamas!!!

It only has 10,000's of rockets in its arsenal, instead of the 100,000's of rockets, that it wants.         :(            :D








IMAGE....
http://www.idfblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/graph-640x640.jpg


SOURCE....
http://www.idfblog.com/facts-figures/rocket-attacks-toward-israel/

Annie do you share Gandalf's delusion that Hamas militants do not hide behind civilians and use them as cover to attack Israel?

Sometimes a question is just a question, Annie.

freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 11:17am:

Quote: You've got to be joking. There is no moral high ground in this conflict. None. They are relying on Israel not stooping as low. They are relying on Israel not deliberately firing on civilians, as Hamas does. They are relying on the human shields working, otherwise they would not rely on human shields. If Israel applied the same policy as Hamas with it's far greater firepower, all the palestinians would be dead. Every single one. Hamas relies on their unwillingness to do so. .

The human shields argument is bullshit. There is nowhere in Gaza that isn't densely populated, which is why there are such high civilian casualties. I get that it works both ways - if Hamas can't avoid drawing power to densely populated areas, Israel can't avoid hitting densely populated areas. There is no alternative for either of them while this stupid, stupid war continues.

But Israel has a record of punitive, disproportionate punishment. Flechette shells, white phosphorus...all completely unecessary for anything but to inflict as much suffering as possible on the civilian population. That is unforgivable.


Quote:

You are making the logical fallacy of assuming because the Palestinians are losing, they must somehow have a moral claim.

How do you get that I think Palestinians have a moral claim from me saying that there is no moral highground? I see nothing moral about any part of this.

We have Israeli leaders calling for the murder of Palestinian mothers. Other leaders suggesting that only through the rape of Palestinian woman can terrorists be beaten. Not weird one off psychopaths - members of parliament and scholars.

Your moral highground is a joke. 

A well written article by Mike Carlton puts into words the agony of Palestine. The world makes noises of disapproval and then they turn away and forget.

An extract only..


Quote:

In an open letter to US President Barack Obama, Dr Mads Gilbert, a Norwegian surgeon working at Gaza's al-Shifa hospital, writes of "the incomprehensible chaos of bodies, sizes, limbs, walking, not walking, breathing, not breathing, bleeding, not bleeding humans. Humans! "Ashy grey faces – Oh no! Not one more load of tens of maimed and bleeding. We still have lakes of blood on the floor in the emergency room, piles of dripping, blood-soaked bandages to clear out ... the cleaners, everywhere, swiftly shovelling the blood and discarded tissues, hair, clothes, cannulas – the leftovers from death – all taken away... to be prepared again, to be repeated all over." The onslaught is indiscriminate and unrelenting, with but one possible conclusion: Israel is not fighting the terrorists of Hamas. In defiance of the laws of war and the norms of civilised behaviour, it is waging its own war of terror on the entire Gaza population of about 1.7 million people. Call it genocide, call it ethnic cleansing: the aim is to kill Arabs. As none other than Malcolm Fraser tweeted this week: "If any other country went to war killing as many civilians, women and children, it would be named a war crime." But it is not, although the UN is asking the question of both sides. Yes, Hamas is also trying to kill Israeli civilians, with a barrage of rockets and guerilla border attacks. It, too, is guilty of terror and grave war crimes. But Israeli citizens and their homes and towns have been effectively shielded by the nation's Iron Dome defence system, and so far only three of its civilians have died in this latest conflict. The Israeli response has been out of all proportion, a monstrous distortion of the much-vaunted right of self defence. It is a breathtaking irony that these atrocities can be committed by a people with a proud liberal tradition of scholarship and culture, who hold the Warsaw Ghetto and the six million dead of the Holocaust at the centre of their race memory. But this is a new and brutal Israel dominated by the hardline, right-wing Likud Party of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his coalition. As one observer puts it: "All the seeds of the incitement of the past few years, all the nationalistic, racist legislation and the incendiary propaganda, the scare campaigns and the subversion of democracy by the right-wing camp – all these have borne fruit, and that fruit is rank and rotten. The nationalist right has now sunk to a new level, with almost the whole country following in its wake. The word 'fascism', which I try to use as little as possible, finally has its deserved place in the Israeli political discourse." Fascism in Israel? At this point the Australian Likudniks, as Bob Carr calls them, will be lunging for their keyboards. There will be the customary torrent of abusive emails calling me a Nazi, an anti-Semite, a Holocaust denier, an ignoramus. As usual they will demand my resignation, my sacking. As it's been before, some of this will be pornographic or threatening violence. http://www.smh.com.au/comment/israels-rank-and-rotten-fruit-is-being-called-fascism-20140724-zwd2t.html#ixzz38XiNbrrI

mantra wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 12:19pm:

A well written article by Mike Carlton puts into words the agony of Palestine. The world makes noises of disapproval and then they turn away and forget. An extract only.. Quote: In an open letter to US President Barack Obama, Dr Mads Gilbert, a Norwegian surgeon working at Gaza's al-Shifa hospital, writes of "the incomprehensible chaos of bodies, sizes, limbs, walking, not walking, breathing, not breathing, bleeding, not bleeding humans. Humans! "Ashy grey faces – Oh no! Not one more load of tens of maimed and bleeding. We still have lakes of blood on the floor in the emergency room, piles of dripping, blood-soaked bandages to clear out ... the cleaners, everywhere, swiftly shovelling the blood and discarded tissues, hair, clothes, cannulas – the leftovers from death – all taken away... to be prepared again, to be repeated all over." The onslaught is indiscriminate and unrelenting, with but one possible conclusion: Israel is not fighting the terrorists of Hamas. In defiance of the laws of war and the norms of civilised behaviour, it is waging its own war of terror on the entire Gaza population of about 1.7 million people. Call it genocide, call it ethnic cleansing: the aim is to kill Arabs. As none other than Malcolm Fraser tweeted this week: "If any other country went to war killing as many civilians, women and children, it would be named a war crime." But it is not, although the UN is asking the question of both sides. Yes, Hamas is also trying to kill Israeli civilians, with a barrage of rockets and guerilla border attacks. It, too, is guilty of terror and grave war crimes. But Israeli citizens and their homes and towns have been effectively shielded by the nation's Iron Dome defence system, and so far only three of its civilians have died in this latest conflict. The Israeli response has been out of all proportion, a monstrous distortion of the much-vaunted right of self defence. It is a breathtaking irony that these atrocities can be committed by a people with a proud liberal tradition of scholarship and culture, who hold the Warsaw Ghetto and the six million dead of the Holocaust at the centre of their race memory. But this is a new and brutal Israel dominated by the hardline, right-wing Likud Party of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his coalition. As one observer puts it: "All the seeds of the incitement of the past few years, all the nationalistic, racist legislation and the incendiary propaganda, the scare campaigns and the subversion of democracy by the right-wing camp – all these have borne fruit, and that fruit is rank and rotten. The nationalist right has now sunk to a new level, with almost the whole country following in its wake. The word 'fascism', which I try to use as little as possible, finally has its deserved place in the Israeli political discourse." Fascism in Israel? At this point the Australian Likudniks, as Bob Carr calls them, will be lunging for their keyboards. There will be the customary torrent of abusive emails calling me a Nazi, an anti-Semite, a Holocaust denier, an ignoramus. As usual they will demand my resignation, my sacking. As it's been before, some of this will be pornographic or threatening violence. http://www.smh.com.au/comment/israels-rank-and-rotten-fruit-is-being-called-fascism-20140724-zwd2t.html#ixzz38XiNbrrI

Thank you for posting that. It's an excellent article - I hadn't seen it.

Quote:

But Israel has a record of punitive, disproportionate punishment.

Hamas has a history of steady unprovoked attacks and a policy of wiping Israel of the map. What is "disproportionate punishment" when "proportionate punishment" merely results in a steady stream of ongoing rocket fire?


Quote:

We have Israeli leaders calling for the murder of Palestinian mothers.

It is not Israeli policy. This is idiots saying stupid things. When it comes to destroying Israel on the other hand, it is official policy, and that is exactly what they would do, if they could.


Quote:

Other leaders suggesting that only through the rape of Palestinian woman can terrorists be beaten. Not weird one off psychopaths - members of parliament and scholars.

Israeli politicians say what Hamas is prepared to do. If your "no moral high ground" argument rests on Israeli's saying mean thing, then you are already coming up short.


Quote:

The onslaught is indiscriminate and unrelenting, with but one possible conclusion: Israel is not fighting the terrorists of Hamas. In defiance of the laws of war and the norms of civilised behaviour, it is waging its own war of terror on the entire Gaza population of about 1.7 million people. Call it genocide, call it ethnic cleansing: the aim is to kill Arabs

Crap. They could do this in about three seconds if they wanted to. They could kill all of the Palestinians, then move on to further fields of Arabs. The outcome has actually been an increase in the palestinian population. Unless of course he is suggesting that they want them to breed so that they can continue killing them for sport, rather than to get rid of them.

if i was a parent in israel and my government refused to unleash every bit of armaments at their disposal i would be asking why if my conscripted son or daughter was killed.
the israeli government have a duty to their people .
end of story.
my criticism is that israel is losing fine young men and women (conscripts) by trying to pussy foot around.
Who telephones an address 10 minutes before it is hit?
Even the police executing a warrant wouldnt extend this courtesy.
they need to go in hard and finish this and stop this death by a 1000 cuts.(which seems to have been going on for 60 years.

The USA is nearly energy independant now, so they will rapidly lose interest in the middle east. Israel should act decisively now. They dont have much time.

Quote:

The human shields argument is bullshit. There is nowhere in Gaza that isn't densely populated, which is why there are such high civilian casualties.

Crap. Google maps satellite view and map view both indicate enourmous variation in population density, as you would expect, as do other maps that attempt to capture population density in the area. Furthermore, Hamas is the effective government. It is within their rights to set aside one of the less populated areas for military use. They would never do this of course, because that would present Israel with a military target every time Hamas fires rockets from there, and they would not be able to whine about Israel targetting civilians.

The fact is, Hamas deliberately fires from populated areas in order to inflict as much suffering on their own people as possible, because that suffering furthers the political agenda of Hamas. It is a cold, calculated strategy to maintain a state of war because they are convinced of their ability to one day defeat Israel.

Do you still share Gandalf's delusion that Hamas militants do not hide behind civilians and use them as cover to attack Israel?

freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 1:39pm:

Quote: The human shields argument is bullshit. There is nowhere in Gaza that isn't densely populated, which is why there are such high civilian casualties. Crap. Google maps satellite view and map view both indicate enourmous variation in population density, as you would expect, as do other maps that attempt to capture population density in the area. Furthermore, Hamas is the effective government. It is within their rights to set aside one of the less populated areas for military use. They would never do this of course, because that would present Israel with a military target every time Hamas fires rockets from there, and they would not be able to whine about Israel targetting civilians. The fact is, Hamas deliberately fires from populated areas in order to inflict as much suffering on their own people as possible, because that suffering furthers the political agenda of Hamas. It is a cold, calculated strategy to maintain a state of war because they are convinced of their ability to one day defeat Israel. Do you still share Gandalf's delusion that Hamas militants do not hide behind civilians and use them as cover to attack Israel?

Dear Freediver,
have you ever thought that Hamas has gone crazy after all the
oppression the Palestinians have suffered & so rational thinking has been lost?


forgiven

namaste

freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 8:57am:

And this proves Hamas is not using densely populated areas?

No, I am not proving anything. The point is about what Israel is claiming ad-nauseum (that hamas uses human shields) - which they have no evidence for.


Quote:

Gandalf, you yourself recently claimed that a 2 year old casualty of Israel was in fact killed by a Palestinian rocket fired from within a densely populated urban area that misfired and went into the house in front. The child topped the list of civilian casualties being blamed on Israel at the time and being posted widely on this forum.

The incident reveals nothing whatsoever regarding whether or not the rocket was fired from a densely populated area.


Quote:

The fact is Hamas is outgunned. They are militarily inferior by orders of magnitude. The only way they can keep it up is by hiding behind their mother's skirts and relying on Israel keeping the moral high ground. They actually want the Palestinian casualties, because that is what keeps the Muslims angry and supporting Hamas

Pure conjecture.

An honest appraisal of this would acknowledge that armed resistance is a natural and inevitable consequence of walling people in and enforcing an economically crippling blockade.

An honest appraisal would also acknowledge that in the past the only thing that has reduced the rocket attacks has been negotiations under a ceasefire - as happened in 2008.

Your talk about who is taking the moral high ground regarding this practice is a joke - given the fact that the only known use of human shields was done - systematically - by the IDF for the best part of a decade.


Quote:

It takes an elaborate exercise in ignoring reality to analyse it any other way.

Actually, it just takes an honest appraisal of the actual evidence. Not hard really.

Hamas clearly firing rockets behind children's skirts in the middle of densely populated neighbourhoods:

http://humanevents.com/uploads/2014/07/hamas_rockets.jpg

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/photos/uncategorized/2008/12/31/type901a.jpg

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 1:54pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 8:57am: And this proves Hamas is not using densely populated areas? No, I am not proving anything. The point is about what Israel is claiming ad-nauseum (that hamas uses human shields) - which they have no evidence for.

I am intrigued by this gandalf, are you sincere in your belief that Hamas does not use monuments, churches, schools and hospitals for protection, knowing that the result will mean non combatant fatalities, ( which incidentally for Hamas  is an entirely rational act) that achieves multiple aims or are you acting as a propagandist?

Data I am intrigued by people continually coming up with the allegation and not providing a shred of evidence.

I suppose you could always go the FD route and counter this most fundamental point with endless pages of obfuscation, until the original point is lost.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 2:57pm:

Data I am intrigued by people continually coming up with the allegation and not providing a shred of evidence. I suppose you could always go the FD route and counter this most fundamental point with endless pages of obfuscation, until the original point is lost.

Go whatever route you like, I care not, neither one reflects well on you. 

http://i.imgur.com/YyEPEIQ.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/YgMJ1Ik.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/PmcdP0z.jpg

Datalife wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 3:03pm:

Go whatever route you like, I care not, neither one reflects well on you.

Pointing out that the human shield claim has no shred of evidence doesn't reflect well on me?

I see..

Quote:

Dear Freediver, have you ever thought that Hamas has gone crazy

Yes


Quote:

after

I suspect they were crazy to begin with.


Quote:

No, I am not proving anything. The point is about what Israel is claiming ad-nauseum (that hamas uses human shields) - which they have no evidence for.

It is pretty much common knowledge. I hope you have not also deluded yourself into thinking that hamas has survived in a military capacity despite taking on the Israeli army directly. All it takes is for you to think for yourself. It takes a rather convoluted conspiracy to come up with an alternative explanation.


Quote:

The incident reveals nothing whatsoever regarding whether or not the rocket was fired from a densely populated area.

So what? They went to a farm and hid behind the farm house to shoot it, and accidentally shot it into the farm house?


Quote:

Pure conjecture.

Crap. Hamas is outgunned, and hopelessly so.


Quote:

An honest appraisal of this would acknowledge that armed resistance is a natural and inevitable consequence of walling people in and enforcing an economically crippling blockade.

A consequence, or a cause? You are making the same logical fallacy as Annie - that because Hamas are hopeless losers they must be the victims.


Quote:

Hamas clearly firing rockets behind children's skirts in the middle of densely populated neighbourhoods:

The first one is clearly a staged photoshoot. The second one looks like a stock Russian army photo.


Quote:

I am intrigued by this gandalf, are you sincere in your belief that Hamas does not use monuments, churches, schools and hospitals for protection, knowing that the result will mean non combatant fatalities, ( which incidentally for Hamas  is an entirely rational act) that achieves multiple aims or are you acting as a propagandist?

You have to be particularly dedicated to self delusion to conclude that Hamas do not hide behind their mother's skirts. It also helps if you can google a few staged photoshoots to show what brave soldiers Hamas are, taking on the might of the Israeli army from the cover of only trees.


Quote:

Data I am intrigued by people continually coming up with the allegation and not providing a shred of evidence.

It is common knowldge, and well established. I think it should be up to you to demonstrate the opposite, unless of course you only point in this thread is your inability to figure out the obvious for yourself.


