You and the following countries call it genocide: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Malaysia, Brazil, South Africa, Venezuela. ❌
Me and the following countries say it is not genocide: USA, UK, the EU, NATO, Germany, France, Australia, Norway, Japan, and Canada. ✅
E: These downvotes are called cognitive dissonance. Your brains literally cannot let you recognize I am right because ya'll are so dug in. Canada disagrees with you. Doesn't that throw up a red flag that maybe you got tricked?
The International Court of Justice has found it is "plausible" that Israel has committed acts that violate the Genocide Convention. In a provisional order delivered by the court's president, Joan Donoghue, the court said Israel must ensure "with immediate effect" that its forces not commit any of the acts prohibited by the convention.
Further you are using a variation of the Argumentum ad populum logical fallacy. It's immaterial which countries agree or disagree. In the end it's the court that matters.
Ad populum fallacy refers to a claim that something is true simply because that’s what a large number of people believe. In other words, if many people believe something to be true, then it must be true.
I disagree. International affairs, coalitions and who supports it matters very much. Do you have an explanation for why you are siding with Iran and every other alt right theocratic shithole? Oh, you think in this instance they are beneveolent and concerned for human rights, and not just furthering Hamas's strategy of human shields and lawfare?
I disagree. Happy to be proven wrong. Pretty much all Israel has to do is point to legit military targets and their record of effectively warning civilians.
Israel is prosecuting its own people for war crimes and incitement as appropriate.
Not much more than that is required by international law.
Sealioning refers to the disingenuous action by a commenter of making an ostensible effort to engage in sincere and serious civil debate, usually by asking persistent questions of the other commenter. These questions are phrased in a way that may come off as an effort to learn and engage with the subject at hand, but are really intended to erode the goodwill of the person to whom they are replying, to get them to appear impatient or to lash out, and therefore come off as unreasonable.
No, I did not know of these exact quotes. I know the Likud party is utter shit, authoritarian trash, and they should be voted out. I have a lot of faith that will happen especially if Israel fails to rebuild the housing and infrastructure. It's a democracy so I can have faith that the better ideals will win out. Israel just had an election not that long ago and Likud barely won.
I have zero faith Gaza will ever embrace voting as a form of government. When was Gaza's last election? Seems pretty reasonable to want to isolate political and economic capital in Gaza from the West Bank, for which I personally support statehood after benchmarks for anti corruption and anti terrorism efforts.
Thanks for admitting your mistake. It's actuall refreshing. Next step is actually challenging your own views after being confronted with facts.
I have zero faith Gaza will ever embrace voting as a form of government.
Well, that's funny... given that Hamas' rise to power was during/right after an election. They already embraced that, long ago.
Seems pretty reasonable to want to isolate political and economic capital in Gaza from the West Bank,
Why? What's reasonable about disallowing an ethnic group to have their own self-determination and representation in their own lands? the same lands you have plundered and renamed, and who you (Israel, not you) put under an apartheid rule... it's only reasonable if you want to continue ethnically cleansing them and preventing them from ever taking part in "democratic" Israel or in their own Palestinian elections.
For any people to have their own self determination they must have elections. The ideology of Hamas and it's ideological allies is antithetical to elections and for that matter to Israel.
Yes, it's the Socratic method of rhetoric. I'm not pretending to try and fool you, but to illustrate my point. Are you pretending not to know to try and fool someone, or just don't want to answer because it will illustrate my point?
I find the diplomatic and intelligence consensuses of the US, EU, UK, NATO, France, Germany, Japan, Poland, Norway, and Canada to have more credibility than your links to Human Rights Watch.
What's more likely, Canada got this one wrong or that you got tricked?
Hamas's strategy is to trick you by using human shields and exaggerated civilian casualties: lying to people about whether to evacuate, holding people against their will, convincing them to willingly stay in harm's way to die for the cause. This is how Hamas operates and has been operating for decades. I don't need to spell it out with links because it's easily verifiable information.
The idea that Israel uses human shields is absolute lunacy. Shields for what, where?
That has more to do with the history of Global North/South and Neocolonialism. Not the reality on the ground or what's morally right.
I've already linked info to what extent there is evidence Hamas uses human shields. You're also referencing this call, no coercion.. Well, here's some information that is verifiable. Or you should look into some New Historians, they know far more than me.
Yeah bud I know. Until October 7, I would have agreed with you. The tunnels are forfeit now. They have to go. Sucks that the Palestinian people let Hamas undermine their homes and schools with unsafe tunnels and then used them to launch one indiscriminate terrorist attack on Israel after another. October 7 was the end of the line for Hamas.
Because the people didn't get rid of Hamas and the tunnels and put an end to the terrorism themselves, now the tunnels have to be destroyed by the neighbor. If they call ahead and tell everyone to get away from the building, that's valid under any legal or moral standard for warfare.
Nothing I've said excuses the actual war crimes committed by groups or individuals in the IDF. Israel will prosecute them pretty fairly and fairly aggressively. Maybe they might even throw the fucking book at them to help shut down some of these wildly exaggerated narratives.
While I don't think there is evidence of genocide or genocidal intent, that could change if, after destroying Hamas and the tunnels, Israel were to do things such as fail to rebuild the housing, hospitals, and schools it has destroyed in order to get to the tunnels. That's part of Israel's duty as a neighbor: Before October 7, I viewed Israel's occupation and control over Gaza as illegal annexation. But the tunnels are forfeit now and since the very foundation of the cities themselves make the ground above structurally inhabitable, now I consider it irredentism. The Palestinian people have no capacity to govern or rebuild without their neighbor's good will, at this point.
As a Democracy, I have hope that the Israeli people are people of good will and will make right what can be restored.
You're excusing the war crimes of Israel starving the people of Gaza of food, water, electricity, and basic medical care while they bomb residential homes, critical public infrastructure, safe zones, and refugee camps. The decades of brutal occupation, the deprivation of basic human rights of Palestinians.
You're failing to recognize how groups like Hamas exist in the first place and you're failing to recognize how this repeated forced displacement, unending bombing, and deprivation of fundamental needs is not how those groups go away.
The tunnels are a result of the blockade blocking necessities along with Israel controlling water, electricity, sea, air, movement, etc.
The one where Hamas isn't running from the Palestinian people in utter fear for having caused and prolonged their suffering under things such as the dual use policy. Instead, Hamas is more popular than ever. It's inexcusable. Their ideolgy is one of far right authoritarianism, which makes your profile commentary an absolute joke. Again, wondering why you're here siding with the diplomatic corps of Iran and North Korea, against those of Canada and Japan, France and America. Truly bizarre how twisted up you are.
I support Palestinian emancipation, not the actions of Hamas. You're confusing geopolitical interests of countries that want to weaken the global power of the US and humanitarian interests in Palestinian people to have basic human rights. I guess Ireland is also siding with North Korea if your view is that simplistic. Most of those countries you mentioned just want to weaken the US foothold in the middle east and soft power and don't have a genuine interest in Palestinian emancipation. You're the one getting it twisted
Have the civilians been giving warnings to evacuate again and again? Yes. Do they stay behind to die as voluntary martyrs to draw sympathy? Yes.
Those are the facts. And they aren't doing because they want to "see America weakened" or whatever bs you think you know about. The are doing it because the self determination of individuals through representative government is antithetical to their entire sense of identity and being, you know, rich customs such as stoning women to death for learning too much math and other atrocities.
You think Palestinians like to get killed for Internet fame? That makes no sense, you have no idea what a martyr is here, it's anyone who dies from the occupying forces.
Your argument boils down to "it's their fault they died because they wanted to" and "they deserve it because of their backward views" none of which are based in reality. I've given you a huge variety of sources you can easily verify on your own accord. Yet you consider that a 'trick' unlike the official IDF narrative supported by many western media outlets despite a record of falsified information. Even Biden has literally repeated IDF talking points such as the 40 beheaded babies, until it was quickly proven false and walked back.
Yes, we Palestinians celebrate resisting colonial oppression, and even though a "martyr" is essentially an Islamic term used to describe people who die fighting the enemy, we Palestinians use it for any and every Palestinian of every religion or of no religion out of respect for their struggle, whether they die while fighting or in their homes alongside their whole family.
Yes I know, and glorify them as heroes for the cause. Does Hamas not force people to stay and be killed? Does Hamas not lie to people about whether they are safe, about whether to evactuate? Do not some Palestinians knowingly ignore warnings so that they can be "martyred?"
I don't think Hamas forces people to stay in places to be killed lol
Do some Palestinians ignore warnings? Yeah I think some decided they'd rather die together as a family with dignity and not risk the risky roads to the "safe zone" and die instead on the streets. I hope you never have to make such a choice in your life...
But no, I don't think it's a widespread phenomena to stay in harm's way... Except when Israel put harm all around you.
It's funny because it's literally Israel that orders people into a safe zone then bombs them there...
I hope I never have to make such a choice either. Hamas really sold out every person in Gaza with those tunnels and terrorist attacks, huh?
Does Hamas lie to people to trick them into staying, yes or no? And if yes (it is yes), why?
Orders them into a safe zone, *then calls them on the phone again before the bombing, you mean. *Bombs a military target under the building, not the "them." That's the evidence.
In Palestine, the term shahid for "martyr" is used to mean any person who was killed by an aggressor, whether targeted or untargeted, and regardless of religion. Researchers Neil Whitehead and Nasser Abufarha state that the shahid concept of a victim who falls at the hands of an oppressor became a symbol of the First Intifada and was congruent with the political dynamics of the time when efforts were made to lobby international support for Palestinians’ pursuit for independence.
You have all the links to learn about the history of Israel practicing Settler Colonialism and the creation/maintainance of an Apartheid State. You choose to ignore them
Hey when you can't make an argument call me a racist, which is ridiculous.
I supported statehood for Gaza through October 6. I protested the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
They are not at all comparable to this war right here, though. This war began with an a terrorist-invasion of mass shootings and indiscriminate rocket attacks.
Israel is in fact a "flawed democracy" by the consensus of political scientists. Still a democracy.
My logic is that a military target and a fair warning is sufficient to negate any charge of intentional bombing of civilians and therefore there is no genocide taking place in Israel.
Seperate is the question of the morality of proceeding with a bombing mission that will knowingly kill civilians, even if you've warned them. That's a question for the ballot box.
My logic as to the question of genocide the same logic as every major western power and NATO. My view is hardly unique and whole hard to swallow, not flawed, if I may say so myself.
My logic is that a military target and a fair warning is sufficient to negate any charge of intentional bombing of civilians and therefore there is no genocide taking place in Israel.
Too bad it's still a war crime to bomb a hospital in this way, even if the IDF (notice how it's them who decide what is a target and what is not) say it's a military target. Also too bad that the "warnings" you're talking about are minutes, chaotic, and don't reach all citizens especially since Israel keeps cutting off internet and cellular. They don't do it adequately, on purpose, and frankly it seems like people have been trying to show you this but you dismiss their facts and evidence as "being tricked".
It's not a war crime if there's a legit military target and a reasonably tailored warning.
People have tried and failed to show me where the IDF has failed to warn. Read the articles people have shared with me, and articles that you read, carefully. Can you identify the date and location of the bombing? As in South Africa's complaint, the most sensational and horrific stories are attributed to anonymous "reports" or even straight from Hamas.
My followon thought process is simple: when the "reports" do not include material information sufficient to fact check the story, I color in the blanks based on the evidence from the reports I can fact check. And every single time I have fact checked one of these horrific stories, it turns out to be not so horrific because I've been able to find attributed sources describing the warnings, sometimes including audio recordings and screenshots, of the warnings that the decedents received, as well as the IDF explanation.
And the next part is simple too: I find the information shared by IDF and Hamas so incongruent that it can only mean that one side is completely lying, and I find that Hamas is the liar because: Hamas never admits it's fighter are among the dead, and never admits that it's weapons or infrastructure are in or under the destroyed buildings. It stands to reason that with tens of thousands of rocket attacks and hundreds of miles of tunnels, the air strikes must sometimes be killing Hamas fighters or infrastructure. Therefore, I find Hamas not credible.
I could still find Israel to be not credible, however it has anti corruption practices in place and competent, legitimate law enforcement and military justice apparatuses, under the command of elected representatives, and those institutions are working to prosecute incitement to genocide and war crimes. Whereas, Hamas openly embraces corruption, social crimes, and war crimes; rather than prosecuting criminals that target civilians; that is Hamas's objective and in Gaza people are rewarded for doing so, not punished.
To ignore the above reasoning, and nevertheless give credit to unattributed reports or Hamas's reports, seems like a trick, to me.
It’s not a war crime if there’s a legit military target and a reasonably tailored warning.
It is when it's disproportionate and kills tens of civilians and endangers their lives further by destroying infrastructure... and the "reasonably tailored warning" is not reasonable nor tailored.
That's where we disagree, it seems.
People have tried and failed to show me where the IDF has failed to warn
Let's see you refute these by anything other than the equivalent of "Trust me, bro, the IDF said so!"
The Washington Post: "A sniper from the Israel Defense Forces shot the women “without warning” and “in cold blood” Saturday, the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem, an ecclesiastical office for the Latin Catholics in the region, said in a statement earlier. The two were sheltering at the Holy Family Parish, where the majority of Christian families in Gaza have taken refuge during the war, it said."
Euronews: Other video showed the chaotic aftermath in the hospital - among those present was Mohammad Lafy, who survived the mosque strike. "We were sitting in the house, they hit the mosque directly next to the house without warning," he said.
France24: The campaign on the territory run by Islamist group Hamas has killed at least 230 Palestinians, including 65 children, Gaza health authorities say, and displaced tens of thousands from their homes. Many bereaved relatives say their family members are being bombed without warning, while others say their telephones have rung, but they were not given enough notice. This was the case on Saturday for Jawad Mehdi, the owner of Jala Tower in Gaza City that was until Saturday home to the offices of two foreign media outlets. Mehdi said an Israeli intelligence officer warned him he had one hour to ensure the building was evacuated, and his plea for "10 extra minutes", broadcast live on television, was denied.
I think what you do is call them "reports" when they collide with your view matching the IDF, but you call it "truth" when it's an IDF report, an army that literally violates international and humanitarian law all the time with almost perfect impunity. Please...
I could still find Israel to be not credible, however it has anti corruption practices in place and competent, legitimate law enforcement and military justice apparatuses, under the command of elected representatives, and those institutions are working to prosecute incitement to genocide and war crimes.
This cannot be true with 75 years of documented fucking Apartheid and ethnic cleansing. You're not being honest if you ignore their human rights violations detailed by Amnesty, B'Tselem, the UN, WHO, etc, etc, etc...
You're doing the same thing again with the half truths and exaggeration.
The first link is about one person being shot. I can't read the whole thing but would if I could.
The second link talks about two explosions. One in North Gaza killed twenty people four days ago, cannot identify the specific location other than "a roundabout in Gaza City." The article doesn't say anything about whether or not there was a warning. The only statement from IDF is that they are investigating. It takes a few days for one hand to know what the other is doing with regard to IDF statements on missions it has conducted. I'll try and keep an eye out and see if more info comes out. The second explosion killed five people at a mosque at Rafah. A neighbor who survived heard the blast and said he was not warned. I see only three outlets reporting this bombing, and it seems Euronews has copy and pasted the story from Qatari and UAE state media. No statement from the IDF as far as I can find yet. I don't see how this is sufficient information to draw conclusions.
The third link is literally about a guy being warned, evacuating his entire building, and no civilians being killed, as a result of the warning, back 2021.
If it's foolish of me to trust Israel's institutions, it's still more foolish to trust Gaza's institutions.
I bolded them for you. There's not much more I can do. 🤷
If it’s foolish of me to trust Israel’s institutions, it’s still more foolish to trust Gaza’s institutions.
Gaza's institutions according to you: any news outlet that's not the IDF, including France24, the BBC, the CNN, The Guardian, AP, Al-Jazeera... and certainly all human rights organizations like B'Tselem or Doctors Without Borders, and also the personal testimonies of any Palestinian in Gaza, except if they agree with the IDF
Islamic fundamentalists, of which Hamas is included, along with its patron states, Iran and Qatar. I'm exaggerating about the stoning for rhetorical purposes, but not by much.
You know who I'm talking about, right around this region here: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A_map_showing_countries_where_public_stoning_is_judicial_or_extrajudicial_form_of_punishment.SVG#mw-jump-to-license
You claimed that they shoot women for learning math despite there actually being women in Hamas.
You then claimed that you just exaggerated, but only to make the connection between radical Islamism and Hamas.
Then when the evidence you showed doesn't show Hamas stoning anyone nor adopting the kind of Islam we'd expect of ISIS or the Taliban, you jump to a totally different example with a sassy "Anyhow!"
The point you're making about Hamas is fine: they are awful dictators, they treat people who oppose them like that. But what I'd like to know is why you are trying to generalize and paint Hamas in a different picture. Also, playing on Islamophobic tropes... interesting, why? They already suck enough, you just have to say real examples directly. And on top of that, almost no one on lemmy will like Hamas or support them in any way, yet in every discussion with you, it starts to be clear that you simply converge to Hamas even though we all dislike them just as much as you do. But that wasn't good enough maybe?
The point you're making about Hamas is fine: they are awful dictators, they treat people who oppose them like that. *But what I'd like to know is why you are trying to generalize and paint Hamas in a different picture.
Please excuse my ignorance if I said anything you feel was inaccurate. Certainly not my intention to be wrong about anything. Hamas's ideological origins did not arise with the founding of Hamas™ in 1987.
It's an ideology of Sunni Islamism, which is itself an ideology of Sharia law and Islamic separtism, nationalism, supremacy, and violent oppression of anyone that some some unelected cleric or imamate unilaterally says are "the infidels." And that would largely be fine with me if it wasn't part of an international coalition of far right authoritarian theocracies bent on one missiom: bleeding out the west using any means necessary including indiscriminate attacks on civilians, suicide bombings, until it can get its hands on nuclear weapons and "destroy the West for good." It includes virtually all militant Islamists and arise from pan-Islamism.
It is an ideological alliance that can be fairly lumped together for some purposes. It's not just a total coincidence that this coalition constitutes most of countries supporting South Africa's application to the UN, many of whom are state sponsors of terrorism, including support for Hamas, as well as other terrorist groups. As I understand it, ISIS and Hamas have virtually identical ideologies with the exception being as to who should be the head of the snake, Iran or the Caliphate. Both organizations are indistinguishable as to their willingings to target civilians, ya know, terrorism, and their desire to bring death to all infidels. Both groups are adherents of jihad.
I'm not saying they are the same, I'm saying they are ideological allies to a point, and that point is well within the bounds of intolerance to western civilization, once they are acting like imperialists I mean.
That's not to say that imperialism is only okay when the West does it. Rather, it's to say that it took all humanity including the West thousands of years to come up with government of the people and by the people rather than by some king or some imaginary magicical sky man, and damn it all to hell if decent people fail to stop us from falling back into the dark ages.
Yes it's true. The UK is not trick averse, as with Brexit. A lot of people there, as in America, are angry want to see the violence stopped. I am too. I just don't think the violence should stop until Hamas is gone and the area can be rebuilt safely.
It seems clear to me why Irish leadership has more sympathy with Hamas than than folks in the UK. Do you need me to explain their history?
No they cannot defeat Hamas using strategic bombing alone. The strategy is evolving. Already the bombings have slowed way down. Pretty soon it will be man to man combat followed by at least a few years of martial law during reconstruction.
I don't see any other way forward in Gaza in the short term. Do you? It will look awful for a while but with light at the end of the tunnel. The foundations of the three largest cities were turned to Swiss Cheese, and are completely uninhabitable from a structural standpoint. I imagine the cities must essentially be paved over and rebuilt.
The tunnels are unprecedented. I don't know that anyone knows what it looks like or how they will deal with pressing concerns such as restoring arable soil. I know Palestinians in Gaza have no institutions in place to address any of these concerns. Hamas should have thought of these innocent people who would suffer the reconstruction before it sold out their foreseeable futures to kill 1,300 Israeli civilians and first repsonders. I know Hamas was super popular in Palestine on October 8.
I've said that the Israeli people are going to need to accept their obligation to restore Gaza and its people and that's going to start with the upcoming elections and whether the Likud party maintains its narrow margin. I have hope they will do the right thing.
I don’t see any other way forward in Gaza in the short term. Do you?
Literally a fucking ceasefire.
It will look awful for a while but with light at the end of the tunnel.
Except for the Palestinians who needlessly had to die
The foundations of the three largest cities were turned to Swiss Cheese, and are completely uninhabitable from a structural standpoint.
Thanks to Israel.
I imagine the cities must essentially be paved over and rebuilt.
Literally admitting that Israel destroyed homes and infrastructure: a fucking war crime.
Hamas should have thought of these innocent people who would suffer the reconstruction before it sold out their foreseeable futures to kill 1,300 Israeli civilians and first repsonders. I know Hamas was super popular in Palestine on October 8.
Would you like just for one second in your life hold Israel (a so-called democracy) up to the same standards you hold Hamas? If Hamas can't and shouldn't kill 1,300 Israeli civilians (btw like 1/3 or something were military personnel, and the number was revised down to "1000+" whatever that means), then Israel shouldn't do the barbaric crap they are doing now that I have no words for.
Give them rights... why is this so hard for Israel?!?!!? Why is their "self-determination" tied to the complete erasure and genocide of another group of people?!?!?!
Eh screw it I'm out, I'm done, like done with this for good. I gave you a chance, said to myself that this guy/gal have some hope for scepticism in them. I think I was wrong.
It's not tied to any erasure, except of Hamas. And nobody is going to miss it after it's gone. My skepticism and willingness to admit when I'm wrong about somethinf is evident in my post history and my good faith discussions with you. Regards.
But aren't most of those countries in your list countries with a colonial history?
So, if you argue that we should draw conclusions based on which countries agree or disagree with the genocide charge, then surely you can see how this list of countries is actually argument against that? you know, given that most of those countries on your list were colonial or committed some kind of war crime or human rights violation in the past that they took ages to admit, hence not trustworthy when commenting on genocide claims?
Based on your own logic, would you really trust France or the UK to comment on this situation where we have a colonial racist nation plundering the goods of another and grabbing their lands?
Or perhaps Canada, who we now know committed genocide against the indigenous population?
Yes they are, most all of them. There's nothing flawed about it. Despite their colonial pasts everyone of these countries has embraced democracy, which is itself the greatest and most precious thing humankind has ever achieved. It took humans thousands of years to realize ourselves but we can be set back to the dark ages in a few bad years if authoritarian theocracies and Islamic fundamentalism achieve their goals of "death to America" and "death to Israel" and all that horseshit.
I'm not siding with Canada that forced out indigenous people and kidnapped their kids. I'm talking about Canada right now. NATO right now. America right now. All standing up against a movement that desires a new world order led by Russia, North Korea, and Iran, right now. Nah, I'll stick with the people who have mostly voted themselves away from colonialism and sectarian violence.
This is what pro-Hamas news coverage calls "human shields":
With the 'early warning' procedure the Israeli army would force local Palestinians to approach the homes of militants and tell them to surrender.
That is what Israel outlawed.
That's a pretty loose definition of human shields. Hamas literally surrounds themselves with dozens or hundreds of people and builds military infrastructure under their homes.
With the ‘early warning’ procedure the Israeli army would force local Palestinians to approach the homes of militants and tell them to surrender.
That is what Israel outlawed.
Which part of this is acceptable to you? Which part of forcing a civilian Palestinian to enter a military area or battle zone is acceptable to you?
Here are some examples of Israel using Palestinians as a human shield (either under the definition or not):
"In 2004, a 13-year-old boy, Muhammed Badwan, was photographed tied to an Israeli police vehicle in the West Bank village of Biddu being used as a shield to deter stone-throwing protesters." source: Wikipedia source from below)
"On Friday, 13 May 2022, at around 6:00 A.M., Israeli troops, including Special Police Unit forces, entered the al-Hadaf neighborhood in Jenin. They stopped by the home of the extended Mer'eb family, blew up the door of Muhammad and Manal Mer'eb’s apartment on the first floor, and called for the couple’s son Mahmoud (20) to come out. The parents came out with three of their children – ‘Ahd (16), Fares (9) and 'Abd a-Rahman (4). Mahmoud stayed in the apartment. Two of Muhammad's brothers, their mother Khairiyah (64), and their wives and children – 12 people in total – stayed in their apartments on the top floor." Shortly after the family members came outside, armed Palestinians began firing at the forces. An exchange of fire ensued, in which Mahmoud Mer'eb also participated, firing from inside the apartment. After about three hours, the family members on the top floor also came outside, and then the forces fired at least six missiles at the house. One of the armed Palestinians, Daoud Zubeideh, a resident of Jenin Refugee Camp, and Special Police Unit commander Noam Raz sustained critical injuries in the exchange of fire. Both later died of their wounds. Testimonies collected by B'Tselem's field researcher indicate that during their attempt to draw Mahmoud outside, the forces used his parents, his sister ‘Ahd and his grandmother as human shields: they stood his father Muhammad and his sister ‘Ahd between the military jeeps and the armed Palestinians who were firing at them, leaving the two unprotected and exposed to gunfire; they ordered his mother Manal to go into the house – which was at the center of the exchange of fire – in order to persuade Mahmoud to come out and bring them the military robot they had sent towards the house; and finally, after Manal failed at the task they had assigned her, they ordered his grandmother to go inside, too, to try and convince Mahmoud to turn himself in. source: B'Tselem
Or this one caught on video: "DURA, West Bank, Jan 16 (Reuters) - A Palestinian shop owner said Israeli troops used him as a human shield to protect themselves during a raid on the town of Dura in the occupied West Bank." source: Reuters
According to B'tselem, the IDF repeatedly used Palestinians as human shields. This practice became military policy during the Second Intifada, and was only dropped when Adalah challenged the practice before Israel's High Court of Justice in 2002. However, the IDF persisted in using Palestinians in its 'neighbor procedure', whereby people picked at random were made to approach the houses of suspects and persuade them to surrender, a practice which arguably placed the former's lives in danger. The court ruled in October 2005 "that any use of Palestinian civilians during military actions is forbidden, including the 'prior warning procedure'." (link below)
I get it. Yeah, those are awful and I'm glad Israel outlawed such conduct.
