Israel hits Palestine again while West Cheers Them On
-
Israel defends munitions amid white phosphorus accusations
RAW STORY
Published: Tuesday January 13, 2009http://rawstory.com/news/2008/CNN_reports_on_Israels_use_of_0113.html
JERUSALEM (AFP) — The Israeli army on Monday insisted all weapons being used in its Gaza war were within the bounds of international law amid accusations it was using white phosphorus and other deadly munitions.
Medics in Gaza say they have treated more than 50 people suffering burns caused by controversial white phosphorus shells, a claim backed up by a report of the New York-based Human Rights Watch.
And two Norwegian doctors, recently returned from working in the Gaza Strip, accused Israel of using the territory as a testing ground for a new "extremely nasty" type of explosive.
An army spokesman refused to confirm or deny claims it was using white phosphorus, saying: "All weapons used by the IDF (Israel Defence Forces) are in accordance with international law.
"We are only using what is being used by other Western armies -- we are not using anything out of the ordinary," he said.
The controversy surrounding the nature of weapons being used by the Israeli army stepped up a notch on Monday when the two medics said they had seen clear signs that DIME explosives, a new experimental kind of weapon, were being used in Gaza.
According to Mads Gilbert, the two had seen evidence of a number of "very brutal amputations... without shrapnel injuries" -- injuries which were likely to have been caused by such a weapon.
An army spokeswoman said she was "not aware of this type of weapon" and reiterated claims that all weapons used by the military were legal.
Mark Regev, spokesman for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, said Israel was only using legal weapons of the type used by other Western armies.
"Israel military forces only use munitions that are acceptable under international law and international convention," he said.
"The type of munitions used by Israel are similar, if not identical, to munitions used by other Western democracies, including NATO members."
His comments came as Yusef Abu Rish, a doctor at Gaza City's Nasser hospital, said he had treated at least 55 people suffering burns caused by white phosphorus shells.
Under international law, white phosphorus is banned for use against civilians, but is permitted if used for creating a smokescreen.
Earlier, Human Rights Watch had slammed Israel's use of white phosphorus which it said had been used in areas of Gaza City and the northern district of Jabaliya.
"Israel appears to be using white phosphorus as an 'obscurant' (a chemical used to hide military operations), a permissible use in principle under international humanitarian law," HRW said in a statement.
"However, white phosphorus has a significant, incidental, incendiary effect that can severely burn people... The potential for harm to civilians is magnified by Gaza's high population density, among the highest in the world," it said.
The group said its researchers in Israel had observed multiple air-bursts of artillery-fired white phosphorus which would spread the chemical over an area between 125 and 250 metres (yards) in diameter.
"Human Rights Watch believes that the use of white phosphorus in densely populated areas of Gaza violates the requirement under international humanitarian law to take all feasible precautions to avoid civilian injury and loss of life," it said.
During Israel's 2006 war against Lebanon's Hezbollah militia, the army was accused of using cluster bombs -- the use of which is banned in civilian areas -- but Israel said they were only being used within the confines of international law.
White phosphorus is a toxic chemical agent which can cause severe burns.
Dispersed in artillery shells, bombs, and rockets, it burns on contact with oxygen and creates a smokescreen in order to hide the movement of troops.
CNN has more details here. -
If the Arabs put down their weapons, there will be no more violence.
If the Jews put down their weapons, there will be no more Israel.
Who disagree?
-
Originally posted by googoomuck:
If the Arabs put down their weapons, there will be no more violence.
If the Jews put down their weapons, there will be no more Israel.
Who disagree?
Which country has ever "put down their weapons"? And by that phrase, do you mean permanent disarmament?
Israel could have been destroyed up till the 70s, if they "put down their weapons" against the combined armies of the Arab countries. Today, it is hard to imagine Hamas, the ragtag Palestinian guerilla force, destroying Israel as a state.
-
Originally posted by freedomclub:
Which country has ever "put down their weapons"? And by that phrase, do you mean permanent disarmament?
Israel could have been destroyed up till the 70s, if they "put down their weapons" against the combined armies of the Arab countries. Today, it is hard to imagine Hamas, the ragtag Palestinian guerilla force, destroying Israel as a state.
OK, freedomclub disagrees that if Arabs put down weapons, there will be no violence.
Next, Hamas use civilians as human shields. Who disagrees?
Silence?!
This is typical of terrorist supporters, denying Hamas' wrong doing.
Short clips as evidence:
-
-
Originally posted by freedomclub:
Which country has ever "put down their weapons"? And by that phrase, do you mean permanent disarmament?
Israel could have been destroyed up till the 70s, if they "put down their weapons" against the combined armies of the Arab countries. Today, it is hard to imagine Hamas, the ragtag Palestinian guerilla force, destroying Israel as a state.
Have we all forgotten The Japanese Surrender in WW 2 ?
The only problem is.. can the Gazans " put down their pride" ?
HAMAS would rather they die fighting.
Pride has always been man's self destruction.
-
Originally posted by jojobeach:
Have we all forgotten The Japanese Surrender in WW 2 ?
The only problem is.. can the Gazans " put down their pride" ?
HAMAS would rather they die fighting.
Pride has always been man's self destruction.
More like Hamas would rather let Palestinian women and children die for their fighting.
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
More like Hamas would rather let Palestinian women and children die for their fighting.
Ofcors.. wat is a few thousand women and children to them when they are guaranteed 75 virgins ?
-
Originally posted by Perrin_:
We have to look at the cause which created this problem which came into effect 41 years ago. The arab nations have tried to protect the people of Palestines twice, the first which failed terriblely and they failed the second time only when the American came in and protected an invading nation(Israel).
Those are lies!
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it - Joseph Goebbels
You must be very frustrated by now.
-
Originally posted by googoomuck:
If the Arabs put down their weapons, there will be no more violence.
If the Jews put down their weapons, there will be no more Israel.
Who disagree?
This poetic quote seems terribly romantic but it is aimed to facilitate an uninterrupted territorial expansion of greater israel. At its rate of illegal territorial expansion, for its neighbours to disarm will be a great god send to the zionists. However, this quote professes double standards biased towards the Israelis. No country in their right mind would disable their miliatry capabilities in view of a belligerent neighbour at its doorstepThus, I would disagree with your statement.
However, you seem to be an ardent supported of Israeli terrorism in full view and knowledge that so many inocent lives have been lost.
Any support for the Israeli onslaught should be construed as support for terrorism and disregard for innocent lives.
-
i'm always neutral in the Gaza Strip strife but children and their mothers are innocent...
-
Originally posted by googoomuck:
You nincompoop!
I say current conflicts. The list is not complete. I can add on many more countries involved in conflicts in the last 100 years, either by Muslims against others or Muslims against Muslims. That does not include countries that have experienced terrorist bombings.
You call me a nincompoop..Come on, I challenged you to a debate and you keep avoiding the challenge. A debate will prove who is the idiot. Once again, I challenge you to a debate in person. I will assume another avoidance of my challenge as an admission to defeat by you.
Would you engage me in an intellectual discourse?
-
Originally posted by jojobeach:
Ok Jarhum, so what exactly is your point ? Really. Hhahahahahh !!!
My "constant referrence to analogies" is simply to make everything SIMPLE enough so people like you who likes to complicate things gets to understand it in very SIMPLE terms. Gettit ?
You keep saying we don't understand muslim history... ok ok .. so we don't. Now what ?
Will understanding Islam's history change our perceptions ?
Will understanding Islam's history .. turn us against our common sense ?
Will understanding Islam's history.. makes us hate the jews more and be more sympathetic towards the Islamic extremists more ?
I don't know Jarhum. YOU tell me. I'm listening.
By the way Jarhum.. this is a discussion forum. What's there to challenge? And what is it you want to challenge ???? You want to challenge me to a hand to hand combat duel ??? Or you want to use your mind force against mine aka star wars style ???hahahahahh... too funny !
If you win.. you get to write a letter to tell HAMAS to dissapear from Gaza so the Gazans may have peace. If you lose.. I buy you a jug of beer. Ok ?
You want to discuss.. then discuss here. Ok ? good.
Jojobch,
My point is pretty simple. Stop discussing a topic if you have little information or shallow knowledge about it. You have done it again with your nonsensical and idiotic assumptions such as:
Will understanding Islam's history change our perceptions ?
Will understanding Islam's history .. turn us against our common sense ?
Will understanding Islam's history.. makes us hate the jews more and be more sympathetic towards the Islamic extremists more ?
Something which is lighter in essence, not too taxing on you incapable mental capacity.
Do not assume intellectualism as complicated simple because your mind is not conditioned to accept it.
I challenged you to a debate. I assumed it would be a simple point to understand. But I got it wrong. You are unable to even grasp my simple statement.
Star wars...you are terribly immature. Hand to hand combat.. ahhh... That is interesting. Thus I think its best for you to stop discussing here until you have done proper readings on the topic.
So, do you want to accept my challenge to a debate in person? Or maybe you can even engage me in some form of intellectual discussion. Because all this while, you have not stopped pouting ABSOLUTE NONSENSE in your posts. Thus I do not think it is worthwhile my time to respond to cowardly bickering from someone like yourself.
You hide behind your PC and trust me, you will avoid my challenge again.
Surprise me.
-
Jojobch,
My point is pretty simple. Stop discussing a topic if you have little information or shallow knowledge about it. You have done it again with your nonsensical and idiotic assumptions such as:
Will understanding Islam's history change our perceptions ?
Will understanding Islam's history .. turn us against our common sense ?
Will understanding Islam's history.. makes us hate the jews more and be more sympathetic towards the Islamic extremists more ?
Something which is lighter in essence, not too taxing on you incapable mental capacity.
Do not assume intellectualism as complicated simple because your mind is not conditioned to accept it.
I challenged you to a debate. I assumed it would be a simple point to understand. But I got it wrong. You are unable to even grasp my simple statement.
Star wars...you are terribly immature. Hand to hand combat.. ahhh... That is interesting. Thus I think its best for you to stop discussing here until you have done proper readings on the topic.
So, do you want to accept my challenge to a debate in person? Or maybe you can even engage me in some form of intellectual discussion. Because all this while, you have not stopped pouting ABSOLUTE NONSENSE in your posts. Thus I do not think it is worthwhile my time to respond to cowardly bickering from someone like yourself.
You hide behind your PC and trust me, you will avoid my challenge again.
Surprise me.
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
Jojobch,
My point is pretty simple. Stop discussing a topic if you have little information or shallow knowledge about it. You have done it again with your nonsensical and idiotic assumptions such as:
Will understanding Islam's history change our perceptions ?
Will understanding Islam's history .. turn us against our common sense ?
Will understanding Islam's history.. makes us hate the jews more and be more sympathetic towards the Islamic extremists more ?
Something which is lighter in essence, not too taxing on you incapable mental capacity.
Do not assume intellectualism as complicated simple because your mind is not conditioned to accept it.
I challenged you to a debate. I assumed it would be a simple point to understand. But I got it wrong. You are unable to even grasp my simple statement.
Star wars...you are terribly immature. Hand to hand combat.. ahhh... That is interesting. Thus I think its best for you to stop discussing here until you have done proper readings on the topic.
So, do you want to accept my challenge to a debate in person? Or maybe you can even engage me in some form of intellectual discussion. Because all this while, you have not stopped pouting ABSOLUTE NONSENSE in your posts. Thus I do not think it is worthwhile my time to respond to cowardly bickering from someone like yourself.
You hide behind your PC and trust me, you will avoid my challenge again.
Surprise me.
Wait.. are you trying to date me out ?
May I remind you dear Jarhum, the current war is between Gaza and Israel.
Not between Muslims and Jews.
If you cannot even get this simple fact right.. then there really is no reason for you to challenge me.
When you say ZIONIST.. are you talking about the JEWS or Israel ?
Do you really think I have no muslims friends ? I do.... plenty of them.
What about you Jarhum ? Who do you surround yourself with ?
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
You call me a nincompoop..Come on, I challenged you to a debate and you keep avoiding the challenge. A debate will prove who is the idiot. Once again, I challenge you to a debate in person. I will assume another avoidance of my challenge as an admission to defeat by you.