Quote:

Pointing out that the human shield claim has no shred of evidence doesn't reflect well on me?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence of evidence of evidence, merely of your willingness to not bother informing yourself before starting another misleading thread of Islamic propaganda.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 10:45am:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 8:55am: Annie Anthrax wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 7:31am: Chicken lips - do you think the civilian casualties are justified? You and I have had sensible talks about sensitive topics before, so I hope you know I am not baiting you. I'm generally interested to know if you think these deaths are okay. I know you are not baiting me Annie, and I never would have thought so. The civilian casualties are never ever justified, however I am increasingly saddened by the total inevitability of the situation. The moment Hamas started firing long range rockets into Israel the week before invasion reaching northern cities and towns left the Israeli's with no choice whatsoever other than to go in to Gaza to destroy Hamas. Hamas is sworn to the killing of Jews and the total destruction of Israel, meaning there is no room left for negotiation. They simply want the Jews dead. The Israeli Jews are under no illusion that should Hamas prevail, the world will sit back and witness another Holocaust, and the Israeli's truly believe they can expect no assistance from the UN in this case and can only count on themselves to protect their people. And Israel can have a ceasefire for as long as they like as many times as they like, Hamas will continue to attack regardless. Israel wants to meet peace with peace, however is prepared to meet war with war. And the mixture of total urban warfare coupled with Hamas being totally ingratiated into Palestinian society having no soldiers barracks to live in, means there will be automatically increased civilian casualties despite any attempt by the Israeli's to minimise casualties through various means. Hamas has been found time and time again to be using schools, hospitals and areas close to UN buildings to launch attacks into Israel making them legitimate targets of war. The UN has been found to be good at talking but dreadfully poor in action. Logic would suggest the Bluecaps should be kept in Gaza to keep the terrorists in check, however the experience in southern Lebanon before the 2006 invasion against Hezbollah demonstrated the UN's total incapability in stopping the terrorists ability to re-arm themselves as we saw. The Bluecaps were left cowering in their barracks in fear for their lives leaving the terrorists to go about their business, and we could expect the same in Gaza should foreign troops ever be stationed there. Hamas pushed the Israeli's too far this time, and the Israeli government and IDF are now totally committed to ripping out Hamas from Palestinian society 'root and branch'. This can only mean one thing. More civilian casualties. Thank you for that. I appreciate it. I think we both know that we have differing views on this conflict, but I agree about the increasing inevitability of yet more tragedy and how deeply saddening it is. I don't even know what's happening anymore - I can't bear to watch the news. May it be over as soon as possible. Another point on which I'm sure we agree :)

We do Annie.

wally1 wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 3:21pm:

http://i.imgur.com/YyEPEIQ.jpg http://i.imgur.com/YgMJ1Ik.jpg http://i.imgur.com/PmcdP0z.jpg

More sci fi from Wally.

freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 4:19pm:

It is pretty much common knowledge.

Yes thats the problem. I'm sure we could both rattle off a list of at least a dozen "common knowledge" slanders about Israel that we would both dispute.


freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 4:19pm:

I hope you have not also deluded yourself into thinking that hamas has survived in a military capacity despite taking on the Israeli army directly.

Hamas - military capacity? Now there's a laugh.


freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 4:19pm:

So what? They went to a farm and hid behind the farm house to shoot it, and accidentally shot it into the farm house?

You don't need to hide behind the farm house to accidentally hit the farm house. For all we know the rocket travelled for miles before coming down - the only thing we know is that it fell short of Israel. How far it actually travelled is not mentioned.


freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 4:19pm:

A consequence, or a cause? You are making the same logical fallacy as Annie

And you are having the same inability to understand a historical timeline as Soren.

Wall completed around Gaza - 1996
First rockets fired from Gaza - 2001


freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 4:19pm:

You have to be particularly dedicated to self delusion to conclude that Hamas do not hide behind their mother's skirts. It also helps if you can google a few staged photoshoots to show what brave soldiers Hamas are, taking on the might of the Israeli army from the cover of only trees.

Ok, reality check - in case you haven't noticed these firecrackers are pretty small - like very maneuverable small. Isn't it conceivable that they can fire a rocket or two from a relatively open space, and then pack them up and hide them before Israel has a chance to pinpoint where it came from?

Besides, the human shield claim isn't just the firing-rockets-from-busy-neighbourhoods allegation, its also that Hamas is forcing civilians to stay in the firing line. This is directly refuted by independent reporting referenced earlier. Thus the Israel government has form, and any honest and objective observer should be taking anything they say about the evil practices of Hamas with a grain of salt.

The human shield claim should be seen first and fore-mostly as a piece of propaganda that greatly benefits the Israeli attack. Anyone who doesn't consider this, and thinks that such an allegation that is so beneficial for Israeli propaganda is just "common knowledge" without requiring a shred of evidence - is either extremely gullible, or a blind Israeli partisan.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 6:52pm:

Ok, reality check - in case you haven't noticed these firecrackers are pretty small - like very maneuverable small. Isn't it conceivable that they can fire a rocket or two from a relatively open space, and then pack them up and hide them before Israel has a chance to pinpoint where it came from?

No, modern Israel radar direction and counter battery calculators would have return rounds on the way whilst the Hamas rockets are still in the air.

Quote:

Hamas - military capacity? Now there's a laugh.

OK, I think we do not even need evidence to figure this out. Hamas manages to consistently attack Israel, without the Israeli army wiping them out before heading out for kebabs. How do you think Hamas manages this?


Quote:

Ok, reality check - in case you haven't noticed these firecrackers are pretty small - like very maneuverable small. Isn't it conceivable that they can fire a rocket or two from a relatively open space, and then pack them up and hide them before Israel has a chance to pinpoint where it came from?

Hide where? Behind their mother's skirts? That way it would be unfair for Israeli to drop a large bomb on it when they eventually figured out where they were hiding it, right?


Quote:

Besides, the human shield claim isn't just the firing-rockets-from-busy-neighbourhoods allegation, its also that Hamas is forcing civilians to stay in the firing line. This is directly refuted by independent reporting referenced earlier.

You choose to set a remarkably low standard for evidence when it suits you.


Quote:

Thus the Israel government has form

I don't even know what conclusion you are leaping to here.

Datalife wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 7:39pm:

No, modern Israel radar direction and counter battery calculators would have return rounds on the way whilst the Hamas rockets are still in the air.

Of course,the operators couldn't possibly be already disassembling them and be on the move - whilst the rockets are still in the air.


freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 7:40pm:

OK, I think we do not even need evidence to figure this out. Hamas manages to consistently attack Israel, without the Israeli army wiping them out before heading out for kebabs. How do you think Hamas manages this?

Let me guess - with their awesome military capacity?


freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 7:40pm:

You choose to set a remarkably low standard for evidence when it suits you

How so? Independent reporters don't constitute a good standard of evidence? Maybe we should stick to "common knowledge" eh?

From the Guardian:


Quote:

Israel also claimed that Hamas had forced civilians to remain in the Gaza City neighbourhood of Shujai'iya after the IDF warned them to evacuate ahead of its assault on Sunday. Civilians were being "held as hostages", said Peter Lerner, an IDF military spokesman. These claims have not been backed up by independent reporting from international journalists covering the war from Gaza. Instead, dispatches from the ground have presented complex reasons why some residents did not evacuate from Shujai'iya and other areas targeted by the IDF. Many said nowhere in Gaza was safe, so they saw little point in abandoning their homes. Others cited worries about not knowing the identities of people who would be their new neighbours; they could be evacuating a familiar neighbourhood for one that was a militant stronghold and others were simply too terrified to go out on the streets. Many media reports said there was no evidence of coercion by Hamas.

freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 7:40pm:

I don't even know what conclusion you are leaping to here

That they are lying about civilians being forced to stay by Hamas. Of course we don't have "common knowledge" to back us up, so thats going to be a problem I suppose...

Sir Bobby,

Quote:

Dear Freediver, have you ever thought that Hamas has gone crazy

Freediver the fisherman

Quote:

Yes

War is crazy - it's what happens when men don't agree
& decades of hatred gets in the way of reason.

namaste

No no Bobby, its all about Islam. Hamas is a symptom of islam you see. The blockade only started because there are a group of muslims who want to emulate their Prophet's example. See a blockade for 5 years before the rockets started doesn't constitute a blockade.

We all blame islam - 100%, never ever.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 9:08pm:

Of course,the operators couldn't possibly be already disassembling them and be on the move - whilst the rockets are still in the air.

I don't think you appreciate the speed and effectiveness of modern counter-battery fire.

And as a solution it would not work anyway, incoming fire would be almost immediate and if you are in an open area it is too easy to program the template with a suitable beaten zone. 

Or just have the clearing from which you receive fire surveilled by a reaper drone 24/7.

If you sincerely believe that Hamas do not use civilian infrastructure as a shield for its activities you are either irrational in a way that Hamas is not or incredibly naive and unthinking.

Quote:

Let me guess - with their awesome military capacity?

By hiding  behind their mothers skirts.


Quote:

How so? Independent reporters don't constitute a good standard of evidence? Maybe we should stick to "common knowledge" eh?

Your article is vague arm waving. Being "independent" doesn't mean anything.


Quote:

That they are lying about civilians being forced to stay by Hamas.

But not about hiding behind their mothers' skirts?


Quote:

I don't think you appreciate the speed and effectiveness of modern counter-battery fire.

There is a good video floating around of that.

freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 9:35pm:

Your article is vague arm waving. Being "independent" doesn't mean anything.

Of course it doesn't - not when we're talking about what muslims do. We defer to "common knowledge".

As i mentioned about the graph gandalf, hamas stopped nearly all there rocket attacks post nov 2012 ceasefire.

Did israel say thank you hamas, did they lift the seige and sanctions, of course they didnt, they kept bombing them and killing them.

http://i.imgur.com/pGdwtiz.jpg

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 6:52pm:

Wall completed around Gaza - 1996 First rockets fired from Gaza - 2001 Ok, reality check - in case you haven't noticed these firecrackers are pretty small - like very maneuverable small. Isn't it conceivable that they can fire a rocket or two from a relatively open space, and then pack them up and hide them before Israel has a chance to pinpoint where it came from?

The first reality check is the Hamas leaders do not live in Palestine they are living the high life in Qatar

The wall was built around Gaza to stop suicidal-homicidal muslims from walking into Israel and blowing themselves up along with any Israelis who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The wall dramatically reduced the number of suicide attacks which resulted in Palestinians firing rockets into Israel..

Of course this wall is an international border between Israel and Gaza just like the wall separating east-west Germany and the demilitarized zone between north and south Korea.

This Gaza wall which dopey muslims claim is part of the blockade is actually an international border,Israel has every right to determine who comes and goes from Israel.

Gaza has a border with Egypt,the Gaza-Egypt border controls are a matter for Egypt and Gaza.

There have been around 2000 innocent Israelis injured by firing these rockets into Israel which is a war crime, of course muslims will downplay this as just letting off a few firecrackers.

The Ezzedine al Qassam brigades, the military wing of hamas are responsible for these rockets being fired,the military wing of Hamas are firing these rockets so do people expect the Israeli military to not respond?

The Syrian conflict has seen 170,000 muslims killed by fellow muslims and we see no protests in the streets from muslims,Israel kills a thousand in response to thousand's of rocket attacks and muslims are protesting in the streets.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 11:07pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 9:35pm: Your article is vague arm waving. Being "independent" doesn't mean anything. Of course it doesn't - not when we're talking about what muslims do. We defer to "common knowledge".

Your article is full of absurd leaps of logic. If "independent" is the only thing it has going for it, then it has nothing going for it. It is an exercise in not looking for evidence, not even thinking about what the evidence might look like or what to look for, then leaping to conclusions based on your ignorance.


wally1 wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 9:59am:

As i mentioned about the graph gandalf, hamas stopped nearly all there rocket attacks post nov 2012 ceasefire. Did israel say thank you hamas, did they lift the seige and sanctions, of course they didnt, they kept bombing them and killing them. http://i.imgur.com/pGdwtiz.jpg

Looks to me like the two wars were the most effective at reducing rocket attacks.

Annie, there was a very strong 'meme', to channel Gandy, in Chicken's excelent summary about Hamas.
Your response, like that of so many other like you?

Oh, can't discuss the topic any more.

WHen it comes to condemning Jews for defending themselves, there is no end to the willingness to discuss.
When Hamas's role is brought up, everyone like you starts looking at their watches are need to go.

Far, FAR more Muslims are killed by other Muslims than by Israel in the Middle East. In Syria alone it has topped 100 thousand. Add Iraq, Pakistan, Labia, Iran - it is completely out of hand. Yet all the kvetching and outrage is about Israel not putting up with Hamas's hundreds and thousands of indiscriminate rockets fired off simply to hit Jews, any Jews. And you will cite Hamas's incompetence in achieving its aims as if that was an excuse.



You are all mad, totally barking bugger*g mad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-5Q7yuaXjM

freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 6:53pm:

Your article is full of absurd leaps of logic. If "independent" is the only thing it has going for it, then it has nothing going for it. It is an exercise in not looking for evidence, not even thinking about what the evidence might look like or what to look for, then leaping to conclusions based on your ignorance.

Of course actually talking to the people in question and getting an understanding of their motives for not leaving, and noting the discrepancies with unsourced Israeli claims equals "absurd leaps of logic" in FD's book.  :P

I think we can safely conclude from this that there is literally nothing at all that would cause you to question Israeli propaganda. At least just be honest FD and admit that this has nothing to do with any logically leaping articles, or my ignorance - and everything to do with your stubborn refusal to concede anything that deviates from your cartoon caricaturing of Palestinians and muslims.

freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 6:53pm:

Looks to me like the two wars were the most effective at reducing rocket attacks.

Then you clearly need glasses.

The lowest rate of attacks for the longest period occured during a ceasefire in 2008, which was broken by Israel.

The wars succeed in reducing attacks - eventually - but only after experiencing the largest spikes in attacks - caused by initiating the war.

Quote:

I think we can safely conclude from this that there is literally nothing at all that would cause you to question Israeli propaganda. At least just be honest FD and admit that this has nothing to do with any logically leaping articles, or my ignorance - and everything to do with your stubborn refusal to concede anything that deviates from your cartoon caricaturing of Palestinians and muslims.

I am questioning your propaganda. Hamas militants are hiding behind their mothers skirts while attacking Israel, then blaming Israel for the consequences and milking the misery of the Palestinians for their own political gain. I don't particularly care whether they strap their mother to the bonnet of the rocket truck or park the truck in their mother's garage. Either way the outcome is the same, and Hamas are scum. I don't see why you are so keen to make the distinction either, other than to score some meaningless points.


Quote:

The lowest rate of attacks for the longest period occured during a ceasefire in 2008, which was broken by Israel.

The post war periods were much longer, with only slightly more attacks.


Quote:

The wars succeed in reducing attacks - eventually - but only after experiencing the largest spikes in attacks - caused by initiating the war.

Not sure about the details of the earlier ones, but in the latest round the rocket attacks started long before the war, and I expect you have gotten the timing backwards for the rest of them too.

freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 9:13pm:

I am questioning your propaganda.

No, you are not questioning, you are trolling. We have before us accounts from actual reporters on the ground in Gaza, providing evidence that directly contradicts the completely unsubstantiated claims by the IDF -claims that just happen to support their massacring of civilians - and you try and dismiss it with whatever meaningless crap jumps into your head - like "leaps of logic".


freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 9:13pm:

Hamas militants are hiding behind their mothers skirts while attacking Israel, then blaming Israel for the consequences

Of course they are - we have "common knowledge" to prove it (just not actual evidence)  :P

Also its not just hamas who are blaming Israel, its non-aligned human rights organizations, the UN and most of the international community - who are also, incidentally, blaming hamas.


freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 9:13pm:

I don't see why you are so keen to make the distinction either, other than to score some meaningless points.

A distinction? Is that what you call it? Is calling out blatant Israeli lies that are used to allow the further slaughter of innocents called making a pointless distinction now?

freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 9:13pm:

ot sure about the details of the earlier ones, but in the latest round the rocket attacks started long before the war, and I expect you have gotten the timing backwards for the rest of them too.

Incorrect on all counts. Over 750 rockets and mortars were fired during Cast Lead in 2008-09, which then represented the biggest ever spike since the rockets began in 2001. During the November 2012 Israeli air offensive, in just 7 days Hamas managed to fire off over 1400 rockets - up from 116 rockets fired for the whole of October. And in this war, over 2400 rockets have been fired since the Israeli offensive began on  July 8 - up from 53 during all of June.

So yeah, you couldn't be more wrong about that FD. And not only is Hamas getting better and better at shooting off more and more rockets during each war, the rockets are getting bigger and more sophisticated. It kinda reminds me of that movie The Fifth element - where they tried to destroy that thing that was threatening them - but the more nukes they fired at it, the stronger it became.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 9:12pm:

No no Bobby, its all about Islam. Hamas is a symptom of islam you see. The blockade only started because there are a group of muslims who want to emulate their Prophet's example. See a blockade for 5 years before the rockets started doesn't constitute a blockade. We all blame islam - 100%, never ever.

gandalf,

It is not as easy as we may at first believe, to be able to link moslems [...and ISLAM] to acts of terrorism.

As these TV reporters discovered;          :P

Refusing to Name the Enemy in the War on Terror
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpM8qk3t52A



So, please do not carelessly associate moslems with wrongdoing or violence, just because they are moslems!

And just because moslems are followers of,   ....ISLAM.

Because as everyone knows, ISLAM is the religion that promotes peace and harmony.       :P

And as everyone knows, killing an innocent, is not allowed by ISLAM.







+++


A UK moslem community leader, speaking of the London 7/7 bombing;

YT
KILLING OF NON-MUSLIMS IS LEGITIMATE
"...when we say innocent people, we mean moslems."
"....[not accepting ISLAM] is a crime against God."
"...If you are a non-moslem, then you are guilty of not believing in God."
"...as a moslem....i must have hatred towards everything which is non-ISLAM."
"...[moslems] allegiance is always with the moslems, so i will never condemn a moslem for what he does."
"...Britain has always been Dar al Harb [the Land of War]"
"...no, i could never condemn a moslem brother, i would never condemn a moslem brother. I will always stand with my moslem brother....whether he is an oppresser or the oppressed."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maHSOB2RFm4



"....the death of those who are killed for the cause of God gives more impetus to the cause, which continues to thrive on their blood."
Egyptian ISLAMIC scholar, Sayyid Qutb.

