bud

a few things: #1 - the screaming hamas man in the first video didn't say "we used women and children as human shield". he said the people formed a shield around the fighters. palestinians volunteering to use themselves as shield has been documented before. as dumb as it may be, it's their choice to do this. actually, the goldstone report talks about this [page 145]: 475. The Mission is also aware of the public statement by Mr. Fathi Hammad, a Hamas member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, on 29 February 2009, which is adduced as evidence of Hamas’ use of human shields. Mr. Hammad reportedly stated that … the Palestinian people has developed its [methods] of death seeking. For the Palestinian people, death became an industry, at which women excel and so do all people on this land: the elderly excel, the mujahideen excel and the children excel. Accordingly, [Hamas] created a human shield of women, children, the elderly and the mujahideen, against the Zionist bombing machine.335 476. Although the Mission finds this statement morally repugnant, it does not consider it to constitute evidence that Hamas forced Palestinian civilians to shield military objectives against attack. The Government of Israel has not identified any such cases. #2 - you weren't able to show me any reports that backs your claim that a 'a significant number of those civilian deaths [in cast lead] were a direct result of hamas'. all you've done is show random videos which are from pre-cast lead attack. you and some others here want to discredit the goldstone report while using random youtube videos to counter his report? this type of irresponsible debating tactic should be left to people like dancer and dogonporch. you're above that. i'd love to see something, anything to back up this claim. here is what the goldstone report [page 143] had to say about that: 466. In its report, the Government of Israel states that Hamas used two units and a groundfloor wing of al-Shifa hospital, the largest in the Gaza Strip, as a military base. 325 As its sources, it cites an interview with a “Hamas activist” captured by Israel and an Italian newspaper article, 326 which in turn bases this assertion on a single anonymous source. The Mission did not investigate the case of al-Shifa hospital and is not in a position to make any finding with regard to these allegations. 467. On the basis of the investigations it has conducted, the Mission did not find any evidence to support the allegations made by the Israeli Government. that is true. here is part of the report that discusses these warnings. page 151+: A. Warnings 498. The Israeli Government has stated that it took the following steps to warn the civilian population of Gaza: 347 • The Israeli armed forces made 20,000 calls on 27 December and 10,000 on 29 December 2008; • 300,000 warning notes were dropped over the whole of the Gaza Strip on 28 December; • 80,000 leaflets were dropped in Rafah on 29 December; • In the context of the beginning of ground operations on 3 January, 300,000 leaflets were dropped in the entire Gaza Strip, especially in the northern and eastern parts; • On 5 January, 300,000 leaflets were dropped in Gaza City, Khan Yunis and Rafah; • In total some 165,000 telephone calls were made throughout the military operations;348 • In total some 2,500,000 leaflets were dropped. 349 7. Conclusions 535. While noting the statements of the significant efforts made by the Israeli armed forces to issue warnings, the sole question for the Mission to consider at this point is whether the different kinds of warnings issued can be considered as sufficiently effective in the circumstances to constitute compliance with article 57 (2) ©. 536. The Mission accepts that the warnings issued by the Israeli armed forces in some cases encouraged numbers of people to flee and get out of harm’s way in respect of the ground invasion, but this is not sufficient to consider them as generally effective. 537. The Mission considers that some of the leaflets with specific warnings, such as those that Israel indicates were issued in Rafah and al-Shujaeiyah, may be regarded as effective. However, the Mission does not consider that general messages telling people to leave wherever they were and go to city centres, in the particular circumstances of this military campaign, meet the threshold of effectiveness. 538. The Mission regards some specific telephone calls to have provided effective warnings but treats with caution the figure of 165,000 calls made. Without sufficient information to know how many of these were specific, it cannot say to what extent such efforts might be regarded as effective. 539. The Mission does not consider the technique of firing missiles into or on top of buildings as capable of being described as a warning, much less an effective warning. It is a dangerous practice and in essence constitutes a form of attack rather than a warning. 540. The Mission is also mindful of several incidents it has investigated where civilians were killed or otherwise harmed and met with humiliation and degrading treatment by Israeli soldiers, while fleeing from locations about which some form of warning was issued. The effectiveness of the warnings has to be assessed in the light of the overall circumstances that prevailed and the subjective view of conditions that the civilians concerned would take in deciding upon their response to the warning.

i'm hoping that's sarcasm but it's most likely not. when you shoot a rocket into a building and 5 of the 8 killed are civilian, then you are killing civilians indiscriminately. according to who? is there an independent report done that shows 'a significant number of those civilian deaths [in cast lead] were a direct result of hamas' strategy of human shields'? goldstone came to the conclusion that hamas did not use civilians as human shield. something that he has not retracted. he also has not retracted that on several occasions, the IDF used civilians as human shield (link- page 19+) during cast lead. i'm not defending hamas' tactics. they have lost credibility by indiscriminately firing rockets at civilians in israel. i don't think anyone here disputes that they are guilty of violating international law. that still doesn't mean that we shouldn't have to get the facts straight. i prefer to see facts discussed instead of misinformation that has been widely accepted as fact. like, for example, it's actually the idf who has repeatedly used civilians as human shield. of course. no question there. the jenin incident and the attack on gaza were different in that the size of areas were different, the option of 'getting out of dodge' were different and the military tactics were different. i do recommend that you and anyone else to check all the reports that are out there. the goldstone report is 575 pages of findings which highlights the approach to the operation on different sides. there are also reports by HRW, AI, b'tselem and other organizations.

holy god. is bob trying to sell us that hamas is different than the idf when they come to killing civilians? i guess bigger and badder weapons equals more civilian deaths? like the 1000+ palestinian civilians the idf killed during the military action that killed less than a handful of israeli civilians? i asked a simple question bob. i don't agree with any civilian deaths. not hamas' approach and of course, not idf's approach. you can try to dismiss the comparison all you want. the comparison still stands. the idf indiscriminatory kills civilians far more than any group involved in this conflict.

http://www.truthdig.com/images/eartothegrounduploads/lk040811dBP-500.jpg

is this okay? Hamas says didn't mean to target Israeli school bus Thursday's attack, which critically wounded a teen and moderately wounded a bus driver, has sparked latest round of border fighting; Israel air strikes have killed 17 Gazans thus far as rockets continue to be fired into Israel. "It was not known that the bus targeted on the outskirts of Gaza carried schoolchildren," spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters, adding that the road where the bus was travelling was often used by Israeli military vehicles. link thankfully, no one was killed. however, a school bus was hit and civilians were injured. hamas says it didn't mean to target the bus. according to the israeli apologists, shrugging and saying 'we didn't mean to target civilians' makes hamas' attack justifiable. in other news: The early morning air strike brought the two-day death toll from Israel's ongoing retaliation to 17 Gazans - 10 militants, a Hamas policeman and six civilians

the mufti was to the nazis and vice versa as the christian phalangist of lebanon and israel were to each other in the 80's. they shared a common enemy and used each other to achieve their own agenda.

done.

every GOP candidate or potential candidate, besides romney, is a clown. this is a good time for rand paul to consider running.

why does israel need $3 billion+ in welfare cheque every year? all foreign aid from the federal government should be cut off.

lol. nice poll, you schmuck.

ah, okay, right jack. i'm glad you learned your lesson and you'll think twice next time you accuse someone of being on the opposite side of the same extremist coin.

bob believes gaza should be wiped off the map and he agrees with killing people, even if they're civilians (as long as they're arabs). the opposite side of the same extremist coin suggests that i believe israel should be wiped off the map and i agree with terrorist attacks that kill israelis. unless you have another meaning by saying "you are both fanatics and are the opposite sides of the same coin", do share, jack.

what you are saying is that i want israel to be wiped off the map and that i agree with terrorist attacks. please provide any quote/comment from me that shows that i believe the above. if you can't, then stfu.

woman watching israel bombing gaza from a hillside: "i think they should just clear off all the city [gaza] and just take it off the ground. yes, i'm a little bit fascist." bob: I agree with her 100%. Their mere existence is a threat to us. And they never suffer nearly enough for their crimes against us. Nothing fascistic about that. --- you suck bob.

you are an extremist fanatic who believes gaza should be wiped off. i've given you more time than you deserve.

i'm going to give you what you deserve; limited recognition of an extremist settler who believes palestinian land belongs to jews and who also believes that all of gaza should be wiped out.

i don't know about you guys, but i'm glad rue is here as the voice of stability and rational and to keep everyone in check. thanks rue. you're super duper.

control of border includes the sea borders. you forgot the control of air and the control of movement. occupation, bobby. stop fighting reality.

rand paul is pretty awesome. i'm glad shady agrees with him and his stance on foreign aid.

wrong, bobby. control of borders, sea, air and control of movement = occupation

the term palestine was used before the christian calendar came to be. you have to be pretty desperate to try to delegitimize palestinians. you're using another fanatical and extremist argument.

is that a yes? i'm sure you'll look into the cost once the floor plans and prices come out. don't forget to get on the mailing list.

catch phrases like 'him or us', or we did it because of 'self-defense' or comparing the palestinians to the nazis and the idf to the allied forces are all bs that do not add up when you bring reality into the equation. does it make sense that israel claims to be defending itself from someone who is defending itself from an occupation? why do those who try to justify israel's actions are never honest about why rockets are being fired? why do they never put the occupation, the blockade, the settlements, the violations of human rights into the equation?

there you go. a non-response. are you going to look into moving into the new cheap housing? you'll be helping to further the dream of greater israel and helping the fat cats who make millions from building these illegal settlements.

you are part of the problem bob. you're contributing to the loss of the meaning of self-defense. systematic land grab, theft of water, brutal occupation and violations of human rights are not 'self-defense'.