Amnesty Finds Hizbullah Guilty of War Crimes.

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
It's your call to trust them or not, personally I don't. But does not trusting them make Hezbollah any better? Or is this the usual knee jerk reaction "America is the evil empire" crapola? Is there only one evil on this planet? The US of A? Doesn't anyobdy have any other skeletons? I think so.

I agree there are more than enough skeletons to go around, but we are talking about what degree of "truth" or dependability/reliability that can reasonably be expected of presentations of opinion from invested organizations and interest groups. I'm simply pointing out that the "truth" is very unlikely to get a great deal of exposure even from those whom a great many people regard as honest and truthful. Many American's embrace President Bush as their hero. Many believe that the dog and pony show that Colin Powel put on at the U.N. is still the current level of understanding the world has with respect to the potential threat of an Iraq with stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.Many embrace Donald Rumsfeld's fantasies delivered to the newsrooms of CNN and FOX via "embedded" journalists and actually believe that that they're watching and hearing the "truth".

Patriotism will permit of listening to if not (although any study of history is replete with examples) outright lies and fabrications, but perspectives only remotely affiliated with the actual course of events, as unvarnished absolute truth.

Politicians lie.

They all lie and they all have their minions on websites and throughout media of all kinds to further their lies and hidden agendas. Hizbolla :) the Whitehouse and the Parliament buildings...I would have thought people understand this but apparently there are still a great many people struggling with that reality.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Israel has been in conflict with Lebanon since it was first created:

A brief history of the Lebanese-Israeli conflict:

Because Israel and Lebanon have never signed a peace accord, the countries remain officially in a state of war that has existed since 1948 when Lebanon joined other Arab nations against the newly formed Jewish state.

The two countries have been bound by an armistice signed in 1949, which regulates the presence of military forces in southern Lebanon.
With a large Christian minority in an overwhelmingly Muslim region, mercantile and Westernized, Lebanon was considered the least hostile Arab neighbor to Israel _ and the weakest. The rare skirmishes that occurred were mostly symbolic.
That began to change as Palestinian guerrillas became active. In 1968, Israeli commandos landed at Beirut airport and blew up 13 Lebanese airliners in retaliation for Arab militants firing on an Israeli airliner in Athens, Greece.
Under pressure from staunch anti-Israeli Arab regimes in 1969, Lebanon signed an agreement that effectively gave away a southern region for Palestinian guerrillas to use as a springboard to infiltrate Israel or launch cross-border attacks.
Israel retaliated regularly as Palestinian guerrillas fired on northern Israel, and Israeli forces invaded southern Lebanon in 1978. A U.N. peacekeeping force deployed and the Israelis pulled out after installing a local Lebanese militia in a border buffer zone, but the attacks continued.
Israel invaded again on a wider scale in 1982 to destroy Yasser Arafat's Palestinian guerrilla movement, which had established itself as a force within Lebanon during the country's civil war that began in The bulk of Palestinian guerrillas were evacuated from Lebanon, but a new Lebanese guerrilla force, Hezbollah, emerged with the aid of Iran and drawn from the Shiite Muslim community that inhabits southern and eastern Lebanon.
U.S.-sponsored negotiations produced a Lebanon-Israel agreement but that deal died as Lebanon collapsed in another round of civil war.
After a destructive and costly military campaign that lasted for three years, Israeli forces withdrew from most of Lebanon but retained a self-proclaimed "security zone" just north of its own border.
Fighting inside Lebanon would escalate periodically, including a 1993 Israeli bombing offensive and the 17-day "Grapes of Wrath" military campaign in 1996 that left about 150 Lebanese civilians dead. At that time, Israel was reacting against guerrilla attacks by Hezbollah against Israeli soldiers inside the occupied zone and against Katyusha rockets being fired by Hezbollah into Israel proper.
Israel left that zone in 2000, but warned that it would return if its security to the north was compromised.
Hezbollah trumpeted Israel's withdrawal as a great victory but claimed that Israel continued to occupy illegally a small, empty parcel near Syria called the Chebaa Farms. Diplomats mostly see that claim as a convenient excuse to justify attacks against Israel. Nevertheless, the Israeli-Lebanese frontier had remained largely quiet for the past six years with occasional outbursts _ until a cross-border raid July 12 resulted in the capture of two Israeli soldiers and the killing of eight others, sparking the current warfare.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/17/D8ITOV1G0.html

But the big problem isn't Israel and Lebanon but Israel itself and its relationship with its neighbors:

The Destruction of Palestine
Jonathan Cook, The Electronic Intifada, 29 September 2006


Palestinian electricity workers extinguish a fire inside the headquarters of the main electricity company in the Gaza Strip after it was attacked by an Israeli missile during air strikes over the city, June 28, 2006. (MaanImages/Wesam Saleh)

...electricity is available to most of Gaza's 1.4 million inhabitants for a few hours a day, and running water for a similar period. The sewerage system has all but collapsed, with the resulting risk of the spread of dangerous infectious disease.

In their daily lives, Gazans can no longer rely on the basic features of modern existence. Their fridges are as good as useless, threatening outbreaks of food poisoning. The elderly and infirm living in apartments can no longer leave their homes because elevators don't work, or are unpredictable. Hospitals and doctors' clinics struggle to offer essential medical services. Small businesses, most of which rely on the power and water supplies, from food shops and laundry services to factories and workshops, are being forced to close...

...The occupation of Gaza did not begin this year, after Hamas was elected, nor did it end with the disengagement a year ago. The occupation is four decades old and still going strong in both the West Bank and Gaza. In that time Israel has followed a consistent policy of subjugating the Palestinian population, imprisoning it inside ever-shrinking ghettos, sealing it off from contact with the outside world, and destroying its chances of ever developing an independent economy...

...First, it has imposed forms of collective punishment to weaken Palestinian resolve to resist the occupation, and encourage factionalism and civil war. Second, it has "domesticated" suffering inside the ghettos, ensuring each Palestinian finds himself isolated from his neighbours, his concerns reduced to the domestic level: how to receive a house permit, or get past the wall to school or university, or visit a relative illegally imprisoned in Israel, or stop yet more family land being stolen, or reach his olive groves.


Palestinian electricity workers extinguish fire inside the headquarters of the main electricity company in Gaza Strip it was attacked by Israeli missile during an air strike on the city, 28 June 2006, (MaanImages/Wesam Saleh)


The goals of both sets of policies, however, are the same: the erosion of Palestinian society's cohesiveness, the disruption of efforts at solidarity and resistance, and ultimately the slow drift of Palestinians away from vulnerable rural areas into the relative safety of urban centres — and eventually, as the pressure continues to mount, on into neighbouring Arab states, such as Jordan and Egypt.

Seen in this light, the bombing of the Gaza power station fits neatly into Israel's long-standing plans for the Palestinians...

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article5796.shtml


An eye witness account:

Does Israel have a policy of killing Palestinian civilians?
Nigel Parry, The Electronic Intifada, 13 June 2006


"The IDF is the most moral military in the world; there has never been - and there isn't now - a policy of attacking civilians."

-- Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's remarks at the start of the weekly Cabinet meeting, 11 June 2006. Communicated by the Prime Minister's Media Adviser.​
Stepping through the looking glass

In the foreground, Palestinian youths carry off an injured friend to a waiting ambulance. Al-Nakba demonstrations, Ramallah, 14 May 1998. (Nigel Parry)
When I lived in Ramallah between 1994-1998, the era of the so-called peace process, I witnessed perhaps 30 clashes between young Palestinians and Israeli soldiers to very consciously document and photograph what transpired. I was sick to my stomach with reading media reports by foreign correspondents that characterized these events along the lines of:

Israeli soldiers and Palestinians clashed today on the outskirts of Ramallah. Two Palestinians were killed and four injured.

What was problematic about these reports was the utter lack of contextual information that let you know how a stone-throwing protest routinely ended up with dead Palestinian teenagers and children.

Bar the five days of the September 1996 Clashes, which saw an escalation from stones to guns after 5 Palestinians were shot dead at the beginning of the first day, none of the Palestinians at these 30 clashes were armed with anything other than stones and the very occasional Molotov cocktail. It was simpler in those days, unlike the speedy militarization of the Second Intifada, courtesy of Arafat’s Fatah movement. With the guns on only one side, the chilling context of power disparity was out there in plain sight.

Of the several Palestinians who I saw shot dead at these 30 clashes, not a single one of them was killed within any range that they could have hit an Israeli soldier with a stone. In the single clash where I witnessed an Israeli soldier grazed by a stone, the killing that took place happened much later. At no time was there any life-threatening situation that required these soldiers to behave any differently than riot police would behave in a more civilized country.

A young Palestinian with a head injury from a rubber-coated metal bullet. Al-Nakba demonstrations, Ramallah, 14 May 1998. (Nigel Parry)
At these clashes, the Israeli soldiers would do things that boggled the mind. They would trade curses with the young Palestinians, laughing and shouting with other soldiers. They would shoulder their rifles and throw stones at the Palestinians. They would make animal sounds, grunting and jumping around like monkeys, inciting the Palestinians to venture out of cover. The soldiers would use live ammunition and “less lethal” ammunition (such as rubber-coated metal bullets) simultaneously, thus negating the very reason that troops are issued with the “less lethal” munitions.

Out of nowhere, when the energy of the clashes seemed to be dissipating, a soldier would suddenly shoot a child or teenager, 100 meters away from them or more and in front of you. Next time you find yourself in an open space with no people around, see how far you can throw a stone. You’ll find it to be considerably less than 100 meters.

Let me be clear. The events I am describing, in the clashes where people died, were not the exception. They were the rule. And not one soldier was ever punished.

Palestinians take cover behind a metal dumpster as Israeli troops open fire. Abu Ghnaim clashes, Ramallah, 26 March 1997. (Nigel Parry)

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4802.shtml
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
So why aren't there British American and Canadian troops in Israel and Lebanon, a peace-making contingent to bring stability to that region instead of of Canadian troops sitting in Afghanistan being targetted by American air force fighters and bomber crews?

If you don't know the answer I'll be happy to oblige...
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
I believe the political right officially proclaimed Amnesty International an organization not worth taking seriously. Why the sudden change?
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
So why aren't there British American and Canadian troops in Israel and Lebanon, a peace-making contingent to bring stability to that region instead of of Canadian troops sitting in Afghanistan being targetted by American air force fighters and bomber crews?

If you don't know the answer I'll be happy to oblige...

Amnesty International is objective. What they said about Hezbollah is correct. This organization committed a war crime because it deliberately attacked civilians.

Israel is also guilty of committing war crimes.

Its hard to say which side started it. The fighting has been going on for decades. It is already a global conflict.

Canada should try to remain as objective and impartial as Amnesty International. If we choose sides, we would also commit war crimes.
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Another excellent reason why our troops shouldn't be in Afghanistan!

And probably another excellent reason why our troops and American troops and British troops should be in Israel.
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
I haven't heard nor to be honest, made the effort to research the entire Rwanda mess, but what was Amnesty International's perspective and recomendations regarding tens of thousands dying daily by the hand of violence?

You've satisfied me already that you're well acquainted with the Palestinian/Israeli infections but could you shed some light on when and under what circumstances it becomes apparent that the combatants in a civil struggle are inflicting unnecessarily grievous injury and mayhem upon each other and are completely and totally unable to resolve thier issues peacefully....and it is appropriate to intervene...or is it ever..let's ask Uncle Sam....
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
Amnesty International is objective. What they said about Hezbollah is correct. This organization committed a war crime because it deliberately attacked civilians.

Israel is also guilty of committing war crimes.

Its hard to say which side started it. The fighting has been going on for decades. It is already a global conflict.

Canada should try to remain as objective and impartial as Amnesty International. If we choose sides, we would also commit war crimes.

A reasonable aproach in many ways. I find myself wanting to agree.

Then I remember that Israel is a western democracy surrounded by lunatics who would be happiest if they got to butcher every Jew on the face of the Earth............

Then I'm willing to cut them A LOT of slack.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
Another excellent reason why our troops shouldn't be in Afghanistan!

And probably another excellent reason why our troops and American troops and British troops should be in Israel.

Now, Mikey, IMHO this is just silly.

Folks from Afghanistan ATTACKED us.

Israel has not.

Afghanistan was a nation that publically stoned women to death for appearing in public without a proper escort.

Israel is a modern democracy.

Israel was ATTACKED by folks living in a nation officially at war with Israel since 1948.

If you can't see the difference........
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Amnesty International re 1994 Rwanda
http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/rwanda/document.do?id=49C30EC60619AD6A802569A600604D51

Its not true that all Muslims want to slaughter all Jews.
http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/1998/02/03/intl/intl.3.html

What they want most is justice and emancipation. Many, Palestinians for example, have neither. We have been misinformed about what are governments do in predominately Muslim/Arab countries, why these people are angry with us and what they want.

To some degree their suffering is a result of our governments interference in their affairs. To some degree their anger at us is justified. 9/11 was a consequence, not a random event.

STATE OF ISRAEL
Overview - Covering events from January - December 2005

http://web.amnesty.org/report2006/isr-summary-eng
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
Absolutely not all Muslims want to kill all Jews. That I know.

However, Hezbollah wants to kill all Jews. Their leader has said so.

The government controled press of Saudi Arabi and Egypt have both printed the "blood libel" at Passover, and printed it as truth as recently as 2004. The blood libel is the ancient belief that Jews use the blood of gentile children to make their unleavened bread........and kidnap and murder the children to do so. This has been the excuse for many a pogrom in Medieval Europe.........

Iran is led by a lunatic anti-Semitic Holocaust denier.

A LOT of Muslims would like to kill all the Jews........
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
It's never been the case throughout human history that the victor glorifies the conquered. Because the victor writes history and because the strong prevail, the only "truth" ever expressed is the version of "truth" in support of anything the strong may have done on their way to dominance. To imagine that a hatred of the west or for Christianity or as GWB put it... "they hate us for our our freedom" arises spontaneously is completely irrational. To believe that seventy or eighty men women and children were necessarily murdered when an entire spectrum of alternatives was available (Branch Davidian massacre) was in fact so irrational that Timothy McVeigh declared war on a government that had demonstrated yet again that it was being led by men without conscience, men who prize wealth and power before human life and even before self-preservation. The U.S.government has repeatedly included the execution of innocent people including women and children on the streets of its cities however this is never described as oppression or terrorism. When the same behaviour is demonstrated on the streets of any city in the Middle East except Jerusalem of course it is called terrorism.

It all depends who's reading the news and of course who wrote the news being read.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Well they have their propaganda, we have ours.

Is Iran's leader an anti-Semitc Holocaust denier or is he more than this two dimensional caricature?

Instead of having an opinion based on someone's else's opinion of what Ahmadinejad supposedly said, why not read his own words:

The letter was submitted to President Bush on Monday, May 9, 2006 via the Swiss embassy in Tehran, which takes care of the US interest section in Iran and acts as a liason between the two countries.
The following is the full text of President Ahmadinejad's letter to President George Bush:
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful,
Mr George Bush,
President of the United States of America,
For sometime now I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, especially in political forums and amongst university students. Many questions remain unanswered. These have prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hope that it might bring about an opportunity to redress them.
Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the great Messenger of God, feel obliged to respect human rights, present liberalism as a civilization model, announce one’s opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and WMDs, make “War on Terror” his slogan, and finally, work towards the establishment of a unified international community – a community which Christ and the virtuous of the Earth will one day govern, but at the same time, have countries attacked. The lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed and on the slight chance of the presence of a few criminals in a village, city, or convoy for example, the entire village, city or convoy (are) set ablaze.
Or because of the possibility of the existence of WMDs in one country, it is occupied, around one hundred thousand people killed, its water sources, agriculture and industry destroyed, close to 180,000 foreign troops put on the ground, sanctity of private homes of citizens broken, and the country pushed back perhaps fifty years. At what price? Hundreds of billions of dollars spent from the treasury of one country and certain other countries and tens of thousands of young men and women – as occupation troops – put in harms way, taken away from family and loved ones, their hands stained with the blood of others, subjected to so much psychological pressure that everyday some commit suicide and those returning home suffer depression, become sickly and grapple with all sorts of ailments; while some are killed and their bodies handed to their families.
On the pretext of the existence of WMDs, this great tragedy came to engulf both the peoples of the occupied and the occupying country. Later it was revealed that no WMDs existed to begin with. Of course Saddam was a murderous dictator. But the war was not waged to topple him, the announced goal of the war was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction. He was toppled along the way towards another goal; nevertheless the people of the region are happy about it. I point out that throughout the many years of the imposed war on Iran Saddam was supported by the West.
Mr. President,
You might know that I am a teacher. My students ask me how can these actions be reconciled with the values outlined at the beginning of this letter and duty to the tradition of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the Messenger of peace and forgiveness?
There are prisoners in Guantanamo Bay that have not been tried, have no legal representation, their families cannot see them and are obviously kept in a strange land outside their own country. There is no international monitoring of their conditions and fate. No one knows whether they are prisoners, POWs, accused or criminals.
European investigators have confirmed the existence of secret prisons in Europe too. I could not correlate the abduction of a person, and him or her being kept in secret prisons, with the provisions of any judicial system. For that matter, I fail to understand how such actions correspond to the values outlined in the beginning of this letter, i.e. the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH), human rights and liberal values.
Young people, university students, and ordinary people have many questions about the phenomenon of Israel. I am sure you are familiar with some of them.
Throughout history many countries have been occupied, but I think the establishment of a new country with a new people, is a new phenomenon that is exclusive to our times.
Students are saying that sixty years ago such a country did not exist. They show old documents and globes and say try as we have, we have not been able to find a country named Israel.
I tell them to study the history of WWI and II. One of my students told me that during WWII, which more than tens of millions of people perished in, news about the war, was quickly disseminated by the warring parties. Each touted their victories and the most recent battlefront defeat of the other party. After the war they claimed that six million Jews had been killed. Six million people that were surely related to at least two million families.
Again let us assume that these events are true. Does that logically translate into the establishment of the state of Israel in the Middle East or support for such a state? How can this phenomenon be rationalized or explained?

The rest here:


http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_2607.shtml

In this interview Ahmadinejad answers questions related to his "alleged" call to wipe Israel off the map:

...
QUESTION: Your Excellency, I'm not a speaker of Farsi, but there is a debate going on as to what exactly you said at the conference on the World Without Zionism.
Did you say that Israel as a state should be wiped off the map or did you say something else? Could you just please specify this, because there is this debate going on?
And if you said Israel should be wiped off the map, that's very scary. If you said something else perhaps less alarming; perhaps you could tell us.
AHMADINEJAD (THROUGH TRANSLATOR): It's quite interesting. I mean, it seems to me that there's a strong Zionist lobby. And it seems to me that I face this question wherever I go. And I have always been ready to answer.
I am not saying that you are a Zionist lobbyist, sir. I'm just saying that wherever I go I face questions like this.
But I'd like to say...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/21/AR2006092100829.html