BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 07:16 PM

didn't you just say that?

or rather didn't the discredited Steinberg?

Unfortunately however it is true - if you chuck enough dirt at people who criticize the actions of the IDF and Israeli coverups and use the usual despicable tactic of accusing them of anti-semitism - as seen on this thread!

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: bobad
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 07:12 PM

Marc Garlasco – Is HRW's Anti-Israel Investigator A Nazi-Obsessed Collector?
By
Omri Ceren
Published: September 8, 2009Posted in: Diplomacy, Global

UPDATE: I've published a critical followup to this post, both because I've gotten specific emails accusing Garlasco of being a Stormfront.org contributor (100% not true) and because there's a general risk that this controversy is becoming one about him personally (misses the point). He's a guy who has a lot of inchoate sensibilities when it comes to Jews and the Jewish State, and there's obviously something going on that's consistently tilting his reports in an anti-Israel direction. If he was just incompetent then 50% of his mistakes would favor Israel.

He should never have been tasked with producing reports about the Middle East, if for no other reason than there's something moving him other than level-headed analysis. It's not straightforward and its not vulgar, but it's obviously doing work.

But this isn't about him as an individual. It's about HRW's institutional culture, where people couldn't tell that something was amiss because everyone holds the same opinions he does. His anti-Israel biases are literally institutionalized in that organization. As I said at the bottom of this post, this is their mess as much or more than it is his. More elaboration at the followup.

http://www.mererhetoric.com/2009/09/08/marc-garlasco-is-hrws-anti-israel-investigator-a-nazi-obsessed-collector/

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: bobad
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 07:04 PM

"This week, Human Rights Watch suspended Garlasco after learning that he has a, um, thing for Naziism. Among other things, he collects Nazi paraphernalia. Using fake names on the Internet, he has talked about how "cool" the leather SS jackets are. One pseudonym he reportedly used was "Flak88" -- "88" being code for the neo-Nazi salute, "Heil, Hitler" ("H" is the eighth letter of the alphabet).

Those Human Rights Watch reports attacking Israel always were a bit puzzling, being so one-sided and hostile. Sadly, they're perhaps not so puzzling anymore."

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 06:58 PM

My apologies for

"
"ROFLMAO.... and you are trying to tell us that civilians are NOT targeted?"

There is nothing funny about any of this.
It is for smoke. It is dangerous, but not a targetted weapon."


Could not find the Sarcasm Font.

But from your approach to this thread, I'm not surprised that it went over your head.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 06:32 PM

Well copied from an op ed by Gerald Steinberg!

N.B.
'The next time any respectable news media outlet quotes or interviews Gerald Steinberg, I'd hope they'd note that his NGO Monitor was hauled into Israeli court for smearing the reputation of a Palestinian NGO by claiming that it "justified violence."
The group in question, the Applied Research Institute-Jerusalem (ARIJ), whose purpose is to "promote applied research, technology transfers, sustainable development, and the self-reliance of the Palestinian people through greater control over their natural resources," did not take kindly to this libel and responded with a lawsuit.
Prof. Steinberg was forced to eat humblepie and released this "Correction" which should have also included the title "Apology:" '

article by Richard Silverstein


It seems unlikely that Garlasco is ever going to read this repetition of an attack on him from last year but he has defended himself elsewhere

The Huffington Post September 11, 2009

"I'm used to taking heat for my job as a military analyst for Human Rights Watch, because our findings that this government or that armed group has violated the laws of war frequently provoke accusations that we're biased or siding with the enemy.

Now I've achieved some blogosphere fame, not for the hours I've spent sifting through the detritus of war, visiting hospitals, interviewing victims and witnesses and soldiers, but for my hobby (unusual and disturbing to some, I realize) of collecting Second World War memorabilia associated with my German grandfather and my American great-uncle.
I'm a military geek, with an abiding interest not only in the medals I collect but in the weapons that I study and the shrapnel I analyze. I think this makes me a better investigator and analyst.
And to suggest it shows Nazi tendencies is defamatory nonsense, spread maliciously by people with an interest in trying to undermine Human Rights Watch's reporting

As an American child, I learned that Germans were the bad guys; as I got to know my grandfather, I realized that not all Germans were Nazis. Because of him, and my great-uncle, a gunner on an American B-17 bomber, I developed an interest in German and American war memorabilia, and I wrote a long monograph, published last year, on German Second World War Air Force and anti-aircraft medals

I told my daughters, as I wrote in my book, that "the war was horrible and cruel, that Germany lost and for that we should be thankful." I meant what I wrote. And because of the intense suffering during the Second World War and the genocidal campaign against the Jewish people, I spend my days doing what I can to ensure that such horrors are never allowed to happen again"


John H Richardson writing in Esquire October 13, 2009 asks
"Why Is This Good Man Getting Hung Out to Dry?

'Before becoming a human-rights worker, Garlasco worked in military intelligence.

Because of this unusual background, he has none of the lefty peacenik prejudices common to many human-rights workers. "Israel has every right to defend itself," he told me. "Not only a right, but an obligation to defend its people." Another time, he argued in favor of using bulldozers to clear a "free-fire zone." But Garlasco also criticized Israel for a number of human-rights violations, like "white flag killings" of people who were trying to surrender and using drones to kill too many people from a distance — including some twenty-five children.

BECAUSE OF THIS, AN ISRAELI ORGANIZATION CALLED NGO MONITOR HAS DECIDED TO TRY TO DESTROY MARC GARLASCO — NOT TO ARGUE WITH HIM OR DISPUTE HIS STATISTICS, BUT TO DESTROY HIM PERSONALLY.

Run by an Israeli academic named Gerald Steinberg, NGO Monitor is a rabidly partisan organization that attacks just about anyone who dares to criticize Israel on any grounds. It is dedicated to fighting "the narrative war," as Steinberg puts it in one editorial. ("Many Israeli Jews now realize that the narrative war threatens national survival.")

He has made a special project of attacking Human Rights Watch in editorials with titles like "Israel V. Human Rights Watch" and "Human Rights Watch has betrayed its original mission." H
e is so overwrought, he even attacks Jews who criticize Israel as "anti-Zionists" who are secretly in favor of "wiping Israel off the map."

Recently, Steinberg learned that Garlasco collects Nazi memorabilia. Garlasco also wrote a book about a certain kind of Nazi badge and made some goofy comments on collectors' Web sites about how his "blood ran cold" when he saw certain rare items, like a leather SS Jacket. There's a simple reason for this: Garlasco's grandfather was in the German Army, and the badge he collected happened to be his grandfather's unit badge.
Garlasco never hid this. When I first visited his home about three years ago, his grandfather's Nazi uniform was on display in a glass box. I didn't think there was anything particularly surprising about it — but then, my father was in the CIA, and I have CIA books and memorabilia coming out of my ears." '


Well Steinberg has had his 'victory' and Garlasco has resigned from Human Rights Watch so won't be publishing exposés on the use of White Phosphorus in Gaza City any more or on the 'Mass Home Demolitions in the Gaza Strip'

'Well done'!

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: bobad
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 03:20 PM

"Human Rights Watch"


Not-so-secret motives

Israelis often wonder if the vilification of their country has anything to do with the fact that they are the world's only Jewish state.

Jews historically have played the role of scapegoat in many societies, and Israelis wonder if the effort to delegitimize their country is a modern gloss on an age-old tradition.

Israel-haters usually deny any suggestion they are motivated by hostility toward things Jewish, and they complain that the accusation of anti-Semitism is tossed about recklessly in order to silence them. The best way to approach this subject is case-by-case, which inevitably reveals that some attacks on Israel are motivated by anti-Semitism and some are not.

Yet there does seem to be a surge in cases where anti-Zionism is a vehicle for some deeper animosity.

The most sinister example was the hallucinatory anti-Israel documents which found their way onto the United Church of Canada website this summer. The documents circulated the libel that Canadians affiliated with Israel -- i.e., Jews -- have dual loyalties and can't be trusted in sensitive government jobs. In the ensuing uproar, the larger church membership wisely disassociated itself from those sentiments.

Also this summer, protests against a Dead Sea Scrolls exhibition in Toronto were carried out in the name of anti-Israel activism, but protesters were essentially arguing that the Jews of today are impostors and thieves who have no ancestral connection to the Holy Land -- another standard anti-Semitic trope.

Now there is the case of Marc Garlasco, a senior official with Human Rights Watch. In his capacity as an influential "human rights" activist, Garlasco has made a career of painting Israel as a criminal state. Scholars and other researchers have exposed Garlasco's reports as inaccurate and malicious, but no matter -- among anti-Israel activists, Garlasco is a hero.

This week, Human Rights Watch suspended Garlasco after learning that he has a, um, thing for Naziism. Among other things, he collects Nazi paraphernalia. Using fake names on the Internet, he has talked about how "cool" the leather SS jackets are. One pseudonym he reportedly used was "Flak88" -- "88" being code for the neo-Nazi salute, "Heil, Hitler" ("H" is the eighth letter of the alphabet).

Those Human Rights Watch reports attacking Israel always were a bit puzzling, being so one-sided and hostile. Sadly, they're perhaps not so puzzling anymore.
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 02:13 PM

EU Development and Humanitarian Aid Commissioner, Louis Michel, ALSO said in an interview
"Israel is ridiculing international humanitarian law" - which obliges states to protect the civilians.

"One must continue to put a maximal pressure to stop the operations and secure the access to humanitarian aid. The situation in Gaza is catastrophic.
No more drinking water, no more electricity, hospitals in very bad shape."

"I am indignant when I see that there is little notice of the side damages suffered by one and a half million people who live in a tiny strip of land," he added.

He has also been reported as saying -
"blocking access to people who are suffering and dying is also a breach of humanitarian law."


Of course in stating a refusal to enter into formal discussions with Hamas Michel is echoing the official position that -

'Political contacts with Hamas are banned under the rules of the international Quartet for Middle East peace – which groups the US, the EU, Russia and the UN – on the grounds that the Palestinian faction remains committed to the destruction of Israel.
The international community insists that the ban will only be lifted once the Islamists agree to recognise Israel and renounce violence.

But this policy, set out in 2006 following the Hamas victory in Palestinian elections, has been called into question since the three-week war in Gaza'

Extract from an article in The Independent 19 February 2009

Earlier this month, Former EU commissioner Chris Patten suggested it was time to reassess the isolation of Hamas, saying that approach had failed to weaken it.

'Patten, who found it "easier to get into a maximum security prison in the UK than to enter Gaza", said Israel's relaxation of its blockade had not gone far enough. "It's moved from about minus 10 to about minus eight. It doesn't do anything to help restore economic activity in Gaza.

"It's difficult to understand what preventing exports has to do with security. It has everything to do with the view that Gaza should be collectively punished to discredit Hamas. Unfortunately there are some centuries, if not millennia, of history that show that does not work.

On negotiations with Hamas, Patten referred to his involvement with the Northern Ireland peace process, which "would not have been successfully concluded if we hadn't – with considerable American encouragement – agreed to talk to Sinn Fein/IRA.

"You don't always agree with people you talk to – indeed sometimes you find them despicable – but you need to ease them out of the corners into which they've painted themselves rather than lay on the paint much thicker.

"I think it's wholly reasonable to say we couldn't deal with Hamas unless they agreed to a comprehensive and complete ceasefire.
But do we need to insist on them accepting all past agreements?
Has Israel accepted all past agreements?
If you simply isolate them, do you weaken them?" In fact, he said, "you strengthen people who are even more extreme than they are".

The Guardian Sunday 18 July 2010

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 01:21 PM

Sorry about post getting split up.

You and others will not accept that view, but there it is.
I really have nothing to add about the incursion into Gaza.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 01:18 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7851545.stm

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 01:09 PM

There have been two previous threads on the incursion, which I did not have much to do with.
The Gazan suffering and loss of life was deplorable, but it should be remembered that Israel only went back into Gaza to try to stop the rockets.
They who fired the rockets must share the blame for what happened.
The largest single donor of aid to Gaza is the EU.
Inn the aftermath of the incursion, an EU envoy visited Gaza.
"Humanitarian aid chief Louis Michel called the destruction left by Israel's offensive "abominable", but said Hamas bore "overwhelming responsibility".

He said there would be no dialogue with the "terrorist" movement until it gave up violence and recognised Israel. "

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 12:44 PM

"the complication being that there were also civillians in the combat zone"??

Gaza city is 45 km2 and home to about 400,000 people.
At the start of the Israeli ground invasion, operation Cast lead,even more Palestinians flooded in to the heart of Gaza City in the hope of finding shelter

As all borders were sealed Palestinian civilians were unable to escape from the 'orbit of harm'

There is no doubt that the Israeli forces had far superior fire power

Using modern weaponry on a large scale against an already weakened occupied people living under the very confined conditions that existed in Gaza City has to pose the question - is it possible to distinguish between legitimate military targets and the civilian population?

If this is not possible then such actions are not lawful.

I suppose if you re-define the city as a 'combat zone' then anything is permissible   - even the use of phosphorus in densely built up residential areas or 'enclosed spaces' if you prefer; certainly the wanton destruction of the civilian infrastructure in an attempt to bring down the government

(One of the most important questions raised by the Goldstone Report is whether there was an intentional Israeli objective to destroy Gaza's civilian infrastructure)

"The Dahiya doctrine is a concept said to be used in the Israel Defense Forces regarding asymmetric warfare in an urban setting, according to which a conventional army targets civilian infrastructure that is used by terrorists" - wiki

Gadi Eizenkot, a general in the IDF is credited with being the most prominent exponent of the Dahiya doctrine, a proposed and approved defence strategy of Israel under which "Israel finally realizes that Arabs should be accountable for their leaders' acts"
He stated -

"What happened in the Dahiya quarter of Beirut in 2006 will happen in every village from which Israel is fired on. We will apply disproportionate force on it and cause great damage and destruction there. From our standpoint, these are not civilian villages, they are military bases. [...] This is not a recommendation. This is a plan. And it has been approved."


"In several areas of Gaza, the IDF destroyed or damaged civilian structures-including a flour mill, food factories, cement factories, and greenhouses-without military necessity as required by international law.
In total, Israeli forces damaged or destroyed 14,000 homes, around 60 health facilities, 68 government buildings, and 31 offices of nongovernmental organizations, according to the UN.

Throughout the war Israeli authorities banned journalists and human rights monitors from entering Gaza, and placed restrictions on peaceful protests against the war.

Israeli government authorities sought to cut off funding to Breaking the Silence, a group of IDF veterans that published the testimonies of 26 Israeli soldiers who participated in and were critical of abuses committed during Operation Cast Lead"

Human Rights Watch

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 10:39 AM

Thanks Emma.
I have said all along that its use in Gaza was reckless and possibly illegal.
Confined space means as in an enclosed spaced.
The Israelis WERE using it as a battlefield obscurant which is legal, the complication being that there were also civillians in the combat zone.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 10:20 AM

"Israel did not use WP in confined spaces." 21 Jul 10 - 07:47 AM

Israel used WP in densely populated civilian areas - proved, despite all earlier attempts to deny it.

"US intelligence classified white phosphorus as 'chemical weapon"

Sigfrido Ranucci who made the film "The Hidden Massacre" looking at the effects of white phosphorous bombs on the civilian population of Fallujah in the November 2004 assault on the Iraqi city said that a US intelligence assessment had characterised WP after the first Gulf War as a "chemical weapon".

"In late February 1991, an (American) intelligence source reported, during the Iraqi crackdown on the Kurdish uprising that followed the coalition victory against Iraq, "Iraqi forces loyal to President Saddam may have possibly used white phosphorous chemical weapons against Kurdish rebels and the populace in Erbil and Dohuk.
The WP chemical was delivered by artillery rounds and helicopter gunships."

When Saddam used WP it was a chemical weapon," said Mr Ranucci, "but when the Americans use it, it's a conventional weapon. The injuries it inflicts, however, are just as terrible however you describe it."

From The Independent 23 November 2005

Used in a densely populated area in Gaza and NOT as the legal 'battlefield obscurant'** or 'means of illumination' (the attack seen on the school was in full daylight) WP can only be described - as its use was by Saddam Hussein - as a 'chemical weapon'


"The Israeli military may be using legal weapons, but it is using the weapons in an illegal manner"

Marc Garlasco
Human Rights Watch

** White phosphorus is permitted on the battlefield to make smoke screens to allow troops to move undetected, and also to impede infrared anti-tank weapons.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 06:57 AM

"ROFLMAO.... and you are trying to tell us that civilians are NOT targeted?"

There is nothing funny about any of this.
It is for smoke. It is dangerous, but not a targetted weapon.

"Just love that understatement .. "but the school was also hit by high explosive shells""
The school was hit by HE shells. Should I have used capitals.

Jim raised the issue of WP.
I challenged two of his statements.
He described it as a chemical weapon attack. That is wrong.
He described it as an act of genocide. That is ludicrous.
All the other stuff you raise, no one is arguing with you.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 06:54 AM

video of attack on school

It is disingenuous in the extreme to claim "Anyone inside was safe."

This certainly was NOT true for the family of Sabah Abu Halima

"The phosphorus smoke bomb punched through the roof in exactly the spot where much of the family had taken refuge — the upstairs hall away from the windows.

The bomb, which international weapons experts identified as phosphorus by its fragments, was intended to mask troop movements outside. Instead it breathed its storm of fire and smoke into Sabah Abu Halima's hallway, releasing flaming chemicals that clung to her husband, baby girl and three other small children, burning them to death"

Richard Silverstein quoting from a news report Tikun Olam

Even if you limit this misleading remark to the attack on the school it is obvious that anyone in the playground area at the start of this phosphorus attack was at risk as were the people who attempted to deal with the flaming pieces of phosphorus which can not be extinguished using ordinary fire fighting euipment.

Nevertheless I'm gratified to see that Israel has, in the face of irrefutable evidence that it used phosphorus munitions in densely populated areas and the universal disapprobation to the attempt to cover this up as well, decided to 'restrict' their use in future.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 06:38 AM

WP munition "the projectiles bouncing along the roof of the school. Anyone inside was safe. A classroom did catch fire, but the school was also hit by high explosive shells."

ROFLMAO.... and you are trying to tell us that civilians are NOT targeted?

Just love that understatement .. "but the school was also hit by high explosive shells"

ROFL....

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 05:51 AM

Click on image to enlarge.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 05:48 AM

I will say again that I have not supported the use of WP in Gaza.
Everything I have said has been accurate.
The first picture here shows the projectiles bouncing along the roof of the shool. Anyone inside was safe.
A classroom did catch fire, but the school was also hit by high explosive shells.
http://www.france24.com/en/20100721-israel-restrict-use-white-phosphorus-munitions

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 05:24 AM

"Only people out in the open during this battle were in any danger. from it."

I'm sure we could raise a one way air ticket so you could experience the real civilian conditions on the ground for yourself. Probably not much chance of you needing a return....

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 05:06 AM

"Only people out in the open during this battle were in any danger. from it." ? ?

'On 4 January, Sa'adallah Matar Abu Halima and four of his children were killed in a white phosphorus attack on their HOME in the Sayafa area in north-west Gaza.
His wife Sabah was seriously burned and told Amnesty International that she had watched her baby girl Shahed melt in her arms.

Soon after the attack Israeli soldiers shot dead at close range cousins Matar and Muhammad Abu Halima as they tried to take their burned relatives to hospital.'

'At about 6am on 17 January a white phosphorus artillery shell exploded in the UNRWA primary school in Beit Lahia, where more than 1,500 people were sheltering.
Two children – Muhammad al-Ashqar and his brother Bilal – aged five and seven respectively, were killed. More than a dozen other civilians sheltering in the school were injured.'

