Israel - Palestine Conflict Discussion Thread

[Dolev 867]

Israeli Druze mother mourn for her killled son, who was killed yesterday by Palestinian terrorists in the Jerusalem attack.

 

NYDailyNews cover

[Dolev 867]

 

 

Palestinians celebrating the attack and the killing of 5 Israelis

[lego 44,165]

Photos are the weakest receipt to prove something. You can never see the full picture. In your case, you'd probably want to. 

[EXCXSXE 0]

 

 

 

This. Come on Dolev. That second post was weak and cheap. Don't stoop to the level of other members!

[lego 44,165]

Generally curious, but is it in allowable under international law? 

 

Not that Israel is one to follow international law, but it still seems strange that the international community considers that form of punishment "ok".

I also meant that as a genuine curiosity.  I don't know either, so if someone wants to fill us in that would be great! 

I think the lines are blurry between that and collective punishment, but when you have a government encouraging suicide bombers to attack your citizens, I think international law takes the back seat. Not that I think any of this is OK. 

It's not.

Article 33. No persons may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Pillage is prohibited.

Reprisals against persons and their property are prohibited.

Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, collective punishment is a war crime.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Commentary to the conventions states that parties to a conflict often would resort to "intimidatory measures to terrorize the population" in hopes of preventing hostile acts, but such practices "strike at guilty and innocent alike. They are opposed to all principles based on humanity and justice."

Additional Protocol II of 1977 explicitly forbids collective punishment. But as fewer states have ratified this protocol than GCIV, GCIV Article 33 is the one more commonly quoted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention

Article 75. Fundamental guarantees

1. In so far as they are affected by a situation referred to in Article 1 of this Protocol, persons who are in the power of a Party to the conflict and who do not benefit from more favourable treatment under the Conventions or under this Protocol shall be treated humanely in all circumstances and shall enjoy, as a minimum, the protection provided by this Article without any adverse distinction based upon race, colour, s-x, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or other status, or on any other similar criteria. Each Party shall respect the person, honour, convictions and religious practices of all such persons.

2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:

(a) violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:

(i) murder;

(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;

(iii) corporal punishment; and

(iv) mutilation;

(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;

© the taking of hostages;

(d) collective punishments; and

(e) threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.

[hmm 979]

It's not.

Article 33. No persons may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Pillage is prohibited.

Reprisals against persons and their property are prohibited.

Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, collective punishment is a war crime.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Commentary to the conventions states that parties to a conflict often would resort to "intimidatory measures to terrorize the population" in hopes of preventing hostile acts, but such practices "strike at guilty and innocent alike. They are opposed to all principles based on humanity and justice."

Additional Protocol II of 1977 explicitly forbids collective punishment. But as fewer states have ratified this protocol than GCIV, GCIV Article 33 is the one more commonly quoted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention

Article 75. Fundamental guarantees

1. In so far as they are affected by a situation referred to in Article 1 of this Protocol, persons who are in the power of a Party to the conflict and who do not benefit from more favourable treatment under the Conventions or under this Protocol shall be treated humanely in all circumstances and shall enjoy, as a minimum, the protection provided by this Article without any adverse distinction based upon race, colour, s-x, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or other status, or on any other similar criteria. Each Party shall respect the person, honour, convictions and religious practices of all such persons.

2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:

(a) violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:

(i) murder;

(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;

(iii) corporal punishment; and

(iv) mutilation;

(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;

© the taking of hostages;

(d) collective punishments; and

(e) threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.

 

Thanks for clearing that up

[EXCXSXE 0]

It's not.

Article 33. No persons may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Pillage is prohibited.

Reprisals against persons and their property are prohibited.

Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, collective punishment is a war crime.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Commentary to the conventions states that parties to a conflict often would resort to "intimidatory measures to terrorize the population" in hopes of preventing hostile acts, but such practices "strike at guilty and innocent alike. They are opposed to all principles based on humanity and justice."

Additional Protocol II of 1977 explicitly forbids collective punishment. But as fewer states have ratified this protocol than GCIV, GCIV Article 33 is the one more commonly quoted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention

Article 75. Fundamental guarantees

1. In so far as they are affected by a situation referred to in Article 1 of this Protocol, persons who are in the power of a Party to the conflict and who do not benefit from more favourable treatment under the Conventions or under this Protocol shall be treated humanely in all circumstances and shall enjoy, as a minimum, the protection provided by this Article without any adverse distinction based upon race, colour, s-x, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or other status, or on any other similar criteria. Each Party shall respect the person, honour, convictions and religious practices of all such persons.

2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:

(a) violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:

(i) murder;

(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;

(iii) corporal punishment; and

(iv) mutilation;

(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;

© the taking of hostages;

(d) collective punishments; and

(e) threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.

 

This is rather vague and common sense... Do we have any sources that specifically mention this practise? 

What's protocol when the other government is encouraging the murder of civilians? 

[Dolev 867]

This. Come on Dolev. That second post was weak and cheap. Don't stoop to the level of other members!

Let's not act like they're not known for doing such stuff. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMOZvbYJMvU

[lego 44,165]

I think you misinterpreted my post. I didn't mean to say that the lack of punishment is acceptable for hate crimes, but those rates are probably not that far off of what happens everyone else in the world,

You cannot just say probably, back this up with something.

I cannot think of any democratic state where for the same or similar crime invenstigation and punishment depends from religion or ethnicity you belong to. And this is exactly the case, if you compare and look at the statistics.

albeit the hate crimes there are far worse and of a very different type. My point was rather that Hamas praised the attack of innocents in a synagogue the other day, calling it divine justice, while the Israeli government condemns attacks committed by Israeli terrorists time and time again. When you're constantly talking about incitement, you have to consider that Hamas is radicalizing its civilians openly. The violence is unacceptable in both cases, but you have to admit there's a massive issue with Hamas praising its civilians who glorify terrorists. That is just as bad as those who believe Goldstein is a hero.

Again, they're not the same. Also being unequal under the law is one of the reasons these things are happening. I should remind you that this wasn't even ordered or inspired by Hamas, the two attackers belonged to secular group created by Palestinian Christian George Habash. What other things happened before: Israeli forces injured 454 Palestinians 10/28-11/10, most in East J'lem; shot & blinded child on 11/13, fractured child's skull on 11/14

They see Palestinian civilians getting killed almost every day, they see that their blood is cheap, and their murderers are walking free. The retaliation always follows. And it comes from both sides.

Only one side is always labeled as "terrorist", while others just "defend themselves".

If you don't follow this closely, you will not know about every Palestinian victim, media will not inform you.

I don't even post about every victim, because it would take pages and pages, and I see that users here just skip over them. One of these active users even had problem to say RIP or anything similar for Palestinian 5yo girl, while only Israeli child mattered.

Israel is the occupier, they can ban doctors, building equipment, human rights organizations from entering Gaza, so how is even Hamas in charge?

You can't label everyone who supports the Gaza war as an extremist... You should review the definition of that word.

Yes I can and I will. What happens every few years in Gaza is a collective punishment against unarmed civilians in densely populated area, blocked both from land and the sea. I will not forget over 500 butchered children and videos of some groups of Israelis chanting "no school in Gaza, no more children left".

You should also look up the definition of the words terror and terrorist. Israeli state-sponsored terrorism is what Palestinians suffer from for decades. Just because it's government and army doing the killing, it doesn't make it justified.

If destroying their homes is in accord with international law, I see no reason why they can't do it. It's a way to deter the terrorist attacks. The perpetrators know they're putting their families at risk and choose to do it anyway; its a choice they make. It's very difficult to reason with people who are willing to commit suicide while killing as many civilians as possible, in case you didn't realize. It's a sad situation in any case. When the neighbours are suffering as well, however, I think it loses its proportionality and it shouldn't be done.

That is a valid point about Goldsteins family members. That does not seem right, but there are far fewer incidents involving Israeli terrorist attacks than Palestinian terror attacks. There's no reason for Israel to demolish houses other than to deter attacks; I don't think it's about "an eye for an eye".

It is illegal under international law and you even quoted part which says they stopped this practice since it was counterproductive. And of course it is! Those people's only crime was that they were blood related or lived nearby. No one should ever be punished for other person's crime.

By your logic, that Israeli politician was right, the one who said knowledge of raping potential suicide bomber's sister and mother would prevent attack. How vile. Hamas called for abandoning suicide bombings in 2006, so I don't know why you keep bringing them up. Since this last case, Israeli government doesn't seem to think they're doing anything wrong, and they're only creating more hate and adding fuel to the fire.

And I disagree with "far fewer Israeli terrorist attacks", when you look up definition of terrorism you'll see.

[lego 44,165]

Let's not act like they're not known for doing such stuff. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMOZvbYJMvU

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4hHDKsA0KMo

http://youtube.com/watch?v=sZ5-91kUu98

http://youtube.com/watch?v=FnR9EYDjRXc

[Dolev 867]

Israel is the only democratic state facing Islamic world directly. Don't let anyone fool you with false comparsion.

 

Israel is not the only country bordering Gaza as Egypt sits on its southren borders. If someone wish to enter Gaza he could just pass through Egypt. Israel has every right to decide who is to enter Israel.

 

"Hamas called for abandoning suicide bombings in 2006"... Gurl, the fact is that Palestinans are killing Israeli civilians in terror attacks for decades now and you seem to ignore that part.

Whether its the PLO, Hamas or even individuals, it's still their own culture that educated them to believe they're going to heaven to get 72 virgins if they'll kill people.

[lego 44,165]

 

Gurl, the fact is that Palestinans are killing Israeli civilians in terror attacks for decades now and you seem to ignore that part.

 

And vice versa.

 

 

Israel is the only democratic state

 

[EXCXSXE 0]

You cannot just say probably, back this up with something.

I cannot think of any democratic state where for the same or similar crime invenstigation and punishment depends from religion or ethnicity you belong to. And this is exactly the case, if you compare and look at the statistics.

 

 

Again, they're not the same. Also being unequal under the law is one of the reasons these things are happening. I should remind you that this wasn't even ordered or inspired by Hamas, the two attackers belonged to secular group created by Palestinian Christian George Habash. What other things happened before: Israeli forces injured 454 Palestinians 10/28-11/10, most in East J'lem; shot & blinded child on 11/13, fractured child's skull on 11/14

They see Palestinian civilians getting killed almost every day, they see that their blood is cheap, and their murderers are walking free. The retaliation always follows. And it comes from both sides.

Only one side is always labeled as "terrorist", while others just "defend themselves".

If you don't follow this closely, you will not know about every Palestinian victim, media will not inform you.

I don't even post about every victim, because it would take pages and pages, and I see that users here just skip over them. One of these active users even had problem to say RIP or anything similar for Palestinian 5yo girl, while only Israeli child mattered.

Israel is the occupier, they can ban doctors, building equipment, human rights organizations from entering Gaza, so how is even Hamas in charge?

 

Yes I can and I will. What happens every few years in Gaza is a collective punishment against unarmed civilians in densely populated area, blocked both from land and the sea. I will not forget over 500 butchered children and videos of some groups of Israelis chanting "no school in Gaza, no more children left".

You should also look up the definition of the words terror and terrorist. Israeli state-sponsored terrorism is what Palestinians suffer from for decades. Just because it's government and army doing the killing, it doesn't make it justified.

 

It is illegal under international law and you even quoted part which says they stopped this practice since it was counterproductive. And of course it is! Those people's only crime was that they were blood related or lived nearby. No one should ever be punished for other person's crime.

By your logic, that Israeli politician was right, the one who said knowledge of raping potential suicide bomber's sister and mother would prevent attack. How vile. Hamas called for abandoning suicide bombings in 2006, so I don't know why you keep bringing them up. Since this last case, Israeli government doesn't seem to think they're doing anything wrong, and they're only creating more hate and adding fuel to the fire.

And I disagree with "far fewer Israeli terrorist attacks", when you look up definition of terrorism you'll see.

 

 

My post was in reference to Hamas celebrating the attacks, which they continue to do, not whether they order them.   Their official stance is very important. Also notice I used the word terrorist in both cases, Israeli and Palestinian... Both have employed terror. One government has done so openly and admitted to targeting civilians, something that no other government in the world has gotten away with. Now tell me you don't see a problem with that, without mentioning "an eye for an eye". 

 

Y'all (you and Dolev) both need to stop using isolated civilian extremists as examples. Especially when you complain of Palestinians being painted as savages. It is so hypocritical! THE EXTREMISTS ARE MINORITIES. Now recall the post you just made on collective punishment, and how absolutely against it you are. It really bothers me how often you complain about dehumanization and then use the exact same tactics to serve your own purpose.  

[lego 44,165]

This is rather vague and common sense... Do we have any sources that specifically mention this practise? 

What's protocol when the other government is encouraging the murder of civilians? 

 

It's not vague at all.

 

 

 

The Israeli authorities have committed human rights violations and violations of international humanitarian law in their responses to these attacks, including by carrying out punitive home demolitions against the families of those involved in the attacks.

“Punishing the families of suspects by destroying their homes is collective punishment and is prohibited by international law. Tensions across the West Bank have been at fever pitch following the conflict in Gaza this summer. Authorities must not trample over the rights of Palestinians through collective punishments and other heavy-handed measures in order to restore security,†said Philip Luther.

There has also been a spate of unlawful killings of Palestinians during demonstrations by police when their lives were not in danger, while Israeli settlers have carried out attacks on Palestinians harvesting their olives.

“The Israeli security forces have an obligation to protect the whole civilian population regardless of whether they are Palestinian or Israeli. Instead of stepping up their heavy-handed tactics, the Israeli authorities must ensure that anyone who attacks civilians on either side is held to account. Failing to do so is only likely to embolden attackers and worsen the cycle of bloodshed,†said Philip Luther.

 

http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/israelopt-killing-worshippers-synagogue-abhorrent-attack-2014-11-18

 

 

Order to demolish homes of Palestinians who perpetrated attacks unlawful and immoral

 

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has ordered the demolition or sealing of the homes of the families of the Palestinians who carried out recent attacks against Israelis. This action constitutes harming the innocent. It is collective punishment that is both unlawful and immoral.

 

Since the occupation began in 1967, Israeli security forces have demolished hundreds of homes to punish relatives of Palestinians who harmed or allegedly harmed Israelis. This policy rendered homeless thousands of people who were not themselves accused of any wrongdoing.

About ten years ago, a military committee headed by Major General Udi Shani found punitive home demolitions to be a measure of questionable effectiveness in deterring attacks against Israelis. It found that there are even indications that demolitions sometimes achieve the opposite effect and stated that the measure is just on the “verge of legalityâ€. Shaul Mofaz, Defense Minister at the time, ordered that the committee’s recommendations be accepted. Since 2005, the security establishment has rarely used this measure.

The habitual call for punitive demolition in response to attacks against Israelis ignores the committee’s findings and is apparently made primarily to achieve media interest and political gain.

A policy of punitive home demolition is fundamentally wrong, irrespective of effectiveness. It contravenes basic moral standards by punishing people for the misdeeds of others. B’Tselem calls upon the authorities not to demolish these homes.

 

http://www.btselem.org/press_releases/20041116_planned_punitive_demolitions

 

 

The Israeli government has adopted an official policy of harming the innocent

 

The intention to demolish the family home of the two Palestinians charged with the killing of Baruch Mizrahi means adopting an official policy of harming the innocent, stated Israeli human rights NGO B'Tselem. The two suspects will be tried for the attack, and are expected to be sentenced to long periods of detention. Their family members, who are not suspected of any offence, are the ones who will suffer the loss of their home: 13 people are currently living in the house, including 8 children.

Years ago, the army concluded that punitive home demolitions are not an effective measure to deter attacks against Israelis, and there are even indications that they achieve the opposite effect. It seems therefore that the motives are reaping revenge and politically capitalizing on the current public mood in Israel, in light of the abduction. This draconian measure was not utilized for almost ten years, except for one case in 2009:

 

Background on the Demolition of Houses as Punishment

On 17 February 2005, the minister of defense announced that the procedure would no longer be used. In the period between October 2001 (when Israel began once again to demolish homes as a means of punishment in the Occupied Territories, after four years in which it had not used this measure) and the end of January 2005, Israel demolished 664 houses as punishment.

 

http://www.btselem.org/press_releases/20140623_renewal_of_punitive_house_demolitions

 

 

The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits the occupying state from destroying the property of civilians in occupied territory, “except where such destruction is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.†Israeli officials have argued that its policy falls within this exception. However, this contention is baseless. Israel’s interpretation of “military operations†contradicts the official commentary of the International Committee of the Red Cross, which defines “military operation†as “the movement, maneuvers, and actions of any sort, carried out by the armed forces with a view to combat.†Punitive demolitions are not conducted in the framework of “movements†or “maneuvers†of IDF forces, and are not carried out in the context of hostilities. The action cannot, therefore, be deemed a “military operation†within the meaning of the term in the Geneva Convention.

In some cases at least, Israel argues that the demolitions are lawful in that they are carried out pursuant to Section 119 of the Emergency Defense Regulations, which were enacted during the British Mandate. Section 119 is a draconian provision that allows a house to be demolished based on suspicion that certain offenses have been committed. The house does not have to belong to the suspects themselves, but can be the home of their family, neighbors, and other residents in the community. The applicability of Section 119 is questionable: it was revoked by the British before the Mandate ended. However, even if the British did not revoke it, Section 119 should be nullified because it violates international humanitarian law. Relying on Section 119, the High Court of Justice rejected these arguments and adopted, time after time, the state’s contention that the punitive house demolitions are lawful.

[lego 44,165]

Punitive home demolitions are racist  and just plain wrong

 

Law abiding societies do not exact punishment on uninvolved parties. And it certainly doesn’t look good when the families of Palestinian terrorists are harmed while the homes of Jewish terrorists are left standing. One such punitive demolition leaves nine innocent people homeless Wednesday morning.

“Do not discriminate between blood and blood,†Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Tuesday night, calling for international condemnation of a murderous attack inside a synagogue that morning. Moments later, he announced the steps he plans to take in response to the senseless bloodletting.

“This evening I ordered the demolition of the homes of the terrorists who perpetrated the massacre and the hastening of the demolition of the homes of the terrorists who perpetrated the earlier attacks,†Netanyahu told the nation, asking it to allow the state to settle scores on its behalf.

Five months earlier, Netanyahu made a similar statement after the horrific murder of Palestinian teenager Mohammed Abu Khdeir. “We don’t distinguish between [Palestinian] terror and [Jewish] terror, and will deal severely with both,†the prime minister said, vowing to bring the full force of the law down upon the murderers, who he said, “have no place in Israeli society.â€

Of course, Netanyahu  like his predecessors  does discriminate between blood and blood, and he does distinguish between Jewish terror and Palestinian terror.

The prime minister did not order the police or army to demolish family homes of the suspects in the Abu Khdeir murder. Then again, they, and their families who live in said homes, are Jewish.

In 2005, when Eden Natan-Zada  an army deserter and follower of Kahane Chai, which is recognized as a terrorist organization by Israel, the U.S. and the EU  killed four Arab citizens of Israel and wounded a dozen others, then-prime minister Ariel Sharon called him “a bloodthirsty Jewish terrorist.†His family’s home was not demolished.

In 2002, when “Bat Ayin†underground members were arrested and convicted of attempting to bomb a Palestinian girls’ school in East Jerusalem, nobody ordered their family homes demolished.

In 1994, after settler Baruch Goldstein murdered 29 and wounded 125 Palestinian worshipers in Hebron’s Ibrahimi Mosque massacre, then-prime minister Yitzhak Rabin called the American-born doctor a “foreign implant†and “an errant weed.†He did not order Goldstein’s family home demolished.

A decade earlier, in 1984, when members of the “Jewish Underground†terrorist group were arrested while placing bombs under Palestinian buses in Jerusalem, their harsh prison sentences were commuted. Needless to say, their family homes were not demolished.

Ineffective, illegal and just plain wrong

Israeli police on Tuesday arrested at least 10 family members of the terrorists  including their mothers  who murdered four Jewish worshipers just hours earlier. Their detentions are troublesome but they will most likely be released, assuming Israeli security services cannot directly tie them to the attack. Why? Because being related to a criminal  or even to a terrorist  is not a crime.

And yet, these family members who have committed no crime, will be punished. They will be made homeless. Why? Two reasons. The first, Netayahu explained: revenge. “As a state, we will settle accounts with all of the terrorists,†he said at his Tuesday evening press conference.

The second rationale: deterrence. How better to deter someone who is willing to die than make sure they know that you will punish their family for your deeds. Logical, perhaps. Effective, not so much.

Up until this summer, Israel hadn’t used home demolitions as a punitive measure since 2005, following an army report that said it was not an effective deterrent against terrorism.

The practice is also illegal under international law, Israeli, Palestinian and international human rights groups say.

But efficacy and legality aside, collective punishment is simply wrong. Civilized, democratic and law abiding societies do not exact punishment on uninvolved parties. They do not exact punishments that aren’t dictated by a penal code and ordered by a court.

A situation where the prime minister intentionally causes great harm and pain to completely innocent and uninvolved parties in order to exact revenge and “send a message,†and does so only to perpetrators of one race or nationality, is vigilantism, not justice.

Nine civilians left homeless

On Wednesday morning Israeli police demolished Abdelrahman Shaloudi’s family home in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Silwan.

Shaloudi ran down and killed two people in late October, including a three-month-old baby. He was shot and killed by Israeli security forces at the scene of that attack.

Nine people lived in the apartment Israel demolished Wednesday morning. None of them had anything to do with the attack.

 

http://972mag.com/punitive-home-demolitions-are-racist-and-just-plain-wrong/98994/