Quote:

No, you are not questioning, you are trolling. We have before us accounts from actual reporters on the ground in Gaza, providing evidence that directly contradicts the completely unsubstantiated claims by the IDF -claims that just happen to support their massacring of civilians - and you try and dismiss it with whatever meaningless crap jumps into your head - like "leaps of logic".

In other words you built an elaborate strawman and anyone who points this out is a troll. You don't actually care if Hamas is deliberately hiding behind palestinian civilians and taking political advantage of the misery they bring upon them. We are only allowed to discuss the one particular version of "hiding behind" you managed to dig up from somewhere.

The IDF does not deliberately massacre civilians. They do their best fighting an enemy that deliberately hides behind their mothers skirts and draws military conflict into the most heavily populated areas.


Quote:

Of course they are - we have "common knowledge" to prove it (just not actual evidence)

Not just common knowledge, but common sense. A point I have repeatedly made to you, that you stubbornly refuse to address, is that Hamas is totally outgunned and could not possibly take on Israel without hiding among civilians and relying on Israel not being prepared to stoop as low as them. You post some obviously staged photos of Hamas fighting among trees in an open area (an area that according to Annie does not even exist). Taking this even remotely seriously requires a dedication to self delusion regarding the might of the Muslim armies that is worthy of Abu.

To top this off you post a photo of the Israelis arresting some idiot kid and insist they are the ones really using human shields. The Israeli army does not need human shields. They have the balls to take on Hamas militants openly, wherever Hamas chooses to take the fight. Hamas is incompetent, scared and relying on Israel taking the moral high ground. Their political strategy is to keep the Palestinians angry by provoking the Israeli army while hiding behind civilians, in order to bring constant misery to the Palestinian people and paint themselves as heros seeking vengeance on their behalf. They are scum, and you are desperately trying to quibble over what flavour of scum they are and labeling anyone who doesn't care about the flavour a troll.

You also point out, as if it means something, that Hamas do not force civilians to stay. The reality is they give them no choice. The Israeli return fire can come within seconds. If a neighbour fires a rocket at Irael, the last thing you want to do is venture out onto the street. If you are quick you might make it out the front door in time to see your neighbour's house explode and cop a brick in the head.


Quote:

Also its not just hamas who are blaming Israel, its non-aligned human rights organizations, the UN and most of the international community - who are also, incidentally, blaming hamas.

That's great. So what does it mean? Does it mean that Hamas is not hiding behind civilians? Remember, this thread is about what flavour of scum Hamas are, and trying to change the subject to Israel is trolling.


Quote:

So yeah, you couldn't be more wrong about that FD. And not only is Hamas getting better and better at shooting off more and more rockets during each war, the rockets are getting bigger and more sophisticated. It kinda reminds me of that movie The Fifth element - where they tried to destroy that thing that was threatening them - but the more nukes they fired at it, the stronger it became.

And you are reminding me more and more of Abu every day. Israel could wipe out the entire gaza strip if they wanted to, and if Hamas leaves them no option, they will. The more powerful Hamas becomes, the more misery they inflict on the Palestinian people, because they will never be strong enough to take on the Israeli army away from civilians in open warfare. You delude yourself about Hamas's military might the same way Abu did. The only thing they are capable of achieving is mass Palestinian casualties. You resort to absurd hollywood analogies because the reality is too dismal for you to accept.

freediver wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 1:02pm:

In other words you built an elaborate strawman and anyone who points this out is a troll.

Dismissing the accounts of independent reporters as "leaps of logic" - and whatever other meaningless crap jumps into your head without even attempting to explain what you mean by that description is grade A trolling. We have here the only thing remotely resembling evidence in relation to the human shield claim, yet you would dismiss and belittle it, and insist that blatant propaganda must be accepted at face value without question. In fact not just dismissing and belittling it, but not even attempting a sensible justification for doing so - outside the standard 'garrr evil muslims" meme.


freediver wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 1:02pm:

You don't actually care if Hamas is deliberately hiding behind palestinian civilians and taking political advantage of the misery they bring upon them. We are only allowed to discuss the one particular version of "hiding behind" you managed to dig up from somewhere.

Firstly *YOU* don't care if that meme is even true - or at the very least you don't want to even consider any evidence that may refute it. Secondly, this "one particular version" is based on the only shred of evidence about the meme that has been presented thus far. If you wish to discuss a different version - that is based on some actual evidence - and not just your prejudicial bs masquerading as "common sense" and "common knowledge" - then lets have it.


freediver wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 1:02pm:

A point I have repeatedly made to you, that you stubbornly refuse to address, is that Hamas is totally outgunned and could not possibly take on Israel without hiding among civilians and relying on Israel not being prepared to stoop as low as them. You post some obviously staged photos of Hamas fighting among trees in an open area (an area that according to Annie does not even exist).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Flickr_-_Israel_Defense_Forces_-_Eight_Qassam_Launchers_in_Gaza.jpg
- an actual Qassam launch site in Gaza captured by IDF. (image too big to post).

I'd say thats about as open as you can get in Gaza. Also, lets look at the actual evidence to date - Israel and the UN made much song and dance about rockets being stored in a disused school. I say again - a disused school. Tell me, if they were all about hiding behind little girl's skirts, why wouldn't they use an actual school, full of little kids, rather than a disused school?

Given what evidence we have at the moment (and that is bugger all), the scenario that Hamas is using buildings and other terrain that is as least populated as is practically possible for Gaza, but still provides some cover for them - is just as plausible as the alternative made-for-propaganda scenario spewed every opportunity by Israeli authorities.


freediver wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 1:02pm:

To top this off you post a photo of the Israelis arresting some idiot kid and insist they are the ones really using human shields. The Israeli army does not need human shields.

Umm sorry to burst your bubble FD, but the IDF itself has admitted to using human shields during the second intifada. It was taken to the Israeli High Court.


freediver wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 1:02pm:

They are scum, and you are desperately trying to quibble over what flavour of scum they are and labeling anyone who doesn't care about the flavour a troll.

They probably are - but occupations tend to produce scum. Another viewpoint is that the Israeli government is scum - for engaging in collective punishment (such as putting Gazan's "on a diet" - an Israeli official's term), and conducting periodic massacres in an effort to turn the Palestinians off Hamas. This viewpoint is based on the idea that such military operations not only don't reduce the threat of rockets, but inspire Hamas to become more efficient and develop deadlier weapons (which has been evident after each war).


freediver wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 1:02pm:

Remember, this thread is about what flavour of scum Hamas are, and trying to change the subject to Israel is trolling.

Actually the thread is about what evidence we have for the propaganda being used by the Israeli government (check the OP). What trolling is, if it really needs to be spelled out to you, is perpetuating baseless smears and caricatures and masquearading it as "common sense" and "common knowledge".

FD, do you believe Israel is entitled as Y asserts to use Palestinian children as human shields because they are Moslems?

I’m curious.

Karnal wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 5:03pm:

FD, do you believe Israel is entitled as Y asserts to use Palestinian children as human shields because they are Moslems? I’m curious.

The link to my 'assertion' ???

Quote:

Dismissing the accounts of independent reporters as "leaps of logic" - and whatever other meaningless crap jumps into your head without even attempting to explain what you mean by that description is grade A trolling

By that I mean there is an absence of logic. A leap, if you prefer. If you'd like I can quote the absence of logic for you. Might as well do it now:


Quote:

[/quote] Do you see the lack of logic there? I have, by the way, provided several counter-arguments that rest largely on logic, or at the very least require you to reveal the hidden assumptions you are making - eg Hamas' mysterious ability that no-one else knows about to take on the Israeli army without hiding behind their mother's skirts. [quote]We have here the only thing remotely resembling evidence in relation to the human shield claim, yet you would dismiss and belittle it, and insist that blatant propaganda must be accepted at face value without question. In fact not just dismissing and belittling it, but not even attempting a sensible justification for doing so - outside the standard 'garrr evil muslims" meme.

It is an absence of evidence, not actual evidence. That is a logical fallacy.


Quote:

Firstly *YOU* don't care if that meme is even true

I don't care what flavour of scumbag Hamas is, and I think you are only trying to get hung up on the minutia to avoid the elephant in the room - that Hamas hides behind their mothers skirts and deliberately heaps suffering on their fellow palestinians for political gain.


Quote:

Secondly, this "one particular version" is based on the only shred of evidence about the meme that has been presented thus far. If you wish to discuss a different version - that is based on some actual evidence - and not just your prejudicial bs masquerading as "common sense" and "common knowledge" - then lets have it.

I have presented it, over and over again. I am getting sick of repeating it, only for you to completely ignore it.


Quote:

I'd say thats about as open as you can get in Gaza.

So what is that wall on the right of the image? I have already responded to Annie's bullshit claim that there are no open spaces in Gaza. Do I need to repeat myself?


Quote:

Also, lets look at the actual evidence to date - Israel and the UN made much song and dance about rockets being stored in a disused school. I say again - a disused school. Tell me, if they were all about hiding behind little girl's skirts, why wouldn't they use an actual school, full of little kids, rather than a disused school?

Because the palestinians who get sick of Hamas heaping misery after misery upon them might dob them in to the Israelis. Kids talk, and a bunch of hooded militants wheeling rocket vehicles in and out of a school full of kids is such a caricature of Islamic stupidity I am sure it has actually happened.


Quote:

Given what evidence we have at the moment (and that is bugger all), the scenario that Hamas is using buildings and other terrain that is as least populated as is practically possible for Gaza, but still provides some cover for them - is just as plausible as the alternative made-for-propaganda scenario spewed every opportunity by Israeli authorities.

Sure, if you maintain the absurd delusion that Hamas is a military strength compared to Israel. I was hoping I would not have to explain something as basic as that to you.


Quote:

They probably are - but occupations tend to produce scum.

Hamas has floated to the top of the scum. Few movements inflict such misery on their supposed comrades as Hamas on the Palestinians.


Quote:

Another viewpoint is that the Israeli government is scum

Wow, such conviction. Another viewpoint is that Israel should simply lay down their arms and wait for the Palestinians to forgive and forget. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, aren't they.


Quote:

for engaging in collective punishment

Crap. By any historical measure (especially the Muslim ones) they have been saints.


Quote:

Actually the thread is about what evidence we have for the propaganda being used by the Israeli government (check the OP). What trolling is, if it really needs to be spelled out to you, is perpetuating baseless smears and caricatures and masquearading it as "common sense" and "common knowledge".

It is not baseless. I have explained it all, over and over again, which you are steadfastly ignoring, while pretending my argument is nothing more than baseless smears.

You didn’t answer the question, FD.

Evasion is a Moslem tactic, you know.

freediver wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 7:15pm:

It is not baseless. I have explained it all, over and over again, which you are steadfastly ignoring

Oh I know FD - we have "common knowledge", "common sense", and now "logic". As in, when reporters in Gaza point out that there are a complex set of reasons why residents don't flee the bombing, and that there is no indication that it was because Hamas forced them to stay - its clearly an "absence of logic". I think we're well across that FD - no need to keep repeating it.

And I'm not ignoring them, I'm just pointing out that we have other terms for those as well - such as "unsubstantiated", "propaganda", "contradicted (by actual evidence)" - and "BS trolling".

Quote:

As in, when reporters in Gaza point out that there are a complex set of reasons why residents don't flee the bombing

Nothing to do with not wanting to be out on the street with Israeli return fire on it's way, not to mention all the misguided rockets from Hamas itself? How about not even knowing which way to run?

How powerful do you think the Hamas militia is? Do you think it would be possible for them to take on the Israeli military directly without hiding behind their mother's skirts? The photo you posted a link to earlier screams "I like to fire a wocket then wun and hide behind my mother's skirt".

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 12:10am:

reporters in Gaza point out that there are a complex set of reasons why residents don't flee the bombing, and that there is no indication that it was because Hamas forced them to stay

Looks like Hamas are beating up those who want to leave.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBvhHE8ePxg

freediver wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 8:41am:

Nothing to do with not wanting to be out on the street with Israeli return fire on it's way, not to mention all the misguided rockets from Hamas itself? How about not even knowing which way to run?

Spot on FD - well done!!

It is asolutely those reasons and more.

Just no evidence for this:


Quote:

“We’re telling the civilians to leave, Hamas is telling them to stay,” Netanyahu said in satellite interviews from Israel. “Why is it telling them to stay? Because it wants to pile up their own dead bodies.”

http://www.timesofisrael.com/day-21-obama-calls-netanyahu-urges-immediate-unconditional-ceasefire-in-hamas-conflict/#ixzz38uznKOj6

None whatsoever, zip, zilch nada. Just BS propaganda to justify slaughtering civilians.


freediver wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 8:41am:

How powerful do you think the Hamas militia is? Do you think it would be possible for them to take on the Israeli military directly without hiding behind their mother's skirts?

The flaw here is you seem to think it makes a difference to whether or not Israel will attack - its pretty obvious it doesn't. Hospitals and multi-storey residences are being flattened regardless.

Quote:

It is asolutely those reasons and more.

So it's not that Hamas if forcing their human shields to be human shields, rather that they are giving them no choice, and it is deplorable propaganda by the Israelis to describe it incorrectly?


Quote:

The flaw here is you seem to think it makes a difference to whether or not Israel will attack

It makes a difference to whether you can keep a straight face and argue that Hamas is not hiding behind their mothers skirts - remember all that "logic" you keep going on about, but failing to address?


Quote:

its pretty obvious it doesn't. Hospitals and multi-storey residences are being flattened regardless.

Regardless of what? So Israel will shoot back regardless of whether Hamas fires rockets, and the Hamas militants are valiantly standing in the path of Israeli rockets and firing off a few shots before they get obliterated?

Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 12:16pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 30th, 2014 at 12:10am: reporters in Gaza point out that there are a complex set of reasons why residents don't flee the bombing, and that there is no indication that it was because Hamas forced them to stay Looks like Hamas are beating up those who want to leave. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBvhHE8ePxg

baron,

Thanks for posting.

YT
"Published on Jul 22, 2014
War crime: Hamas members brutally beating civilians of Gaza who leave their homes following IDF warning......."

Hamas members brutally beating civilians of Gaza who leave their homes following IDF warning.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBvhHE8ePxg

A pity the translation commentary is in German.




Where is Annie ?

That is what i want to know.

She could be here, posting something.

Defending the Hamas militants, and condemning the Israelis for being murderers.



And yet the rockets are still being launched by Hamas, against Israeli cities and towns.

freediver wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 7:17pm:

So it's not that Hamas if forcing their human shields to be human shields, rather that they are giving them no choice, and it is deplorable propaganda by the Israelis to describe it incorrectly?

I gave you the quote from Netanyahu where he claimed specifically that hamas is ordering people to stay.

I think we both agree that is BS - Netanyahu is not merely "describing it incorrectly" - he is telling bald faced lies to justify the slaughter of hundreds of civilians.

Is it so hard to call a spade a spade?


freediver wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 7:17pm:

Regardless of what? So Israel will shoot back regardless of whether Hamas fires rockets, and the Hamas militants are valiantly standing in the path of Israeli rockets and firing off a few shots before they get obliterated?

You just finished arguing that Hamas are prevailing only because they use human shields. Yet you seem to agree with me that human shields are no obstacle to the Israelis - and Hamas are getting "obliterated" anyway. So there goes your argument about why hamas can't operate from non-built up areas.

posted by mantra, #21


Quote:

....The onslaught is indiscriminate and unrelenting, with but one possible conclusion: Israel is not fighting the terrorists of Hamas. In defiance of the laws of war and the norms of civilised behaviour, it is waging its own war of terror on the entire Gaza population of about 1.7 million people. Call it genocide, call it ethnic cleansing: the aim is to kill Arabs. As none other than Malcolm Fraser tweeted this week: "If any other country went to war killing as many civilians, women and children, it would be named a war crime." But it is not, although the UN is asking the question of both sides. Yes, Hamas is also trying to kill Israeli civilians, with a barrage of rockets and guerilla border attacks. It, too, is guilty of terror and grave war crimes. But Israeli citizens and their homes and towns have been effectively shielded by the nation's Iron Dome defence system, and so far only three of its civilians have died in this latest conflict. The Israeli response has been out of all proportion, a monstrous distortion of the much-vaunted right of self defence. http://www.smh.com.au/comment/israels-rank-and-rotten-fruit-is-being-called-fascism-20140724-zwd2t.html#ixzz38XiNbrrI

The current conflict involving Gaza and Israel.....

Hamas militants continue to launch their rockets against Israeli cities and towns, from wherever they can, including from beside civilian infrastructure, hospitals, civilian shelters and UN schools.

But Israel must not respond, nor retaliate against the Hamas militants who fire their rockets [against Israeli cities and towns from these locations], we are told - because the Israelis may cause casualties among Gaza's civilians.

And there is a rising cacophony of insistent voices within the world community of nations - that Israel must cease trying to target Hamas militants [who are firing rockets against Israeli cities and towns] - because the Israelis may will certainly, cause casualties among Gaza's civilians !



Yet nobody at the United Nations [hardly anyone] points out that - TO END THE CARNAGE THAT IS OCCURRING - all that is required, is that Hamas must cease launching rockets - laden with High Explosives - against Israeli cities and towns.








