'Human shield' dies as Hamas man is killed by troops
- Thread starter justint
- Start date
Ummmm... I beg to disagree with the title of this thread, and article.
The man was NOT a human shield. It wasn't an IDF soldier holding him up in front of himself walking down a hallway so he would take the first bullet. And the man was NOT killed by the troops, the man was killed by machine gun fire from some unknown source.
They sent the man knocking on doors to find his neighbor. Probably was killed because they considered him an Israeli supporter because he did it.
The man was NOT a human shield. It wasn't an IDF soldier holding him up in front of himself walking down a hallway so he would take the first bullet. And the man was NOT killed by the troops, the man was killed by machine gun fire from some unknown source.
They sent the man knocking on doors to find his neighbor. Probably was killed because they considered him an Israeli supporter because he did it.
I would debate wether or not this man is a Human shield as I consider troops using civillians in any capacity as constituting the use of Human Shields. In this situation the IDF forces sent this 19 year old to knock on doors to mitigate the danger to themselves, that is a policy that seems to scream Human Shield to me and one which the IDF pledged to discontinue. Uniformed soldiers of a democracy are not supposed to use civillians to do thier work for them.
I also think that you are mistaken in your reading of the title of the thread. The title clearly states that the Hamas man was killed by troops. This was the man in the house where they sent the 19 year old to knock on the door. I thought that was pretty clear.
How the British Fought Arab Terror in Jenin
Dr. Rafael Medoff
21 April 2002
?Demolishing the homes of Arab civilians?? ?Shooting handcuffed prisoners?? ?Forcing local Arabs to test areas where mines may have been planted?? These sound like the sort of accusations made by British and other European officials concerning Israel´s recent actions in Jenin. In fact, they are descriptions from official British documents concerning the methods used by the British authorities to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in Jenin and elsewhere in 1938.
The documents were declassified by London in 1989. They provide details of the British Mandatory government´s response to the assassination of a British district commissioner by a Palestinian Arab terrorist in Jenin in the summer of 1938. Even after the suspected assassin was captured (and then shot dead while allegedly trying to escape), the British authorities decided that ?a large portion of the town should be blown up? as punishment. On August 25 of that year, a British convoy brought 4,200 kilos of explosives to Jenin for that purpose. In the Jenin operation and on other occasions, local Arabs were forced to drive ?mine-sweeping taxis? ahead of British vehicles in areas where Palestinian Arab terrorists were believed to have planted mines, in order ?to reduce [British] land mine casualties.? The British authorities frequently used these and similar methods to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in the late 1930s. British forces responded to the presence of terrorists in the Arab village of Miar, north of Haifa, by blowing up house after house in October 1938. ?When the troops left, there was little else remaining of the once busy village except a pile of mangled masonry,? the New York Times reported. The declassified documents refer to an incident in Jaffa in which a handcuffed prisoner was shot by the British police.
Under Emergency Regulation 19b, the British Mandate government could demolish any house located in a village where terrorists resided, even if that particular house had no direct connection to terrorist activity. Mandate official Hugh Foot later recalled: ?When we thought that a village was harbouring rebels, we´d go there and mark one of the large houses. Then, if an incident was traced to that village, we´d blow up the house we´d marked.? The High Commissioner for Palestine, Harold MacMichael, defended the practice: ?The provision is drastic, but the situation has demanded drastic powers.? MacMichael was furious over what he called the ?grossly exaggerated accusations? that England´s critics were circulating concerning British anti-terror tactics in Palestine. Arab allegations that British soldiers gouged out the eyes of Arab prisoners were quoted prominently in the Nazi German press and elsewhere.
The declassified documents also record discussions among officials of the Colonial Office concerning the anti-terror methods used in Palestine. Lord Dufferin remarked: ?British lives are being lost and I don´t think that we, from the security of Whitehall, can protest squeamishly about measures taken by the men in the frontline.? Sir John Shuckburgh defended the tactics on the grounds that the British were confronted ?not with a chivalrous opponent playing the game according to the rules, but with gangsters and murderers.?
There were many differences between British policy in the 1930s and Israeli policy today, but two stand out. The first is that the British, faced with a level of Palestinian Arab terrorism considerably less lethal than that which Israel faces today, nevertheless utilized anti-terror methods considerably harsher than those used by Israeli forces. The second is that when the situation became unbearable, the British could go home; the Israelis, by contrast, have no other place to go.
Dr. Rafael Medoff
21 April 2002
?Demolishing the homes of Arab civilians?? ?Shooting handcuffed prisoners?? ?Forcing local Arabs to test areas where mines may have been planted?? These sound like the sort of accusations made by British and other European officials concerning Israel´s recent actions in Jenin. In fact, they are descriptions from official British documents concerning the methods used by the British authorities to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in Jenin and elsewhere in 1938.
