The Ha'aretz blood libel

Davidd

"Blood libel"? What an appallingly loaded phrase. You are no better than those that accuse Israel of committing a "holocaust".

You should be ashamed.

Truthtriumphs

William Hague demonstrated where his real sentiments lie during the 2006 conflict in Lebanon when he used the now-notorious adjective "disproportionate" to describe Israel's precision targeting of Hezbollah's positions. Never mind that the British military's actions in Iraq and Afghanistan were and are far more "disproportionate". William Hague is bad news for Israel and thus for the West's struggle against militant Islam.

As I wrote on an earlier thread, the sacrifice of the 23 IDF infantry in Jenin to save the lives of Palestinian civilians, should serve as an eternal memorial to the decency and morality of the IDF.
That Ha'aretz should give publicity to the as-yet unproven accusations of a malcontent, serves to underline the genuine democracy that Israel is.
A whistle-blower in Hamas's ranks would be thrown off a tall building, hands and feet tied together.

KB

I'm sure you forgot to mention the bit where 'Red' Andy asked Hague about the behaviour of Hamas, from the mere breaches of the Geneva Conventions (not wearing uniform) to videotaped evidence of war crimes (launching mortars from a school).

Michael B

It's a libel, Davidd, a blood libel, much as al-Dura was a yet more egregious blood libel, in terms of the use it was put to. If you're going to be easily offended and resort to reactionary formulations and harrumphs, you might at least attempt some coherence - in lieu of displaying an appalling and shameful ignorance.

jim comfort

Well done Melanie. Glad to have someone call it the way it is. Yes it is Blood Libel the manner in which it is presented in the international media.

James P (James Pearce)

In all this , invariably, there is acceptance of the brilliantly planned and deseminated lie that Hamas provoked Israel to launch it's long planned "Operation Cast Lead". The FACTS are not now disputed by any reputable source - just avoided. In June a ceasefire came into effect. Hamas honored that ceasefire despite Israel tightening its (and Egypt's) brutal and illegal blockade. On November 4th the IDF, on the laughable pretext of some tunnel construction that was being monitored (so any use of it could easily be thwarted) broke the conditions of the ceasefire, entered Gaza and killed six Palestinians. This exercise was repeated a few days later with the essentially gratuitous killing on another eight Palestinians. Predictably, and as intended by Israel, Hamas retaliated with rockets that killed one Israeli. Hamas then offered to renew the ceasefire. Israel however used this situation to at last launch the long planned "Operation Cast Lead/white phosphorus",with the intention of "Educating the Palestinians" though the hundreds of children slaughtered willl not be in a position to learn this lesson.

Augustus

Of course, Uncle Tom Israelbasher and all could just as equally admit openly that the moral standards of the Israeli forces are higher than any other army on this planet, but that wouldn't suit their twisted agendas, now would it?

Vision Aforethought

You know what? Probably, like many, I am growing tired of people who have no affiliation with Israel and/or Judiasm (and 'the struggle' to coin a term used by an African American friend of mine who also knows the meaning of prejudice) even sticking their noses into all of this. Are there other forums covering wars, struggles and/or genuine atrocities in other nations (such as Africa) where a specific nation and/or their military is constantly under the microscope - never mind the distortions of the truth that appear to come about after every single event? I mean, there isn't even a forum covering Mugabe's regime, or North Korea, or even Iran. Israel is defending itself and getting on with the Western way of building an industrious standard of living enhancing democracy, superb housing (visit and check out the lovely architecture) while it's enemies build societies based on shoddy engineering (hence buildings spontaneously collapse every so often, even without an Earthquake), medieval 'laws' and a generally backwards way of life. Surely, and this is why the Americans support Israel (it has nothing to do with oil or territory), because they respect people who don't complain and get on and create or exploit opportunities and thanks to the proven concept of the trickle down economy, employ people of all races or creeds. It works in New York, it works in California and it works in London, so it can work in the Middle East if the unjustified envy and hate ceases and the deserved respect starts.

Yehuda

Why would any one expect the Tories to be any less indecent than the left in matters relating to Jewish self-determination and to truth?

Jerry

Suppose they slaughtered them - old men, women, children and infants. Does that make them bad people?

Well, that would depend upon whether "they" were Israeli soldiers or Hamas terrorists. Right!?

J.L. Peppers

This column is clearly the work of a drama queen. Accusing the IDF of war crimes is "blood libel"? I guess bringing up Shatila and Sabran is the equivalent of Babi Yar.

According to Phillips, the words of soldiers who described atrocities by the IDF are not to be believed since it's just their say-so. But an IDF soldier who tells another tall tale about advance warnings to allow civilians to flee buildings before they are attacked is to be believed (as if the "terrorists" wouldn't notice their neighbors running away and do the same).

It just go to show that IDF camp followers like Melanie Phillips have no shame.

Miranda Rose Smith

Dear Davidd: If this isn't a blood libel, what is?

Carl

Highlighting Israeli atrocities against Palestinians is a duty for all good people.

just Louise

I'm still a card-carrying member of the Conservative Party (to my shame, old habits die hard) and I'm still a six-days-a week purchaser of the Torygraph (ditto). But I'm appalled at the response of both to Israel's Gaza crisis. I consider the Boy Hague to be out of his depth on foreign matters, and believe the writing on the wall began with Michael Ancram, no particular friend of the little Jewish State. The Torygraph used to be a wonderful counterweight to the Grauniad, but it gave prominence to this story with no attempt at analysis. It's previous stalwart support of Israel has evaporated. Clearly, Lord Black's loss of ownership was the blackest of days - no more Barbara Amiel, no more Mark Steyn, to bang the drum for Israel and rally the forces.

Paul Freeman

Thanks, Melanie, for laying out the facts as always in a clear and balanced fashion.

Crawford

Carl, that is true. And never forgetting that Hamas has consistently attacked Israel for many years is also a duty of for all good people.

Miranda Rose Smith

Dear Carl: Talk about straining out a gnat while you swallow a camel. REPORTING Israel atrocities against Palestinians, on the odd, rare, isolated occasions that they occur, is the JOB of responsible journalists. It is the DUTY of all good people, all people who don't want to see the world united under a Moslem Brotherhood caliphate, to support Israel

Ronnie

Another tawdry, but possibly lucrative, piece of propaganda.