"If you cut me, do i not bleed?"

The next time you get an itch,       ......DO NOT SCRATCH IT.

The next time a mosquito bites you on your arm,       ......DO NOT SWAT IT.

The next time an American Pit Bull dog bites your child, and hangs on, and hangs on, and hangs on,       ......DO NOT BEAT THE DOG - WHICH IS ATTACKING YOUR CHILD.



Show some restraint!!!

Quote:

I think we both agree that is BS - Netanyahu is not merely "describing it incorrectly" - he is telling bald faced lies to justify the slaughter of hundreds of civilians.

No we don't both agree. They probably do what he accuses them off. Not caring what flavour scum Hamas are is not the same as agreeing with you on what flavour of scum they are.

If this alleged misrepresentation is the worst thing you can dig up on them then in my opinion you are painting Israel in a very positive light.


Quote:

Is it so hard to call a spade a spade?

Lets see. Would you call Hamas' human shields human shields? You have been doing your best to avoid the topic of whether Hamas is even capable of doing what they do without using human shields.


Quote:

You just finished arguing that Hamas are prevailing only because they use human shields. Yet you seem to agree with me that human shields are no obstacle to the Israelis - and Hamas are getting "obliterated" anyway. So there goes your argument about why hamas can't operate from non-built up areas.

That makes no sense Gandalf. I have been arguing the exact opposite - that human shields are an obstacle, and that hamas would be wiped out in 5 minutes if they did not use them. Israel is forced, through common decency (which hamas completely lacks) to significantly scale down it's response compared to what it would do if this was a more conventional military vs military engagement. It does this to avoid the mass casualties that would otherwise occur due to the fact that Hamas is hiding behind their mothers skirts. Just because Israel cannot completely avoid death or injury to the human shields does not mean it is no obstacle to them. You are deliberately creating a false dichotomy here. Israel has more than two options open to them.

This is exactly the sort of stupidty that Hamas relies on to get international sympathy and to milk the misery of the Palestinian people for their own political end. Being a progressive Muslim, you should be trying to put an end to this misery, not trying to enable it by spewing ignorant hamas propaganda at every opportunity. The Palestinian people deserve better than Hamas and they deserve better than you trying to shift the blame for the misery that Hamas constantly inflicts on them. They are not going to get it, of course, because Islam is in the way, doing what it does, preventing people from thinking for themselves or putting it in any perspective.

freediver wrote on Jul 31^st, 2014 at 1:15pm:

Quote: I think we both agree that is BS - Netanyahu is not merely "describing it incorrectly" - he is telling bald faced lies to justify the slaughter of hundreds of civilians. No we don't both agree.

True, FD, but I'm sure you'll agree; it is not our job to agree or disagree. Our job is to ask questions.

freediver wrote on Jul 31^st, 2014 at 1:15pm:

Quote: I think we both agree that is BS - Netanyahu is not merely "describing it incorrectly" - he is telling bald faced lies to justify the slaughter of hundreds of civilians. No we don't both agree. They probably do what he accuses them off. Not caring what flavour scum Hamas are is not the same as agreeing with you on what flavour of scum they are. If this alleged misrepresentation is the worst thing you can dig up on them then in my opinion you are painting Israel in a very positive light. [quote]Is it so hard to call a spade a spade?

Lets see. Would you call Hamas' human shields human shields? You have been doing your best to avoid the topic of whether Hamas is even capable of doing what they do without using human shields.


Quote:

You just finished arguing that Hamas are prevailing only because they use human shields. Yet you seem to agree with me that human shields are no obstacle to the Israelis - and Hamas are getting "obliterated" anyway. So there goes your argument about why hamas can't operate from non-built up areas.

That makes no sense Gandalf. I have been arguing the exact opposite - that human shields are an obstacle, and that hamas would be wiped out in 5 minutes if they did not use them. Israel is forced, through common decency (which hamas completely lacks) to significantly scale down it's response compared to what it would do if this was a more conventional military vs military engagement. It does this to avoid the mass casualties that would otherwise occur due to the fact that Hamas is hiding behind their mothers skirts. Just because Israel cannot completely avoid death or injury to the human shields does not mean it is no obstacle to them. You are deliberately creating a false dichotomy here. Israel has more than two options open to them.

This is exactly the sort of stupidty that Hamas relies on to get international sympathy and to milk the misery of the Palestinian people for their own political end. Being a progressive Muslim, you should be trying to put an end to this misery, not trying to enable it by spewing ignorant hamas propaganda at every opportunity. The Palestinian people deserve better than Hamas and they deserve better than you trying to shift the blame for the misery that Hamas constantly inflicts on them. They are not going to get it, of course, because Islam is in the way, doing what it does, preventing people from thinking for themselves or putting it in any perspective.[/quote]


How many innocent kids will die before this latest war is over?

freediver wrote on Jul 31^st, 2014 at 1:15pm:

Quote: I think we both agree that is BS - Netanyahu is not merely "describing it incorrectly" - he is telling bald faced lies to justify the slaughter of hundreds of civilians. No we don't both agree. They probably do what he accuses them off. Not caring what flavour scum Hamas are is not the same as agreeing with you on what flavour of scum they are. If this alleged misrepresentation is the worst thing you can dig up on them then in my opinion

telling fibs in order to help facilitate the slaughter of hundreds is not a trivial matter. its spineless apologetics like this that enables israel to get away with this sort of stuff.


Quote:

That makes no sense Gandalf. I have been arguing the exact opposite - that human shields are an obstacle, and that hamas would be wiped out in 5 minutes if they did not use them. Israel is forced, through common decency (which hamas completely lacks) to significantly scale down it's response compared to what it would do if this was a more conventional military vs military engagement. It does this to avoid the mass casualties that would otherwise occur due to the fact that Hamas is hiding behind their mothers skirts.

baseless crap

Bobby. wrote on Jul 31^st, 2014 at 7:50pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 31st, 2014 at 1:15pm: Quote: I think we both agree that is BS - Netanyahu is not merely "describing it incorrectly" - he is telling bald faced lies to justify the slaughter of hundreds of civilians. No we don't both agree. They probably do what he accuses them off. Not caring what flavour scum Hamas are is not the same as agreeing with you on what flavour of scum they are. If this alleged misrepresentation is the worst thing you can dig up on them then in my opinion you are painting Israel in a very positive light. [quote]Is it so hard to call a spade a spade? Lets see. Would you call Hamas' human shields human shields? You have been doing your best to avoid the topic of whether Hamas is even capable of doing what they do without using human shields. [quote]You just finished arguing that Hamas are prevailing only because they use human shields. Yet you seem to agree with me that human shields are no obstacle to the Israelis - and Hamas are getting "obliterated" anyway. So there goes your argument about why hamas can't operate from non-built up areas.

That makes no sense Gandalf. I have been arguing the exact opposite - that human shields are an obstacle, and that hamas would be wiped out in 5 minutes if they did not use them. Israel is forced, through common decency (which hamas completely lacks) to significantly scale down it's response compared to what it would do if this was a more conventional military vs military engagement. It does this to avoid the mass casualties that would otherwise occur due to the fact that Hamas is hiding behind their mothers skirts. Just because Israel cannot completely avoid death or injury to the human shields does not mean it is no obstacle to them. You are deliberately creating a false dichotomy here. Israel has more than two options open to them.

This is exactly the sort of stupidty that Hamas relies on to get international sympathy and to milk the misery of the Palestinian people for their own political end. Being a progressive Muslim, you should be trying to put an end to this misery, not trying to enable it by spewing ignorant hamas propaganda at every opportunity. The Palestinian people deserve better than Hamas and they deserve better than you trying to shift the blame for the misery that Hamas constantly inflicts on them. They are not going to get it, of course, because Islam is in the way, doing what it does, preventing people from thinking for themselves or putting it in any perspective.[/quote]


How many innocent kids will die before this latest war is over?

[/quote]


How many more rockets, will Hamas launch against Israeli cities and towns, bobby ?

Do tell us all, bobby.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 9:34pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 31st, 2014 at 1:15pm: Quote: I think we both agree that is BS - Netanyahu is not merely "describing it incorrectly" - he is telling bald faced lies to justify the slaughter of hundreds of civilians. No we don't both agree. They probably do what he accuses them off. Not caring what flavour scum Hamas are is not the same as agreeing with you on what flavour of scum they are. If this alleged misrepresentation is the worst thing you can dig up on them then in my opinion telling fibs in order to help facilitate the slaughter of hundreds is not a trivial matter. its spineless apologetics like this that enables israel to get away with this sort of stuff. [quote]That makes no sense Gandalf. I have been arguing the exact opposite - that human shields are an obstacle, and that hamas would be wiped out in 5 minutes if they did not use them. Israel is forced, through common decency (which hamas completely lacks) to significantly scale down it's response compared to what it would do if this was a more conventional military vs military engagement. It does this to avoid the mass casualties that would otherwise occur due to the fact that Hamas is hiding behind their mothers skirts.

baseless crap
[/quote]

Are you saying that is not what I have been arguing? We don't seem to be getting anywhere Gandalf, apparently because you have no idea what is going on.

Bobby. wrote on Jul 31^st, 2014 at 7:50pm:

How many innocent kids will die before this latest war is over?

bobby,

Something for ya.
I hope you will watch it.


Dennis Prager's simple synopsis of the Middle East conflict

The Middle East Problem                        30mb
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EDW88CBo-8





And oh yeah,
Hamas firing rockets against Israeli cities and towns, again, from beside human shields, again......
IMAGE.....
http://www.skynews.com.au/content/dam/skynews/news/top-stories/2014/08/02/skynews_1902064821.jpg
http://www.skynews.com.au/content/dam/skynews/news/top-stories/2014/08/02/skynews_1902064821.jpg/jcr:content/renditions/skynews.img.1200.745.jpeg

freediver wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 9:49pm:

Are you saying that is not what I have been arguing? We don't seem to be getting anywhere Gandalf, apparently because you have no idea what is going on.

Sorry I was struggling to make a meaningful post on my phone (my advise don't try it - trying to put the cursor in the right spot for editing quotes is an absolute nightmare).

Anyway, let me be more clear:

this specifically...


freediver wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 9:49pm:

Israel is forced, through common decency (which hamas completely lacks) to significantly scale down it's response compared to what it would do if this was a more conventional military vs military engagement. It does this to avoid the mass casualties that would otherwise occur due to the fact that Hamas is hiding behind their mothers skirts.

= baseless crap.

We know Israel is targeting Hamas targets wherever it can find them. There is no bases on which to make the claim that Israel is "significantly scaling down its response" if it believes that such targeting will put civilians in harms way. Even Israeli propaganda is not giving us any hint that this is the case. There is much fanfare about those "tap on the roof" warning shots and phone calls to residents to leave specific targets - but after that, there is no evidence that Israel holds off or "scales down" its attack when there is a high probability that innocents are still at the premise(s). In fact Israel has hinted that they think they are under no obligation to do so - since they can (and do) use the "oh but we told them to leave" defense.

freediver wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 9:49pm:

We don't seem to be getting anywhere Gandalf, apparently because you have no idea what is going on.

Don't worry about me FD - I am very aware of whats going on. One person here is interested in actual facts and acknowledging what little we actually know, the other insists on blindly parroting baseless propaganda and pretends that its called "common sense", common knowledge", "logic", or the slightly more creative "not caring what flavour scum Hamas are".

Quote:

We know Israel is targeting Hamas targets wherever it can find them.

They know exactly where they are - in the Gaza strip.


Quote:

There is no bases on which to make the claim that Israel is "significantly scaling down its response"

Except of course for the bleeding obvious. Israel could chain drag the entire strip if it wanted to.

You are still avoiding the question of how strong Hamas is in a military sense. Why? The closest you have come is a ridiculous reference to a Hollywood film.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2014 at 3:53pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 9:49pm: We don't seem to be getting anywhere Gandalf, apparently because you have no idea what is going on. Don't worry about me FD - I am very aware of whats going on. One person here is interested in actual facts and acknowledging what little we actually know, the other insists on blindly parroting baseless propaganda and pretends that its called "common sense", common knowledge", "logic", or the slightly more creative "not caring what flavour scum Hamas are".

And then there's FD's side. He believes in truth and Freeedom.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2014 at 3:53pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 9:49pm: We don't seem to be getting anywhere Gandalf, apparently because you have no idea what is going on. Don't worry about me FD - I am very aware of whats going on. One person here is interested in actual facts and acknowledging what little we actually know, the other insists on blindly parroting baseless propaganda and pretends that its called "common sense", common knowledge", "logic", or the slightly more creative "not caring what flavour scum Hamas are".

gandalf,

What's not to understand ?

Wherever Allah provides the 'opportunity', moslems are commanded to engage in warfare against their fellow man.

And because their fellow man are deemed to have the status of cattle, they [the infidels] may be slaughtered - whenever such an outcome serves 'the cause of Allah'.

Even ISLAMIC scholars know that slaughter of your fellow man, in 'the cause of Allah', is Kosher halal.



"....the death of those who are killed for the cause of God gives more impetus to the cause, which continues to thrive on their blood."
ISLAMIC scholar, Sayyid Qutb







"....parroting baseless propaganda"


gandalf,

What's not to understand ?

Allah declares - IN THE KORAN ITSELF - that the words in the Koran are clear [perspicuous!!], and therefore those words [contained within the Koran] can only mean, what a rational person understands the Koran texts to mean.


Koran
012.001
YUSUFALI: A.L.R. These are the symbols (or Verses) of the perspicuous Book.
PICKTHAL: Alif. Lam. Ra. These are verse of the Scripture that maketh plain.
SHAKIR: Alif Lam Ra. These are the verses of the Book that makes (things) manifest.


Koran
026.002
YUSUFALI: These are verses of the Book that makes (things) clear.
PICKTHAL: These are revelations of the Scripture that maketh plain.
SHAKIR: These are the verses of the Book that makes (things) clear.



Dictionary;
perspicuous = =
1 clearly expressed and easily understood; lucid.
2 expressing things clearly.





as per....

"...Allah is an enemy to those who reject Faith."
Koran 2.98


"....those who reject Allah have no protector."
Koran 47.008
v. 8-11


"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...."
Koran 9.111


"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "
Koran 9.29


But its all Chinese to me.        ;)

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2014 at 3:46pm:

We know Israel is targeting Hamas targets wherever it can find them. There is no bases on which to make the claim that Israel is "significantly scaling down its response" if it believes that such targeting will put civilians in harms way. Even Israeli propaganda is not giving us any hint that this is the case. There is much fanfare about those "tap on the roof" warning shots and phone calls to residents to leave specific targets - but after that, there is no evidence that Israel holds off or "scales down" its attack when there is a high probability that innocents are still at the premise(s). In fact Israel has hinted that they think they are under no obligation to do so - since they can (and do) use the "oh but we told them to leave" defense.

So now your issue is that the Jews are not always giving notice to the Palestinians, two weeks into a war, that they are going to respond to the Hamas rockets and the tunnels?


Hamas executes Palestinian protesters
On July 29, 20 Palestinians in Gaza were reportedly executed by Hamas for treason, making a total of over 30 in two days. If you're wondering what "treason" means -- it means they protested against Hamas because of the destruction Hamas' repeated refusal for ceasefire was causing. Hamas calls it treason, but daring to speak and protest is the real reason.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lilac-sigan/the-voices-of-gazans-that_b_5639865.html

No warning there.

http://i.imgur.com/udne1ud.jpg

freediver wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2014 at 8:05pm:

Except of course for the bleeding obvious.

;D Great FD - we'll add that to the list: common sense, common knowledge, logic, and now "bleeding obvious".


freediver wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2014 at 8:05pm:

You are still avoiding the question of how strong Hamas is in a military sense.

am I? Thats funny FD, I seem to recall making it clear I think their strength "in a military sense" is virtually non-existent. It tends to be that way when it is entirely blockaded from the outside world, and is periodically decimated by one of the world's most advanced militaries at will, like shooting fish in the barrel - with no evidence that the risk of civilian casualties hinders these turkey shoots in any significant way.


wally1 wrote on Aug 4^th, 2014 at 3:29pm:

...

And rightly so Wally - Jeremy should have understood we don't do evidence here - only baseless propaganda masquerading as 'common knowledge', 'common sense', 'logic' and 'the bleeding obvious'. If only he checked with FD first he would have known.

Quote:

I seem to recall making it clear I think their strength "in a military sense" is virtually non-existent. It tends to be that way when it is entirely blockaded from the outside world, and is periodically decimated by one of the world's most advanced militaries at will, like shooting fish in the barrel - with no evidence that the risk of civilian casualties hinders these turkey shoots in any significant way.

You also made a parallel with an invincible alien enemy. So how do you reconcile a non-existent military force constantly attacking one of the world's most advanced militaries with your insistence that they are not hiding behind their mother's skirts?

Do you think it is somehow unfair that their military is periodically decimated and prevented from getting their hands on more advanced weapoins?


