Netanyahu: No war crimes trials for Israelis

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: QuantumPion


In all seriousness - When you call every soldier, commander, general, pilot, anyone even remotely connected to the act of any war anywhere, a "war criminal", you render the term completely meaningless.

Sorry, but I didn't do that, I was quite specific: "the politicians and army generals who ordered the Israeli army to bombard civilian areas, resulting in the deaths of over 300 children."

Were there any Hamas militants in those civilian areas?

Of course. There are crime lords in certain areas of New York. Should we simply bomb the entire zone? I mean, it doesn't matter if we kill a few hundred civilians, so long as we get who we intended to get. This is the argument you are presenting to justify Israel's actions, can't you see how stupid it is?

Are those crime lords blowing up buses and discos? I have a feeling after sustained suicide bombing attack most of NY would be in favor of clusterbombing the bad areas if the locals didn't give up the baddies. But we can play the hypothetical game all day, so lets stick with reality.

How many murders in NY? Are the numbers comparable to the amount of people killed by Hamas in the same year?

This is the reality: you guys are trying to justify blanket shelling of civilian areas because you blindly support Israel, to the extent that you are willing to act as apologists for the killing of over 300 children.

 

[QuantumPion]

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: QuantumPion


In all seriousness - When you call every soldier, commander, general, pilot, anyone even remotely connected to the act of any war anywhere, a "war criminal", you render the term completely meaningless.

Sorry, but I didn't do that, I was quite specific: "the politicians and army generals who ordered the Israeli army to bombard civilian areas, resulting in the deaths of over 300 children."

Were there any Hamas militants in those civilian areas?

Of course. There are crime lords in certain areas of New York. Should we simply bomb the entire zone? I mean, it doesn't matter if we kill a few hundred civilians, so long as we get who we intended to get. This is the argument you are presenting to justify Israel's actions, can't you see how stupid it is?

Are those crime lords blowing up buses and discos? I have a feeling after sustained suicide bombing attack most of NY would be in favor of clusterbombing the bad areas if the locals didn't give up the baddies. But we can play the hypothetical game all day, so lets stick with reality.

How many murders in NY? Are the numbers comparable to the amount of people killed by Hamas in the same year?

This is the reality: you guys are trying to justify blanket shelling of civilian areas because you blindly support Israel, to the extent that you are willing to act as apologists for the killing of over 300 children.

There is no "blanket shelling of civilian areas" except by Hamas' inaccurate rocket strikes. Israelis use laser-guided bombs and helicopters and such for the most part.

We justify Israel's military responses because it is Hamas always strikes first.

The reason why you are so blatantly and absurdly in the wrong is because you over and over again ignore the undisputed fact that Hamas intentionally puts civilians in harms way and uses civilians as human shields, precisely so that people like you will have an excuse to criticize Israel.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: QuantumPion
There is no "blanket shelling of civilian areas" except by Hamas' inaccurate rocket strikes. Israelis use laser-guided bombs and helicopters and such for the most part.

We justify Israel's military responses because it is Hamas always strikes first.

The reason why you are so blatantly and absurdly in the wrong is because you over and over again ignore the undisputed fact that Hamas intentionally puts civilians in harms way and uses civilians as human shields, precisely so that people like you will have an excuse to criticize Israel.

Like I said, Israel killed over 300 children, the international community is calling for war crime investigations, but you and your buddies are convinced that the blame fully lies with a handful of Muslim terrorists: blind fanaticism and denial.

 

[QuantumPion]

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: QuantumPion
There is no "blanket shelling of civilian areas" except by Hamas' inaccurate rocket strikes. Israelis use laser-guided bombs and helicopters and such for the most part.

We justify Israel's military responses because it is Hamas always strikes first.

The reason why you are so blatantly and absurdly in the wrong is because you over and over again ignore the undisputed fact that Hamas intentionally puts civilians in harms way and uses civilians as human shields, precisely so that people like you will have an excuse to criticize Israel.

Like I said, Israel killed over 300 children, the international community is calling for war crime investigations, but you and your buddies are convinced that the blame fully lies with a handful of Muslim terrorists: blind fanaticism and denial.

I have no knowledge of the specific event you are referring to but my guess is that the 300 children were actually 16-20 year old Hamas militants.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: QuantumPion

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: QuantumPion
There is no "blanket shelling of civilian areas" except by Hamas' inaccurate rocket strikes. Israelis use laser-guided bombs and helicopters and such for the most part.

We justify Israel's military responses because it is Hamas always strikes first.

The reason why you are so blatantly and absurdly in the wrong is because you over and over again ignore the undisputed fact that Hamas intentionally puts civilians in harms way and uses civilians as human shields, precisely so that people like you will have an excuse to criticize Israel.

Like I said, Israel killed over 300 children, the international community is calling for war crime investigations, but you and your buddies are convinced that the blame fully lies with a handful of Muslim terrorists: blind fanaticism and denial.

I have no knowledge of the specific event you are referring to but my guess is that the 300 children were actually 16-20 year old Hamas militants.

I'm referring to Israel's last incursion into Gaza. If you have no knowledge of this event, you were living in Mars since the beginning of the year and you have no business posting in a thread specifically concerned with the war crimes accusations that have arisen as a result of this event.

As to your guesses, they simply confirm your denial and blind support.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: QuantumPion

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: QuantumPion
There is no "blanket shelling of civilian areas" except by Hamas' inaccurate rocket strikes. Israelis use laser-guided bombs and helicopters and such for the most part.

We justify Israel's military responses because it is Hamas always strikes first.

The reason why you are so blatantly and absurdly in the wrong is because you over and over again ignore the undisputed fact that Hamas intentionally puts civilians in harms way and uses civilians as human shields, precisely so that people like you will have an excuse to criticize Israel.

Like I said, Israel killed over 300 children, the international community is calling for war crime investigations, but you and your buddies are convinced that the blame fully lies with a handful of Muslim terrorists: blind fanaticism and denial.

I have no knowledge of the specific event you are referring to but my guess is that the 300 children were actually 16-20 year old Hamas militants.

I'm referring to Israel's last incursion into Gaza. If you have no knowledge of this event, you were living in Mars since the beginning of the year and you have no business posting in a thread specifically concerned with the war crimes accusations that have arisen as a result of this event.

As to your guesses, they simply confirm your denial and blind support.

Talk about being in denial.....just because he doesn`t agree with your assesment is no reason to childishly lash out at him!!

 

[ZzZGuy]

Originally posted by: Red Irish
<snip>
How many murders in NY? Are the numbers comparable to the amount of people killed by Hamas in the same year?

This is the reality: you guys are trying to justify blanket shelling of civilian areas because you blindly support Israel, to the extent that you are willing to act as apologists for the killing of over 300 children.

This is a bad example and you should know better.

This and your previous statement about crime lords can not be compared to Israel/gaza/west bank because in your example it is the countries own citizens in question, which every country in the world has to deal with to some extent (including Israel/gaza/west bank). There are already means in which to deal with such things, why would you resort to bombing which would cause more problems then it solves?

So I shall ignore your example as it has no meaning.



As to the topic of Arab civilian causalities during cast lead, does anyone know if the figures are accurate yet? I do not trust the Arabs in gaza/west bank, Israel or the UN to give a reliable figure unless they show the same thing so some outside sources would be nice.

Then, how did these people die? Was it one or two here and there, or large numbers of civilians killed in the same incident. What killed them (eg, rifle fire, artillery, mortars, bombs dropped by planes)? Where there armed individuals near by? Where those armed individuals a threat to Israeli forces? And how many cases are there with hard evidence of human shields?

Opinion only determines who you call a terrorist.

Also keep in mind that not avoiding civilian causalities when possible is a war crime but it's also just as bad to let human shields work. "Black and white" has no bases in reality unless your trying to decide what color you want your next car.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: QuantumPion

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: QuantumPion
There is no "blanket shelling of civilian areas" except by Hamas' inaccurate rocket strikes. Israelis use laser-guided bombs and helicopters and such for the most part.

We justify Israel's military responses because it is Hamas always strikes first.

The reason why you are so blatantly and absurdly in the wrong is because you over and over again ignore the undisputed fact that Hamas intentionally puts civilians in harms way and uses civilians as human shields, precisely so that people like you will have an excuse to criticize Israel.

Like I said, Israel killed over 300 children, the international community is calling for war crime investigations, but you and your buddies are convinced that the blame fully lies with a handful of Muslim terrorists: blind fanaticism and denial.

I have no knowledge of the specific event you are referring to but my guess is that the 300 children were actually 16-20 year old Hamas militants.

I'm referring to Israel's last incursion into Gaza. If you have no knowledge of this event, you were living in Mars since the beginning of the year and you have no business posting in a thread specifically concerned with the war crimes accusations that have arisen as a result of this event.

