1 Israeli = 155 Palestinians

elshambo

PeakOutput wrote: »

ah i see, so they havnt actually introduced burning into their law as punishment

AAh ya,
So its ok that the army are burning people because they are doing it illegally!

Look in a mirror and slowly say the things you are typing to yourself!

munchester29 wrote: »

The report is interesting, what I found most interesting was the picture on the side, showing the Palestinians who had their homes demolished, were already starting to rebuild them!

So its ok that the houses were knocked down because they have rebulit them?
What?

munchester29 wrote: »

See my last comment, about the "International law" claim.

Your posts are wrong
The way you are both aggressive and constantly changing the entry point to your arguement means you know you are wrong
and you dont seem to care that you are wrong

1.Do you think you are helping Israels image with these posts?
2.If England did this to Ireland in the 80's for the crimes of Irish IRA members , would you have been fine with it, your arguement is that Israel has to bomb because terrorists live there
Well in the 80's IRA members lived in Ireland and gun runners were in Paralment, so whats the difference
3. using these in the way you do can only lead to one conclusion about your opinion about the dead brown babies, what is it?

Ive left a few tangents and spelling mistakes in there for you to riff off because you seem to have no interest in facing the truth

Israel are murdering children
Israel are breaking international laws

you support the murdering of children and breaking of same laws

Stay Classy!

munchester29

The Saint wrote: »

Once again for those who for some reason can't understand this even though it has been covered repeatedly. We have covered the legality of the settlements repeatedly in this thread. It is not ambiguous and there's no controversy about it.

In 2004 the International Court of Justice ruled that ALL settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are ILLEGAL UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW. What Israel says means nothing.

Wow, you really don’t read what anyone says but the headings do you? At least there is no controversy about that.

I already commented about this ICJ case, and how it means nothing basically. Legally, I mean.


As for the expansion of settlements and their expansion:

The Saint wrote: »

Total in West Bank settlements including East Jerusalem (population)
2003 - 396,988
2004 - 411,829
2005 - 426,487
2006 - 443,702

It does not matter if existing settlements are being expanded. This of course will necissitate the confiscation of more Palestinian land. How do you suppose they fit all those new people in?

Irrespective of this, it is illegal under international law to transfer your population into an occupied area.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND?????????

I’m really impressed with your figures, 4% increase in population per year.
Now we expect those settlers not to have sex & babies anymore either?

I’m still waiting for someone to show me all the confiscated Palestinian land from recent years, the thousands of dispossessed Palestinians.

concussion

Under the Geneva Treaty of 1980, white phosphorous is banned as a weapon of war in civilian areas because of the severe injuries it causes.

Robert Mendick is being economical with the truth. WP is allowed in civilian areas if:
There are military objectives
The munition is not air-delivered (ie by aircraft)

This information can be found in the convention fully titled
1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons

It's used to create smokescreens and in urban areas is pretty useless as an incindiery as it won't penetrate buildings. You'll get isolated fires from bins, stacks of timber etc but if you really want to start a conflagration you have to use it in conjunction with high explosive to blow holes in roofs and shatter windows, allowing WP to penetrate and providing plenty of oxygen.

A short thread on WP being used in Gaza
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055453402

elshambo wrote: »

you know that was not the point of the post

Then why include it in your post??

TOMASJ wrote: »

you will hear them describe in detail the effects on their patients in that hospital of W.P and Depleted Uranium weapons

I know the effects of WP, but what effects of DU are described?

PeakOutput

elshambo wrote: »

AAh ya,
So its ok that the army are burning people because they are doing it illegally!

are they doing it deliberately or is it a side effect of war? is their mandate to kill innocent women and children? have they said that they want to kill palestinians and this is how they are going to do it?

2.If England did this to Ireland in the 80's for the crimes of Irish IRA members , would you have been fine with it, your arguement is that Israel has to bomb because terrorists live there
Well in the 80's IRA members lived in Ireland and gun runners were in Paralment, so whats the difference

there is not a massive difference accept the ira were not in control of the country. they did not set up their locations with the sole intention of having human shields and there would have been way way easier ways of taking out the ira than blanket bombing an area

the big difference is that of course we will say it wouldnt be right and that england were the evil aggressors etc etc this is because we are not independant in the issue and it is almost impossible for us to look at it objectively. this is not / should not be the case for the middle east as we are far enough removed to let our heads rule and not our hearts(for wants of a better expression)

3. using these in the way you do can only lead to one conclusion about your opinion about the dead brown babies, what is it?

i know it wasnt directed at me but the deaths of innocents are always tragic that dosnt mean that israel is wrong it just means that tradgedies happen in war

Israel are murdering children
Israel are breaking international laws

you support the murdering of children and breaking of same laws

whatever about the breaking of international laws it seems that every nation only adheres to them when it suits them. but supporting israel and supporting murdering babies is not the same thing and thats the same type of argument used by plenty of groups who try to use emotions and not rationale to garner support for their cause

munchester29

ionix5891 wrote: »

i think all the members here should be aware of the flood of propaganda being unleashed by the Israeli government


more interesting reading here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/09/israel-foreign-ministry-media

Wow, now Israel is even blamed for more successful propaganda than the Palestinian's?

Although, if that is the case, then I think this is unproportionate! And unjust! They should write less!

munchester29

TOMASJ wrote: »

Hello Solarat,
"Did you know" that the Israelis Army have introduced "burning woman and baby's by white phosphorous" (crime) - for being Palestinian,

Lie.

munchester29

ionix5891 wrote: »

i presume hes referring to this

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23611375-details/Israel+uses+phosphorus+shells+as+smokescreen+for+troops/article.do
see the bolded bit

I really can’t believe you are starting this one again!

The issue of phosphorus shells was already covered in the Military forum. Do some reading.

munchester29

ionix5891 wrote: »

yes but theres a big difference

Israel are actually killing people by the hundreds (just switch on your tv or goto any news website for confirmation) here Hamas haven't killed anyone this way

anyways Hamas are bunch of Nutjobs but you have to remember HAMAS were encouraged and funded by Israel so this mess is the fault of Israel they wanted Hamas in control to takedown the left wing PLO



anyways linky on depleted uranium from Irish Sunday Business Post

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=TOM+MCGURK-qqqs=commentandanalysis-qqqid=38729-qqqx=1.asp

.

Israel is killing terrorists by the hundreds, and some civilians are also killed.
At least Hamas leaderes are all safe & snug in their bunkers. Never bothered building some for their people though...

youcrazyjesus!

I think you need to learn some maths.

munchester29 wrote: »

Wow, you really don’t read what anyone says but the headings do you? At least there is no controversy about that.

I already commented about this ICJ case, and how it means nothing basically. Legally, I mean.


As for the expansion of settlements and their expansion:
Total in West Bank settlements including East Jerusalem (population)
2003 - 396,988
2004 - 411,829
2005 - 426,487
2006 - 443,702

It does not matter if existing settlements are being expanded. This of course will necissitate the confiscation of more Palestinian land. How do you suppose they fit all those new people in?

Irrespective of this, it is illegal under international law to transfer your population into an occupied area.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND?????????

I’m really impressed with your figures, 0.04% increase in population per year.
Now we expect those settlers not to have sex & babies anymore either?

I’m still waiting for someone to show me all the confiscated Palestinian land from recent years, the thousands of dispossessed Palestinians.[/QUOTE]

munchester29

marius wrote: »

This is absolutely disgsting and goes to the heart of this conflict.

The flippant and light hearted way you throw this into the debate makes me sick...

Loosely translated......Israel has decided it has a claim to the land, despite internatiol law deciding otherwise, but Israel does not give a fcuk as Isreal knows that if they keep attacking and murdering people for a long enough time that they will probably get some type of peace agreement where they get a bit more land.....

Everyone keeps talking about international law, and how it supports the Palestinian claims, but the truth is - international law can also be used to support some of Israel's claims. When the time comes.

munchester29

elshambo wrote: »

Your posts are wrong
The way you are both aggressive and constantly changing the entry point to your arguement means you know you are wrong
and you dont seem to care that you are wrong

1.Do you think you are helping Israels image with these posts?
2.If England did this to Ireland in the 80's for the crimes of Irish IRA members , would you have been fine with it, your arguement is that Israel has to bomb because terrorists live there
Well in the 80's IRA members lived in Ireland and gun runners were in Paralment, so whats the difference
3. using these in the way you do can only lead to one conclusion about your opinion about the dead brown babies, what is it?

Ive left a few tangents and spelling mistakes in there for you to riff off because you seem to have no interest in facing the truth

Israel are murdering children
Israel are breaking international laws

you support the murdering of children and breaking of same laws

Stay Classy!

I’m simple telling it like it is.

The English/Irish point has been covered enough. Not even remotely connected. The Irish didn’t fire 3000 rockets in less than a year into The UK, and there weren’t dozens of suicide bombs in the streets of London. Ireland never called for the destruction of England, and the expelling and killing of all its citizens.

