General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
JihadJane said:
RT's Abby Martin responds to the Israel's bombing of media buildings and targeting of journalists:

'Israel's War on Truth | Brainwash Update'

Click to expand...

"In case you are tired of hearing my parroted mindless rhetoric, here's the source of my mindless rhetoric saying the same nonsense I have been saying"

How can one watch this and not laugh?
Edited by kmortis: 
Removed personal comments


Also, people who start off by referring to "what you won't hear in the corporate media" are basically just saying "I don't have anything of substance to say".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Safe-Keeper said:
As a matter of fact, surveys consistently show that the Israeli populace is willing to surrender a considerable amount of land in exchange for peace. Equally consistently, this offer is rejected by HAMAS. Every Israeli withdrawal is followed up by harsher attacks from Palestine.

Giving up ground is interpreted by HAMAS as appeasement. It only makes them more aggressive.
Click to expand...

No argument that Hamas refuse to give up land and that they are wrong in refusing to do so but then again Israel refuse to give back East Jerusalem so there's a line that both sides are unwilling to cross.

My (admittedly skewed) view is that Israel is indeed prepared to engage in a land swap but the land they are willing to give up (tracts of countryside) although the same size as the land they want in return (East Jerusalem and surrounding environs, the settlements and land around them) is of a higher value.

That said, I believe that the Israelis are genuine in their offer (as opposed to making an offer they know will be refused to score political points), it's just that it's unacceptable.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
"In case you are tired of hearing my parroted mindless rhetoric, here's the source of my mindless rhetoric saying the same nonsense I have been saying"

How can one watch this and not laugh? And I bet you ironically hate Ann Coulter? I sometimes have to wonder if Jane is actually serious. It's hard to believe anyone would actually act like this.

Also, people who start off by referring to "what you won't hear in the corporate media" are basically just saying "I don't have anything of substance to say".
Click to expand...

Do you support the Israeli military's targeting of media buildings and journalists?
 
JihadJane said:
Do you support the Israeli military's targeting of media buildings and journalists?
Click to expand...

You mean the Hamas command center? Yes. That's what happens when you use a media center to command attacks. However unlike Hamas, Israel phones those in the building to warn them so they could evacuate.

Do you support a military using civilian facilities for planning attacks on innocent civilians?

Do you not have any problem with Hamas spending all this money on a "media center" for foreign press but none on building shelters for it's civilians? Of course you don't. It's win/win for them. They carry out military operations in the center knowing it will get targeted and then they get people like you to act like sheep claiming that Israel is targeting the media. Of course this only works if people like you conveniently leave out most of the important information.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
You mean the Hamas command center? Yes. That's what happens when you use a media center to command attacks. However unlike Hamas, Israel phones those in the building to warn them so they could evacuate.
Click to expand...

Please present your evidence that either al-Shawa building or Al-Shawa Wa Hassri Tower were "Hamas command centers". Israeli war criminals threatened to demolish the entire building.

Attacks against civilian targets constitute war crimes.

“Even if the targeted media support Hamas, this does not in any way legitimize the attacks. We call for a transparent investigation into the circumstances of these air strikes. Attacks on civilian targets are war crimes and serious violations of the Geneva Conventions. Those responsible must be identified.” - Reporters Without Borders

According to Protocol 1, Article 79 of the Geneva Convention, it is a war crime to target journalists.

I also notice that you haven't said anything about the Israeli military targeting other civilian infrastructure.

Do you support a military using civilian facilities for planning attacks on innocent civilians?
Click to expand...

Which civilian facilities are you talking about? Please present your evidence.

Do you not have any problem with Hamas spending all this money on a "media center" for foreign press but none on building shelters for it's civilians? Of course you don't. It's win/win for them. They carry out military operations in the center knowing it will get targeted and then they get people like you to act like sheep claiming that Israel is targeting the media. Of course this only works if people like you conveniently leave out most of the important information.
Click to expand...

Nice conspiracy theory. Please present your evidence that it has any substance.

Please also present your evidence that Hamas were carrying out military operations in the targeted buildings. Journalists cars were also targeted. Please present your evidence that Hamas were carrying out military operations in these journalists' cars.



'Tu quoque fallacy'
 
However unlike Hamas, Israel phones those in the building to warn them so they could evacuate.
Click to expand...
JJ knows this. In her world, Israel warns civilians to terrorize them:boggled:.
 
JihadJane said:
Please present your evidence that either al-Shawa building or Al-Shawa Wa Hassri Tower were "Hamas command centers". Israeli war criminals threatened to demolish the entire building.
Click to expand...
The article itself states the reason the IDF says it targeted those buildings. Hamas was using those buildings as communication centers. Notably, the article, despite having spoken to journalists stationed in the building, found nobody to deny the truth of Israel's allegations.

IDF specifically states it did not target journalists. It targeted a building that constituted a legitimate target under the Geneva Convention that it knew had journalists within. That is not a violation of the Geneva Convention and does not contribute "targeting journalists". Otherwise it would be a violation of the Geneva Convention to target any armed forces that were known to be travelling with an embedded journalist.

If you believe that it is a violation of the Geneva Convention to target a military target that also houses journalists, I would like to know what provision of the Geneva Convention prohibits such behavior. If you believe that the building was not used as a communications center by Hamas, I would like to see your evidence. I have looked for any confirmation or denial that this building was used by Hamas as a communications hub or center, and found no such denials.
 
Last edited:
marksman said:
The article itself states the reason the IDF says it targeted those buildings. Hamas was using those buildings as communication centers. Notably, the article, despite having spoken to journalists stationed in the building, found nobody to deny the truth of Israel's allegations.

IDF specifically states it did not target journalists. It targeted a building that constituted a legitimate target under the Geneva Convention that it knew had journalists within. That is not a violation of the Geneva Convention and does not contribute "targeting journalists". Otherwise it would be a violation of the Geneva Convention to target any armed forces that were known to be travelling with an embedded journalist.

If you believe that it is a violation of the Geneva Convention to target a military target that also houses journalists, I would like to know what provision of the Geneva Convention prohibits such behavior. If you believe that the building was not used as a communications center by Hamas, I would like to see your evidence. I have looked for any confirmation or denial that this building was used by Hamas as a communications hub or center, and found no such denials.
Click to expand...

This post will be overlooked, or hand-waved away with rhetoric.

Otherwise, great post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom