News from Gaza Part 2

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by S.A.M., Nov 20, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,285
    :bugeye:

    Do you even read your own posts SAM?


    M


    NOTE: Is Scientology as valid a belief system as Islam? Are the two equal? Or is Scientology much like Buddhism, which I think you regard as moronic drivel wasted on humanity by some silly Indian with his head up his arse trying to escape reality. Not like superior Islam, you know, Me Muslim, Me Can Do Than That.... smooches magical space rock.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    His reception by Israelis:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mh_F0p8Jcrc
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Do you think Muslim nations should become like the US and Israel? I think we have advantage of seeing where it all leads. We don't need to step into their shoes.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. CheskiChips Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,538
    The woman said they were firing from his house...his word vs. hers.

    So how is it proof?
     
  8. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931

    Sorry to disagree with you but having faith and education are not mutually exclusive of one another.

    That is why i have such respect for Zakaryia, His faith.

    The problem is that in Islam the Theocracy has the power to issue and enforce decision on Muslims.

    They can declare a war and call up the faithful, and make it a Holy duty to go on Jihad.

    In the West and Eastern Religions, the theocracy are limited to only their sphere of religious systems.

    They cannot declare war Holy or other wise, they cannot pass secular judgement on a individual, and they cannot enforce religious judgment against individuals, or any corporal punishment.

    In Islam, the Religious Courts can and do convict the people under their sphere of influence, and pass and carry out punishments, from simple beatings to amputations to the death penalty.

    Ayatollahs, Immam and other Religious authorities can issue Fatwa that Muslims faithful enforce even out side their own boarders, Salmon Rushdie, being one of the best known, a Fatwah being issued that:

    And Salmon Rushdie is still living in hiding today because Muslims are still trying to carry out those Fatwa.

    And the Muslim who succeed in Murdering Mr. Rushdie will be hailed as a Hero by a vast number of Muslim, and held up as a Paragon of Muslim Virtue to be emulated by the Children.

    If a religious leader in the west tries something like that, the secular government comes down on him like a ton of bricks, and anyone trying to carry out or carrying out such a religious order will be charged tried and convicted, and sent to jail.

    Not treated as a Hero by 99.9% of Christians, or 99.9% of the rest of the population
     
  9. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,285
    That's not what you said, you said Western people think they are better than everyone and then you turned around and said being Muslim meant you were better than people in the West! :bugeye:
     
  10. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    No I said we can do better than that, we are Muslims, i.e. we can avoid the pitfalls of those without faith.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Yeah, a Palestinian doctor who works for peace and just had three of his daughters killed by Israelis. Thats the way to treat him.

    Here he is on Israeli Channel 10?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UxJWdCwOpc
     
  12. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,285
    This thread is about Education BR. Most people doing research and teaching at high level Universities are atheist (or at best agnostic). Most scientific theories are based on a Godless Universe - a universe that can be explained by physical phenomena. ALL modern Biology is predicated on the idea we evolved without the help of any Gods. etc... etc... etc..

    This is antithesis to Islam and hence Islamic countries will never be highly educated.
     
  13. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,744
    That's appalling. Thankfully the Israeli staff at the hospital seemed to be more understanding. How can you attack a person who's just lost three children in one shelling..

    So firing on civilian targets is acceptable? Doesn't that breach the Geneva Convention that Buffalo so proudly lauded earlier on in this thread? To kill one supposed sniper (of which, no proof has emerged there were snipers in the Dr's home), you bomb the whole building that is, or was, a civilian home? Yeah, that's reasonable..

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,285
    Go back and read your post SAM. You clearly say that people from the West thing that are better than non-Western people and then turn around and suggest Muslims are better people and therefor can do better.

    If "Islam" (whatever the hell that is) was going to create some egalitarian society it would have done so at some point in the last ONE THOUSAND AND FIVE HUNDRED years. The fact is it didn't.

    Most Chinese will now agree (after 3 generations) yeah, Communism didn't work and was a failure. A few Communist complain the nation was never truly Communistic and they continue to think it's going to work. They are in the Minority.

    Some Muslims may agree (after 90 generations) yeah, Islam didn't work and was a failure. Most Muslims complain the nations were never truly Islamic and they continue to think it's going to work. They are in the Majority. They can try for another ONE THOUSAND AND FIVE HUNDRED years and it'll work as good then as it did the last ONE THOUSAND AND FIVE HUNDRED years.



    Nothing unleashes human potential like a secular democracy.
     
  15. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    I would rather we were "backward" than destroying entire countries.

    You can go to Gaza and see the human potential unleashed there. Zionism, an atheist philosophy. Another nail in the coffin of humanity.

    Yup, we can do better than that. We'll still be around in another 1400 years.
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2009
  16. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    And if Hamas had kept, and extended the Peace, not engaged in Hudna, and not armed and kept smuggling arms, prepared to attack Israel, tried to kidnap Israeli Soldiers, they wouldn't have died either.

    In every thing Hamas did and has done since it has taken power in Gaza, when has it ever dealt with Israel in a honest and open manner.

    They started from the very first to smuggle weapons for a war against Israel, they declared a cease fire, to slow down Israeli response, and used Hudna, and Israel back way off, and Hamas went full speed ahead with rearming and planing for a attack on Israel.

    They want Israel to open the boarder crossings, but what have they done to show that they are trustworthy of having the crossings open?

    Suicide Bombings, kidnapping of Israeli Soldiers, rocket attacks, arms smuggling-------
     
  17. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931

    Read the:

    Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949
     
  18. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,285
    Zionism SAM? Surely you can build an even bigger strawman. Come on, just say it, Hitler and Nazi Germany blah blah blah...


    Can you build a better society? Maybe. Will it be Islamic. No.
     
  19. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,744
    Now I know why you only posted the title of the Article. What exactly did you think I quoted from?

    I would suggest you actually look up and see just what Israel is a party to.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I'll give you a hint. Israel is a party to Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949. Or are you claiming that Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts. Geneva, 8 June 1977 applies in this case because Palestinians in Gaza are deemed 'non-International'?
     
  20. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    Bells, Israel is in compliance with the Geneva Convention and the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949.

    Read the whole, not the selected parts that you wish backed up you rant.
     
  21. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    Again read the whole not the parts that you wish backed up your rant, the

    Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949​

    Has not been recinded nor has it been superceeded, it is still in effect, and part of the whole Geneva Convention.



    And here is a hint for you:

    Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949​

    7. The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.

    CHAPTER IV.-PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES
    Article 57.-Precautions in attack​

    1. In the conduct of military operations, constant care shall be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects.

    2. With respect to attacks, the following precautions shall be taken:

    (a) Those who plan or decide upon an attack shall:

    (i) Do everything feasible to verify that the objectives to be attacked are neither civilians nor civilian objects and are not subject to special protection but are military objectives within the meaning of paragraph 2 of Article 52 and that it is not prohibited by the provisions of this Protocol to attack them;

    (ii) Take all feasible precautions in the choice of means and methods of attack with a view to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects;

    (iii) Refrain from deciding to launch any attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated;

    (b) An attack shall be cancelled or suspended if it becomes apparent that the objective is not a military one or is subject to special protection or that the attack may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated;

    (c) Effective advance warning shall be given of attacks which may affect the civilian population, unless circumstances do not permit.

    3. When a choice is possible between several military objectives for obtaining a similar military advantage, the objective to be selected shall be that the attack on which may be expected to cause the least danger to civilian lives and to civilian objects.

    4. In the conduct of military operations at sea or in the air, each Party to the conflict shall, in conformity with its rights and duties under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, take all reasonable precautions to avoid losses of civilian lives and damage to civilian objects.

    5. No provision of this Article may be construed as authorizing any attacks against the civilian population, civilians or civilian objects.


    All of the highlighted parts allow for the attack of military targets in civilian zones and presence, and the deaths of civilians are allowed under conditions out lined.
     
  22. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,744
    Oh Buffalo.. Where shall I begin..

    Yes.. Do you have proof that Hamas has explicitly directed the movement of the civilians to act as shields? Thus far, they are being accused of using civilian areas to launch rockets. Does that render those civilian areas, dwelling, hospitals, schools as military targets? No, it does not. That is why I pointed out to you that both Hamas and the IDF have been accused of using the civilian population as human shields. There have been reports, posted in this and other threads, of IDF forcing themselves into people's houses (civilian dwellings), locking the family downstairs while they base their operations upstairs in the dwelling. Does that mean that civilian dwelling is automatically a military target for Hamas?

    Let me point out to you Article 52 (2):

    2. Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military of advantage.

    The dropping of a bomb on a house because a member of Hamas resides in it does not make it a military target, nor is it a military objective. Article 52 (3):

    3. In case of doubt whether an object which is normally dedicated to civilian purposes, such as a place of worship, a house or other dwelling or a school, is being used to make an effective contribution to military action, it shall be presumed not to be so used.

    You do realise that you are highlighting sub-sections of Article 57 which Israel is accused of violating, aren't you?

    Israel has to take particular care to ensure the safety of the civilian population. And while Hamas is within the civilian population, or more to the point, their movements in Gaza are amongst the civilian population, dropping huge bombs and using artillery that is designed for massive destruction is not ensuring the safety of the civilian population.. ergo, the IDF is not taking care to protect the civilian population when they completely destroy a civilian dwelling to kill one member of Hamas that is in that building or near it. Do you get it now? They have not, in the weapons they are using, minimised the civilian casualties when they have bombed the bejesus out of civilian dwellings, schools, hospitals, UN site, places of worship. On the contrary, the ordinance they have used are solely designed for massive casualties and destruction of whatever it is they are targeting.

    So while they have the right to defend themselves, the manner in which they have done so is in direct violation of their obligations under the Geneva Convention in regards to the protection of the civilian population. For example, Article 57 (2)(b):

    (b) An attack shall be cancelled or suspended if it becomes apparent that the objective is not a military one or is subject to special protection or that the attack may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated;

    Do you get it now? You are not applying Article 57 as it is meant to be applied. While it grants Israel the right to defend itself, it does so with express intent that the civilian population is to be protected at all times and if, as section 2(b) states, it becomes obvious that the target they are planning to attack is not a military one, but a civilian one or if their attacks is expected to cause "incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof", the attack "shall be cancelled or suspended".

    It is sections and subsections such as the above which points out Israel's flagrant disregard for the Convention itself, which is why I was astounded that you had resorted to it to attempt to justify Israel's actions.

    Therefore, what you are stating grants Israel the right to defend itself, primarily sub-section 7 of Article 57, does so in accordance with the whole article. While Israel can defend itself, even in areas where the target is amongst the civilian population, it must do so in a manner in which the civilian population is protected at all times and attacks must be conducted in a manner to reduce the chance of casualties amongst the civilian population. Therefore, destroying a whole building, bombing a school or hospital, a house, mosque, is not conducive to the reduction of harm or danger to the civilian population. For example, if they drop a one tonne bomb on a civilian dwelling containing civilians and possibly one or two members of their enemy, it is not complying with Article 57, or with Article 52. Do you know why? Because their attack was not designed to reduce the number of civilian casualties. The same applies to their bombing the school, when they claimed that Hamas were launching rockets from the school grounds (which they later rescinded).. Shelling a school, used at the time to shield civilians from the war, is in direct violation of the Convention. Why? Because they took no care to ensure the protection of the civilian population in the manner in which they launched their attacks.

    Article 52 is very clear. I would suggest you acquaint yourself with it. Article 57 is also clear. While sub-section 7 does give the right to Israel to defend itself, Article 7 is not to be taken apart from the convention itself, in that it does not render the rest of the Convention as being void.
     
  23. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,313
    bells he's not going to get it. He doesn't want it to be true so to him its not.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page