It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gaza Ceasefire’s Shocking Photos, Then Carnage Resumes Full Force

page: 1
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 09:19 PM
link   




"The Israeli army has insisted that a mortar round it fired into a UN shelter in Gaza on Thursday in a clash with "militants" was not responsible for the deaths of at least 15 people.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said in a statement that only a "single errant mortar" landed in the school courtyard.

It has released aerial footage which it says proves the shelter was empty at the time the stray shell went off."* The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down.


Cenk breaks down the Gaza War and the destruction the Palestinians suffer at the hands of the IDF. I have nothing more to add than I completely agree with his analysis.

But, knowing the responses that will be drawn in I want to make clear that neither I or the TYT's support Hamas and their campaign of death. Don't believe me? Check this video by the TYT's breaking down Charlie Rose's interview with an Hamas leader. Cenk tears him apart.

Should Israel Exist? Hamas Leader’s Dumb, Damaging Answer






"In the second part of his interview with Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal, CBS News’ Charlie Rose attempted to ascertain whether Hamas’ goal was to actually defeat Israel militarily, an aim that seems unrealistic given the disparity between the two forces. Meshaal insisted that history had always been against what he called “occupiers” in the end, citing the American Revolution.

“The world has two choices,” Meshaal said. “They need to help us peacefully reach this state or we will expel this occupation from our land.”

“So unless the world will take the Israelis out of the West Bank and Gaza, you will expel them militarily,” Rose said. “That’s your objective. You believe you can do that?”"* The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down.




posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 09:36 PM
link   
"... imploring Israel to stop killing Palestinians with US-supplied weapons like F-16 warplanes and heavy 155mm self-propelled guns – which violates the US Arms Export Act, though no one in Washington dares to admit this? "

"The Israeli Tail Keeps Wagging the U.S. Dog"




posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasoul
"... US-supplied weapons like F-16 warplanes and heavy 155mm self-propelled guns – which violates the US Arms Export Act, though no one in Washington dares to admit this? "


Would you site the specific code violation, please? I'd like to read that myself. Seems to me there would be no market for such products if they came with strings attached.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

Cenk breaks down the Gaza War and the destruction the Palestinians suffer at the hands of the IDF. I have nothing more to add than I completely agree with his analysis.

Sorry, Swills. I have to disagree with Cenk. He artfully downplays the sanctity of UN (anything) responsibilities to comply with the rules of war. If those schools are 'supposed to be' non-targets ... they should never have been used for weapons storage ... EVER.

Same thing with the dual roles of Palestinian ambulances. You can't use them to transport patients ... turn around and use them to transport 'freedom fighters' ... and not expect them to be fired on as legitimate targets.

All I saw in your video was one side of the argument being 'spun' ... and that's all I have to say about that.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 09:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: seasoul
"... US-supplied weapons like F-16 warplanes and heavy 155mm self-propelled guns – which violates the US Arms Export Act, though no one in Washington dares to admit this? "


Would you site the specific code violation, please? I'd like to read that myself. Seems to me there would be no market for such products if they came with strings attached.

It wasn't that hard to find.
Arms Export Control Act

In January 2009, Congressman Dennis Kucinich sent a notice to Secretary of State, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, that Israel’s actions in Gaza since December 27, 2008 may constitute a violation of the requirements of the AECA. The AECA requires that each nation that receives a shipment of arms from the United States must certify that the weapons are used for internal security and legitimate self-defense, and that their use does not lead to an escalation of conflict. However, the AECA does not define "internal security" or "legitimate self-defense." Kucinich said that Israel's actions in Gaza killed nearly 600 and injured over 2,500, including innocent civilians and children in residential areas and civilian institutions like schools. Kucinich said that this may have violated the AECA because they didn't further Israel's internal security or legitimate self-defense, but increased the possibility of an outbreak or escalation of conflict.[9] The charges were denied by the IDF and no action has been taken under the act.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Snarl

" The U.S. Arms Export Act of 1976 was passed to help guarantee that US made weapons would only be used for legitimate self-defense reasons and not for violations of internationally recognized human rights. The act requires the State Department to report to Congress when there is a ”substantial violation” of the law. "

"U.S. Must Monitor Use of U.S. Weapons in Gaza"




posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 09:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Snarl

What are you talking about? He talks about the UN not at all supporting Hamas or any terrorist faction by harboring them or their weapons. Cenk tells you the UN are the ones who find the weapons and IMMEDIATELY turn them in. Do you really think the UN is storing weapons for Hamas? If you do, you should take a step back and realize how ridiculous you sound.

I have a feeling you didn't watch the video, but if you did you completely missed all the points and I expect this from many people who find their way into this thread.

So I suppose we're just gonna have to agree to disagree.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 10:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: seasoul
"... US-supplied weapons like F-16 warplanes and heavy 155mm self-propelled guns – which violates the US Arms Export Act, though no one in Washington dares to admit this? "


Would you site the specific code violation, please? I'd like to read that myself. Seems to me there would be no market for such products if they came with strings attached.

It wasn't that hard to find.
Arms Export Control Act

In January 2009, Congressman Dennis Kucinich sent a notice to Secretary of State, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, that Israel’s actions in Gaza since December 27, 2008 may constitute a violation of the requirements of the AECA. The AECA requires that each nation that receives a shipment of arms from the United States must certify that the weapons are used for internal security and legitimate self-defense, and that their use does not lead to an escalation of conflict. However, the AECA does not define "internal security" or "legitimate self-defense." Kucinich said that Israel's actions in Gaza killed nearly 600 and injured over 2,500, including innocent civilians and children in residential areas and civilian institutions like schools. Kucinich said that this may have violated the AECA because they didn't further Israel's internal security or legitimate self-defense, but increased the possibility of an outbreak or escalation of conflict.[9] The charges were denied by the IDF and no action has been taken under the act.

Thanks for that ... but, it doesn't look conclusive to me, which is why I was hoping someone would _specify_ the title and chapter of the law Israel is purportedly violating. I looked ... saw a maze of legal BS ... came back, and asked. Somebody'll have to do better than Wikipedia to convince me. He'll, I'll even settle for 'an opinion' if one's come out of the SCOTUS.

There were a lot of 'soft words' in your source quote (e.g. however, may, possibility, etc.). Anything you know of which is definitive? I'm not even a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure I could go to court and defend this.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

Do you really think the UN is storing weapons for Hamas? If you do, you should take a step back and realize how ridiculous you sound.


I don't sound ridiculous to me. I'm not the guy who makes the rules the UN must comply with, but here's my question. How did the rockets get in there in the first place? How long were they in there for ... before they were 'reported'? Under what circumstances were they formally reported? You see ... there's a whole bunch of unanswered questions.

Hamas is running free throughout Gaza. They do what they want, when they want, until they fire rockets at Israel. Then ... all the Intel Israel has been collecting turns into targeting data and schools get blown up.

Let me ask you, would you let your kids attend a school that was being used as an arsenal ... even for a day?



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Snarl

No. We lock down our schools over "suspicious" packages.

They are quiet familiar with the old bait and hook trick. Using f#g kids at that.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 10:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Snarl

Again, if you think the UN is allowing Hamas to store their weapons in their buildings you are being ridiculous. Clearly Hamas smuggled the weapons inside hoping the IDF wouldn't strike a UN building. You know, Hamas the expert smugglers who always hide weapons in places they hope the IDF won't strike, like hospitals and schools.

Like I said, if you really believe that nonsense then we agree to completely disagree and I'm not gonna bother debating anymore. No point going in circles about craziness.

The UN supporting and allowing Hamas to store weapons in their facilities... This is a conspiracy site and the UN has lots of conspiracies attached to it but this ain't one of them.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Do you really think the UN is storing weapons for Hamas? If you do, you should take a step back and realize how ridiculous you sound.
I don't think that the UN is affirmatively storing weapons for Hamas. But we do know that weapons are being stored in UN buildings.

There's more than enough evidence to show that Hamas is intentionally putting civilians and civilian buildings in danger. It's also likely that some of those "do it yourself" cheap rockets that Hamas uses are blowing up in Gaza, killing their own people.

But leave that all aside for just a moment, then you can go back to the propaganda war. Forget, for just an instant, what happened in 1917, 1948, 1967, all of that stuff. Israel exists now. So does Hamas. Israel does not want to be dissolved as a country, or be continually attacked. Who does?

I'm glad I've found where the Palestinian supporters are hanging out. I'd like you to come up with what Palestine wants for peace that insures Israel can continue it's existence and that this fighting back and forth can end. When you come up with something, either post it here please, or on this thread devoted to that subject.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

If the Palestinians say that the only possible solution is the destruction of Israel, then I think the George Zimmerman verdict applies.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 11:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

If the UN 'cared' ... they wouldn't be hanging this around Israel's neck. They would issue a statement condemning Hamas ... and that would be the end of it.

I am here to debate. Every thread that jumps out at me ... the ones placing All of the blame on Israel ... need a disinterested opposing voice. I think all of my arguments have been within reason. You don't see me 'calling you' names or labeling you ridiculous. I haven't seen a winning argument on the subject for either side ... but it's not hard to see the tactics used against (some more subtle than yours) when I put rational thoughts out for discussion.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 11:23 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952

And when the UN finds the weapons they turn them over.

Is Hamas blowing up their own people? Anything is possible but as Cenk points out the destruction caused and shown in pictures & video are clearly the work of the IDF. Hamas only wishes they had the fire power that they Israelis do.

You want a solution for peace? The only solution is for Hamas to stop the violence and go the diplomatic route to a 2 state solution. But Hamas will never stop their violence so the only answer is for them to be removed, either by death from Israeli strikes or the Gazans themselves. The only path to peace is for there to be peace, trouble is those in power don't want peace.
edit on 28-7-2014 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 11:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

Umm, yeah, right. It's the UN that says that Hamas stored rockets in a UN building. Is the UN in on the crazy theory business, too?

The UN handed the rockets over to Gaza police. Wonder who the police will give them to?

Care to respond to my question about a peace deal? I'm not getting too many Palestinian supporters who are willing to talk about peace.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 11:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: seasoul
"... US-supplied weapons like F-16 warplanes and heavy 155mm self-propelled guns – which violates the US Arms Export Act, though no one in Washington dares to admit this? "


Would you site the specific code violation, please? I'd like to read that myself. Seems to me there would be no market for such products if they came with strings attached.

It wasn't that hard to find.
Arms Export Control Act

In January 2009, Congressman Dennis Kucinich sent a notice to Secretary of State, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, that Israel’s actions in Gaza since December 27, 2008 may constitute a violation of the requirements of the AECA. The AECA requires that each nation that receives a shipment of arms from the United States must certify that the weapons are used for internal security and legitimate self-defense, and that their use does not lead to an escalation of conflict. However, the AECA does not define "internal security" or "legitimate self-defense." Kucinich said that Israel's actions in Gaza killed nearly 600 and injured over 2,500, including innocent civilians and children in residential areas and civilian institutions like schools. Kucinich said that this may have violated the AECA because they didn't further Israel's internal security or legitimate self-defense, but increased the possibility of an outbreak or escalation of conflict.[9] The charges were denied by the IDF and no action has been taken under the act.

Please show me the part where it says it conclusively does. It may, it could ... it doesn't.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 11:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Snarl

I don't have to look it up but I'm sure the UN condemns Hamas and their actions. The UN isn't in Gaza to support Hamas, they're there to provide relief, shelter, and aid to the wounded and homeless, which there are now over 100,000 Gazans homeless. Do you want the UN to pull out of Gaza effectively stopping all aid?

Debating is one thing but clinging to a ridiculous belief based on no facts is another. I don't have the patience debating in circles about nonsense. No one is accusing you of name calling, I'm just telling you I'm not gonna waste my time with such things and will leave it agreeing to disagree.

If you think I'm here to place all the blame on Israel then you haven't been paying attention.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 11:34 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952

So are you also saying the UN is working with Hamas?

Care to answer your question? I thought I did. What's your question again?
edit on 28-7-2014 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 11:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

Dear Swills,

Please forgive me. I'm sorry, you did answer it. Thank you. It's a sad answer, but it's the only one that anyone here has offered. No, wait a minute that's wrong, too. Someone in the other thread suggested the complete evacuation of the area involved in conflict. It does have some practical problems, however.


So are you also saying the UN is working with Hamas?

No. I don't have enough information on that one to offer a definite opinion. It could be that the UN representatives didn't know about it. Or, Hamas might have lied about what they wanted the storage space for. Or, perhaps there is a UN representative or two sympathetic to the Palestinians. That was silly, of course they're sympathetic to the Palestinians. I would suspect most of them are. But I would hope they're professional enough to not be influenced by their personal opinions.

Again, my apologies for missing your answer.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Jul, 29 2014 @ 12:36 AM
link   
HANDBOOK: Talking points and context for Israeli assault on Gaza.


International law and the right to resist occupation

Palestinians have been under occupation for decades. This is the last and longest military occupation in modern history. International law guarantees all people the right to self-determination because it is the foundations from which springs all human rights. The Fourth Geneva Conventions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Charter all guarantee the right to resist occupation, as does UNGA Resolution 2649. (US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation)



Israeli violations of the US Arms Export Act and the Foreign Assistance Act

In order to understand how Israeli attacks on Palestinians may violate American laws regarding the sale of weaponry to foreign countries, it is important to understand how international law regulates warfare. The Fourth Geneva Conventions, The Hague Regulations of 1907, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Conventions on the Right of Children stipulate: 1. Principle of Distinction - parties in conflict must distinguish between civilians and combatants, and civilian and military objects. (Al Mezan Center for Human Rights) 2. Principle of Proportionality - The aggressor must refrain from any attack that could result in the loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and loss of their property, or any measure disproportionate to the anticipated military benefit. (National Lawyers Guild) 3. The Foreign Assistance Act stipulates that the United States may not sell weapons to any country that ‘engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights. (National Lawyers Guild) 4. Israel and the US signed the Mutual Defense Agreement in 1952. It stipulates that Israel can only use US-made weapons for internal security, as part of a peacekeeping mission or in legitimate self-defense. (NLG) The US Arms Export Act stipulates the US president must notify Congress of any country misusing weapons it had purchased from the United State. 1.”Israel’s starvation diet for Gaza,” by Jonathan Cook The Electronic Intifada, Oct. 24




new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join