Discussion
Mrr T said:
Do you expect Israel to hand over secret military documents to a commission, set up by a Malaysian pollution with a clear agenda, and no international standing.
As for a quote from Hillel Cohen my Grandmother said to never suck eggs its about as relevant.
Why are the documents still secret? As for a quote from Hillel Cohen my Grandmother said to never suck eggs its about as relevant.
The relevance of Cohen -- and the new Israeli historians -- is that they still can't get hold of 60 year old Israeli documents: they've had to develop different historical methods as a result of Israel's refusal to release stuff.
Or are you alleging that Cohen is an anti-Semite? He's a brick s
thouse of a man, I'd be very careful.Mrr T said:
As for the rest its just conjecture.
Utter horsest. It's borne out by just about all the reports. Mrr T said:
I do not have time to do any detailed research but when you say:
Pretty much expected that much from you -- sneer at what evidence there is, don't actually look at it. Mrr T said:
1. "Israelis shared a command centre with the Phalangists". From a purely military stand point even if they where physically in the same location from s security perceptive I am sure the Israel commanders would have ensured there was complete separation of operational commands.
Literally the same location. The top floor of a multi storey building. They could not only hear each other's conversations, but did. Translators were on hand. See the quote from Wikipaedia "Two hours after the first Phalangist force entered Shatilla camp a mixed group of Phalangists and Israeli officers were observing the attack from the roof of the forward command post when one of the militia men in the camp radioed his commander Hobeika asking what to do with 50 women and children who had been taken prisoner. Hobeika's reply was overheard by an Israeli officer, who testified that he said: "This is the last time you're going to ask me a question like that; you know exactly what to do." Other Phalangists on the roof started laughing. Amongst the Israelis there was Brigadier General Yaron, Divisional Commander, who asked Lieutenant Elul, his Chef de Bureau, what the laughter was about and Elul translated what Hobeika had said. Yaron then had a five minute conversation, in English, with Hobeika. What was said is unknown.[35][45]
At 11:00 pm the same evening a report was sent to the IDF headquarters in East Beirut, reporting the killings of 300 people, including civilians. The report was forwarded to headquarters in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, where it was seen by more than 20 senior Israeli officers.[33]
Later in the afternoon, a meeting was held between the Israeli Chief of Staff and the Phalangist staff. On Friday morning, the Israelis surrounding Sabra and Shatila ordered the Phalange to halt their operation, concerned about reports of a massacre.[35]
On 17 September, while Sabra and Shatila still were sealed off, a few independent observers managed to enter. Among them were a Norwegian journalist and diplomat Gunnar Flakstad, who observed Phalangists during their cleanup operations, removing dead bodies from destroyed houses in the Shatila camp.[46]
Many of the bodies found had been severely mutilated. Many boys had been castrated, some were scalped, and some had the Christian cross carved into their bodies.[47]
Janet Lee Stevens, an American journalist, later wrote to her husband, Dr. Franklin Lamb, "I saw dead women in their houses with their skirts up to their waists and their legs spread apart; dozens of young men shot after being lined up against an alley wall; children with their throats slit, a pregnant woman with her stomach chopped open, her eyes still wide open, her blackened face silently screaming in horror; countless babies and toddlers who had been stabbed or ripped apart and who had been thrown into garbage piles."[48]"
(which is pretty well attested to elsewhere).
Mrr T said:
5. "and, when they were, the Phalangists continued". So you blame Israel because the massacre continued even after they insisted it stopped.
Again, from the Israeli Kahan Commission:
"Similarly, it is clear from the course of events that when the reports began to arrive about the actions of the Phalangists in the camps, no proper heed was taken of these reports, the correct conclusions were not drawn from them, and no energetic and immediate action were taken to restrain the Phalangists and put a stop to their actions."
Emphasis mine.
The reports started coming in 2 hours or so after the Phalangists entered the camps. The massacre continued for at least 24 hours.
Edited by TheRealFingers99 on Tuesday 23 September 14:20
Edited by TheRealFingers99 on Tuesday 23 September 14:57
Edited by TheRealFingers99 on Tuesday 23 September 15:02
Edited by TheRealFingers99 on Tuesday 23 September 15:04
Mrr T said:
So your final support comes from the views of a US official and the UN.
Since the UN seems to spend much of its time condemning Israel but seems incapable of launching enquiries into Bosnia, Rwanda, Crimea, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, etc etc.I shall ignore there viewes.
Hang on, no-one said that the UN was perfect. We have had prosecutions with regard to Bosnia. The UN was involved in Iraq (but was ignored by Bush and Blair), the UN is heavily involved in Iran. Since the UN seems to spend much of its time condemning Israel but seems incapable of launching enquiries into Bosnia, Rwanda, Crimea, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, etc etc.I shall ignore there viewes.
If you really want Israel to be viewed in the same light as Syria and Iraq, to put Netanyahu up alongside Serbian fascists, well, it hardly speaks well of that poor little Western democracy out there in the Middle East.
Mrr T said:
Your view seems to be that if some one is prosecuted for murder the prosecutor should appoint the defence lawyer, the jury, the judge and choose the law.
Israel -- if you're thinking Kuala Lumpur -- had the right to provide legal representation and evidence, but chose to do neither. Mrr T said:
If the International Court of justice in the Hague ever becomes involved then I will expect Israel to cooperate.
Bring it on! Do these machinations and legal justifications look familiar ?
But this means arguing that Isis is equivalent to al-Qaida, even though the groups are split – logic that several critics in Congress, such as Virginia senator Tim Kaine, have argued is flawed and requires a fresh authorisation to fix.
Power reached for similar arguments in her letter to the UN, arguing that Tuesday’s separate attack on Khorasan rebels in Syria was also an act of self defence by the US due to the group’s closeness to al-Qaida.
“The United States has initiated military actions in Syria against al-Qaida elements in Syria known as the Khorosan Group to address terrorist threats that they pose to the United States and our partners and allies,” she wrote.
“Isil and other terrorist groups in Syria are a threat not only to Iraq but also to many other countries, including the United States and our partners in the region and beyond,” Power’s letter said.
Recent testimony by US intelligence and homeland security officials in Washington has acknowledged that Syrian groups such as Isis are not known to be planning any direct attacks on the US.
US ties itself in legal knots to cover shifting rationale for Syria strikes
But this means arguing that Isis is equivalent to al-Qaida, even though the groups are split – logic that several critics in Congress, such as Virginia senator Tim Kaine, have argued is flawed and requires a fresh authorisation to fix.
Power reached for similar arguments in her letter to the UN, arguing that Tuesday’s separate attack on Khorasan rebels in Syria was also an act of self defence by the US due to the group’s closeness to al-Qaida.
“The United States has initiated military actions in Syria against al-Qaida elements in Syria known as the Khorosan Group to address terrorist threats that they pose to the United States and our partners and allies,” she wrote.
“Isil and other terrorist groups in Syria are a threat not only to Iraq but also to many other countries, including the United States and our partners in the region and beyond,” Power’s letter said.
Recent testimony by US intelligence and homeland security officials in Washington has acknowledged that Syrian groups such as Isis are not known to be planning any direct attacks on the US.
US ties itself in legal knots to cover shifting rationale for Syria strikes
Russell Tribunal finds evidence of incitement to genocide, crimes against humanity in Gaza.
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/09/incitement-genocide-...
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/09/incitement-genocide-...
Interesting stuff from ex IDF grunt, now whistle blower and reporter Eran Efrati.
danoli777 said:
Russell Tribunal finds evidence of incitement to genocide, crimes against humanity in Gaza.
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/09/incitement-genocide-...
like they have any objective credibility...http://mondoweiss.net/2014/09/incitement-genocide-...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Tribunal
Scuffers said:
I think, once again, you have to state what you would consider objective. Maybe Netanyahu standing up in front of the TV cameras and saying "Yes, we did it!"? (But you'd probably argue that Hamas had infiltrated Mossad and dosed him with psychotropics.) [aside] Arguably more moral than Mossad poisoning Hamas, but still rather naughty.[/aside]
Certainly, and quite objectively, the Tribunal has no statutory authority. Certainly it has gotten up a lot of people's noses (just as the founders, Russell and Sartre did).
But the principle it was set out to uphold (from your Wikipaedia entry):
"If certain acts and violations of treaties are crimes, they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them. We are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us."
remains a fine one.
Scuffers said:
Yes, setup with good intentions, but look at the current members.
I don't see anyone on the current "jury" (the Wikipaedia list contains several people who died years ago) who I'd object to: a few lawyers with human rights backgrounds, a couple of musicians, a French Resistance fighter, Angela Davis, UN folk........For sure, the result was a foregone conclusion -- it had to be as Israel refused (again) to represent itself.
Some of the comments on the Mondoweiss feature are apposite.
TheRealFingers99 said:
...that section of an article being based on a translation from Palestinian Media Watch.Come on Fingers, you normally do better than that.
Try three weetabix in future.
Phil
Well, Muhammad Barakei is an Israeli MP. He's been convicted of thumping a settler, and not convicted of thumping an Israeli agent disguised as a Palestinian.
He's of Arab descent and the citation is to the militarily censored and highly Kosher Jerusalem Post.
So, where's the problem (or are you saying I shouldn't trust the Jerusalem Post)?
It would seem to be to Israel's advantage (as seen by the idiot Netanyahu at any rate) to be nice to ISIS (in so far as possible) so as to counter its former trading partner Iran (and Hezbollah and of course, Hamas).
Note how in his UN speech he posits Iran (wouldn't it be dreadful if someone in the Middle East challenged Israel's nuclear hegemony?) as the main enemy.
Note also that Hezbollah has been far more active against the ISIS-alikes (or such they will be if the US continues to lump al Quaida and ISIS all together) than Israel, whose only action so far seems to have been to shoot down a Syrian jet which entered "Israeli" airspace after bombing "bad" Syrian rebels.
He's of Arab descent and the citation is to the militarily censored and highly Kosher Jerusalem Post.
So, where's the problem (or are you saying I shouldn't trust the Jerusalem Post)?
It would seem to be to Israel's advantage (as seen by the idiot Netanyahu at any rate) to be nice to ISIS (in so far as possible) so as to counter its former trading partner Iran (and Hezbollah and of course, Hamas).
Note how in his UN speech he posits Iran (wouldn't it be dreadful if someone in the Middle East challenged Israel's nuclear hegemony?) as the main enemy.
Note also that Hezbollah has been far more active against the ISIS-alikes (or such they will be if the US continues to lump al Quaida and ISIS all together) than Israel, whose only action so far seems to have been to shoot down a Syrian jet which entered "Israeli" airspace after bombing "bad" Syrian rebels.
Edited by TheRealFingers99 on Tuesday 30th September 08:37
Transmitter Man said:
I think Israel has played the best card in staying out of the Syrian conflict other than to protect it's borders.
Not forgetting the very quiet humanitarian assistance given to injured Syrians in their field hospitals with the help of the UN forces stationed along the Golan.
Let's face it, it hasn't really even protected its boarders (even if you take the Golan as belonging to Israel) other than shooting down one plane and chucking back the odd shell in exchange for misdirected mortar rounds. Not forgetting the very quiet humanitarian assistance given to injured Syrians in their field hospitals with the help of the UN forces stationed along the Golan.
I've heard that they've treated other combatants, as well, not just "official" Syrians.
I'm really not sure how they're going to play this, if push comes to shove, but it's probably wise to avoid a war on 3 fronts!
Transmitter Man said:
I think Israel has played the best card in staying out of the Syrian conflict other than to protect it's borders.
Not forgetting the very quiet humanitarian assistance given to injured Syrians in their field hospitals with the help of the UN forces stationed along the Golan.
The Israeli overt actions have been low key, stay out of the way and let them slog it out, a wise decision.Not forgetting the very quiet humanitarian assistance given to injured Syrians in their field hospitals with the help of the UN forces stationed along the Golan.
I would be interested to know the covert Israeli part of the conflict, as I bet that would make great but very confusing reading, as the plethora of groups and alliances seems to be multiplying daily.
IDF's Gaza assault is to control Palestinian gas, avert Israeli energy crisis.
I'd completely missed that!
I'd completely missed that!
TheRealFingers99 said:
IDF's Gaza assault is to control Palestinian gas, avert Israeli energy crisis.
I'd completely missed that!
Israel would never do that, specifically target civilian infrastructure to increase civilian suffering. You should remember it takes great care to limit civilian suffering or deaths, all 2000 of them. It must be true, Mark Regev says so.I'd completely missed that!
Scuffers said:
if you believe that report, your even more gullible that I ever imagined.
how we will ever resolve the issues with stupid crap like that being published I will never know.
It is totally inconceivable that countries would go to war over resources, gas, oil or commodities, using either blatant lies or conveniently provided excuses, to justify their actions. That would be complete craziness, no sane leadership or democratic country would ever do that, only autocratic or theocratic countries do that.how we will ever resolve the issues with stupid crap like that being published I will never know.
QuantumTokoloshi said:
It is totally inconceivable that countries would go to war over resources, gas, oil or commodities, using either blatant lies or conveniently provided excuses, to justify their actions. That would be complete craziness, no sane leadership or democratic country would ever do that, only autocratic or theocratic countries do that.
don't be a dipstckIF Gaza was sitting on oil or gas, just how hard would it be to tap into these without touching Gaza soil?
think about it, Gaza is not that big, ever heard of horizontal drilling?
more to the point, the numbers quoted are minuscule in Gas terms, to the point even if these were somewhere uncontentious, I can't see a commercial oil co bothering to invest the money to get at them.
it smacks of somebody putting 2+2 and coming up with 4,000,000.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff