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.
Originally posted by budski
reply to post by BlueRaja
the sources also contain articles condemning the actions of hamas - is that equally tainted and unreliable?
If you had bothered to read them you would know this.
Now, AGAIN, why do you deny the accuracy of these reports from the UN and humanitarian organisations, bearing in mind that they also comdemn hamas's actions against israel?
The exploitation of international legal rhetoric is a major weapon in the political war to delegitmize Israeli anti-terror operations. Under this strategy, crystallized at the NGO Forum of the UN's 2001 Durban Conference, the terminology of international humanitarian (IHL) and human rights law is selectively applied to charge Israel with "violations of law," "crimes against humanity," "war crimes," "disproportionate force" and "indiscriminate attacks." In contrast, the violation of Gilad Shalit's human rights and Hamas' use of human shields are ignored. NGOs use the legal language to increase the credibility and seriousness of the charges, and in the Gaza conflict, many are already calling for international "investigations" and "lawfare" (i.e. filing lawsuits against Israeli officials in different countries) based on these accusations. Hamas, Hezbollah, and the PLO have reaped significant political benefits from this strategy in their conflicts with Israel.
Hamas exploits schools, mosques, hospitals and cultural centers to carry out its attacks in flagrant violation of article 51 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. This factor is minimized or ignored by numerous NGOs, and the emphasis is placed on Israel to avoid civilian casualties. But international law is clear: in cases of human shields, civilian deaths that result are clearly the responsibility of Hamas and not Israel.
NGO claims that Israel deliberately targets civilians or does not attempt to distinguish between civilian and military targets are entirely without foundation. The NGOs leveling these charges do not possess military expertise, detailed information on the dispersal of weapons by Hamas, and they are not privy to Israeli targeting decisions. Such information is essential in order to make a credible evaluation of Israeli military responses to the thousands of rocket attacks by Hamas.
Originally posted by budski
reply to post by BlueRaja
the fact that your source is actually sponsored by israeli foundations means nothing then?
The UN and the links I provided have very clear opinions on hamas, and are highly critical of them - but because they are also highly critical of israels actions and use of WP and flechettes you dismiss them.
You dismiss all evidence from all sources that are not pro israel, and then have the nerve to accuse others of bias.
Face it - you don't have a leg to stand on as has been proven over and over.
Pathetic sources, an extremely weak argument and a refusal to look at any source that is not pro israel.
I'm afraid that the world is at it is because of attitudes like this.
Originally posted by budski
reply to post by BlueRaja
you say this and yet immediately dismiss the UN and Hum Org links simply because they have evidence of isreal wrongdoing, despite the fact that they also show evidence of hamas wrongdoing.
The fact is, as I previously said, any poster could come up with absolute proof but you would still dismiss it because you don't like it.
End of story.
you couldn't convince me that the sun rises in the east, much less sets in the west.
www.physics.hku.hk...
Because the Earth is rotating from the west to the east, everything on the celestial sphere will apparently move from the east to the west. This is why the Sun rises from the east
There were no incidents that violated international law, and you can keep strumming this same chord time and again, but your so-called proof is a joke.
www.icrc.org...
Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare. Geneva, 17 June 1925
Originally posted by budski
reply to post by BlueRaja
I'd believe that if it weren't for the fact that you dismiss the UN and Hum org sources out of hand despite the fact that they critisize both sides.
In other words nothing is suitable unless it's pro israeli - and none of those are going to say anything against israel, so my point stands.
You simply won't believe that israel is capable of wrongdoing.
Congratulations, you have been successfully brainwashed by your superiors and the pro israel MSM.
Fistly, the sun does rise in the east and it does set in the west.
Here is a video showing the use of white phosphorous by Israel on Gaza
au.youtube.com...
I hope this is enough proof.
Originally posted by budski
reply to post by BlueRaja
I'd say that the use of WP in an area as densely populated as gaza falls under the category of deliberate policy with malice aforethought.
In other words, they knew they would kill, maim and severely injure civilians and just didn't care.
The reported use of flechettes also falls into this category.