Would you engage me in an intellectual discourse?
"She" is in America man, it's pretty clear where the logic is coming from.
-
Originally posted by Stevenson101:
"She" is in America man, it's pretty clear where the logic is coming from.
Har ? What has my location gota do with my logic ? What kind of logic you using ?? hahahahah..
Dude.. get out of your little well. If your logic is correct.. then those muslims currently living outside middle east are all traitors ?? hahahahahah !!!
Even small children are learning that the war is not between religions.
-
I remembered I argued that th initiator of this cycle of violence is ambigious, a chicken and egg issue. However, I would like to shed more light on this matter with relevence from new information obtained from my most recent research on the cause of this recent mindless round of violence
Most here assume that Hamas perpertrated this initial cycle of violence. However, Jimmy Carter, former U.S president a several centre-right Israeli think tanks have produced justifications contrary to this Israeli propaganda to justify its massacre of innocent women and children.
Allow me to quote:
"The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, whose December 31 report titled "Six Months of the Lull Arrangement Intelligence Report," confirmed that the June 19 truce was only "sporadically violated, and then not by Hamas but instead by ... "rogue terrorist organisations".
Instead, "the escalation and erosion of the lull arrangement" occurred after Israel killed six Hamas members on November 4 without provocation and then placed the entire Strip under an even more intensive siege the next day."Moreover, a joint Tel Aviv- European University study affirms that Israeli terrorism is responsible for ending 79% of all ceasefires with its neighbour compared to 8% by Hamas or other Palestinians "terrorist" groups.
The Israeli PR machinery realised that this argument is losing credibility thus they have shifted their argument to the 'need' to stop Hamas smuggling of weapons through tunnels from Egypt.
Historian Avi Shalim of Oxford University asserts that Israel is responsible for breaking this ceasefire. He is among a number of Jewish intellectuals who have repeatedly claim and denounce Israeli initiation and acts of violence towards the Palestinians. Others include Meisheimer and Stephen Walt. No one is able to accuse these Jews of prejudice as they share the same roots as those perpertrating the carnage at this moment. Especially when Professor Avi Shalim served "loyally in the Israeli Air Force" in the mid 1960s.
The Israeli military and political elite are no less of a terrorist organization than Hamas, I iterate. The difference is the results of their terrorist activities which hugely favour Israel winning Hamas hands down.
I advise anyone who attempts to argue in favour of the Israeli carnage to employ proper and impartial substantiations when stating their claims.
This current Gaza massacre has the mainstream media lambasting and denouncing the Israeli acts. Remnants of its supporters should be construed as supporters of terrorism.
-
Originally posted by jojobeach:
Wait.. are you trying to date me out ?
May I remind you dear Jarhum, the current war is between Gaza and Israel.
Not between Muslims and Jews.
If you cannot even get this simple fact right.. then there really is no reason for you to challenge me.
When you say ZIONIST.. are you talking about the JEWS or Israel ?
Do you really think I have no muslims friends ? I do.... plenty of them.
What about you Jarhum ? Who do you surround yourself with ?
I pride myself in dating smarter people than you and I am not about to contaminate that reputation of mine especially with Bimbos.
Never did I mention this war is between Muslims and Jews. In your attempt to accuse me, please, at the very least, take my statement out of context.
Zionism is a political movement. I take issue of a movement which adheres to beliefs entrenched in biblical connotations thousands of years ago and attempts to realise it through the massacre of innocents. Zionism in itself is a potent amalgamation of racism and religious fervour or extremism. And unfortunately, the adherents to Zionism hold key posts of the Israeli political elite, the AMERICAN administration. It is akin to Osama being the King of Saudi Arabia, Al-Zawhari being the PM of Britain and so on.
I am a proud Singaporean and I am proud of our multi-racial culture. Unfortunately, this harmony is less evident in America. I have numerous friends who are part of the Christian clergy, Imams, Buddhist Monks and Jewish academics.
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
I pride myself in dating smarter people than you and I am not about to contaminate that reputation of mine especially with Bimbos.
Never did I mention this war is between Muslims and Jews. In your attempt to accuse me, please, at the very least, take my statement out of context.
Zionism is a political movement. I take issue of a movement which adheres to beliefs entrenched in biblical connotations thousands of years ago and attempts to realise it through the massacre of innocents. Zionism in itself is a potent amalgamation of racism and religious fervour or extremism. And unfortunately, the adherents to Zionism hold key posts of the Israeli political elite, the AMERICAN administration. It is akin to Osama being the King of Saudi Arabia, Al-Zawhari being the PM of Britain and so on.
I am a proud Singaporean and I am proud of our multi-racial culture. Unfortunately, this harmony is less evident in America. I have numerous friends who are part of the Christian clergy, Imams, Buddhist Monks and Jewish academics.
Is Zionism akin to Islamic Separatists movement ?
If you think the Jews living in Israel now are not entitled to their "Promised land". Where do you think they should go ? Back to Egypt before Moses lead them out from Pharaohs's slavery ?
When you say American.. you are refering to UNITED STATES of America in NORTH America .
May I also remind you that in USA.. the diversity of cultures and races are much more than just the big 4 in Singapore.
If you ever have the chance to travel USA.. you will know that your perception of USA being Zionist is severely handicapped.
-
Originally posted by jojobeach:
Is Zionism akin to Islamic Separatists movement ?
If you think the Jews living in Israel now are not entitled to their "Promised land". Where do you think they should go ? Back to Egypt before Moses lead them out from Pharaohs's slavery ?
Actually, Zionism,ideologically, is very similar to numerous Muslim separatist movements.According to Elizier Schweid diaspora contradicts a central tenet of Zionism. Your argument is flimsy, again based on prophecies. This order of contention can be used by Muslims and Christians likewise. Muslims may argue that Caliph Umar commanded Jerusalem in 637 or Christians may argue that their lord was born in Bethlehem and died in Jerusalem. I thought you mentioned that this is not about religion?
I agree Israel has the right to exist but absolutely wrong in expanding their territorial existance. The Arabs and Muslims have offered Israel full normalization of diplomatic ties and recognition to Israel in return to Israel returning to its pre 1967 boundaries which is undisputedly legitimate. Even, read, Hamas, Hizbullah and Iran agreed to this Arab Initiative. But Israel has politely declined.
I believe that this is the means for both parties to live peacefully side by side.
Thus, there are numerous Jews living all over the world but a central tenet of their political-religious doctrine requires them to relocate to Israel which may require Israel to engulf the territories of its neighbours.
Now, you tell me, whose ideology has sparked and flamed anarchy in the Middle East?
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
Actually, Zionism,ideologically, is very similar to numerous Muslim separatist movements.According to Elizier Schweid diaspora contradicts a central tenet of Zionism. Your argument is flimsy, again based on prophecies. This order of contention can be used by Muslims and Christians likewise. Muslims may argue that Caliph Umar commanded Jerusalem in 637 or Christians may argue that their lord was born in Bethlehem and died in Jerusalem. I thought you mentioned that this is not about religion?
I agree Israel has the right to exist but absolutely wrong in expanding their territorial existance. The Arabs and Muslims have offered Israel full normalization of diplomatic ties and recognition to Israel in return to Israel returning to its pre 1967 boundaries which is undisputedly legitimate. Even, read, Hamas, Hizbullah and Iran agreed to this Arab Initiative. But Israel has politely declined.
I believe that this is the means for both parties to live peacefully side by side.
Thus, there are numerous Jews living all over the world but a central tenet of their political-religious doctrine requires them to relocate to Israel which may require Israel to engulf the territories of its neighbours.
Now, you tell me, whose ideology has sparked and flamed anarchy in the Middle East?
Erm... Pan-Islamic ideaology is the main culprit of all problems in Middle East less Israel? Zionism idealogy is the main culprit of all problems in Israel and its surrounding regions? -
Originally posted by jojobeach:
Is Zionism akin to Islamic Separatists movement ?
If you think the Jews living in Israel now are not entitled to their "Promised land". Where do you think they should go ? Back to Egypt before Moses lead them out from Pharaohs's slavery ?
When you say American.. you are refering to UNITED STATES of America in NORTH America .
May I also remind you that in USA.. the diversity of cultures and races are much more than just the big 4 in Singapore.
If you ever have the chance to travel USA.. you will know that your perception of USA being Zionist is severely handicapped.
Yeah, I know that.
A wide diversity of cultures and races do not necessarily mean a more harmonious relationship between races. Singapore very rarely experience racial tensions and blatant acts of racism vis a vis America. Our Muslim women wearing the hijab do not fear having their scarf yanked off by racists. We do not publically taunt our darker skinned people.
You do not perceive Zionism as it is subtly entrenched in the political elite. Zionism is sublime. I have studied Zionism enough to know America is zealously Zionist at its upper echelons. You do not need to be very well read to know this fact.
I have travelled to America frequent enough. The common citizens are pretty much normal, you have got the good and bad apples as you find anywhere. However, an experience travelling there with a Sikh collegue was pretty traumatic. He had to strip his turban which is explicitly forbidden in his adherence to Sikhism. What was more humiliating he was strip search just because he had a big beard and wore a large turban.
Read David Dukes' writings to get a better picture.
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
Yeah, I know that.
A wide diversity of cultures and races do not necessarily mean a more harmonious relationship between races. Singapore very rarely experience racial tensions and blatant acts of racism vis a vis America. Our Muslim women wearing the hijab do not fear having their scarf yanked off by racists. We do not publically taunt our darker skinned people.
You do not perceive Zionism as it is subtly entrenched in the political elite. Zionism is sublime. I have studied Zionism enough to know America is zealously Zionist at its upper echelons. You do not need to be very well read to know this fact.
I have travelled to America frequent enough. The common citizens are pretty much normal, you have got the good and bad apples as you find anywhere. However, an experience travelling there with a Sikh collegue was pretty traumatic. He had to strip his turban which is explicitly forbidden in his adherence to Sikhism. What was more humiliating he was strip search just because he had a big beard and wore a large turban.
Read David Dukes' writings to get a better picture.
Nope, Singapore did experience racist tensions before but the ISD clamped down hard on all agitators. US. of A is not zealously Zionist at its upper echelons but rather stauchly Christians who view that if Israel is gotten rid off first, then US of A is the next big target.
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
Yeah, I know that.
A wide diversity of cultures and races do not necessarily mean a more harmonious relationship between races. Singapore very rarely experience racial tensions and blatant acts of racism vis a vis America. Our Muslim women wearing the hijab do not fear having their scarf yanked off by racists. We do not publically taunt our darker skinned people.
You do not perceive Zionism as it is subtly entrenched in the political elite. Zionism is sublime. I have studied Zionism enough to know America is zealously Zionist at its upper echelons. You do not need to be very well read to know this fact.
I have travelled to America frequent enough. The common citizens are pretty much normal, you have got the good and bad apples as you find anywhere. However, an experience travelling there with a Sikh collegue was pretty traumatic. He had to strip his turban which is explicitly forbidden in his adherence to Sikhism. What was more humiliating he was strip search just because he had a big beard and wore a large turban.
Read David Dukes' writings to get a better picture.
Any form of racism is a result of not understanding the cultures of others.
While you may insist that the airport securities should not have infringed on the religious rights of your Sikh friends... I'd like to remind you also that airport securities first priority is to make sure everyone onboard the plane are safe. They do not go through religious classes to understand all the taboos of global religion. And as a Sikh.. he is the minorities of minorities. Get what I mean ?
As a frequent traveller myself.. I also get random pat down and screened... and I doubt I look like a terrorist. Even a caucasian mother with a baby bottle of milk are told to either throw the liquids away or not take the plane.
Like many other travellers.. you do what you can to ensure a safe and uninterrupted travel. If I go to a Muslim country.. I don't walk around in my hot shorts.. or wear revealing clothings. It is a form of respect and also to ensure I comply with the general practise expected of an outsider.
So regarding the 1967 boundaries.. why do you think it is illegitimate ?
Just an after thought though... you know your sikh friend ? If he don't take off his turban... then is he willing to put his head through the X-ray machine ? No offence ah.. just trying to figure what would I do .. if I am the airport security.