Amnesty International Report 2010

"....one patient, a three-year-old girl, who was sent for a scan because of a head wound: "After about two hours she came back, we opened the wound, and smoke came out from the wound," he said. Surgeons used forceps to pull out a substance from the wound that was "like dense cotton and it started to burn," he said. "The piece continued to burn until it disappeared." The child, who was from Atatra, in Beit Lahiya, in northern Gaza, died."

deadly burns consistent with white phosphorus

NB 'Phosphorus burns carry a greater risk of mortality than other forms of burns due to the absorption of phosphorus into the body through the burned area, resulting in liver, heart and kidney damage, and in some cases multiple organ failure.
These weapons are particularly dangerous to exposed people because white phosphorus continues to burn unless deprived of oxygen or until it is completely consumed.' - Wiki

During Operation Castlead phosphorus was used in the densely populated Gaza City
Many people were 'out in the open' fleeing from attacks

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 04:58 AM

You still think it OK to lie just to try and gain a tiny advantage on a Mudcat thread.
And without shame!

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 04:49 AM

"He should be ashamed of claiming to have found an original piece by me on the net, and maintaining the lie."
Me, me, me. Sorry - should have realised that a slur on your otherwise impeccable character was far more important than the fate of the Gazans at the hands of Israeli thugs - apologies.
Others have said what needs to be said about chemical weapons far more eloquently than I could - thanks especially to Foolstroupe for an expert opinion
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 10 - 04:33 AM

Don,
"JIM should be ashamed for opposing your specious rubbish?"

No Don, I do not expect to be agreed with.
He should be ashamed of claiming to have found an original piece by me on the net, and maintaining the lie.
Do you find that acceptable behaviour Don?

All armed forces use WP smoke. I have seen it often enough and have fired it from the 81mm mortar.
You will see that I have not supported its use in Gaza.
I said it was wrong and deplorable. It could also be illegal.
I only disagreed with Jim when he said it was a chemical weapon, which is wrong, and an act of genocide, which is simply ludicrous.

WP should not be used against civillians, but a battle was being fought. The smoke was to conceal IDF troop movements to reduce their casualties.
Only people out in the open during this battle were in any danger. from it.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 07:40 PM

OH - yes, and the 'nail in the coffin' argument about WHY anyone who says that there exist 'safe smoke producing only White Phosphorus munitions' is OUTRIGHT LYING,

is that IF they DID exist, trust me, every Riot Squad & SWAT Team in the world would use them - the fact that they don't gives me a little glow of faith in a minimal general level of humanity existing on this planet!

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 07:23 PM

""You should be ashamed, but you are not are you Jim.""

That is the sickest joke you have ever produced, and you've produced many Keith.

YOU are an apologist for fascist thugs who bomb another country back to the stoneage, and JIM should be ashamed for opposing your specious rubbish?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 07:23 PM

"like everyone else I saw it on the news videos."

I saw the VERY distinctive radiating white 'tree root like' trails from exploding shells in the air in many different videos - recognised them immediately from the first time I saw it and with no mention of what they were. Very few materials behave like that.

I have studied Physical, Inorganic & Organic Chemistry at Tertiary Level.

Phosphorus is phosphorus is phosphorus - there is only one such chemical - yes, red, yellow and white, but the chemical still burns like buggery on exposure to air - a solid version of napalm, really. If you claim that I am wrong, and that it was 'something else', please provide documentary links to what real military material you THINK it was.

In my high School, a distracted teacher with a misbehaving class (we tended to watch him MUCH more closely in future!) once accidentally put Sodium (stored under oil) in the Phosphorus Bottle (stored under water). Putting Sodium in water is very dangerous, especially in ANY quantity larger than the tiniest 'pea-sized' piece. The resulting explosion set fire to the oil, which EXPOSED THE PHOSPHORUS TO THE AIR and wow! Firecracker Night on Steroids! - lucky the glass fragments went in 'safe directions' - not even the nearby teacher was injured.

Btw, a M.A.S.H. episode went realistically into the effects & consequences of (Korea War period, remember) a soldier hit by phosphorus fragments.


I can only say that I do not believe the lying b*stards did NOT use Phosphorus shells in great quantity - it is even documented that they set fire to the UN Food & Aid storage warehouse with them. I watched the footage from inside the storage area of them raining down and starting fires.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 06:11 PM

Thanks 999 - couldn't agree more (and went to bed Jamesonised) but thanks for the thought.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 05:37 PM

I think I can see where Keith's confusion arose -

2009

January 5 The Times reports tell-tale smoke above Gaza. An Israeli military official says: "We categorically deny the use of white phosphorus."

January 8 The Times runs pictures of white phosphorus shells stockpiles. Major Avital Leibovich, a military spokesman, says: "This is what we call a quiet shell - it has no explosives and no white phosphorus. It is not for killing people."

January 12 The Times finds more than 50 phosphorus burns victims in hospital

January 14 Gabi Ashkenazi, Israel Defence Forces Chief of Staff, says: "The IDF acts only in accordance with international law and does not use white phosphorus ."

January 16 UN Relief and Works Agency HQ hit with phosphorus munitions

January 21 Major Leibovich admits use of white phosphorus "according to international law". Major- General Amir Eshel, the army's head of strategic planning, says: "It is the most non-lethal kind of weapon. I don't see any issue with that."

January 23 Israel launches investigation into white phosphorus munitions:
"Some practices could be illegal. The IDF is holding an investigation concerning one specific unit and one incident."

April 22 Israeli military official tells The Times that a "media buzz" led to the order to stop using white phosphorus shells

The results of IDF investigations into alleged violations committed by the military during the operation, in which more than a thousand Palestinians were killed. ……

'An Israeli official said that inquiries "revealed a very small number of incidents in which intelligence or operational errors took place". By and large, the army had "maintained a high professional and moral level".

The incidents included an attack that killed 21 people when forces targeted a home rather than a nearby weapon storage facility.
"These unfortunate incidents are unavoidable and occur in all combat situations, in particular of the type which Hamas forced on the IDF by choosing to fight from within the civilian population," the official said.'

Human Rights Watch said: "We consider the IDF investigations a cover-up for serious violations of international law"

And yes!…
They also accused Hamas of seriously violated the laws of war but then we in the West are not supporting Hamas politically and finacially

"Israel backs down over white phosphorus"
The Times April 23, 2009

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 01:28 PM

"You should be ashamed, but you are not are you Jim."
Nope - said all I have to say on the subject and have no intention of clogging up this or any other thread with arguments that have nothing to do with the topic in hand - open a thread.
How about your pointing out which news videos claimed that there were two types of phosphorus and that the Israelis were using the harmless type.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Emma B
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 01:17 PM

From The New York Times January 21, 2009

Amnesty International said it found "indisputable evidence of widespread use of white phosphorus in densely populated residential areas in Gaza City and in the north."
In a statement, it said its investigators "saw streets and alleyways littered with evidence of the use of white phosphorus, including still-burning wedges and the remnants of the shells and canisters fired by the Israeli Army."

Phosphorus rounds are usually used to spread a thick, white smoke to screen military actions and mark specific areas. Military experts say phosphorus is often particularly useful in urban warfare, in part because it creates tall columns of smoke that can obscure upper-story windows.

But human rights groups harshly criticize its use, saying that the horrible burns and the widespread fires that phosphorus causes make it a menace to civilians.....

Part of what makes white phosphorus controversial is that it can be difficult to control how wide the effects are.

When the shells explode in the air, they disperse pieces of felt soaked in phosphorus — larger version of the shells contain more than 100 of them — that can land on people and cause intense burning, according to Chris Cobb-Smith, a British Army veteran

In early January, a week into Israel's war in Gaza, the home of Sabah Abu Halima was hit by an Israeli shell.
Ms. Abu Halima, the matriarch of a farming family in the northern Gaza area of Beit Lahiya, was caught in an inferno that burned her husband and four of their nine children to death.

Dr. Nafez Abu Shaban, head of Shifa's burn unit, said the family's burns, which he and an assisting doctor from Egypt had treated, were of a kind he had never encountered, reaching to the muscle and bone.

"They were deeper and wider than anything I had seen; a bad odor came from the wounds and smoke continued to come out of them for many hours," he said in his office around the corner from Ms. Abu Halima's sickbed.

He added, "We took out a piece of foreign matter that a colleague identified as white phosphorous."

full report

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 11:05 AM

"with what authority did you claim the Israelis were using the 'smoke-producing' type -"

Er, like everyone else I saw it on the news videos.

Your silence on establishing who lied tells us all we need to know.
Everyone now knows something about you, and what you are capable of for the sake of a debating point.
You should be ashamed, but you are not are you Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 10:31 AM

Incidently - even if there had been two types of phosphorus weapons, with what authority did you claim the Israelis were using the 'smoke-producing' type - aren't we goiung a little overboard in our support for Israeli fascism?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 10:13 AM

Read the definition Keith - it doesn't mention two types, it says that WP does both - used on the marsh Arabs by Saddam Hussain and on Palastinian civilians by the Israelis - did you not see the film footage of " short-range missiles which burst into burning flakes of phosphorus upon impact"?
I've said what I have to say regarding cut and paste - as you are fond of saying, what on earth has this to do with " New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid"
As for your saying no more - gi'e us a break Jimmy - chance'd be a fine thing
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 09:56 AM

Which is the liar?
Judge for yourself.
My piece.
Most of Ireland wanted out of British rule, but Ulster wanted to stay in and was prepared to fight.
Dublin wanted to force them out, but did not have the might.
Britain wanted to force them out, but the army refused to do it.
Illiberal Jim thinks they should have been forced out.
How Jim?

Politicians can only hope to please most of the people most of the time.
They tinkered with the border so as few people as possible found themselves on the wrong side of the (open) border.
What more could they do?
Some of those who did not get their own way, stamped their feet and started executing people.
It still goes on.

Now, give us the piece you found Jim, and I will say no more.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 09:39 AM

Thanks Jim.
It was the smoke producing munitions that were used in Gaza.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 09:31 AM

PS
A bit of cut-and-paste on chemical weapons - as used by Saddam Hussain and the Israelis.
"As an incendiary weapon, WP burns fiercely and can set cloth, fuel, ammunition and other combustibles on fire. Since WWII, it has been extensively used as a weapon, capable of causing serious burns or death.[2] White phosphorus is used in bombs, artillery, and mortars, short-range missiles which burst into burning flakes of phosphorus upon impact. White phosphorus is commonly referred to in military jargon as "WP", and the slang term "Willy/Willie Pete/Peter" (dating from World War I) is still commonly used by infantry and artillery servicemen.[citation needed]
WP is also a highly efficient smoke producing agent, burning quickly and causing an instant bank of smoke. As a result, smoke producing WP munitions are very common, particularly as smoke grenades for infantry, loaded in defensive grenade dischargers on tanks and other armored vehicles, or as part of the ammunition allotment for artillery or mortars. These create smokescreens to mask movement from the enemy, or to mask his fire."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 09:24 AM

And still you refuse to acknowledge the inordinate force used against the Palestinian people and the imbalance of fire-power of the Israelis and those opposing them. These are war crimes, plain and simple, and are widely recognised as such.
Do you believe that if the opposition to these war crimes ceased, the Israelis would return seized land, cease incursions into Palestinian territory, stop demolishing hoses, bombing hospitals and schools, remove the blockade, the checkpoints and the wall and maybe start to act more like human beings and less like fascist thugs?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 09:16 AM

"Remember the Stern Gang and the Irgun Zwei Leumi, who numbered ex president Menachim Begin among their activists, when they poured petrol over tents full of British soldiers, and set light to them, back in 1948.

Beats the hell out of a few unguided rockets, doesn't it.
"

The attacking of MILITARY has always been done in war- too bad the PALESTINIANS can't restrict themselves to military targets- which I have never complained about, except as being a bad path to peace.







"2. FACT! Israel plans to populate land which has been cleared of Palestinians, with Israelis. Israel also still occupies and claims ownership of land acquired by military force, having substituted the original dwellers with Isralis. By any definition this is de facto ethnic cleansing, and they are vey good at it.
"

FACT- the West bank had a large Jewish population prior to 1948, as did a number of Arab nations. Where are those people now, and why do you think THEY were NOT ethnically cleansed? Perhhaps you need to consider that Israel is just RESETTLING tha areas that were previously Jewish. You seem to think it ok for Palestinains to perform ethnic cleansing, re Jews and Christians: I detect more than a slight whiff of bigotry in your posts.





"They claim that Palestinians were using hospitals and schools as shelter for weapons and terrorists, but whose word do we have for the truth of that?"

The UN? Observers? BBC TV reports, showing the school? Claims that the PALESTINAS made? You have NO problem in taking PALESTINIAN statements as true without outside verification- again, a stink appears in your posts.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 08:24 AM

I suggest that we both agree not to bicker.
Just put the two pieces side by side so anyone can see which of us is lying.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 07:53 AM

I did not accuse Don of cut and paste, I just reminded him that he used it and used it openly and correctly as we all do.

The other matter is not about "you said, I said, the writer said"
It is about you saying you found something I claimed as original on the web.
You lied to discredit me.
No such piece existed.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 07:47 AM

It did get out of Gaza, the rockets continued.

Malnutrition is a bad thing found in many countries including developed ones.
No one is starving in Gaza. Why exagerate when the truth is bad enough.
It weakens your case.

Whatever plans you are talking about, there is no ethnic cleansing going on.
The issues over land are bad enough. Exagerating and using emotive expressions that do not describe the actual situation weakens your case.

You may have a hard time not seeing "incipient genocide" whatever that is, but genocide has a clear definition and is not happening in Gaza. What is happening is bad enough. Why exagerate wildly?

Israel did not use WP in confined spaces. It was delivered by artillery and aircraft to create smoke.
The use close to civillians was reckless and deplorable, but it was not a chemical weapons attack.
Why exagerate when the truth is bad enough?

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 07:44 AM

"Post and be damned."
And drive this thread into yet another "you said, I said, the writer said" blind alley - don't think so really. If you really can't remember where you got your 'original thoughts', do what I did and google them again.
You accused Don of cut-and-paste - he denied it - you don't feel the need to justify your accusations or withdraw them, neither do I.

"Those "ineffective" rockets do kill, maim and terrorise".
So do the chemical weapons, the tanks, the bombings, the destruction of hospitals, schools and homes, the killing of civilians, the blockade, the checkpoints, the wall - which you have neither acknowledged nor denied, so therefore, you find acceptable.
Do you think this all or any of this is a good or bad thing?
Compare like with like in this somewhat David and Goliath situation and you have a true picture.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 07:30 AM

""Those "ineffective" rockets do kill, maim and terrorise people Don, and they are indiscriminate.
If only they would stop, things would be very much better.""

If England were occupied and under seige, you would be the first to start lobbing bombs at the intruder, yet you decry the people of another land feeling the same.

If Israel got the fuck out of land it doesn't have any right to, perhaps the rockets would stop.

But we'll never know, because Israel is merciless, implacable, and greedy for expansion.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 07:25 AM

""1. Starvation. No one is starving in Gaza.
2. Ethnic Cleansing. No ethnic group is disappearing from any area, except Christians from some Palestinian areas.
3. Genocide. Can you find any responsible body claiming that?
By its charter, UN MUST intervene militarily wherever it is happening.
It is not happening in Gaza.
4. Chemical weapons. Does your army not use WP smoke? Most do. It is not classed as a chemical weapon (except by you obviously). ""

1. FACT! A large percentage of the Gaza population are not getting enough food, and are suffering from malnutrition. This is the first stage of starvation, and it will get worse as long as the Israelis are banning the import of items like butter, in case they should be used to make bombs. In light of this your comment is specious.

2. FACT! Israel plans to populate land which has been cleared of Palestinians, with Israelis. Israel also still occupies and claims ownership of land acquired by military force, having substituted the original dwellers with Isralis. By any definition this is de facto ethnic cleansing, and they are vey good at it.

3. FACT! Israel, in reponse to even the most minor incidents, carries out massive punitive expeditions into Gaza, killing civilians, (men, women, and children) indiscriminately, and in hundreds, or even thousands. They have bombed Gaza to rubble, destroying hospitals, and schools, and even United Nations buildings and staff. I have a really hard time seeing this as anything other than incipient genocide.

They claim that Palestinians were using hospitals and schools as shelter for weapons and terrorists, but whose word do we have for the truth of that? .......ISRAEL'S Oh,that's all right then, after all they wouldn't lie......would they?

4. FACT! Willie Pete (White Phosphorus) is not considered to be an illegal chemical weapon when used as a smoke screen, on an open battlefield. Its use, however, in confined spaces as an anti personnel weapon, against defenceless human beings, is a horrendous crime against humanity. If you support that use, then you are quite simply inhuman.

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 06:55 AM

As I said Don, we all use cut and paste to put information to the forum.
Nothing wrong with that.

Those "ineffective" rockets do kill, maim and terrorise people Don, and they are indiscriminate.
If only they would stop, things would be very much better.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 06:49 AM

BTW Keith. I never have, and never will, cut'n paste articles by other sources such as the media.

The only cut'n past I do, is to sample the post I am answering, and by that, to let the poster know to what I refer.

Just about all Catters do that, and it helps the discussion.

Apart from that, all that you see from me is my own words, thoughts, and opinions.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 06:43 AM

Maybe this was an Iraqi Kurdish boy, though that is not quite what was said.

However, that is nit-picking on a pretty mean level. The article also said that about half of those treated were Palestinian, and my comment still stands.

It doesn't compensate for the killings and destruction, the deliberately produced malnutrition, or the refusal to allow supplies of basics to be shipped in.

There were no war supplies on any of those ships, and the silly, and largely ineffective rockets, are presumably homemade.

You can nit-pick to your hearts content, but it won't alter the fact that you support terror tactics by one modern, well equipped, military regime, against a bunch of primitive third world farmers.

Nor will it change the fact that Israel is the local playground bully, and the most likely cause of an eventual major conflagration which may destroy the whole of the Middle East.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 05:28 AM

You said you had "easily found" a piece I had copied "almost verbatim"
That is a lie.
I am so touched that you refrained from revealing it to spare me humiliation!

Do it Jim.
Post and be damned.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 05:14 AM

Keith,
My cut-n-paste accusation was based onthe fact that:
1 It seemed familiar to something I had read elsewhere
2 It was trite and preachy as if it had been lifted out of a political manifesto
3 It bore a very close resemblence to an article on the net on Bernadet Devlin - complete with Civil Rights references.
The article in question came up almost immediately in response to my googling some of your text straight in. I did not put it up to humiliate you but because you presented it as 'original thought' which I believe it was not.
As for the rest of your 'arguments' all your points have been answered elsewhere ad-nauseum,
Others can decide whether they wish to continue this one-player tennis match but as far as I'm concerned you can take your war of attrition elsewhere - I'm gone from this farce (not to say I won't participate in response to others, just that I refuse to make any thread a back-and-forth with someone who brings no knowledge or even evidence of interest to the subjects he seeks to dominate).
You manage to make the most interesting subjects boooooooring
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 10 - 04:42 AM

Jim, cut and paste was not an accusation.
It is a tool we all use to put information to the forum.
Don just forgot doing it.

I really am not aware of avoiding any questions.
If you have one in mind, I promise to address it.

I am not claiming great knowledge of all this.
I came in because people seemed to be unquestioningly accepting highly dubious claims from one side and rejecting out of hand very plausible claims from the other.
When it came, the video evidence vindicated that impression.

I would discuss any of the list of issues you have just produced, but one at a time please.

I would ask you to refrain from hysterical, wildly exagerated claims.
1. Starvation. No one is starving in Gaza.
2. Ethnic Cleansing. No ethnic group is disappearing from any area, except Christians from some Palestinian areas.
3. Genocide. Can you find any responsible body claiming that?
By its charter, UN MUST intervene militarily wherever it is happening.
It is not happening in Gaza.
4. Chemical weapons. Does your army not use WP smoke? Most do. It is not classed as a chemical weapon (except by you obviously).