Quote:

with no evidence that the risk of civilian casualties hinders these turkey shoots in any significant way

The evidence is there. You are just incapable of seeing it for what it is. You don't even know what the evidence should look like. You are basically expecting us to give you photos of what Israel does not do. Israel could level entire cities in a day. They do not do this, because of the civilians. It is not the evidence that is lacking, but logic on your part. It is all there. You just need to join the dots. For most people, this really does fall into the bleeding obvious category.

freediver wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 7:07am:

So how do you reconcile a non-existent military force constantly attacking one of the world's most advanced militaries with your insistence that they are not hiding behind their mother's skirts?

I reconcile it by pointing to the fact that there is no shred of evidence that "hiding behind their mother's skirts" makes any difference to the Israeli response. They will bomb hamas targets wherever they can find them - regardless of who they are hiding behind. I also reconcile with the actual evidence - like the independent reporters in Gaza who directly contradict the (baseless) Israeli claims about Hamas forbidding people to leave.


freediver wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 7:07am:

Do you think it is somehow unfair that their military is periodically decimated and prevented from getting their hands on more advanced weapoins?

No, I think its unfair that the Palestinians are continually denied their human rights by a brutal occupier.


freediver wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 7:07am:

he evidence is there. You are just incapable of seeing it for what it is. You don't even know what the evidence should look like. You are basically expecting us to give you photos of what Israel does not do. Israel could level entire cities in a day. They do not do this, because of the civilians.

You seem to be under the delusion that my argument is dependent on the belief that Israel is indiscriminately flattening the entire Gaza strip. It is not. It is dependent only on the belief that Israel seeks out hamas targets, and flattens them regardless of what collateral might be in the way. They do not opt for the "chain drag" option this because it would be completely pointless. They level buildings they suspect Hamas is based in, as well as any mother's skirts that might be in the way. But they do not hit mother's skirts where there are no Hamas targets because they are not targeting mother's skirts - they are targeting hamas.


freediver wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 7:07am:

It is not the evidence that is lacking, but logic on your part. It is all there. You just need to join the dots. For most people, this really does fall into the bleeding obvious category.

Yes, lets talk about logic and joining the dots shall we FD? Israel says that Hamas are using human shields and forcing civilians to stay in the line of fire. Now logic would tell us that these claims serve the PR interests of Israel, who are under enormous international pressure to stop the slaughter of civilians - who even by the most pro-Israel estimates are dying in disproportion to actual Hamas operatives and militants. In fact, to completely discount the propaganda motive for making these claims is decidedly illogical. Logic would also tell us that being a movement that is native to Gaza, it is inconceivable that the bulk of the targets - which includes non-military infrastructure and official residences (and Israel does not hide the fact that such structures have been targeted) - would or could ever be located outside built up urban areas - especially in such a small and densely populated area.

Quote:

I reconcile it by pointing to the fact that there is no shred of evidence that "hiding behind their mother's skirts" makes any difference to the Israeli response.

Are you conceding that they are in fact hiding behind their mothers' skirts? Or are you arguing that because you have deluded yourself into thinking Israel is not holding back, hiding behind their mothers' skirts somehow becomes not hiding behind their mothers' skirts?


Quote:

I also reconcile with the actual evidence - like the independent reporters in Gaza who directly contradict the (baseless) Israeli claims about Hamas forbidding people to leave.

You have been going to great lengths to explain that this is not the same thing and that you are only disagreeing with a very narrow, specific claim by the Israelis, rather than the broader issue of the deliberate and cynical use of human shields by Hamas.


Quote:

No, I think its unfair that the Palestinians are continually denied their human rights by a brutal occupier.

It is Hamas who denies them human rights.


Quote:

You seem to be under the delusion that my argument is dependent on the belief that Israel is indiscriminately flattening the entire Gaza strip.

No Gandalf, merely capable of it. Why is that so hard for you to understand?


Quote:

It is not. It is dependent only on the belief that Israel seeks out hamas targets, and flattens them regardless of what collateral might be in the way. They do not opt for the "chain drag" option this because it would be completely pointless.

Flattening the entire Gaza strip would also flatten Hamas.


Quote:

Yes, lets talk about logic and joining the dots shall we FD?

How about you explain what the "evidence" you demand of me would look like? You appear to concede that Israel is capable of far more than what it does, but somehow cannot make the huge mental leap from there to Israel holding back militarily.


Quote:

Now logic would tell us that these claims serve the PR interests of Israel, who are under enormous international pressure to stop the slaughter of civilians - who even by the most pro-Israel estimates are dying in disproportion to actual Hamas operatives and militants.

That is the point of Human shields Gandalf. Israel are not the police. They are not ruling Palestine as you claim they are. Instead, they are returning indiscriminate Hamas rocket fire with far more accurate missiles of their own - but they are still doing this from a long distance away. It is not reasonable to expect them to drop a bomb on the head of one Hamas militant but not injure nearby civilians. That is a fairytale, and the ultimate in hypocrisy. That is why the world condones Israel killing a "proportionate" (you will hear this term uttered by world leaders in reference to Israel on a regular basis) number of Palestinian civilians, because any unbiased consideration of the facts can only lead to one conclusion - that it is Hamas that is to blame when this happens, not Israel.


Quote:

Logic would also tell us that being a movement that is native to Gaza, it is inconceivable that the bulk of the targets - which includes non-military infrastructure and official residences

Is there any Hamas military infrastructure that Israel is aware of that they do not target? Or are you trying to blame Israel for not knowing all the places where Hamas stashes its rockets behind their mothers' skirts?


Quote:

would or could ever be located outside built up urban areas - especially in such a small and densely populated area

More blatant crap. I have responded to the "densely populated area" argument several times already in this thread. You are blatantly lying about this, then changing the topic ever time this is pointed out to you. If Hamas wanted to avoid civilian casualties, it is easily within their power to move military infrastructure outside of urban areas. They do not do this, no because there is nowhere to go, but because they actually want Palestinian civilians to die, so they can capitalise politically on the misery they inflict on them.

freediver wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 8:01pm:

Are you conceding that they are in fact hiding behind their mothers' skirts? Or are you arguing that because you have deluded yourself into thinking Israel is not holding back, hiding behind their mothers' skirts somehow becomes not hiding behind their mothers' skirts?

I'm arguing that since Israel has made it quite clear that mother's skirts are no obstacle to annihilating hamas targets, the logic you use to make this particular human shield argument becomes null and void. You made the argument that Hamas could not possibly continue to exist if they didn't hide behind their mother's skirts. This is clearly a flawed argument - unless you can somehow demonstrate that Israel is restraining themselves when it comes to hitting Hamas targets that are "hiding" behind their mother's skirts. And you haven't.


freediver wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 8:01pm:

You have been going to great lengths to explain that this is not the same thing and that you are only disagreeing with a very narrow, specific claim by the Israelis, rather than the broader issue of the deliberate and cynical use of human shields by Hamas

No idea what you are on about - but no. The claim from Israel that Hamas is forcing people to stay is front and centre to the human shield propaganda. I made that pretty clear in the OP.


freediver wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 8:01pm:

Flattening the entire Gaza strip would also flatten Hamas.

Incorrect - the top brass is safely tucked away in Qatar. And Hamas thrives on despair and destruction. Each of these little incursions by Israel is a God-send to Hamas. The best way to destroy Hamas is to let them fail at the day-to-day civil administration of Gaza. Yet Israel seems determined not to let this happen - and what timing for this attack - just when Hamas and the PA forge a deal for a unity government. Hmmm....


freediver wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 8:01pm:

How about you explain what the "evidence" you demand of me would look like?

Gee FD, its not really my job to explain to you or the Israelis what isn't a baseless claim - but rather to point out when a baseless claim is being made, and to call it for the BS that it is. But *NOT* having independent reporters on the ground in Gaza directly refuting what you are claiming, from Tel Aviv or Jerusalem, would be a good start.


freediver wrote on Aug 5^th, 2014 at 8:01pm:

More blatant crap. I have responded to the "densely populated area" argument several times already in this thread. You are blatantly lying about this

Calm down, you misunderstand me.

Hamas is the civil authority of Gaza. As such, it must contain a fair bit of civil infrastructure within built up urban areas - such as police stations, ministry offices and state run TV and radio stations, which we know Israel considers fair game. It is perfectly normal for such civil infrastructure to be located in built up areas - and it is entirely unreasonable to apply your logic and say that this constitutes Hamas "hiding behind their mother's skirts" when Israel decides to target them. Then of course there is the targeting of the homes of individual Hamas operatives - who, shock horror, happen to live in urban areas just like everyone else. Of course you would describe sleeping in your own bed in your own home as "hiding behind your mother's skirt" - even when you are not there.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 12:01pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 11:17am: Quote: You've got to be joking. There is no moral high ground in this conflict. None. They are relying on Israel not stooping as low. They are relying on Israel not deliberately firing on civilians, as Hamas does. They are relying on the human shields working, otherwise they would not rely on human shields. If Israel applied the same policy as Hamas with it's far greater firepower, all the palestinians would be dead. Every single one. Hamas relies on their unwillingness to do so. . The human shields argument is bullshit. There is nowhere in Gaza that isn't densely populated,             which is why there are such high civilian casualties. I get that it works both ways - if Hamas can't avoid drawing power to densely populated areas, Israel can't avoid hitting densely populated areas. There is no alternative for either of them while this stupid, stupid war continues. But Israel has a record of punitive, disproportionate punishment. Flechette shells, white phosphorus...all completely unecessary for anything but to inflict as much suffering as possible on the civilian population. That is unforgivable.

You are mistaken or lying Annie [i cannot know which].

You and other apologists for Hamas would like everyone to believe that Gaza is so built up, and so densely populated, that Gazan civilians have no opportunity to remove themselves from 'targeted' areas - whenever Gazans receive warnings from Israel to evacuate a suburb/area.
OR,
To you want us to believe that Hamas has no opportunity to fire rockets at Israel, except from densely populated 'built-up' areas.

Those proposition are just not true.

And you, are spreading LIES.





http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/pics/large/619.jpg



Quote:

The empty spaces in Gaza by Alan M. Dershowitz August 5, 2014 How many times have you heard on television or read in the media that the Gaza Strip is "the most densely populated area in the world"? Repeating this statement, however, does not make it true. There are dense parts of Gaza, especially Gaza City, Beit Hanoun and Khan Younis, but there are far less dense areas in Gaza between these cities. .....why doesn't Hamas use sparsely populated areas from which to launch its rockets and build its tunnels? Were it to do so, Palestinian civilian casualties would decrease dramatically, but the casualty rate among Hamas terrorists would increase dramatically. ......using civilians as human shields—which the Hamas battle manual mandates—is an absolute war crime. There are no exceptions or matters of degree, especially when there are alternatives.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4580/gaza-population-density



I have watched an interview with a Gazan doctor, complain;
...."Why are the Israelis targeting civilians? Why don't the Israeli soldiers fight against soldiers, instead of killings only civilians???"

Coz it is a Hamas strategy to cause as many casualties among Gazan civilians as it can, whenever it fights against Israel - so as to portray Israel as murderers of civilians.

The truth is that Hamas could launch its rockets from the open areas, that do exist within Gaza.

But Hamas militants are cowards who are trying to protect their own militants, at the expense of casualties among Gazan civilians - because Hamas knows that Israel has no option but to 'return fire', or, to surrender to every demand that Hamas makes [or watch its own Israeli population be subjected to the terror of Hamas rockets].




Quote:

Demanding that Israel does not 'shoot back' - whenever Hamas militants are found to be crouching behind a woman who is holding a small child in her arms - is choosing to surrender to Hamas's terrorist tactics, and is giving Hamas terrorists immunity in their 'freedom fighting' violence. Bibi explains it better that i can.... Israeli PM Netanyahu on CNN - FULL INTERVIEW 7_27_2014                  goto 7m 05s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pximx9vbXtE

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 2:22pm:

Hamas clearly firing rockets behind children's skirts in the middle of densely populated neighbourhoods: http://humanevents.com/uploads/2014/07/hamas_rockets.jpg http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/photos/uncategorized/2008/12/31/type901a.jpg

http://humanevents.com/uploads/2014/07/hamas_rockets.jpg

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/photos/uncategorized/2008/12/31/type901a.jpg


Hamas clearly - NOT - firing rockets behind children's skirts in the middle of densely populated neighbourhoods.


gandalf,

The above was clearly a 'phot-op' by Hamas.

But there are many, many photos - being published online - of Hamas rockets - CLEARLY - being launched from within built-up areas of Gaza.

So the two photos above, prove ZIP.

POST Operation Cast Lead....

Quote:

....based on my knowledge and experience, I can say this: During Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli Defence Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare. Israel did so while facing an enemy that deliberately positioned its military capability behind the human shield of the civilian population. Hamas, like Hizballah, are expert at driving the media agenda. Both will always have people ready to give interviews condemning Israeli forces for war crimes. They are adept at staging and distorting incidents. .... The truth is that the IDF took extraordinary measures to give Gaza civilians notice of targeted areas, dropping over 2 million leaflets and making over 100,000 phone calls. Many missions that could have taken out Hamas military capability were aborted to prevent civilian casualties. During the conflict, the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza. To deliver aid virtually into your enemy's hands is, to the military tactician, normally quite unthinkable. But the IDF took on those risks. Despite all of this, of course, innocent civilian lives were lost. War is chaos and full of mistakes. There have been mistakes by the British, American, and other forces in Afghanistan and in Iraq, many of which can be put down to human error. But mistakes are not war crimes. More than anything, the civilian casualties were a consequence of Hamas's way of fighting. Hamas deliberately tried to sacrifice its own civilians. Mr. President, Israel had no choice apart from defending its people to stop Hamas from attacking them with rockets.

http://www.meforum.org/2605/idf-tried-to-safeguard-civilians
Testimony - Col. Richard Kemp MBE, a former commander of British forces in Afghanistan






AND in 2014...

Quote:

Demanding that Israel does not 'shoot back' - whenever Hamas militants are found to be crouching behind a woman who is holding a small child in her arms - is choosing to surrender to Hamas's terrorist tactics, and is giving Hamas terrorists immunity in their 'freedom fighting' violence. Bibi explains it better that i can.... Israeli PM Netanyahu on CNN - FULL INTERVIEW 7_27_2014                  goto 7m 05s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pximx9vbXtE

Yadda wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 7:13am:

POST Operation Cast Lead....

Post Operation Cast Lead...

- Gaza had a chicken factory that was bulldozed to the ground - along with thousands of chickens.
- the only bread mill had been bombed to smitherenes
- the water treatment facilities had been destroyed (deliberately)

All Hamas's fault though of course.

Quote:

I'm arguing that since Israel has made it quite clear that mother's skirts are no obstacle to annihilating hamas targets, the logic you use to make this particular human shield argument becomes null and void.

They are an obstacle, or Hamas would no longer exist. You keep creating a false dichotomy, whereby if Israel responds at all to Hamas rocket fire, then Hamas hiding behind their mothers' skirts makes no difference to them. It does make a difference to how Israel responds, and Israel holds back militarily compared to how it would respond if Hamas militias operated away from civilians, as the Israeli army does. Your argument fails on logic.


Quote:

You made the argument that Hamas could not possibly continue to exist if they didn't hide behind their mother's skirts. This is clearly a flawed argument - unless you can somehow demonstrate that Israel is restraining themselves when it comes to hitting Hamas targets that are "hiding" behind their mother's skirts. And you haven't.

This is simple Gandalf -  IIsrael has not chain dragged the gaza strip. There, do you see that? Please let me know so I can stop worrying about you going blind.

I have demonstrated this several times. Pretending you are incapable of understanding the argument does not mean I have not made it.


Quote:

No idea what you are on about - but no. The claim from Israel that Hamas is forcing people to stay is front and centre to the human shield propaganda. I made that pretty clear in the OP.

It is not front and centre of what we are discussing.


Quote:

Incorrect - the top brass is safely tucked away in Qatar.

What would the top bras do without the restof Hamas? It is the rockets Israel objects to, not the top bras being in Qatar.


Quote:

Gee FD, its not really my job to explain to you or the Israelis what isn't a baseless claim - but rather to point out when a baseless claim is being made

You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence.....

And on it goes. At some point I have to ask you what evidence you are asking for, because you cannot comprehend the evidence I have presented. You are blind to it. Perhaps you do not even realise you are asking me to provide evidence of Israel not doing something? Do you understand what I keep saying about your argument failing on logic?


Quote:

Hamas is the civil authority of Gaza. As such, it must contain a fair bit of civil infrastructure within built up urban areas - such as police stations, ministry offices and state run TV and radio stations, which we know Israel considers fair game. It is perfectly normal for such civil infrastructure to be located in built up areas - and it is entirely unreasonable to apply your logic and say that this constitutes Hamas "hiding behind their mother's skirts" when Israel decides to target them.

Obviously I am referring to the military actions and infrastructure.


Quote:

Then of course there is the targeting of the homes of individual Hamas operatives - who, shock horror, happen to live in urban areas just like everyone else. Of course you would describe sleeping in your own bed in your own home as "hiding behind your mother's skirt" - even when you are not there.

If they fire a rocket at Israel then run home to mother and hide under the bed, then yes, that is exactly how I would describe it. The Israeli soldiers also have homes, but they don't park the tank out the front after a hard day of shooting at Hamas. If Hamas grows the balls to target Israeli soldiers, they know exactly where to find them, in large numbers, well away from civilian areas, and if they managed to inflict any damage, the rest would come, away from civilian areas, to fight. Of course, Hamas prefers to target the civilians. If Israel was able to take on Hamas directly away from urban areas, the would. They can't, because Hamas is hiding behind their mothers' skirts. It is entirely Hamas who decides where the fight happens. It is entirely Hamas who decides that it should happen in urban areas. You can't blame Israel for that, nor can you expect Israel to not respond because Hamas is firing rockets from behind their mothers' skirts.


Quote:

All Hamas's fault though of course.

I'm sure they also bombed a few flower patches Gandalf. Add it to your list.

freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 8:25pm:

This is simple Gandalf -  IIsrael has not chain dragged the gaza strip.

Israel can destroy all Hamas targets they can find without chain dragging. It is safe to assume they have done this - and thats why they have ended the offensive. The fact that there is no evidence they were in any way restrained by the risk of collateral damage in doing this, defeats your argument.

The 'chain dragging' argument is a complete red herring. Like I said, it is a completely pointless exercise for Israel if they can destroy all their targets without resorting to it. And there is every indication that this is what they have done - and there is no evidence to suggest that mother's skirts were in any way an obstacle. And if you insist they were, then its up to you to provide the evidence.


freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 8:25pm:

It is not front and centre of what we are discussing.

It is 100% front and centre of what we're discussing. It is a blatant lie by Israel because they have not a shred of evidence for the claim, and it is directly refuted by actual witnesses on the ground. You fail at this debate because you don't even know what its about - namely the lies Israel is perpetuating so they can get away with slaughtering innocents. Again, please read the OP.


freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 8:25pm:

What would the top bras do without the restof Hamas?

They would simply replenish their following from the inexhaustible pool of angry and resentful young men - inexhaustible because of the endless suffering caused by the Israeli siege.


freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 8:25pm:

And on it goes. At some point I have to ask you what evidence you are asking for, because you cannot comprehend the evidence I have presented.

LOL - so its "evidence" now is it? You do realise that until now you've been quite open about the fact that you have no evidence - instead trying to pass it off as "common sense", "logic" etc right?

But since you are apparently now in the "evidence" game, I'll try and be helpful and tell you what I would expect as evidence:

1. The claim that Hamas is using "human shields" by storing and firing rockets directly from inside populated civilian infrastructure. Evidence would include documents, images, footage etc of rockets existing in these places and/or rockets being fired from these places. Now unless more evidence has come to light since I posted the OP (which I haven't seen), the only evidence of anything related to this is that Hamas stored some rockets in a disused UN school. I repeat a disused school. Thus the only place we know for sure where Hamas rockets were being stored was in a place that was not being used, or was occupied by any civilians.

But please FD, enlighten me with some evidence that demonstrates the opposite. Not the demonstrably flawed logic that Hamas must store/fire rockets in/from inside civilian-occupied buildings - otherwise they would not survive. Thats not evidence.

2. The claim that Hamas is specifically ordering people to stay in areas that are under Israeli attack. Evidence for this might include recorded TV/radio broadcasts, intercepted phone calls to affected residents, flyers/leaflets/letters sent to residents with the alleged orders, statements by residents corroborating the Israeli claim. Things like that.

Once again, the only actual evidence we have related to this is the testimony of locals given to independent reporters, which completely contradict the Israeli claim. But please FD, if you have any other evidence that supports the Israeli claim, please enlighten me.


freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 8:25pm:

Obviously I am referring to the military actions and infrastructure.

civilian infrastructure associated with Hamas are being targeted FD.


freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 8:25pm:

If they fire a rocket at Israel then run home to mother and hide under the bed, then yes, that is exactly how I would describe it. The Israeli soldiers also have homes, but they don't park the tank out the front after a hard day of shooting at Hamas.

They live there FD. They would live there regardless of whether or not they fired a rocket and ran home to mother, and therefore Israel would target them regardless - since they are a hamas target. And don't be so obtuse - I already said these residents are targeted irrespective of whether or not the particular operative is home under the bed or not. Frequently they are not at home during the strike.


freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 8:25pm:

It is entirely Hamas who decides that it should happen in urban areas.

Yes FD, Hamas should build civilian infrastructure all out of the urban areas they are servicing I suppose - and recruit people who are all living outside urban areas  :P Get a grip on reality - please.


freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 8:25pm:

I'm sure they also bombed a few flower patches Gandalf. Add it to your list.

Presumably you can explain to us all the security imperative of bulldozing chicken factories and destroying water treatment plants?

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 12:25pm:

Yadda wrote on Aug 7th, 2014 at 7:13am: POST Operation Cast Lead.... Post Operation Cast Lead... - Gaza had a chicken factory that was bulldozed to the ground - along with thousands of chickens. - the only bread mill had been bombed to smitherenes - the water treatment facilities had been destroyed (deliberately) All Hamas's fault though of course.

Of course it is.
If the terrorist group Hamas weren't attacking Israel, Israel would not be responding.
Hamas has long ago declared war on Israel, and as such this decision has consequences.
How popular will Hamas remain with the people with the chicken mill, bread mill and water treatment facility destroyed.
Whilst Hamas continues to wage war on their neighbour, Israel will do whatever is necessary to win that war.

So CLFM you are a supporter of collective punishment.

Thats fine, just as long as we can dispense with the endless BS about Israel not targeting civilians.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 10:03pm:

So CLFM you are a supporter of collective punishment. Thats fine, just as long as we can dispense with the endless BS about Israel not targeting civilians.

gandalf,

How about you dispense with the endless BS about moslems NOT wanting to die for Allah's cause.

Hmmmm?



gandalf,

Please tell us all - definitively - which is it ?

#1.....
"Oh, oh!!!!!! The nasty Zionists are murdering our children!!"

Or,
#2.....
"DEATH FOR THE SAKE OF ALLAH IS OUR MOST LOFTY ASPIRATION!!!"


I know that providing an - HONEST - answer is very difficult choice for you.

'Should i answer, in a way which will evoke the most sympathy for the dead moslem children, or should i reveal that i am indeed a pure moslem - just like Mohammed Morsi ?'

No ?






+++


Is this claim made by Mohammed Morsi, true ?

OR NOT ?



Mild mannered - Mohammed Morsi -
Ex-President of Egypt

Watch the words coming out of his lips.....

"The Koran is our constitution"
"The Prophet Muhammad is our leader"
"Jihad is our path"
"AND DEATH FOR THE SAKE OF ALLAH IS OUR MOST LOFTY ASPIRATION!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8NtiUMOFFg






AND........


Quote:

"Moderate" Palestinian Authority TV: 'Palestinian children created to fertilize the land with their blood' "Our children are our glory and honor, they were created to be fertilizer for the land of Palestine, and for our pure land to be saturated with their blood."

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/02/moderate-palestinian-authority-tv-palestinian-children-created-to-fertilize-the-land-with-their-bloo.html








AND........


Quote:

"We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two."

- Osama bin Laden, November 2001





Quote:

"The Jews love life, .....they love life and we love death."

Hezbollah’s Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah





Quote:

".....On the one hand, Israeli culture values life in all its aspects, including the sanctity of the life of others. Their soldiers take risks to spare civilians on the other side, unprecedented in the history of warfare. Aware of Israeli inhibitions, Jihadi groups use their own people as human shields in fighting the Israelis. Over the last few years, these Jihadi groups have developed a full-blown death cult in which they raise their children to want to die killing others."

Quote:

"We have discovered how to hit the Jews where they are the most vulnerable. The Jews love life, so that is what we shall take away from them. We are going to win, because they love life and we love death."

Hezbollah’s Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah





Quote:

"Our blood is cheap compared with the cause which has brought us together and which at moments separated us, but shortly we will meet again in heaven…"

Yasser Arafat (Maariv, Oct. 4, 1996)





Quote:

"Why do other people love life, while we love death and violence, slaughter and suicide, and [even] call it heroism and martyrdom?"

Tunisian intellectual Al-Afif Al-Akhdar




Those "...we love death" quotes, above, were sourced here...
http://www.theaugeanstables.com/2006/08/02/501/




Google;
jihad - "we love death"

Google;
muslims "we love death"

Google;
Hamas charter, calls for the genocide of all Jews



The Israel/Palestinian conflict.....

It is not about land [for a Palestinian 'homeland']....

The Israel/Palestinian conflict - is about ISLAM and about 'pre-set' ISLAMIC religious doctrines.    Koran 9.29




Quote:

THE COVENANT OF THE HAMAS - MAIN POINTS .... On the Destruction of Israel: ----------------------------- 'Israel will exist and  will  continue  to  exist  until  Islam  will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.' (Preamble) The Exclusive Moslem Nature of the Area: ---------------------------------------- 'The  land  of  Palestine  is  an  Islamic  Waqf  [Holy   Possession] consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day. No  one can renounce it or any part, or  abandon  it  or  any  part  of  it.' (Article 11) 'Palestine is  an  Islamic  land...  Since  this  is  the  case,  the Liberation of Palestine  is  an  individual  duty  for  every  Moslem wherever he may be.' (Article 13)....

http://fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/880818a.htm


Moslems want genocide.

It is what ISLAM has primed the moslem psyche for.

The long awaited genocide of the Jews.





Time to let some blood flow.



Ezekiel 35:5
Because thou hast had a perpetual hatred, and hast shed the blood of the children of Israel by the force of the sword in the time of their calamity, in the time that their iniquity had an end:
6  Therefore, as I live, saith the Lord GOD, I will prepare thee unto blood, and blood shall pursue thee: sith thou hast not hated blood, even blood shall pursue thee.


Ezekiel 35:10
Because thou hast said, These two nations and these two countries shall be mine, and we will possess it; whereas the LORD was there:
11  Therefore, as I live, saith the Lord GOD, I will even do according to thine anger, and according to thine envy which thou hast used out of thy hatred against them; and I will make myself known among them, when I have judged thee.
12  And thou shalt know that I am the LORD, and that I have heard all thy blasphemies which thou hast spoken against the mountains of Israel, saying, They are laid desolate, they are given us to consume.
13  Thus with your mouth ye have boasted against me, and have multiplied your words against me: I have heard them.
14  Thus saith the Lord GOD; When the whole earth rejoiceth, I will make thee desolate.
15  As thou didst rejoice at the inheritance of the house of Israel, because it was desolate, so will I do unto thee: thou shalt be desolate, O mount Seir, and all Idumea, even all of it: and they shall know that I am the LORD.


Psalms 83:4
They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance.
5  For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee:
6  The tabernacles of Edom, and the Ishmaelites; of Moab, and the Hagarenes;
7  Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; the Philistines with the inhabitants of Tyre;
8  Assur also is joined with them: they have holpen the children of Lot. Selah.

Psalms 85:8
I will hear what God the LORD will speak: for he will speak peace unto his people, and to his saints: but let them not turn again to folly.
9  Surely his salvation is nigh them that fear him; that glory may dwell in our land.
10  Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other.
11  Truth shall spring out of the earth; and righteousness shall look down from heaven.
12  Yea, the LORD shall give that which is good; and our land shall yield her increase.
13  Righteousness shall go before him; and shall set us in the way of his steps.

IMAGE....
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/pics/large/623.jpg
[image script...] Is a Hamas member who stores weapons in his home a civilian or combatant?
Pictured, weapons and ammunition found by the IDF in the bedroom of a Gaza home, July 2014.
(Image source: IDF)




Quote:

Hamas' Phony Statistics on Civilian Deaths by Alan M. Dershowitz August 7, 2014 It's a mystery why so many in the media accept as gospel Hamas-supplied figures on the number of civilians killed in the recent war. Hamas claims that of the more than 1800 Palestinians killed close to 90% were civilians. Israel, on the other hand, says that close to half of them were combatants. The objective facts support a number much closer to Israel's than to Hamas'. Even human rights group antagonistic to Israel acknowledge, according to a New York Times report, that Hamas probably counts among the "civilians killed by Israel" the following groups: Palestinians killed by Hamas as collaborators; Palestinians killed through domestic violence; Palestinians killed by errant Hamas rockets or mortars; and Palestinians who died naturally during the conflict. I wonder if Hamas also included the reported 162 children who died while performing child slave labor in building their terror tunnels. Hamas also defines combatants to include only armed fighters who were killed while fighting Israelis. They exclude Hamas supporters who build tunnels, who allow their homes to be used to store and fire rockets, Hamas policemen, members of the Hamas political wing and others who work hand in hand with the armed terrorists. ......Data published by the New York Times strongly suggest that a very large number—perhaps a majority—of those killed are closer to the combatant end of the continuum than to the civilian end. First of all, the vast majority of those killed have been male rather than female. In an Islamic society, males are far more likely to be combatants than females. Second, most of those killed are within the age range (15-40) that are likely to be combatants. The vast majority of these are male as well. The number of people over 60 who have been killed is infinitesimal.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4585/hamas-phony-statistics-on-civilian-deaths

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 10:03pm:

So CLFM you are a supporter of collective punishment. Thats fine, just as long as we can dispense with the endless BS about Israel not targeting civilians.

Why don't you google it Gandalf? Perhaps its not BS eh, and you are too scared to  learn the truth!

https://www.google.com.au/#q=hamas+puts+rockets+next+to

Quote:

Israel can destroy all Hamas targets they can find without chain dragging. It is safe to assume they have done this - and thats why they have ended the offensive.

No they can't. Evidence for this is that Israel has not destroyed all Hamas targets. The rockets keep coming.


Quote:

The fact that there is no evidence they were in any way restrained by the risk of collateral damage in doing this, defeats your argument.

Not sure how to make it any simpler Gandalf. The reason you insist there is no evidence is because you are demanding evidence that something has not happened.


Quote:

The 'chain dragging' argument is a complete red herring. Like I said, it is a completely pointless exercise for Israel if they can destroy all their targets without resorting to it. And there is every indication that this is what they have done

hamas is still there, with a mission to destroy Israel.


Quote:

and there is no evidence to suggest that mother's skirts were in any way an obstacle

Wrong. You are incapable of even imaginging what such evidence would look like.


Quote:

LOL - so its "evidence" now is it?

You have been banging on about evidence for several pages Gandalf.


Quote:

You do realise that until now you've been quite open about the fact that you have no evidence - instead trying to pass it off as "common sense", "logic" etc right?

Because you are demanding I provide evidence that something has not happened.

freediver wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 6:31pm:

Wrong. You are incapable of even imaginging what such evidence would look like.

Israel have been flattening apartment buildings and other civilian infrastructure because they found hamas targets there. There you go I have just proven that Israel is prepared to slaughter civilians in their pursuit of Hamas. Now its up to you to prove that Israel has been "restrained" in any way in these strikes. Otherwise it is perfectly logical to conclude that Israel is not restrained. And please, bring up the chain dragging red herring again - a completely flawed argument given that Israel is perfectly capable of achieving its goals without resorting to chain dragging.


freediver wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 6:31pm:

You have been banging on about evidence for several pages Gandalf.

Thats right FD - I've been banging on about it because you kept insisting you didn't need it - merely only common knowledge and logic and whatever other BS terms you could come up with. That is until your last post, when you suddenly decided it was "evidence" you were presenting after all. You still haven't explained how that works yet - how you can go from "I don't need evidence" for 5 pages to suddenly "I've always been giving you evidence". Care to have a stab at that now? Come on FD, give us your best two word non-response to set me straight - thats what you excel at after all.


freediver wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 6:31pm:

hamas is still there, with a mission to destroy Israel.

Israel has no intention of destroying Hamas. It would be completely illogical for them to create a power vacuum that would only be filled by even more extreme hardliners.


freediver wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 6:31pm:

Because you are demanding I provide evidence that something has not happened.

;D ;D - oops - don't forget FD - you *ARE* providing evidence remember?...


freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2014 at 8:25pm:

You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence. You insist I have not provided the evidence. I provide the evidence.....

Quote:

Israel have been flattening apartment buildings and other civilian infrastructure because they found hamas targets there. There you go I have just proven that Israel is prepared to slaughter civilians in their pursuit of Hamas

Sure. This is the bit we agree on. Unfortunately for you I was referring to the bit we disagree on.


Quote:

Now its up to you to prove that Israel has been "restrained" in any way in these strikes.

So you want me to provide evidence that Israel did not do the things it did not do?


Quote:

Otherwise it is perfectly logical to conclude that Israel is not restrained. And please, bring up the chain dragging red herring again - a completely flawed argument given that Israel is perfectly capable of achieving its goals without resorting to chain dragging.

Israel's goal is to stop the rockets, not knock down a few Palestinian buildings. How successful have they been? Are they "perfectly capable" of doing that?

freediver wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 7:50pm:

So you want me to provide evidence that Israel did not do the things it did not do?

No FD, we're talking about something they did - according to you. Here I'll jog your memory...


freediver wrote on Jul 31^st, 2014 at 1:15pm:

Israel is forced, through common decency (which hamas completely lacks) to significantly scale down it's response compared to what it would do if this was a more conventional military vs military engagement.

I want some evidence that Israel *DID* this "scaling down" you are claiming.

In my opinion, Israel hit any and every hamas target they could find in built up civilian areas with no less ferocity than they would have hit them in non-built up areas. There is nothing - neither evidence or logic - to suggest otherwise.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 8:39pm:

In my opinion, Israel hit any and every hamas target they could find in built up civilian areas with no less ferocity than they would have hit them in non-built up areas. There is nothing - neither evidence or logic - to suggest otherwise.

Your main man Mo said it was OK, do you have a problem with that.

Go back to the black book if you think I lie.

adamant strikes again.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 9:45pm:

adamant strikes again.

No lie then!

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 8:39pm:

I want some evidence that Israel *DID* this "scaling down" you are claiming.

I did not mean in a temporal sense Gandalf. I have made the same argument a dozen different ways. Trust a Muslim to go out of his way to misunderstand.

freediver wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 10:28pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 8th, 2014 at 8:39pm: I want some evidence that Israel *DID* this "scaling down" you are claiming. I did not mean in a temporal sense Gandalf. I have made the same argument a dozen different ways..

Taqiyya, eh? Marvellous stuff.

Ah, the shifting sands of Moslem rhetoric.

It is an FD world, no?

Please desist with the personal attacks FD - you've been warned about this before.

freediver wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 10:28pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 8th, 2014 at 8:39pm: I want some evidence that Israel *DID* this "scaling down" you are claiming. I did not mean in a temporal sense Gandalf. I have made the same argument a dozen different ways. Trust a Muslim to go out of his way to misunderstand.

LOL - they either scaled down their attack or they didn't - temporal or otherwise.

I call bullshit - they did not scale down their attack, and you have no basis whatsoever to say they did: hamas targets in the middle of residential areas were destroyed with the same ferocity as they would have been destroyed non-residential targets.

Quote:

LOL - they either scaled down their attack or they didn't - temporal or otherwise.

If it was temporal your demand for evidence would make sense. If it was not temporal then you are merely demanding evidence that something did not happen. It's not like this is the first time I have explained this to you.


Quote:

I call bullshit - they did not scale down their attack, and you have no basis whatsoever to say they did

I have explained the basis, over and over agian.


Quote:

hamas targets in the middle of residential areas were destroyed with the same ferocity as they would have been destroyed non-residential targets

Do you have evidence of Israel replying with equal ferocity to hamas targets who were not hiding behind their mother's skirts?


Quote:

Please desist with the personal attacks FD - you've been warned about this before.

What personal attacks? Are you offended that I accused you of misunderstanding? Would you prefer I spent another 8 pages subtly hinting that you do not understand what is going on?

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 8:17am:

If it was temporal your demand for evidence would make sense. If it was not temporal then you are merely demanding evidence that something did not happen. It's not like this is the first time I have explained this to you.

If they were more restrained than they would have been if the targets were in non-residential areas - you need some sort of basis to demonstrate this. You have none.


freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 8:17am:

Do you have evidence of Israel replying with equal ferocity to hamas targets who were not hiding behind their mother's skirts?

Sure - they destroyed every hamas target they could find - no targets were somehow "attacked less" because of the presense of mother's skirts. If you insist otherwise, its up to you to prove it. See? simple - no need to obfuscate with silly words like temporal.


freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 8:17am:

What personal attacks?

freediver wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 10:28pm:

Trust a Muslim to [insert negative stereotype]

Quote:

If they were more restrained than they would have been if the targets were in non-residential areas - you need some sort of basis to demonstrate this. You have none.

I have presented the basis. You rejected it because you cannot comprehend it, despite it's simplicity.


Quote:

Sure - they destroyed every hamas target they could find - no targets were somehow "attacked less" because of the presense of mother's skirts.

That's probably because every single one was in urban areas. But I eagerly await your thorough analysis of the military force of every Israeli strike. I'm sure you are not just making this up as you go along.


Quote:

If you insist otherwise, its up to you to prove it. See? simple - no need to obfuscate with silly words like temporal.

It is not possible to prove a negative Gandalf. But it is quite easy for me to point out the bleeding obvious. It just doesn't seem to work on some people, who in a bizarre coincidence also happen to be Muslim.


Quote:

Trust a Muslim to [insert negative stereotype]

So you are offended that I accuse you of misunderstanding, despite you dedicating 8 pages to failing to understand a very simple argument? Or are you merely offended that I labelled you a Muslim?

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 12:56pm:

I have presented the basis. You rejected it because you cannot comprehend it, despite it's simplicity.

You presented it, I debunked it - multiple times. You then resort to your cryptic obfuscations - as always.


freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 12:56pm:

It is not possible to prove a negative Gandalf.

I'm not asking you to - I'm asking you to prove that Israel (in your words) "scaled down their attacks" against Hamas targets in residential areas. Thats not asking you to prove a negative - thats asking you to substantiate a baseless claim. Asking you to prove a negative would be asking you to prove something Israel didn't do - which I am not doing. I am asking you to prove something that Israel *DID* do - namely that they (again in your words) "scaled down their attack".


freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 12:56pm:

So you are offended that I accuse you of misunderstanding

I am not offended - I am simply accusing you of breaking your own rules - personally attacking me by caricaturing me as a deliberately deceptive/lying muslim. You've done it before, I thought you took the hint when I started deleting those attacks.

You are perfectly capable of accusing me of misunderstanding without needlessly attacking me as a person


freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 12:56pm:

It just doesn't seem to work on some people, who in a bizarre coincidence also happen to be Muslim.

.
I guarantee you FD, no rational person who reads your "arguments" here would consider them sensible or in any way reasonable - muslim or otherwise. Fortunately for you, I seem to be the only person with enough patience to persist with your discussions. Most people simply shake their heads after enduring one or two of your unique style of rebuttals and move on in complete dismay. But it might be worthwhile for you to go through your posting history and see how you have completely flabbergasted just about everyone you have debated with - on both sides of the spectrum. Of course it could mean that you really are the only one here who makes sense, and everyone else is too stupid to understand your wisdom - but more likely not.

Quote:

You presented it, I debunked it - multiple times.

No you haven't. You have not presented anything coming to close a rational counter-argument. You cannot counter an argument that you do not even comprehend.


Quote:

I'm not asking you to - I'm asking you to prove that Israel (in your words) "scaled down their attacks" against Hamas targets in residential areas. Thats not asking you to prove a negative - thats asking you to substantiate a baseless claim. Asking you to prove a negative would be asking you to prove something Israel didn't do

Yes Gandalf, that's what you are asking. As I already explained, I was not claiming a chain of events. You are creating a strawman of my argument, and demanding i prove that. Either that, or you are demanding I prove a negative. Take your pick.


Quote:

I guarantee you FD, no rational person who reads your "arguments" here would consider them sensible or in any way reasonable - muslim or otherwise

Brian may be on your side on this one, but I doubt anyone else is.


Quote:

Of course it could mean that you really are the only one here who makes sense, and everyone else is too stupid to understand your wisdom - but more likely not.

Plenty of people here appreciate my wisdom. I just don't attract sycophants.

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 4:23pm:

I was not claiming a chain of events.

You are claiming Israel "scaled down their attacks" - based on nothing at all.

But do continue pretending thats not a claim that requires substantiation.

You are claiming Israel "scaled down their attacks" - based on nothing at all.

Close - based on what Israel does not do. Is any of this sinking in yet? I am not sure how many different ways I can phrase the same thing.

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 4:57pm:

Close - based on what Israel does not do.

Ahh I see - so they do somethimg by not doing something  ;D ;D

Are you really fooling yourself into thinking this makes sense??

So what don't they do FD? Chain drag the entire strip? I've already explained why that is a red herring argument.

Israel hits each and every target they want to hit with as much force as they deem necessary to destroy it. There is no shred of evidence that:

a) some hamas targets are avoided because they are in residential areas
b) some hamas targets are hit with less firepower than they would otherwise because they are in residential areas.

To spell out again why its perfectly logical to assume Israel does not "scale down" their attacks on Hamas targets in residential areas - or in other words, Israel hits hamas targets with complete disregard to any potential collateral - because a) there has been crap load and disproportionate number of civilians killed during which time (presumably) all Hamas targets were hit (no reason to assume otherwise), and b) they can (and do) simply use the "human shield" BS propaganda, and absolve themselves of responsibility - which evidently, enough people like you are gullible enough to swallow for this to work.

Quote:

Ahh I see - so they do somethimg by not doing something ;D ;D

They "restrain themselves" by not doing things. Is any of this sinking in yet? Is there something about Islam preventing you from understanding this? I imagine it must take a lot of effort on your part.


Quote:

So what don't they do FD? Chain drag the entire strip? I've already explained why that is a red herring argument.

Because the leaders are in a different country, and would somehow orchestrate continuing attacks from there?


Quote:

There is no shred of evidence that

Right, you cannot prove a negative. Well done Gandalf.

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 6:03pm:

They "restrain themselves" by not doing things. Is any of this sinking in yet?

So what things don't they do FD? Are you *EVER* going to address my points? Does it occur to you that "not doing things" that have absolutely no value in relation to destroying their intended targets, does not in any way entail a "scaled down attack"?

And yes FD, it really has sunk in - its sunk in well and deeply that you have completely lost the plot and simply resort to finding slightly more creative ways of repeating your useless and evasive non-responses.


freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 6:03pm:

Right, you cannot prove a negative. Well done Gandalf.

proving that:

a) some hamas targets are avoided because they are in residential areas
b) some hamas targets are hit with less firepower than they would otherwise because they are in residential areas.

is *NOT* proving a negative. It is something specific, something tangible that you claim Israel *DID*, something that *HAPPENED* - not something Israel *DIDN'T* do, or didn't happen. And as such it requires evidence to be substantiated.

Would you like me to explain that in another language? Would that help you understand this exceedingly simple concept.

Quote:

So what things don't they do FD?

Pretty much everything Gandalf. They can do whatever they want - up to and including chain dragging the entire Gaza strip. They have a vastly superior military, and it is quite frankly ludicrous to suggest that anything other than not wanting to kill too many civilians is preventing them from wiping Hamas out.


Quote:

Does it occur to you that "not doing things" that have absolutely no value in relation to destroying their intended targets, does not in any way entail a "scaled down attack"?

Chain dragging the entire gaza strip would wipe them out completely.


Quote:

some hamas targets are avoided because they are in residential areas

They are all in residential areas. It would be a rather simple matter to get rid of them if they weren't. Obviously if Israel knows exactly where they are they will take them out, but remember I am saying they are "hiding" behind their mothers skirts. You understand the point of hiding don't you? Israel knows they are in there somewhere, but is not willing to wipe out the whole city to get them. If it was a patch of forest they would let rip.


Quote:

some hamas targets are hit with less firepower than they would otherwise because they are in residential areas

Israel has the capacity to chain drag the entire gaza strip. They use less firepower than that.

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 6:57pm:

Chain dragging the entire gaza strip would wipe them out completely.

Maybe one day it will get through to you that "wiping them out completely" was never the Israeli's intention.

Israel is not interested in creating a power vacuum - for obvious reasons.


freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 6:57pm:

Obviously if Israel knows exactly where they are they will take them out, but remember I am saying they are "hiding" behind their mothers skirts. You understand the point of hiding don't you? Israel knows they are in there somewhere, but is not willing to wipe out the whole city to get them.

If Israel believes they are "hiding" somewhere in an apartment building, they will happilly take out the entire building - and not give any consideration to any civilians that might still be in that building. We know they have been doing that, and justifying the death of civilians by saying "oh but we told them to get out" - and the "Hamas ordered them to stay" BS. Taking out the entire city would be completely unnecessary, and a stupid red herring argument by you.

Do you understand that yet??

Quote:

Israel is not interested in creating a power vacuum - for obvious reasons.

If there was a vacuum of power because there was a vacuum of people, the rockets would stop.


Quote:

If Israel believes they are "hiding" somewhere in an apartment building, they will happilly take out the entire building - and not give any consideration to any civilians that might still be in that building.

Well done Gandalf. That is what the international community dubs a "proportionate response". We tolerate Israel doing this sort of thing, because we appreciate what scum Hamas are and how little choice they leave Israel when they hide behind their mothers skirts. A disproportionate response might look like leveling the entire city. This is well within Israel's capability. They don't do it of course, because unlike Hamas, they are not scum.


Quote:

Taking out the entire city would be completely unnecessary, and a stupid red herring argument by you.

It would get rid of them all. Obviously the one building at a time approach is not sufficient.

Would you like photographic evidence of Israel not leveling entire cities?

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 7:59pm:

If there was a vacuum of power because there was a vacuum of people, the rockets would stop.

Good argument FD.  :P Unfortunately, along with the rockets stopping, so would Israel's existence.


freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 7:59pm:

A disproportionate response might look like leveling the entire city. This is well within Israel's capability. They don't do it of course, because unlike Hamas, they are not scum.

They don't do it because it would be completely bloody pointless. Israeli objectives (which again, is not to wipe out Hamas), are served perfectly well by targeted strikes of identified hamas targets - and to hell with the civilians inside.

You can't "scale down" from a planned attack that never existed in the first place.


freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 7:59pm:

Would you like photographic evidence of Israel not leveling entire cities?

Would you like photographic evidence of a completely retarded and irrelevant non-argument?

So basically, you are arguing that Israel's response is somehow the optimum one from a purely militaristic perspective, totally devoid of any consideration for the loss of civilian lives, but it is up to me to provide evidence to the contrary? I have to prove not only that Israel is capable of using more force, but also that using more force would be more effective and the optimum level is different from what they are currently using?

Typical Muslim 'logic' there.

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 9:27pm:

So basically, you are arguing that Israel's response is somehow the optimum one from a purely militaristic perspective, totally devoid of any consideration for the loss of civilian lives, but it is up to me to provide evidence to the contrary? I have to prove not only that Israel is capable of using more force, but also that using more force would be more effective and the optimum level is different from what they are currently using?

No, but at least your first sentence is a marginal improvement of your comprehension of my position. The second sentence is completely incomprehensible drivel.

What is "up to you", is to substantiate your BS claim that Israel somehow executed a "scaled down" attack on Hamas targets. Pretty simple really.

And while your at it, you can explain what "scaled down" even means.

But thats just in this little tangent - I am also still after a coherent explanation for why Israel's "human shield" argument must be blindly accepted with no evidence at all, and why the independent reporters on the ground in Gaza, directly refuting Netanyahu's BS and baseless claims of Hamas ordering civilians to stay in the line of fire, are (in your words) "full of absurd leaps of logic".

But I do acknowledge my patience for this will need to be virtually boundless.

Israel has the capability to carpet bomb gaza into dust, and salt the earth.  The only thing stopping them is international opinion and America would be compelled to withdraw support. 

I dunno why gandalf finds it hard to understand that Israel is showing restraint.  I suspect he does, he cannot possibly be that silly, but he is a Muslim first and needs to defend and protect his religion and the actions of other Muslims, even the ones throwing missiles into Israel in every way he can.i

Quote:

What is "up to you", is to substantiate your BS claim that Israel somehow executed a "scaled down" attack on Hamas targets.

It is far less than what they are capable of, yet insufficient to wipe out Hamas. It doesn't get any simpler than that Gandalf. I can point the bleeding obvious out to you, but cannot force you to see it.


Quote:

But thats just in this little tangent - I am also still after a coherent explanation for why Israel's "human shield" argument must be blindly accepted with no evidence at all

It is not blindly accepted without evidence. The overwhelming evidence puts it in the bleeding obvious category. Hamas owes it's continued existence to hiding among civilians.


Quote:

I dunno why gandalf finds it hard to understand that Israel is showing restraint.  I suspect he does, he cannot possibly be that silly, but he is a Muslim first and needs to defend and protect his religion and the actions of other Muslims, even the ones throwing missiles into Israel in every way he can.

He seems to have painted himself into a corner where Israel would not want to take more drastic action, even if it could, and thus the presence of civilians makes no difference. Apparently letting a vastly inferior enemy militia lob rockets at you for years on end is a standard military strategy. Their current response is somehow the optimum one, and anyone arguing any different needs to provide the evidence. All the 'bleeding obvious' evidence is simply dismissed with Gandalf's "pre-optimised" theory of retaliation. It does not matter that Israel could destroy Hamas if it was willing to kill more civilians - they choose not to, for entirely non-humanist reasons. Such is the mental gymnastics that Muslims put themselves through to defend Hamas from unfair criticism from those who consider it wrong to deliberately draw fire into civilian areas so you can capitalise politically on human misery. I am beginning to think that Gandalf was actually serious when he likened Hamas to the invincible alien enemy (was it Fifth Element Gandalf?) that grew stronger the more you blow the crap out of it.

Still, I think this is a slight improvement on Falah's argument that Hamas must keep lobbing rockets because a glorious military victory for the Islamists is just around the corner, and the have not lost the war if they refuse to surrender.

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 10:37pm:

Apparently letting a vastly inferior enemy militia lob rockets at you for years on end is a standard military strategy.

And it presents the Pallos as being without any agency. Even when they start firing rockets at Israel, it is Israel's doing. The Pallos are victims, no matter what they do.

Datalife wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 10:17pm:

Israel has the capability to carpet bomb gaza into dust, and salt the earth.  The only thing stopping them is international opinion and America would be compelled to withdraw support.

Bingo. Plus the fact that they don't want a power vacuum in Gaza.


Datalife wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 10:17pm:

I dunno why gandalf finds it hard to understand that Israel is showing restraint.

restraint - as in "restraining" themselves from an attack that was never on the agenda anyway - sure. Perhaps you can understand why I find FD's term of a "scaled down" attack such nonsense. The only way the term could make sense is if they would have gone for a "chain drag" or whatever option - but were forced to "scale" it down on account of civilians being in the way. Which is rubbish - the chain drag option was never on the table in the first place - a point that FD cannot seem to comprehend. In fact he can't even explain what the attack was "scaled down" from.

Israel hit Hamas exactly as hard as they always intended to.

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 10:37pm:

It is not blindly accepted without evidence. The overwhelming evidence puts it in the bleeding obvious category. Hamas owes it's continued existence to hiding among civilians.

Hamas is a grassroots Gazan movement - they *EXIST* among civilians. Striking rockets are only a small part of the Israeli campaign - much of it involved targeting Hamas residences, and civil infrastructure linked to Hamas.

I have pointed out to you the absurdity of expecting Hamas to recruit only from people who live outside urban areas, or building civil infrastructure outside the urban areas that it serves. A point you naturally ignore.

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2014 at 9:27pm:

So basically, you are arguing that Israel's response is somehow the optimum one from a purely militaristic perspective, totally devoid of any consideration for the loss of civilian lives, but it is up to me to provide evidence to the contrary? I have to prove not only that Israel is capable of using more force, but also that using more force would be more effective and the optimum level is different from what they are currently using? Typical Muslim 'logic' there.

Having seen what the jews have gone through in history I am almost sure Israel would not seek out war deliberately...

maybe I am wrong but seems to me the Jews have been fighting off religious groups since time began...why this is I am not 100% sure...fear for the most part I guess..

but really the Palestinians elected Hamas...so they must be in  favour of them trying to push back this monster called Israel..David and Goliath.... wrong on both sides right on both sides....

is Hamas looking after its people????????...

are they really?

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 11:43am:

freediver wrote on Aug 9th, 2014 at 10:37pm: It is not blindly accepted without evidence. The overwhelming evidence puts it in the bleeding obvious category. Hamas owes it's continued existence to hiding among civilians. Hamas is a grassroots Gazan movement - they *EXIST* among civilians. Striking rockets are only a small part of the Israeli campaign - much of it involved targeting Hamas residences, and civil infrastructure linked to Hamas. I have pointed out to you the absurdity of expecting Hamas to recruit only from people who live outside urban areas, or building civil infrastructure outside the urban areas that it serves. A point you naturally ignore.

do you think Hamas is taking care of the people that elected them to do just that???..

no ifs or buts....dont you think any govt should put its people first.? and make sure they have bomb proof places to go into.. if they wish to keep firing rockets..

seems to some of us.. the Hamas are using the children as shields.... not a good look is it?

Foreign press: Hamas didn't censor us in Gaza, they were nowhere to be found

On Wednesday night Benjamin Netanyahu briefed the foreign press, summing up four weeks of warfare in Gaza. “Now that the members of the press are leaving Gaza and are no longer subjected to Hamas restrictions and intimidation,” he said,” I expect we will see even more documentation of Hamas terrorists hiding behind the civilian population, exploiting civilian targets. I think it’s very important for the truth to come out.”

The prime minister’s voice betrayed no rancor but his words masked a deep frustration in his office over what one adviser called “a conspiracy of silence” by the foreign correspondents reporting from Gaza for the past month. “They have remained silent over how no one digs too deep into the Hamas side or into how they use civilians as human shields,” the adviser said. “That’s how they get an opportunity to cover Gaza, and it creates an imbalanced picture, which is bad for Israel. We should be trying to expose that.”

Netanyahu’s expectations have yet to be fulfilled. Of the 710 foreign journalists who crossed into Gaza during Operation Protective Edge, only a handful have claimed they were intimidated by Hamas or produced hitherto unpublished footage of rockets being fired from civilian areas, such as the pictures filmed by Indian channel NDTV, which were shown at the Netanyahu briefing. Maybe such footage will still emerge — all the foreign correspondents interviewed for this piece insisted that it doesn’t exist, and not because they wouldn’t have liked to obtain such pictures.

“It’s a phony controversy,” said one reporter who spent three weeks in Gaza and, like most who were interviewed, asked to remain anonymous. “This is a post-facto attempt to claim the media’s biased and Netanyahu [is] therefore infallibly right."

Elusive Rockets

But how could Hamas and other Palestinian organizations launch 2,657 rockets and mortar shells from Gaza, Israeli officials ask, and only NDTV reporter Sreenivasan Jain captured a launcher on film? Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor says he can’t believe “how veteran war photographers couldn’t capture even one launch team, a single Hamas fighter on a barricade, the kind of exclusive photo they routinely risk their neck for.”

“What nonsense,” says one senior correspondent based in Israel. “The fact that NDTV succeeded proves nothing; it was an almost unbelievable opportunity. There are places which are just too dangerous and a photographer has to first protect himself.”

“I didn’t see a rocket at point of launch,” says one European photographer who left Gaza a few days ago, “but I did see a lot in the air, and those pictures were published. If I had a chance I would have photographed launchers, but they were well hidden. Israel, with all its sensors and drones, didn’t find them all.”

“You couldn’t tell exactly where a rocket was being launched from,” says an American reporter. ”Often they were hundreds of yards away, although you could hear the launch and see the contrails. We didn’t hesitate to mention the general area in our reports, but that didn’t necessarily add much.”

“There are always some gung-ho photojournalists who would go to any front line, no matter how dangerous,” says Anne Barnard, the New York Times Beirut bureau chief, who spent two weeks reporting from Gaza. “But that requires essentially an informal embed with the militants, to even be able to locate them without getting caught in crossfire on the way. Our team in Gaza noted frequently in stories that Hamas operates in urban areas and from farm fields. We mentioned witnessing specific rocket launches in numerous stories, witnessing the rocket going up from some distance away, that is. But in two weeks I never saw a rocket crew; for obvious reasons, to avoid getting a hit by Israeli strikes, they try not to be seen.”

Missing in Action

The elusive rocket launchers are only one detail in the Israeli criticism. Where were the Hamas attackers throughout the operation? Why are pictures of uniformed and armed fighters totally absent from the coverage?

“I described the few Hamas fighters I saw in my pieces,” says one veteran war reporter, “but there were so few of them. It reminded me a lot of Lebanon in 2006, where you didn’t really see Hezbollah fighters even right at the border. Except for one chance encounter with a mortar team who looked embarrassed to be spotted. It was the same in Iraq, too, in the 2003 insurgency. Most of the time the fighters were invisible and dangerous.”

Reporter after reporter returning from Gaza has spoken of how, with the notable exception of spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri, Hamas fighters melted away during the warfare, even abandoning their regular checkpoint at the entrance to the Strip from Erez, so no one was checking the journalists’ passports.

“Members of the political wing could only very occasionally be found or talked to,“ says Barnard. “This was frustrating because, of course, there are many questions they should be asked, not just to respond to Israeli allegations but to evaluate their performance on their own terms and those of Palestinians in Gaza: Are their strategy and tactics effective? Do they believe they have popular support for their conduct of the conflict and the decisions they made? How do they respond to people who complain that they went into hiding and left ordinary people who had no choice ab

Quote:

restraint - as in "restraining" themselves from an attack that was never on the agenda anyway - sure.

Not putting it on the agenda is an act of restraint Gandalf. Israel has every option open to them. That you pretend their course of action is the only one open to them just highlights how deliberately deceptive you must be to promote this bullshit argument.


Quote:

Perhaps you can understand why I find FD's term of a "scaled down" attack such nonsense. The only way the term could make sense is if they would have gone for a "chain drag" or whatever option - but were forced to "scale" it down on account of civilians being in the way.

Again you misunderstand Gandalf. They choose to.


Quote:

Which is rubbish - the chain drag option was never on the table in the first place - a point that FD cannot seem to comprehend. In fact he can't even explain what the attack was "scaled down" from.

Israel has actually used bulldozers already. For Israel, every option is a possibility.


Quote:

Israel hit Hamas exactly as hard as they always intended to.

They would hit Hamas much harder if Hamas weren't hiding behind their mothers skirts, and it takes a peculiar dedication to delf delusion to insist otherwise. Israel does not want to have rockets fired at them for the next few decades, and only a Muslim ciould suggest they do.


Quote:

Hamas is a grassroots Gazan movement - they *EXIST* among civilians.

Israel is also a grassroots organisation. So are the Greens apparently. What makes Hamas different is not idiotic labels like grassroots, but drawing military fire into urban areas and capitalising politically on the misery they create. Being grassroots is no excuse for being scum.


Quote:

Striking rockets are only a small part of the Israeli campaign - much of it involved targeting Hamas residences, and civil infrastructure linked to Hamas.

Ah, so it is unfair for Israel to target the people firing the rockets, as well as the rockets themselves?


Quote:

I have pointed out to you the absurdity of expecting Hamas to recruit only from people who live outside urban areas, or building civil infrastructure outside the urban areas that it serves. A point you naturally ignore.

You have not. This is a new claim. I have not suggested this at all. It is a strawman, of Islamic stupidity. What I suggest is Hamas stop firing rockets from within urban areas.


Quote:

is Hamas looking after its people????????...

Hamas' charter is to destroy Israel, and the suffering of the Palestinian people helps them achieve this goal. Or at least, to keep firing rockets at Israel.


Quote:

“You couldn’t tell exactly where a rocket was being launched from,” says an American reporter. ”Often they were hundreds of yards away, although you could hear the launch and see the contrails. We didn’t hesitate to mention the general area in our reports, but that didn’t necessarily add much.”

Were these reporters camped out in open land, or in the cities?

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 7:06pm:

Not putting it on the agenda is an act of restraint Gandalf. Israel has every option open to them. That you pretend their course of action is the only one open to them just highlights how deliberately deceptive you must be to promote this bullshit argument.

*facepalm*

They could also launch a nuke against New York, or bomb the polar bears in the arctic. Yes, FD, "every option" is open to them - but we don't say that because they made the shock decision not to launch nukes against New York that they are executing a "scaled down" attack. We say such "options" are smacking retarded, and as such not in the least bit relevant to the discussion.


freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 7:06pm:

They would hit Hamas much harder if Hamas weren't hiding behind their mothers skirts

Once again, baseless.

There is no reason to think that Israel didn't hit those targets just as hard as it needed to to achieve their goals - which once again did not involve flattening Gaza, or even anhialating Hamas.


freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 7:06pm:

Israel does not want to have rockets fired at them for the next few decades

Of course they don't, but it can be argued that it is an acceptable price to pay for maintaining the gaza blockade and keeping the Gazan economy perpetually crippled. It does after all require a freak alignment of the planets for the rockets to actually do any harm to the Israelis. But even so, absolutely the Israelis would prefer Gaza to be suppressed *AND* non-beligerant at the same time.


freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 7:06pm:

You have not. This is a new claim. I have not suggested this at all. It is a strawman, of Islamic stupidity. What I suggest is Hamas stop firing rockets from within urban areas.

I did mention it before, you ignored it then just like you are ignoring it now with a completely unrelated response.

Israel targeted Hamas civil infrastructure including TV and radio broadcasters - fact.
Israel also targeted Hamas personnel's residences in built up urban areas - fact.

See how thats got nothing to do with targeting rockets?

Quote:

They could also launch a nuke against New York, or bomb the polar bears in the arctic. Yes, FD, "every option" is open to them - but we don't say that because they made the shock decision not to launch nukes against New York that they are executing a "scaled down" attack. We say such "options" are smacking retarded, and as such not in the least bit relevant to the discussion.

Is the option of using twice as much firepower as they currently do "smacking retarded"?


Quote:

Once again, baseless.

For most people, it is common sense.


Quote:

There is no reason to think that Israel didn't hit those targets just as hard as it needed to to achieve their goals

You are making up imaginary goals for them. Having rockets lobbed over the border for years on end is not a goal Gnadalf. Stopping the rockets is. Have they achieved that?


Quote:

Of course they don't, but it can be argued that it is an acceptable price to pay for maintaining the gaza blockade and keeping the Gazan economy perpetually crippled.

Ah yes, the "Jews are evil" argument. Israel doesn't impose a blockade to try to stop the rockets, rather it permits the rockets so it can maintain the blockade and use Palestinian civilians as target practice. You've got me there Gandalf. Muslim logic wins the day, once again. Falah would be impressed.


Quote:

Israel also targeted Hamas personnel's residences in built up urban areas - fact.

So you keep saying. As I responded earlier - is this unfair? Should they bomb them at the army base instead?


Quote:

See how thats got nothing to do with targeting rockets?

It has something to do with stopping the rockets. I'll let you figure it out. That way you won't demand evidence.

freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 10:29pm:

Is the option of using twice as much firepower as they currently do "smacking retarded"?

The idea of nuking the gaza strip or "chain dragging" as you describe it - is smacking retarded.


freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 10:29pm:

You are making up imaginary goals for them.

Israel has pulled out. *THEY* say all their objectives are complete. Do you have any good reason to suggest they are lying, or not being completely honest with us?


freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 10:29pm:

Ah yes, the "Jews are evil" argument.

Once again, you said it FD, not me. Beginning to become a pattern this isn't it?

As I have said before, it would be so much easier for you to turn this into an "evil joos" debate.


freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 10:29pm:

Israel doesn't impose a blockade to try to stop the rockets

The wall and the blockade was established about 5 years before any rockets started. I believe I have stated that about 5 times already in this thread alone.


freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 10:29pm:

So you keep saying. As I responded earlier - is this unfair? Should they bomb them at the army base instead?

"unfair" is neither here nor there, and therefore completely meaningless.

What it is though, is a complete debunking of this idea that Israel only bombs residential areas because Hamas are hiding behind their mother's skirts. Unless you think its only reasonable for Hamas to recruit from people who live outside urban areas.


freediver wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 10:29pm:

It has something to do with stopping the rockets. I'll let you figure it out.

Yes, and I'll let you figure out how the imperative of Hamas to build civil infrastructure in residential areas to fulfill their duties as civil administrators, which then gets targeted by Israel - has nothing to do with Israel hitting residential areas because Hamas "hides behind their mother's skirts".

Quote:

The idea of nuking the gaza strip or "chain dragging" as you describe it - is smacking retarded.

Oh goody. Circles again. Is the option of using twice as much firepower as they currently do "smacking retarded"?

freediver wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 8:07pm:

Is the option of using twice as much firepower as they currently do "smacking retarded"?

If they never needed to in the first place - then yes.

The reason I specified the chain dragging option is because that was your original answer to how Israel had "scaled down" their attack.

Also, I'd be interested on your thoughts about how having residences and civil infrastructure within urban areas constitutes "hiding behind their mother's skirts".

Quote:

If they never needed to in the first place - then yes.

How effective have current measures been at stopping the rockets. Please for a moment drop the BS that Israel's only goal is killing innocent Palestinians, or whatever else you can make up on the spot.


Quote:

The reason I specified the chain dragging option is because that was your original answer to how Israel had "scaled down" their attack.

That was my effort to explain to you that Israel is capable of far more than what it does. I tried many different ways to explain the same thing. Trust a Muslim to get it wrong eh?


Quote:

Also, I'd be interested on your thoughts about how having residences and civil infrastructure within urban areas constitutes "hiding behind their mother's skirts".

Firing rockets from behind their mothers skirts constitutes hiding behind their mothers skirts.

freediver wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 10:30pm:

How effective have current measures been at stopping the rockets.

We shall see. But finding evidence that Israel failed in stopping the rockets is not evidence that not all of Israel's objectives were complete.

Israel says all their objectives were complete - would you disagree?

And please pause before posting your usual knee-jerk "Hamas still exists" retort- and consider the point I have been making repeatedly that the anhialiation of Hamas is almost certainly not a desirable Israeli outcome, nor is the wholesale flattening of Gaza.

Like I said, a continuation of rockets that require a freakish alignment of planets to cause any actual damage might be considered an acceptable price - for the continued denial of Palestinian rights.


freediver wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 10:30pm:

That was my effort to explain to you that Israel is capable of far more than what it does.

Of course it is - it is also capable of bombing polar bears in the arctic, or launching nukes against the US.

That said, your point is not an invalid one - but saying this therefore means the Israelis "scaled down" their attack is. You have no basis whatsoever to conclude that Israel would have chosen and would have prefered a more intense attack if it hadn't been for civilians. There is nothing, I say nothing, at all to assume that what transpired in this last attack, wasn't the exact intensity of targeting and firepower that Israel intended all along, and indeed felt was the most optimal all along. There are many reasons to argue why this was that case that I have covered - including the dangers of creating a power vacuum that would be filled by worse extremists than Hamas, the economic cost of rebuilding Gaza - that even a negligent occupier as Israel would find impossible to ignore, not to mention both a domestic and international backlash. But mostly, your "scaled down" attack argument is invalid because it is completely baseless - just like everything else you argue.


freediver wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 10:30pm:

Firing rockets from behind their mothers skirts constitutes hiding behind their mothers skirts.

So I take it you concede that there is at least some Israeli targeting of residential areas that isn't because of "hiding behind their mothers skirts"?

TV station in the middle of residential neighborhood hit by Israeli warplanes

Israel shell and bomb Gaza power plant, government offices and "symbols" of Hamas power:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/israel-pounds-hamas-infrastructure-in-gaza-1406625853

http://www.france24.com/en/20140729-israel-gaza-hamas-shelling-aqsa/