UN official voices deep concern as Hamas raids offices of aid groups - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;22579304]You don't have access to the internet. You're in a Ghetto. What are you going to do? Wave a flag at the boarder?[/QUOTE] Organize with a group of like-minded people and I'm sure I could find a way to do it. Also in Gaza there are reporters, who for for BBC or CNN if I'm not mistaken, I'm sure they could get a message across.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22579334]Organize with a group of like-minded people and I'm sure I could find a way to do it. Also in Gaza there are reporters, who for for BBC or CNN if I'm not mistaken, I'm sure they could get a message across.[/QUOTE] You know, this is kind of missing the original point. Which was, "What would your view of Israel be"?

You've asked "how does this look to you?". Not "what would your view of Israel be?". If I would be "against" Israel (don't really know how to put it) I would still act in a non-violent way, because I think that's the best way to achieve something. Violent ways may seem quicker or easier, but they bring more problems with them.

[QUOTE=Glorbo;22578062] [URL="http://www.facepunch.com/#"]View YouTUBE video[/URL] [URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=g0wJXf2nt4Y[/URL] [URL="http://www.facepunch.com/#"]View YouTUBE video[/URL] [URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=J08GqXMr3YE[/URL] [URL="http://www.facepunch.com/#"]View YouTUBE video[/URL] [URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=vH0tEceCe9Y[/URL] [/QUOTE] OK. The first video just shows a man talking about this one event. To prevent further bombing of Gaza, he suggested creating a human chain. The human chain was to prevent further destruction to Gaza. And if you're going to bring what an unimportant guy says; its my turn. -- * The Jerusalem Post reported on May 30, 2007, a letter sent by Israel's former Sephardic Chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu - one of the most senior theocrats in the Jewish state - pontificating "that there was absolutely no moral prohibition against the indiscriminate killing of civilians during a potential massive military offensive on Gaza..." It reportedly went on to say that "According to Jewish war ethics, an entire city holds collective responsibility for the immoral behaviour of individuals." Mordechai's son Shmuel Eliyahu, the chief rabbi of Safad, elaborated on his father's comments, stating: "If they don't stop after we kill 100, then we must kill a thousand." He added, "And if they do not stop after 1,000 then we must kill 10,000. If they still don't stop we must kill 100,000, even a million. Whatever it takes to make them stop." On February 29, 2008, BBC reported that Israeli Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai avowed in an Israeli army radio "the Palestinians will bring upon themselves a bigger shoah because we will use all our might to defend ourselves." -- The 2nd video is insanely obvious. I watched the original video in its form with commentary, what happened was, Hamas pulled the kids out of the line of fire as you can see. The obviously doctored video shows Hamas pushing a kid away from something, then the video cuts off (I WONDER WHY) then the next shows Hamas grabbing a kid who was in the middle of the street, in front of the pillars and takes him to safety, then the video immediately cuts. They weren't using them as human shields, they were bringing them to safety. But the immediate video cuts should be enough to prove that this video is a load of crap. [editline]04:48PM[/editline] [QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22579187]You are forgetting that the HRW [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Human_Rights_Watch"]don't know shit.[/URL][/QUOTE] An organization receives criticism? [B]HOW DARE THEY!!![/B]

It's not just some criticism, it shows they don't know what the hell they're talking about. This paragraph on its own should be enough: "The Times accuses HRW of lack of sufficient expertise to report on warfare because the organization has never hired any former members of any military or any person with expertise in warfare with the sole exception of Marc Garlasco.[25] The Times accuses HRW of overriding its own researcher who wished to rescind a factually inaccurate report accusing Israel of responsibility for the Gaza beach explosion (2006).[25] HRW has been accused of bias in gathering evidence because it is said to be "credulous of civilian witnesses in places like Gaza and Afghanistan" but "sceptical of anyone in a uniform."[25] Robert Bernstein, founder of HRW, now accuses the organization of poor research methods, for relying on "witnesses whose stories cannot be verified and who may testify for political advantage or because they fear retaliation from their own rulers."[26] According to The Times, HRW "does not always practice the transparency, tolerance and accountability it urges on others."[25]" But there are a lot more too. Even the founder of the organization says it sucks and doesn't do what it's supposed to do at all.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22581841]It's not just some criticism, it shows they don't know what the hell they're talking about. This paragraph on its own should be enough: "The Times accuses HRW of lack of sufficient expertise to report on warfare because the organization has never hired any former members of any military or any person with expertise in warfare with the sole exception of Marc Garlasco.[25] The Times accuses HRW of overriding its own researcher who wished to rescind a factually inaccurate report accusing Israel of responsibility for the Gaza beach explosion (2006).[25] HRW has been accused of bias in gathering evidence because it is said to be "credulous of civilian witnesses in places like Gaza and Afghanistan" but "sceptical of anyone in a uniform."[25] Robert Bernstein, founder of HRW, now accuses the organization of poor research methods, for relying on "witnesses whose stories cannot be verified and who may testify for political advantage or because they fear retaliation from their own rulers."[26] According to The Times, HRW "does not always practice the transparency, tolerance and accountability it urges on others."[25]" But there are a lot more too. Even the founder of the organization says it sucks and doesn't do what it's supposed to do at all.[/QUOTE] Theres plenty of more human rights organizations that will say the same, and plenty of more criticism written into in the wiki by AIPAC and other lobbies.