The last 3 comments could have come from a book I once read called “Palestinian propaganda for beginners”

munchester29

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

I think you need to learn some maths.

[/QUOTE]


Sorry, meant 4% (stupid calculators) – still not impressive, and doesn’t indicate mass expansion into the west bank.

youcrazyjesus!

Pub bombings and London bombings, mortar attacks on Downing St. Brighton hotel bomb which almost wiped out the whole British Cabinet. Learn some history. Would Britain have been justified in levelling West Belfast in response to this terrorism?

munchester29 wrote: »

I’m simple telling it like it is.

The English/Irish point has been covered enough. Not even remotely connected. The Irish didn’t fire 3000 rockets in less than a year into The UK, and there weren’t dozens of suicide bombs in the streets of London. Ireland never called for the destruction of England, and the expelling and killing of all its citizens.

The last 3 comments could have come from a book I once read called “Palestinian propaganda for beginners”

PeakOutput

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Pub bombings and London bombings, mortar attacks on Downing St. Brighton hotel bomb which almost wiped out the whole British Cabinet. Learn some history. Would Britain have been justified in levelling West Belfast in response to this terrorism?

the irrelevant question has already been answered a couple of times at least

Nodin

munchester29 wrote: »

Your second link, from our favourite source, The Guardian.
Let’s ignore for a second that it is from 2005, talks about a “secret” UK document that “accuses Israeli policies are designed to prevent Jerusalem from becoming a Palestinian capital, particularly settlement expansion in and around the city”.(?)…

And whats changed since 2005?

Theres an EU document that says the same in circulation.

I note sly attempts at well posioning there

The Israelis said in the same link:

Israel believes that Jerusalem should remain the united capital of Israel. At the same time Israel has committed itself that Jerusalem is one of those final status issues."
Key words by Israel: “Final status issues”

The knesset annexed it in the 90's. But you probably know that.

Your third link…
Won’t really bother, it’s from 2002.

Evasion.

Fourth link: Personally, I don’t like to use “unbiased” sites like Amnesty for debates in this conflict, but since you seem to consider them as a fair observer:.

Poisoning the well....

The report is interesting, what I found most interesting was the picture on the side, showing the Palestinians who had their homes demolished, were already starting to rebuild them!:.

Cherry picking.

Interesting way Israel has to get control of a land, and put mobile homes on it (?)…

It allows settlers expand the territory under their control and get more numbers there.

This is not colonialism, unless you think Israel is doing it to the Palestinians one house at a time…

It's just one example of what you've been sneeringly dismissing.

I’m still waiting for someone to show me all the confiscated Palestinian land from recent years, the thousands of dispossessed Palestinians.…

More intellectual dishonesty. You've dismissed everything you've been shown, including the village referred to above.

TOMASJ

concussion wrote: »

Robert Mendick is being economical with the truth. WP is allowed in civilian areas if:
There are military objectives
The munition is not air-delivered (ie by aircraft)

What difference does it make what way it is delivered (as you put it) it comes from above let it be chopper plane or cannon.

It's used to create smokescreens and in urban areas is pretty useless as an incindiery as it won't penetrate buildings. You'll get isolated fires from bins, stacks of timber etc

Can it go through a window and fry a baby in a cot, or is it smart as well and distinguish between a soldier and a civilian,
according to you, you would think these weapons had common sense,

I know the effects of WP, but what effects of DU are described?

I would have thought that would have been obvious, As well as blowing anyone in the vacinty to bits , It is said to cause cancer in years to come to those who were injured by it initially.
This has been reported in Iraq where it was used, by the American Army

elshambo

munchester29 wrote: »

The last 3 comments could have come from a book I once read called “Palestinian propaganda for beginners”

Cheap shots are much like cheap suits!
Everyone can see them for what they are and you are fooling nobody!

there are 3 or 4 on here involved in a propaganda "war"
im not one of them
You are (no need for this:eek:, cause even you know thats what you are doing)

the cheap psychological trick which you and others are engaged in of shouting people down and picking 1 sentence out of a post of 30 or so works in the street, works in the playground(draw from that what you will)

dont work on the internet because

1.Internet fights dont count as they dont draw blood
2.Every time you go back on yourself is in print for all to see, all the desperate little digs, little side tracks dont evaporate into the sky like they would in a verbal forum
3.Do you think you are helping Israels image with these posts?

Saying that, im not going to bother posting on this topic anymore (might if you get partically childish:eek:)

as the Israel apologists are saying more than I ever could as to why that country is so so wrong

And btw, only people defending Israel could see someone like me who is asking questions of a countries behaviour as being somone involved in
“Palestinian propaganda for beginners"

Why cant i ask questions about Israel without being labeled a hater?
Actually dont answer that, id prefer to not have to respond!:eek:

“Palestinian propaganda for beginners"
Does that book really exist or was it a lie?

TOMASJ

munchester29 wrote: »

TOMASJ wrote: »

Lie.

So the Israel Army has Murdered NO baby's in Gaza?

youcrazyjesus!

+1

elshambo wrote: »

Cheap shots are much like cheap suits!
Everyone can see them for what they are and you are fooling nobody!

there are 3 or 4 on here involved in a propaganda "war"
im not one of them
You are (no need for this:eek:, cause even you know thats what you are doing)

the cheap psychological trick which you and others are engaged in of shouting people down and picking 1 sentence out of a post of 30 or so works in the street, works in the playground(draw from that what you will)

dont work on the internet because

1.Internet fights dont count as they dont draw blood
2.Every time you go back on yourself is in print for all to see, all the desperate little digs, little side tracks dont evaporate into the sky like they would in a verbal forum
3.Do you think you are helping Israels image with these posts?

Saying that, im not going to bother posting on this topic anymore (might if you get partically childish:eek:)

as the Israel apologists are saying more than I ever could as to why that country is so so wrong

And btw, only people defending Israel could see someone like me who is asking questions of a countries behaviour as being somone involved in
“Palestinian propaganda for beginners"

Why cant i ask questions about Israel without being labeled a hater?
Actually dont answer that, id prefer to not have to respond!:eek:

“Palestinian propaganda for beginners"
Does that book really exist or was it a lie?

TOMASJ

munchester29 wrote: »

Israel is killing terrorists by the hundreds, and some civilians are also killed.
At least Hamas leaderes are all safe & snug in their bunkers. Never bothered building some for their people though...

The some civilians to date is 40% woman and children, more if you include the ambulance people, old men, journalist, UN members, ect

munchester29

Nodin wrote: »

And whats changed since 2005?

Apparently a lot, since you don’t hear about these things anymore, which was my point.

Nodin wrote: »

The knesset annexed it in the 90's. But you probably know that.

I have a source that says “Israel Furthers Plans to Annex East Jerusalem through Ongoing Settlement Expansion“, as in future plans. Haven’t done it yet though.

http://www.palestinemonitor.org/spip/spip.php?article467

Nodin wrote: »

Evasion.

Not evasion – my point was that in recent years Israel didn’t kick Palestinians out of their homes in their thousands; Israel is not actively building new colonies in the west bank, etc. The argument’s point if you follow my posts was that Israel has shown by action that they want peace (leaving Gaza, stopping building new settlements, relocating thousands of Israeli families from the Gaza area), while the Palestinians only reciprocate with violence.

Nodin wrote: »

Poisoning the well....

Maybe, maybe not.

Nodin wrote: »

Cherry picking.

No, actually only pointing to one small fact in the report that might suggest it is not that accurate and just tells a one sided version of the story.

Nodin wrote: »

It allows settlers expand the territory under their control and get more numbers there.

With 4% growth rate in existing settlements, and no new settlements being built, not much colonizing is actually done there.

Nodin wrote: »

It's just one example of what you've been sneeringly dismissing.

And these are hard to find. Palestinian supporters claim Israel is still doing it to people all the time, that’s part of the reasons Hamas is fighting, etc. Well, not really.

Nodin wrote: »

More intellectual dishonesty. You've dismissed everything you've been shown, including the village referred to above.

On the contrary, I haven’t dismissed anything. I read every shred of proof people thought they had (all those links…), and proved their invalidity.
In some cases, I even proved that people don’t read the things they themselves are posting – they skim headlines and ignore the finer details which sometimes, can be very surprising.

PeakOutput

TOMASJ wrote: »

What difference does it make what way it is delivered (as you put it) it comes from above let it be chopper plane or cannon.

the point was made that they are breaking the geneva convention by using wp he was pointing out this isnt necessarily the case

Can it go through a window and fry a baby in a cot, or is it smart as well and distinguish between a soldier and a civilian,

probably, does this automatically mean it should not be used? probably not

munchester29

TOMASJ wrote: »

munchester29 wrote: »

So the Israel Army has Murdered NO baby's in Gaza?

No, Babies were hit unintentionally while attacking a terrorist organization who uses its Palestinian civilians as human shields.

munchester29

TOMASJ wrote: »

The some civilians to date is 40% woman and children, more if you include the ambulance people, old men, journalist, UN members, ect

Considering the UN figures treat anyone below the age of 17 as civilian, even though Hamas recruits children much younger than that, I would say the actual figure of civilian losses is actually lower than that.
Still, maybe the Hamas leaders can put some Palestinian children in their private shelters to protect them?

PeakOutput

munchester29 wrote: »

Considering the UN figures treat anyone below the age of 17 as civilian, even though Hamas recruits children much younger than that, I would say the actual figure of civilian losses is actually lower than that.

ah i dont know if i agree with that. i do agree that the figures do seem to support exactly what israel says its doing which is targetting hamas which is resulting in collateral damage


tomasj you say yourself that 40% of casualties are civilians. to me this seems to suggest that israel are attacking hamas and due to the placement of the hamas facilities civilians are being killed aswell. would you not agree?

dresden8

PeakOutput wrote: »

tomasj you say yourself that 40% of casualties are civilians. to me this seems to suggest that israel are attacking hamas and due to the placement of the hamas facilities civilians are being killed aswell. would you not agree?

No he said 40% were women or children. No doubt Israel considers any male adult it kills as a Hamas terrorist so there's no point even debating the male adult body count with your lot.

concussion

TOMASJ wrote: »

What difference does it make what way it is delivered (as you put it) it comes from above let it be chopper plane or cannon.

Because we're getting into legalities - a lot of people are saying that it's illegal under the convention to use WP in civilian areas. That is untrue, it's perfectly legal and if you wanted to prosecute someone for using it against a military target in a civilian area using artillery to deliver it you wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

I don't know why the convention states air-delivery is excluded, if I was to give an opinion it would be because you can deliver a lot, lot more over a large area with less accuracy from aircraft than you could from artilery pieces.

TOMASJ wrote: »

Can it go through a window and fry a baby in a cot, or is it smart as well and distinguish between a soldier and a civilian,
according to you, you would think these weapons had common sense

Yes it can - if you left the baby in a cot beside an open window with a war going on around you.

How, according to me, do these weapons have 'common sense'? I only made note of how they're used.

TOMASJ wrote: »

I would have thought that would have been obvious, As well as blowing anyone in the vacinty to bits , It is said to cause cancer in years to come to those who were injured by it initially.
This has been reported in Iraq where it was used, by the American Army

Well, here's where you're falling down - DU doesn't blow people to bits.

All it is is a large, very dense, bullet. It relies on kinetic energy, not explosives to destroy armoured vehicles. On passing through very hard substances (such as armour plating) the 'dust' can vaporise and combust around (and inside) the point of entry.

"It is said" - there are literally hundreds of compounds which 'are said' or 'though' to cause cancer and most are enviornmental agents or things used day to day. There is, as yet, very little evidence that it causes cancer and you're very unlikely to be exposed to it anyway.

Did you know that if you heat Teflon (non stick frying pans) over 340 degrees Celcius (standard electrical hobs can reach almost 400 degrees) two carcinogenic chemicals are released?

Did you know lead is a very strong neurotoxin and if your injured by a bullet you could get lead poisoning and suffer convulsions, comas and eventually die?

youcrazyjesus!

munchester29 wrote: »

TOMASJ wrote: »

No, Babies were hit unintentionally while attacking a terrorist organization who uses its Palestinian civilians as human shields.

Sources please. IDF or who?

TOMASJ

munchester29 wrote: »

No, Babies were hit unintentionally while attacking a terrorist organization who uses its Palestinian civilians as human shields.

Why can you not bring yourself to say the word Killed, instead of words like Hit when you are talking about this Genocide,
Thse W.P bombs can cover an area of 250 sq yards when it explodes overhead, and burns human beings to the bone, not to mention what it can do to a persons lungs,
Your assumption that Hamas are within yards of civilians fried by this W.P. hold no water, a victim could have been 50 yards away from a member of Hamas and still be killed,
It an indiscriminate bomb.

concussion

dresden8 wrote: »

No he said 40% were women or children. No doubt Israel considers any male adult it kills as a Hamas terrorist so there's no point even debating the male adult body count with your lot.

The UN wouldn't consider every male Palestinian over the age of 17 a terrorist and they're the ones releasing the casualty figures. It's worth noting that as militants are dressing in civilian clothing there's every chance the UN would classify them as civilians unless they were still armed when arriving at hospitals/morgues etc.