View Full Version : "Lib's" LAST remaining claim of Israeli moral supremacy DIES RIGHT HERE.
Jay_Esbe
08-03-2006, 12:12 AM
The claim that Hezbollah uses civilians as "human sheilds" and that Israel does not as a lie from hell exposed:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4333982.stm
IDF to appeal human shield ban
Israeli soldiers make a Palestinian resident enter a house in Nablus in August 2002
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40879000/jpg/_40879524_shield203ap.jpg
The practice of using human shields is against international law
The Israeli Defence Ministry will appeal against a supreme court ruling banning the use of Palestinian human shields in raids, officials said.
Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz is prepared to make a personal appearance in court to defend the practice, ministry officials added.
Human rights groups have frequently condemned the use of human shields.
The Israeli military believes that the use of Palestinian civilians can often defuse a tense situation.
Mr Mofaz is also set to argue that alternative methods of apprehending suspects, such as through the use of bulldozers, would endanger the lives of both Israeli soldiers and Palestinian civilians, a military source said.
Early warning
The Israeli supreme court issued its formal ruling last week, saying the practice violates international law.
It had already issued a temporary injunction against the practice in 2002 after a teenager was killed when troops made him negotiate with a wanted militant.
The court ruled out both the placing of civilians in front of soldiers on operations and an "early warning" procedure employed by the army.
In this practice, the Israeli army would force local Palestinians to approach the homes of militants and ask them to surrender.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I wonder if Hezbollah actually has a formal policy IN FAVOR of using human sheilds. I wonder if they've actually gone to court REPEATEDLY demanding the "right" to use human sheilds. ISRAEL HAS.
So then, NOT ONLY HAS ISRAEL DELIBERATELY "HIDDEN BEHIND CIVILIANS" AND USED THEM, THEY WERE TOLD TO STOP AND THEY ACTUALLY HAD THE UNMITIGATED AUDACITY TO REFUSE TO STOP AND HAVE STATED THEIR INTENT TO "APPEAL" THE DECISION.
Now then, let's look at this situation, FROM A FACTUAL VIEW POINT:
1. Hezbollah engaged ARMED ISRAELI MILITARY PERSONALE (NOT 'CIVILIANS) AND CAPTURED TWO SOLDIERS.
2. Hezbollah had not fired a single rocket at Israel, when Israel STARTED ROCKETING, SHELLING, AND BOMBING AND KILLING LEBANEZE CIVILIANS BY THE HUNDREDS.
3. HEZBOLLAH THEN RESPONDED WITH WHAT IT HAD AGAINST ISRAEL.
That is IT, IN THAT ORDER, PERIOD. Israel started this.
There is no proof whatsoever that Hezbollah has EVER used civilians intentionally as "human sheilds". NONE. But there ABSOLUTELY IS PROOF THAT ISRAEL BOMBED ROADS AND BRIDGES WHICH PREVENTED ESCAPE, AND THEN DELIBERATELY TARGETED CIVILIAN AREAS. THAT IS NOT DEBATABLE.
Hezbollah is not using civilians as "Human sheilds". It's FUCKING PREPOSTEROUS: WOULD THE LEBANESE PEOPLE NOT ONLY STAND FOR THAT, BUT TURN AND BACK HEZBOLLAH IF THEY DID THIS? ABSURD. There are ALSO news crews ALL OVER LEBANON. Tell me this: HOW MANY LEBANESE CIVILIANS HAVE COME FORWARD AND CLAIMED THEY WERE DELIBERATELY USED AS "HUMAN SHEILDS"?
The next fat: Hezbollah has NEVER killed American citizens.
Israel's so-called "response" to the LEGAL capture of two of it's soldiers is a WAR CRIME called "COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT". The law has been cited and posted and THERE IS NO DEBATING IT, ONLY LYING ABOUT IT. It says what it says: Israel is NOT legally entitled to hit civilians EVEN IF THERE ARE ENEMY TROOPS IN THE VICINITY. Israel has ADMITTEDLY killed AT LEAST TWICE AS MANY CIVILIANS AS HEZBOLLAH.
Israel has lost this war NO MATTER WHAT NOW: Public opinion has turned and they can NEVER recover from this. They're finished. And YOU FUCKING KNOW IT "LIB". All they can do is kill more innocent people, and create more hatred and death, but THE WHOLE WORLD HAS FINALLY TURNED ON THE LOUSY BASTARDS.
Spin away "Lib", you're a LYING FILTHY PIG.
I'm going to respond in pieces.
Esbe is right. I am wrong. The IDF has used human shields. The practice is reprehensible and I condemn it. I will not make the claim again that Israel does not use human shields.
I am not deterred from asserting that with the exception of this failure I know of no immoral or illegal methods used by the IDF. If Esbe is I am sure we will hear about it.
I am indebted for other reasons for Esbe's bringing this to light. This occurrence highlights the native justice and liberality of the Jewish state. A group of Israeli bl;eeding hearts recognizes a wrong being committed by its military and brings the matter before the Israeli Supreme Court.. Imagine that happening in Palestine or Syria or Lebanon or Iran. Laughable. But this Israeli Supreme Court, despite being the judiciary of a nation constantly threatened with attack and depending upon its military to protect its very existence, has the integrity, the respect for Israeli and International law and the courage to call 'em as they see 'em, rendering a strict and unambiguous ruling disciplining the IDF.
Not only would this not happen in any Arab or Muslim nation, would it even happen here in America? We cannot be sure. My compliments to those Israelis who uncovered this despicable practice and to the liberality and fidelity to principle of the Israeli Supreme Court.
What an irony that this nation, which Esbe so thoroughly reviles, sets a shining example for the world when official wrong has been done and needs to be righted. Thank you Jay, I hope everyone reads about this case.
Mickey take note. Impressive, huh?
I wonder if Hezbollah actually has a formal policy IN FAVOR of using human sheilds. I wonder if they've actually gone to court REPEATEDLY demanding the "right" to use human sheilds. ISRAEL HAS.
Hezbollah is an illegal private army on the territory of sovereign country. They don't give a shit about law.
From Human Rights Watch (http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006/07/17/lebano13748.htm)
Hezbollah – must take all necessary precautions to protect civilians against the dangers resulting from armed hostilities, and must never use the presence of civilians to shield themselves from attack. That requires positioning its military assets, troops and commanders as much as possible outside of populated areas. The use of human shields is a war crime.
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5200791,00.jpg
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5200790,00.jpg
Israel started this.
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/images/editions/lebanon.gif
Since the launch of Israel's offensive on July 12 after the abduction of two Israeli soldiers in a Hizbullah raid and death of three more...
But this is even better. Esbe, do you happen to know what al Manar TV is? Hint: It's the Hezbollah channel: http://www.almanar.com.lb/NewsSite/News.aspx
Notice the date on the following story. It is the very beginning and Hezbollah's channel is reporting.
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:2PpHLxySHooJ:almanar.com.lb/Story.aspx%3FLanguage%3Den%26DSNO%3D652905+%22july +12%22+capture+%22two+israeli+soldiers%22+site:alm anar.com.lb&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1
http://www.almanar.com.lb/NewsSite/Images/ar/TopHeaderLogo2.gif
Islamic Resistance captures two Israeli soldiers and kills 7 others
Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - 12:37 PM [Kods Time]
Hezbollah - the Islamic Resistance of Lebanon declared Wednesday at 9.05 am Beirut time that it had captured two Israeli soldiers to secure the release of detainees held in Israeli prisons.
The statement said: "In order to fulfill a promise to free the prisoners and detainees, the Islamic Resistance captured at 9:05 am local time two Israeli soldiers at the borders with occupied Palestine. It added that the soldiers were moved to a safe place.
According to the France Press Agency the seizure of the two soldiers, which Israel described as a "strong possibility" threatened to open up a new front in the troubled region after the capture of another Israeli soldier in Gaza two weeks ago plunged the region into chaos.
"In order to fulfill a promise to free the prisoners and detainees, the Islamic Resistance captured at 9:05 am (0605 GMT) two Israeli soldiers at the borders with occupied Palestine," a Hezbollah statement said referring to its Resistance fighters.
"There is a strong possibility that two soldiers were abducted by Hezbollah," an Israeli army spokesman said moments later.
Israeli occupation Prime Minister Ehud Olmert vowed that those who "try to shake Israel's determination" will "pay heavily" for their actions as Israeli troops rolled across the international border for the first time in six years.
Islamic Resistance said the two soldiers "were moved to a safe place". The claim came after intense cross-border clashes that left at least four Israeli civilians wounded, according to Israeli military sources.
Hezbollah fighters fired dozens of Katyusha rockets and mortar rounds on the Lebanese occupied Shebaa Farms border area, security sources said.
There was also a barrage of fire on northern occupied Palestine at the other end of the frontier close to the Mediterranean coast, the sources added.
The shelling, accompanied by automatic gunfire, began at 9:00 am
(0600 GMT), Israeli military sources said.
The Shebaa Farms district was seized by Israel from Syria in 1967 but is now claimed by Lebanon with Syrian blessing.
Israel promptly launched a ground and air assault on Lebanon, a military spokesman said. It was the first ground operation since Israeli troops withdrew from southern Lebanon in May 2000.
"Our planes, tanks and artillery are operating inside Lebanese territory," the spokesman said.
Hezbollah and its leader Hassan Nasrallah have repeatedly urged Hamas not to release the Israeli soldier [captured in Gaza], arguing that his capture was the best bargaining chip for the release of Palestinian and Arab prisoners.
The three groups detaining Shalit in the Gaza Strip have demanded the release of 1,000 Palestinian, Arab, Muslim and "other" prisoners.
Say uncle Jay.
The next fat: Hezbollah has NEVER killed American citizens.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...t/etc/cron.html
http://www.liberty05.com/civilwar/img/pic229.JPG
A suicide bomber in a pickup truck loaded with explosives rammed into the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon. Sixty-three people were killed, including 17 Americans, eight of whom were employees of the Central Intelligence Agency, including chief Middle East analyst Robert C. Ames and station chief Kenneth Haas.
Reagan administration officials said that the attack was carried out by Hezbollah operatives, a Lebanese militant Islamic group whose anti-U.S. sentiments were sparked in part by the revolution in Iran. The Hezbollah operatives who carried out the attack on the embassy reportedly were receiving financial and logistical support from both Iran and Syria. [For more on how and why Iran and Syria were helping to direct attacks on the U.S., see FRONTLINE's interviews with Robert Oakley and Robert C. McFarlane.]
And here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_...Embassy_bombing
The April 1983 U.S. Embassy bombing was the April 18, 1983, suicide bombing of the United States Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon. It was the deadliest attack on a U.S. diplomatic mission up to that time, and is seen by some as marking the beginning of anti-U.S. attacks by Islamist groups.
The bomb was detonated in a delivery van driven by a suicide bomber, carrying about 400 pounds (181 kg) of explosives. The van, believed stolen from the embassy a year before, gained access to the embassy compound and parked under the portico at the very front of the building, where it exploded. The blast collapsed the front section of the embassy and killed 63 people. Seventeen of these were Americans, and eight of them worked for the Central Intelligence Agency, including the CIA's Middle East director. Another one of the Americans was a United States Marine. More than a hundred others were wounded.
The attack was motivated by the American intervention in the Lebanese Civil War. In the aftermath of the massacre of Palestinians at the Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps by Lebanese Christian militiamen backed by nearby Israeli army units, American troops had landed to try and restore order and central government authority to the war ravaged country. Many groups within Lebanon were opposed to the American presence but the militant group Hezbollah, under the code name "Islamic Jihad," is believed to have been responsible for the attacks.
Following the attack, the embassy was moved to a supposedly more secure location in East Beirut. However, on September 20, 1984, another car bomb exploded at this embassy annex, killing 20 Lebanese and two American soldiers.
The next fat: Hezbollah has NEVER killed American citizens.
http://www.afa.org/magazine/Feb2002/0202terror2.jpg
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/30/i...rracks.bombing/
Iran responsible for 1983 Marine barracks bombing, judge rules
WASHINGTON (CNN) --Iran is responsible for the 1983 suicide bombing of a U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 American servicemen, a U.S. District Court judge ruled Friday.
U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth said the suicide truck bombing was carried out by the group Hezbollah with the approval and funding of Iran's senior government officials.
Lamberth ordered that the plaintiffs in the case -- the servicemen wounded in that bombing and the families of those killed -- have a "right to obtain judicial relief" from Iran. The judge called the October 23, 1983 bombing "the most deadly state-sponsored terrorist attack made against United States citizens before September 11, 2001."
"In the early morning hours of that day, 241 American servicemen were murdered in their sleep by a suicide bomber," he wrote. "On that day, an unspeakable horror invaded the lives of those who survived the attack and the family members whose loved ones had been stolen from them."