Yehuda

James Pearce: cease-fire, shmeace-fire- the "Palestinian" ruling cliques, both in Judea-Samaria and Gaza are committed to the annihilation of Israel, the seat of Jewish national self-determination.
That they are not yet powerful enough to succeed is no reason for Israel to hold its fire; on the contrary, given the politicidal and genocidal nature of these foes, it is incumbent on Israel to pre-empt them at every opportunity- zero tolerance.
When human shields are killed, the guilty party is the one that deploys them, namely the Palestinian leaders.
This principle is anchored not only in common sense and justice, but in what is known as "international law."
Get off your soap box and write letters of protest to the miserable leaders of the Palestinian people for leading them down a path to disaster, while murdering Jews in the process. Don't hold your breath waiting for a sensible reply.
Only two days ago a car loaded with a large quantity of explosives was disarmed in a large shopping mall in the Israeli city of Haifa. That is the nature of Israel's foes.
Some years ago an Arab put his pregnant European girlfriend on a plane, having placed a bomb in her luggage. That is the nature of Israel's enemies.
Not that long ago Israeli security forces discovered a homicide bomb belt under an Arab baby's stroller mattress. That is the nature of Israel's foes.
Get over it and get real.

James Heartfield

To excuse the Israeli Defence Force in all circumstances from any criticism whatsoever, that would be anti-Semitism, too. Better to wait and see what the facts are, no?

James Murphy

Highlighting Carl's atrocities against intellectual probity is a duty for all good people.

Miranda Rose Smith

Dear Ronnie: WHAT is "Another tawdry, but possibly lucrative piece of propaganda?" Ms. Phillips' article or the HaAretz piece?
Dear Mr. Heartfield: I don't see anybody, least of all Ms. Phillips, excusing the Israeli Defence Force in all circumstances.

Stephen

Well Melanie, this was so much easier for Andrew Marr than looking closer to home, say, at the pretty appalling reports coming out of Mid Staffordshire hospital, where staff were told to meet targets rather than save patients lives. However, that is not the BBC way, and might have implied criticism of the current government - that would never do.

Yehuda

James Heartfield: some one has told me that some one else told him that you have done so and so.
Therefore an inquiry should be conducted to see what the facts are. Right, James?

Stephen Rothbart

I do agree that the testimony of one soldier is as much hearsay as the ones in the Ha'aretz article. It does seem that there is a civil war going on between the religious and secular wings of the IDF and there is, thankfully, an investigation going on by a fully operational democratic State called Israel, whereas the atrocities of Hamas in Gaza are not being investigated by anyone, least of all any so-called State of Palestine, which was a fanatsy, dreamed up by an Egyptian opportunist, and stupidly endorsed by Israeli leaders at the time, and with which the world has used to whip Israel at every opportunity.

That is the reality. In defence of William Haig, I would say that in deferring to an enquiry, he placed good faith in Israel's ability to investigate its own internal problems, and no one, not even the Israelis, know for sure what is the truth, so I think he dealt with a difficult question well.

Andrew Marr and the BBC's attitude comes as no suprise to anyone who is conversant with its pro-Islamic, anti-Israeli views.

But what Melanie seems to be ignoring is what the devil is Ha'aretz playing at? Israelis are well know for self-inflicted wounds, such as electing a racist right wing government to replace Kadima's more pragmatic approach at this moment in the world's history. Handing her enemies a PR coup like this is quite incredible at this dangerous time, especially with an apparent appeaser of Islamic abuses now in the White House.

Ha'aretz is where Melanie's vitriol should be directed, and her continued investigations concentrated as to what is going on.

Suffolkbor

William Hague is a has been.
I would set more store by the political and social opinions of Roland Rat than by the Weevils that infest our tv screens these days .

Linda Smith

@ James P (James Pearce) - anglo armchair philosopher.

If you wish to criticise the actions of a foreign State (Israel) which has been the victim of War declared against its existence since 1947, then , if you have not done so already, convert to Judaism, take up residence in Israel, and argue from your bomb shelter.

Do not forget, that, should your army fail to protect you, you will be exterminated by the enemy because you are a Jew.

Life is not a game. War is ugly. It always has been and it always will be. You prattle on like a silly schoolboy under the delusion that war can be clean and sanitised with nobody getting killed. In the end - it's them or you. Get real.

Paulme

It's hysterical nonsense like this which makes it difficult to support Israel sometimes.

Oh, and how compassionate of the IAF to fire a missile into the corner of a house so that the inhabitants can flee - except the ones in the corner of the house presumably.

Ronnie

Dear Miranda.

Allegations have been made, as they commonly are in these circumstances, and they are being investigated. So far so good.

It is reasonable to say that the allegations are appalling but that does not make them true. In saying the allegations are appalling, as any politician in the real world would, the speaker is not supporting them. They are being investigated and we await the outcome. Period.

Attacking William Hague in hsyterical terms in these circumstances is absurd, TAWDRY and frankly demeaning. Why do it...?

Now, back to the shouting.

Wm. Hazlitt

I think this is an instance where we should take the IDF and the politicians at their word:

Here is a statement from Deputy Defence Minister Matan Vilnai on Army Radio: "The more Qassam fire intensifies and the rockets reach a longer range, they will bring upon themselves a bigger shoah because we will use all our might to defend ourselves." (Shoah? -tasteless at best.)
In Lebanon in 2006, Dan Halutz, the Chief of Staff, explained the war aim as to "turn back the clock twenty years." Yoav Galant, who is I believe the head of the southern command, explained the war aim in Gaza this time as to "send Gaza decades into the past".
Gadi Eisenkot, the head of the northern command, explained in October last year the new military doctrine common to both Lebanon and Gaza, unofficially called the Dahiya doctrine: "What happened in the Dahiya quarter of Beirut in 2006 will happen to every village from which Israel is fired on (in practice that has proved to mean any area or position the Israeli military believe may have been a source of enemy fire or may prove to have the potential to be so in future. Wm Hazlitt). We will apply disproportionate force on it and cause great damage and destruction there. From our standpoint, these are not civilian villages, they are military bases. This is not a recommendation. This is a plan."
The doctrine was given a more scholarly gloss by Gabriel Siboni, a colonel in the reserves, in an article published by Tel Aviv's Institute of National Security Studies in October last year. To paraphrase: Conventional military strategies for waging war against states and armies cannot defeat sub-national resistance movements that have deep roots in the local population. The goal instead is to use "disproportionate force" thereby "inflicting damage and meting out punishment to an extent that will demand long and expensive reconstruction processes."
Then there are the orders to the ground troops. See the article in The Times on 28 January this year. The order to the troops in the Givati Shahed battalion was to "fire on anything that moves in Zeitoun". I recommend the whole article. There is similar testimony from other soldiers to the effect that they routinely reduced any area they had to enter to rubble with heavy artillery fire before risking an advance. (For the soldiers, in extreme danger, these are clearly rational tactics.)
Finally there is a matter less frequently remarked on. For this I refer you to Ha'aretz 26 January and 8 February this year, and to Yesh Din and Breaking the Silence. What is the effect on soldiers who are orthodox Jews of the booklet of advice provided by the army Rabbinate before the invasion? I believe that the IDF itself has conceded that the booklet was inappropriate. Orthodox Talmudic advice on how to treat Gentile combatants and non-combatants can be very severe and is not generally considered consistent with the rules of war.
Given all this, and the details of the actual assault, the use of fleschettes, DIME bombs, phosphorus etc. are we to believe that the IDF did not expect its chosen tactics of disproportionate and excessive force to cause civilian casualties? Or are we to admire the noble campaign of phone calls, and accept that exceesive force plus phone calls absolves the IDF of responsibility?
Melanie Phillips and the inhabitants of MelanieLand resemble two of the famous monkeys - they refuse to see evil or hear of evil committed by their friends. Any agency that is in a position to investigate accusations of war crimes is dismissed as anti-Semitic. Only the IDF is accepted as a reputable source of information, and only if it does not corroborate any accusations of war crimes.

