Gaza: Israel Uses Hannibal Directive To Kills 50 Palestinians After Soldier Captured
A cease-fire between Gaza and Israel was announced for this morning at 8am local time. The Israeli defense forces continued to operate in Gaza and to destroy the Palestinian tunnels. Shortly before the official cease-fire start, according to Palestinian sources, a commando of Islamic Jihad fighters infiltrated the Israeli line through a tunnel, attacked a group of Israeli soldiers, killed several and captured one of them alive. This happened near the southern Rafah border crossing between Gaza and Egypt.
The Israelis took a while to notice that a soldier had been captured but when they found out they immediately responded according to the Hannibal directive which demands to do everything possible to prevent that an Israeli soldier captured alive stays captured alive.
Accordingly, even before the capture of its soldier was publicly known, the Israeli army opened a barrage of artillery fire over south Gaza killing some 50 Palestinians and wounding more than 200 of them. These people were out in the streets and markets because they thought that the cease-fire was in place.
The cease-fire is for now over. It is unlikely that the Israelis have a chance to find their soldier.
Will they now again escalate and risk more possible captures or will they negotiate a new cease-fire and later the captured soldier's release?
Posted by b on August 1, 2014 at 11:27 UTC | Permalink
According to the Palestinian side the captured Israeli soldier is Colonel Adeer Goldren.
If true such a high officer is quite a catch. The IDF brass will be fuming.
I know one thing — this latest flare-up in the eternal Israeli-Palestinian conflict has turned the notion of a cease-fire on its head. I'm not sure what it means anymore, or if it means anything beyond the rhetoric.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1 2014 12:06 utc | 3
Correction to my comment 2 "IDF: Name of captured soldier is Hadar Goldin, 23, a second lieutenant in the Givati Brigade"
Not sure yet which is correct
Anshel Pfeffer of Haaretz tweets.
This is no longer an IDF operation against the Hamas tunnels. It's a captive recovery operation and there's no limits to that
No limits. Yeah well and, who knows where and how long they might have him hostage? Maybe he's already been smuggled to teheran.
Posted by: peter radiator | Aug 1 2014 12:14 utc | 5
Big News, big News!
Maybe he's already been smuggled to Russia.
The occupiers continue the raids and they call it a ceasefire?
Posted by: slirs | Aug 1 2014 12:28 utc | 6
Looks like the Palestinians have got their hands on a much bigger rat I fear the impending massacre of civilians as revenge from the IDF...
Posted by: Zico | Aug 1 2014 12:52 utc | 7
Maybe he's already been smuggled to Russia.
Perhaps this is satire, but your last statement is not, so I can't be sure.
Either way, it implies Russia has a more substantial hand in the Gaza conflict than is explored by the mainstream press. In fact, the mainstream press doesn't explore such an angle at all. It wouldn't surprise me considering Russia's amiable loose affiliation with Dubya's vaunted Axis of Evil.
One has to wonder, what does Dubya think of all this if he thinks about it at all? Will his portrait painting of Putin survive the nuclear conflagration Putin initiates — a symbolic token testament to the fierce will of a tyrant who wouldn't back down for anything, including all life on earth?
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1 2014 13:01 utc | 8
Israel is commiting Crimes against humanity and genocide, one cant deny that, still msm babbling about the poor israelis that just defend themselves.
Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 1 2014 13:06 utc | 9
#5
"No limits. Yeah well and, who knows where and how long they might have him hostage"
I believe you should use the correct word: prisoner of war instead of "hostage" which kind of legitimize the bombing of innocent by Israelis
Posted by: ATH | Aug 1 2014 13:42 utc | 10
#5, #10
Yes, another Zionist turn of phrase, so very convenient for propaganda purposes. A post about how the "special, chosen by God" people manipulate language and perception, and violate ceasefire agreements when it suits them:
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2014/08/gaza-genocide-diary-1-august-2014.html
Posted by: JerseyJeffersonian | Aug 1 2014 14:05 utc | 11
Peter Fisk,who is another biased reporter,though his bias is not Israeli,but Armenian I believe,says;The US Congress outdoes Arab dictatorships 98% with a 100% vote for Israel,and they aren't even Israeli citizens.(Well.most)Then he mentions Hamas corruption.Eh,I have never heard them being corrupt,as Fatah,that's why the monsters hate them.
Posted by: dahoit | Aug 1 2014 14:12 utc | 12
Robert Fisk;Peter Radiator was still stuck in my sleepy head.
Posted by: dahoit | Aug 1 2014 14:13 utc | 13
#3
"I know one thing — this latest flare-up in the eternal Israeli-Palestinian conflict has turned the notion of a cease-fire on its head. I'm not sure what it means anymore, or if it means anything beyond the rhetoric."
It simply means that even such a disproportionate battle is being lost. Sorry for you.
Posted by: ATH | Aug 1 2014 14:14 utc | 14
Yes, another Zionist turn of phrase, so very convenient for propaganda purposes. A post about how the "special, chosen by God" people manipulate language and perception, and violate ceasefire agreements when it suits them:
The tactic you mention is not so-called "Zionist" specific. It's a tactic used by all those in power throughout the history of Civilization. Hamas does it too. Putin's Russia does it too. Germany's leadership does it too. America's leadership does it too. The Chinese government does it too.
There are no exceptions to this most basic rule. Some do it better than others, but they all do it.
Your scapegoating "Zionists" as the developers and perpetrators of this tactic is a bit too The Protocols of the Elders of Zionish methinks. You might want to dial it back some.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1 2014 14:15 utc | 15
israel trying to start a world war?
"Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option
Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 1 2014 14:17 utc | 16
#15
So I gather you agree that the correct term to use is POW, yes?
Posted by: ATH | Aug 1 2014 14:17 utc | 17
Israel is on a suicide trajectory -- it relies upon military dominance to secure territorial expansionism. It can't back down and negotiate without committing more and more massacres. But the Palestinians are increasingly inflicting significant losses on Israel, driving the latter to engage in further aggression and violence. Everything Israel is doing is leading to its inevitable demise. BDS is the way forward for the international solidarity movement.
Posted by: k | Aug 1 2014 14:30 utc | 18
Tunnels are the answer. If Gaza and all of Isreal are tunneled to the extent that when they collapse everything disappears into a pit.
Posted by: Curtis | Aug 1 2014 15:18 utc | 19
Your scapegoating "Zionists" as the developers and perpetrators of this tactic is a bit too The Protocols of the Elders of Zionish methinks. You might want to dial it back some.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1, 2014 10:15:48 AM | 15
No need to dial it back. The Jews, uniquely among the perps of such mendacity and iniquity, brag (and gloat) about it. It's part of their G-d given, documented, Satanic doctrine.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 1 2014 15:20 utc | 20
#15
So I gather you agree that the correct term to use is POW, yes?
Posted by: ATH | Aug 1, 2014 10:17:58 AM | 17
I don't think anything about it — yet. It remains to be seen how each side treats the apprehension of this IDF soldier. If Hamas chooses to treat the soldier as a hostage and bargain with his life, well, at that point, at least as it relates to Hamas's motivation, he's a hostage and not a prisoner of war. Same goes for Israel. If Israel assumes he's a hostage and takes the stance "we don't bargain or negotiate with terrorists" then he is a hostage in their view regardless of Hamas's intent or perception of this apprehension.
If I had to bet, and perhaps we can create a blog pool to take wagers, I'd say both sides will treat it as a hostage situation.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1 2014 15:31 utc | 21
#15, Cold N. Holefield: "The tactic you mention is not so-called "Zionist" specific."
Umm, yes it is: "There is a reason for this enhancement of the PR skills of Israeli spokesmen. Going by what they say, the playbook they are using is a professional, well-researched and confidential study on how to influence the media and public opinion in America and Europe. Written by the expert Republican pollster and political strategist Dr Frank Luntz, the study was commissioned five years ago by a group called The Israel Project, with offices in the US and Israel, for use by those "who are on the front lines of fighting the media war for Israel".
Every one of the 112 pages in the booklet is marked "not for distribution or publication" and it is easy to see why. The Luntz report, officially entitled "The Israel project's 2009 Global Language Dictionary, was leaked almost immediately to Newsweek Online, but its true importance has seldom been appreciated. It should be required reading for everybody, especially journalists, interested in any aspect of Israeli policy because of its "dos and don'ts" for Israeli spokesmen."
And the booklet, the Israel Project's "2009 Global Language Dictionary", an absolute must-read, here:
People keep thinking in sound bites or censoring their critical thinking in order to appear non-conspiratorial. Too bad this means they will never understand our world.
Posted by: Alan | Aug 1 2014 15:34 utc | 22
Posted by: Alan | Aug 1, 2014 11:34:09 AM | 22
All that proves is that Israel does it too, it doesn't prove it's Israel (versus "Zionist") specific. Critical thought renders what I've said obvious and apparent. If you get your hate off, you can see more clearly.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1 2014 15:44 utc | 23
18 & 19: I think you are both right. Israel's bargaining position is the fantasy of demilitarization. The "terror tunnels" can never be policed, no matter how many "international inspectors" are put on the ground in Gaza (notice how Israel keeps mentioning the Iraq WMD inspectors and Syrian chemical weapons ban as prior UNSCR precedents it thinks would work for Gaza). So what Israel is really try to do is get a deal like it did after 2008/9 and 2012 -- a return to the status quo, which means the blockade and "mowing the grass." But Palestinians, now unified, are not going to go for the status quo ante.
So the slaughter will continue. And while it does the number of supporters of the BDS Movement will surge. Israel cannot win.
Posted by: Mike Maloney | Aug 1 2014 15:45 utc | 24
Israel's bozo army needs 87,000 troops (71,000 before the 16,000 were added) to find 30 tunnels?
Posted by: MRW | Aug 1 2014 15:47 utc | 25
Israel's bozo military logic is let's kill 1000+ civilians overground to find 30 tunnels underground?
Posted by: MRW | Aug 1 2014 15:48 utc | 26
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1, 2014 11:44:12 AM | 23
It isn't Zionist specific, except it is (cognitive dissonance anyone?). It's the Israel Project's handbook for those "who are on the front lines of fighting the media war for Israel", one of many we've seen over the years.
Instead of doubling down, you should read the report. The level of sophistication of Israeli/Zionist propaganda is incomparable to anything we have ever seen.
Posted by: Alan | Aug 1 2014 15:49 utc | 27
#17
Silence on that point, uh, "methinks" a prolonged one. I don't expect that your query will be addressed, sorry to say. But then, I wasn't talking to our ever-helpful thread troll in the first place.
#20
Dialing it back? Oh, geez, I'll get right on it. Thanks ever so much for pointing out the errors of my ways, Mr. Right-thinking, concern trolling, passive-aggressive thread Nazi! How very hasbara of you.
Posted by: JerseyJeffersonian | Aug 1 2014 15:53 utc | 28
Israel's bozo military logic is let's kill 1000+ civilians overground to find 30 tunnels underground?
Posted by: MRW | Aug 1, 2014 11:48:37 AM | 26
nop - that ain't the logic at all.
The zio-Nazi's bozo military logic is
"Let's PRETEND the logic is to kill 1000+ civilians overground to find 30 tunnels underground when really all we wanna do is bomb the crap outta Gaza and we don't really care how many we kill"
Posted by: your mom | Aug 1 2014 15:54 utc | 29
The level of sophistication of Israeli/Zionist propaganda is incomparable to anything we have ever seen.
The bolded part is the operative phrase. Israel, in this sense, isn't as savvy as other powers because it makes its playbook available for all to see. Israel is still amateurish when it comes to this. The others are so good at it you don't even know they're good at it.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1 2014 15:54 utc | 30
#21
That is sophistry and I would add relativism. In another words, you don't display any kind of moral standing here. Israel obviously would love to propagandize this event as a hostage taking which by definition is a criminal act from the perpetrators' side; the situation here though is, and I thought you referred several times in your previous postings to it the same way, a powerful state trying to make life as miserable as possible for the locals by killing and maiming them (you proposed rewarding the aggressor by moving the victims out, thee perfect outcome for Israel, which is another sorry display of your moral standing). Capturing one of the agents of such a wrong endeavor is not a crime but a morally commendable action in any sense of the word. A tactical win too, as an additional bonus.
Posted by: ATH | Aug 1 2014 15:54 utc | 31
dahoit @12
The Fisk article http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/08/01/gaza-and-the-press/ is very good. He suggests that the consumers of the MSM are beginning to revolt against the extreme anti-Palestinian biass in news and editorials.
The Irish Times, which he refers to, is a good example: the editor is completely pro-Israel, Comments under the line are pro Palestine, for the most part, and very well argued.
As to corruption in the Hamas leadership, the organisation's desertion of Syria, clearly at the instructions of the Qatari tyrant, and support of Qatar, a hell for tens of thousands of migrant muslim workers, is evidence of that.
But the rank and file militias, of Hamas and the other factions, are obviously blameless and admirable.
Posted by: bevin | Aug 1 2014 15:56 utc | 32
@26 As far as the civilians slaughtered numbers go, that number will soar as disease and malnutrition sets in. The various aid agencies, the real ones not intelligence fronts, are stretched to the breaking point between Iraq, Syria, and the Ebola outbreak.
Libya and the Ukraine have largely been abandoned, and Libya is of genuine concern to France and Italy as opposed to falling under the rights of empire. The death toll will be astonishing.
Judging from the reaction of Israelis, this is a final solution for Israel which may not fly in five years from the U.S.
Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Aug 1 2014 15:57 utc | 33
Israel's bozo logic is that only Jewish safety and security is what the world should be concerned with.
Posted by: MRW | Aug 1 2014 15:57 utc | 34
The US offers in aid 3 billion dollars a year to Isr., approved by Obama.
30 billion for 10 years, from 2009 to 2018.
***Not news but it should be stated over and over.***
Official doc:
For 2014, that looks like:
3.1 billion, plus:
for the “Iron Drome” - 504 million
David’s Sling - 150 million
Arrow II, III - 44 million and 74 million
(milit mat., all)
Budget for 2015 is even larger (see document.)
In any case, the ‘aid’ is mostly spent on (no choice) US arms. The US taxpayer funds the arms industry in the US and marginally Israel, in short protection of an important industry and many jobs.
The necesary upshot is that Israel has to be at war-without-end.
> no change, no ‘peace’, no real negotiation, no move in any direction, regular provocation and flare-ups to keep the conflict going, no winners, no losers, no nothing new, stasis, murk, hysteria, etc.
So a bitty-light genocide and a sprinkle of war-crimes is the least of what is needed.
Israel complies or loves it, c’est selon.
The more ppl are outraged and despairing, the better! the more Israel is dealing with enemies, the better!
Curiously, recently some funding for Isr. was refused in the US Senate, by the Repubs., probably just a glitch.
Posted by: Noirette | Aug 1 2014 15:59 utc | 35
sorry i posted the wrong link, here is the 'official doc', the posted link was about refusing aid ro Isr.
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf
Posted by: Noirette | Aug 1 2014 16:08 utc | 36
So what. War is hell. If you build your community around an ethic of warfare and "resistance" you reap the results. What the hell did you think was going to happen, chocolate drops and gumballs?
Posted by: Northern Observer | Aug 1 2014 16:28 utc | 37
Not captured, KIDNAPPED, and he is not a prisnor, he is a HOSTAGE becuase he is not being held by troops in a war, he is being held by TERRORISTS. Sheesh, people let's get the terminology right.
I was in the Navy, not Army, but I have to wonder how it feels to have your nation's policy be that if I'm captured (pardon me kidnapped) my country will not attempt to rescue me but will kill me as quickly as possible. Seems like loyalty might be an issue.
Extension of the Gas War to the Levant
by Thierry Meyssan
After three years of war against Syria, "Westerners" have deliberately expanded their offensive to Iraq and Palestine. Behind the apparent political contradictions between religious and secular parties, strong economic interests explain this strategy. In the Levant, numerous groups have several times changed camps, but gas deposits are immutable. ...
Voltaire Network | Damascus | 21 July 2014
Posted by: really | Aug 1 2014 16:35 utc | 39
Extension of the Gas War to the Levant by Thierry Meyssan
http://www.voltairenet.org/article184806.html
Here is the link for my post (#38) above. This may explain a bit why many arab nations are not that outspoken against israel regarding the gaza conflict. My apologies for the error.
Posted by: really | Aug 1 2014 16:41 utc | 40
Many news from Ukraine today; are people too busy with barbecues and else?
http://rt.com/news/177296-ukraine-mh17-satellite-images/
http://rt.com/news/177376-kiev-nato-ballistic-missile/
http://eng.mil.ru/en/analytics.htm
http://nstarikov.ru/blog/43817
(scroll down for English)
This is not to diminish what is happening in Gaza. The Israeli push the US for war coz they have no B plan. They thought removing Asad would be a piece of cake, and try now to punish Asad's big helper. The Ukraine story is the answer to EU populations anti-Euro vote in the last European election and a way to enforce the Transatlantic partnership no matter what the people would like or not.
Posted by: Mina | Aug 1 2014 17:11 utc | 41
That is sophistry and I would add relativism.
Everything's relative, unless of course you're an ideologue like a Muslim. It's certainly not sophistry, what I said. If Hamas treats the IDF soldier like a prisoner of war and not a hostage, then that's what he'll be for them, but that's no guarantee that Israel will see it that way. Why? Because each has a relative perception and that relativity is complex and based off years, decades and even centuries of inculcated culture and customs. As for you, you see it your own way and your own way is one more example of relativity. I was trying to look at it holistically taking all these relative perceptions into account, but you, you want to apply your relative moralistic absolutism to it, and yes, that sounds oxymoronic but it's not. Not everyone shares your moral absolutism, so it's relative to you and any others who share in it. I'm not saying that what is happening in Gaza is not immoral. I don't believe it is moral according to my morality, but my morality is relative and despite what I think morally, the conflagration in Gaza continues, therefore I put my morality aside in analyzing the situation to see it for what it really is and not what I'd wish it to be. Do I want the suffering to end? Yes, and I've provided a plausible road map to accomplish that. No one, and I mean no one, who bitches and moans about the plight of the Palestinians seems interested in honestly ending their suffering. Instead, they advise the Palestinians to suffer more and harder by resisting with more intensity. Talk about immoral, that takes the cake.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1 2014 17:11 utc | 42
@35 Noirette... that puts the focus on ''the enabler'' of israels military ability to continue to commit the slow genocide on palestinians - the usa is fully supportive of this...not the general public, but the folks running the usa.. the boycott movement needs to engulf israel and the usa..
Posted by: james | Aug 1 2014 17:19 utc | 43
#42
You are wrong, it's not MY way. It's about morality in politics and it's the brain product of the brightest minds in Europe. What is right and what is wrong. Bombing civilians is wrong. Defending yourself and fighting for self-preservation is right. When those people wrote about those values, they claimed their writings be absolutely correct. Today those values are claimed to be the pillars of the Western democracies. If you have issues with those absolute values, don't take on a war that should be happening for you in the fringe of your polity. Go fight your own political establishment.
Posted by: ATH | Aug 1 2014 17:33 utc | 44
If you have issues with those absolute values, don't take on a war that should be happening for you in the fringe of your polity. Go fight your own political establishment.
I don't have an issue with said values, but I'd say at this point, those values are more window dressing than anything else. Also, those values, despite being presented as absolute, are still relative to a period of time. Before that time, such values would have been considered a ridiculous notion, and from the look of things lately, these cherished values held on a pedestal but discarded when inconvenient, will become an artifact of history. Heaven only knows what comes after the end of enlightenment.
I'll make a deal with you, though. I'm willing to indict the Israeli and Hamas leadership on war crimes and transport the lot of them to the Hague for trial if you're willing to do the same with Putin and the Russian leadership for the war crimes they committed in Chechnya which make this Israeli-Palestinian flare-up in their eternal conflict look like a child's birthday party in comparison. What do you say? Deal?
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1 2014 18:00 utc | 45
#45
You said you had issue with those values being considered universal. And my reply to you was the Western thinking consider those values as both universal and founding values for her political order. So, consequently if you have issue with this universalism, you should target your own political establishment not what should constitute for you a fringe incident.
From that UNIVERSAL perspective the political leadership of Israel IS the aggressor and the political leadership of Gaza population IS the one which is defending their population. Based on the same perspective putting those two on the same level is called moral ignominy.
Posted by: ATH | Aug 1 2014 18:26 utc | 46
You said you had issue with those values being considered universal.
No I didn't. Prove that I said it. Read it again. I said no such thing.
I said they are not UNIVERSAL despite absolutists believing they are. That says nothing about whether I would want them to be universal or not. As a result, those values are relative, and even if universally held and practiced, would still be relative because it wouldn't hold for all time, and so therefore said values would be relative to a historical time period.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1 2014 18:31 utc | 47
From that UNIVERSAL perspective the political leadership of Israel IS the aggressor and the political leadership of Gaza population IS the one which is defending their population. Based on the same perspective putting those two on the same level is called moral ignominy.
Since you're talking about levels, I consider perspective a level of sorts. Change your perspective from capacity to harm to intent/motivation to do harm. When you do, you quickly realize the leadership of both sides of this conflict are equally immoral, and in fact, one could make the argument by virtue of the 1988 Hamas Covenant that the Hamas leadership is, when it comes to explicit intent/motivation, more of an aggressor based on public statements alone.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1 2014 18:41 utc | 48
48
Hamas have no "convenant" and that you think the occupier and occupied is equal you really show what a moron you are.
It was also you that linked to nazi sites here on MoA awhile ago little perv.
Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 1 2014 18:48 utc | 49
#47
I don't see any difference between:
"I said they are not UNIVERSAL despite absolutists believing they are"
AND
"You said you had issue with those values being considered universal."
UNLESS
you are into sophistry.
So, absolutists want X,Y,Z values to be UNIVERSAL, but you, in your mind, have issue with this and CONSIDER that they cannot be UNIVERSAL, correct ?
So, my reply to you was your problem is with your own establishment practicing maybe duplicity: those are the one considering these values to be universal and those are the ones that have set-up international rules based on this certainty and claim acting based on them. That is your main political problem. Not Hamas leadership.
Posted by: ATH | Aug 1 2014 18:51 utc | 50
#48
Again, I refer you to the actions of the Western political leadership, both from an efficiency point of view (as far as you are concerned) and humanitarian and political outcome you are claiming to root for.
But, how do you know what the intent of Israelis or Palestinians are in this war. I believe the Israeli's political goal (i.e. intent) is to destroy the burgeoning alliance between Hamas and PLO, because this is the worse outcome for them. Hamas is trying to deter the aggressor by any means. Can you prove me wrong?
Posted by: ATH | Aug 1 2014 18:56 utc | 51
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1, 2014 2:41:52 PM | 48
Lol. What a dedicated, transparent hasbarist. The difference between the Occupier and the Occupied is recognized not only by anyone on the planet with decency and a conscience, but by International Law as well. Except the hasbarists of course. Spare as your sophistries about moral values. You have none. All you have is tribalism.
And while you are at it, quit insulting other people's intelligence. You are not that smart, and we are not that stupid.
Posted by: Alan | Aug 1 2014 18:56 utc | 52
So, absolutists want X,Y,Z values to be UNIVERSAL, but you, in your mind, have issue with this and CONSIDER that they cannot be UNIVERSAL, correct ?
This is the last I'll say about it because at this point I think you're just being purposely difficult.
Wrong. I'm not sure what absolutists want or don't want, but I do know by virtue of their absolutism they believe their values are thee values and no other values stand before their values. In this respect, it doesn't make any sense to say an absolutist wants its absolute values to be universal because an absolutist already believes its values are universal and it's just a matter of educating the masses about said universal, absolute values.
I do not believe, like the absolutist, that said values are absolute or universal even though I may share and practice some, or all, of said values.
Could said values be universal? Sure, anything's possible — except peace in Palestine apparently. It's plausible but improbable considering the trajectory of things.
Are values absolute? No way. Despite what the so-called "Founders" of America wrote, that "we hold these truths to be self-evident," said truths are not self-evident, but rather relative — and relative to a great many things.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1 2014 19:04 utc | 53
#53
Again your problem is with your own political establishment.
Here's for your education:
1) an "absolutist" (Kant for example) as you call him, believe that his values are absolute
2) some others make these values universal by codifying them into laws
3) political establishment proclaim those Universal and claim acting based on them.
Posted by: ATH | Aug 1 2014 19:20 utc | 54
Again your problem is with your own political establishment.
Here's where you're wrong. It's not my political establishment. I don't have one of those and don't try to impose one on me. Therefore, I have a problem with all political establishments and none of them are mine.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 1 2014 19:35 utc | 55
#55
Why ? you are a World citizen ?
The reality is that your political establishment is the one you are living under her jurisdiction. The kind of problem you are expressing should direct you to a political fight against your own political establishment, especially concerning the duplicity matter.
Posted by: ATH | Aug 1 2014 20:01 utc | 56
@Bill H, #38:
You may wish to consult Article 1(4) of the Additional Protocol I to the 4th Geneva Convention:
"4. The situations referred to in the preceding paragraph include armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist régimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations."
They are no terrorists.
Posted by: g_h | Aug 1 2014 20:37 utc | 57
@55 You live in some kind of country so unless you live in, I dont know, west sahara or another non-state, then you are under a political establishment, even if you have nothing to do with it. Watching you dodge things with wordplay gets old after awhile.
Posted by: Massinissa | Aug 1 2014 20:57 utc | 58
@38, were you starved for oxygen aboard your sub? Civilians are kidnapped not soldiers. "prisnor" vs hostage is a miniscule distinction. He's surely both since he isn't free to go and is being held for further considerations.
Posted by: ruralito | Aug 1 2014 21:18 utc | 59
The Chinese have a very good saying
"You become what you hate"
i've been working for months now on this phrase,
trying to expand on its meaning
Posted by: chris m | Aug 1 2014 22:05 utc | 60
@21 "If Hamas chooses to treat the soldier as a hostage and bargain with his life, well, at that point, at least as it relates to Hamas's motivation, he's a hostage and not a prisoner of war."
Untrue. The Geneva Conventions are clear: a captured soldier is incarcerated for the duration of the armed conflict, and once that armed conflict ends then that prisoner of war must be repatriated.
But if Israel wants his IMMEDIATE release - i.e. if Israel wants him released BEFORE the armed conflict ends - then Hamas is perfectly entitled to make their own demands in turn.
There is nothing illegal about that, since Israel's own demand (his immediate release) itself lies outside the bounds of International Humanitarian law.
"If Israel assumes he's a hostage and takes the stance "we don't bargain or negotiate with terrorists" then he is a hostage in their view regardless of Hamas's intent or perception of this apprehension."
Well, whoop-de-doooo. Israel can also "assume" that this soldier is on an all-expense-paid holiday, courtesy of Hamas. Or it can also hold the "view" that he has defected to Hamas, and is now an Enemy Of The State.
Whatever.
What matters is what international law has to say on the matter, and on this matter the law is crystal-clear: a soldier on active duty is fair game for capture, and once he falls into the hands of the enemy he is a "prisoner of war".
Posted by: Johnboy | Aug 1 2014 23:17 utc | 61
@60, is that true? I hate hasbara. Is hasbara my fate? Nah.
Posted by: ruralito | Aug 1 2014 23:53 utc | 62
The End Game Scenario Gaza: Is Annexation Israel’s ‘Permanent Solution’?
...When originally discovered in 2000, Gaza’s ofshore 1.4 trillion cubic feet of gas reserves were valued at $4 billion. Since then the Gaza Marine reserve has been re-estimated to 1.6 trillion cubic feet, according to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) while”offshore Gaza territory may hold additional energy resources.”
Israel is approaching a severe domestic ‘gas crunch’ pending the development of its own deep-water Leviathan gas field. Moreover it is now estimated that Gaza Marine’s exploitation could yield revenues of $6-7 billion per year And one thing is clear – Israel has no intention of letting Hamas anywhere near that money – nor even Fatah, which runs the West Bank, on any terms other than those that Israel lays down.
In 2007 Moshe Ya’alon, a former IDF chief of staff, stated:“It is clear that without an overall military operation to uproot Hamas control of Gaza, no drilling work can take place without the consent of the radical Islamic movement.”
And needless to say, that would be entirely unacceptable...
...So why can’t Israel simply take the gas, but leave the people where they are? In a word, rockets. So long as Hamas and other armed groups can target offshore gas infrastructure with their rockets the gas is unexploitable. So not only must Hamas go, but the entire‘sea’ in which Hamas swims (that is, the Palestinian people) must also go.
Moreover, so long as Palestinians control the territory of Gaza they will also be able to assert and sustain claims of ownership of its offshore marine resources The real estate of Gaza would be an additional boon – and a highly valuable one, releasing 365 square kilometres of prime development land, including 41 kilometres of to-die-for Mediterranean coast. Estimates of its economic value must surely begin around $10 billion.
Israel is also severely alarmed at the impact that Hamas’s increasingly sophisticated rockets can have on vulnerable infrastructure: in particular Tel Aviv airport, which came under a partial international travel ban...
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/08/01/gaza-is-annexation-israels-permanent-solution/
Hamas, Israel and the worlds governments (oligarchs) know what this conflict is about. Sad thing is the poor civilians who always get fucked by oligarch's psuedo-governments powerplays for ever increased control over the planets resources and land. Wash, rinse and repeat.
By the way the same thing is going on in the Ukraine and it appears to me that the gaza and ukraine conflicts are related in a struggle to see who will supply natural gas to the EU. Just a thought.
Posted by: really | Aug 2 2014 0:07 utc | 63
@55 You live in some kind of country so unless you live in, I dont know, west sahara or another non-state, then you are under a political establishment, even if you have nothing to do with it. Watching you dodge things with wordplay gets old after awhile.
Posted by: Massinissa | Aug 1, 2014 4:57:33 PM | 58
Who's hasbara now? It's clear many of you posting here must be, because it can only be in the interest of Israel to include all Palestinians under the political jurisdiction of Hamas and thus responsible for Hamas's actions so the slaughter of civilians can continue unabated.
Nice job, you creeps. Disgusting.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 2 2014 1:44 utc | 64
The kind of problem you are expressing should direct you to a political fight against your own political establishment, especially concerning the duplicity matter.
Once again, I don't have a political establishment so it's not mine. I think and decide for myself and resist just enough to avoid incarceration. To resist more than that or in militant ways is playing into the hands of the political establishment. Thinking and deciding for oneself on all matters is the greatest form of resistance. Without it, there is no resistance. I implore you all to try it. If you did, the world would be a better place. I can't do it alone. I need your help.
Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Aug 2 2014 1:50 utc | 65
#65
I've told you of 2 ways of doing things in your site without going to jail. Bot obviously, even though you have claims the contrary, those are not your political goals
Posted by: ATH | Aug 2 2014 3:16 utc | 66
Interesting point made by Richard Silverstein when he quotes Israel's Channel 10: "The IDF is bombing every vehicle approaching Abu Yousuf Al-Najjar hospital in Rafah."
I admire the subtlety of that statement, because Channel 10 is obviously attempted to slip a message past the IDF censor.
Because that statement amounts to Channel 10 screaming out that the IDF has responded to the wounding and capture of one of its soldiers by deliberately trying to kill that soldier.
It is a reasonable assumption that Hamas would rush a wounded IDF captive to the nearest hospital for treatment. Whacking any vehicle approaching that hospital can therefore only be seen as an attempt by the Israelis to assassinate.... Hadar Goldin, second lieutenant, Givati Brigade, Israel Defence Force.
Most Moral Army In The World, my ass.
Posted by: Johnboy | Aug 2 2014 6:39 utc | 67
@ Posted by: chris m | Aug 1, 2014 6:05:32 PM | 60
Try:
Pick your enemies wisely, you become like them.
