The face of Israeli justice

[Arctish]

No. When you go back far enough you find Muslims in charge, the Jews and Christians second class citizens.

Apparently you never researched the Ottoman Empire and how Jews lived under the Turks. If you had you would know that Istanbul was a place of refuge for European Jews where their culture and communities flourished. Yeah, they had to pay an extra tax, and they had to say Islam was super awesome. But for the most part, that was it.

The Jews in Palestine lived side by side with their Christian and Muslim neighbors, and endured the same bureaucracy, bad weather, and bandits as everyone else. And they married their neighbor's kids, just as their neighbors married theirs.

That's really driving this--the closest parallel in history is a slave revolt. The creation of Israel was a successful slave revolt, it's no wonder the Muslims went ape.

You keep using this slave revolt comparison even though the Jews in Palestine weren't the slaves of the Palestinians - they were family. I realize it sounds dramatic, but given the context it also sounds absurd. If the Jews were anyone's slaves, it was the Europeans'. The Palestinians had nothing to do with it.

Arafat's counter proposal was to stick with the Oslo Accords, and not replace them with an inferior substitute.

1) Arafat had already abandoned Oslo.

2) Oslo was never meant to be an answer.

^^ Bald-faced assertions that have nothing to do with the actual history and everything to do with promoting a line of propaganda.

1) Arafat never abandoned Oslo. He went to Camp David to insist the Oslo Accords be followed.

2) The Accords were a step-by-step process of disengagement. As such, it was the answer to the failure of the Israelis and Palestinians to come to terms. Unfortunately, a Zionist extremist killed the only Israeli Prime Minister willing to give it a try, and no Prime Minister since has had the fortitude to even suggest what was proposed in the Accords.

Israel reneged on it's obligations. You know this. You know Israel refused to hand over land it had agreed to hand over. You know Barak insisted on a new agreement that didn't go nearly as far as what had been agreed to at Oslo. You know what Barak offered Arafat was a handful of shit. Or at least, you used to.

Have you forgotten that Netanyahu boasted he, personally, was the one who sabotaged the Oslo Accords? Why won't you take Bibi at his word? You believe everything else he says. Why not this?

I've seen that video--it doesn't say what you claim. He said he knew it would fail, not that he caused it to fail.

No, he was very specific about what he personally did to sabotage the Accords. He talked about specific conditions he insisted be put in place, then says "Why is this important? Because from that moment on I stopped the Oslo Accords". He's taking full credit for the failure of the Accords, and he's proud of it.

So why don't you believe he is telling the truth? You believe everything else he says he did. Why don't you believe him this time?

 

[Bomb#20]

I don't watch Law & Order so you're going to have to spell out the analogy you're trying to make. That's the show where the police investigate during the first half of the show, and the rest is legal drama?

That's the one. Sure, I'll spell it out. You're arguing as though it's reasonable to expect a crime to be solved in half an hour, making the fact that one hasn't been solved after three days legitimate grounds to infer that the police aren't lifting a finger. What you wrote was so patently ridiculous that the most plausible explanation for why you wrote it was because you feel no compunctions about writing false damaging claims about the Israelis with reckless disregard for the truth, because of malice against them.

Within the same time frame, when investigating the kidnapping of the three Israeli kids, the investigation was very visible.

Israel has over a hundred murders a year. Do you see a hundred very visible investigations? With police, very visible investigations are very much the exception, not the rule. How could you possibly not know that?

I am not privy to internal workings of the Israeli police, I can only assess the facts that had been made public at the time.

Not being privy to the internal workings of the Israeli police means you don't know if they're lifting a finger, which is a reason to say you don't know if they're lifting a finger.

Besides, the kid's cousin was captured and burned alive by Israelis, and the police is not lifting a finger to bring the murderer to justice.

 

[Bomb#20]

So if somebody squats on your land and won't leave, kidnapping him and then killing him while he's helpless is legal?

In this case "him" is an entire nation state and the population it has illegally transferred into someone else's sovereign territory under the cover of a powerful military organization. Strictly speaking, that makes the settlers a component of an invasion force, and they would be legitimate targets.

"Strictly speaking" according to what law, bloodlust against children? Noncombatants don't magically become military targets just because murderer sympathizers recite "There's no such thing as an Israeli civilian."

But even if they were a component of an invasion force, and even if some misguided treaty of international law defined them as military targets, that would simply mean that if you kidnap the enemy's children they become prisoners of war. Shooting prisoners is a war crime. The people who killed them deserve to be hauled in front of an international military tribunal, prosecuted, convicted, and hanged. The people who applaud and defend their actions deserve to be recognized for their efforts with the customary word the world has for that special type of fascist who has a taste for murdered Jews.

 

[Jayjay]

That's the one. Sure, I'll spell it out. You're arguing as though it's reasonable to expect a crime to be solved in half an hour, making the fact that one hasn't been solved after three days legitimate grounds to infer that the police aren't lifting a finger. What you wrote was so patently ridiculous that the most plausible explanation for why you wrote it was because you feel no compunctions about writing false damaging claims about the Israelis with reckless disregard for the truth, because of malice against them.

There was nothign patently ridiculous what I wrote. There was a boring, non-public investigation, which had no indication of being solved quickly (as it had been going on for a while), and the statements by Israeli officials and the victim's family make it seem as if the investigation would be swept under the rug. Sure in retrospect I was wrong, and you can hammer that in my head all you like... but at the time with the evidence at hand, it was a reasonable conclusion. Your hypothesis that this is motivated by malice would likewise be a reasonable conclusion, if you could point out that I would be making different conclusions if the victims were Jews or perpetrators were Arabs.

Within the same time frame, when investigating the kidnapping of the three Israeli kids, the investigation was very visible.

Israel has over a hundred murders a year. Do you see a hundred very visible investigations? With police, very visible investigations are very much the exception, not the rule. How could you possibly not know that?

Which was my point exactly. I have no doubt that without that very public operation, the Hamas operatives would not have been identified and the bodies of the three victims would never have been found. But Israeli police cannot take that kind of exceptional action when the perpetrators are Jews. There have been a lot of cases where the "price tagging" vandalism and terrorist have not been caught, simply becuase the police didn't have enough evidence to go by and they cannot go batshit insane on their own people.

Not being privy to the internal workings of the Israeli police means you don't know if they're lifting a finger, which is a reason to say you don't know if they're lifting a finger.

And what evidence did you have that they were lifting a finger? We know that it took a massive, extremely intrusive and public police operation to catch (or identify, as some of them are still at large) the perpetrators of the previous case. No such operation was underway during investigation of the death of a Palestinian kid. With that information at hand, is it unreasonable to say that maybe the guys won't be caught?

 

[Jayjay]

In this case "him" is an entire nation state and the population it has illegally transferred into someone else's sovereign territory under the cover of a powerful military organization. Strictly speaking, that makes the settlers a component of an invasion force, and they would be legitimate targets.

"Strictly speaking" according to what law, bloodlust against children? Noncombatants don't magically become military targets just because murderer sympathizers recite "There's no such thing as an Israeli civilian."

But even if they were a component of an invasion force, and even if some misguided treaty of international law defined them as military targets, that would simply mean that if you kidnap the enemy's children they become prisoners of war. Shooting prisoners is a war crime. The people who killed them deserve to be hauled in front of an international military tribunal, prosecuted, convicted, and hanged. The people who applaud and defend their actions deserve to be recognized for their efforts with the customary word the world has for that special type of fascist who has a taste for murdered Jews.

A legitimate target is a legitimate target, regardless of the motivations of who targets them. I don't have to applaud Hamas or defend their actions to recognize that the kids are dead because their fucked up parents thought to involve them in their nationalistic plans to take over Palestinian land.

 

[Togo]

But even if they were a component of an invasion force, and even if some misguided treaty of international law defined them as military targets, that would simply mean that if you kidnap the enemy's children they become prisoners of war. Shooting prisoners is a war crime. The people who killed them deserve to be hauled in front of an international military tribunal, prosecuted, convicted, and hanged. The people who applaud and defend their actions deserve to be recognized for their efforts with the customary word the world has for that special type of fascist who has a taste for murdered Jews.

Presumably the same would be true of the seven or so Palestinians who have been lynched by Israelis in revenge attacks, and the defiant approval of these actions from the Israeli settlers?

 

[Derec]

Gaza delenda est!

Hamas is now shooting a lot of rockets into Israel, debris of one of them even hit a German cruise ship as it was leaving port.
Israel in turn attacking Hamas and other terrorist targets in Gaza with air strikes.

Time for Israel to "mow the lawn" with another Cast Lead level operation, although she should not be pressured into withdrawing early like they were in January of 2009. Hamas has 10,000 rockets and they all need to be found and destroyed. By the way, while most of the rockets are relatively short range locally made Quassams, terrorists also have an unknown number of longer range Iranian supplied missiles including the Fajr-5 that is capable of hitting Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

 

[untermensche]

Time for Israel to "mow the lawn" with another Cast Lead level operation, although she should not be pressured into withdrawing early like they were in January of 2009.

That's one option. And the option Israel seems to always prefer. There are of course many other options.

Like doing away with the brutal oppression and denial of rights that causes the rockets.

Israel should take the second option, and quickly. Because rockets today is precision drones tomorrow.

 

[Derec]

That's one option. And the option Israel seems to always prefer. There are of course many other options.

Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Popular Front Resistance Committees and other terrorist scum know only the language of force. The main problem has been that Israel has been pressured to end the operations prematurely, before the job was done.

Like doing away with the brutal oppression and denial of rights that causes the rockets.

Nonsense. When Israel ended the occupation of Gaza that intensified the rocket attacks rather than ending them.

Israel should take the second option, and quickly.

It has been tried in 2005.

Because rockets today is precision drones tomorrow.

Hopefully not. In any case, Iran needs to be held responsible for supplying longer range rockets to Palestinian terrorists and also these drones if it ever comes to that.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

"Strictly speaking" according to what law, bloodlust against children? Noncombatants don't magically become military targets just because murderer sympathizers recite "There's no such thing as an Israeli civilian."

But even if they were a component of an invasion force, and even if some misguided treaty of international law defined them as military targets, that would simply mean that if you kidnap the enemy's children they become prisoners of war. Shooting prisoners is a war crime. The people who killed them deserve to be hauled in front of an international military tribunal, prosecuted, convicted, and hanged. The people who applaud and defend their actions deserve to be recognized for their efforts with the customary word the world has for that special type of fascist who has a taste for murdered Jews.

A legitimate target is a legitimate target, regardless of the motivations of who targets them. I don't have to applaud Hamas or defend their actions to recognize that the kids are dead because their fucked up parents thought to involve them in their nationalistic plans to take over Palestinian land.

You're not showing a legitimate target.

They were not combatants, two of then didn't even live in the West Bank.

- - - Updated - - -

Time for Israel to "mow the lawn" with another Cast Lead level operation, although she should not be pressured into withdrawing early like they were in January of 2009.

That's one option. And the option Israel seems to always prefer. There are of course many other options.

Like doing away with the brutal oppression and denial of rights that causes the rockets.

Israel should take the second option, and quickly. Because rockets today is precision drones tomorrow.

The attacks existed long before the oppression you claim is causing them. Do the Palestinians have a time machine?

 

[Jayjay]

A legitimate target is a legitimate target, regardless of the motivations of who targets them. I don't have to applaud Hamas or defend their actions to recognize that the kids are dead because their fucked up parents thought to involve them in their nationalistic plans to take over Palestinian land.

You're not showing a legitimate target.

They were not combatants, two of then didn't even live in the West Bank.

One of them did, and all of them were sent to a religious school / brainwashing institute in West Bank in areas that were off-limits to Palestinians. Israel has a right to a military occupation, but it does not have right to civilian population transfers. The purpose of these civilians is to act as human shields and justify the land annexation, and while it is their parents who are primarly to blame, maybe other people who are doing the same thing will now think twice about sending their kids to a war zone.

If Palestinians set up a base in Israel, and brought their kids with them, and then some of these kids would get killed by Israelis who were trying to remove them, you'd be the first in line to acknowledge that the kids were being used as human shields. I'm just applying the same logic to the other side.

 

[Arctish]

The attacks existed long before the oppression you claim is causing them. Do the Palestinians have a time machine?

Zionist terror campaigns of the 1930s and 1940s took place before Israel existed, so of course that round of violence happened before the IDF oppressed Palestinians. But considering it was Zionists bombing markets and murdering shoppers, tossing hand grenades at people lined up in front of movie theaters, conducting drive-by shootings, etc. it would be deliberately deceptive to say the violence predated Israeli participation. The Irgun, Lehi, Haganah, and all the other Zionist terror cells went on to form the Israeli government, and continued to brutalize the Palestinian people.

So yes, the attacks existed long before the current oppression. But no, they were not a separate, unrelated issue.

 

[Bomb#20]

Shooting prisoners is a war crime. The people who killed them deserve to be hauled in front of an international military tribunal, prosecuted, convicted, and hanged. The people who applaud and defend their actions deserve to be recognized for their efforts with the customary word the world has for that special type of fascist who has a taste for murdered Jews.

Presumably the same would be true of the seven or so Palestinians who have been lynched by Israelis in revenge attacks, and the defiant approval of these actions from the Israeli settlers?

Yes, quite so. (With the qualification that you are unjustifiably broad-brushing the Israeli settlers. Some of them have defiantly approved revenge lynchings and some of them haven't.) What's your point? Did somebody on TFT defiantly approve revenge lynchings?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're not showing a legitimate target.

They were not combatants, two of then didn't even live in the West Bank.

One of them did, and all of them were sent to a religious school / brainwashing institute in West Bank in areas that were off-limits to Palestinians. Israel has a right to a military occupation, but it does not have right to civilian population transfers. The purpose of these civilians is to act as human shields and justify the land annexation, and while it is their parents who are primarly to blame, maybe other people who are doing the same thing will now think twice about sending their kids to a war zone.

The Geneva convention prohibits forced transfers. It says nothing about people simply moving in.

- - - Updated - - -

The attacks existed long before the oppression you claim is causing them. Do the Palestinians have a time machine?

Zionist terror campaigns of the 1930s and 1940s took place before Israel existed, so of course that round of violence happened before the IDF oppressed Palestinians. But considering it was Zionists bombing markets and murdering shoppers, tossing hand grenades at people lined up in front of movie theaters, conducting drive-by shootings, etc. it would be deliberately deceptive to say the violence predated Israeli participation. The Irgun, Lehi, Haganah, and all the other Zionist terror cells went on to form the Israeli government, and continued to brutalize the Palestinian people.

So yes, the attacks existed long before the current oppression. But no, they were not a separate, unrelated issue.

And if you go back even farther you'll find attacks on the Jews.

- - - Updated - - -

Presumably the same would be true of the seven or so Palestinians who have been lynched by Israelis in revenge attacks, and the defiant approval of these actions from the Israeli settlers?

Yes, quite so. (With the qualification that you are unjustifiably broad-brushing the Israeli settlers. Some of them have defiantly approved revenge lynchings and some of them haven't.) What's your point? Did somebody on TFT defiantly approve revenge lynchings?

Yeah, finding 1% of a population that supports some extreme position doesn't surprise me.

 

[Arctish]

Zionist terror campaigns of the 1930s and 1940s took place before Israel existed, so of course that round of violence happened before the IDF oppressed Palestinians. But considering it was Zionists bombing markets and murdering shoppers, tossing hand grenades at people lined up in front of movie theaters, conducting drive-by shootings, etc. it would be deliberately deceptive to say the violence predated Israeli participation. The Irgun, Lehi, Haganah, and all the other Zionist terror cells went on to form the Israeli government, and continued to brutalize the Palestinian people.

So yes, the attacks existed long before the current oppression. But no, they were not a separate, unrelated issue.

And if you go back even farther you'll find attacks on the Jews.

How far back do you want to go? At what point in history is the violence that took place there not connected to the present day violence?

I'd put the cut-off at the end of the Ottoman Empire and the start of the British Mandate in Palestine. That was when the political landscape changed and the familial bonds between Palestinian Jews, Christians, and Muslims began to unravel under the pressures of Zionism and nationalism. What do you consider the starting point?

 

[Jayjay]

One of them did, and all of them were sent to a religious school / brainwashing institute in West Bank in areas that were off-limits to Palestinians. Israel has a right to a military occupation, but it does not have right to civilian population transfers. The purpose of these civilians is to act as human shields and justify the land annexation, and while it is their parents who are primarly to blame, maybe other people who are doing the same thing will now think twice about sending their kids to a war zone.

The Geneva convention prohibits forced transfers. It says nothing about people simply moving in.

Article 49 in the fourth Geneva Convention states:

"The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies."

Period. If it had meant forced transfers, it would have said so, and indeed the same article explicitly denied forcible transfer of civilian populations within the occupied area, so clearly the authors knew when to use the word "forcible" and when not. A sovereign power is responsible for actions of its civilians, and the colonization scenario that Israel is engaged in is exactly the kind of shit Nazi Germany did during WW2 that prompted the inclusion of this paragraph.

The International Criminal Court agrees with the original interpretation... in fact only sources that I've seen arguing for Paragraph 6 applying only to "forced" transfers are Israeli apologists who want to justify the settlement policy.

 

[Togo]

Shooting prisoners is a war crime. The people who killed them deserve to be hauled in front of an international military tribunal, prosecuted, convicted, and hanged. The people who applaud and defend their actions deserve to be recognized for their efforts with the customary word the world has for that special type of fascist who has a taste for murdered Jews.

Presumably the same would be true of the seven or so Palestinians who have been lynched by Israelis in revenge attacks, and the defiant approval of these actions from the Israeli settlers?

Yes, quite so. (With the qualification that you are unjustifiably broad-brushing the Israeli settlers. Some of them have defiantly approved revenge lynchings and some of them haven't.) What's your point?

My curiosity was raised by the idea that you're agreeing to label members of the settler community with 'the customary word the world has for that special type of fascist who has a taste for murdered Jews', a position some might find a bit odd. The alternative, using a jewish-specific term for one side and not another, implies that you're not treating the deaths as equal and opposite. Hence my curiosity.

The emphasis on war crimes also seems a little odd, considering how much of Israeli action in the West Bank would fall under that term. Where does this leave the punitive bombing carried out by the IDF in the wake of the murders, or the demolition of major local businesses, despite no obvious connection to the crime? Or indeed, the settlements themselves?

 

[Derec]

Israel Warns Gaza Targets by Phone and Leaflet
Israel is going out of their way to minimize civilian casualties. On the other hand, Hamas and other terrorist scum want to maximize civilian casualties, both Israeli and Palestinian, by deliberately placing people on buildings targeted by Israel.

Also, saw this on Facebook. It further illustrates the anti-semitic double standard of the pro-Palestinian faction here and elsewhere.

 

[laughing dog]

Israel Warns Gaza Targets by Phone and Leaflet
Israel is going out of their way to minimize civilian casualties. On the other hand, Hamas and other terrorist scum want to maximize civilian casualties, both Israeli and Palestinian, by deliberately placing people on buildings targeted by Israel. v

Funny with how that IDF minimization, the Palestinian civilian casualties still vastly outnumber the Israeli ones.

Besides the tragedies of the brutal murders of 4 innocents, there is an additional tragedy: the wishes of the terrorists and extremists for more bloodshed and war is being realized.

 

[Sabine Grant]

Israel Warns Gaza Targets by Phone and Leaflet
Israel is going out of their way to minimize civilian casualties. On the other hand, Hamas and other terrorist scum want to maximize civilian casualties, both Israeli and Palestinian, by deliberately placing people on buildings targeted by Israel. v

Funny with how that IDF minimization, the Palestinian civilian casualties still vastly outnumber the Israeli ones.

To my knowledge, the IDF does not use Israeli civilians as human shields. Hamas persistently turns against its "own people" in the Gaza by using them as human shields. Further Hamas controls who will benefit of the NGOs humanitarian services in the Gaza. Their policies can only produce more victims and helpless dire poverty stricken Palestinians in the Gaza no matter how much the IDF attempts to concentrate their fire on locations where they have identified the presence of Hamas militants/combatants. No matter how much Israel had relaxed its embargo allowing for more humanitarian based goods to come into the Gaza.

Hamas is extremely toxic to the Gaza population.

Besides the tragedies of the brutal murders of 4 innocents, there is an additional tragedy: the wishes of the terrorists and extremists for more bloodshed and war is being realized.

Indeed.

Going back to the Op and Tariq's fate,

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politi...ts-with-palestinian-authoritys-leader/2187544

Florida International University political scientist Shlomi Dinar said it's "unfortunate that the face of the conflict that we're seeing now is through children."

But many children have already been victims in that conflict. Whether it be a school bus blown up in Israel or Palestinian children used as human shields by Hamas (such as having their firepower located near by schools and hospitals and positioning their combatants in heavy populated areas with play grounds and other locales frequented by children).