IDF Soldier Caught on Tape Humiliating Handcuffed and Blindfolded Palestinian Woman

[fuji]

Settlers are called settlers because they are actively taking over areas of the Occupied Palestinian Lands, at present they and Israel now control 60% of the West Bank.

Yup, and I disagree with that activity, and believe the illegal settlements should be torn down.

All settlers are involved in this illegal activity and Hamas considers them an armed first branch of Israeli invasion of their lands

Which is false. That is Hamas justifying its terrorist attacks on civilians, as terrorists are wont to do. The ICRC had explicitly stated that the settlers are civilians. While there may be some exceptions, perhaps some have organized a militia (nobody has shown that, though) the rest of them, the overwhelming rest of them, are just civilians caught up in a political dispute over land.

they must be considered an invasion force. Not civilians. Civilinians don't have a duty to invade other peoples lands.

Only according to terrorists and terrorist supporters like you. The law is clear: they are civilians and they are entitled to all the protections under the GC.

As for the Hamas police, you have shown no proof whatsoever that they should be considered militia, nor has Israel.

Correct. So we don't know whether they are or not: Israel has asserted they are. Hamas has asserted they are not. Neither side has shown any proof of their claim, at least up until now. If it were ever to go to trial (unlikely) it would hinge on whether Israel can show that it had positive information that they were terrorists. Not just a suspicion--some actual, real, credible intelligence that they were in fact militia. Israel may well have that--it says it does--but it has never revealed what. Presumably to protects its sources, perhaps informants inside the Hamas organization. Presumably Israel would only release that information in a closed hearing so as to protect its sources from being found out by Hamas.

And since this is charging them with abdication of duty, you must consider them innocent of this charge until proven guilty. They are civilians until proven otherwise.

I'm not charging them with anything. In fact it's illegal to charge soldiers with crimes just for being soldiers. The question is whether Israel has positive information that would lead any reasonable person to believe they were militia. The answer to that question is unknown.

 

[flubadub]

Yup, and I disagree with that activity, and believe the illegal settlements should be torn down.

All settlements in the West Bank are illegal.
Do you support tearing down all settlements?

 

[basketcase]

Wow. Flub's logic is astounding, as circular and nonsensical it is.

 

[fuji]

All settlements in the West Bank are illegal.
Do you support tearing down all settlements?

All the illegal ones, yes. Or if not torn down, only because a mutually agreeable deal is reached involving some sort of land swap acceptable to the Palestinians. As it stands, in my view, they're on Palestinian land.

 

[flubadub]

All the illegal ones, yes.

According to the UN, all settlements inside the Palestinian side of the 1967 borders are illegal. So you support tearing all of them down?
Do you also support tearing down the illegal security wall?

 

[fuji]

According to the UN, all settlements inside the Palestinian side of the 1967 borders are illegal. So you support tearing all of them down?

Yes, subject to negotiation. Some of them are significant and it would probably make sense for Israel to swap land rather than tear them down, but one way or another, they need to either be torn down, or made legal through a negotiated settlement.

Do you also support tearing down the illegal security wall?

No. It's a necessary instrument to keep terrorists out of Israel proper, and I do not agree that it's illegal, and I do not think anybody else agrees with you that it is illegal, save perhaps Palestinian propagandists.

I do think there are a few sections of the wall that should be moved, specifically, where it encircles an illegal settlement unless there's a land swap making the settlement legal the wall should be moved to the proper border, but other than some changes in its location, I agree with the wall in principle.

 

[flubadub]

Yes, subject to negotiation. Some of them are significant and it would probably make sense for Israel to swap land rather than tear them down, but one way or another, they need to either be torn down, or made legal through a negotiated settlement.

Nice to hear something reasonable from you, Fuji.

No. It's a necessary instrument to keep terrorists out of Israel proper, and I do not agree that it's illegal, and I do not think anybody else agrees with you that it is illegal, save perhaps Palestinian propagandists.

Except for the International Court of Justice, they ruled it illegal. Oh, and the UN, check out resolution 1544. Oh, and Amnesty and Human Rights Watch and the EU.
Are you calling all those organizations Palestinian propagandists?

Given that its illegal, do you support tearing it down?
And given Israel's tendancy to shoot at farmers and children who get too near the wall, seems like it should come down.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israeli-soldiers-shot-at-children-collecting-gravel-by-gaza-border-2103992.html

 

[basketcase]

According to the UN, all settlements inside the Palestinian side of the 1967 borders are illegal. So you support tearing all of them down?
Do you also support tearing down the illegal security wall?

Several settlements existed in the region for decades/centuries prior to 1949 as Jewish settlements until Arab/Jordanian forces ethnically cleansed them. Israel as a whole (but with a few exceptions) has realized that Hebron won't be under Jewish control even though it is Judaism's second holiest city and there had been a continual Jewish presence there from antiquity until they were forced out by Arab riots in 1929 but the Etzion block (just inside the West Bank) will likely remain Jewish (as it was before the Jordanian Army slaughtered the Jewish people who lived there).

I hope many of the other settlements get shut down and the people living there moved back to Israel (or heaven forbid become equal citizens in a Palestinian state).

 

[fuji]

=Except for the International Court of Justice, they ruled it illegal. Oh, and the UN, check out resolution 1544. Oh, and Amnesty and Human Rights Watch and the EU.
Are you calling all those organizations Palestinian propagandists?

I took a look at, say, UN resolution 1544 and noticed it does not say that the wall is illegal. You are, once again, completely full of shit and making things up as you go.

 

[Ulan Bator]

A common sense plan for peace:

1) Israel to evacuate all territory seized in 1967
2) Independent Palestinian state to be erected on evacuated territory
3) Jewish settlers may remain provided Israel pays compensation to former Palestinian owners
4) New Palestinian state to guarantee equal treatment, rights and due protection to settlers
5) Demilitarized Zone to be established on both sides of border and patrolled by UN or a selected international force

My preferred solution:

#3 - Jewish settlers evacuate all land and said land to be returned to former owners
#4 - Palestinians living in Israel to be evacuated to new Palestinian state

This would eliminate Israel's much feared 'population time bomb' of declining Israeli birthrates vs. increasing Palestinian birthrates. Segregation? Yes. It's the only way to avoid future conflict.

 

[flubadub]

And the right of return?

 

[fuji]

And the right of return?

They would return to the Palestinian state, which is what they claim they left. It would have different borders than when they left it... namely, the map now includes Israel in addition to Palestine.

 

[blackrock13]

Whenever you are despartely losing an argument you resort to calling everything lies. And the number of times you had to repeat it, Fuji, shows me how much.

Lets analalzye a bit of Fuji logic here, once more.
Fuji calls the killing of 278 Gaza police letitimate, where the Goldstone report calls it a war crime, because Israel might have had information that makes them think those police were actually Hamas agents. Police being civilians and killing civilians intentionally a war crime.
Hamas calls settlers militia. They argue they are armed, take over land in the occupied Palestinian Lands, have the backing of Israel police, army and government. That's more of a case presented then Fuji's argument, which only assumes that Israel had information and refused to share it with Goldstone or the world. Israel has not ever said it had any information.

So, according to Fuji logic, having information asserting that people are not civilians allows you to not treat them as civilians. That would mean that Hamas would be within their rights, since Fuji says Hamas is at war with Israel (othewise the blockade is also a war crime), to kill settlers.


Me, I'm against killing and think they should just settle for a one state solution and get it all over with.
Fuji, a warmonger who supports permanently disfiguring tottlers, so what do you expect.

As usually FD, you just don't, much like the other sand fleas Gryf' and nottyboi, get it and must justreally just web sites that sniffs 'Israel bad' then throw it up here like a Rub' al-Khali sand storm. Things haven't changed a bit. Lack of reading comprehension or retention, I'm just not sure which it is.

Fuji is many things, but i've not ever considered him a warmonger. I guess it the fact that the word has three syllables that makes it fun to say for you. just keep flapping you lips and exercise those jaw muscles, it might kick up a breeze or two in your cell.

You've even got Fuji's fall-back strategy wrong as well. You are however trying to imitate Fuji by inserting thoughts into other psyches, but you're doing it just as badly.

 

[flubadub]

Fuji has repeatedly called for the bombing of Iran.
Despite Iran being a signatory to the NPT and undergoing inspections, as opposed to Israel which is one of the 3 countries in the world not a NPT signatory.
That makes him a warmonger.

 

[blackrock13]

Fuji has repeatedly called for the bombing of Iran.
Despite Iran being a signatory to the NPT and undergoing inspections, as opposed to Israel which is one of the 3 countries in the world not a NPT signatory.
That makes him a warmonger.

...... and you trust Iran's signature will stand up because why? Most of their neighbours don't trust them.

I've said numerous times than Israel has done some dumb/bad/odd unusual things, but I trust them just a tad more than Iran and their finger puppets in the Territories

 

[fuji]

Fuji has repeatedly called for the bombing of Iran.
Despite Iran being a signatory to the NPT and undergoing inspections, as opposed to Israel which is one of the 3 countries in the world not a NPT signatory.
That makes him a warmonger.

A nuclear armed Iran or a nuclear armed North Korea would be a horrendous danger to the entire international community and therefore some action needs to be taken. That no action has been taken, no credible action, is a good case study on how useless the UN is when it comes to resolving problems.

A nuclear armed Iran might supply a terrorist organization with nuclear weapons, as Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism. Think about that. Toronto, say, could be wiped out by some Iran backed terrorist group.

Iran should be threatened with a credible invasion force unless it submits to measures that guarantee it will not achieve nuclear weapons capability, and if it does not submit, then it should be invaded and its government replaced with a regime that will comply.

 

[flubadub]

A nuclear armed Iran .....blah blah..... terrorist group......blah blah.....
Iran should be threatened with a credible invasion .....blah blah.... and if it does not submit, then it should be invaded and its government replaced with a regime that will comply.

Warmonger.

Iran hasn't started a war in 150 years, is a signatory and undergoing inspections for the NPT.
Israel is one of 3 countries in the world that is not an NPT signatory, has started numerous wars, ignored UN resolutions and committed numerous war crimes.
On top of that Israel tried to sell the bomb to apartheid South Africa, almost dropped the bomb on Egypt in the '70's, has wantonly killed people in other countries......

Why start a war for them?

 

[basketcase]

Warmonger.

Iran hasn't started a war in 150 years, is a signatory and undergoing inspections for the NPT.
...

Life is easy when you can sign agreements yet not have to live up to them.

Also great is when you could visit another country where you created and fund a terrorist group that has started wars, you flaunt that terrorist groups existence in a region where it's not supposed to be (despite UN 'enforcement'), who are slowly taking over that country through force, and making an unstable democracy even more unstable.

 

[flubadub]

Life is easy when you can sign agreements yet not have to live up to them.

Also great is when you could visit another country where you created and fund a terrorist group that has started wars, you flaunt that terrorist groups existence in a region where it's not supposed to be (despite UN 'enforcement'), who are slowly taking over that country through force, and making an unstable democracy even more unstable.

So many errors in those statements.....
Whether Hezbollah is terrorist or not is up for debate.
Hezbollah and Israel are both not honouring UNIFIL requests.
Hezbollah is also democratically elected in Lebanon, they do not rule by force.
And is Hezbollah's democracy any less stable then Israel's, where Lieberman and his horrid ideas are keeping Netanyahu in power.

 

[fuji]

Warmonger.

Iran hasn't started a war in 150 years, is a signatory and undergoing inspections for the NPT.

The worry is not that Iran will start a nuclear war. The worry is that Iran will give nuclear weapons to terrorists. Iran is recognized by most democracies as a state sponsor of terrorism, and has funded and backed terrorist organizations in many countries, and has been responsible for a variety of terrorist attacks.