Suffolkbor

On the subject of the BBC and it,s Islamic bias why is it that the opinions of the so called "Smart set " in London are seen as representing Britain as a whole ?

London , as noted by Charles Moore in the Telegraph a while ago is a city state detached from the rest of the country socially , politically ,and increasingly ethnically which regards the rest of the country , especially the market towns and villages of rural districts as backward non entities of no consequence .

I am sure I am not alone in being more than a little tired of being supposedly represented by a place and a people with whom I have as much in common as a rock on the surface of Mars.

Does anyone remember The Rest Of Britain Society which was formed I believe in the 1970,s by a group of people who were cheesed off with the focus of everything being centred on London . If they are still going I would quite like to join.

Dr Michael Grave

And, as ever, the lying, cheating, extorting, bigoted BBC cheerleading the way in this blood libel....

Labhras

The bar is raised two or three feet when the accusation is against Israeli,s, by their own soldiers.

The word of a newt in the grass is sufficient when proof of a Palestinians crime is required.

Really Miss Phillips.You are so transparent.

Incidentally it was one woman and her two children that were executed for going the wrong direction.The other older lady was executed at a distance of 100 metres.

Try to report the truth.

Robert

There's a good reason the IDF is one of the few reputable sources of information on what goes on with Israel - most of the other sources (e.g., Ha'aretz, New York Times, BBC, CNN, etc.) have been proven over and over and over and over again to have lied. Now that we have the whole story, once again we see that the allegations against Israel are yet again lies (what a surprise). As the story of The Boy Who Cried Wolf illustrates, a known liar will not be believed, and rightly not.

George Laird

Dear Labhras

Melanie would have no problem reporting the truth if it fits her story.

I am surprised at you, there is a pattern on here!

If the truth doesn't fit her story then she is happy to use subjective opinion.

Melanie also likes to over the pudding by using our people's quotes and putting her theatrical bent on it.

"Peppers today people tomorrow", is a good example.

We are 'treated' to hysteria which is for the benefit of the howling mob fan club she attracts on here.

They don't like the truth much either when Israeli war crimes are pointed out.

Still good to see more people telling Ms. Phillips she is wrong again.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

phil

Wm. Hazlitt your words represent the definition of chutzpah -tastelessness is your own expertise and you never let truth spoil your story .Do you have a reason to be writing here other than to annoy everyone with the distortions you produce ?-Do you have an aversion to Jewish people or Israelis ?-it is allowed but its better if you tell us, then we can better evaluate your contributions-do not worry we are used to it ,and its only to try to understand your motives. .

David Olesker

When it comes to international treaties on human rights in time of war, the countries of the world fall into three categories:

a) Those that don't fight wars and are therefore willing to sign off on any and every restriction.

b) Those tyrannies that fight war without any intention of abiding by the agreements they've signed, and so they will also agree to anything.

c) A few countries (US, UK, Holland etc.) who do fight, and do attempt to stick to the rules.

It's not just that Israeli soldiers behave better than Syrian or Afghani ones do, they behave better than British or Dutch soldiers do. Does anyone seriously think that American or Polish troops would be ordered to clean and tidy a civilian home they had requisitioned after they'd finished with it? Maximum, civilians could apply for compensation for damage and inconvenience.

NATO troops on "peace keeping" missions are routinely ordered to open fire at anyone who gets to close to a position.

Israel isn't just better than her neighbors, she's better than other western countries who are not facing an existential threat.

Mike Higgings

Can Melanie Phillips just spare a thought to the 1400 Palestinians who got killed in this slaughter. Shame on her for trying to justify the unexcusable

Mike

Lies???hmmm!! 1400 + Dead ciilians 250+ Dead children.
Do you have any morals. Just one of those children could be the difference, the world was watching, and people know more about the lies than ever before.
THE LAVON AFFAIR, USS LIBERTY,USS COLE ,911!!! to name a few!!!!Now you tell me what are the lies. The Mossad Motto 'By Way of Deception, thou shalt do War'.
Isn't that the start of a lie?
WE WILL LIE YOU INTO OUR WAR.

YA

In the media, there is clear pattern of treason.

.."lost cause in afghanistan", "non-existent Al-Qaida", "excessive use of force by police", "torture of guano prisoners", "danger of radicalization", "illegal gathering of information by government", "anti-war protesters", and so on, not even talking about israeli phosphorus bums, "Gaza underground tunnel complex", illegal zionist atrocities, and all that blossom.

Some shadow force, with big money and/or considerable gift of persuasion, is holding the strings.

Why does BBC ad nauseum discusses non-existing "torture" of someone who is proven terrorist, whereas the fate of 5 British citizens, those who were kidnapped (who remembers how long ago?) in Iraq by Islamists, - isn't of interest to anybody. One of these hostages is seemingly still alive, and what happened with others? Shot? Beheaded? Eaten alive?.. Who knows, they were just kuffr.. Our point is, don't torture Muslims guys, otherwise you can radicalize.. and you know.. those who insult our feelings, won't have good destiny..

UK media talks on behalf of Al-Qaida. What a shameful times.

Bruce

Israel choose to ban the world media from reporting in Gaza. It is clear they did things they don't want the world to see. I am sure Melanie Phillips will be welcoming Netanyahu to government, a man who commemorates the bombing of the King David Hotel which killed 92 people. Maybe the terror laws that Brown and Blair have placed on us can be used to detain Netanyahu as well.

Carl

David Olesker, what fantasy planet do you live in? NATO soldiers would be tried and imprisoned if found guilty of a fraction of the atrocities that the IDF routinely commit. The IDF is a disgraced army of a morally bankrupt State.

onlywanttruth

israel lying? never ever. you gentiles never learn. it will be a criminal offence to dispute the facts of the gaza war eventually. there will be no debates! you will believe what we tell you to believe

just Louise

Fasten your safety belts, boys and girls.
Severe turbulence ahead.
Tomorrow's Grauniad has a screaming front page headline on this topic - they have a big story claiming to have covered more evidence of "Israel's War Crimes" in Gaza following an investigation of their own.
That nice man off the TV (BBC News) just told me so!

phil

Mike what on earth was that last outburst about -lavon 1954 .ussliberty friendly fire accident 1967 -uss cole ???????????? and 9/11 are you barking mad or have you been fisked -go and sit on your galloway and think man you seem to have really lost it now .

