Palestinian children tortured, used as shields by Israel: U.N.

[krych3k]

Here's the problem: This Falk person has expressed anti-Semitic attitudes on at least four occasions cited in this one article. And NO, it's not impossible to be born of Jewish parents and have bias against Judaism and Jews: perhaps it's illogical or inconsistent, but since when is *that* unusual among humans?

So, there are at least four instances of 'prejudicial' statements by this individual - and they are PUBLIC and DELIBERATE and 'official'. He HAS to know he is 'a public figure', and the POV he has chosen to present is a biased one.

When the Secretary-General of the UN is chastising Falk for his bias *publically* as well, I think Mr. Moon ALSO knows he himself is 'a public figure' and is well aware of the implications.

The headline of the ARTICLE cited in the OP, which was used for the title here, is one of those misleading 'grabber' things. It's not the OP's fault that the headline was so misleading. The 'report' alleges: there doesn't appear to be much in the way of actual proof nor opportunity to provide any proof. It is far from comprehensive and not necessarily factual.

This report addressed in the OP is not the Falk Report. The Falk Report addressed other human rights abuses of the past year and thst are ongoing, but was not focused on abuses against children.

Do you or do you not understand that all "reports" regarding Israel via the UNHRC involve Falk?

 

[HistoryBefore67]

Just as being pro bono means you don't like Cher.

Wait... that's wrong.

krych3k is right, though.

 

[krych3k]

What motivates me is a sense of fairness and justice on both sides.

She's here all week, folks! Make sure you tip your waitress and try the veal!

Is this kind of childish retort all you are capable of?

If the report on Israel is wrong, maybe you can show us evidence that specific aspects are false?

We're not going to accept you making false accusations and us requiring to acknowledge it by disproving the stupidity. It's your problem if you see legitimacy in the UNHRC. I wonder if you can even name the head of the UNHRC or which state is currently chairing it without running to Google. Ten shekels says you can't do it.

 

[krych3k]

Guess you've never heard of "innocent until proven guilty."

Stop dodging.


If the report on Israel is wrong, maybe you can show us evidence that specific aspects are false?

For example - one allegation made was that the IDF used Palestinian children as human shields and, in one case specifically, the charge was investigated by Israeli authorities, the soldier found guilty, but his only punishment was demotion and a mild sentence.

That is easy to prove one way or the other.

Of course you would prefer Israeli soldiers walk into traps an end up as amputees, right? That's the better outcome? The soldiers used these kids as "human shields" in order to decrease the likelihood of terrorists setting off bombs remotely as they went into apartments and buildings. Bear in the mind that the only reason they're doing these house-to-house searches is because of a misplaced sense of compassion for our enemies, rather than simply leveling the buildings with all the residents inside. So what we have here, essentially, is an extremely compassionate prosecution of counter-terrorism operations that place the IDF soldiers at excessive risk in order to reduce the likelihood of harm befalling "civilians", and yet it's still not enough for Jew-haters like Coyote.

 

[krych3k]

Much better for an IDF soldier to do whatever he or she needs to do to stay safe and alive then end up dead or horribly injured XXXXXXX. Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six, as the phrase goes.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGxi5ZJnSpk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Where did this incident happen and on what date?

 

[CMike]

Is that the UN group headed by Iran?

 

[toastman]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGxi5ZJnSpk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Where did this incident happen and on what date?

That's a very old video from the second intifada, that Sherri reposts quite often

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGxi5ZJnSpk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Where did this incident happen and on what date?

That's a very old video from the second intifada, that Sherri reposts quite often

I guessed so.

 

[Intense]

What is wrong with the use of WP? Oh, right. Nothing.

Laws Regulating Use

According to the Chemical Weapons Convention Schedule of Chemicals, the chemical P4 is neither a toxic chemical nor a precursor to a toxic chemical. Protocol III of The Convention on Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (CCW) prohibits and restricts the use of incendiary weapons in civilian populations. It defines an incendiary weapon as "any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons"; this definition excludes "munitions which may have incidental effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signaling systems." Under that qualification, WP is not necessarily considered an "incendiary weapon" if it incidentally sets buildings on fire. The United States has ratified other protocols and amendments of the CCW, but it has not ratified Protocol III.
Treatment

Initially, contaminated clothing should be removed to prevent re-ignition. Treating skin exposed to WP requires irrigation of the contaminated areas or placement of water- or saline-soaked pads. If the area becomes dry, then the WP can re-ignite. In addition, bathing the area in a bicarbonate solution will neutralize any phosphoric acid that may have been produced. Remaining WP particles should be immediately removed surgically. Removal requires care to prevent further contamination of the person or responders. After complete removal, the patient can be treated as a burn victim.


Military Use

The United States military and foreign militaries use WP in grenades, mortar shells, and artillery shells to mark targets, to provide smokescreens for troop movement, to “trace” the path of bullets, and as an incendiary. These items are classified as both smoke ammunitions and incendiary ammunitions. When burning, WP emits smoke that can screen troop movement. This same smoke can act as target markers for aircraft and as signals. WP particles can burn combustible items upon contact until it has completed its reaction with oxygen, which can last up to 15 minutes depending on the munition. As described in the article “The Fight for Fallujah” in the March-April issue of Field Artillery, U.S. military units “fired ‘shake and bake’ missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE [high explosives] to take them out.”

https://www.fas.org/programs/bio/factsheets/whitephosphorus.html

Where WP is shown to be intentionally used on Civilian Populations there is a problem.

 

[toastman]

What is wrong with the use of WP? Oh, right. Nothing.

Laws Regulating Use

According to the Chemical Weapons Convention Schedule of Chemicals, the chemical P4 is neither a toxic chemical nor a precursor to a toxic chemical. Protocol III of The Convention on Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (CCW) prohibits and restricts the use of incendiary weapons in civilian populations. It defines an incendiary weapon as "any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons"; this definition excludes "munitions which may have incidental effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signaling systems." Under that qualification, WP is not necessarily considered an "incendiary weapon" if it incidentally sets buildings on fire. The United States has ratified other protocols and amendments of the CCW, but it has not ratified Protocol III.
Treatment

Initially, contaminated clothing should be removed to prevent re-ignition. Treating skin exposed to WP requires irrigation of the contaminated areas or placement of water- or saline-soaked pads. If the area becomes dry, then the WP can re-ignite. In addition, bathing the area in a bicarbonate solution will neutralize any phosphoric acid that may have been produced. Remaining WP particles should be immediately removed surgically. Removal requires care to prevent further contamination of the person or responders. After complete removal, the patient can be treated as a burn victim.


Military Use

The United States military and foreign militaries use WP in grenades, mortar shells, and artillery shells to mark targets, to provide smokescreens for troop movement, to “trace” the path of bullets, and as an incendiary. These items are classified as both smoke ammunitions and incendiary ammunitions. When burning, WP emits smoke that can screen troop movement. This same smoke can act as target markers for aircraft and as signals. WP particles can burn combustible items upon contact until it has completed its reaction with oxygen, which can last up to 15 minutes depending on the munition. As described in the article “The Fight for Fallujah” in the March-April issue of Field Artillery, U.S. military units “fired ‘shake and bake’ missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE [high explosives] to take them out.”

https://www.fas.org/programs/bio/factsheets/whitephosphorus.html

Where WP is shown to be intentionally used on Civilian Populations there is a problem.

Except, it was used as a smokescreen, not to burn Palestinians. They have not used it since and have stated they wont use it in future confrontations/wars

 

[Coyote]

I'm not asking Israel. I'm asking *you* as someone who is posting on a political messageboard.

Same answer. I'm not required to present evidence to DISPROVE every made-up accusation against Israel.



So you want me to compare a situation in which a government condones acts of violence to one in which acts of violence are punished?

In other words you have no argument except insults.

You are way too easily insulted.

I find your "arguments" to be an insult to my intelligence, and that of every other person on this forum.

So to summarize, the only argument you seem to have is something along the lines of: "the UN hates Israel, all the human rights organizations hate Israel, and it's all propaganda and lies but don't expect *me* to back up my claims".

Either you think you are really special or it doesn't take much to insult your "intelligence".

 

[krych3k]

What is wrong with the use of WP? Oh, right. Nothing.

Laws Regulating Use

According to the Chemical Weapons Convention Schedule of Chemicals, the chemical P4 is neither a toxic chemical nor a precursor to a toxic chemical. Protocol III of The Convention on Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (CCW) prohibits and restricts the use of incendiary weapons in civilian populations. It defines an incendiary weapon as "any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons"; this definition excludes "munitions which may have incidental effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signaling systems." Under that qualification, WP is not necessarily considered an "incendiary weapon" if it incidentally sets buildings on fire. The United States has ratified other protocols and amendments of the CCW, but it has not ratified Protocol III.
Treatment

Initially, contaminated clothing should be removed to prevent re-ignition. Treating skin exposed to WP requires irrigation of the contaminated areas or placement of water- or saline-soaked pads. If the area becomes dry, then the WP can re-ignite. In addition, bathing the area in a bicarbonate solution will neutralize any phosphoric acid that may have been produced. Remaining WP particles should be immediately removed surgically. Removal requires care to prevent further contamination of the person or responders. After complete removal, the patient can be treated as a burn victim.


Military Use

The United States military and foreign militaries use WP in grenades, mortar shells, and artillery shells to mark targets, to provide smokescreens for troop movement, to “trace” the path of bullets, and as an incendiary. These items are classified as both smoke ammunitions and incendiary ammunitions. When burning, WP emits smoke that can screen troop movement. This same smoke can act as target markers for aircraft and as signals. WP particles can burn combustible items upon contact until it has completed its reaction with oxygen, which can last up to 15 minutes depending on the munition. As described in the article “The Fight for Fallujah” in the March-April issue of Field Artillery, U.S. military units “fired ‘shake and bake’ missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE [high explosives] to take them out.”

https://www.fas.org/programs/bio/factsheets/whitephosphorus.html

Where WP is shown to be intentionally used on Civilian Populations there is a problem.

As opposed to what? A "military population"?

 

[Coyote]

Just as being pro bono means you don't like Cher.

Wait... that's wrong.

krych3k is right, though.

So, in other words, all those Israeli's who are working to improve justice and rights for Palestinians are anti-semitic.

Go figure.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

 

[Coyote]

She's here all week, folks! Make sure you tip your waitress and try the veal!

Is this kind of childish retort all you are capable of?

If the report on Israel is wrong, maybe you can show us evidence that specific aspects are false?

We're not going to accept you making false accusations and us requiring to acknowledge it by disproving the stupidity. It's your problem if you see legitimacy in the UNHRC. I wonder if you can even name the head of the UNHRC or which state is currently chairing it without running to Google. Ten shekels says you can't do it.

I didn't make false accusations. I'm referring to material in the OP. Surely, if it's "stupidity" and "false" you should have no problem refuting it with fact.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

A little girl named Fera has burns all over her body and her mother died from burns and other family members died. And the deaths and injuries were caused when Israel used white phosphorous against civilians in ground operations during Cast Lead.

 

[Coyote]

There was no valid reason to use WP in that particular instance. None.

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

A little girl named Fera has burns all over her body and her mother died from burns and other family members died. And the deaths and injuries were caused when Israel used white phosphorous against civilians in ground operations during Cast Lead.

Why was this girl and mother outside and not taking shelter or did she live in the houses where Hamas forced the residents out at gunpoint in order for those residents to be again used as pawns in their campaign?