The documents were declassified by London in 1989. They provide details of the British Mandatory government´s response to the assassination of a British district commissioner by a Palestinian Arab terrorist in Jenin in the summer of 1938. Even after the suspected assassin was captured (and then shot dead while allegedly trying to escape), the British authorities decided that ?a large portion of the town should be blown up? as punishment. On August 25 of that year, a British convoy brought 4,200 kilos of explosives to Jenin for that purpose. In the Jenin operation and on other occasions, local Arabs were forced to drive ?mine-sweeping taxis? ahead of British vehicles in areas where Palestinian Arab terrorists were believed to have planted mines, in order ?to reduce [British] land mine casualties.? The British authorities frequently used these and similar methods to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in the late 1930s. British forces responded to the presence of terrorists in the Arab village of Miar, north of Haifa, by blowing up house after house in October 1938. ?When the troops left, there was little else remaining of the once busy village except a pile of mangled masonry,? the New York Times reported. The declassified documents refer to an incident in Jaffa in which a handcuffed prisoner was shot by the British police.
Under Emergency Regulation 19b, the British Mandate government could demolish any house located in a village where terrorists resided, even if that particular house had no direct connection to terrorist activity. Mandate official Hugh Foot later recalled: ?When we thought that a village was harbouring rebels, we´d go there and mark one of the large houses. Then, if an incident was traced to that village, we´d blow up the house we´d marked.? The High Commissioner for Palestine, Harold MacMichael, defended the practice: ?The provision is drastic, but the situation has demanded drastic powers.? MacMichael was furious over what he called the ?grossly exaggerated accusations? that England´s critics were circulating concerning British anti-terror tactics in Palestine. Arab allegations that British soldiers gouged out the eyes of Arab prisoners were quoted prominently in the Nazi German press and elsewhere.
The declassified documents also record discussions among officials of the Colonial Office concerning the anti-terror methods used in Palestine. Lord Dufferin remarked: ?British lives are being lost and I don´t think that we, from the security of Whitehall, can protest squeamishly about measures taken by the men in the frontline.? Sir John Shuckburgh defended the tactics on the grounds that the British were confronted ?not with a chivalrous opponent playing the game according to the rules, but with gangsters and murderers.?
There were many differences between British policy in the 1930s and Israeli policy today, but two stand out. The first is that the British, faced with a level of Palestinian Arab terrorism considerably less lethal than that which Israel faces today, nevertheless utilized anti-terror methods considerably harsher than those used by Israeli forces. The second is that when the situation became unbearable, the British could go home; the Israelis, by contrast, have no other place to go.
So previous atrocities and violations of human rights make current violations okay if they are less dramatic in scale?? So does the fact that Israeli terrorists such as Menachim Begin, Yitzak Shamir and organization such as the Stern Gang played a crucial role in "encouraging" the British to leave the Palestine mandate make it okay for modern day Palestinian terrorists to do the same thing?
drbignik: you cite an article. for what purpose you did not clarify? if its to say, "the british did it, so its ok." im with justint in saying that you are wrong.
if the british INVADED country and killed thousands of its inhabitants to maintain its imperial relationship in - lets say CHinA for example - is it ok for israel or america or nigeria to do the same.
maybe it is in the sick world we live in.
if the british INVADED country and killed thousands of its inhabitants to maintain its imperial relationship in - lets say CHinA for example - is it ok for israel or america or nigeria to do the same.
maybe it is in the sick world we live in.
why is everyone debating if he was a human shield or not??
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2195155.stm
and
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020815/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians_6234
edt
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2195155.stm
and
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020815/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians_6234
did he have a choice? no, what was the purpose? to not put Israeli soildiers in danger, instead putting civilians in danger
how can this not be human shields for the IDF ??
edt
Who says he didn't have a choice?
Why did the Arabs kill him? Could it be that they are savages mister Nordic?
I view Islam as a savage religion. Thus the people who follow it strictly are savages otherwise I consider them secular. Joseph Farah, a Maronite Christian Arab from Lebanon who runs WorldNetDaily is not a savage.
Kadarin
Lifer
- Nov 23, 2001
- 44,296
- 16
- 81
When it comes to Islamic terrorists, I like this method. When you're dealing with people who have no respect for their own lives, let alone those of innocent civilians, the only thing that will work is to do something that will truly hurt them in retaliation.
Whitecloak
Diamond Member
- May 4, 2001
- 6,074
- 2
- 0
It is actually a requirement of Islam to kill the Kafir (Non Muslim) untill he submits (Becomes a Muslim) or is willing to live as a subordinate. The subordinates have very little if any civil rights, and must pay the special dhimmi (Tax).
"human shield" conjurs up images of soldiers holding a man in front of them as they fight. i think "messenger" would have been a more appropriate term for this poor fellow.
Many non-Christians view Christianity as a savage religion. The Christianity of Jesus is not . . . but many of his "devotees" have been and continue to be extremely violent. You are using the same propaganda as radical Islam when it castigates "Zionists" and "Christians". The label is convenient but wrong. By your logic the devout Muslims serving in the US military are savages.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter