dub

who cares what israel calls itself. they killed over 1000 people, with 300 of them children so you bet your biased ass they're going to be concentrated on. if kuzadd means that israel doesn't want a just peace, then i'd have to agree. however, i do believe israel does want peace in their terms, where palestinians will have the permission to live in a land with scattered jewish settlements on their land, no control of air or land or borders and no guns and call it a state.

this is one of your desperate posts, isn't it? this is all a big conspiracy theory where the human rights organizations and veteran IDF organizations are all lying to get israel!

we weren't there and have not done an investigation on it to know what was wrong or what was right, so, both of our opinions have o weight. perhaps expert human rights organizations' reports like, the amnesty report, the red cross report and HRW's report can let you know.

at the moment, the official line from iran is that there were no voting irregularities.

you're showing your unbiased view of this conflict in another thread right now.

so far you believe the Amnesty report is false, the red cross report is false, HRW's report is false and now you're saying that these testimonies are made up by Breaking the Silence, "an organization of veteran Israeli soldiers that collects testimonies of soldiers who served in the Occupied Territories"?

i still haven't seen an iranian human rights violation apologist come in here and trying to discredit this report by saying Amnesty International is not to be trusted because someone who they don't ever agree with has said Amnesty International is biased. oh and lol @ krusty as he tries to sell himself as an unbiased, 'call'm as they are' fellow.

RELIGIOUS RHETORIC A number of soldiers said they were uncomfortable with the use of religious rhetoric by rabbis given access to troops during the operation.

WHITE PHOSPHORUS White phosphorus causes very severe burns. Amnesty International says it is inherently indiscriminate and its use in urban areas was a war crime.

VANDALISM OF PALESTINIAN PROPERTY Several testimonies report the destruction of Palestinian property - often within homes that the Israeli soldiers had taken over. Many photographs of offensive graffiti on Palestinian walls were published in the wake of the conflict. Some soldiers said water tanks were targeted, despite the fact that many Palestinians were without running water.

AGGRESSIVE ATTITUDE A number of the testimonies alleged that some soldiers were eager to kill, or even took pleasure in doing so.

BUILDING DEMOLITIONS Many of the testimonies say large swathes of buildings were demolished because of concerns that they may be booby trapped, contain weapons or conceal tunnels. Some soldiers raise concerns about the scale of the destruction:

HUMAN SHIELDS Some testimonies described the use of Palestinian civilians as human shields, for example by making neighbours enter suspect houses ahead of troops. The use of human shields is prohibited under article 51.7 of the Geneva Conventions.

RULES OF ENGAGEMENT - ROOFS, CELLULAR TELEPHONES, NIGHT TIME Some accounts suggest soldiers were led to view anyone talking on a mobile phone, present on a roof, or moving at night, as a target. Testimonies 13 and 14: These describe an incident where an old man carrying a torch at night, walking towards an Israeli-held building, approached from about 150 metres - and was allowed to approach to 25 metres with no deterrent fire, before he was shot dead.

RULES OF ENGAGEMENT Several testimonies describe rules of engagement which were either unclear, or encouraged soldiers to prioritise protecting their own lives over determining whether a person in the vicinity was a civilian.

excerpts below:

a mistake is a mistake. but when you see these things repeating and you see the number of civilians killed, civilians injured and civilian buildings destroyed, then it's understandable why it's called a war crime. these incidents go beyond F16's dropping bombs. there are also much evidence of soldiers shooting civilains in numerous occasions. proof that has been verified by israeli soldiers. there are also proof of israeli soldiers using civilians as human shields, again, verified by israeli soldiers. over 300 children were killed. not sure what you mean by reducing civilian casualties. the phone calls did nothing to help the civilians as shown by AI. many received the same phone calls. no place was safe to go. even the UN buildings were hit by israel. they have been verified by the people who have been killed and the building that have been bombed. wouldn't you say that's a pretty good evidence? the statements given by the palestinians have all been verified, because the same allegations have been made by several people. the very same type of research and investigation was done for the holocaust victims. unless of course, you mean, that these palestinians got together to make up a story and then demolished their homes and then faked the deaths of their families. hamas was found guilty of committing war crimes by AI. however, in regards to using people as human shields, after their investigation, they verified that the only people using civilians as human shields was the IDF. eh? read above. people being killed either by explosions or by being crushed under their property is a pretty good evidence, don't you think? you're wrong and have no idea what you're talking about. they are a signatory to the geneva conventions. they are obliged to follow the rule of the war. even israel acknowledges this. it might be fun for you to make up rules of war, but i rather not waste my time in responding to them. a nation that depends on PR to make itself look good. but they obviously failed to protect the civilians as the numbers killed show and as it has been concluded by AI.

what are they doing to israel, day in and day out?

israel had every right to fight back anyone who is attacking their country. however, what they're doing to the palestinians and the annexation of their land is not excusable.

i do believe that egypt's blockade should be talked about more. but i guess since it was a request from the U.S. (and the israeli lobby in the US government), you're not going to see much focus on egypt's assistance to continue this punishment on the gaza pppulation. but don't pretend that it's just the israeli border that israel is controlling. they're also controlling the water and the air. they've stopped and seized numerous humanitarian ships that are trying to get to gaza. it doesn't make you look good when you apologize for israel's violation of human rights. it also doesn't make you look good for making stuff up. you seem to mention the suicide attacks quite often. even though the last to happen was years ago. we also don't have any rocket attacks coming from the west bank either. so what's the reason you're still apologizing for israel's behaviour which includes the expanding of the illegal settlements?

it's to make a point. what this regime is doing cannot be excused and should be condemned by all. we don't see any apologists for human rights violations in iran. apologists who will go to any desperate length, like try to discredit AI, to show their unconditional love for the regime they're cheering for. but we do see apologists for israel. why is that?

i wonder if there are iranian regime apologists, like the IDF apologists that we have in here. who will go to any length to try to discredit amnesty international because AI is criticizing and upsetting their patriotism and pride.

you failed to respond to my comment and instead brought up something that has nothing to do with the questions: again: your comparisons are always lacking logic and your twisting of the situation leaves one thinking: "wtf are you talking about?" are you comparing jordan's so-called occupation of the region to israel's occupation? are you comparing jordan's agenda to the zionist agenda? did jordan try to segregate? did jordan attack villages and try to drive people out? and how the heck did you get 'jordanians who have never set foot... ' from the post you made? get off the ridiculous talk already. i have no patience for stupid debates.

i apologize. you did make a mention that you found them to be wrong. my mistake. i hope you continue to make all your posts as truthful as that one.

lol?