The court will determine compensatory damages after reviewing reports submitted by "special masters" appointed by the court for claims resolution. Lamberth also wrote in his ruling that he would "take under advisement" the possibility of awarding punitive damages.
Two separate suits were filed in 2001; Lamberth considered the two together. Both suits sought claims for wrongful death, battery, assault and "intentional infliction of emotional distress resulting from state-sponsored terrorism."
Noting that Iran was served with the lawsuits in 2002 but failed to file any responses, Lamberth wrote that the court entered default judgments against the defendants in last December but was required to study the matter further under federal law regarding lawsuits against other countries.
From the subsequent bench trial, Lamberth concluded that Hezbollah was formed under the auspices of the Iranian government, was completely reliant on Iran in 1983 and assisted Iranian Ministry of Information and Security agents in carrying out the operation.
Hezbollah, or Party of God, is based in Lebanon and has waged a campaign for 18 years against Israel's occupation of southern Lebanon as a self-declared security zone. Israel withdrew its forces from Lebanon two years ago, but maintains a heavy military presence on Israel's northern frontier.
Hezbollah is blamed for anti-Western and anti-Israeli terrorist acts dating from the early 1980s and is on the U.S. State Department's official list of terrorist organizations.
A key point in determining the plaintiffs' eligibility to recover damages was the issue of whether the Marines were engaged in combat in their mission to Lebanon. Lamberth said the bulk of the evidence pointed clearly to a peacekeeping mission operating on stringent peacetime rules of engagement.
"As pointed out during trial, the (Marines) were more restricted in their use of force than an ordinary U.S. citizen walking down a street in Washington, D.C.," the judge wrote.
Lamberth wrote that the court had no power to "heal the pain that has become a permanent part of the lives" of the family members.
"But the court can take steps that will punish the men who carried out this unspeakable attack, and in so doing, try to achieve some small measure of justice for its survivors, and for the family members of the 241 Americans who never came home," he wrote.
The lawsuit was filed under a 1996 U.S. law that allows Americans to sue nations that the State Department considers sponsors of terrorism for damages suffered in terrorist acts.
Several Americans have won judgments against Iran and other countries named as sponsors of terrorism, but the U.S. government has been reluctant to seize foreign assets to pay the judgments, fearing international retaliation, according to a report by The Associated Press.
There's more but there are hundreds of American citizens killed by Hezbollah.
Say uncle, Jay.
Israel's so-called "response" to the LEGAL capture of two of it's soldiers is a WAR CRIME called "COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT". The law has been cited and posted and THERE IS NO DEBATING IT, ONLY LYING ABOUT IT. It says what it says: Israel is NOT legally entitled to hit civilians EVEN IF THERE ARE ENEMY TROOPS IN THE VICINITY.
From Human Rights Watch
What is meant by “collective punishment” of the civilian population?
International humanitarian law prohibits the punishment of any person for an offense other than one that he or she has personally committed. Collective punishment is a term used in international humanitarian law to describe any form of punitive sanctions and harassment, not limited to judicial penalties, but including sanctions of “any sort, administrative, by police action or otherwise,” that are imposed on targeted groups of persons for actions that they themselves did not personally commit. The imposition of collective punishment is a war crime. Whether an attack or measure could amount to collective punishment depends on several factors, including the target of the measure and its punitive impact, but of particular relevance is the intent behind a particular measure. If the intention was to punish, purely or primarily as a result of an act committed by third parties, then the attack is likely to have been collective punishment.
Say uncle, Jay.
Jay_Esbe
08-03-2006, 02:48 AM
I'm going to respond in pieces.
And I am going to tear you to pieces.
Esbe is right. I am wrong. The IDF has used human shields. The practice is reprehensible and I condemn it. I will not make the claim again that Israel does not use human shields.
I am not deterred from asserting that with the exception of this failure I know of no immoral or illegal methods used by the IDF.
Then you don't know much.
If Esbe is I am sure we will hear about it.
ISRAEL IS STILL USING HUMAN SHEILDS. RIGHT NOW:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5212870.stm
Tuesday, 25 July 2006, 11:39 GMT 12:39 UK
Israelis accused of 'human shields' tactic
By Lucy Williamson
BBC News, Gaza
The Israeli army has been accused of using Palestinian civilians as human shields in an operation in northern Gaza.
According to the Israeli human rights group, B'tselem, six civilians including two minors were subjected to the illegal tactic during an incursion into the town of Beit Hanoun last week.