Sort of amusing to recall the enemies the US has chosen, German National Socialist, Italian Fascist, Japanese Imperialist and Bolshevik. Sort of explains the strange creature that country has become.
Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Aug 2 2014 7:11 utc | 68
Cold N. Holefield also appears as an assigned Hasbara-ish disruptor of comments at other blogs similar to this as well, using the same techniques as a student lawyer practicing argument, and about as convincing as well with the noticeable characteristic covering of cheeto-dust.
It is my habit to elide whatever and whenever the nom-de-blog appears (or its predecessor nom-de-blog), making this comment thread some fifteen to eighteen items shorter, and saves being brain-slimed. It is also amusing putting the nom-de-blog into the dyslexic machine with what that can produce, particularly appending various perjoritives.
Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Aug 2 2014 7:48 utc | 69
Richard Silverstein
...Today brings news explaining the reason the ceasefire broke down. A Palestinian militant cell ambushed an IDF patrol of Givati brigade soldiers. One of the militants had a suicide vest and blew himself up, killing Maj. Benaya Sarel and Sgt. Liel Gidoni. Three other Israelis were seriously wounded. One of them, Second Lt. Hadar Goldin was dragged away by the fighters. But the Israelis who were unscathed in the attack invoked Hannibal and returned fire, shooting both Goldin and the militant who was dragging him away. It was a clear attempt not just to frustrate the Hamas operation and the capture, but to actually kill the Israeli soldier.
Once news of the attack arrived at the IDF High Command, they began massive shelling of Rafah, attempting to kill him. Israel’s Channel 10 news reported:
The IDF is bombing every vehicle approaching Abu Yousuf Al-Najjar
hospital in Rafah.
My Israeli source goes farther and says that the massive Israeli air and artillery assault on Rafah was in revenge for the attack. 60 Palestinians were killed in the barrage...
Israeli soldier captured? See Red Pill Views http://www.redpillviews.com/a-humane-excuse-for-killing-palestinians/
Posted by: Robert Gorden | Aug 2 2014 18:28 utc | 71
"...While Israel was fighting to get rid of Hamas, they were simultaneously supporting and negotiating with Fatah. In 2011, a new round of negotiations with Fatah completely excluded Hamas from the process; in turn, Hamas declared these talks as illegitimate. Even more shocking, wikileaks cables from December 2010 confirmed that Fatah had asked Israel to attack Hamas. Yuva Diskin, the head of Israel’s security agency Shin Bet, made comments on Israel’s desire to strengthen Fatah. “Fatah is in a very bad shape in Gaza. We have received requests to train their forces in Egypt and Yemen. We would like to get them to get the training they need, and to be more powerful, but they do not have anyone to lead them”. Before that, in 2006 after the election of Hamas, Israel authorized the delivery of “light weapons and ammunition” to armed forces loyal to Fatah.
All in all, it is clear that Fatah, heavily criticized by the People’s Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and other liberation- seeking groups in Palestine, has at least to a great extent sold itself out to Israel. It is also evident that Israel would much prefer Fatah over Hamas in negotiations on natural gas. Operation Protective Edge, very much like Operation Cast Lead, has neither anything to do with self-defense (as the right may tell us), nor is it a meaningless slaughter motivated principally by a hatred for Palestinians (as the confused left may believe). It is very clear what it is: a war driven by the hankering yet callous lust of the imperialist capital of a colonial state to expand its appropriation of Palestinian natural resources and profit at the severe expense of the Palestinian people Palestinian people...."
I wonder how good a deal that hamas will get from pa, abbas,fatah and israel this bloody brokered go around.
Posted by: say what | Aug 5 2014 2:30 utc | 73
Middle East “Peace Envoy” Tony Blair Parties as Gaza Burns
by Felicity Arbuthnot / August 2nd, 2014
http://dissidentvoice.org/2014/08/middle-east-peace-envoy-tony-blair-parties-as-gaza-burns/
Posted by: 1togrowon | Aug 5 2014 13:15 utc | 74
The comments to this entry are closed.
US Bill Seeks to Exonerate Israel of War Crimes
"The US House of Representatives has passed a resolution that will now go to the Senate. It calls on the international community to recognize and condemn Hamas breaches of international law through the use of human shields and condemns the United Nations Human Rights Council’s biased commission of inquiry into Israel’s Gaza operations. There is no evidence that Hamas has used human shields, nor that UNHRC is biased The full text is shown below The bill has many steps to pass before it becomes Law. But it is important. ..."
https://petergarciawebb.com/peter-garcia-webb/2014-08-01/us-bill-seeks-exonerate-israel-war-crimes
Posted by: really | Aug 1 2014 11:48 utc | 1