[redcarpet]

I do not propagate, I share my expirience. You just sit back in your chair and decide for yourself if these sources contrudicting me are the more reliable ones.
Can't help you there.

Pardon me, Wat0n, I meant to quote GreenGoblin. He seemed to be dismissing CommonDreams

[Solastalgia]

This is just getting pedantic now. The Common Dreams citation was on the four kids that were killed today by the IDF. There was a short five hour cease fire announced after this happened, and most major media outlets already reported on this, I just happened to link to CD. I seriously cannot understand why wat0n would say that Common Dreams (an independent non-profit news outlet that's been around for almost 20 years) is no more trustworthy than his Zionist blogs who quote Israeli intelligence organizations.

Anyways, the point is that the CD story isn't fake. Here's the footage from today's killing of four kids.

Warning: This is very graphic.
[youtube]7djBXgGMHHQ[/youtube]

[redcarpet]

Anyways, the point is that the CD story isn't fake. Here's the footage from today's killing of four kids.

False, it doesn't show them being killed. It shows them being taken away by ambulance. It doesn't show them being killed so we don't know who's responsible.

[Solastalgia]

False, it doesn't show them being killed. It shows them being taken away by ambulance. It doesn't show them being killed so we don't know who's responsible.

Israeli Strike Kills Four Boys Playing on Gaza Beach http://abcnews.go.com/International/isr ... d=24583817

[wat0n]

This is just getting pedantic now. The Common Dreams citation was on the four kids that were killed today by the IDF. There was a short five hour cease fire announced after this happened, and most major media outlets already reported on this, I just happened to link to CD. I seriously cannot understand why wat0n would say that Common Dreams (an independent non-profit news outlet that's been around for almost 20 years) is no more trustworthy than his Zionist blogs who quote Israeli intelligence organizations.

Anyways, the point is that the CD story isn't fake. Here's the footage from today's killing of four kids.

Warning: This is very graphic.
[youtube]7djBXgGMHHQ[/youtube]

I was talking about its overall reliability. The Zionist blogs are also independent as far as I'm aware, that doesn't make them reliable however. They have their own editorial line just like Common Dreams.

I find it interesting you chose to disregard HRW's report on rockets as well. It's the kind of source, and example, you asked for.

Not that human rights NGOs are necessarily reliable or accurate anyway. I at least haven't forgotten this fiasco.

[Solastalgia]

I didn't disregard HRWs report (as I already responded to it two posts ago), it just didn't substantiate that particular IDF propaganda video you posted earlier. That's what I asked for.

In regards to your argument about the IDF warning civilians.

from AP:

NOWHERE TO GO FOR GAZA CIVILIANS URGED TO EVACUATE

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) — The text message was as urgent as it was unwelcome: The Israeli army advised Mouin Ghaffir to leave his home quickly or risk being killed in airstrikes against Hamas rocket squads.

He swiftly sent his wife and 11 children to a dirty U.N. emergency shelter, with more than 40 people crammed in each classroom, but had to endure a night under bombardment at home after failing to find a safe place for his ailing 75-year-old mother.

Such is the life-and-death predicament of tens of thousands of Gazans being told by Israel to flee targeted areas, most with nowhere to go. U.N. shelters lack the space, and relatives, with their own overcrowded homes, often cannot help.

Israel says urging residents to evacuate — with warnings delivered through automated calls, text messages and leaflets dropped from planes — is part of the military's attempt to spare civilians whenever possible.

It holds Hamas responsible for the ordeal of Gaza's 1.7 million people, saying Hamas fighters fire rockets toward Israel from residential areas, effectively using civilians as human shields.

However, rights groups say simply sending warnings does not absolve Israel of responsibility and that those being urged to evacuate need somewhere to go.

In Ghaffir's case, there was no way he could move his mother, Fawziyeh, after receiving the army's text message late Tuesday. The elderly woman, afflicted by diabetes, high blood pressure and incontinence, needs constant care, he said. Conditions were chaotic in the U.N. girls' school in a safer area where his wife Mona and their 11 children immediately sought refuge. But it was no place for his mother.

Instead, he moved her into the living room of the family's home in the Shijaiyah neighborhood in eastern Gaza City, one of three areas Israel said it would target. Mother and son kept low to the ground, away from the windows.

"I didn't sleep the entire night from the sound of the bombings," said 48-year-old Ghaffir. "The walls were shaking and there was a crack in the wall." He said the blasts shattered several windows in the house.

On Wednesday morning, Ghaffir moved his mother to his sister Leila's apartment in an area deemed somewhat safer. But Leila, 65, had no room for the rest of his family, he said, noting that she lives in a one-bedroom apartment with her husband and four other family members.

After getting his mother out of Shijaiyah, where airstrikes continued Wednesday, Ghaffir joined his wife and children at the U.N. school. The classroom where his family slept the night before on a bare floor was filled with noisy children, but Ghaffir said he preferred the crowded conditions to being at home.

"Here, we are surrounded by people," he said. "We get the feeling we are all together."

Ghaffir's story highlights the hard choices Gazans face in this war.

The Israeli army did not say how many homes it sent the warnings to, but the three areas — the town of Beit Lahiya and the sprawling Gaza City neighborhoods of Zeitoun and Shijaiyah — have a combined population of well over 300,000 people.

That's far more than can be accommodated in U.N. schools, which cannot shelter more than 35,000. Currently, some 21,000 Gazans are crammed into 24 U.N. schools, said Sami Mshasha, a spokesman for the U.N. aid agency.

Moving in with relatives is not an option for most. While familial bonds tend to be strong in Gaza's traditional society, families are large and — with a severe housing shortage — homes are crowded.

Danger lurks not only in the areas the Israeli military says it will hit. Since the start of cross-border fighting on July 8, Israel has carried out close to 1,900 airstrikes across Gaza. Israel says it is targeting Hamas installations to try to halt Hamas rocket fire on Israel, but more than half of the over 200 Palestinians killed so far have been civilians, according to U.N. figures.

"There is no safe place, whether in the homes or in the streets," said Amjad Shawa, who heads a network of civic groups in Gaza.

There were no reliable estimates of how many residents left after Tuesday's warnings, but the exodus was not massive. Gaza's Interior Ministry urged people to stay put, saying the Israeli warnings were part of "psychological warfare." It later said most people had not heeded Israel's call.

Among those deciding against evacuation was the extended Hassanain family — brothers Jawad and Fathi, their wives, mother and 12 children. "When we hear the sound of explosions, we think we might be the next target," Jawad said by telephone. "We know it's not safe, but where to go? Can you tell me about a safe place?"

He said several tank shells landed near the family's house close to the Israeli border on Wednesday. If the situation gets worse, he might send his wife and five children to a safer area, but said his 72-year-old mother, Khadija, refuses to trade her home for a shelter.

Israel holds Hamas, which has fired hundreds of rockets at Israel in the past nine days, responsible for the civilians' predicament. "All the rockets launched so far have come from these civilian areas," said Lt. Libby Weiss, an army spokeswoman. "We also know they (Hamas militants) store weapons there as well."

Hamas rocket squads have become increasingly sophisticated, often firing from underground launch sites with movable covers.

Weiss said the military meets its obligations for safeguarding civilians by sending the warnings.

However, Sarit Michaeli of the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem said more is required under international humanitarian law. The army also needs to make sure the civilian population can act on the warnings, she said.

At the same time, those firing rockets "show utter disregard for the lives of Israeli civilians, but also the lives of Palestinians in the neighborhoods they are firing from," she said.

Yet residents in the targeted areas seem unwilling to blame Hamas.

Hassanain, a long-time supporter of Hamas' political rival Fatah, said he cheers on the rocket squads.

"For me, it's personal," he said. "Every rocket avenges the daily terror that my family has been living through since 2000 when they (Israeli troops) started using tanks for shelling."

"Rockets now are our last symbol of dignity."

[dcomplex]

Elder Of Ziyon has a strict editorial line, and he explains his reasoning while providing evidence. I am pretty sure he is an attorney IRL.

[Solastalgia]

Elder Of Ziyon has a strict editorial line, and he explains his reasoning while providing evidence. I am pretty sure he is an attorney IRL.

Not strict enough to quote Israeli intelligence community propaganda orgs, and pretend that it's unbiased information.

[wat0n]

I didn't disregard HRWs report (as I already responded to it two posts ago), it just didn't substantiate that IDF propaganda you posted earlier. That's what I asked for.

Which is why I posted an excerpt from it you are invited to comment on. It deals directly with what you were asking for.

In regards to your argument about the IDF warning civilians.

from AP:

There is only so much Israel can do about that, unfortunately. The fact that they are dropping leaflets and letting able-bodied people leave is, as far as I'm concerned, an effort to lower civilian casualties - even if it is just for PR purposes (not that I buy that concern for them is the primary reason for it either, BTW. Some Zionists say the IDF is the most moral army in the world and all that shit, I simply think they have an incentive to reduce civilian casualties and that would be it. I'm very cynical when it comes to warfare, and apply this equally).

[redcarpet]

:roll:

Israeli Strike Kills Four Boys Playing on Gaza Beach http://abcnews.go.com/International/isr ... d=24583817

Yes your article from US BC shows the IDF taking responsibility, but you claimed the video proved it when it didn't.

[dcomplex]

How is Israeli intelligence going to end up in press reports? Explain how an IDF report is "biased" any more than the reports of the reporters and "human rights activists" (i.e. solidarity campaigners) embedded with Hamas. Amnesty International juat wrote an article saying that Palestine Arab eyewitness testimony is extremely unreliable.

Human Rights Watch's mideast director is Sarah Leah Whitson who started out as a Palestine Solidarity Liar, as are many of the people who she has hired since. HRW has no professional soldiers or officers with any experience determining what constitutes "military necessity".

There is no such thing as an unbiased source aside from one that simply lists all the facts. Then you can liste to both narratives overlaid upon the facts themselves and make a judgment. The problem with HRW, et. al. is that their facts are wrong or incomplete, and they make an interpretation that imputes guilt where such an imputation cannot be justified.

[Solastalgia]

Yes your article from US BC shows the IDF taking responsibility, but you claimed the video proved it when it didn't.

Wow, can this thread get anymore pedantic? I didn't claim anything about that video. When I said it was footage from today, I was reffering to exactly what was in the video, and not some stock of the strike, itself. Why would I make that claim and then post that video? You're just being pedantic here for no reason....The bottom line is that the IDF was responsible for the killing today.

[Solastalgia]

Which is why I posted an excerpt from it you are invited to comment on. It deals directly with what you were asking for.

I already commented on the HRW report and that other excerpt didn't change a thing. The HRW report is about Hamas actions being close to civlian infrastructure, thus putting them at risk. The IDF propaganda video you posted before was about Hamas using civilian infrastructure, itself, to store munitions in and fire from directly. As I already stated, the HRW report doesn't substantiate your earlier IDF propaganda video. It doesn't deal directly with what I asked for. How many more times must I explain to you that it's not the same case?

There is only so much Israel can do about that, unfortunately. The fact that they are dropping leaflets and letting able-bodied people leave is, as far as I'm concerned, an effort to lower civilian casualties - even if it is just for PR purposes (not that I buy that concern for them is the primary reason for it either, BTW. Some Zionists say the IDF is the most moral army in the world and all that shit, I simply think they have an incentive to reduce civilian casualties and that would be it. I'm very cynical when it comes to warfare, and apply this equally).

Exactly. So now you admit it's probably more of a PR move than anything, and it really doesn't matter if they dropped the leaflets or not because most people can't leave. The leaflets don't dispute the dahiya doctrine though. That was the point of your argument, and it doesn't work. The IDF can continue to kill civilians and can also continue to drop leaflets for PR purposes.

[Solastalgia]

How is Israeli intelligence going to end up in press reports? Explain how an IDF report is "biased" any more than the reports of the reporters and "human rights activists" (i.e. solidarity campaigners) embedded with Hamas. Amnesty International juat wrote an article saying that Palestine Arab eyewitness testimony is extremely unreliable.

Is this a joke? You really think that the level of bias is the same for the IDF, as it is for independent human rights organizations? Obviously there's criticism that can be made against certain organizations and their reports. But for the most part, these organizations are expected to have less bias than a report from a party that's directly involved in a conflict (let a lone the party that's doing the killing and being criticized by the international community).

Human Rights Watch's mideast director is Sarah Leah Whitson who started out as a Palestine Solidarity Liar, as are many of the people who she has hired since. HRW has no professional soldiers or officers with any experience determining what constitutes "military necessity".

Yet another joke. Sarah Leah Whitson is not some Palestinian propagandist. Far from it, she's denounced the Palestinian government and been criticizing it constantly for years. She also has a very negative stance towards Hamas, largely in line with Israel. It's just that because HRW also criticizes Israel, therefore Zionists like you make a fuss about HRW. You wouldn't if they were just criticizing Palestinians.

[wat0n]

I already commented on the HRW report and that other excerpt didn't change a thing. The HRW report is about Hamas actions being close to civlian infrastructure, thus putting them at risk. The IDF propaganda video you posted before was about Hamas using civilian infrastructure, itself, to store munitions in and fire from directly. As I already stated, the HRW report doesn't substantiate your earlier IDF propaganda video. It doesn't deal directly with what I asked for. How many more times must I explain to you that it's not the same case?

The excerpt says quite explicitly eyewitnesses saw rockets being fired from the compound of the Gazan power plant. It fits your standard quite closely.

Exactly. So now you admit it's probably more of a PR move than anything, and it really doesn't matter if they dropped the leaflets or not because most people can't leave. The leaflets don't dispute the dahiya doctrine though. That was the point of your argument, and it doesn't work. The IDF can continue to kill civilians and can also continue to drop leaflets for PR purposes.

Just because they do it for PR, doesn't really mean it somehow doesn't affect the reality on the battlefield. In particular, the leaflets do warn civilians and many do take them seriously and act in accordance, thus undermining the Dahiya doctrine (thanks for noting the typo BTW, I always forget its name).

There is no real or logical contradiction in acting for PR purposes and adjusting military doctrine to do so. In fact, it just means the new doctrine takes the propaganda front more seriously than the old one.

[Solastalgia]

The excerpt says quite explicitly eyewitnesses saw rockets being fired from the compound of the Gazan power plant. It fits your standard quite closely.

No it doesn't fit my standard. I originally asked you for an example of Hamas using civilians houses to store munitions and to fire from directly. You then posted an IDF official propaganda channel youtube clip about them using schools and what not. I asked you to substantiate that with an actual source from an independent org. You then posted the HRW report which was not about the specific case that was made in the IDF video, and was about Hamas actions happening close to civilian houses putting them in jeopardy. As already explained, this is an obvious inevitability due to the density in Gaza.

Just because they do it for PR, doesn't really mean it somehow doesn't affect the reality on the battlefield. In particular, the leaflets do warn civilians and many do take them seriously and act in accordance, thus undermining the Dahiya doctrine (thanks for noting the typo BTW, I always forget its name).

Yet the Associated Press documented that most people aren't able to act in accordance and leave their houses. Even if the leaflets were working, it still doesn't undermine the Dahiya doctrine. As I've said multiple times now, already, they can do both at the same damn time. They can continue to kill civilians and they can also drop the leaflets. As the AP article stated, according to rights groups, the leaflets don't absolve the IDF of responsibility.

There is no real or logical contradiction in acting for PR purposes and adjusting military doctrine to do so. In fact, it just means the new doctrine takes the propaganda front more seriously than the old one.

I never said there was a contradiction between that. As I've already said multiple times, the leaflets can be a part of the doctrine if need be. It's provides good PR cover for whatever they want to do. "Well we warned them. It's their fault they were killed." Meanwhile most people weren't even able to heed the flyers warning.

[Solastalgia]

You know, I should've heeded the warning from other PoFo users, that debating the resident Zionists is pointlessly tiring.

Can we just agree to disagree and end this thing? I don't expect to change your mind on anything.

[redcarpet]

I didn't claim anything about that video.

Ah, yes you did. You said "Here's the footage from today's killing of four kids", which was false. 4 had already died, 1 in critical condition. The attack had already taken place.

A more honest description would have been 'aftermath' or 'ambulance delivery', not 'killing'.

[Solastalgia]

Ah, yes you did. You said "Here's the footage from today's killing of four kids", which was false. 4 had already died, 1 in critical condition. The attack had already taken place.

A more honest description would have been 'aftermath' or 'ambulance delivery', not 'killing'.

My god man, that's what I meant. I'm sorry I wasn't specific enough to say aftermath, or ambulance delivery. Why do we need to be pedantic here, when I've told you multiple times what I meant with that. I'm sorry I didn't use the best wording. Sue me. Please.

Edit: Wait, I just checked your profile, now I know why you're being so pedantic over this.

You zionists teaming up on me in this thread, just want to get me on any little thing that you can. This is just sad...

[redcarpet]

Now you're being immature. What next, the 'Cry me a river!' response? 'Take a walk!'?