Hazem Ali outside his house in Gaza, Beit Hanoun
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41927000/jpg/_41927292_hazemhouse203.jpg
Hazem Ali says he was subjected to a terrifying 12-hour ordeal
There are piles of rubble leading up to the hole in Hazem Ali's house.
It's a week since Israel came into Beit Hanoun, but the gash in the side of his house is still raw, the soft inside of family life still visible through the lumps of concrete hanging from the wall. A broken bed; a few girders dripping onto it; an elegant wardrobe still standing against the back wall.
It was soon after dawn when the Israeli army bulldozed their way in. Hazem was still sleeping, taking a break from his job as an engineer with the local Palestinian news agency.
'Blindfolded'
It was his mother who met them in the hallway, Israeli soldiers in a Palestinian home. Behind her, Hazem and his two brothers emerged, one by one.
The three brothers were blindfolded, says Hazem, and their hands tied behind their backs. He shows me the wounds on his wrists from the plastic handcuffs - still sore and infected, but beginning to heal over.
He shows me where the soldiers positioned them: outside the entrance to his flat on the third floor, in the stairwell, facing down the steps.
wrist wound
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41927000/jpg/_41927296_wrists203.jpg
The wounds are healing
"I think they put us here because they were expecting suiciders to come into the flat because none of the soldiers were on the stairs - they were all inside the flat. They put us here so we'll be shot first."
Inside the flat, the soldiers punched holes in the walls of his living room, and bedroom. Through them, snipers exchanged fire with Palestinian militants. Hazem and his brothers heard it all, but could see nothing.
Hazem says he had little idea at the time exactly how long he was kept there. All he remembers was listening to the heavy gunfire around him, and counting the calls to prayer as they echoed over the area: one at lunchtime, one at tea-time, and one in the evening as the sun set. Twelve hours in all.
He says he expected to die any second. He still can't understand why, as civilians, they couldn't be kept in a room somewhere inside the house, where they would have been safer. But they put us in the middle of the clashes, he says. "There was no need for that."
Court outlawed tactic
Allegations over Israel's use of human shields have surfaced before. The last time they made headlines was during Operation Defensive Shield in the West Bank town of Jenin, four years ago.
This was a very blatant violation of the prohibition of the use of human shields
Yekhezel Lain, B'tselem
The army denied its personnel systematically used civilians as human shields during that operation, but it did issue an order outlawing the practice. As did the Israeli High Court.
But Yekhezel Lain, research director with the Israeli human rights group B'tselem says they are worried those guarantees are now being eroded. He says the cases in Beit Hanoun last week are the first of their kind since the High Court decision.
"This was a very blatant violation of the prohibition of the use of human shields," he tells me. "It was just soldiers hiding behind the back of civilians who were held with force in their homes."
B'tselem says it is investigating reports of other, similar incidents in Gaza during the past month. And it is worried that - having withdrawn from Gaza last year - the Israeli army may see the area as distinct from other Palestinian Territories.
The group is concerned about Israel establishing different rules in the case of the Gaza Strip where according to the state, there is no occupation any more - it's only a state of war, or armed conflict. The human rights group does not believe there is a difference when it comes to the protection of civilians.
The IDF told the BBC the claims in Beit Hanoun were being investigated, and that its soldiers were obliged to act in accordance with moral principles and the rules of engagement. Any misconduct, they said, would be looked into.
As he waits for news of his case in Beit Hanoun, Hazem Ali has got the builders in to fill the holes in his flat, re-glaze his windows and repair as much of the damage as he can.
His wife, meanwhile, is preparing for the birth of their first child. She is half Egyptian, and has been asking Hazem to move out of the Gaza Strip for months now. But he refuses to leave. There's no running away from Gaza, he says.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I am indebted for other reasons for Esbe's bringing this to light. This occurrence highlights the native justice and liberality of the Jewish state. A group of Israeli bl;eeding hearts recognizes a wrong being committed by its military and brings the matter before the Israeli Supreme Court..[/img]
God what a spinner you are. So, people who object to civilians being used as human sheilds are "bleeding hearts" are they. That tell me everything i need to know about you you goddamned sadistic bastard.
[quote=Lib]Imagine that happening in Palestine or Syria or Lebanon or Iran. Laughable.
You don't know WHAT THE FUCK happens in Palestine, Syria or Lebanon, THAT is what's "laughable".
But this Israeli Supreme Court, despite being the judiciary of a nation constantly threatened with attack and depending upon its military to protect its very existence, has the integrity, the respect for Israeli and International law and the courage to call 'em as they see 'em, rendering a strict and unambiguous ruling disciplining the IDF.
What an utterly impotent strawman. I don't give a rat's ass what their court has said, it's WHAT THEY ARE DOING THAT MATTERS.
Not only would this not happen in any Arab or Muslim nation,
SAYS YOU, and we all know how credible you are don't we. You're nothing but a mindless parrot of Fox News propaganda.
would it even happen here in America? We cannot be sure. My compliments to those Israelis who uncovered this despicable practice and to the liberality and fidelity to principle of the Israeli Supreme Court.
What an irony that this nation, which Esbe so thoroughly reviles, sets a shining example for the world when official wrong has been done and needs to be righted. Thank you Jay, I hope everyone reads about this case.
Oh yes, what a shining example indeed. You make me want to vomit more than Bush does. At least he never claimed to be a "liberal".
Mickey take note. Impressive, huh?
http://www.halturnershow.com/IsraeliAtrocities.html
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/palestine.html
Jay_Esbe
08-03-2006, 02:50 AM
http://www.afa.org/magazine/Feb2002/0202terror2.jpg
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/30/i...rracks.bombing/
Iran responsible for 1983 Marine barracks bombing, judge rules
WASHINGTON (CNN) --Iran is responsible for the 1983 suicide bombing of a U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 American servicemen, a U.S. District Court judge ruled Friday.
U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth said the suicide truck bombing was carried out by the group Hezbollah with the approval and funding of Iran's senior government officials.
Lamberth ordered that the plaintiffs in the case -- the servicemen wounded in that bombing and the families of those killed -- have a "right to obtain judicial relief" from Iran. The judge called the October 23, 1983 bombing "the most deadly state-sponsored terrorist attack made against United States citizens before September 11, 2001."
"In the early morning hours of that day, 241 American servicemen were murdered in their sleep by a suicide bomber," he wrote. "On that day, an unspeakable horror invaded the lives of those who survived the attack and the family members whose loved ones had been stolen from them."
The court will determine compensatory damages after reviewing reports submitted by "special masters" appointed by the court for claims resolution. Lamberth also wrote in his ruling that he would "take under advisement" the possibility of awarding punitive damages.
Two separate suits were filed in 2001; Lamberth considered the two together. Both suits sought claims for wrongful death, battery, assault and "intentional infliction of emotional distress resulting from state-sponsored terrorism."
Noting that Iran was served with the lawsuits in 2002 but failed to file any responses, Lamberth wrote that the court entered default judgments against the defendants in last December but was required to study the matter further under federal law regarding lawsuits against other countries.
From the subsequent bench trial, Lamberth concluded that Hezbollah was formed under the auspices of the Iranian government, was completely reliant on Iran in 1983 and assisted Iranian Ministry of Information and Security agents in carrying out the operation.
Hezbollah, or Party of God, is based in Lebanon and has waged a campaign for 18 years against Israel's occupation of southern Lebanon as a self-declared security zone. Israel withdrew its forces from Lebanon two years ago, but maintains a heavy military presence on Israel's northern frontier.
Hezbollah is blamed for anti-Western and anti-Israeli terrorist acts dating from the early 1980s and is on the U.S. State Department's official list of terrorist organizations.
A key point in determining the plaintiffs' eligibility to recover damages was the issue of whether the Marines were engaged in combat in their mission to Lebanon. Lamberth said the bulk of the evidence pointed clearly to a peacekeeping mission operating on stringent peacetime rules of engagement.
"As pointed out during trial, the (Marines) were more restricted in their use of force than an ordinary U.S. citizen walking down a street in Washington, D.C.," the judge wrote.
Lamberth wrote that the court had no power to "heal the pain that has become a permanent part of the lives" of the family members.
"But the court can take steps that will punish the men who carried out this unspeakable attack, and in so doing, try to achieve some small measure of justice for its survivors, and for the family members of the 241 Americans who never came home," he wrote.
The lawsuit was filed under a 1996 U.S. law that allows Americans to sue nations that the State Department considers sponsors of terrorism for damages suffered in terrorist acts.
Several Americans have won judgments against Iran and other countries named as sponsors of terrorism, but the U.S. government has been reluctant to seize foreign assets to pay the judgments, fearing international retaliation, according to a report by The Associated Press.
