George Galloway 'beaten over Israel comments'

[fuji]

The only reason why the word "may" is being used is because HRW, etc, want a court to prosecute Hamas. They only use the definitive when guilt has been adjudicated at trial.

Gryfin is probably not familiar with democratic concepts like "innocent until proven guilty", the benefit of which even slime line Hamas are entitled when it comes to formal statements.

 

[Moviefan-2]

It's even more obvious that you seem to have forgotten that the word "concession" is not part of the quote in any way. It's nowhere to be found.

"Nowhere to be found"?

It was in the Merriam-Webster definition of "may" that was provided by you. It is in point 3 -- the part that describes what it means when someone says something "may" be the case, "but....".

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/may

My previous point stands. It is very difficult to take you or Groggy seriously as commentators on Hamas and Israel, when (if your posts are sincere) neither of you could pass a high school English exam.

 

[gryfin]

"Nowhere to be found"?

It was in the Merriam-Webster definition of "may" that was provided by you. It is in point 3 -- the part that describes what it means when someone says something "may" be the case, "but....".

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/may

My previous point stands. It is very difficult to take you or Groggy seriously as commentators on Hamas and Israel, when (if your posts are sincere) neither of you could pass a high school English exam.

You certainly do reek of desperation. It's interesting that you suddenly dropped any reference to the word "concession" after you were challenged to find it in the original text.

But let's not stop there... the text you referenced in the Merriam Webster definition did bears no resemblance to the quote in the original text. It was unequivocally interrogative and the definition example is clearly not.

And let's remind you that the original text does not say "have used" but actually says "may have used".

 

[basketcase]

"Nowhere to be found"?

It was in the Merriam-Webster definition of "may" that was provided by you. It is in point 3 -- the part that describes what it means when someone says something "may" be the case, "but....".

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/may

My previous point stands. It is very difficult to take you or Groggy seriously as commentators on Hamas and Israel, when (if your posts are sincere) neither of you could pass a high school English exam.

Groggy and Gryf know exactly what the quote means yet are pathologically obliged to stand up for Hamas.

 

[Moviefan-2]

And let's remind you that the original text does not say "have used" but actually says "may have used".

Actually, it says, yes, they and others may have used civilians as human shields, but....

That use of "may" is clearly defined in the Merriam-Webster dictionary as a concession, not as an expression of uncertainty.

The problem, Gryfin, is that I'm willing to believe you're sincere when you say you don't understand that point. That is why it is almost impossible to believe that you could pass a high school English exam.

It is equally difficult to believe that someone with such limited reading abilities is knowledgeable about the Middle East.

 

[gryfin]

Actually, it says, yes, they and others may have used civilians as human shields, but....

That use of "may" is clearly defined in the Merriam-Webster dictionary as a concession, not as an expression of uncertainty.

The problem, Gryfin, is that I'm willing to believe you're sincere when you say you don't understand that point. That is why it is almost impossible to believe that you could pass a high school English exam.

It is equally difficult to believe that someone with such limited reading abilities is knowledgeable about the Middle East.

In other words it does not say " have used" but in fact say's "may have used" meaning possibility or probability. You've been clinging on to the word "concession" despite the dictionary explicitly stating that it only pertains to purpose and expectation. Absolutely nothing about anything being definite. Further, the example you rely upon does not match the interrogative structure of the quoted text.

 

[fuji]

"May have used" is the language HRW use when they want an investigation/prosecution.

 

[Moviefan-2]

You've been clinging on to the word "concession" despite the dictionary explicitly stating that it only pertains to purpose and expectation.

Unreal. Now, you want us to believe you don't know what the word "or" means.

Take another look at the definition. The third listing is citing examples where "may" is being used in an auxiliary function.

It does not say that all of the examples pertain to purpose and expectation. That is only the case for the first example. That is why the word "or" appears in front of the words contingency, concession, and choice.

Those are other examples of "may" being used in an auxiliary function. They are not examples of purpose and expectation.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/may

You obviously don't know what you're talking about and it sure looks like you are borderline illiterate. Certainly, you could not pass a high school English exam.

The bigger question remains: Why should anyone care about your views on the Middle East when it is quite clear that anything more challenging than The Cat in the Hat is beyond your reading abilities?

 

[groggy]

Look at it this way.

Hamas is now calling for ICC investigations.
Israel is shitting its pants over the possibility.

You figure out which one is worried about having committed war crimes.

 

[fuji]

That is because Hamas has no intention of abiding by any law. It is a criminal, terrorist group that has always broken the law and plans to go on flouting the law. Hamas routinely commits just about every war crime there is and brags about doing so. It means nothing to Hamas to ignore an ICC prosecution, they have already ignored far more serious laws. Kidnappings, murders, blowing up restaurants, blowing up buses, firing rockets at civilians, using human shields, what crime hasn't Hamas committed?

If the ICC issues an arrest warrant for Meshal, or Dief, Hamas will certainly not deliver them to the Hague. Hamas will just continue in as a fully criminal and illegal terrorist organization and shoot anybody from the ICC who comes to Gaza to arrest Meshal.

Hamas hopes to use the ICC for propaganda while refusing to abide by the law itself.

 

[groggy]

That is because Hamas has no intention of abiding by any law. It is a criminal, terrorist group that has always broken the law and plans to go on flouting the law. Hamas routinely commits just about every war crime there is and brags about doing so. It means nothing to Hamas to ignore an ICC prosecution, they have already ignored far more serious laws. Kidnappings, murders, blowing up restaurants, blowing up buses, firing rockets at civilians, using human shields, what crime hasn't Hamas committed?

If the ICC issues an arrest warrant for Meshal, or Dief, Hamas will certainly not deliver them to the Hague. Hamas will just continue in as a fully criminal and illegal terrorist organization and shoot anybody from the ICC who comes to Gaza to arrest Meshal.

Hamas hopes to use the ICC for propaganda while refusing to abide by the law itself.

So you think they want the ICC in so Hamas can get charged and then thumb their noses at the ICC?
You are getting really wacko, you know that?

Who do you expect will believe that, ok, well I'm sure you expect shack, basketcase and mf2 to buy it.
The sane world would just laugh at theories like that, it just makes you look really wacko.

 

[basketcase]

So you think they want the ICC in so Hamas can get charged and then thumb their noses at the ICC?
You are getting really wacko, you know that?

Who do you expect will believe that, ok, well I'm sure you expect shack, basketcase and mf2 to buy it.
The sane world would just laugh at theories like that, it just makes you look really wacko.

Yep, the PA has refused to actually file charges. It's all for show (especially since Fatah members publicly admitted to a war crime by launching rockets indiscriminately http://www.timesofisrael.com/moderate-fatah-joins-hamas-and-islamic-jihad-in-missile-launches/).


p.s. Are you still trying to pretend that Hamas hasn't fired rockets indiscriminately, from civilian centers, and used a hospital as their HQ?

 

[fuji]

So you think they want the ICC in so Hamas can get charged and then thumb their noses at the ICC?

Hamas is a criminal organization dedicated to the commission of war crimes. They have never followed the law before, and they aren't about to start following the law just because Abbas signs a deal with the ICC. Hamas are criminals and they will continue to be criminals no matter what treaty Abbas signs.

The problem in bringing Hamas to justice isn't lack of a court to try them in, it's the fact that they are heavily armed and arresting them involves a major battle that kills lots of civilians. The ICC won't change that, and Hamas isn't going to hand over Meshal if there's an arrest warrant issued.

 

[Moviefan-2]

So you think they want the ICC in so Hamas can get charged and then thumb their noses at the ICC?
You are getting really wacko, you know that?

Who do you expect will believe that, ok, well I'm sure you expect shack, basketcase and mf2 to buy it.
The sane world would just laugh at theories like that, it just makes you look really wacko.

The "sane world" is OK with a terrorist organization complaining about war crimes?

If you say so.

 

[groggy]

Hamas is a criminal organization dedicated to the commission of war crimes. They have never followed the law before, and they aren't about to start following the law just because Abbas signs a deal with the ICC. Hamas are criminals and they will continue to be criminals no matter what treaty Abbas signs.

The problem in bringing Hamas to justice isn't lack of a court to try them in, it's the fact that they are heavily armed and arresting them involves a major battle that kills lots of civilians. The ICC won't change that, and Hamas isn't going to hand over Meshal if there's an arrest warrant issued.

Heavily armed?
They don't have tanks, armed drones, jets, nukes, guided missiles, iron dome or a myriad other armaments that Israel has.

In this last round of slaughter though, it appears they mostly abided by the Geneva Conventions, other then the use of missiles that can't be aimed.
That's why they aren't worried about the ICC but people like you and the IDF are shitting their pants over the possibility.

 

[groggy]

The "sane world" is OK with a terrorist organization complaining about war crimes?

If you say so.

The sane world will be happy that international law can be applied to both sides.
But you won't be, will you?

 

[fuji]

Heavily armed?

They have machine guns, rockets, antitank missiles, and bombs. Yes they are heavily armed. Arresting them would require a full scale invasion and very heavy fighting with lots of casualties. Just destroying their tunnel network cost around 60 soldiers lives, plus many civilian casualties.

In this last round of slaughter though, it appears they mostly abided by the Geneva Conventions

No they didn't, not even fucking close.

They committed thousands of counts of attempted murder by firing rockets at Israeli civilians, they used Palestinian civilians as human shields, they committed kidnappings and murders of children, they sent armed death squads to slaughter villagers, they put weapons caches in hospitals and schools, and they shot a whole lot of people in the street without trial.

They are a criminal and terrorist organization that is dedicated to the commission of war crimes.

There is no justification for any of their behavior all of which is both deeply criminal and highly immoral.

 

[groggy]

They committed thousands of counts of attempted murder by firing rockets at Israeli civilians, they used Palestinian civilians as human shields, they committed kidnappings and murders of children, they sent armed death squads to slaughter villagers, they put weapons caches in hospitals and schools, and they shot a whole lot of people in the street without trial.

They are a criminal and terrorist organization that is dedicated to the commission of war crimes.

There is no justification for any of their behavior all of which is both deeply criminal and highly immoral.

There is no legit evidence to back up any of those claims.
And you know it, otherwise you would be backing calls for the ICC to investigate both sides, since you repeatedly claim that Israel has committed no war crimes.
But you don't, and its because you know who would end up on the docket, don't you?

 

[fuji]

Sorry liar but every one of those Hamas war crimes is extensively documented.

1. Thousands of rockets fired at civilians, each one a count of attempted murder

2. A half dozen reliable news reports of Hamas firing from civilian structures

3. Multiple Hamas leaders confirm Hamas kidnapped and murdered children

4. Hamas death squads shot in the act of trying to infiltrate an Israeli village

5. Multiple weapons caches publicly found in hospitals and schools and widely reported

6. Hamas itself broadcast video of Palestinians being shot in the street without trial

Hamas is a criminal organization dedicated to the commission of war crime.

 

[groggy]

1. Hamas named military targets this time, they are still a war crime because you can't aim them, but its not terrorism
2. nope, every instance you provided was suspect.
3. nope, Hamas confirmed they didn't order and the IDF confirmed it was by a rogue trying to start a coup
4. nope, seems they only killed military targets
5. nope, none found in operating schools or hospitals
6. they claimed they had trials, I'm against corporal punishment, but it was less offensive then Israel's 'targeted assasinations'


But if you really believe all those true then you should support bringing both sides to the ICC.
But you're really fucking afraid of that happening, aren't you?