People need to quit whining about israel occupying the land that they're on. They won it the old fashioned way, the same way that every nation won the land it sits on, with blood. Israeli soldiers died to ensure that their families would have a homeland. The arabs lost. Get over it. You don't see the american indians being terrorists because they lost their land. Even during the nineteenth century they waged actual war, not absolute terror.
I tried to make my own thread about this video to show how oppressive the Israelis really are. If you want to know the truth about Israel, watch this.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7828123714384920696&q=Propaganda
Red Cross ambulances destroyed in Israeli air strike on rescue mission· Volunteer paramedics demand UN guarantees
· Flags and lights prove no protection for aid teamsSuzanne Goldenberg in Tyre
Tuesday July 25, 2006
The GuardianThe ambulance headlamps were on, the blue light overhead was flashing, and another light illuminated the Red Cross flag when the first Israeli missile hit, shearing off the right leg of the man on the stretcher inside. As he lay screaming beneath fire and smoke, patients and ambulance workers scrambled for safety, crawling over glass in the dark. Then another missile hit the second ambulance.
Even in a war which has turned the roads of south Lebanon into killing zones, Israel's rocket strike on two clearly marked Red Cross ambulances on Sunday night set a deadly new milestone.
Six ambulance workers were wounded and three generations of the Fawaz family, being transported to hospital from Tibnin with what were originally minor injuries, were left fighting for their lives. Two ambulances were entirely destroyed, their roofs pierced by missiles.
The Lebanese Red Cross, whose ambulance service for south Lebanon is run entirely by volunteers, immediately announced it would cease all rescue missions unless Israel guaranteed their safety through the United Nations or the International Red Cross.
For the villages below the Litani river, the ambulances were their last link to the outside world. Yesterday, that too was gone, leaving the 100,000 people of Tyre district with no way of reaching hospital other than to take to the roads themselves, under the roar of Israeli war planes.
The fateful call to the Red Cross operations room came through at about 10pm - well after dark, a time when almost no Lebanese now dare venture out.
At the Red Cross office in Tyre, three volunteer medics dressed in their orange overalls, and got into their ambulance. The plan was to drive halfway, meet the local ambulance, and transfer the three patients to their vehicle to return to Tyre.
By Nader Joudi's reckoning, the ambulances had been stopped for barely two minutes. Two patients had been loaded: Ahmed Mustafa Fawaz, who had been hit by shrapnel in the stomach, and his son, Mohammed, 14. The volunteer attendant was just easing Jamila Fawaz, 80, inside and setting up a drip when the missile struck. He managed to get the old woman and the child outside, but there was no way to reach Mr Fawaz. "It was horrible," Mr Joudi said. "He was screaming, and we couldn't do anything."
One of the members of the three-man crew from Tibnin radioed for help when another missile plunged through the roof. Ambulance crew and patients retreated to the cellar of a nearby building, then waited to be rescued, trying as best as they could to help the injured. "Each of us treated ourselves. There was no light," said Kassem Shaalan, a medic from Tyre.
By the time patients and ambulance crew reached Tyre, Mr Fawaz was unconscious after losing one leg, and suffering severe fractures to the other. His son had lost part of a foot, and his mother's body was riddled with shrapnel. Mr Joudi had shrapnel wounds in his left arm, and Mr Shaalan cuts to the face and leg.
He was adamant that the ambulances, with their Red Cross insignia on the roof, were clearly visible from the air. "I don't think there can be a mistake in two bombings of two ambulances," he said.
Although the air strike marked the first time ambulances have been hit by Israel in this war, for Mr Shaalan and the other Red Cross volunteers it was only a matter of time. After two weeks of strikes designed to choke off possible supply lines to Hizbullah guerrillas, travel to many villages was just too dangerous. Coastal villages even within a few kilometers of Tyre are cut off. In some, corpses remain trapped in the rubble for days.
But nothing is more perilous than travelling by night, and no more so than just before midnight that Sunday when another Red Cross crew set off from Tyre to pick up their injured colleagues.
"I was trembling," said Ali Deeb, one of the volunteers on the mission. "It was too dangerous, and helicopters buzzing, and all through this, I am thinking one thing: the ambulance that left half an hour before you has already been injured, and you could be next." Later yesterday afternoon, two missiles landed in the building across the road from the Red Cross office.
The toll
Lebanese
Yesterday
Civilian deaths 8
Hizbullah deaths 0
Since outbreak
Military deaths 66
Civilian deaths 377
Wounded 1,550+
Israeli
Yesterday
Civilian deaths 0
Military deaths 4
Since outbreak
Military deaths 24
Civilian deaths 17
Wounded 360+
Originally posted by crazy
I tried to make my own thread about this video to show how oppressive the Israelis really are. If you want to know the truth about Israel, watch this.http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7828123714384920696&q=Propaganda
Ouch..maybe Hitler did have a valid reason...
Go America
Originally posted by Osaka
Go America
God sometimes you people make me sick with your bullshit anti-American garbage.
Yea I'm American that automatically means I'm an evil conquering, stupid idiot that tries to boss everyone.
Stop lobbing Bush's foul ups on the rest of us...
Originally posted by crazyThe IDF at its "best".
I tried to make my own thread about this video to show how oppressive the Israelis really are. If you want to know the truth about Israel, watch this.http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7828123714384920696&q=Propaganda
Originally posted by SoleranCute. Way to strawman.
You draw a comparison between the two frequently, I just wanted some more positive propoganda for the Hizbollah, they are just misunderstood.
Please point out where I initiate a comparison between Hezbollah's actions and the IDF's actions.
Quote me.
I've stated there should be a clear distinction between conduct of an army and the actions of terrorist criminals. And that one cannot use the latter to justify the former.
If anything you have been implying that Israel is justified in their violation of international law because Hizbollah do not comply and thus inadvertently but implicitly that the expectation of the standard of conduct should be similar. "Hizbollah does this, Israel is allowed to do that."
So I'll ask again. Do you want to draw comparison between IDF and Hezbollah actions? Is it not disconcerting that this is even a possibility? Do you think that a nation's army should only be held to the same expectation of standard of conduct as a terrorist group?
And no one here has said Hezbollah's actions are in any way condonable. The video isn't even about Hezbollah and Lebanon for the most part. So your lovely tidbit of sarcasm isn't even relevant. I'm wondering if you actually watched it, because if you have you should realise how ironic your statement is. The video is about the discrepancy between American and international media coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Some more IDF goodness. A high regard for civilians.
Israel bans use of human shields
Israeli soldiers make a Palestinian resident enter a house in Nablus in August 2002
The practice of using human shields is against international lawIsrael's supreme court has banned the use of Palestinian human shields in arrest raids, saying the practice violates international law.
The court issued a temporary injunction against the practice in 2002 after a teenager was killed when troops made him negotiate with a wanted militant.
Human rights groups who brought the case say the Israeli army has repeatedly violated the temporary ban.
The army cannot use civilians for its purposes, Israel's chief justice said.
"You cannot exploit the civilian population for the army's military needs, and you cannot force them to collaborate with the army," Aharon Barak said.
Early warning
The court ruled out both the placing of civilians in front of soldiers on operations and as well as an "early warning" procedure employed by the army.
In this practice the army forces local Palestinians to flush out wanted militants by making them approach their homes first and asking them to surrender.
The state argued that its rules were necessary to arrest wanted militants and did not endanger Palestinian civilians who - it argued - gave their consent to take part in the operations.
But that was disputed by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel and the Israeli Arab human rights organisation Adallah, who brought the case.
Adallah submitted an affidavit by one Israeli reservist who said: "No civilian would refuse a 'request' presented to him at 0300 by a group of soldiers aiming their cocked rifles at him."
"It's an important decision, but we need to see if the military will abide by it," said Adallah lawyer Marwan Dallal.
'Pity for the cruel'
The judges decided that under the circumstances it was impossible to properly get the consent of Palestinians.
"In light of the inequality which exists between the apprehending force and the local resident, the civilian cannot be expected to resist the request to pass on an alert," Mr Barak wrote.
A hard-line member of the Israeli Knesset or parliament has criticised the ruling, saying it will hamper the military's anti-terrorism capabilities.
"Supreme court judges demonstrated today that their pity for the cruel will prove cruel to the merciful and will expose [Israeli] soldiers to more danger," said Effie Eitam of the National Religious Party.
Soldier cleared of Gaza killingAn Israeli soldier accused of shooting a British cameraman dead has been cleared by a judge of any wrongdoing.
James Miller was killed in 2003 at the age of 34, as he filmed a documentary in the Rafah refugee camp.
Israel had already said the soldier - known only as Lt H - would not be prosecuted over the death.
On Thursday a military judge also dismissed disciplinary proceedings, acquitting the soldier of "misusing his firearm", a military official said.
It means no action will be taken against him.
Mr Miller's relatives have accused the army of a cover-up, and have threatened to sue the Israeli Defence Force.
The Israeli embassy in London said the investigation has been one of the most complex the army has ever launched, but the evidence gathered did not provide "a reasonable chance for conviction as required under criminal law".
'Regret'
Mr Miller, from Braunton, Devon, was shot as he left a Palestinian home in the dark.
He was struck in the neck, between his helmet and bullet-proof vest.
The victim's colleagues said the team were carrying a white flag and had made themselves known to troops in the area before he was shot.
The Israeli army expressed regret over Mr Miller's death but said he had "taken great risks by being in a virtual war zone".
Israel's embassy in the UK said the charges have been dropped because the fire was reasonable "given the operational and environmental conditions under which the IDF force was working; frequent terrorist attacks, thick darkness and earlier that same day the soldiers were fired at by anti tank missiles".
Last month a judge ruled that the soldier accused of discharging his weapon at the time of the incident could not be proved beyond doubt to have killed Mr Miller.
'Outrage'
Relatives expressed "outrage" and accused the Israeli investigative and legal system of "failing to deliver".
Mr Miller's sister Anne said the family would seek a judicial review of the decision not to prosecute and issue a civil action for wrongful killing.
British Foreign Office Minister Baroness Symons said she would be meeting the Israeli Ambassador on Monday and would discuss the matter with him.
"I was very shocked and saddened to hear that the disciplinary proceedings that followed the Israel Defence Forces investigation into James Miller's death have ended this way," she said.
Mr Miller's wife, Sophy, called on Lady Symons to put pressure on the Israeli government for a criminal indictment of the officer.
"I would urge her to ask the Advocate General to reconsider his decision and indict that key officer who fired at the time James was killed, in the direction of the house of a journalist from which James was exiting, and has admitted to all this, to indict him for killing James."
Israeli army 'lied' about Miller deathLeaked report returns Gaza Strip death of British film-maker to the spotlight
Mark Townsend
Sunday April 24, 2005
The ObserverIsraeli soldiers stand accused this weekend of 'lying' and tampering with evidence in an attempt to obstruct an inquiry by military prosecutors into the death of British film-maker James Miller, according to internal army documents seen by The Observer.
A 79-page report by the chief lawyer of the Israeli army's southern command into the shooting of Miller in the Gaza Strip details how soldiers questioned over the killing changed earlier testimonies. The version of events offered by the soldier originally implicated in the shooting, identified only as Second Lieutenant H, were so contradictory that his accounts were described in the report as coming 'full circle'.
'Evidence shows that Second Lieutenant H heard his soldiers lying in their testimonies during the investigation, and unfortunately did not mention that fact to his commanders, that his soldiers are giving them details that are not true,' the report says.
In addition, the report alleges the barrel of the rifle understood to have been used in the shooting two years ago was changed. Rifles submitted as part of the investigation could not have been those used in the shooting because it was 'impossible' that bullets found at the scene in Rafah belonged to the weapons surrendered, adds the report.
'It is important to point out that during the investigation a concern was raised, based on intelligence information, that some of the soldiers later changed the barrel they used during the event with a different barrel,' it continues.
Concern over a possible cover-up is underlined by the disappearance of videotapes that would have been recorded by the army's observation system and may have filmed Miller's death. Despite several attempts to locate them, the tapes from 3 May 2003 have never been found. The report's contents, disclosed here for the first time, come days after the Israeli advocate general announced he would appeal against a decision to acquit the officer of charges of misuse of his weapon. He was never charged with the killing after the Israeli army's judge advocate general said that there was insufficient evidence.
Released on 7 April, the report was circulated to all senior Israeli Defence Force commanders, including the chief of staff.
Although the report stops short of recommending the suspect should face criminal charges, its catalogue of highly damaging revelations will tarnish the reputation of the Israeli army in the Occupied Territories.
The high-profile case of Miller has become a source of increasingly strained diplomatic tension between the Israel authorities and the British government. Last Sunday, Miller won a Bafta award for his film following the lives of Palestinian children during the intifada. He was shot just after 11pm on the last day of filming Death in Gaza .
The 34-year-old, who was wearing journalist insignia and waving a white flag when he was shot in the neck, was targeted as he emerged from the home of a Palestinian family in the Rafah refugee camp. Initially, Israeli troops claimed they had come under fire, accounts now disproven. Radio conversations from the day confirm that Israeli soldiers knew there were journalists in the area.
'By allowing vital evidence to be tampered with, the Israeli army was complicit in my son's murder,' said Miller's father, Geoffrey.
The report says that all the soldiers interviewed changed their testimonies from accounts given to an earlier inquiry by the military police.
'Their versions paint a poor picture, to say the least,' it states. 'Not only that there are differences and contradictions between one soldier's version to another soldier's version, but there are also contradictions and differences within one soldier's testimony itself, many times in the same version one could not find any coherence.'
By contrast, army lawyers said all journalists and Palestinian witnesses interviewed gave reliable accounts.
However, the Israeli army report said that they could ultimately find no evidence that troops exchanged weapons or attempted to obstruct their investigation. They also concluded that the results of ballistic tests meant that it was not possible to establish a 'reasonable connection' between shots fired by Second Lieutenant H and Miller's death.
'There is a real suspicion that Second Lieutenant H is the one who hit the deceased with the shots he fired, but after reviewing the evidence as a whole, I find that it is impossible to charge him with the legal responsibility for shooting the deceased,' the report concludes.
The report also offers a wider insight into the operations of the Israeli army, in particular the tensions and lack of unity among soldiers stationed there. 'There is a possibility that some soldiers were trying to frame others and "get back at them", as this is a common thing between them,' it says.
The report goes on to cast suspicion upon the army's entire chain of command. Senior officers assumed without question that the soldiers when questioned were telling the truth. Attempts to explain the contradictions were based on assumptions that 'they were confused because of the fighting,' the report concludes.
Film-maker murdered by Israeli soldier, inquest finds
By Times Online and AgenciesA talented British cameraman who died while filming in the Gaza Strip was murdered by an Israeli soldier, an inquest ruled today.
James Miller, 34, from Braunton, Devon, was killed by a member of the Israeli Defence Forces three years ago while making a film about Palestinian children in the Rafah refugee camp.
According to witnesses at the inquest, Mr Miller was easily identifiable as a journalist and shining a torch onto a white flag when he approached Israeli soldiers at around 11pm on the night of May 2, 2003. He was shot in the neck at close range and died.
Last year, the Israeli army cleared an officer, identified only as Lieutenant H, of any wrongdoing in Mr Miller’s death, drawing an official protest from the British Government.
But at today's inquest into the killing at St Pancras Coroner’s Court in London, Coroner Dr Andrew Reid told the jury the only possible verdict they could return was that of unlawful killing.
He told them they had to decide in the context of the case whether he had been murdered or was a victim of manslaughter. After around an hour of deliberation, the 10-strong jury decided that Mr Miller, an award-winning film-maker, had been deliberately shot.
To sobs from members of Mr Miller’s family, the jury spokeswoman told the court: "We, the jury, unanimously agree this was an unlawful shooting with the intention of killing Mr James Miller. Therefore we can come to no other conclusion than that Mr Miller was indeed murdered."
She added: "It is a fact that from day one of this inquest the Israeli authorities have not been forthcoming in the investigation into the circumstances surrounding Mr Miller’s death."
Dr Reid said he would write to the Attorney General to seek to prevent similar deaths occurring.
In a statement, the Israeli Embassy in London said it regretted Mr Miller’s death but said there no grounds for a criminal inquiry. "After a very thorough investigation using laboratories in Israel and abroad and after reviewing all the available evidence, it was not possible to reach a reliable conclusion that could provide a basis for proceedings under criminal law," the Embassy said.
Mr Miller's family said their efforts to investigate Miller’s death had "finally been vindicated" by today's verdict, after a three-year struggle. The family, critical of official attempts to investigate the shooting, hired a Home Office pathologist and an independent military expert to gather evidence.
Death in Gaza, a film of Mr Miller's death completed by his colleagues, won three Emmy awards in 2005. Beneath the Veil, a documentary about life under the Taleban in Afghanistan, which Mr Miller made with fellow journalist, Shaira Shah, won an Emmy in 2001.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Please point out where I initiate a comparison between Hezbollah's actions and the IDF's actions.
Your entire presentation of facts is to illustrate how Israel is as ruthless as Hizbollah, are you trying to say that you are presenting otherwise?
I've stated there should be a clear distinction between conduct of an army and the actions of terrorist criminals. And that one cannot use the latter to justify the former.
War isn't nice, Israel has had to protect itself numerous times and its a game of survival for them.
If anything you have been implying that Israel is justified in their violation of international law because Hizbollah do not comply and thus inadvertently but implicitly that the expectation of the standard of conduct should be similar. "Hizbollah does this, Israel is allowed to do that."
What I am saying is that if International Law actually managed to stop these petty tyrants and terrorists then no laws would be needed, no action would need to be taken, huh. Yet we find in Africa, Middle East etc these same things occur over and over without regard to UN law. So I just question the vailidity of these laws and who they are really protecting.
So I'll ask again. Do you want to draw comparison between IDF and Hezbollah actions? Is it not disconcerting that this is even a possibility? Do you think that a nation's army should only be held to the same expectation of standard of conduct as a terrorist group?
Paint any picture you want, there are no saints in war. All I look at is intent and the cause of said action. Unfortunetly it points at the inability of the Lebanese Govt at the moment and at Hizbollah for jeapordizing Lebanese civilians with it's military actions.
Israel has the right to protect its borders and its civilians, hey it's been said disarm Hizbollah, place lebanese army at the Israel border and return Israel soldiers, the end.