John Edwards

Good comment by James Pearce. The truth about the Gaza Massacre will come out irrespective of the results of one of those IDF "investigations"

Also when Yehuda refers to "Judea-Samaria" he actually means the "Occupied Palestinian Territories,including East Jerusalem" the correct description as used by the Internationl Court of Justice in its advisory opinion on the illegality of the Wall in the West Bank.

William Brown

These lunatic leftists have never understood right from wrong and good from evil. They always choose the wrong and side with evil. For them, facts not only don't matter, they don't exist. The Jew, of course, will always be the left's primary target. Kudos to Melanie for maintaining a sane course.

Adam B.

John Edwards, Judea and Samaria are not "Palestinian" Arab - never were - ever. East Jerusalem includes the Jewish and Armenian Quarters - or are these exclusively Arab as well?

Adam B.

Bruce, the international media was also barred from the Falklands.

Or are you saying British troops committed atrocities which they didn't want the world to see (as you put it)?

Adam B.

Bruce, Netanyahu didn't blow up the King David Hotel.

Amazing how every Jew hater brings this up, a single event which occurred 61 years ago. Not to Bruce: Lehi and the Stern Gang haven't been operational for a while. And how is it relevant here?

Please get a grip on your ignorant hate.

Linda Rivera

Hamas/PA Target JEWISH INNOCENTS. Israel Targets Terrorists
Israel sends truck loads of food, medical and other supplies into Gaza. Israeli hospital treats Gaza patients in urgent need.

An Israeli hospital treated a young Muslim woman-she returned strapped with a bomb belt to blow up amongst the Jewish doctors and nurses who helped her.

Israel warns Gaza civilians by leaflets, loudspeakers and telephone calls to evacuate battle areas.

ACJ - Vilified: TELLING LIES ABOUT ISRAEL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Op5vT3vnfOk

Hamas TV video teaches that bombs that kill Israelis are more precious to an Arab mother than her children.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIBNRVgq59Y

Hamas Member of Parliament Fathi Hammad, February 29, 2008 on Al-Aqsa TV that for PA Arabs, "death has become an industry at which women excel… The elderly excel at this, and so do the mujahideen and the children."

Translated by MEMRI, Hammad : "This is why they have formed human shields of the women, the children, the elderly and the mujahideen, in order to challenge the Zionist bombing machine. It is as if they were saying to the Zionist enemy: 'We desire death like you desire life.'"

Religious HATE and Religious MURDER of Jews and other non-Muslims is taught in mosques worldwide.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buzRV-t5fLM&feature=related
PA Muslims CHEERING murders of Americans on 9/11

The Islamo Fascists commit war crimes: they use human shields; hide behind women and children; wage war from densely populated areas, store and fire rockets from residential buildings, schools, hospitals and mosques to deliberately MAXIMISE Arab injuries and deaths so that when Israel fires back in self defense and accidently kills civilians, the Islamics scream to the world, but the blood of the Arabs is on the heads of the Islamo Fascists.

Linda Rivera

To John Edwards:
The inalienable rights of Jews to the Biblical heartland must not be violated! No one is demanding Muslims surrender THEIR top religious areas of Mecca and Medina!

In 1948, Egypt invaded Gaza, ethnically cleansing all Jews and in 1948, Jordan invaded Judea, Samaria and east Jerusalem, ethnically cleansing all Jews.

In violent opposition to G-D, Muslim Jordan destroyed 58 synagogues in Jerusalem. The jihad is against the Holy One.

When Israel won the Arab war of aggression in 1967, Jews returned to the areas of their ancestral homeland they had been ethnically cleansed from for 19 years. Anti-Israel propaganda DECEITFULLY calls Jews' legitimate return "occupation".

Jews have had a continuous presence in physical and spiritual homeland Israel for 4000 years.

Jewish ownership of the land, homes and buildings stolen from the Jews in the 1948 Islamic invasion must be restored!

Yehuda

There are no "occupied 'Palestinian' territories". Under international law Judea, Samaria and Gaza should be part of The State of Israel. This was the plan that was determined in 1922 by the then-supreme determiner of international law, the Council of The League of Nations.
Nowadays, however, bodies such as the U.N. and its agencies, as well as NGO's and national governments feel free to trample on the Jewish People's rights because they can do so with impunity, and because they wish to ingratiate themselves with the globally powerful Islamic lobby. We live in a world where the likes of Libya, Syria and Iran are considered to be arbiters of human rights.
We've seen it all before in the 1930's: Herr Hitler "wanted peace"; the "nasty" Czechs were "oppressing" the "unfortunate" Sudeten Germans; anyway, Czechoslovakia "wasn't really a democracy" etc. etc.Israel is not and will not be Czechoslovakia. Pushing it into a corner is not in any one's objective interests.
Now, it may be in Israel's interests to relinquish this or that piece of land and donate it to Arabs who call themselves "Palestinians", but this in no way legitimises the lie of "occupied 'Palestinian' territories."
Jordan's occupation of Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem between 1948 and 1967 was indeed illegal, as was Egypt's occupation of Gaza in that period, but no one complained about those illegal occupations because it wasn't Jews who were doing the occupying.
Not even the "Palestinians" were then demanding a second state additional to Jordan, which has always de facto been one.

Yehuda

John Edwards has demonstrated his "objective detachment" and "willingness" to believe the findings of an investigation
by already asserting that there has been a "Gaza Massacre", utilising his well-honed prophetic skills.
What a pathetic joke these people are.

Yehuda

"Civilian sites"? International law says that when a civilian site such as a university or mosque is abused for military purposes, its status becomes that of a military target that may legitimately be bombed.
The leaders of the Arabs who call themselves "Palestinians" lead the world in this sort of "remake."
The non-Arab enemies of Jewish self-determination, however, collaborate in the Arab attempts to create the illusion that "civilian" sites have been attacked.
Why, Arabs regularly bomb their own religious and secular sites, best examples are in Iraq , but the James Pearces and John Edwardses et alii don't make a fuss about that because Jews aren't involved.

Markov

You can try to deny the entire world's reporters access to Gaza so that crimes against humanity go uncovered and unpunished, but in the information age, that kind of thing doesn't stay hidden long.
http://images.google.com/images?&q=gaza%20white%20phosphorus&

Israel also tried to kill the US Green Party's 2008 Presidential Candidate in December, Cynthia McKinney. US Greens will never forget that.

We've seen the results of Israel investigating herself before, and she always finds herself innocent.

My admiration for the rational voices at Haaretz, for the refuseniks and Sarvanim and people of conscience everywhere.

Blind partisan rage accusing people of blood libels. Why is that such a familiar sound?

Larry

it's an absolute disgrace that Ha'Aretz is still in business, all the worse for those clueless Tel Aviv Lefty know-nothings - Jews for a Second Holocaust. Look at how the Jew-haters posting up on this thread just love Ha'Aretz, as does the BBC of course.

Original Tony

James Pearce...so Hamas did nothing to break the ceasefire did they? No rockets flew into Israel?

And "it's a LIE that Israel was provoked into attacking Hamas"...well, what would you do if 8000 rockets were fired at your house?

You are obviously one of these weak-wristed lefties that would rather lie on your stomach and let Hamas have its way with you than fight back.

I can assure you, if Hamas acted decently, Israel would abandon its blockade overnight.

Yehuda

Bruce, I don't know if you really believe what you wrote.

Israel banned foreign media personnel from the recent Gaza war as a direct consequence of the misconduct of some of them during the 2006 war against Hizballah, when their reporting of sensitive military data assisted the enemy.
Now, non-Jews and ill-informed Jews or Jews who don't really want to be Jews are not concerned about the enemy's receiving such data and using it to kill Israelis (among them, Arabs), but you cannot expect Israeli and diaspora Jews to be indifferent to this.
Given the declared aims of the leadership of the Arabs who call themselves "Palestinians" and given the apparent endorsement of these aims by a large part of their rank and file, Israel must exercise sufficient force to frustrate the achievement of those traditional Arab aims, and do so regularly.

You may also be unaware that news agencies rely heavily on local Arab "journalists" for their stories about the Arab-Israeli conflicts. These journalists, unlike some of their Ha'Aretz counterparts, are actually loyal to their own people to such a degree that they often falsify, distort, assert half-truths, gloss over their own people's criminal behaviour and so on. They admit it, just as some "Ha'Aretz" journalists openly admit that they fabricate their work to serve as a weapon in their war against the majority of their own countrymen. That is why rags such as "The Guardian" virtually copy entire slabs of Ha'Aretz junk regularly.

Australians for Non-Bigoted Thinking

....and of course REAL ATROCITIES have neen committed by Hamas again and again and again and again.....but how deep do you have to dig to find maybe one story about their barbarism?

How far to the centre of the earth and how rare is gold???

Wm. Hazlitt

Yehuda,

You must know that the League of Nations did not determine that there should be a State of Israel, let alone that Judea and Samaria should be a part of it.

If you are going to appeal to international law, you will have to recognize the bodies that determine international law.

The International Court of Justice in 2004 gave an advisory opinion:

It is a fundamental principle of international law (a "peremptory norm") that it is inadmissable to acquire territory by war.

Under article 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention it is illegal for an occupying power to transfer its population to the occupied territory.

East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza are Occupied Palestinian Territories.

The judges, many with a long history of support for Israel, voted for this opinion 14 to 1, and the 1 agreed to the above part of the judgement. (Most judgements by the court are very close, with majorities of only one or two votes.)

There is no doubt. There is no ambiguity. Israel's occupation is illegal. Israel's settlements are illegal.

phil

wm hazlitt -how slow I was to realise why you use this name -----"On The Pleasure Of Hating" (c.1826)-his most famous essay .you will not answer the question I posed you yesterday no doubt because I get to the point rather than write endless tomes of twisted ideology .but now the readers will have a better idea of your true purpose here -its not to inform but just to indulge the pleasure described in your predecessors essay .What a pathetic way to live one,s life .

Original Tony

wm hazlitt...The Balfour declarartion recommended a home for Jews in 'Palestine', not a state, I agree...but please tell me what the difference is? Is the home of the British people the British state or not? Is the home of the German poeple the German state or not?

You cannot have a national home without it being a state and therefore, by default, the home of the Jews is the 'state' of Israel.

This same (and subsequent declarations) gave the border of Israel as East of the river Jordan, in what is now called Jordan.

Between 1948 and 1967 the West Bank (the ancient heart of Israel in pre-Roman times)was annexed from Israel and administered by Jordan.

Therefore, when the Israelis took this land back in 1967, they took their own land back. Try and get this into your head.

Therefore, any settlements built by Israelis on Israeli soil is perfectly legal. And which entity recognizes this? Why the UN!!!

If, as you say, a country cannot acquire territory by war, then the West bank should have been given back to Israel in 1949....AND NOT STAY IN JORDANIAN HANDS! You can't have it both ways my friend.

Labhras

For Original Tony--Indeed your material is original.

Please google "Case ~2056/04 Beit Zourik V Israel".
You will find that the IHCJ (Israeli High court of Justice) ruled the West Bank,(formerly Judea/Samaria --now defunct)as "Being Held under Belligerent Occupation" by Israel.

We do not need the opinion of the ICJ but what the hell--why not take it into account.The IHCJ did not argue with it.In fact they used it as a guide in determining their ruling.

Hope this is of help in clearing up your obvious confusion and that you will now resort to telling the truth.

Dan Alba

I fully expect Ms. Philips to start coming out for the Islamic Republic of Iran based on the standard she has set here today.

Since all the accusations about an Iranian bomb have also thus far been "just innuendo, rumour and hearsay, demonstrably ... wrenched out of context and refracted through the patent prejudice," Ms. Phillips would be obliged — if she is not a hypocrite, that is — to speak out against the anti-Persians.

Like you said, Melanie: "[H]ow do you disprove something for which no evidence is offered whatever?"

(I think the word you're looking for right about now is: touché.)

Yehuda

The fascists, as well as their bosom allies, the risible leftist-fundamentalist half-baked, smug pretenders to omniscience, who don't want the Jews to have national self-determination, but also despise the exilic Jews who live amongst them, always trot out the pathetic "but the Balfour Declaration and The League of Nations only endorsed 'a Jewish National Home', not a state of Israel.
If they ever managed to scrape together any integrity, to remove their blinkers and to study what went on behind the scenes, what the key policymakers of the time declared to be the intention of the enterprise, such as Balfour, Curzon, Churchill, MacMahon, they would see that the unambiguous intention of the Mandate was the reconstitution of the Jewish State. They would also learn why the term "national home" was used.
Moreover the boundaries of that Jewish State were to encompass all of the territory lying between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.

Labhras

Some real evidence of idf,s attitude to Palestininas.
Taken from the chief Rabbis "Contribution" to these war crimes.This hate material was passed out to the IDF on their way to carry out their "Divine Mission".

"“[There is] a biblical ban on surrendering a single millimeter of it [the Land of Israel] to gentiles, though all sorts of impure distortions and foolishness of autonomy, enclaves and other national weaknesses. We will not abandon it to the hands of another nation, not a finger, not a nail of it.”…The text is from “Books of Rabbi Shlomo Aviner,” who heads the Ateret Cohanim yeshiva in the Muslim quarter of the Old City in Jerusalem.

Labhras

Phil --re Wm Hazlitt.

Is your response meant to be serious.

I mean can you address the content of his post--No--Ok, that explains the personal attacks.

Not too worry--you are not alone.Many apologists resort to that tactic, when at a loss for credible comeback.

Must be frustrating, not being able to "Untruth" the truth.

Tim

Well done Melanie Phillips, what a research you've put in to this... and what a rhetoric! Dismissing the truths of others as lies merely because they conflict with yours is the hallmark of a good piece of writing. Or politics. Or history?

I always thought shameless propaganda (especially for a cause for which there are, as these comments show, already more than enough evangelists) wasn't The Spectator's cup of tea. Apparently I was wrong. And re: Yehuda, you are mistaken. In fact, you couldn't be more mistaken. As recent research by the University of Amsterdam has pointed out, Western media tend to rely far too heavily on information provided by journalists based in Israel. If only they would at times draw on sources in Palestina - a lack for which they are hardly to blame; the same research suggests Palestinian press centres are constantly attacked.

Wm. Hazlitt

Original Tony,

The League of Nations is by now of historic interest only. But it is of interest, and since you place so much weight on it, it is worth considering further.

The League did indeed disregard British commitments to the Arabs in the McMahon-Hussain letters of 1916 and its public declaration of 1917 to the Arabs that "future government...should be based upon the principle of consent of the governed", and its joint statement with France in the same year assuring the Arabs of their continuing commitment to "the complete and definite emancipation of the peoples so long oppressed by the Turks and the establishment of national governments and administrations deriving their authority from the initiative and free choice of the indigenous population."

The League did indeed repeat the wording of Balfour's letter to Lord Rothschild calling for "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people" (the Zionists had wanted "the national home"). At the time the Jews were about 10% of the population.

It is true that Lloyd-George was a keen Zionist for religious, geopolitical and racist reasons. It is true that Balfour said in private "in Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants."

The League also included clauses about "the development of self-governing institutions" for the Jews. However, it also followed Balfour in the caveat: "it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities" (that is, the other 90% of the population).

It should be no surprise that the Great Powers acted with such disregard for their own word and principles, and for natural justice. Self-determination for subject peoples was not in their interest. It is also no surprise that the Zionists were so skillful in using the self-interest of the Great Powers to their own advantage. (It is surprising however that you should be so open about your disregard for self-determination for anyone in Palestine other than the Yishuv.)

As we all know, British rule was a mixture of Imperialist arrogance, good intentions, and ignominy. The British in general favoured the Zionists, and were brutal in suppressing the Arab revolts, but did make efforts to live up to the caveat in the Mandate. These attempts to meet demands from both communities were ultimately unacceptable to both Arabs and Zionists. The Arabs had long since resorted to attacks on Jews and British, both of whom were well able to retaliate in force. The Zionists in the 1940s reosrted to terrorism against the British.

When Britain gave up on the responsibilities it had assumed, the UN (the US) stepped in. The UN partition proposal of 1947 is in many ways a similar Great Power diktat. The Arabs were to have 42% of the territory with approxiamtely 818000 Arabs and 10000 Jews. The Jewish state was to have 56% of the territory with 438000 Arabs,and 4990000 Jews. The remainder was to be an internationally governed enclave around Jerusalem with 100000 Arabs and 100000 Jews. 85% of the Jews were centred around three cities, and Jews owned 10% of the privately held land. This is self-evidently grossly unfair to the Arabs.

The states that voted against the resolution that embodied the partition proposal had a population of 480million or 28.9% fo the total represented in the UN. Those who abstained had 625million or 37.5%. Those who voted for had 560million or 33.6%. Over 400million of the world's population were not represented at the UN. As Dean Rusk noted, "The pressure and arm-twisting applied by American and Jewish representatives in capital after capital to get that affirmative vote are hard to describe." Judah Magnes said, The kind of pressure that was used at the UN Assembly to put through partition was as evil as partition itself. I feel ashamed that the Holy Land should have been made a bargaining counter."

Your account of subsequent history is strangely mistaken. One look at the partition map will disabuse you.

You will note in passing that a large part of the land included within Israel's 1967 borders was acquired in the 1948 war, and therefore technically is subject to the same international law as East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza. But the Palestinians have to be realists: they are only asking for the 22% of Mandate Palestine that comprises the "Occupied Territories".

You are also strangely mistaken in asserting that the UN recognizes Israel's settlements as legal. It does not. I refer you back to its request to the International Court of Justice. The court's ruling was clear and unambiguous. Your arguments, I'm afraid, are without merit.

As a footnote, the fact that Jordan and Egypt have been so keen to swallow up bits of Palestine gives the lie to the notion that the Palestinians should just go and live in another part of their domains. The Palestinians are the people who lived in Palestine. They are also unfortunately the people who have had no Great Power to look after their interests, and no meagre middle size or puny power to even take an interest.

phil

Labhras I study at your feet and I know a liar when I" see" one-you may think you tell the truth as you believe in the Arab cause as I do for the Israeli cause , but our hater has no cause other than the one he pursues and he defines by his choice of name -look it up .

Original Tony

Labhras and Hazlitt...you are both intelligent people but unlike you Labhras I will not accuse you of being a liar.

You both make very intersting points.

However, without going into hundreds of conventions and resolutions that were passed, either with bias in the UN or whatever, I will re-paint the simplistic picture that everyone ignores.

1. It was mandated (however the mandate was achieved, whether by threat, bully tactics or disregard for arab inhabitants of 'Palestine', that Israel's Eastern homeland/state border would be the river Jordan (this was the revised border by the way...it originally went to Iraq).
2. Jordan, in breach of international law, annexed the west bank from Israel in the 1940's. I say in breach of International law because the law sates and I quote "While hostilities continue, the occupying state is prohibited by international law from annexing the territory or creating another state....."

Hostilities had not ceased (by treaty) at the time of the "annexation" and the annexation is therefore illegal.
3. When Israel took the West bank in 1967, it simply took over soveregnty of its own land.

The fact that some high court judge uses the "belligerent occupation clause" to determine where a partition wall is to be built has NOTHING to do with sovreignty over the land but has everything to do with fairness about where the wall was to be built. (This is why the petitioners won the argument against an Israeli army officer who bult a wall through peoples' orchards).
4. The West bank is therefore part of Israel. Get it into your heads please.It has been part of Israel since ancient times and I feel Israelis have more right to that land than people who drifted onto it in the last couple of centuries.

Also, everyone is so worried about a homeland for these people but they are not semetic and dont belong in Israel and as for comensation for them, what about comepnsation for 870 000 Jews kicked out of Arab lands?

phil

Original Tony I dont know how one can make a sensible reply to a list of accusations that come from the realms of Alice in Wonderland -pressure by the zionists ,a speck of dust in overall numbers .Lloyd George the racist !If it wasnt a serious subject it would be a joke by a man who sounds like a failed law student inflicting his misery on the rest of us -I wouldnt bother.

btw this is the man hazlitt calls a racist "As the war (boer)progressed, he moved his attack to its conduct by the generals, who, he said (basing his words on reports by Burdett Coutt in The Times), were not providing for the sick or wounded soldiers and were starving Boer women and children in concentration camps."---- I think we know who is the racist here !!!

robin

Of course the Israeli Defense Force did do nothing but distributing cigarettes, drinking tea, and cleaning the houses of those dirty, dirty (irony, dear moderator, irony)people of the Gaza strip. We should all thank our highly respected, well-informed and unprejudiced author for deconstructing the fairytale that a theatre of war brings out the worst in men, and for revealing the exaggerations, if not lies, of several western media, which have reported the bombing of, say, schools. Thank you, Melanie Phillips, thank you, and again. Now we can stop wasting our time with being critical; there are so many more amusing things to do

phil

robin this tirade of sarcasm has no scholarship ,just invective that no doubt makes you feel good and exemplifies the stupidity of those that ply your trade .Many of us look for solutions ,those like you only make a continuation ever more certain .do yuo care ?nah I thought not

Tim

Re: Phil

Phil, none of your comments so far has made any sense, let alone evoked even a scent of the 'scholarship' you apparently appreciate, so in the future would you be so kind to refrain from comments on posts that have not only relativized the debate with a wink but also, simultaneously, deconstructed the absurdity of Melanie's argument.

Re: Robin

Well done!

Daan

Phil, Robin's 'tirade of sarcasm' as you call it, comes close to Melanie Phillips' 'tirade of parody', wouldn't you think? Is it not ironic that when the 'global press' brings news (which is, as Tim already mentioned, mainly from the Israeli front to begin with) it is unproven and 'hearsay', as Phillips calls it, while her analysis based on an eye-witness from the Israeli army is lacking the same evidence? In fact, is it not a bit simplistic to think of this conflict as a battle between good vs. bad? the truth of the Israeli's vs. the lie's of Palestinians (and apparently, since the global press is suddenly pro-palestina, The West)? I never imagined a conflict of war could be explained that easily: Israeli soldiers sharing tea, Palestinian activists lying. But well, probably its just my 'stupidity' as you say Phil that agree with Robin's 'tirade of sarcasm'.

Jillsy

Oh robin, i think you've just proved that the theatre of discussion brings out equally ugly parts of men - and women, for that matter.

BTW, the school you refer to was not bombed and this has been commen knowledge for quite awhile.

phil

Tim you have confirmed my original thoughts -you are on your 12th pint and so far have said nothing ,but no worries you obviously know nothing a fact which you have ably demonstrated

Labhras

To Original Tony"

4. The West bank is therefore part of Israel. Get it into your heads please.It has been part of Israel since ancient times and I feel Israelis have more right to that land than people who drifted onto it in the last couple of centuries." Oriniginal Tony.

If the west bank is in Israel, when are "ALL" the inhabitants getting their "Vote".

Just a short reply will do.More is less, if you see what I mean.

Wm. Hazlitt

~Original Tony,

Thank you for your response.

The Mandate did not specify that a Jewish homeland was to take the form of a sovereign state, and certainly did not stipulate a particular territory. The League of Nations did not cede sovereignty of Palestine to the Yishuv.

In the partition of 1947, the West Bank was designated as part of the Palestinian state. Similarly, Israel occupied it illegally in 1967, (illegally, for reasons similar to those you adduce for Jordan).

Your reading of the opinion of the International Court is in error. Prior to making a judgement on the Wall, the judges determined various points of principle, as I described in my first comment, the most important of which concerned sovereignty. Their judgement, which represents the judgement of the highest court of international justice, was clear, unambiguous, and left no room for doubt. This is simply a fact which you will have to accept. Under international law (the law you said gave the Yishuv the right to set up a state in Palestine) the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza are Occupied Palestinian Territory illegally occupied and settled by Israel.

Finally, I am not sure why the fact that "these people" are neither "semetic" (?) nor Israeli should be considered a reason not to care about their welfare and their right to self-determination: they are human beings like the rest of us, with the same aspirations and the same rights.

robin

Re: Phil
Phil, or rather, Dr. Phil, since you simultaneously are such a gifted scholar of the Middle-East and such a clever analyst of the human psyche. For you, anyone who dares to oppose your highly-informed opinion is either, and I quote from the oeuvre of Dr. Phil, "mad" and a "liar", or a "hater" or someone who "has an aversion to jewish people". Your rants seem to be informed by a very outdated discourse. In that sense, you remind me a bit of Don Quichote, whose world view was also informed by narratives of times gone-by, resulting in his infamous dealings with giants and monsters, which, in reality, were nothing but wind mills and water drains, symbols of a new stage in history, which he could not yet comprehend. If your tone of voice would not have been so agressive, i would have had sympathy for you, like we all have sympathy for the man of La Mancha; sympathy for your incapability of coping with a debate that is finally coming of age. Now, I can only hope that people like you, people who are so blinded by ideology that they do not reason with other people, and merely scream that everybody is, and I quote again from the oeuvre of Dr. Phil, "stupid" will never hold any power of some sort, and just keep doing what they do best: sitting in a gloomy room, posting gloomy messages.
Re: Tim. Thank god some people are not too blind to understand irony, and its rhetorical use.

Original Tony

Phil...1:02 pm...well said!

robin

Re: Phil
Phil, or rather, Dr. Phil, since you simultaneously are such a gifted scholar of the Middle-East and such a clever analyst of the human psyche. For you, anyone who dares to oppose your highly-informed opinion is either, and I quote from the oeuvre of Dr. Phil, "mad" and a "liar", or a "hater" or someone who "has an aversion to jewish people". Your rants seem to be informed by a very outdated discourse. In that sense, you remind me a bit of Don Quichote, whose world view was also informed by narratives of times gone-by, resulting in his infamous dealings with giants and monsters, which, in reality, were nothing but wind mills and water drains, symbols of a new stage in history, which he could not yet comprehend. If your tone of voice would not have been so agressive, i would have had sympathy for you, like we all have sympathy for the man of La Mancha; sympathy for your incapability of coping with a debate that is finally coming of age. Now, I can only hope that people like you, people who are so blinded by ideology that they do not reason with other people, and merely scream that everybody is, and I quote again from the oeuvre of Dr. Phil, "stupid" will never hold any power of some sort, and just keep doing what they do best: sitting in a gloomy room, posting gloomy messages.
Re: Tim. Thank god some people are not too short-sighted to understand irony, and its rhetorical use.

phil

Daan I would have thought by now the posters are aware that I do not approve of any tirades wherever they come from -I seek peace for all and those like robin and tim are only here to insult and amuse their twisted minds -for my part it would be better to wait until all investigations were finished -the accusations are mostly one way and invariably proven wrong -what do they achieve ?.only more enmity and lack of trust ----------

I well understand the Arab world,s anger ,but it is these smart alecs from amongst us that cause the most trouble and they do it without thought for the consequences ,just a cheap thrill at seeing their names in print .Do you think they care for an Arab ,you must be joking ,they care for them as much as they care for us -nada --DAAN I do care for all of us and I assure you most Jews do to -we want peace ,the likes of those two want sport .

Istvan Slaughenwhite

A democratic state? 20 percent of the population are non-Jews (approximately 1.1 million Muslims, 130,000 Christians and 100,000 Druze).1, while in the Knesset, 8 seats in the 120 are for anyone of non-jewish decent, and of that number, and falling. Also, many of the social disparity can be explained by the nature of welfare and social programs tied to military service, and religious affiliation, further excluding that portion of the population that is non-Druze. Govermental post? An ambassador to Finland, and a few Druze or Bedouinns. A "Jewish State" concept is based on ethnically preferential treatment towards Jews enshrined in immigration (the Law of Return) and land policy (the Jewish National Fund), and is not Democratic to a large minority of the population.

phil

robin- plain phil will do thank you -I think I have said it to DAAN all that you need to know-I do not need to justify myself to the other posters they know by now where I am coming from and you choose to ignore it for whatever word you prefer to describe your self with -stupid ,hater .liar I don't think I have used mad yet but who cares , you are here for the sport and I will comfort myself with the belief if it wasn't us it would be the Arabs or in fact any other minority that would give you the sport you seek . Both you and tim have nothing constructive to say ,no peace to seek just the vicarious pleasure of being hateful in the comfort of your own chair-you would never dare to say these things face to face ,that is the mark of a bully of which I have no doubt you both are .

Wagner

I love a good Philibuster.

Wm. Hazlitt

Original Tony,

A brief sermon on how rationality works. When you come across a fact that your current beliefs are not consistent with, this means that your current beliefs cannot all be true. In honesty you cannot just continue as before.

The system of international law that stipulated, however unjustly, that the Yishuv should have a state in part of Palestine, also stipulates that Israel's occupation and settlement of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza is illegal.

Si, N

Original Tony
March 25th, 2009 12:44pm -

‘Labhras and Hazlitt...you are both intelligent people…[y]ou both make very intersting points.’ (sic)

phil
March 25th, 2009 1:02pm -

‘Original Tony I dont know how one can make a sensible reply to a list of accusations that come from the realms of Alice in Wonderland’. (sick)

Original Tony
March 25th, 2009 4:32pm -

‘Phil...1:02 pm...well said!’ (sicker)

Flakey flakey

Original Tony

Si,N...at least Phil doesn't lie, which is a Si,n...lol

Wm. Hazlitt

Original Tony

At least Si,N makes the effort to answer his critics. He does not hide behind other contributors, as you appear to have taken to doing. If this is to be your strategy (or perhaps you just want a brief rest from your endeavours), at least look to contributors who do not chop logic, who can carry an argument, (you know, make coherent statements and produce evidence to support them), who do not turn maudlin or abusive if they get a vague sense that maybe they are not winning, in other words, contributors looking for honest debate. Otherwise, what is the point?

phil

Wm. Hazlitt you continue to define yourself by comparing sin to OT ,a man you would do well to emulate,a person of truth and compassion regardless of race or religion -What do you do?-just continue to attack Israel ,a place you will never have been to and a people you will have no knowledge of -your skills are in cutting and pasting from places that suit your purposes and you have never absorbed anything anyone has ever said to you here-why ? because you do not want to ---------

.you have a purpose and you will pursue it regardless of the fact that no other person is interested in distortions other than those you praise such as sin -I am answering my own questions I know because I am aware that you will not -I am just to direct and perceptive for you ,but no worries I do not care whether or not you reply ,I just feel better by telling you --Original Tony you are a star here and I hope you will ignore his ignorance .

Si, N

Thank you Wm. Hazlitt.

Original Tony - point to a single lie that can be directly attributed to me.

While you're at it, point to one post by 'phil' that makes a coherent point and doesn't malign a fellow poster.

Leroidavid

As usual, the anti-Jewish racists are using Internet to spit their hate...

Leroidavid

Melanie's article is EXCELLENT !

Cheers !

Damian Lataan

Evidence of IDF war crimes committed against the Gazan people is overwhelming - and not just from IDF soldiers but also from the UN and Palestian individuals.

Re-invoking the old 'blood libel' nonsense makes the propaganda of trying to deflect the reality of war crimes having been committed simply more transparent.

Crawford

Damian Lataan, is that the same UN who claimed and broadcast globally that IDF targeted a school killing children then had to grovel in the sand of shame as they retracted their vile accusation?

But, hey, retraction or not, their goal had been achieved. Israel painted as the aggressors.

Crawford

Damian Lataan, is that the same UN who claimed and broadcast globally that IDF targeted a school killing children then had to grovel in the sand of shame as they retracted their vile accusation?

But, hey, retraction or not, their goal had been achieved. Israel painted as the aggressors.

Boy79

If you've never heard Radiohead, you're missing out. ,

Don Boston

Such selective reporting. The soldiers talking about how great they were are credible while those who spoke to Breaking the Silence are liars.

Most people do what is in their best interests. In US courts, testimony reporting people's statements that are detrimental to their own interests can be admitted as credible evidence while that reporting self-serving statements by the same people would be inadmissible as hearsay. Isn't it better for soldiers themselves to deny rather than admit committing and observing war crimes? Who is really credible?

Israel admits attacking UN facilities, claiming readily avoidable small arms fire as an excuse. The whole world watched Israeli-shot video of white phosphorus being used as a weapon.

On the other hand, Hamas is a terrorist organization that has fired thousands of rockets into Israel that are too crude to be directed at military targets and are effectively targeting innocent civilians. The people of Sderot are among the few Israelis who know suffering as do the WB Palsestinians - constant exposure to arbitrary destruction and violence.

The soldiers and militants on both sides acted horribly. There is lots of video evidence of prvasive vandalism, spreading of waste and vicious, racist graffiti left by IDF on homes they stole/occupied during the invasion. Hamas militants at times took positions knowingly exposing innocent Palestinians to fire. Both sides used human shields.

Thre were no saints in Cast Lead. Much of my selective focus on Israeli misconduct is unfair and biased like this article - but proves the point that selective reporting can distort reality so as to lose all true value.