Palestine (continuation)

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 04:39 PM

If something is not actually against existing codes of International Law it's quite OK, Keith? That's a line of defence that didn't work too well in the Nuremberg Trials...

(And no, MtheGM, that doesn't mean I'm saying Israel is a Nazi state!)

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 04:57 PM

"Show some to us please."
Why Keith? - you don't read what others write - you've had numerous examples put up which you've either contradicted without evidence or totally ignored; "there have been NO massacres" - no civilians targeted. Do your own ****** homework and prove there have been no massacres - there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.
There is plenty of evidence presented to you of heavy artilery and chemical weapons have been used on civilians - produce your own evidence that the reports are lies as you have claimed.
You've seen the squalid list of banned goods aimed directly at civilians - stop hiding behind what is legal and justify why any country should even want to debase the everyday life of an already impoverished people other than "that's what the law allows them to get away with".
The number of times you have denied having claimed things that you yourself have written convince me that you don't even bother to read these - you're noted for it on this forum.
Mc Grath has just summed it up perfectly "If something is not actually against existing codes of International Law it's quite OK, Keith?"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 05:59 PM

""The United Nations exists as an organisation to promote peace, understanding and reconciliation amongst its members. Israel and the Arabs of Palestine must bi-laterally reach an accommodation that guarantees peace, understanding and reconciliation BEFORE Palestine can become a full member.""

Maybe, just maybe, the UN will achieve by talking to the new Palestinian STATE, what the IDF have FAILED to achieve by bombing it back to the Stone Age, starving it of essential supplies with a coastal blockade and annexing huge tracts of its territory.

None of which indicates ANY desire to talk peace to the Palestinians.

What you really advocate is an abject and unconditional surrender to IDF aggression and occupation.

THAT IS NOT PEACE!

Don T.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 06:15 PM

""Do you deny that Israel delivered all the aid to Gaza anyway, but it turned out to be junk that the Gazans did not want or need.""

Do you have ANY evidence that the useless junk that was delivered was in fact the cargo removed from the Marmara?

Oh, of course, the Israelis said it was so that must be true, RIGHT?

After all, the Israelis wouldn't lie!

Are you really dumb enough to believe that those who loaded the Marmara wouldn't know what was most needed in Gaza?

Don T.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 06:37 PM

""Yes, how about the deliberate targeting of civilian Israeli Jews and Arabs by Hamas rockets???

You have NEVER condemned that, I notice.""

Another LIE!

We have all condemned the use of those rockets, but, while the Israelis continue to steal Palestinian territory with impunity, thanks to their vastly superior military capability, and their complete willingness to kill without hesitation and interrogate the corpses later to ascertain whether or no they are civilians, it is hardly surprising that they are used.

You can't have it both ways. Either this is or is not armed conflict. If yes, both sides have an equal right to attack the other, if no, then neither has that right.

The problem is the inequality of the two parties' capabilities. Israel will, in the fullness of time (if allowed to continue), annihilate the Palestinians, and the only question that matters right now is this: "When are we going to stop them?"

Because, if we don't, we are complicit in their genocide.

Don T.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 11 Nov 11 - 07:15 PM

Gee thanks Teribus ...

... Thanks for trying to justify your notion that if you need to expand you have the right to annex other peoples land ...

... But I'm afraid their is never a good justification for theft - let alone theft facilitated by murder.

But you just keep on sticking up for it if that's what makes you feel good.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 03:31 AM

"Do you deny that Israel delivered all the aid to Gaza anyway, but it turned out to be junk that the Gazans did not want or need."
Can we just clear this load of viciously unpleasant (and rather typical of Keith) nonsense up about what is sent as relief.
The volunteers who collect the goods to break the blockade are ordinary people who collect what they can in donations - they send what they collect and what they can give themselves. Their actions are as much a gesture of solidarity with the Palestinian people as anything else, and in the circumstances created by the viciousness of the Israeli regime, it's a huge, life - risking gesture, as the Israelis have made it quite clear that they are not averse to killing volunteers to maintain their squalid blockade.
Keith says he is "only putting the Israelis case" (and he accuses the rest of us of being "prejudiced!!!). I have no doubt whatever that the Israelis are happy for us to believe that "it turned out to be junk" - they would say that, wouldn't they?
I'm sure the Palestinians need the medicines Keith mentioned; the Israeli 'wonderfully humanitarian behaviour' in setting up this blockade is aimed at creating the maximum suffering and inconvenience as possible to the men, women and children of Palestine, an already greatly impoverished and deprived people; we've all seen the inhumanly selected list of banned goods (yet to be acknowledged by Keith). Unfortunately the the volunteers' meagre resources don't run to such expensive items, assuming that the 'humanitarian' Israelis would allow such useful and necessary items through. If Keith would like to make a donation to relieve the suffering, we are hoping that one of the volunteers will be here next week at our singing week-end - she and her two young daughters are very fine Irish language singers who have sung here before.
But I'm sure he would rather stand on the sidelines and sneer in support of yet another inhumanly terrorist regime - as is his wont.
There still remains the unanswered question of why Israel should expend manpower and expense - not to mention continuing to receive the incredibly bad publicity - if these goods are such "junk".
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 04:10 AM

Jim, Israel denies and refutes those accusations you make.
It is disputed.
You are certain they are guilty, so just share with us that convincing evidence you must have.
Or is it just prejudice?
Please do not insult our intelligence by saying you have lots of evidence but choose to withhold it

Kevin, are you accepting that Israel complies with International law on these issues?
That is all I am suggesting.

Don, a manifest of the cargo would obviously have been supplied to Hamas.
There would have been some complaints if anything went missing.
The Gazans knew exactly what they were getting, but did not bother to collect it.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 04:44 AM

There still remains the unanswered question of why Israel should expend manpower and expense - not to mention continuing to receive the incredibly bad publicity - if these goods are such "junk".

It was junk.
I am sure Israel was supplied with a manifest too, but to impose a blockade you have to check all cargoes.

Kevin, Nuremberg was a trial for war crimes.
The Nazis did break International Law.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 04:55 AM

"Please do not insult our intelligence by saying you have lots of evidence but choose to withhold it "
You've had the evidence and continue to ignore or deny it - waste of time and effort digging it out again only to be told "it didn't happen"
I take it that's a "no" for a contribution to Palestinian aid then?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 05:14 AM

I have seen no evidence and have failed to find any.
I do not believe it exists Jim.
I think you are making it up, and are driven only by prejudice.

Post it now and make me look silly, why don't you?
You could start with that oft. mentioned but never produced "independent enquiry" into the camp massacres.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 05:30 AM

"I think you are making it up, and are driven only by prejudice."
You are the one who has said he is only putting the Palestinian case.
And the aid - can you tell us why the people on the convoys are risking their lives and the Israelis are exposing themselves as the inhuman bastards they are - FOR JUNK?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 06:08 AM

And the aid - can you tell us why the people on the convoys are risking their lives and the Israelis are exposing themselves as the inhuman bastards they are - FOR JUNK?

The flotilla was a politically motivated stunt.
The actual cargo was not important, but the Israelis had to check it.

No evidence to support your hysterical charges then.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 06:56 AM

"Please do not insult our intelligence by saying you have lots of evidence but choose to withhold it "

Actually it isn't Jim who is witholding the evidence.

The IDF confiscated all recording equipment, audio and video, and all cameras and they have refused to let anyone see the evidence that they confiscated.

The only evidence that did come to light was that which was smuggled out by captives.

Why the cover up?

Could it be the same reason that they released a load of faked videos and radio communications?

So they told lies and fabricated evidence, and published that, but won't let anyone see the actual evidence, of which there was a lot since a sizeable proportion of the people on the Marmara were journalists with cameras, mp3 recorders and video cameras.

How much credibility does that give the Israeli side of the story keith?

And as for Jims alleged racism, it seems more the case that you are prepared to side with the Israeli story despite the fact that the above information shows that they are not only set on making sure that we don't know the full extent of what happened, but they have an extensive track record of lying about it.

To say that Jim is discriminating on grounds of race requires you to close your mind to the above and requires you to remain loyal to lies.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Mrrzy
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 12:24 PM

OK, bck to the topic: What about today's developments?

