Malaclypse the Younger Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 You should re read the exchange if that aint too much....You asked for: To which I gave you the exact article of the Geneva conventions which you asked for. Not content you wanted to play more silly buggers It's the fucking geneva conventins!!!! And yet I wait for an apology for asking me for proof the world is round... I will do no such thing. I will not do your dirty work for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malaclypse the Younger Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Oh how facile. And moronic. Moronically facile.I suppose then it's simply the jews fault. They made the arabs want to murder them. Yes, sometimes they have done that. Actually, it's pretty equal tit for tat with both Israelis and Palestinians. It is not even really a war of Jews and Arabs, since many Arabs live in Israel. It's mostly politicians fighting over dirt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 an interesting way to debate. just because you are posting an article from the geneva convention, it doesn't mean that the circumstances and israel's actions is legal. the geneva convention was used by AI, HRW and the red cross when they made their conclusion and their conclusion was that israel violated international law. so tell me when the Dancer fact finding mission was in gaza to investigate AI, HRW and the red cross reports where they've concluded that israel violated international law? I think we have been on this merry go round before. Their interpretation of international law is flawed to the point of absurdity. There is already a good thread quoting a military expert on why their interprtation is cock eyed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted August 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 I think we have been on this merry go round before.Their interpretation of international law is flawed to the point of absurdity. There is already a good thread quoting a military expert on why their interprtation is cock eyed. what is absurd is that you are trying to pass colonel kemp's opinion as evidence to counter AI, HRW and the red cross' investigations which have concluded that israel (and hamas) have committed war crimes. neither you or him have been to gaza to investigate what has happened so your opinions are worthless. (yours is more worthless than kemp's letter to Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. JCPA: "focuses on the main issues affecting Israel's security and international standing in order to wage the war of ideas in global opinion" and "has developed and implemented an array of cutting-edge programs to present Israel's case to the world". conclusion: you are trying to tell everyone that an opinion from a retired british colonel who has done no investigations in gaza and whose opinion has been addressed to an israeli lobby group has more worth than 3 expert, well-respected internatioal humanitarian organizations who have been to gaza and have done on-site investigations and who have published a 100+ report detailing their investigation? you fail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 you are trying to tell everyone that an opinion from a retired british colonel who has done no investigations in gaza and whose opinion has been addressed to an israeli lobby group has more worth than 3 expert, well-respected internatioal humanitarian organizations who have been to gaza and have done on-site investigations and who have published a 100+ report detailing their investigation?you fail. What is with your relentless appeal to authority? Yes there are some international organizations with whatever statements. They are not a court of law, their findings are not the last word, and their viewpoints are often politically influenced or biased, in various directions, for various reasons. People can and do have opinions of their own, based on the facts that are available for everyone to peruse. If you want to have a serious debate, try using facts and logic and reasoning and making your own argument rather than just saying over and over again "AI says so!", "HRW says so!" or some variant there of. Everyone can look up for themselves what AI or HRW says if they care to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted August 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 What is with your relentless appeal to authority? Yes there are some international organizations with whatever statements. They are not a court of law, their findings are not the last word, and their viewpoints are often politically influenced or biased, in various directions, for various reasons. People can and do have opinions of their own, based on the facts that are available for everyone to peruse. who has the final say? the israeli military? why won't israel sign up for international court? how are AI, HRW and international redcross politically motivated? opinions of colonel kemp have no weight against the investigations and reports given by the humanitarian groups. all of those organizations have had no problems reporting investigations that condemn all sides. your attempt and dancer's attempts at trying to discredit these organizations are a failure. If you want to have a serious debate, try using facts and logic and reasoning and making your own argument rather than just saying over and over again "AI says so!", "HRW says so!" or some variant there of. Everyone can look up for themselves what AI or HRW says if they care to do so. unlike you, i went through the AI report and after reading the report and the evidence, i came to my conclusion that israel has committed war crimes. how have you come to your conclusion that israel has not committed war crimes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 (edited) who has the final say? Each individual has the final say when it comes to the formation of their own opinions. Just because you and AI say something, doesn't mean everyone must bow down and conform. how are AI, HRW and international redcross politically motivated? What is their source of funding and of volunteers and workers? What are the motivations of the entitiess that provide funding? What types of people work for these organizations? What kind of statements on the parts of these organizations draw the most attention in the media? Which groups and countries are these organizations free to criticize more severely without getting completely shut out? What kinds of statements are likely to get these organization's workers physically attacked when traveling in certain areas of the world? opinions of colonel kemp have no weight against the investigations and reports given by the humanitarian groups. The opinion of any person or organization has precisely the weight in the estimation of any individual that that individual wishes to give it. You choose to discount Kemp's statements, for whatever reason, others may not. all of those organizations have