Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
1 Israeli = 155 Palestinians
Options
Comments
-
Interesting how Likud denies Palestine a right to exist. I wonder if the West will treat Israel the same way, if they elect Likud, as they did Palestine, when they elected Hamas?0
-
To the extent you didn't have Palestinian land taken by heavily armed Egyptian "settlers", no, it doesn't.....
I dont get your point, tbh. Palestine was occupied by the British, then the Arabs and then by the Isreaeli's. I haven't said otherwise. You're taking what i said about being victims out of context. Again, I will say i was talking about the actual killing of civilians by the Israeli's.Being beaten, tortured and having your land stolen would render you a victim according to my lights, bleeding heart liberal that I am.
And i'm not disagreeing with you.Others have. One gets the feeling that regardless of what people do, some excuse will arise to dismiss their efforts.
Fine, but when quoting me, refer to what i say not what others do.The implication from the quote below was fairly clear.....
It was meant to be. A number of posters have suggested that the shots fired in the Video were by the IDF. There's no evidence to show that they were.Whats that to do with anything?
The point is that if the IDF wanted them dead, then they would be wounded or dead. So why were none of them killed or injured in this apparent IDF shooting?0 -
Deny it all you like but I would take the word of an Internationally recognised body who have been working for over 30 years to document and alleviate human rights abuses by corrupt regimes, over any Israeli apologist.
Deny what? Nothing in that video suggests that the IDF were involved. Its that simple.
And how am i being an Israeli apologist? Really, pray tell.Most perpetrators don't like them because they show them up for what they are and publicise their abuses to the world. Mugabe didn't like them either .
relevence? The point is that they focus on only certain areas of this conflict, and are blind to the actions of the Palestinians themselves, beyond some token gestures of condemnation.Since the IDF are the henchmen of the Israeli regime,and are the ones carrying out the orders to kill it's only fair that they are open to scrutiny.
And i don't disagree, but they should be open to objective & unbiased scrutiny.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »I dont get your point, tbh. Palestine was occupied by the British, then the Arabs and then by the Isreaeli's. I haven't said otherwise. You're taking what i said about being victims out of context. Again, I will say i was talking about the actual killing of civilians by the Israeli's.
...which they do, on occassion.Deleted User wrote: »The point is that if the IDF wanted them dead, then they would be wounded or dead. So why were none of them killed or injured in this apparent IDF shooting?
I never said that the IDF wanted them dead in this instance.0 -
...which they do, on occassion.
Plenty of occasions.I never said that the IDF wanted them dead in this instance.
So where does this video show that it is the IDF doing the shooting?
I cant see where the misunderstanding is. This video shows some farmers, and "human rights workers" in a field. It shows a truck going by in the distance. Then a few shots are fired. The Human rights workers hold up their hands,with someone shouting into a loudspeaker, and they leave.
It doesn't show who fired the shots. It doesn't show any degree of IDF presence in the area. It could have been anyone firing at them, including Palestinian militants.0 -
Advertisement
-
Interesting how Likud denies Palestine a right to exist. I wonder if the West will treat Israel the same way, if they elect Likud, as they did Palestine, when they elected Hamas?
They are shooting themselves in the foot by voting extremists like Netanyahu and Lieberman into government imo and as some have said about the Gazan's voting in Hammas, they will deserve whatever boycotts, sanctions etc they get from now on.
Netanyahu will not abide by the agreements about settlements and this won't please the US or UK. The EU have already put the "special relationship" Israel has with it on hold according to ITN news a few days ago and the American people are beginning to wake up to what their tax dollars are being spent on in Israel. With Cheney, Rumsfeld and co out of business now, the old alliance with the US is not so strong as it has been and Obama seems not to be listening to the Israel's whinging about Iran and is willing to talk with the Iranians.
The ICHR is taking claims of war crimes and HR abuses seriously and there is more condemnation and scrutiny of Israel's actions than ever before.0 -
They are shooting themselves in the foot by voting extremists like Netanyahu and Lieberman into government imo and as some have said about the Gazan's voting in Hammas, they will deserve whatever boycotts, sanctions etc they get from now on.
Well, I would be against applying sanctions to anyone for whom the vote for, regardless of how reprehensible I may find them, but I do agree with the sentiment you express.Netanyahu will not abide by the agreements about settlements and this won't please the US or UK. The EU have already put the "special relationship" Israel has with it on hold according to ITN news a few days ago and the American people are beginning to wake up to what their tax dollars are being spent on in Israel. With Cheney, Rumsfeld and co out of business now, the old alliance with the US is not so strong as it has been and Obama seems not to be listening to the Israel's whinging about Iran and is willing to talk with the Iranians.
Yeah, Netanyahu is openly rejectionist, will be interesting to if the US and EU will call him on it.The ICHR is taking claims of war crimes and HR abuses seriously and there is more condemnation and scrutiny of Israel's actions than ever before.
Good to see that happening.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Deny what? Nothing in that video suggests that the IDF were involved. Its that simple.
And how am i being an Israeli apologist? Really, pray tell.
relevence? The point is that they focus on only certain areas of this conflict, and are blind to the actions of the Palestinians themselves, beyond some token gestures of condemnation.
And i don't disagree, but they should be open to objective & unbiased scrutiny.
They are
"The Security Council and the secretary-general should both work to establish an independent investigation into alleged violations by both sides," said Joe Stork, deputy director of the Middle East and North Africa division at Human Rights Watch. "Since Human Rights Watch first made this call, our on-the-ground investigations have shown that the need for such a comprehensive inquiry is all the more apparent and pressing."
On January 12, the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva voted to dispatch an international fact-finding mission to investigate alleged violations of international human rights and humanitarian law by Israel, but not alleged violations by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups. Leading UN officials have called for an investigation specifically into Israeli attacks on UN schools and headquarters in Gaza. Israeli officials have said that the government will investigate these attacks as well as certain other alleged violations, such as the use of white phosphorus in densely populated areas.
Human Rights Watch said that Israel's poor record of investigating and prosecuting serious violations by its forces, and the absence of any such effort by Hamas or other Palestinian groups, makes it essential that an inquiry be an independent international effort."
I think you're just nit picking for the sake of it about the video. We'll all have to agree, it was the donkey shooting at them .
Sorry I'm just being facetious:p0 -
They are
"The Security Council and the secretary-general should both work to establish an independent investigation into alleged violations by both sides," said Joe Stork, deputy director of the Middle East and North Africa division at Human Rights Watch. "Since Human Rights Watch first made this call, our on-the-ground investigations have shown that the need for such a comprehensive inquiry is all the more apparent and pressing."
On January 12, the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva voted to dispatch an international fact-finding mission to investigate alleged violations of international human rights and humanitarian law by Israel, but not alleged violations by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups. Leading UN officials have called for an investigation specifically into Israeli attacks on UN schools and headquarters in Gaza. Israeli officials have said that the government will investigate these attacks as well as certain other alleged violations, such as the use of white phosphorus in densely populated areas.
Human Rights Watch said that Israel's poor record of investigating and prosecuting serious violations by its forces, and the absence of any such effort by Hamas or other Palestinian groups, makes it essential that an inquiry be an independent international effort."
Again, what relevance is this to what we were discussing? Why do you keep throwing in details like this?I think you're just nit picking for the sake of it about the video. We'll all have to agree, it was the donkey shooting at them .
Because its important. Just as all Israeli claims should not be accepted at face value, and should be investigated, so too should claims against Israel.
This is the problem I see here. The above video lacks any identification of the shooters, and you're all willing to assume that it was the IDF involved. It just shows how biased you really are when you're unwilling to question obviously suspect video's.Sorry I'm just being facetious:p
Its ok. Its something I've come to expect from your posts when faced with opposition to your assumptions.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Again, what relevance is this to what we were discussing? Why do you keep throwing in details like this?
You were criticising the HRW for not including Hammas in their investigations, the statement I quoted says otherwiseDeleted User wrote: »Because its important. Just as all Israeli claims should not be accepted at face value, and should be investigated, so too should claims against Israel.
This is the problem I see here. The above video lacks any identification of the shooters, and you're all willing to assume that it was the IDF involved. It just shows how biased you really are when you're unwilling to question obviously suspect video's.
So who do you think was shooting at them then ?Its ok. Its something I've come to expect from your posts when faced with opposition to your assumptions.
lol I'm flattered you take so much notice of my posting style but no, it's because it was a long boring afternoon and reading long nit picking posts didn't help make it any less boring.0 -
Advertisement
-
I would like to draw an analogy to compare the Israel/Palistinian conflict. There has been a lot of criticism against Jews/Israelis stating that their retaliation against the Palistinian army was 'disproportionate'. Well here is my analogy; if two people are neighbours and one party continually throws stones over the fence at the other in their back garden, first of all where is the surprise in the retaliation of the stoned neighbour? If that neighbour in question throws a rock back in self-defence and knocks the stone-thrower into a coma, does the stone-throwing neighbour have a legitimate defence by saying 'I was only throwing stones, he threw a rock'?
Surely the rock-thrower had the right to defend himself and his family. Some might see this as exacerbation but stones can take your eye out too. 'an eye for an eye and we are both blind' as somebody said, but what about self-defence?0 -
You were criticising the HRW for not including Hammas in their investigations, the statement I quoted says otherwise
And that passage proves that? hardly.So who do you think was shooting at them then ?
I dont know. Thats the point. Neither do you. It could have been staged. It could have been the owner of the field. it could have been a Palestinian militia. It could have been anyone. And that is the point. Your assumptions are flawed because there is no proof or evidence from the video to determine who is shooting.lol I'm flattered you take so much notice of my posting style but no, it's because it was a long boring afternoon and reading long nit picking posts didn't help make it any less boring.
Its hardly nit picking to determine the validity of a video. I guess i should just accept any video that's posted on the internet as being fact, as long as it agrees with your opinion? :rolleyes:0 -
Yellowknife wrote: »I would like to draw an analogy to compare the Israel/Palistinian conflict. There has been a lot of criticism against Jews/Israelis stating that their retaliation against the Palistinian army was 'disproportionate'. Well here is my analogy; if two people are neighbours and one party continually throws stones over the fence at the other in their back garden, first of all where is the surprise in the retaliation of the stoned neighbour? If that neighbour in question throws a rock back in self-defence and knocks the stone-thrower into a coma, does the stone-throwing neighbour have a legitimate defence by saying 'I was only throwing stones, he threw a rock'?
Surely the rock-thrower had the right to defend himself and his family. Some might see this as exacerbation but stones can take your eye out too. 'an eye for an eye and we are both blind' as somebody said, but what about self-defence?
To further your analogy, you have put up a large fence completely surrounding your stone-throwing neighbour so that they couldn't go to the shops for food or supplies of any kind, also you cut off their electricity and power every so often and if they did try to get out because they were sick or something you beat them back. Do you think they would be entitled to get a tad annoyed with you for imprisoning them ?0 -
Deleted User wrote: »And that passage proves that? hardly.
I dont know. Thats the point. Neither do you. It could have been staged. It could have been the owner of the field. it could have been a Palestinian militia. It could have been anyone. And that is the point. Your assumptions are flawed because there is no proof or evidence from the video to determine who is shooting.
Its hardly nit picking to determine the validity of a video. I guess i should just accept any video that's posted on the internet as being fact, as long as it agrees with your opinion? :rolleyes:
Thankfully I don't seem to be as cynical as you.
You obviously didn't read the paragraph, did you ?
Do you think that if it was the local militia shooting at or over them that they would be covering up for them? I don't believe that.
You are quite entitled to doubt anything you like, as I am, and I can't quite understand why you feel you "should " accept anything.:rolleyes:
My opinion is just that, MY opinion.0 -
Thankfully I don't seem to be as cynical as you.
You obviously didn't read the paragraph, did you ?
Well, you seem to be cynical enough if you believe i commented without reading the two paragraphs... I did read them. And I've look at the reports that come out from them in the past. Its like the title of this thread. 1 objection to Palestinian activity, and 155 objections to Israeli activities.
I just dont believe they're particularly impartial in this conflict.Do you think that if it was the local militia shooting at or over them that they would be covering up for them? I don't believe that.
Why not? Are the local militia's bullets are made of chocolate? If bullets are flying around, I'd cover up regardless of who was firing them.You are quite entitled to doubt anything you like, as I am, and I can't quite understand why you feel you "should " accept anything.:rolleyes:
My opinion is just that, MY opinion.
Sure it is, except when you declare something as fact. Not opinion.0 -
Interesting how Likud denies Palestine a right to exist. I wonder if the West will treat Israel the same way, if they elect Likud, as they did Palestine, when they elected Hamas?
I hope likud loses but your comparison is facetious.
Someone asked why does Israel elect people like Netanyahu...comments like the following from Ahmedinijad a couple of days before an election don't help
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1022398.htmlThe Iranian president repeated his previous anti-Israel comments, calling the Holocaust by Nazi Germany during World War II a fabrication and saying that Israel is perpetrating a holocaust on the Palestinian people.