I just find it hilarious how when hamas do it, they're mindless, monstrous terrorists, but when Israel does it, they're a helpless state surrounded by enemies trying to survive. the most ridiculous double standard in terms of killing civilians and unnecessary treatment.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;22583061]I just find it hilarious how when hamas do it, they're mindless, monstrous terrorists, but when Israel does it, they're a helpless state surrounded by enemies trying to survive. the most ridiculous double standard in terms of killing civilians and unnecessary treatment.[/QUOTE] Except Israel delivers these goods to Gaza and the Hamas specifically targets civilians.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22583181]Except Israel delivers these goods to Gaza and the Hamas specifically targets civilians.[/QUOTE] All the while maintaining a blockade that enforces harsh conditions on those who live in Gaza? This is giving with one hand and taking with the other.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;22583237]All the while maintaining a blockade that enforces harsh conditions on those who live in Gaza? This is giving with one hand and taking with the other.[/QUOTE] Yeah well, it's to stop Hamas from getting powerful rockets that they will launch at Israel. They're still launching one or two each day, actually.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22583360]Yeah well, it's to stop Hamas from getting powerful rockets that they will launch at Israel. They're still launching one or two each day, actually.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry, what does cattle and sweets have to do with rockets?

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22583360]Yeah well, it's to stop Hamas from getting powerful rockets that they will launch at Israel. They're still launching one or two each day, actually.[/QUOTE] if israel can justify worsening the conditions for thousands based on the fact that "Hamas might get more powerful rockets", hamas can justify terrorism, saying "Israel might take the rest of palestine" as I was saying, double standard.

[QUOTE=starpluck;22583389]I'm sorry, what does cattle and sweets have to do with rockets?[/QUOTE] We've been through this. Sweets and cattle aren't basic humanitarian products, and Israel can block whatever it wants except for basic humanitarian products. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;22583427]if israel can justify worsening the conditions for thousands based on the fact that "Hamas might get more powerful rockets", hamas can justify terrorism, saying "Israel might take the rest of palestine" as I was saying, double standard.[/QUOTE] It's not "might". Israel has stopped a couple of Iranian ships trying to smuggle several tons of weapons, rockets, and other military goods into Gaza for the Hamas. Without the blockade Iran would send many more too. Also Israel already pulled out of Gaza but the Hamas continues to fire rockets at Israel.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22583492]We've been through this. Sweets and cattle aren't basic humanitarian products, and Israel can block whatever it wants except for basic humanitarian products. It's not "might". Israel has stopped a couple of Iranian ships trying to smuggle several tons of weapons, rockets, and other military goods into Gaza for the Hamas. Without the blockade Iran would send many more too. Also Israel already pulled out of Gaza but the Hamas continues to fire rockets at Israel.[/QUOTE] and all the while denying the supplies palestinian need to rebuild. get this, it doesn't fucking matter if the israeli blockade stops a 'couple of ships' carrying rockets, if it then goes and stops a hundred carrying supplies that palestinians need to rebuild and survive. yeah, pulled out of gaza after killing hundreds, and then building a fucking wall to cage them in.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22583181]Except Israel delivers these goods to Gaza and the Hamas specifically targets civilians.[/QUOTE] Israel doesn't ship the 171 trucks to Gaza because of their kindness, they supply Gaza with just barely enough food to survive to prevent a complete humanitarian crisis catastrophe (no supplies, besides the ones smuggled in) which would lead to further retaliation and world condemnation. Even the Nazis supplied the Warsaw ghetto with food and supplies, not for the interest of those who live there, but for their own. So please so trying to spread the allusion that your government actually cares about the Palestinians. [img]http://sandiego.indymedia.org/images/2006/07/116999.gif[/img]

If you are talking about construction supplies, they are allowed only when humanitarian aid groups request them, but not when "private merchants" request them, because the Hamas uses them to build tunnels into Egypt where they can smuggle weapons and rockets. The walls are there to prevent suicide bombers infiltrating into Israel, and they are VERY effective at that. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_casualties_of_war#Suicide_Bombings[/url] You can see here that after 2006 the number dropped severely. A couple more bombings still occurred, when one man got into Israeli through an underground tunnel, and another I'm not really sure what happened. Israel isn't stopping any basic humanitarian supplies, 171 tons of supplies are going into Gaza each week, actually. [editline]09:15PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Sporkfire;22583670]Israel doesn't ship the 171 trucks to Gaza because of their kindness, they supply Gaza with just barely enough food to survive to prevent a complete humanitarian crisis catastrophe (no supplies, besides the ones smuggled in) which would lead to further retaliation and world condemnation. Even the Nazis supplied the Warsaw ghetto with food and supplies, not for the interest of those who live there, but for their own. So please so trying to spread the allusion that your government actually cares about the Palestinians. [img]http://sandiego.indymedia.org/images/2006/07/116999.gif[/img][/QUOTE] Except Hamas is at great fault for most of these deaths, by using human shields and firing from civilian buildings.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22583492]We've been through this. Sweets and cattle aren't basic humanitarian products, and Israel can block whatever it wants except for basic humanitarian products. It's not "might". Israel has stopped a couple of Iranian ships trying to smuggle several tons of weapons, rockets, and other military goods into Gaza for the Hamas. Without the blockade Iran would send many more too. Also Israel already pulled out of Gaza but the Hamas continues to fire rockets at Israel.[/QUOTE] If Israel can block whatever it wants, they haven't really pulled out have they? The Palestinans are not fucking animals, they should not only be fed what the human body only needs. They have the right like any other human being to enjoy a diversity of food.

[QUOTE=starpluck;22583735]If Israel can block whatever it wants, they haven't really pulled out have they? The Palestinans are not fucking animals, they should not only be fed what the human body only needs. They have the right like any other human being to enjoy a diversity of food.[/QUOTE] As long as their government fires rockets at Israel, it can impose a blockade on the Gaza Strip. Edit: And the rules regarding blockades clearly state that only basic humanitarian products can't be banned, all other products can be banned even for no reason.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22583699]If you are talking about construction supplies, they are allowed only when humanitarian aid groups request them, but not when "private merchants" request them, because the Hamas uses them to build tunnels into Egypt where they can smuggle weapons and rockets. The walls are there to prevent suicide bombers infiltrating into Israel, and they are VERY effective at that. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_casualties_of_war#Suicide_Bombings[/url] You can see here that after 2006 the number dropped severely. A couple more bombings still occurred, when one man got into Israeli through an underground tunnel, and another I'm not really sure what happened. Israel isn't stopping any basic humanitarian supplies, 171 tons of supplies are going into Gaza each week, actually. [editline]09:15PM[/editline] Except Hamas is at great fault for most of these deaths, by using human shields and firing from civilian buildings.[/QUOTE] Except Israel is at great fault for most of these deaths, by continually occupying and stripping the Palestinians's right. I don't necessarily condone suicide bombings, but it's an inevitable outcome from Israel's oppressive policies.

[QUOTE=Sporkfire;22583816]Except Israel is at great fault for most of these deaths, by continually occupying and stripping the Palestinians's right. I don't necessarily condone suicide bombings, but it's an inevitable outcome from Israel's oppressive policies.[/QUOTE] Well Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005, and until 2007 didn't attack Gaza except as retaliation (for example when they kidnapped the soldier Gilad Shalit Israel chose to try and retrieve him by force). So why did the Hamas continue launching rockets? What goal were they trying to achieve?

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22583767]As long as their government fires rockets at Israel, it can impose a blockade on the Gaza Strip. Edit: And the rules regarding blockades clearly state that only basic humanitarian products can't be banned, all other products can be banned even for no reason.[/QUOTE] Ethics = law Even then a blockade is illegal if you cannot distinguish it's purpose between military and civillian.

[QUOTE=starpluck;22583905]Ethics = law Even then a blockade is illegal if you cannot distinguish it's purpose between military and civillian.[/QUOTE] It's not about ethics, everything I said in that post is about laws. As long as Hamas continues to fire rockets at Israel, it is considered to be an armed conflict and thus a blockade is justified. And it's legal as long as the UN security council say otherwise. What kind of a blockade distinguish between military and civilians? There's no such thing.

[QUOTE=Sporkfire;22583670] [img]http://sandiego.indymedia.org/images/2006/07/116999.gif[/img][/QUOTE] That reminds me of this one good point. If Hamas where to sucide bomb a bus because "A IDF soldier was in it". The claim would of been ridiculed. However if the IDF bombed a neighborhood and said "A Hama militiant lived there" It would of been accepted.

[QUOTE=starpluck;22584000]That reminds me of this one good point. If Hamas where to sucide bomb a bus because "A IDF soldier was in it". The claim would of been ridiculed. However if the IDF bombed a neighborhood and said "A Hama militiant lived there" It would of been accepted.[/QUOTE] Depends: Did the IDF soldier fire on Palestinian civilians while he was in the bus? Did the Hamas militant launched a rocket while he was in the house? The IDF only fired on houses from which rockets were fired from.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22583956]It's not about ethics, everything I said in that post is about laws. As long as Hamas continues to fire rockets at Israel, it is considered to be an armed conflict and thus a blockade is justified. And it's legal as long as the UN security council say otherwise. What kind of a blockade distinguish between military and civilians? There's no such thing.[/QUOTE] I meant just because law allows this, doesn't make it right. 2. The security council doesn't have to declare it's legality lol. It's in the Geneva Convention. 3. Yes there is such thing, prove me wrong otherwise. [editline]07:34PM[/editline] [QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22584041]Depends: Did the IDF soldier fire on Palestinian civilians while he was in the bus? Did the Hamas militant launched a rocket while he was in the house? The IDF only fired on houses from which rockets were fired from.[/QUOTE] Not true. The UN confirmed there were no Hamas in the bombed UN schools.

[QUOTE=starpluck;22584087]I meant just because law allows this, doesn't make it right. 2. The security council doesn't have to declare it's legality lol. It's in the Geneva Convention. 3. Yes there is such thing, prove me wrong otherwise.[/QUOTE] Israel isn't signed on the Geneva Convention. I can't prove there isn't such a thing, that's proving a negative, you have to prove me there is such a thing as a blockade that is legal according to your criteria, and if you can't, we can assume there's no such thing.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22584140]Israel isn't signed on the Geneva Convention.[/quote] Because they'd have the most violations. [quote] I can't prove there isn't such a thing, that's proving a negative, you have to prove me there is such a thing as a blockade that is legal according to your criteria, and if you can't, we can assume there's no such thing.[/QUOTE] Not at all. You'd be proving a positive. You said that all blockades don't distinguish between civilians and military, so prove it. [editline]07:39PM[/editline] I can't prove that there are no blockades that distinguish between civilians and military, dolt.

[QUOTE=starpluck;22584223]Because they'd have the most violations. Not at all. You'd be proving a positive. You said that all blockades don't distinguish between civilians and military, so prove it. [editline]07:39PM[/editline] I can't prove that there are no blockades that distinguish between civilians and military, dolt.[/QUOTE] You can prove it by finding a blockade that does distinguish between civilians and military. If I'd had to prove it, I would have to go through all the blockades in history and prove that none distinguished between military and civilians, and if I couldn't find any that do, I would prove myself correct. I could also just say that I did and found none, even without looking, so there, I did. If you want to prove me otherwise, go ahead. Also, [quote]I meant just because law allows this, doesn't make it right."[/quote] Then who decides if it's right or wrong? You?

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22584307]You can prove it by finding a blockade that does distinguish between civilians and military. If I'd had to prove it, I would have to go through all the blockades in history and prove that none distinguished between military and civilians, and if I couldn't find any that do, I would prove myself correct. I could also just say that I did and found none, even without looking, so there, I did. If you want to prove me otherwise, go ahead.[/quote] Are you fucking seriously confused. It's the other way around. I'd be the one doing all that. It's funny actually, you proved yourself wrong. [quote] Also, Then who decides if it's right or wrong? You?[/QUOTE] Uh it's called being human. You're telling me starving a population is moral because according to laws you can?

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22583863]Well Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005, and until 2007 didn't attack Gaza except as retaliation (for example when they kidnapped the soldier Gilad Shalit Israel chose to try and retrieve him by force). So why did the Hamas continue launching rockets? What goal were they trying to achieve?[/QUOTE] Pulled out of Gaza and sealed the borders, preventing Gaza from being sustainable by trade (their land is practically infertile and unsustainable) you also neglected to mention/defend that Israel has and still is expanding itself upon the ever-shrinking Palestinian region. Oh and don't forget the assassination of Palestinian political figures. Sounds hardly like sovereignty to me. [quote]Uh it's called being human. You're telling me starving a population is moral because according to laws you can?[/QUOTE] According to Burnemdown's laws. The blockade still goes against collective punishment.