As to your guesses, they simply confirm your denial and blind support.

Talk about being in denial.....just because he doesn`t agree with your assesment is no reason to childishly lash out at him!!

When people continue to attempt to justify the blanket bombardment of civilian areas and the death of over 300 children, I will continue to attack their arguments. When said posters attack my position and then claim no knowledge of the event in question, I will question the validity of their posts. I did not lash out at anyone. Indeed, if you refrained from starting threads that amount to little more than IDF propaganda, I don't think I would even bother addressing the subject of Israel on these forums.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: ZzZGuy

Originally posted by: Red Irish
<snip>
How many murders in NY? Are the numbers comparable to the amount of people killed by Hamas in the same year?

This is the reality: you guys are trying to justify blanket shelling of civilian areas because you blindly support Israel, to the extent that you are willing to act as apologists for the killing of over 300 children.

This is a bad example and you should know better.

This and your previous statement about crime lords can not be compared to Israel/gaza/west bank because in your example it is the countries own citizens in question, which every country in the world has to deal with to some extent (including Israel/gaza/west bank). There are already means in which to deal with such things, why would you resort to bombing which would cause more problems then it solves?

So I shall ignore your example as it has no meaning.



As to the topic of Arab civilian causalities during cast lead, does anyone know if the figures are accurate yet? I do not trust the Arabs in gaza/west bank, Israel or the UN to give a reliable figure unless they show the same thing so some outside sources would be nice.

Then, how did these people die? Was it one or two here and there, or large numbers of civilians killed in the same incident. What killed them (eg, rifle fire, artillery, mortars, bombs dropped by planes)? Where there armed individuals near by? Where those armed individuals a threat to Israeli forces? And how many cases are there with hard evidence of human shields?

Opinion only determines who you call a terrorist.

Also keep in mind that not avoiding civilian causalities when possible is a war crime but it's also just as bad to let human shields work. "Black and white" has no bases in reality unless your trying to decide what color you want your next car.

The example is perfect. It is as absurd as the justifications presented for Israel's actions: we took out x terrorists and caused x civilian casualties. Are you intentionally being stupid? How can you say that you don't know what killed these people? I watched Israel bombard civilian areas for several days, so I have a fair idea what killed them. Even by conservative estimates (read IDF propaganda), hundreds of civilians were killed. Did you miss this on the news? This is not war, nor is it justificable military action. UNICEF has stated that over 300 children were killed by Israel.

Sorry, try as you might, you can not justify the relentless bombardment of urban areas filled with unarmed men, women and children. Moreover, by criticising such action, you do not automatically become a Hamas supporter or an apologist for terrorism.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: QuantumPion


In all seriousness - When you call every soldier, commander, general, pilot, anyone even remotely connected to the act of any war anywhere, a "war criminal", you render the term completely meaningless.

Sorry, but I didn't do that, I was quite specific: "the politicians and army generals who ordered the Israeli army to bombard civilian areas, resulting in the deaths of over 300 children."

Were there any Hamas militants in those civilian areas?

Of course. There are crime lords in certain areas of New York. Should we simply bomb the entire zone? I mean, it doesn't matter if we kill a few hundred civilians, so long as we get who we intended to get. This is the argument you are presenting to justify Israel's actions, can't you see how stupid it is?

I am making no such arguement to justify Israel's reactions. I am stating that the leaders of Hamas who ordered their people to use civilians as cover should be held to the same standard that others are trying to apply to Isreali leadership

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: ZzZGuy

Originally posted by: Red Irish
<snip>
How many murders in NY? Are the numbers comparable to the amount of people killed by Hamas in the same year?

This is the reality: you guys are trying to justify blanket shelling of civilian areas because you blindly support Israel, to the extent that you are willing to act as apologists for the killing of over 300 children.

This is a bad example and you should know better.

This and your previous statement about crime lords can not be compared to Israel/gaza/west bank because in your example it is the countries own citizens in question, which every country in the world has to deal with to some extent (including Israel/gaza/west bank). There are already means in which to deal with such things, why would you resort to bombing which would cause more problems then it solves?

So I shall ignore your example as it has no meaning.



As to the topic of Arab civilian causalities during cast lead, does anyone know if the figures are accurate yet? I do not trust the Arabs in gaza/west bank, Israel or the UN to give a reliable figure unless they show the same thing so some outside sources would be nice.

