The United Nations has accused Israeli troops of evacuating scores of Palestinians ”“ including children ”“ into a house in Gaza and then shelling the property 24 hours later, killing some 30 people.
In a report published today on what it called “one of the gravest incidents” of the 14-day conflict, the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) complained that the Israeli Defence Force then prevented medical teams from entering the area to evacuate the wounded.
Citing “several testimonies”, OCHA said that Israeli foot soldiers evacuated around 110 Palestinians into a house in Zeitun, south of Gaza City, on Sunday. Half of them were children.
Ths is a deeply troubling story. I bear in mind the saying that truth is the first casualty of war. But even if only part of the accusation is true then it is a terrible indictment of Israel. Take, for example, the refusal to allow ambulances in. Inexcusable, if true. This whole war chills me. It is sowing seeds of bitterness that will sprout for generations.
Color me skeptical, as this doesn’t seem to ring true to me. After that Muhammed al-Dura thing, I just don’t have much faith in reporting in the area.
oops, I accidentally posted this on the wrong thread above. This is where I wanted to post it:
It has now been [url=http://www.popphoto.com/photographynewswire/2772/reuters-pulls-doctored-photo.html]confirmed[/url] that Reuters and CNN has been showing ‘doctored’ photos and videos provided to them from Hamas on their website. At the protest of visitors, these have been taken down, but the [url=http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/32393_A_Staged_Scene_in_a_Gaza_Hospital_-_Update-_CNN_Yanks_Video]CNN text[/url] based on them have remained.
It’s interesting that it was ‘outed’ first on a photography magazine website instead of a news outlet.
Jim Elliott <>< Florida
Readers of this entry ought to know that libraryjim’s comments above bear no relation to the news item about Israelis shelling a house that was a refugee shelter. The news item relates to a United Nations complaint, and the reports come in part from interviews in hospital with survivors. Proof positive? Not yet, but enough to trouble the consciences of thinking, feeling persons.
A news report on this incident can be found at the website of the Israeli daily newspaper Ha-Aretz The Land:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054217.html
Frankly, it strikes me as highly unlikely that the IDF would have deliberately shelled a refugee center, one to which they had taken the refugees themselves. It’s not characteristic of them. There will be an investigation and a report and condemnation should be withheld until what happened is clear. Either a horrible mistake or inaccurate reporting seem the most likely.
Terry,
My posting was to show that one cannot always believe what one sees/reads in the news. The old saying of “never believe all of what you hear and only 1/2 of what you see” is particularly appropriate with this conflict!
When it comes to the Palestinians and Israelis, I’ll believe the Israelis over the Palistinians every time. Period.
#8 of course, that is exactly what the Israelis hope for. And it allows them to bomb indiscriminately.
#7 – one of the consequences, of course, is that it means that if Israel did bomb the children, they can get away with it. One false photograph means, of course, that there is no carnage whatsoever.
Jim, why not just say the children had it coming? Chances are, their parents were in Hamas.
John,
I can always count on you to twist and take out of context any comment made by another on this forum. Thanks for not disappointing.
#9
I don’t for a minute believe they are “bombing indiscriminately.” If civilians are being killed in Gaza, the blame lies squarely on the shoulders of Hamas and the Gazans who voted them into power.
John,
“Safe” havens are off limits for storing weapons or being used as bases for combatants. It is morally wrong to store weapons or to base combatants in any place where non-combatants live or near hospitals, schools, our houses of worship – all of which are considered “safe havens.” Hamas (and terrorists in general) are cowardly enough that they strike from within safe havens and hide behind women and children and old men. The homes and schools and hospitals have little say in whether they are used for military purposes or not. If a home owner declines the honor of having a rocket launcher based in his home, he is shot as a collaborator. If this “safe house” was used to hide ammunition or weapons or fighters, then the blood of the civilians there is on the heads of Hamas.
Now, I don’t blame the Palestinian people in general for Hamas. I’m not sure I even blame those who voted for Hamas any more than I blame those who voted for Stalin in his several “elections” or for Castro in his elections or any other tyrant in their “elections.” The people have very few good choices and their political “leadership” and the arab world have vested interests in keeping it that way.
This is somewhat like the abortion question in America. Neither the strongly pro-abortion group nor the strongly anti-abortion group really want a political solution to the problem. That would entail compromise. Both sides would rather have the issue to drum up funding.
Similarly, neither Hamas nor the Arab neighbors want a compromise solution to the Palestinian/Israeli question. That would mean that their issue would die.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
RE: “And it allows them to bomb indiscriminately.”
Well, the fact that smart people know not to trust the Palestinian Hamas would assist in allowing Israel to bomb indiscriminately — if Israel wanted to.
“that is exactly what the Israelis hope for. And it allows them to bomb indiscriminately. ”
Israel has taken great care in the recent actions to minimize harm to civilians. They have called targets and asked civilians to leave because the targets were going to be bombed.
Hamas is the group that wants civilian casualties, not Israel.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
Philip, well the narrative of safe houses being full of ammunition does give Israel plenty of moral cover. Thus, when children are killed, we can say, “well, they had it coming. Their parents voted for Hamas and there were probably munitions in the house.”
Thus Israel is left off the hook.
It’s quite brilliant, really.
As far as Arab neighbors wanting a solution, you might want to research the Arab Peace initiative of 2002.
[blockquote]#8 of course, that is exactly what the Israelis hope for. And it allows them to bomb indiscriminately. [/blockquote]
A slander that I wish I could say was beneath you, John.
Of course, to admit that Hamas is using schools, apartment buildings, hospitals, etc. to hide weapons, establish command posts, use as launch sites, etc. would be conceding that Israel might just have a point. And we just can’t have that, can we?
For someone who has called Hamas terrorists, criminals, etc., you’re quick to mouth their tropes, Mr. W.
John,
The secondary explosions (research that if you don’t understand it) that occur when Israel hits a “suspected” weapons’ cache testify that Hamas does store weapons and ammunitions in schools, mosques, and hospitals.
The Arab Peace Initiative requires a “right of return” and Israel cannot allow that and still maintain itself as a Jewish country. Further, since 2002, terrorism has not stopped.
Because of the history of the “Peace Process” where Israel withdraws for a promise of peace and then the Palestinians continue violence, I say let the violence stop for a period of time and let the families of the refugees be compensated for the the land they lost. Let the United Nations or even the United States assist in payment of this compensation and let the neighboring Arab coutries allow the “refugees” to become citizens and work and own land (purchased with the proceeds of the settlement). Israel retains the right of self defense and can annex any land that is used to attack it.
Does that seem fair to you?
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
Interesting that many of the responses above shy away from the story in question. If you read Ha-Aretz in the link I provided you will find (1) refugees were herded together in a house; (2) it was allegedly shelled; and (3) it is said that the Israelis did not allow ambulances in, and that children were found starving next to the bodies of their dead mothers when finally donkey-driven carts were allowed in. Do I think that Israel would deliberately have shelled the house? No. Horrible mistakes occur in war, as so-called ‘friendly fire’ incidents show. It is also quite plausible that refugees were put in one place and then, in military administrative chaos, relief denied when the place was shelled. It needs investigation. It needs open minds. It might even need incompetent commanders to be disciplined or dismissed; if it is adjudged that there was wickedness, certainly the latter. It also needs, dare I say it, hearts that can feel suffering. Even your fellow-Anglican bishop has written movingly about the work of his church’s hospital in Gaza. Keep an open mind if you will. But keep your ability to feel also.
Philip, it seems that you are saying that, because of Hamas actions, schools, hospitals and other agencies are targets, whether or not there are in fact munitions there. This, of course, gives plenty of cover for Israel who might just want to teach the “terrorists” a lesson by getting their children. There is precedent for this: when you humiliate and kill indiscriminately, you show people how tough you are. It’s a way of showing the Arabs that the Israelis also know how to kill.
I’m confused by your second sentence. Terrorists didn’t sign the Arab Peace Initiative. Nor would they. Peace with Israel means that poor Arabs wouldn’t have the incentive to join them. The opposition in Arab countries uses Israel to generate support, also against Arab governments.
Nor did the Israelis offer a response. The “right of return” has had several permutations, and it seems that there are ways to handle this. The Arabs have made some suggestions.
I disagree, of course, with the narrative that Israel has supported peace. Several of its prime ministers were former terrorists. It kept building settlements, breaking promises to stop.
No problems with self defense. Although one could argue that that is exactly what Palestinians do within the West Bank, while their land is stolen from them.
I’m not surprised when Hamas kills innocent civilians. It was a mistake for Israel to fund them and bring them into existence. Its a story that repeats itself. We funded Hussein. We helped build Al-Qaeda. We like it when they use violence against our enemies. We act surprised when they turn it against us.
As far as Israel killing children. They can shrug and say it was Hamas’ fault. There were probably weapons there anyway. Chances are they’d eventually become terrorists or vote for Hamas later. Perhaps by Israel killing children Arabs will finally learn to give up on violence.
How convenient to think that way.
Earlier this week the IDF shelled and destroyed a house in which Israeli troops were taking cover, killing several soldiers and injuring more than a dozen. So what should we conclude from this incident? They were bombing “indiscriminately”? (the John Wilkins explanation) They were deliberating targeting their own soldiers? (the Hamas accusation for every civilian casuality) Or was it just a mistake? It’s a war, crap happens. As long as Hamas keeps firing into Israel they will continue to take a beating and the civilian population will suffer. Hamas could easily end this immediately but they don’t want to…
[blockquote]Philip, it seems that you are saying that, because of Hamas actions, schools, hospitals and other agencies are targets, whether or not there are in fact munitions there. This, of course, gives plenty of cover for Israel who might just want to teach the “terrorists†a lesson by getting their children. There is precedent for this: when you humiliate and kill indiscriminately, you show people how tough you are. It’s a way of showing the Arabs that the Israelis also know how to kill. [/blockquote]
The evidence shows that Israel is bombing quite discriminately, contrary to your efforts to propagate the opposite meme. That isn’t to say there haven’t been mistakes in target selection, but that is a far cry from simply lobbing explosives willy-nilly into civilian areas with nary a thought about whom they kill. In fact, the 6,000-plus missiles dispatched by Hamas into Israel fit your description much better than the ordnance delivered by Israel, yet we get only the most perfunctory denunciations about those before another thousand words of flaming rhetoric jet forth to scorch the Jews. After a while, John, a pattern develops that leads one to think that the issue really isn’t the issue.
Jeffersonian’s argument might make sense if it were not for the fact of disproportionality. Israeli dead from rockets: 4. Gaza dead from Israeli ordnance: 800 and counting. But then Jeffersonian, like so many above, does not see the faces but simply them the faceless enemy.
Jefferson, I’m not sure what you are talking bout. Where do I mention “Jews?” I’m not talking about “the Jews.” You might be careful with your insinuations. Read closely.
But it is terrible that 20 Israelis have been killed by Hamas rockets over the last 10 years. There’s no excuse for that.
The idea that bombs are “discriminate” is a bunch of hi-tech mythology. It is a convenient narrative that comes straight from the movies.
“Discrimination” is another way of letting an army off the hook. Personally, I’d take indiscriminate bombs that killed 20 innocents over 10 years than discriminate bombs that killed more than 200 children and injured more than 2000. Because when they do kill, it seems just as deliberate.
Actually perhaps Israel is pretty accurate, and just doesn’t give a damn, except for the cameras. Which probably affirms to the average Palestinian that Israel wants to continue with ethnic cleansing. But its inch by inch, because that way, nobody can do anything.
But I don’t begrudge them. It’s the classic rule: love your friends and hate your enemies. It’s the way the world works. Hamas knows that rule, and so does Israel.
[blockquote]Jeffersonian’s argument might make sense if it were not for the fact of disproportionality. Israeli dead from rockets: 4. Gaza dead from Israeli ordnance: 800 and counting. But then Jeffersonian, like so many above, does not see the faces but simply them the faceless enemy. [/blockquote]
Richard Epstein dealt quite nicely with this sophistry the other day. His thrust was that, if a gang of ten armed criminals was intent on killing you and was in the process of acting on that intent, you are not restrained by the idea of proportionality to using lethal force against only one of the assailants, allowing the rest to murder you. He goes on:
[blockquote]The face-off in Gaza, however, pushes the idea of proportionality one step further. The claim is that it is not permissible for the Israelis to kill many individuals, including civilians, to stop sporadic deaths from rocket fire. Sorry. As with individual aggression, proportionality has no place in dealing with deadly force, where the right rule is that all necessary force is permissible.
The Israelis are not required to slowly bleed in Sderot because Hamas is at present only capable of using primitive rockets against it. It need not wait until the attacks become ever more deadly to raise the ante. It should of course do whatever it can to avoid the killing of civilians, even those who serve as human shields.[/blockquote]
Just so. Hamas is a genocidal, exterminationist organization that has acquired and used the means to advance its agenda. There is simply no reason to allow it to do so.
#24, I see where you spring the length of your chain and where you do not. There is a definite pattern. I am careful with my insinuations…I stand by every word.
Well, Jefferson, if you think children are armed criminals, then God bless you.
You stand by every word, but I’m not sure what you say. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and suppose that you aren’t calling me an anti-Semite. I assume you’d be brave enough to say it plainly. This is blogging. We don’t know each other. You might be wearing a white hood for all I know. I presume you aren’t.
You quote somebody named Richard Epstein, but… it just seems like a rationalization to excuse killing: “All necessary force is possible.” I wonder if we were to extend that to all sides where that would lead us. I’m sure Hamas feels the same way. I don’t expect Palestinian innocents feel better about the Israelis.
After a while, Jefferson, it seems that the lives of random Palestinians is irrelevant in your book. Just numbers. Collateral damage. They got what was coming to them, anyway, right?
Do you enjoy the victory? There is nothing like the delicious scent of dead Palestinian children gloriously sacrificed to the altar of Israeli power and Hamas’ self-righteousness. Israel shrugs “look, we’re just defending ourselves.” Hamas doesn’t give a damn, refusing to take responsibility, happy with a few more martyrs. A few in the world weep.
And that’s where I stand.
Yes, John Wilkins is right. Jeffersonian does not see faces but just ‘random Palestinians … collateral damage.’ My point entirely. A faceless enemy, dehumanised. If there are people in your area letting off rockets then your area can be obliterated. Regarding the Epstein analogy, we could of course pursue the analogy a little further to show the absurdity of it: (a) a gang of armed criminals in living in a house in the next town is threatening you (b) they are armed with knives and shotguns (c) you are armed with B52 bombers and (c) to solve the problem you bomb the entire block on which they live with pinpoint accuracy, guided with laser missiles. Well that neighbourhood had it coming to them! They had all those criminals in their midst and did nothing about it!
[blockquote]Well, Jefferson, if you think children are armed criminals, then God bless you. [/blockquote]
[url=http://zioneocon.blogspot.com/pal children w AK46 rifles.jpg]Now[/url] [url=http://www.worldsecuritynetwork.com/ArticleImages/hamas_child_web.jpg]where[/url] [url=http://washingtonbureau.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/08/13/hamaschild.jpg]would[/url] [url=http://www.israelnewsagency.com/childrenterroristspalestine.jpg]anyone[/url] [url=http://israelsmessiah.com/terrorism/images/hamas_child_bombers.jpg]get[/url] [url=http://bokertov.typepad.com/btb/images/hamas_kids_burn_israeli_flag.jpg]that[/url] [url=http://markhumphrys.com/Bitmaps/hamas.bunny.jpg]idea,[/url] [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1945000/images/_1948502_boys2ap300.jpg]John?[/url]
Like I said, John, I see what gets you huffing and puffing and it isn’t millions getting slaughtered in the Congo, it isn’t the hundreds of thousands getting massacred in Darfur, it sure isn’t the tens of thousands bombed to smithereens in Grozny or even the hundreds of Fatah-affiliated Palestinians murdered by Hamas. Only when Israel is involved do you get onto your hind legs. Why is that, exactly?
And both your and Terry’s objections are, as I said, sophistry. Hamas isn’t merely “threatening” violence, but actively perpetrating it. Its goals are clearly stated, all it lacks is the capability to carry them out.
Every indication is that Israel is doing everything it can to minimize civilian casualties, while Hamas does everything it can to maximize them (on both sides, I might add). Positioning materiel, firing positions, etc. in civilian locations is a war crime, and for good reasons. Yet the only accusations of such crimes come from the Left, and always directed at Israel. Fair-minded readers will draw the obvious conclusions as to motive.
Oops, sorry about that first link. Please substitute [url=http://blog.camera.org/archives/assud.JPG]this one[/url] for some top shelf, Hamas-grade snack advice for the Gaza pre-schooler!
Jefferson, as far as the Congo, perhaps you think that children soldiers are enemies to kill rather than reasons to weep. Instead of seeing children as being indoctrinated into a cult, you already see them as criminals. Pull the trigger, Jefferson, if it feels any better. It’s justification for genocide.
But you still can’t say it yourself can you? Or is it projection. A kind of guilt, perhaps?
It is both a reason to weep and a call for caution. In our society, children are a treasure, a reason to rejoice, They are for us to nurture and to shelter, allowing them to be innocent as long as possible.
Unfortunately, in some cultures, as Jeffersonian points out so well, they are seen as one more weapon to be enlisted in a ‘righteous battle’ where anyone and anything is a means to an end.
Does that mean WE rejoice when children are killed?
No, it does not, but I fear that JW will see it as our saying so.
However it does mean that in some battle situations, whether we like it or not, whether we relate or not, whether we approve or not, children used as weapons are going to be causalities. It is an unfortunate reality of the situation. and one more thing to speak out against.
The fault, however, should be laid squarely on the shoulders of those who used those children in this way: Those who armed them, those who taught them how to use the bombs and guns they bear. Those who send them into ‘battle’ in crowded marketplaces with bombs strapped to their waists.
[b]They[/b] are the ones who caused their deaths. In this case, Hamas, not Israel.
“Allow the little children to come to me — do not hinder them! For to such as these is the kingdom of heaven … If anyone causes a little one to stumble, it were better that a millstone be tied around their neck, and they be cast into the sea.”
6 Pray for the peace of Jerusalem:
“May those who love you be secure.
7 May there be peace within your walls
and security within your citadels.”
8 For the sake of my brothers and friends,
I will say, “Peace be within you.”
9 For the sake of the house of the LORD our God,
I will seek your prosperity.
(Ps. 122 — NIV)
Shalom
Jim Elliott <>< Florida
[blockquote]Jefferson, as far as the Congo, perhaps you think that children soldiers are enemies to kill rather than reasons to weep. Instead of seeing children as being indoctrinated into a cult, you already see them as criminals. Pull the trigger, Jefferson, if it feels any better. It’s justification for genocide. [/blockquote]
Oh please. “Criminal” was your word, not mine, and it’s clear from the pictures that Hamas is eager to use even its most tender young waifs as military props….my point, which you seem to have either missed or avoided in your Rumplestiltskinesque tirade. Do you really think that people who put their kids into suicide bomber outfits and pose them with AKs have any compunction about turning them into glorious [i]shahid[/i] when they are born to be turned into killers?
And don’t kid yourself, John, Hamas’ intent is clear: They deliberately provoke civilian casualties for consumption by people like you, so you can do what you’re doing. [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/world/middleeast/11hamas.html?_r=3&hp;=&pagewanted=all]LINK[/url]:
[blockquote]Hamas, with training from Iran and Hezbollah, has used the last two years to turn Gaza into a deadly maze of tunnels, booby traps and sophisticated roadside bombs. Weapons are hidden in mosques, schoolyards and civilian houses, and the leadership’s war room is a bunker beneath Gaza’s largest hospital, Israeli intelligence officials say.
Unwilling to take Israel’s bait and come into the open, Hamas militants are fighting in civilian clothes; even the police have been ordered to take off their uniforms….
In one apartment building in Zeitoun, in northern Gaza, Hamas set an inventive, deadly trap. According to an Israeli journalist embedded with Israeli troops, the militants placed a mannequin in a hallway off the building’s main entrance. They hoped to draw fire from Israeli soldiers who might, through the blur of night vision goggles and split-second decisions, mistake the figure for a fighter. The mannequin was rigged to explode and bring down the building. [/blockquote]
Nice, huh? War crimes, all. Not that the ICC, UN or useful idiots commenting on blogs care. No Americans or Israelis to finger. And you’re complicit in them, John, insofar as it’s your demand for such atrocities that provokes their commission.
How nice you’ve preached on the Congo in your parish, and how…unverifiable. Not a peep here, nor about Grozny, Hamas’ elimination of Fatah, etc. Like I said, your priorities belie your motivations.
[i] Not that the ICC, UN or useful idiots commenting on blogs care [/i]
How exactly would the International Criminal Court become involved? Neither Israel nor the Palestinian Authority have ratified the relevant treaty.
[blockquote]How exactly would the International Criminal Court become involved? Neither Israel nor the Palestinian Authority have ratified the relevant treaty. [/blockquote]
My apologies, I was under the impression that the ICC was the body that had prosecuted (if one can call it that) Slobodan Milosevic, but I see that it was a special UN body, the ICTY, that did that. I stand partially corrected, but still ask why the UN hasn’t risen from its standard litany of anti-Israel resolutions to form a similar body to prosecute Hamas war criminals.
[i]but still ask why the UN hasn’t risen from its standard litany of anti-Israel resolutions to form a similar body to prosecute Hamas war criminals. [/i]
Jeffersonian, I’ve often wondered the same thing.
One correction to my post above:
they [children] are seen as one more weapon to be enlisted in a ‘righteous battle’ where anyone and anything is a means to an end.
should read:
they are seen as one more weapon [b]delivery system[/b] to be enlisted in a ‘righteous battle’ where anyone and anything is a means to an end.
[blockquote]Jeffersonian, I’ve often wondered the same thing. [/blockquote]
Consider the number of anti-Israel resolutions taken up by the UN’s General Assembly and introduced in the Security Council, and you have your answer.
And John, do those hoods you mentioned in #27 look anything like what the broad-minded folk [url=http://www.fivefeetoffury.com/:entry:fivefeet-2009-01-11-0000/]HERE[/url] are sporting?