240,000 dollars awarded to man forced to cover Arab T-shirt

SWTXBelle · #1 01-12-2009, 08:48 PM

I thought Israel didn't care about world opinion? And even if they did - it would "distract" them? Then they aren't very focused . . . also, why would there be hand-wringing if Israel isn't doing anything wrong?

I'm not going to go all cliche' here, but it is obvious that our opinions are not likely to change - so I don't want to beat a dead horse. Oh wait, that's a cliche' . . .drat.

epchick · #2 01-12-2009, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

also, why would there be hand-wringing if Israel isn't doing anything wrong?

Cause Israel knows they are doing things wrong.

Like the fact it came out that the UN school did NOT have militants (and Israel knew that). Or the fact that Israel is using phosphorus as a weapon, so that the people of Gaza are having their skins peel off before they die.

It isn't that Israel is too "busy" to allow the journalists to report, it's that they don't want the journalists reporting about these things.

UGAalum94 · #3 01-12-2009, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epchick

Cause Israel knows they are doing things wrong.

Like the fact it came out that the UN school did NOT have militants (and Israel knew that). Or the fact that Israel is using phosphorus as a weapon, so that the people of Gaza are having their skins peel off before they die.

It isn't that Israel is too "busy" to allow the journalists to report, it's that they don't want the journalists reporting about these things.

So if journalists didn't report it, how do you know it happened?
(my point is that this is obviously not an effective way to achieve that goal if it's their goal.)

ETA: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_155157.html

They admit using phosphorus in 2006 in Lebanon and apparently it's not illegal to use as a smokescreen.

And they now claim that they were attacked from near the school:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7823204.stm
Who puts something likely to be a target of returned fire 30 meters from a school? Is that much better than it not being at the school itself?

epchick · #4 01-12-2009, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

So if journalists didn't report it, how do you know it happened?
(my point is that this is obviously not an effective way to achieve that goal if it's their goal.)

ETA: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_155157.html

They admit using phosphorus in 2006 in Lebanon and apparently it's not illegal to use as a smokescreen.

And they now claim that they were attacked from near the school:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7823204.stm
Who puts something likely to be a target of returned fire 30 meters from a school? Is that much better than it not being at the school itself?

I never said journalists aren't reporting it.

Idk about using it in Lebanon, but they are currently using it in Gaza.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090112/...ite_phosphorus

It might not be illegal to use but according to the article:

Quote:

Under customary laws of war, however, Israel would be expected to take all feasible precautions to minimize the impact of white phosphorus on civilians, Human Rights Watch said.

It's just a little shady to use it when Israel obviously has the upper hand, there is no need to be using things that will obviously be detrimental to civilians.

And yeah, the militants were supposedly in the vicinity of the school, but the thing is Israel KNEW before they bombed it. They knew before that the militants were actually not in the school, but they decided to bomb it anyways.

UGAalum94 · #5 01-12-2009, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epchick

I never said journalists aren't reporting it.

Idk about using it in Lebanon, but they are currently using it in Gaza.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090112/...ite_phosphorus

It might not be illegal to use but according to the article:

It's just a little shady to use it when Israel obviously has the upper hand, there is no need to be using things that will obviously be detrimental to civilians.

And yeah, the militants were supposedly in the vicinity of the school, but the thing is Israel KNEW before they bombed it. They knew before that the militants were actually not in the school, but they decided to bomb it anyways.

That's not what I'm reading. I'm reading that the latest word from Israel is that they knew Hamas had fired from the area and tried to bomb where they were, but one mortar misfired by 30 meters. Sure, we don't know who to believe, but I find it pretty implausible that Israel knew there were no Hamas militants at the school, but said, "hey, what the hell, let's kill some kids just for fun." Only one of three shells fired by Israel hit the school, and two hit the target they were aiming at, sez Israel today.

epchick · #6 01-12-2009, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

That's not what I'm reading. I'm reading that the latest word from Israel is that they knew Hamas had fired from the area and tried to bomb where they were, but one mortar misfired by 30 meters. Sure, we don't know who to believe, but I find it pretty implausible that Israel knew there were no Hamas militants at the school, but said, "hey, what the hell, let's kill some kids just for fun." Only one of three shells fired by Israel hit the school, and two hit the target they were aiming at, sez Israel today.

Hmmm...well I didn't hear that. The article I read, said that one member of the IDF said that they knew Hamas was in the area (not in the school) but decided to bomb the school so that they might be able to kill the Hamas militants in the area. Then the article goes on to say that other members of IDF said Hamas WAS in the school, and it just kept flip-flopping back and forth like that.

Of course now I want to link the stupid story, I can't find it anymore.

UGAalum94 · #7 01-12-2009, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epchick

Hmmm...well I didn't hear that. The article I read, said that one member of the IDF said that they knew Hamas was in the area (not in the school) but decided to bomb the school so that they might be able to kill the Hamas militants in the area. Then the article goes on to say that other members of IDF said Hamas WAS in the school, and it just kept flip-flopping back and forth like that.

Of course now I want to link the stupid story, I can't find it anymore.

Well, it's pretty clear that their story has changed anyway. But I still kind of doubt that they just decided to bomb the school knowing that they weren't going to hit any of the Hamas targets. But who knows? When you start getting into the motives for a particular strike, you do have to rely on what people tell you I guess or an have a separate understanding of what advantage they would gain from the strike.

Had there been an international journalist present close enough to say what Israel was aiming at, he'd probably be dead.

UGAalum94 · #8 01-12-2009, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

I thought Israel didn't care about world opinion? And even if they did - it would "distract" them? Then they aren't very focused . . . also, why would there be hand-wringing if Israel isn't doing anything wrong?

I'm not going to go all cliche' here, but it is obvious that our opinions are not likely to change - so I don't want to beat a dead horse. Oh wait, that's a cliche' . . .drat.

I'm with you on the horse or off the horse.

I don't think Israel cares about the bad PR of shutting the borders to journalists right now. I think they'd care somewhat more if say the US actually sent in troops to defend the Palestinians in Gaza and would find that pretty distracting, but I don't see that happening.