Israeli/Hamas disregard for human life.

Status
Not open for further replies.
spidergoat said:
And what about all those tribes that the currently existing tribes wiped out in order to take their land?
Click to expand...

Is that in the neanderthal age? From what I read about the Inuit and the native Americans they followed their own notion of borders and did not move into each others lands. But thats beside the point, unless you're advocating a return to slavery.



Anyone else think it strange that Jews immigrating to Palestine will only hire Jewish labour while living on Palestinian land where they built an illegal settlement?

"No Arab workers allowed in Bat Ayin" Not very different from "No coloureds" "Jews and dogs not allowed" etc.

Apartheid rules!
 
S.A.M. said:
Its okay, I don't particularly care what you believe. You're evidently not the kind who goes by evidence.

:p
Click to expand...

Israel Radio reported that the military wing of Islamic Jihad and a lesser-known faction identifying itself as the "Imad Mughniyeh Group" claimed joint responsibility for the attack.
Click to expand...

If it wasn't a terrorist act, I wonder who would have the motive to come along with an axe to kill that 13 years old boy.
 
S.A.M. said:
Clearly, the guy from Gush Etzion is more likely to be a liar.
Click to expand...

Shhhhhh... Lets hear it from the witness who got injured:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1076212.html
"Someone jumped behind me and hit me hard on the head," was how his mother Michal described Yair recalling the attack. "I fell on the ground and I saw the Arab chasing the other boy."
Click to expand...

The suspect was identified as an Arab, later on he was seen running towards the nearby Palestinian village, he was armed, he had the motive;
Case closed.
 
I think it was an act of insanity. But listening to Israelis has made me realise that my definition of insanity may be their normal
 
S.A.M. said:
I'm not asking what the IHL or anyone else has said. I'm asking YOU.

Is the release of WP [made in the USA, I presume] over civilian refuge areas barbaric, murderous and terrorist?


Mahmoud Mattar:


Phosphorous_469695a.jpg
Click to expand...

Not according to the IHL, and as to the murder of innocents at any time yes I consider it barbaric, but then war is a barbaric undertaking, and the IHL was agreed to to make it less so, and again it isn't illegal according to international law, killing a innocent child with a Ax is, by any civilized law, civilian, military, and international.

And again how does that bear on the Murder of Innocent children by a Palestinian Terrorist?

The only way it has any bearing is if You, (SAM) want to excuse the actions of a Muslim because He was only Murdering a Infidel Child who isn't worth as much as a Muslim Child.

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/515?OpenDocument

Now lets look at some of the Hyperbole of this:

384980.jpg


So any weapon dropped on Gaza is a white phosphorous weapon, such is the suggestion from this propaganda.

I have spent a little time looking at what are called white phosphorous burns, and I only saw one picture of what I know a white phosphorous burn looks like, there are many things That cause burn injuries in a war zone, flash burns from explosives, hot shrapnel, trapped in buildings set on fire by tracers, and explosives, fires caused by using non standard cooking and heating sources setting the building on fire, fuel stores and hit by hot munitions fragments, or the hot flash of explosives.

A lot of bad burns, and gross pictures of casualties from fighting, and not all of those from the Gaza, and nothing but propaganda as to what is the caused those burns.

ps: the young man in the picture is not suffering from WP burns, I would say shrapnel, which is very hot and can cause burns of it's own.
 
Not according to the IHL...
Click to expand...

I already know what the IHL thinks. What do you think?

Is this WP aimed at the UNWRA school in Beit Lahiya? Is it murderous and barbaric to aim WP at a school where it is known civilians are taking refuge from the bombing?

002.jpg
 
S.A.M. said:
I already know what the IHL thinks. What do you think?
Click to expand...

I have given you my answer, read the IHL, that is the law and under the law it has been defined what is legal use.

Now provide proof that WP was used in a illegal manner, and is the cause of the burns pictured in Islamic Propaganda Sources,
are form WP, do you even know what the construction of a M825 round looks like?

This is the submunition contained in a M825A1 round, the felt pad that contains the WP. to produce the smoke, it isn't even
WP shrapnel or separate chunks of WP, it is a felt pad saturated in WP.

It isn't capabale of generating anything like the wounds pictured.

white-phosphorus.JPG
 
I asked about the UNWRA Beit Lahiya school above. Is that white phosphorus? Being aimed at a school? Filled with civilian refugees?
 
S.A.M. said:
I already know what the IHL thinks. What do you think?

Is this WP aimed at the UNWRA school in Beit Lahiya? Is it murderous and barbaric to aim WP at a school where it is known civilians are taking refuge from the bombing?

002.jpg
Click to expand...

SAM no it wasn't and the U,N, even had to admit to that:

The al-Fakhura School incident refers to events that took place at the United Nations run school of al-Fakhura located in the Jabaliya refugee camp in the Gaza Strip on January 6, 2009 during the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict. In response to alleged militant gunfire coming from beside the school, the IDF carried out a artillery attack that the UN and several NGOs say killed 42, 41 of them civilians, and that according to the IDF killed 9 Hamas militants and 3 noncombatants. In the last week of January, the UN explicitly clarified that no deaths occurred within the building itself that and that the rounds struck the street outside the school, a "clerical error" in its reports had previously stated otherwise.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233304655600&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
----------------------------------------------------------------------

UNRWA spokesperson Christopher Gunness also stated that day that UNRWA is "99.9% certain" that there were no militants or military activity in the school building itself.[27] Gunness also added that this "does not necessarily contradict Israel's claim that the militants were operating close by".[27]

The UN originally said that the shelling took place outside the school. John Ging, Director of UNRWA operations in Gaza was quoted by The Guardian as saying that three shells had landed "at the perimeter of the school".[36] Another branch of the UN, its humanitarian affairs agency (OCHA) also reported in its daily output of 6 January that the missile strikes had been outside the school.[37] In its report of the following day, however, it mistakenly said the school itself had been shelled.[38] This error was corrected by Maxwell Gaylord, the UN humanitarian coordinator, who stated that the UN "would like to clarify that the shelling, and all of the fatalities, took place outside rather than inside the school.

http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/ocha_opt_gaza_humanitarian_situation_report_2009_02_02_english.pdf
 
@Buffalo.

The streets outside the school? You mean WP can go through walls into the schools too?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top