Then, how did these people die? Was it one or two here and there, or large numbers of civilians killed in the same incident. What killed them (eg, rifle fire, artillery, mortars, bombs dropped by planes)? Where there armed individuals near by? Where those armed individuals a threat to Israeli forces? And how many cases are there with hard evidence of human shields?

Opinion only determines who you call a terrorist.

Also keep in mind that not avoiding civilian causalities when possible is a war crime but it's also just as bad to let human shields work. "Black and white" has no bases in reality unless your trying to decide what color you want your next car.

The example is perfect. It is as absurd as the justifications presented for Israel's actions: we took out x terrorists and caused x civilian casualties. Are you intentionally being stupid? How can you say that you don't know what killed these people? I watched Israel bombard civilian areas for several days, so I have a fair idea what killed them. Even by conservative estimates (read IDF propaganda), hundreds of civilians were killed. Did you miss this on the news? This is not war, nor is it justificable military action. UNICEF has stated that over 300 children were killed by Israel.

Sorry, try as you might, you can not justify the relentless bombardment of urban areas filled with unarmed men, women and children. Moreover, by criticising such action, you do not automatically become a Hamas supporter or an apologist for terrorism.

Those areas were also filled with armed men, women and children.

One becomes a Hamas supporter when one condems Israeli actions and ignores actions of the Hamas militants of playing by their own rules - ignoring the rules of war that one wants to apply to Israel.

 

[Lemon law]

Earth to Israel, earth to Hamas, you have not been reading the fine print salvation of the UN sponsored Goldstone report. Israel and Hamas had six months and now counting backwards to launch their own independent investigations into the chapter and verse specific war crimes allegations, and then to take the appropriate corrective actions.

If at the end of six months, no real corrective actions have resulted, then the matter will be simply turned over to the appropriate international courts and indictments will then be issued.

Denial may be a somewhat natural human reaction, but denial is certainly not a rational course of action now given the way the investigations are structured. And even if Obama tries to shield Israel, its not a security council matter where a veto can be used.

And one fine day, Israeli officials and Hamas officials may wake up and discover they cannot, at a minimum, travel internationally because every country on the planet is duty bound to arrest them and turn them over for trial. That six month clock is already winding down, and the wake up call is less than six months away.

 

[EagleKeeper]

It would be very interesting to see what Hamas and Isreal will do.

Operating on a what if scenario that both ignore or do a whitewash.

Would Syria do anything abouit Hamas leadership if the UN orders an arrest and trial?
Any Hamas leadership in Gaza could also come under such an order. If so; would that allow Israel (as guardian of Gaza) the legal/authorized right to go in and arrest the leadership?

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
It would be very interesting to see what Hamas and Isreal will do.

Operating on a what if scenario that both ignore or do a whitewash.

( On what basis do you call these UN sponsored reports a white wash? If you fail to articulate some basis to call such reports a whitewash, you have no logical right to call such reports a whitewash. )

Would Syria do anything abouit Hamas leadership if the UN orders an arrest and trial?
Any Hamas leadership in Gaza could also come under such an order. If so; would that allow Israel (as guardian of Gaza) the legal/authorized right to go in and arrest the leadership?

( Yes it might, but what does Syria, two countries removed have to do with the price of eggs in Afghanistan? And no, if Israel says it applies to Hamas and not Israel, no, Israel has no such right. You missed the point, this applies, at a minimum, to international travel. If Hamas and Israel choose to persist in denial, after the six months clock expires, then its the international courts that define who to gets initially indicted and who does not. With Hamas and Israel having no say in the matter,)

 

[kylebisme]

It seems Netanyahu has come up with an unoriginal plan to excuse Israel's war crimes:

Benjamin Netanyahu ordered several government ministries to look into floating an international initiative to change the rules of war in light of global terrorism.
...

?Our challenge is to delegitimize the continuous attempt to delegitimize the State of Israel," Netanyahu said at the meeting, according to a statement released by the Government Press Office. "The most important arena where we need to act in this context is in the arena of public opinion, which is crucial in the democratic world. We must continue to debunk this lie that is spreading with the help of the Goldstone report.?

He added: ?In Lebanon, in Gaza and in other places, weapons are being piled up around us with the sole aim of firing them at the citizens of the State of Israel. I want to make it clear to everyone: No one will undermine our ability and right to defend our children, our citizens and our communities.?

I say "unoriginal" because I've seen such arguments before, for example:

This is not the first time such a rationale has been invoked to dispense with international law. According to Nazi ideology, ethical conventions couldn?t be applied in the case of ?Jews or Bolsheviks; their method of political warfare is entirely amoral.? On the eve of the ?preventive war? against the Soviet Union, Hitler issued the Commissar Order, which mandated the summary execution of Soviet political commissars and Jews, and set the stage for the Final Solution. He justified the order targeting them for assassination on the ground that the Judeo-Bolsheviks represented a fanatical ideology, and that in these ?exceptional conditions? civilized methods of warfare had to be cast aside:

In the fight against Bolshevism it must not be expected that the enemy will act in accordance with the principles of humanity or international law?any attitude of consideration or regard for international law in respect of these persons is an error?.The protagonists of barbaric Asiatic methods of warfare are the political commissars?.Accordingly if captured in battle or while resisting, they should in principle be shot.

It was simultaneously alleged that the Red Army commissars (who were assimilated to Jews) qualified neither as prisoners of war protected by the Geneva Convention nor civilians entitled to trial before military courts, but rather were in effect illegal combatants. Plus ça change, plus c?est la même chose.

Granted, Netanyahu doesn't strike me as a student of history.

 

[Lemon law]

Good point kylebisme. But in the grand scheme of things, international courts have an excellent track record in not wasting any time over such bullshit arguments. A momentary chuckle is probably the best the Netanyuhu argument will get.

On the plus side, international courts are very good at following evidence, interviewing witnesses, and once the process starts, the set initially indicted can be expected to grow much larger.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Lemon law

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
It would be very interesting to see what Hamas and Israel will do.

Operating on a what if scenario that both ignore or do a whitewash.

( On what basis do you call these UN sponsored reports a white wash? If you fail to articulate some basis to call such reports a whitewash, you have no logical right to call such reports a whitewash. )

Would Syria do anything about Hamas leadership if the UN orders an arrest and trial?
Any Hamas leadership in Gaza could also come under such an order. If so; would that allow Israel (as guardian of Gaza) the legal/authorized right to go in and arrest the leadership?

( Yes it might, but what does Syria, two countries removed have to do with the price of eggs in Afghanistan? And no, if Israel says it applies to Hamas and not Israel, no, Israel has no such right. You missed the point, this applies, at a minimum, to international travel. If Hamas and Israel choose to persist in denial, after the six months clock expires, then its the international courts that define who to gets initially indicted and who does not. With Hamas and Israel having no say in the matter,)

The use of white wash would be if the parties in question crated a report that overlooked/ignored/excused their actions.

Hamas leadership is operating from Syria. Being that Syria is a different country than Israel and Hamas is Gaza which is Israel - then the Hamas leadership are participating in international travel which subjects them to arrest. If they were indicted by an international court, would Syria hand them over?



And please stop changing around your quoting style - it is confusing to what little grey matter I still have.

 

[Lemon law]

Common Courtesy comes back with, "The use of white wash would be if the parties in question crated a report that overlooked/ignored/excused their actions.

( If the UN and international courts deem either the Hamas or Israeli response a go through the motions whitewash, then such responses will simply be rejected out of hand as being inadequate. Which will result in the same default action of triggering the six month clock, making international courts the arbiters of the resulting indictments. )

Hamas leadership is operating from Syria. Being that Syria is a different country than Israel and Hamas is Gaza which is Israel - then the Hamas leadership are participating in international travel which subjects them to arrest. If they were indicted by an international court, would Syria hand them over?

( A rather interesting question, first requiring the proof that Syria is involved as a Hamas proxy when proxy wars are somewhat legitimate foreign policy, and second that yet to be indicted Hamas leaders travel to Syria. But what the heck, the more the merrier, lets also include Saudi Arabia, and every wealthy Arab who gives money to the Palestinian cause. And also indict every American taxpayer who funds the Israeli military regardless if we like it or not. )

Be careful about what you wish for, the broader the war crimes inquires get, the worse off it will be for Israeli legitimacy is my strong guess. As it is, I think we are beating a dead horse waiting for Israelis and Palestinians to come to an agreement, and sooner or later the only way to a lasting mid-east peace will be to go back to 1948 and impose binding international arbitration on both sides from that 1948 share basis.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
One becomes a Hamas supporter when one condems Israeli actions and ignores actions of the Hamas militants of playing by their own rules - ignoring the rules of war that one wants to apply to Israel.

I get it, unless you remain silent on the subject of Israel killing over 300 children, you are a terrorist or a supporter of terrorist activity. No criticism allowed. You really are a nice piece of work.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
As it is, I think we are beating a dead horse waiting for Israelis and Palestinians to come to an agreement, and sooner or later the only way to a lasting mid-east peace will be to go back to 1948 and impose binding international arbitration on both sides from that 1948 share basis.

Amen to that!

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
One becomes a Hamas supporter when one condems Israeli actions and ignores actions of the Hamas militants of playing by their own rules - ignoring the rules of war that one wants to apply to Israel.

I get it, unless you remain silent on the subject of Israel killing over 300 children, you are a terrorist or a supporter of terrorost activity. No criticism allowed. You really are a nice piece of work.

No your the piece of work. Nowhere does it say that israel killed over 300 children!
What it says is this--
New York - More than 300 children have been killed and 1 500 others injured by the Israel-Hamas fighting in Gaza Strip, the UN Children's Fund said on Wednesday.

Nowhere does it place the blame for all the killing with israel alone.
It takes two to tango!!

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
One becomes a Hamas supporter when one condems Israeli actions and ignores actions of the Hamas militants of playing by their own rules - ignoring the rules of war that one wants to apply to Israel.

I get it, unless you remain silent on the subject of Israel killing over 300 children, you are a terrorist or a supporter of terrorost activity. No criticism allowed. You really are a nice piece of work.

No your the piece of work. Nowhere does it say that israel killed over 300 children!
What it says is this--
New York - More than 300 children have been killed and 1 500 others injured by the Israel-Hamas fighting in Gaza Strip, the UN Children's Fund said on Wednesday.

Nowhere does it place the blame for all the killing with israel alone.
It takes two to tango!!

So the Palestinians resorted to killing their own children to give Israel bad press? Jesus, you people really are grasping at straws in your attempts to exonerate Israel.

 

[DanDaManJC]

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: Red Irish

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
One becomes a Hamas supporter when one condems Israeli actions and ignores actions of the Hamas militants of playing by their own rules - ignoring the rules of war that one wants to apply to Israel.

I get it, unless you remain silent on the subject of Israel killing over 300 children, you are a terrorist or a supporter of terrorost activity. No criticism allowed. You really are a nice piece of work.

No your the piece of work. Nowhere does it say that israel killed over 300 children!
What it says is this--
New York - More than 300 children have been killed and 1 500 others injured by the Israel-Hamas fighting in Gaza Strip, the UN Children's Fund said on Wednesday.

Nowhere does it place the blame for all the killing with israel alone.
It takes two to tango!!

So the Palestinians resorted to killing their own children to give Israel bad press? Jesus, you people really are grasping at straws in your attempts to exonerate Israel.

The problem itself is that the American media is heavily biased towards Israel. The general idea / disscussion of why and how this works is dissussed in this book. Wiki Amazon. Furthermore, you can read a critisim of Obama's approach to Isreal, from the same author, here.

I definitely think it's worth a read. You don't have to agree -- but the facts speak for themselves. Something Chomksy does that many others don't is that he, ::drumroll::, cites his sources which makes his arguments both easy to critique and analyze. So if you don't agree -- look up those sources and see them for yourself.

 

[Red Irish]

Originally posted by: DanDaManJC
The problem itself is that the American media is heavily biased towards Israel.

Of course it is. This is why we have clowns excusing the killing of over 300 children in this thread. We all know that there were terrorists amongst the dead, but the vast majority were simply normal people going about their day-to-day business: that's what happens in city centres, even city centres where terrorists are present.

The media has effectively reduced this to a black and white scenario wherein Israel is the good guy and the Palestinians are terrorists or supporters of terrorism. This is an appalling insult to our collective intelligence, but some people seem more than happy to buy into and disseminate this lie.

I come from a city that was subject to terrorist attacks on a daily basis for the most part of my life; however, at no point would I have advocated shelling those areas of the city where the terrorists were known to reside. The fact that terrorists hide amongst the civilian population does not mean that we should remove this strategic advantage by bombarding all and sundry. When you reach that point, you have become as bad as the terrorists you are combating.

I don't think any of the posters in this thread would have a problem condemning the Hamas rocket attacks on Israel; however, the fact that many posters are willing to defend Israel's bombardment of civilian areas illustrates double standards that can only have their root in the most heinous bigotry and ignorance.

 

[kylebisme]

Our medias' bias is certainly a problem, but in the case of Common Courtesy and JEDIYoda it goes much deeper. They are both dyed in the wool Zionists who will argue our media is biased against Israel whenever it presents even what slight criticism of Israel it occasionally does, and both have a very loose grip on reality in general.