The remarks appear to be part of Ahmadinejad's effort to deflect growing criticism at home over failed economic policies and recent comments by some close associates. Iran's inflation hit 27.6 percent last month, while Vice President Esfandiar Rahim Mashai was recently quoted as saying Iranians were friends of all people in the world - even Israelis.
Ahmadinejad, known for virulent anti-Israeli rhetoric, said in 2005 that Israel should be wiped off the map and later called the Holocaust a myth. Most recently, he described the Jewish state as a germ of corruption.
If the palestinians had given any concession at all to Labor/Kadima it would have given them a better chance in the election. But it looks like Hamas WANTS the hardliners in power. There was a piece in ha'aretz yesterday from the leader of the Gazan palestinians saying they preferred the hardtalkers in power so it would be clear that the palestinians are the victims in the worlds eyes. Well thats just great, continuing to play the victim card rather than trying to do something positive for peace.
Today Fatah are putting their view of Hamas actions forward but theres logic to what he says http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1062761.html0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Well, you seem to be cynical enough if you believe i commented without reading the two paragraphs... I did read them. And I've look at the reports that come out from them in the past. Its like the title of this thread. 1 objection to Palestinian activity, and 155 objections to Israeli activities.
I just dont believe they're particularly impartial in this conflict.
Why not? Are the local militia's bullets are made of chocolate? If bullets are flying around, I'd cover up regardless of who was firing them.
Sure it is, except when you declare something as fact. Not opinion.
I wonder would you feel they were impartial if those who had the F16s and the WP were called Hammas and were being mentioned in their reports. I think you would.
Why would you cover up or protect anyone who was shooting at you ?
It's my opinion that that video is not fake, it's yours that it's staged. I don't know what your problem is. Are we all now to put a disclaimer on every post that it is just our opinion, I always thought that was taken as a given on any forum, or is it only those you don't agree with that are supposed to do that ?
I suppose the Panorama programme on Gaza that has just been aired on BBC could have been staged too, going on your reasoning :rolleyes:0 -
Everyday life in Gaza now. I'm sure all you reservists posting on this thread will be proud of your comrades and their treatment of unarmed Gazan farmers and human rights workers !!!
yes everyday life Im sure all the Hamas supporters/apologists posting on this thread are really proud of there heros and the great efforts they go to to ensure there peoples saftey today
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3669218,00.html0 -
IRISH RAIL wrote: »yes everyday life Im sure all the Hamas supporters/apologists posting on this thread are really proud of there heros and the great efforts they go to to ensure there peoples saftey today
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3669218,00.html
I don't see any Hammas supporters here0 -
-
Advertisement
-
IRISH RAIL wrote: »I could say the same about reservits but it didnt stop you posting it.
What are you on about ?0 -
IRISH RAIL wrote: »yes everyday life Im sure all the Hamas supporters/apologists posting on this thread are really proud of there heros and the great efforts they go to to ensure there peoples saftey today
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3669218,00.html
If Hamas supporters came on here spouting the same intellectual vandalism you have, they would be ridiculed like you have.0 -
They are shooting themselves in the foot by voting extremists like Netanyahu and Lieberman into government imo and as some have said about the Gazan's voting in Hammas, they will deserve whatever boycotts, sanctions etc they get from now on.
.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233304720004&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
WHO WILL BE TO BLAME FOR HARDLINERS COMING TO POWER?0 -
IRISH RAIL wrote: »http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233304720004&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
WHO WILL BE TO BLAME FOR HARDLINERS COMING TO POWER?
The Israeli electorate who have been manipulated to a disgraceful extent?0 -
-
IRISH RAIL wrote: »You make a claim there are reservists posting here without any proof.
I can say the same about Hamas supporters being on this thread.
yet you try and say there are none?
In all fairness IR some have more or less said that. Why is it a problem, they have nothing to be ashamed of , have they. If there aren't any posting here then why should you get upset about it .
I've just found this on the JPost about Gilad Schalit and if the writer is credible then it was Olmert who rejected overtures from Hammas in the early days after his kidnap to bring him home.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233304731246&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull0 -
I wonder would you feel they were impartial if those who had the F16s and the WP were called Hammas and were being mentioned in their reports. I think you would.
Nope, i wouldn't. You see, i disapprove of both Israeli and Palestinian actions. I have no side in this.Why would you cover up or protect anyone who was shooting at you ?
Ahh cover up! not seek cover. Now i get you. Perhaps they didn't know themselves who was shooting at them and just assumed it was the IDF?It's my opinion that that video is not fake, it's yours that it's staged.
No. I said that there was nothing to suggest that the IDF were involved, and the possibility existed that it was staged. Not that it was. My opinion is that there is no evidence in this video to show Israeli aggression. It doesn't seek to identify the shooters.I don't know what your problem is. Are we all now to put a disclaimer on every post that it is just our opinion, I always thought that was taken as a given on any forum, or is it only those you don't agree with that are supposed to do that ?
No, not a disclaimer on an opinion. But this is a politics forum, and when you declare something as fact, it should be. That video isn't evidence of anything.I suppose the Panorama programme on Gaza that has just been aired on BBC could have been staged too, going on your reasoning :rolleyes:
Not really. I believe that Panorama are more likely to show evidence of Israeli involvement. Post up another video with IDF uniforms in sight, and I'd believe you. Show a video interviewing IDF soldiers, or witnesses and i might believe the video. Show a video with Israeli tanks or planes attacking, and i'll believe you.
But to post a video that doesn't show any IDF presence isn't good enough.
Its funny. I suppose you think that i'm pro-israeli because i object to these kind of videos? That i deny Israeli aggression, and that I believe Israel is in the right? Nope. I don't. I don't think Israel is right in doing what it does.
But i will not believe every piece of propaganda footage i see. That video is useless.0 -
In all fairness IR some have more or less said that. Why is it a problem, they have nothing to be ashamed of , have they. If there aren't any posting here then why should you get upset about it .
I've just found this on the JPost about Gilad Schalit and if the writer is credible then it was Olmert who rejected overtures from Hammas in the early days after his kidnap to bring him home.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233304731246&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
again others here have said the same about supporting hamas
I agree with you about Gilad Shalit
the Government should be ashamed about the way this was handled with lives wasted and millions spent in reprisals (summer rain when the Palestinians dug a tunnel underneath the security fence around Gaza and succeeded in ambushing Israel Defense Forces soldiers inside Israeli territory, killing two Israeli soldiers and kidnapping one Gilad Shalit. Two terrorists died at the same time. This is the first time that terrorists were able to penetrate Israel in this manner) last year the Shabak had pinpointed where he was being kept and a commando raid would have brought him home Olmert did not approve the plan. He was afraid Hamas attacks would intensify if any of there operatives were killed. instead he decided to Ignore the issue in the face of his corruption claims and let who ever takes over deal wih the burden of his family knocking on there door wondering when there son will be back from milluim.0 -
IRISH RAIL wrote: »again others here have said the same about supporting hamas
I agree with you about Gilad Shalit
the Government should be ashamed about the way this was handled with lives wasted and millions spent in reprisals (summer rain when the Palestinians dug a tunnel underneath the security fence around Gaza and succeeded in ambushing Israel Defense Forces soldiers inside Israeli territory, killing two Israeli soldiers and kidnapping one Gilad Shalit. Two terrorists died at the same time. This is the first time that terrorists were able to penetrate Israel in this manner) last year the Shabak had pinpointed where he was being kept and a commando raid would have brought him home Olmert did not approve the plan. He was afraid Hamas attacks would intensify if any of there operatives were killed. instead he decided to Ignore the issue in the face of his corruption claims and let who ever takes over deal wih the burden of his family knocking on there door wondering when there son will be back from milluim.
Well I , for one, don't support Hammas and I think the Palestinians would be better off without them but what's the alternative for them. Abbas ? Useless imo.
Interesting, I didn't know how he came to be kidnapped. I'm just curious but how long is milluim and is it every year ?0 -
Advertisement
-
Well I , for one, don't support Hammas and I think the Palestinians would be better off without them but what's the alternative for them. Abbas ? Useless imo.
Interesting, I didn't know how he came to be kidnapped. I'm just curious but how long is milluim and is it every year ?
Milluim is 3 years for a guy 2 for a girl and depending on rank can be 30 days to 90 each year if you get called up. about 80 percent of people called serve there 3 years.
Abbas is useless but he is the best of a bad bunch be that through corrupton terror or other problems. Sometimes we can see the despair he is faced with when Hamas break ceasefires and launch attacks. If Hamas continues in power the nly real solution he has is to annex the wb away from Gaza declare the West bank an independant state along the lines of the two state solution and let Gaza and hamas fend for themselves while they continue terror attacks. A solution that a lot of people dont think would happen but is very realistic in a lot of peoples eyes.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement