Slaughter in Gaza

[tha]

Originally Posted by garo

Ok here is a challenge for you. Try and come up with an equally "accurate but incomplete" film telling the other side of the story. Putting yourself in the other person's shoes is often instructive.

Well, let us start with who is the other person? There are so many actors in this battle. I hope you do not see the Arab population of the former British mandate of Palestine as the other person. They suffer, they suffer big time, no one on either side is questioning that. Do you mean the guy who pays all the money to prop up the UN schools and mosques with weapon caches? The same guy who determines how much money goes to Hamas and how much goes to Islamic Jihad? Do you want such a film to be targeted at a public in Farsi, in Arabic or in English? People that speak those languages have quite different backgrounds that needs to be tailored to from a propaganda directors perspective.

If I am asked to speak on the conflict I often ask the public when they think the hostilities began. Answers that come up most often are 1880, 1948 and 1967 plus a multitude of other random years plus some years of biblical origin. The real start of the fighting is virtually not known to most people. Most films that take sides make use of this by setting the origings of the conflict by whatever suits them. The real year, by the way, was 1920. The fundamental cause was the British, having taken over rule from the Turks, imposing European human rights on the Arab tribes, without there being an infrastructure to support those rights. As a result the Arab tribe leaders could no longer keep their societies stable. So they organised revolts against the British and jews alike, because the jews that originated from Eastern and Western Europe had introduced egalitarian communities with high welfare that the muslim population aspired to as well, adding to the instability within the Arab tribes.

The other most common trick that most films etc. use to misportray the conflict is to claim that it is about land or water.

Can I just submit the entire footage available on Memri? No, that does certainly not meet your criterium for accurate. Memri points out the how wrong the propaganda is. However, since there is very little if any freedom of the press in those countries, it does meet the criterium for accurate where it is broadcasted.

So, if you want it an accurate, but incomplete view as a film, there is a sway of films and movies that portray daily live in Gaza or the West-Bank. They usually are not incorrect, but they include no background whatsoever on the origins. "Soldier on the Roof" was a documentary that I could watch and that did not contain any fragments that would indicate it was a inaccurate portrait.

But what sense does it make to pick a film or movie with these criteria if there is no freedom of the press including the airing of TV in any Arab country, including the territories that are under the control of Hamas or Fatah/PA?

[tha]

Originally Posted by garo

I think the irony of this sentence is totally lost upon the writer.

Well, I needed much more time than the average hour a day to keep up with developments in the past month. I made enough time available to follow the other Middle East developments as well. Did you know that 5 times as many Arabs died in Syria than in Gaza last month due to armed conflict? The numbers from Iraq are not very reliable, but the stream of refugees fleeing Iraw is appalling and no ones notices because TV news stations and newspapers cannot cover more than one conflict at a time and Gaza is at least familiar to us.

I even took the effort to figure out where the neighborhoods are where the TV-pictures come from and what damage, if any, was done. So I think that I want to see what is being done and how it affects both sides.

[tha]

Just today I was watching Dutch National Television. We have three such TV stations and access to these stations a given to about each and every thinkable group who can muster some support. The muslim broadcasting group had another hour today. Virtually no native Dutch people watch it, and if you by accident did you may not have noticed what was being said.

Apparently the Turkish AK Party managed to get control over the broadcast. First they redefined 'european parliamentary democracy' to mean 'imperialism' and then they redefined 'muslim rule' to mean 'democracy'. Oh, and don't forget to vote for Erdohan in the upcoming presidential election where Erdohan is going to do the Putin trick to circumvent the maximum amount of terms restriction.

I wish more western people would watch Middle Eastern TV programs.

[ch4]

Says it pretty well:

Originally Posted by http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/picking-a-side-in-israel-palestine_b_5602701.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

If Israel wanted to kill civilians, it is terrible at it. ISIS killed more civilians in two days (700 plus) than Israel has in two weeks. Imagine if ISIS or Hamas had Israel's weapons, army, air force, US support, and nuclear arsenal. Their enemies would've been annihilated long ago. If Israel truly wanted to destroy Gaza, it could do so within a day, right from the air. Why carry out a more painful, expensive ground incursion that risks the lives of its soldiers?

***

4. Does Hamas really use its own civilians as human shields?

Ask Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas how he feels about Hamas' tactics.

"What are you trying to achieve by sending rockets?" he asks. "I don't like trading in Palestinian blood."

It isn't just speculation anymore that Hamas puts its civilians in the line of fire.

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri plainly admitted on Gazan national TV that the human shield strategy has proven "very effective."

The UN relief organization UNRWA issued a furious condemnation of Hamas after discovering hidden rockets in not one, but two children's schools in Gaza last week.

Hamas fires thousands of rockets into Israel, rarely killing any civilians or causing any serious damage. It launches them from densely populated areas, including hospitals and schools.

Why launch rockets without causing any real damage to the other side, inviting great damage to your own people, then putting your own civilians in the line of fire when the response comes? Even when the IDF warns civilians to evacuate their homes before a strike, why does Hamas tell them to stay put?

Because Hamas knows its cause is helped when Gazans die. If there is one thing that helps Hamas most -- one thing that gives it any legitimacy -- it is dead civilians. Rockets in schools. Hamas exploits the deaths of its children to gain the world's sympathy. It uses them as a weapon.

You don't have to like what Israel is doing to abhor Hamas. Arguably, Israel and Fatah are morally equivalent. Both have a lot of right on their side. Hamas, on the other hand, doesn't have a shred of it.

By Geneva Convention:

If Gaza civilians volunteer to be human shields, they thus voluntarily become combatants and legitimate targets.

If Gaza civilians are involuntarily forced to be human shields or are tricked into being human shields unknowingly (such as by Hamas's hiding weapons in schools or hospitals), Hamas commits a war crime and is then responsible for their deaths.

This isn't saying Israel doesn't do any wrong, but it cuts through the Hamas pretense.

[ewmayer]

@ch4:

"Hamas fires thousands of rockets into Israel, rarely killing any civilians or causing any serious damage."

Clearly, the self-restraint of killing only a 1000-plus "volunteer human shields" in retaliation for the model rocketry club's show of force is laudable.

The preceding several posts in snappy headline form:

"Israel: Even more humane than ISIS!"

"Israel: We deserve praise for liquidating the Gaza ghetto in a careful, measured way: 'Cause if we wanted to, we could solve the problem posed by these Untermenschen in an afternoon."

[The preceding soundbites brought to you by Hasbara International -- check out our detailed style guide for writers, now available in PDF!]

Related links:

o http://maxspeak.net/zionist-style-guide/ -- shorter and snappier than the Hasbara style guide. Perfect for the mobile propagandist!

o An open letter for the people in Gaza -- Open letter to The Lancet

o "Genocide Is Permissible" Muses Times Of Israel, Promptly Retracts

o ‘Kidnapped’ Israeli soldier actually was killed in action, military says -- Good thing the Israelis only killed and wounded a couple hundred civilians, erm I mean of course "volunteer human shields", in retaliation. More laudable humanitarian restraint! I feel much better about U.s. tax dollars continuing to support this stuff now.

[ch4]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

@ch4:

Your point is ... ?

[xilman]

Originally Posted by ch4

Your point is ... ?

Hi Richard, good to see you back.

[tha]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

Clearly, the self-restraint of killing only a 1000-plus "volunteer human shields" in retaliation for the model rocketry club's show of force is laudable.

Hezbollah as an army ranks in the top 10 of armies in the world and is directly on Israels border. It is 100% paid for by Iran. Hamas and Islamic Jihad are both nearly 100% paid for by Iran. The commands all come from Teheran. Very few European armies could win a battle with Hamas if attacked and none with their present rules of engagement. Hamas consists not of amateurs.

Israel does not kill civilians. It returns fire to the exact spot from where it is fired upon by rockets. Hamas chooses from where it originates its fire.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by tha

Israel does not kill civilians. It returns fire to the exact spot from where it is fired upon by rockets. Hamas chooses from where it originates its fire.

Not only false, a non-sequitur.

Israeli military action has killed many civilians over the years.

The Israeli military have also used white phosphorus over civilian areas.

My view is "a plague o' both their houses". What is happening in that area of the world seems, to me, to be a war between the US and Iran conducted by well supplied mercenaries.

[fivemack]

Originally Posted by tha

Hezbollah as an army ranks in the top 10 of armies in the world and is directly on Israels border. It is 100% paid for by Iran. Hamas and Islamic Jihad are both nearly 100% paid for by Iran. The commands all come from Teheran. Very few European armies could win a battle with Hamas if attacked and none with their present rules of engagement. Hamas consists not of amateurs.

Israel does not kill civilians. It returns fire to the exact spot from where it is fired upon by rockets. Hamas chooses from where it originates its fire.

And Hamas knows that Israel fires back with that policy; and Israel therefore knows that it will be shooting at non-combatants; and Israel is therefore deliberately killing schoolchildren. It has a very easy alternative: hold fire.

[tha]

Originally Posted by fivemack

And Hamas knows that Israel fires back with that policy; and Israel therefore knows that it will be shooting at non-combatants; and Israel is therefore deliberately killing schoolchildren. It has a very easy alternative: hold fire.

Since Israel returns fire at the exact position it will be extremely simple for Hamas to make Israel hold fire.