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 03:16 PM

Humanitarian aid a politically motivated stunt - did they really give you access to young people's minds? You rally are a sicko!
Posted this earlier, but it seems to have gone astray; sorry it's from such a biased source as the UN.
Jim Carroll

Gaza: UN official reports horrific hospital scenes of casualties

In a UNICEF warehouse in Zarka, Jordan, workers review boxes of supplies for shipment to the Gaza Strip
12 January 2009 – Appalled that fighting was still continuing in Gaza despite the Security Council's ceasefire resolution, senior United Nations officials said today they were horrified at the human costs amid reports that over 40 per cent of the nearly 900 Palestinians killed in the Israeli offensive, and almost half of the 3,860 wounded, were women and children.
"Behind those statistics that we read out every day is really profound human suffering and grave tragedy for all involved and not just for those who are killed and injured but for their families as well," UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) Director of Operations John Ging told a news conference in New York, speaking by video link from Gaza, where he had just visited the main Al Shifa hospital.

"(It) is the place of course where you see the most horrific human consequences of this conflict. Among the tragic cases that I saw were a child, six years of age, little or no brain activity, people don't have much hope for her survival; multiple amputee – another little girl; and a pregnant woman who'd lost a leg," he said, as the Israeli offensive went into its 17th day with the stated aim of ending Hamas rocket attacks into Israel.

"The hospital is really full of patients whose lives have been in many instances really destroyed, and they're alive."

Mr. Ging paid tribute to "the heroes," the Palestinian hospital staff who have been working round the clock and have lost track of time, and the 40 expatriate medical staff who have joined them from Norway, the Netherlands, Egypt and Jordan, among other places.

He said the sense of fear in Gaza was all pervasive among a battle-hardened population of 1.5 million that had already seen many years of conflict. "In my three years here I have never witnessed anything like the scale of fear that is there," he stressed. "We have to recognize that there's no safe place in Gaza and that continues to be the case and the casualty figures speak to that."

Speaking in New York, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs John Holmes told the news conference the UN had been unable to independently verify the casualty figures given by the Palestinians but they seemed plausible. As of today, there were 884 dead, 275 of them children and 93 women (42 per cent), and 3,860 wounded, 1,333 of them children and 587 women (49 per cent).

"I am appalled that violence on this scale is still continuing in Gaza and horrified at the human cost of all this," he said. "What continues to be worrying is that the Palestinian civilian casualty rate appears to be still increasing."

On a more positive note, the two officials reported that UN food delivery and other operations, suspended after a fatal attack on an UNRWA driver last week, have resumed following Israeli reassurances and aid is now moving around Gaza as much as possible. Mr. Ging said he was very satisfied with the more effective system put in place in high-level talks with the Israelis.

Mr. Holmes said more food supplies were getting through and power supply had improved because of infrastructure repairs and some fuel getting through, but the situation was still not satisfactory even if better than before. Some 500,000 people still lack water as Israel's daily three-hour lull in fighting was insufficient for carrying out repairs and other UN operations, he added, urging Israel to extend the time period.

The UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) has appealed for $16 million to provide families and children with emergency supplies. "We desperately need more resources," Director of Emergency Operations Louis-George Arsenault said, calling on Israel to increase the daily three-hour window for deliveries.

Asked what would happen if Israel escalated its operations deeper into Gaza's cities, Mr. Holmes said UNRWA, the UN World Food Programme (WFP) and others would want to continue their activities insofar as they can. "The fear is that any escalated operations would produce even more casualties, especially when operating in these densely populated urban areas and this would compound what is already a very dramatic humanitarian crisis," he added.

Mr. Ging said 35,000 Gazans had now fled their homes for shelter in 38 UNRWA locations, and many more had sought refuge with relatives in other parts of the Gaza Strip. In answer to questions, he said he had no evidence that Shifa hospital was being used for Hamas military purposes and reiterated his call for an independent investigation amid conflicting reports on deadly Israeli shellings near an UNRWA school and a housing complex in Zaitoun last week.

"I hope that those who are dealing with this issue [the conflict] at the political level will have the same courage and humanity as I've witnessed here at Shifa hospital with the doctors who have come from abroad to help. They can only deal with the consequences in the terms of the injuries," he concluded. "The solution here is to stop the fighting, stop creating the casualties, that's what we want."

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 03:42 PM

Actually it isn't Jim who is witholding the evidence.
Yes it is Lox.
He says he has lots of evidence to substantiate his wild accusations against Israel, but he will not share it with us!

What is there still to know about the "aid" flotilla Lox?
There are enough eye witnesses from both sides.
Some lied though.
The "nurses" who saw piles of bodies.
The ones who saw IDF throwing bodies overboard.
All lies.

Humanitarian aid a politically motivated stunt
If it was, why did the gazans leave it at the crossing for months?
Because it was not "humanitarian aid."
Just worthless junk.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 03:55 PM

"Meanwhile, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh said the Islamic militants have refused to accept any aid from the Israeli-intercepted flotilla. "We are not seeking to fill our (bellies), we are looking to break the Israeli siege on Gaza," he said"

"break the seige"
Political motivation.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 05:51 PM

When Israel prevents people having their basic needs meet by preventing that list of banned goods, that is a political act - and a disgusting one, as many decent Israelis continue to remind us.

Yes, there are many decent Israelis - and people who support the actions of the Israel through thick and thin are no friends to them.
........................
Today I was shopping and was looking at the fruit stand.
Two sorts of oranges were on display, one lot came from Israel, the other from South Africa. It's funny how times have changed that kind of choice... I remember an Aldermaston march, and there were a couple of young men selling oranges to the marchers - "These aren't from South Africa, they're Jaffa oranges."

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 06:38 PM

""Don, a manifest of the cargo would obviously have been supplied to Hamas.
There would have been some complaints if anything went missing.""

And who, pray, do you suppose would have supplied such a manifest after the Marmara had been, with some loss of life, prevented from getting anywhere near its destination?

The Israelis of course, and they wouldn't lie to Hamas, would they?

Your naivete is absolutely astounding.

Don T

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Mrrzy
Date: 12 Nov 11 - 07:11 PM

Meanwhile, back to the thread - what do we think of what happened with the UN today?

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 12:13 AM

'On a more positive note, the two officials reported that UN food delivery and other operations, suspended after a fatal attack on an UNRWA driver last week, have resumed following Israeli reassurances and aid is now moving around Gaza as much as possible. Mr. Ging said he was very satisfied with the more effective system put in place in high-level talks with the Israelis.'
,..,
Anyone else feel that this report is strangely silent as to who attacked & killed this UNWRA driver? It doesn't seem SFAICS to have been Israelis, who were, it appears, co-operating with the operation.

Anyone else think we should be told?

~M~

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 02:22 AM

I assume that we have now finished with the idea that the Israelis have not targetted civilians and have moved on to junking humanitarian aid as a political stunt?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 02:56 AM

Don, a manifest would have been provided by the Turkish authorities before the Marmara sailed.

Numerous people and organisations, including Hamas, would have known exactly what was on board.
There was never any suggestion, by anyone, of a switch.
You really are clutching at straws.

Kevin, Israel legally imposes a blockade because it suffers deadly military attacks and threats from Gaza.
They allow through such humanitarian aid as required by International Law.
They have relaxed the blockade considerably over the last year.

Jim.
I assume that we have now finished with the idea that the Israelis have not targetted civilians and have moved on to junking humanitarian aid as a political stunt?
In any army, individuals may commit crimes, but I do not accept that Israel has deliberately targeted civilians, and would condemn it absolutely as a war crime if they did.
I am just waiting for someone to provide evidence of it.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 05:03 AM

""They allow through such humanitarian aid as required by International Law.""

How very strange.

Perhaps you would point us to the relevant clauses in international law which permit the banning by Israel of all the essential items on the list recently put up on this thread, which includes basic foodstuffs?

Back on topic, I don't believe for one minute that the recognition of Palestine as a Sovereign state will make the slightest difference to the arrogance and intransigence of Israel's government.

The only thing that would do that, would be loss of the support of the worlds biggest bully. the US government, and that ain't gonna happen, given that it is also the worlds largest concentration of "Pro Israel whatever it does" lobbyists.

That situation is gradually moving the Middle East region toward all out war, and if that happens, there will be damn all the West can do to stop it. The attitude displayed by some posters here (Israel can do no wrong and Palestinians are all terrorists and therefore legitimate targets) is multiplied manifold in the US, and those of that mindset cannot countenance the idea that Israel MUST moderate its attitudes.