So I'm 2004 we've got one bootlicker MP assaulting his single teenage ward by tying him to the jeep. Horrible judgment.
In 2022 two prisoners were left in the front of some police cars while their family members started firing at the police, and they forced the mother to go inside the house to try and persuade the shooters to surrender (and retrieve a robot). The three were unharmed.
In 2016 the shop owner was arrested and then the two soldiers walked behind him through a crowd of rock throwers instead of one in front, one behind, which is how a prisoner should be transported with two escorts.
That's five people and your last article, which regardless of the website contains insufficient information to fact check the "reports" and is therefore not credible.
I'm talking about Human shields like in on October 18 in Northern Gaza when Hamas sent out a massive social media campaign falsely telling Palestinians to remain in their homes. Also when Hamas does things like, ya know, build a massive tunnel network to do terrorism underneath the homes of 3,600 people.
I'll grant you your loose definition of "human shields" for the five people you've described and where there is five j assume there is a hundred. It's been outlawed. I wonder if anyone did a follow up to these stories to see if the police/soldiers involved after the change in law were held accountable. Still, Im talking about something materially different.
In 2022 two prisoners were left in the front of some police cars while their family members started firing at the police, and they forced the mother to go inside the house to try and persuade the shooters to surrender (and retrieve a robot). The three were unharmed.
Here is some of her testimony:
I was terrified, especially when some bullets fired by the Palestinians hit the jeep, maybe five bullets. The shooting intensified, and I ducked because I was afraid of being hit, but the officer in the jeep shouted at me to stand up and raise my head.
You also claim that they were prisoners. Instead, they were Muhammad (the father) and his sister ‘Ahd (aged 16).
They threatened them with demolishing their house if they don't cooperate as human shields:
I heard loud blasts and later realized they were the missiles the Border Police fired at our house. One of the officers pressed a phone to my ear and told me I had a call. There was an ISA agent on the line. He wanted me to persuade Mahmoud to turn himself in and threatened that otherwise, they'd bring the house down on top of him.
You are deliberately rephrasing it to make it sound less awful but it's not working...
I’ll grant you your loose definition of “human shields” for the five people you’ve described and where there is five j assume there is a hundred.
ROFL
Palestinian's and human rights org's definition of Israel using human shields: IDF soldiers grab them and tie them to a truck or force them to be in a cross-fire or approach items that may be bombs or go into the homes of terrorists, totally fine!
Israel's definition of Hamas using human shields: literally a Gazan just making food in their home while their daughter plays in the next room... by simply existing in their own house.
These people are five examples of survivors who lived in horror, human rights organizations tried to document their plight. These are classic examples of the use of human shields (unlike 'proximate shielding' which is actually not a textbook example of human shield use). Classic examples and you still can't see it.
Edit:
So I’m 2004 we’ve got one bootlicker MP assaulting his single teenage ward by tying him to the jeep. Horrible judgment.
So a confirmed use of human shields.
In 2022 two prisoners were left in the front of some police cars while their family members started firing at the police, and they forced the mother to go inside the house to try and persuade the shooters to surrender (and retrieve a robot). The three were unharmed.
So a confirmed use of human shields.
In 2016 the shop owner was arrested and then the two soldiers walked behind him through a crowd of rock throwers instead of one in front, one behind, which is how a prisoner should be transported with two escorts.
So a confirmed use of human shields.
It's not "a loose case of human shield use" because you rephrase it into "walked behind him through a crowd of rock throwers"...
By this logic, murder is just "some knife that found itself thrown into a man's chest". Fucking hell, dude... the lengths you go to to make the IDF look okay... I'm starting to wonder, is this psychological? Seriously, like not trying to make you look bad or anything, but... you're driving totally rational people here insane with your circular logic.
I'm sorry. I can't help you.
Back to no talking. Bye!
