Comments on: HRW: Even condemning Hamas shows their anti-Israel bias

By: Ira

Ira — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 05:11:31 +0000

most people don’t understand the technical meaning of “disproportionate” in international law. (those interested can find it on the internet if they look.) It is NOT the same as the common dictionary definition. (And the liberal lawyers and newsmedia who know or should know the true definition, deliberately mislead the public in order to bash Israel.) A simple example of this: A man firing a shotgun is standing in front of your house shouting that he is going to shoot down your door & kill you. You call the police, who question you and confirm that it is only one man with one gun. The proportionate response (in English) would be to send one policeman with one gun. Would you be satisfied with this response? The correct legal proportionate response is to send a SWAT team with enough firepower to safely handle this situation so as to minimize the risk to you and to them (and also to the perpetrator, altho his safety is the last, not the first, concern.) Now imagine he is arrested, and, at trial, demands acquittal because the police used disproportionate force! (by the way, if only one policeman were sent, he would be far more likely to kill the criminal, for his own safety.) An example of a disproportionate legal response (case actually happened) was when police sent so much firepower (with aerial bombing!) that they leveled every house on the entire block.
Israel used less than proportionate force under international law, and less than any other country would have used in similar circumstances. The US would have killed about 100,000 in similar circumstances. (See Colin Powell’s remarks when (while still a general, before he became a politician) he was asked how he would respond to an enemy sniper firing on his troops from within a crowd of civilians; his (legally correct) answer: shoot back, and if 1000 civilians are killed, it’s the sniper’s fault & crime for starting to shoot from within the crowd of civilians. Powell’s response was not disproportionate, but exactly proportionate. It was the sniper (Hamas) whose choice of when & where to start shooting (not Powell or Israel, who responded to being shot at) caused the disproportionate civilian deaths!) Russia would have killed 300,000+ (see its actions in Georgia recently. And remember Dresden in World War 2. After Germany sent only a few hundred rockets over London (remember, Hamas sent 8-11,000 rockets into Israel), England carpet bombed thwe entire city of Dresden. One bomb on EACH & almost every city block, throughout the entire city. In Gaza that would have killed about a million civilians.
One last example. If the roles were reversed and Jews in Gaza were being attacked by Hamas, does anyone doubt that there would be well over a million Jews killed in the first week alone?
So when Israel is accused of killing over a thousand civilians, I feel that this shows remarkable care in trying to protect civilians who were cynically & deliberately put in harm’s way by their own leaders, as cannon fodder to be killed and then exploited for media attention. And remember the Israeli invasion of the refugee camp a number of year ago. Israel lost dozens of soldiers to try to minimize enemy civilian loses. Tho the media quoed (Hamas) that over 3000 Palestinians were killed, the final tally (by an anti-Israel but somewhat honest NGO) was 52 killed, of which well over 90% of whom were heavily armed at the time!

By: Michael Lonie

Michael Lonie — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 04:00:47 +0000

On the matter of “disproportionate” force, we should note that Hamas’ goal (and the PLO’s goal in general, including Fatah) is the destruction of Israel and the genocide of its Jewish inhabitants. Hamas’ genocidal malevolence is limited only by Hamas’ lack of means and lack of competent troops. If it had better Hamas would be pursuing genocide even more violently and effectively. What is Israel’s response supposed to be to an enemy making war on Israel with genocidal intent? It seems to me that Israel’s response was disproportionately mild during Operation Cast Lead, considering Hamas’ goals. Nor can one say “That’s just talk.” The lesson of the 20th Century for Jews is, if someone says he wants to kill you, believe him. Hamas says it wants to kill the Jews. I believe them.

We should note that if Israel’s enemies stopped making war on Israel they would have nothing to fear from Israel. Egypt and Jordan no longer make war on Israel, nor do they let their territory be used to make war on Israel (as Lebanon does). And they have had nothing to fear from Israel for lo, these many years. Surprise, surprise.

Israel’s enemies intend genocide, Israel’s responses to their war making should reflect this reality. Only when Israel’s enemies are hurt to the heart, when they fear even to talk about fighting Israel because of their fear of what Israel will do to them in response, will Israel’s enemies be ready for peace. The sooner that fear comes to them, the sooner peace will come.

By: Ira

Ira — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 03:23:18 +0000

again re Pete. You got it right but 180 degrees backward. “To compare Hamas and Israel is really an â€œapples to orangesâ€ situation. … a Qassam hitting a school is different from an Israeli air strike because Hamas couldnâ€™t intentionally target the school if they wanted to.” They could if they wanted to, but it.’s more expensive (for their Iranian suppliers) and gets them no benefit. Hamas is not targetting any legitimate targets. They are terrorists and are targeting civilians on purpose. Why spend 10 times the cost to target something in particular. They don’t care which innocent civilian they hit. Cheaper to send 10 random rockets at 10 random (innocent civilian) targets than 1 expensive aimed rocket at only one random innocent civilian. Israel on the other hand uses the expensive rockets (which they pay for) to try to minimize innocent civilian deaths (only from humanitarian reasons; there are huge costs with no military benefits). As further proof, remember the stories about Israel cell-phoning nearby (questionably) innocent civilians to warn them to flee before the attack, even tho this frequently allowed the intended guilty target to be warned by his neighbors and to also get away. So you are defending the side (Hamas) that deliberately aims for innocent civilians and doesn’t care whom it hits (or even try to minimize innocent civilian targets) and who (against international law) deliberately fires rockets from amongst innocent civilians using them as a shield. And you are condemning the side (Israel) that wastes expensive, sorely needed resources (while aiming at totally legitimate military targets) to protect enemy civilians deliberately put in danger by their own leaders. I think you are thinking totally a*s-backwards.

By: Meryl Yourish

Meryl Yourish — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 02:45:06 +0000

I am under the impression that the â€œrocketsâ€ used by Hamas resemble a really powerful bottlerocket

Pete, you are wrong. The rockets used by Hamas are exactly that: Rockets. You have been completely taken in by the mainstream media's insistence on calling these "home-made" rockets. Here's a picture of the damage those "bottle rockets" do to an apartment. And here is a photo gallery. Here is a list of those killed by kassams (and mortars). And if all of those sites offend you because they can be considered pro-Israel, here's B'tselem's article on kassams, which also points out that Palestinians have been killed by them. There's a photo of a rocket. Tell me you've shot off a bottle rocket that resembles a kassam. You can't, because you've bought into the lies the anti-Israel media tell. Do your own research. You're someone who I think is intelligent and interested in finding the truth for yourself. I'm confident you will discover that you have been fed a line of bull---at least about the impact of "home-made" rockets. Don't forget that the other thing kassam rockets do is spread ball bearings at the speed of bullets, which makes them---bullets. They're deadly. Just because they're not as accurate as other missiles doesn't mean they can't, and don't, kill. As for your argument about disproportionate force: That won't wash. Because the world doesn't seem to give a shit about civilian deaths unless they're caused by Israelis. Witness this recent BBC story about a bombing attack on a Taliban figure with 40 civilians in the house. Why isn't there world outrage about the civilian deaths and injuries? Because Israelis didn't do it. And finally---the only country that seems to come in for criticism over "disproportionate force" is Israel (although sometimes America gets whacked for it). Why is that? I say it's the world's double standards on the Jewish State.

By: Don

Don — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 02:43:05 +0000

In response to an earlier post. The rockets used by Hamas are capable of targeting a specific building. Similar rockets have been used in Iraq, and during my time there, we caught one of the insurgents who used a gps on his cell phone to help the Jaish al Mahdi terrorists target a madrassa (school) in another district. They fired that rocket from over thirty miles away, to hit a specific building, in a city that is so large, it has to be seen to be believed. As far as the territorial nature of Muslims, they believe (and it is written in their Quran) that ANY city, nation, or even a freaking thorp, that was onder control of Islam at any time in it’s past, is legitimately theirs. Which is why they constantly alude to the idea that Spain should be under Shariah law, and why the Albanian Muslims want most of Eastern Europe. In America, we have CAIR, which claims to want to promote “understanding” between the U.S, and the rest of the Islamic World (whatever that is) but the director of CAIR maintains ties to Hamas. Hezboallah claims to be concerned soley with it’s fight against Israels right to exist, but there is evidence that they have entered Iraq, and trained suicide bombers, as well as teaching insurgents better bomb making methods, and sniper techniques.
Pay attention to this. The BBC, HRW, the Saudi government, CAIR, Hamas…none of these people are your friends, unless you’re one of them.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 02:35:42 +0000

Comment by JIMS â€” 08/06/2009 @ 3:06 pm

4.I just want to respond to one important issue: To compare Hamas and Israel is really an â€œapples to orangesâ€ situation. It is very true and should be emphasized that both sides are required to respect the rules of warfare. That doesnâ€™t mean that the two sides are equivalent, however. To give a good example, consider a situation in which Israel uses an American-made warplane to drop a bomb on an apartment building where a legitimate target exists. In the strike, maybe 40 civilians are killed. What is the appropriate judgment regarding Israelâ€™s actions? The immensely disproportionate capabilities of the two sides means that they must be judged according to different standards. The use of suicide bombers is unacceptable: With that out of the way, I am under the impression that the â€œrocketsâ€ used by Hamas resemble a really powerful bottlerocket more than the modern precision munitions used by America and its proxy, Israel. Correct me if Iâ€™m wrong, but that seems to imply that a Qassam hitting a school is different from an Israeli air strike because Hamas couldnâ€™t intentionally target the school if they wanted to. Just my own observations, but I think itâ€™s important to rememberâ€¦.

So if a blind man shoots a shotgun in a crowded room he cannot be prosecuted because he had no idea who he might hit?

By: Jerry

Jerry — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 02:31:31 +0000

Human Rights Watch is a Saudi front-group that spends most of its time and effort criticizing Israel and Jews. They are based in New York, but get heavily funded by the Saudis. The don’t care about the Africans, North Koreans, Tibetans, and others who are being slaughtered because they aren’t white-skinned like the Palestinians and the Bosnians.
I donate to REAL human rights groups, like the International Campaign for Tibet, the Southern Poverty Law Center, American Indian groups, United Farm Workers, and others. I wouldn’t give HRW a cent.

By: Oscar in Miami Beach

Oscar in Miami Beach — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 02:31:12 +0000

To Pete:I wish you had a neighbor that EVERY day throws rocks at your house and break your windows and hit your kids in the head.Only rocks.Eventually your pacience will blow away and you’ll get your shotgun and blow their property away.I forgot to tell you that your complains about your neighbor NO ONE pays attention to.There is a limit to everybody’s pacience even to nations.This is just my observation,you see.I really you would have go thru this so you’ll understand how it is.Duh…

By: Harri

Harri — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 02:17:41 +0000

Also HRW fails to mention continued rocket fire from Gaza into Israeli civillian areas after the unofficial cease-fire. I, personally, was in the BeerSheva area for most of February and heard rockets every night. Thanks Hamas.

By: Howell-DE-Mich

Howell-DE-Mich — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 01:21:32 +0000

Jerusalem is mentioned over 400 times in the Hebrew Bible, but
not once in the Koran. Yet the Muslims want Jerusalem?

The most important place to Muslims is Mecca, then Medina, then
Jerusalem. Yes, sports fans, Jerusalem is number three to the
Muslims. Yet they want Jerusalem to themselves, too. Please.