Don T.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 05:20 AM

Don ~ Does it not occur to you that there might just, perish the thought, be the minutest touch of reverse tu-quoque-dom in your posts and responses?

Just asking. Might ask Jim the same, but he seems completely & incorrigibly in mind's·made·up·please·don't·confuse·with·facts mode on this one so I have given him up as completely beyond the reach of à propos rationality ~~ I mean, when a man of his intelligence goes confusing a putative arrest warrant with an irreversible finding of guilt...: I am sure you will see what I mean!.

~M~

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 05:27 AM

"In any army, individuals may commit crimes, "
A move away from "it never happened" I suppose, but still mealy-mouthed apologism for the slaughter of civilians.
The troop movement and the bombardments were directed at civilian areas - if you are suggesting that any army moves without orders from above and any command operates independently from government directives - you're crasser than I took you for.
I seem to remember this was your defence of Bloody Sunday - that the ordinary soldier was entirely at fault and the officers in charge were in no way to blame for the massacre (and of course, the Government didn't try to cover it up)
"I am just waiting for someone to provide evidence of it."
No you're not - you're waiting for another set of facts that you can deny ever happened - which is ample reason, as far as I'm concerned, not to bother providing them to someone who seems quite comfortable lending support to atrocities aganst civilians by war criminals - as I said earlier.
Please don't ask for them again.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 06:33 AM

" I mean, when a man of his intelligence goes confusing a putative arrest warrant
Still protecting the lady's honour I see - another step and you'll be right out of your Zionist closet
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 06:51 AM

Can you really not see, Jim, that it is not the bloody lady's 'honour' I am defending ~~ I am quite prepared to believe she is a horrible bit of work ~~ but that it is the integrity of the language, concept of using it in relation to the law with a reasonable degree of precision with which I am engaged? To confuse an arrest warrant with a finding of guilt is a SEMANTIC, not a moral, solecism. The person who is the subject of the confusion thus provoked is of no relevance whatever. Horrible as she might be, she has not been "found guilty", in any viable or meaningful sense, of anything whatsoever, except in your wishful & fevered rantings and imaginings!

Sorry ~ but you really are in a mental mess with regard to this one. You can usually think more clearly than this. I am resisting the overwhelming temptation of reverting, in response to your most unworthy last conclusion, to the question of what closet this might indicate you are almost out of. We have had enough of that topic; please, I beg you, do not revert to it.

~M~

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 07:25 AM

Jim: Do you know the Grimms' story of The Jew In The Bush? ~~ he is not in fact a Jew at all; rather a sort of ogre lying in wait to murder travellers. With that sort of folktale tradition, one can see well where Hitler came from.

Please beware of transforming Ms Livni into a Grimmian bush-dweller. As my cousin Michael Winner might remark, "Relax, dear. She's only a politician."

~M~

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 08:43 AM

Mike
" Do you know the Grimms' story of The Jew In The Bush?"
Stop hiding behind accusatins of Anti Semitism - it really doesn't become you.
Ms Livni is a politician, therefore pretty unlikly to come to trial for any crimes she may have committed while in office - even she recognised that by wisely not keeping her apointment in the UK.
The civilised world recognises Augusto Pinoche as being implicated in mass murder, despite the fact that he never came to trial (thanks partly to the good offices of a British ex Prime Minister)
Tony Blair should have ben banged up for leading Britain into an illegal war.
Many British member of Parliament escaped retribution for crims the rest of us would have been jailed for.
Technically, none of these are criminals; we have no control over what priveleges our 'betters' protect themselves with - don't take away our right to express an opinion on it.
"Sorry ~ but you really are in a mental mess with regard to this one."
And I think you are in a moral mess in what amounts to defending inhuman behaviour while paying lip-service to being opposed to it.
It seems to me you are using my attitude to the Livni case to score points.
As far as I am concerned she is a war criminal who will probably never be tried.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 08:50 AM

Becomes me as well as your of continued influence of Zionism, Mr Pots'n'Kettles Carroll!

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 08:55 AM

"Mr Pots'n'Kettles Carroll!"
Do you have to be so ******* childish?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 09:02 AM

I would have no objection if she were tried, Jim. Get it into your head, please: it is not your attitude to her enormities I am distressed by, it is your misuse of our most precious resource, the English language. Leave it alone if you can't use it properly, and stop persecuting and torturing those who can. My point being, that you generally can; rather well. But your hysteria over this present topic is robbing you of your powers of cogent expression, which can only undermine your arguments.

"Technically, none of these are criminals; we have no control over what priveleges our 'betters' protect themselves with - don't take away our right to express an opinion on it."

Nobody's trying to stop you expressing opinions, Jim; but they are undermined, I say again, by the crass inaccuracy of the terms in which you are expressing them. Remember Backwoodsman that time ~~

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Backwoodsman - PM
Date: 27 Feb 11 - 01:41 AM

The recent posts by Jim and Michael are a perfect example of how two people with diametrically opposed viewpoints, a firm grasp of the English language and decent writing skills can carry on an intelligent, civilised discussion which, whilst probably never leading to agreement between them, at least stands a chance of coming to a successful accomodation. A pleasure to read.

Certain other contributors should also read them.........and learn.

That was a delightful compliment to us both, was it not? Do you feel your recent posts deserve what he said of us in his first sentence? Because I don't, & I consequently feel let down by you. & you are letting down Mudcat too, IMO, with this hysterical and inaccurate ranting on topics, like the application of our laws, where you should know better.

Be ashamed.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 09:06 AM

And if that's 'childish' I shall have to live with it. What, anyhow, is childish about the use of Pots'n'Kettles when you are accusing me of faults similar to those that you are committing yourself? Try "motes'n'beams" if you prefer.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 11:14 AM

Don,
Perhaps you would point us to the relevant clauses in international law which permit the banning by Israel of all the essential items on the list recently put up on this thread, which includes basic foodstuffs?
International Law does cover this situation.
Israel does keep within the law Don.
I am stating that as a fact.
What part do you dispute?

Jim.
The troop movement and the bombardments were directed at civilian areas
Only because Hamas, in contravention of International Law, placed military facilities in those civilian areas.
Israel was then acting within International Law to attack them, having given all the required warnings and attempting to minimise civilian casualties.

Jim.
Bloody Sunday - that the ordinary soldier was entirely at fault and the officers in charge were in no way to blame for the massacre
That is the established facts of it Jim.
Yes.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 12:25 PM

Of course there is no question of "innocent till proved guilty" or trials when it comes to the execution of alleged terrorists/militants well away from any kind of war zone by assassin squad or drone... Or plain-clothes policemen in the London Underground, for that matter.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 12:40 PM

"Only because Hamas, in contravention of International Law,"
Hamas was fighting from a defensive position against invaders from outside - where do you think they come from - Mars - they are Palestinians
What should they have done, run away and left their families and neighbours to the tender mercies of the Israeli army - they were defending their people - friends and neighbours?
Supposing for a second your description is right, you seem now to be defending the killing of "hostages" - something you denied not long ago - MAKE UP YOUR MIND - AGAIN.
The United Nations strongly condemned Israelis action against civilians and considered prosecuting Israel for war crimes - so perhaps they don't understand "International Law" either.
"That is the established facts of it Jim."
I understand that it is the responsibility of the officers on the spot for anything that takes place under their command. Whatever happened to "the buck stops here - or doesn't that apply in the British Army? It seems incredibly spineless to blame the men for what was ultimately the responibility of the officers in charge
If the men had acted against orders they should, at the very least, have been disciplined, if not tried for mass-murder - neither happened.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 01:33 PM

What should they have done, run away and left their families and neighbours to the tender mercies of the Israeli army

Accepted practice is to evacuate civilians from military installations when hostilities are imminent.

to be defending the killing of "hostages"
However distasteful, it is accepted that civilian casualties will be incurred when one side uses them as living sandbags.
The crime is theirs.
The other side must give prior warning, as Israel did, (negating the advantage of surprise) and must try to minimise civilian casualties.
UN did not find Israel to have acted illegally.
The rockets were declared illegal.

On Bloody Sunday a couple of soldiers fired on the demonstrators.
They acted without orders.
They should have face prosecution as happened in subsequent incidents

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 02:01 PM

"Accepted practice is to evacuate civilians from military installations when hostilities are imminent.
"Have you taken a look at how tightly packed Gaza is - there is nowhere for them to go, and had all sides adhered to accepted practice the Israelis would not have bombarded and used heavy artillery on densly populated areas.
"The other side must give prior warning, as Israel did, (negating the advantage of surprise) and must try to minimise civilian casualties."
Then why did the UN consider prosecuting Israel for war crimes - prejudice I suppose.
You are presenting a scenario that runs counter to eye witness accounts - giving the "unbiased" Israili point of view as admitted
At least we seem to have got an honest answer at last about the "expendibility" of hostages - which you denied strenuously.
"They acted without orders."
Which still makes the offficers in charge responsible and exposes the total lie of Bloody Sunday on the part of various Governments since
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 03:05 PM

"Have you taken a look at how tightly packed Gaza is - there is nowhere for them to go
Yes, have you?
140 square miles (363 square km).

Then why did the UN consider prosecuting Israel for war crimes - prejudice I suppose.

And why did they reject it?
Objectivity I suppose.

Speaking of objectivity and prejudice, why do you never miss an opportunity to attack Britain and Israel at great length, but have never criticised PIRA who claim not to have targeted civilians, but killed thousands

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 03:10 PM

The only claim that advance warning was given for the Gaza attack comes from the Israelis - once again - they would say that, wouldn't they.
This appears to give a cross section of contrary opinions on the legitimacy and conduct of the attack from 'Lawyers Without Borders'
Jim Carroll

http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/02/israels-attack-on-gaza-legitimate-self-defense-or-war-crime/

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Nov 11 - 03:21 PM

The violence carried out by whoever was firing those primitive rockets in the general direction of places where civilians were living was criminal, as well as foolish.

The violence carried out by the IDF in attacking civilian areas throughout Gaza with hi-powered and hi-tech weapons was criminal on a far larger scale.

Selective justification of such violence is shameful.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 01:19 AM

Jim, leaflets were dropped all over Gaza, as numerous correspondents and others reported.
Missiles criminal and foolish?
They also caused deaths and maimings of ordinary people, who demanded their government do something about it.
No government in the world would allow that to continue.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 02:46 AM

Kevin, I absolutely refute the jibe of "selective justification" and "shameful."

The motivation for the missile launches was a murderous hatred of Jews, and cannot be justified.
It is "shameful" that Jim does justify them.
I challenge you to state that McGrath of Harlow.

The motivation for the incursion was to stem the tide of missile attacks on homes, schools and families.
That is entirely justifiable.
You can argue that the response was disproportionate, and I might agree, but the fact remains that only a small reduction in the missile attacks was achieved.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 03:10 AM

Leaflets - to evacuate a whole city!!
There is no evidence whatever that any warning was given that the attack was to take place - except claims by the Israelis - if that is not the case, produce your evidence - I've produced mine, and once again you choose to ignore it.
"No government in the world would allow that to continue. "
And no CIVILISED government would target civilians - hospitals, schools..... to the extent that they were accused of war crimes by the United Nations.
You have been making claims here that simply are not backed up by facts - rather like your 'cultural implants', they come out of your own imagination.
EVIDENCE PLEASE Until you come up with some, here's a little to be going on with - with some pictures if you find there are too many words to cope with!!
It would appear that it was the Israelis using civilians as "human shields"
Jim Carroll

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/13/gaza-israel-war-crimes

Israel is facing growing demands from senior UN officials and human rights groups for an international war crimes investigation in Gaza over allegations such as the "reckless and indiscriminate" shelling of residential areas and use of Palestinian families as human shields by soldiers.
With the death toll from the 17-day Israeli assault on Gaza climbing above 900, pressure is increasing for an independent inquiry into specific incidents, such as the shelling of a UN school turned refugee centre where about 40 people died, as well as the question of whether the military tactics used by Israel systematically breached humanitarian law.
Link to this audio The UN's senior human rights body approved a resolution yesterday condemning the Israeli offensive for "massive violations of human rights". A senior UN source said the body's humanitarian agencies were compiling evidence of war crimes and passing it on to the "highest levels" to be used as seen fit.
Some human rights activists allege that the Israeli leadership gave an order to keep military casualties low no matter what cost to civilians. That strategy has directly contributed to one of the bloodiest Israeli assaults on the Palestinian territories, they say.
John Ging, head of the UN Palestinian refugee agency in Gaza, said: "It's about accountability [over] the issue of the appropriateness of the force used, the proportionality of the force used and the whole issue of duty of care of civilians.
"We don't want to join any chorus of passing judgment but there should be an investigation of any and every incident where there are concerns there might have been violations in international law."
The Israeli military are accused of:
• Using powerful shells in civilian areas which the army knew would cause large numbers of innocent casualties;
• Using banned weapons such as phosphorus bombs;
• Holding Palestinian families as human shields;
• Attacking medical facilities, including the killing of 12 ambulance men in marked vehicles;
• Killing large numbers of police who had no military role.
Israeli military actions prompted an unusual public rebuke from the International Red Cross after the army moved a Palestinian family into a building and shelled it, killing 30. The surviving children clung to the bodies of their dead mothers for four days while the army blocked rescuers from reaching the wounded.
Human Rights Watch has called on the UN security council to set up a commission of inquiry into alleged war crimes.
Two leading Israeli human rights organisations have separately written to the country's attorney general demanding he investigate the allegations.
But critics remain sceptical that any such inquiry will take place, given that Israel has previously blocked similar attempts with the backing of the US.
Amnesty International says hitting residential streets with shells that send blast and shrapnel over a wide area constitutes "prima facie evidence of war crimes".
"There has been reckless and disproportionate and in some cases indiscriminate use of force," said Donatella Rovera, an Amnesty investigator in Israel. "There has been the use of weaponry that shouldn't be used in densely populated areas because it's known that it will cause civilian fatalities and casualties.
"They have extremely sophisticated missiles that can be guided to a moving car and they choose to use other weapons or decide to drop a bomb on a house knowing that there were women and children inside. These are very, very clear breaches of international law."
Israel's most prominent human rights organisation, B'Tselem, has written to the attorney general in Jerusalem, Meni Mazuz, asking him to investigate suspected crimes including how the military selects its targets and the killing of scores of policemen at a passing out parade.
"Many of the targets seem not to have been legitimate military targets as specified by international humanitarian law," said Sarit Michaeli of B'Tselem.
Rovera has also collected evidence that the Israeli army holds Palestinian families prisoner in their own homes as human shields. "It's standard practice for Israeli soldiers to go into a house, lock up the family in a room on the ground floor and use the rest of the house as a military base, as a sniper's position. That is the absolute textbook case of human shields.
"It has been practised by the Israeli army for many years and they are doing it again in Gaza now," she said.
While there are growing calls for an international investigation, the form it would take is less clear. The UN's human rights council has the authority to investigate allegations of war crimes but Israel has blocked its previous attempts to do so. The UN security council could order an investigation, and even set up a war crimes tribunal, but that is likely to be vetoed by the US and probably Britain.
The international criminal court has no jurisdiction because Israel is not a signatory. The UN security council could refer the matter to the court but is unlikely to.
Benjamin Rutland, a spokesman for the Israeli military, said an international investigation of the army's actions was not justified. "We have international lawyers at every level of the command whose job it is to authorise targeting decisions, rules of engagement ... We don't think we have breached international law in any of these instances," he said.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 03:21 AM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/10/abbas-gaza-israel-truce http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7822049.stm

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 03:26 AM

Returning to the subject, Palestine has failed to get Security Council support for its membership bid.
US did not need to use its veto.

BBC said, "The Palestinians never expected to win at the Security Council, as the US has said it would veto the request, our correspondent reports.

But she says the Palestinians hoped to muster the nine votes needed to pass a resolution, and so to expose the US as the main obstacle to their bid.

Although European states in the council sympathise with the Palestinians, our correspondent adds, they share Washington's concern that the bid could harm chances of reviving US-led Israeli-Palestinian peace talks and ignite violence in the region. "

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 05:06 AM

Keith,

You are in no position to get high and mighty with Kevin.

His last post was as subtle and profound as anything I have ever read, and for you to attempt to diminish any part of it as a "jibe" is pathetic in the extreme.

Mendacious, disingenuous, jingoistic - these are all terms that describe you.

Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation)
From: Lox
Date: 14 Nov 11 - 05:17 AM

PS - 400 ...