had no problems reporting investigations that condemn all sides. your attempt and dancer's attempts at trying to discredit these organizations are a failure. Dub declares something a failure, so it must be a failure. Tell me, where is your throne room so I can come and bend the knee? unlike you, i went through the AI report and after reading the report and the evidence, i came to my conclusion that israel has committed war crimes. As if you had any doubt of that particular "conclusion" before reading the report. how have you come to your conclusion that israel has not committed war crimes? The conclusion that I have come to is that Israel must do whatever is needed to ensure the security of its own people, and that if anything, it is not doing enough. Edited August 11, 2009 by Bonam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 I say we get dub set-up with a ticket to Israel. He can then complain in person. Would they even let him in? I predict body-cavity searches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malaclypse the Younger Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 What is with your relentless appeal to authority? Yes there are some international organizations with whatever statements. They are not a court of law, their findings are not the last word, and their viewpoints are often politically influenced or biased, in various directions, for various reasons. People can and do have opinions of their own, based on the facts that are available for everyone to peruse. If you want to have a serious debate, try using facts and logic and reasoning and making your own argument rather than just saying over and over again "AI says so!", "HRW says so!" or some variant there of. Everyone can look up for themselves what AI or HRW says if they care to do so. Ah, those pesky facts. Always getting in the way with you, aren't they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 Ah, those pesky facts. Always getting in the way with you, aren't they? All you have brought to the table are your emotions. And when facts are presented, they seem to be too complicated for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted August 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 hey failure: I think we have been on this merry go round before.Their interpretation of international law is flawed to the point of absurdity. There is already a good thread quoting a military expert on why their interprtation is cock eyed. what is absurd is that you are trying to pass colonel kemp's opinion as evidence to counter AI, HRW and the red cross' investigations which have concluded that israel (and hamas) have committed war crimes. neither you or him have been to gaza to investigate what has happened so your opinions are worthless. (yours is more worthless than kemp's letter to Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. JCPA: "focuses on the main issues affecting Israel's security and international standing in order to wage the war of ideas in global opinion" and "has developed and implemented an array of cutting-edge programs to present Israel's case to the world". conclusion: you are trying to tell everyone that an opinion from a retired british colonel who has done no investigations in gaza and whose opinion has been addressed to an israeli lobby group has more worth than 3 expert, well-respected internatioal humanitarian organizations who have been to gaza and have done on-site investigations and who have published a 100+ report detailing their investigation? you fail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 you are trying to tell everyone that an opinion from a retired british colonel who has done no investigations in gaza and whose opinion has been addressed to an israeli lobby group has more worth than 3 expert, well-respected internatioal humanitarian organizations who have been to gaza and have done on-site investigations and who have published a 100+ report detailing their investigation?you fail. Your reading skills leave much to be desired. Kemp along with being a highly decorated commander, actually knows how international law is applied, not just theoretically but practically. Unlike the AI or HRW, Kemp knows that the GC do not outlaw war. You position the JCPA as a lobby group, which it may or may not be. On the otherhand, AI and HRW are lobby groups whose main busines is to convince gullible westerners to part with their money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted August 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 Your reading skills leave much to be desired. Kemp along with being a highly decorated commander, actually knows how international law is applied, not just theoretically but practically. Unlike the AI or HRW, Kemp knows that the GC do not outlaw war. You position the JCPA as a lobby group, which it may or may not be. On the otherhand, AI and HRW are lobby groups whose main busines is to convince gullible westerners to part with their money. kemp talks about distinguishing between civilians and enemy combatants by passing undocumented judgment that hamas hid amongst civilians so that made israel's attacks legitimate and legal. he's talking out of his ass, because he doesn't really know whether hamas was hiding amongst the civilians. there is also more than the disproportionate and illegal strikes on civilians. there are also evidence of israel not allowing medical help to get to the civilians. there is the illegal use of WP and indiscriminate shootings by soldiers and of course, the use of human shields by israeli soldiers. all of which have been documented and even confirmed by israeli soldiers. kemp's opinion piece does not touch on or able to refute any of the mounting evidence that israel committed numerous war crimes. it's just a general opinion piece by a retired colonel who has not set foot in gaza and has not done an investigation. you fail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 kemp talks about distinguishing between civilians and enemy combatants by passing undocumented judgment that hamas hid amongst civilians so that made israel's attacks legitimate and legal. he's talking out of his ass, because he doesn't really know whether hamas was hiding amongst the civilians. *Chortle* HRW also accuses Hamas of putting Palestinians at risk by launching attacks from built-up areas. there is also more than the disproportionate and illegal strikes on civilians. *Chortle* Art. 28. The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations. there are also evidence of israel not allowing medical help to get to the civilians. Hamas has the ambulences, but were using them as troop carriers. there is the illegal use of WP and indiscriminate shootings by soldiers and of course, WP isn't illegal and if you think it is.... Art. 28. The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations. the use of human shields by israeli soldiers. all of which have been documented and even confirmed by israeli soldiers. No IDf personal have gone on record making that accusation. Mind you there have been people who anonymously claim to be IDF.... kemp's opinion piece does not touch on or able to refute any of the mounting evidence that israel committed numerous war crimes. it's just a general opinion piece by a retired colonel who has not set foot in gaza and has not done an investigation.you fail. There is no evidence of war crimes, only allegations. It is not an opinion piece, it was an address. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted August 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2009 *Chortle*HRW also accuses Hamas of putting Palestinians at risk by launching attacks from built-up areas. *Chortle* instead of quoting from the article, show me, in the actual report, where HRW has accused hamas of using people as human shield. after that, show me all the evidence from the report where it's been concluded that israel has used people as human shield. your foot is in your mouth. Hamas has the ambulences, but were using them as troop carriers. where is the evidence of this? are you going to post another video from youtube from years ago as your evidence? WP isn't illegal and if you think it is.... the way it is used can be illegal and that's what the evidence suggests. you keep missing this simple point but i'll continue to shove it down your quivering throat. No IDf personal have gone on record making that accusation. Mind you there have been people who anonymously claim to be IDF.... of course they're not going to go on record while they're serving. plenty of former IDF members have gone on record to speak against the illegal actions by IDF. There is no evidence of war crimes, only allegations. you seem to have the attention span is worse than a guppy's. there is a 100+ report from amnesty international outlining the evidence. It is not an opinion piece, it was an address. same shit. kemp did not go to gaza and did not do an investigation like the human rights organizations have. the same organizations who have concluded that israel has committed war crimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 25, 2009 Report Share Posted August 25, 2009 the way it is used can be illegal and that's what the evidence suggests. you keep missing this simple point but i'll continue to shove it down your quivering throat. It only suggests that to those who have no interest in Israel's ability to defend itself or are confused about the laws of war. In your case both apply. If you need reminding the GC clearly states protected persons do not give a belligerent immunity from attack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted August 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2009 It only suggests that to those who have no interest in Israel's ability to defend itself or are confused about the laws of war. In your case both apply.If you need reminding the GC clearly states protected persons do not give a belligerent immunity from attack. you're babbling just like a mouthpiece would. you lie just like the IDF does. - first, israel denied using white phosphorous and of course you jump on the bandwagon - then, israel says it used it legally and within the laws of the GC when the evidence of its use became overwhelming - then, israel's PR puts out a bogus statement, and floods press releases saying that the red cross has said its use was not illegal. of course, you were one of the first to jump in this. - then, the red cross puts out a statement saying that it did no such thing. - after an investigation by HRW, the conclusion was that israel used white phosphorous illegally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 25, 2009 Report Share Posted August 25, 2009 - after an investigation by HRW, the conclusion was that israel used white phosphorous illegally. Who care about HRW's erroneous conclusions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted August 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2009 Who care about HRW's erroneous conclusions? erroneous according to your worthless opinion. anyone who is not trying to apologize for war crimes cares about HRW's report and conclusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 25, 2009 Report Share Posted August 25, 2009 anyone who is not trying to apologize for war crimes cares about HRW's report and conclusion. Demonstrateble false. You don't care about Hamas' warcrimes and you like HRW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted August 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2009 Demonstrateble false. You don't care about Hamas' warcrimes and you like HRW. you're typing misinformation again. i have condemned hamas' rocket attacks. you, on the other hand, have condoned israel's war crimes. ps - what is demonstrateble? are you getting angry and punching the keyboard again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 25, 2009 Report Share Posted August 25, 2009 you're typing misinformation again. i have condemned hamas' rocket attacks. you, on the other hand, have condoned israel's war crimes. ps - what is demonstrateble? are you getting angry and punching the keyboard again? Get back to me when you acknowledge their systematic use of human shields and their efforts to increase human suffering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted August 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2009 Get back to me when you acknowledge their systematic use of human shields and their efforts to increase human suffering. get back to me when you've done your own investigation to prove that all of these human rights organizations' investigations and conclusions about israeli war crimes are wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 25, 2009 Report Share Posted August 25, 2009 get back to me when you've done your own investigation to prove that all of these human rights organizations' investigations and conclusions about israeli war crimes are wrong. Art. 28. The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations I guess you have the type of learning disability that only constant repeation will suffice to correct. ....irrelevant snivelling in 5...4...3.....2...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dub Posted August 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2009 (edited) I guess you have the type of learning disability that only constant repeation will suffice to correct. lols. you're not really expecting people to be as simple as you, do you? pasting an article from the geneva convention does not win you arguments or proof any points. you have to see whether and how the article applies to different incidents. this is why these investigations are important and in many incidents during the gaza war the investigations and evidence have shown that israel violated international law. ps - fat fingers? "repeation"? Edited August 25, 2009 by dub Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.