READ: THOSE ARE NOT "US CITIZENS". THEY ARE US MARINES AND THEY WERE ATTACKED AS AN OCCUPYING FORCE.
YOU'VE GOT NOTHING. NADDA. ZIP.
There is no proof whatsoever that Hezbollah has EVER used civilians intentionally as "human sheilds". NONE.
U.N. humanitarian chief Jan Egeland:
“Hezbollah must stop this cowardly blending ... among women and children,” Egeland said. “I heard they were proud because they lost very few fighters and that it was the civilians bearing the brunt of this. I don’t think anyone should be proud of having many more children and women dead than armed men.”
Say uncle, Jay.
Or ask may you have another.
This is the point where Esbe usually jumps up and down and screams that he's won the debate. That question, gentle reader, is up to you. We already know where Gerry, Bubba and Bertrand stand.
Jay_Esbe
08-03-2006, 02:54 AM
Hezbollah is an illegal private army on the territory of sovereign country. They don't give a shit about law.
From Human Rights Watch (http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006/07/17/lebano13748.htm)
Hezbollah – must take all necessary precautions to protect civilians against the dangers resulting from armed hostilities, and must never use the presence of civilians to shield themselves from attack. That requires positioning its military assets, troops and commanders as much as possible outside of populated areas. The use of human shields is a war crime.
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5200791,00.jpg
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5200790,00.jpg
YOUR SOURCE HAS ALREADY DECLARED ISRAEL'S ACTIONS A WAR CRIME, DO YOU WANT IT POSTED AGAIN?
You need to learn what words mean: "as much as possible". ISRAEL ILLEGALLY BOMBED THE ROUTS OF ESCAPE, DESTROYING THE ROADS BY WHICH CIVILIANS COULD FLEE.
HEZBOLLAH IS ACTING DEFENSIVELY WITHIN LEBANON AND ESCAPE HAS BEEN RENDERED IMPOSSIBLE FOR MANY OF THE CIVILIANS BEING TARGETED BY ISRAEL BY ISRAEL'S OWN HAND.
Hey, screamer, the Marines will be extremely surprised to discover that they are not US citizens. Whatta dumfuk. How about the Beirut embassy? CIA not American citizens either. Gawd, Jay, have you no shame?
YOUR SOURCE HAS ALREADY DECLARED ISRAEL'S ACTIONS A WAR CRIME, DO YOU WANT IT POSTED AGAIN?
You need to learn what words mean: "as much as possible". ISRAEL ILLEGALLY BOMBED THE ROUTS OF ESCAPE, DESTROYING THE ROADS BY WHICH CIVILIANS COULD FLEE.
HEZBOLLAH IS ACTING DEFENSIVELY WITHIN LEBANON AND ESCAPE HAS BEEN RENDERED IMPOSSIBLE FOR MANY OF THE CIVILIANS BEING TARGETED BY ISRAEL BY ISRAEL'S OWN HAND.
From Human Rights Watch:
Like airports roads and bridges may be dual-use targets if actually used for military purposes. Even then, the same rule applies, requiring the parties to the conflict to weigh carefully the impact on civilians against the military advantage served; they must consider all ways of minimizing the impact on civilians; and they should not undertake attacks if the civilian harm outweighs the definite military advantage. Human Rights Watch has not yet done the field research that would enable an assessment of the legitimacy of Israeli attacks on Lebanese roads and bridges, but among the factors to be considered are whether the destruction of particular roads or bridges serve in fact to impede military transport in light of readily alternative routes – that is, whether the infrastructure attacked is making an “effective” contribution to Hezbollah’s military action and its destruction offers a “definite military advantage” – or whether its destruction seems aimed more at inconveniencing the civilian population and even preventing it from fleeing the fighting and seeking safety.
Jay is omniscient and knows Israel only wanted to mess up the civilians and wouldn't want to inconvenience Hezbollah.
Say uncle, Jay.
Or ask if you can have another.
Jay_Esbe
08-03-2006, 05:07 AM
From Human Rights Watch
What is meant by “collective punishment” of the civilian population?
International humanitarian law prohibits the punishment of any person for an offense other than one that he or she has personally committed. Collective punishment is a term used in international humanitarian law to describe any form of punitive sanctions and harassment, not limited to judicial penalties, but including sanctions of “any sort, administrative, by police action or otherwise,” that are imposed on targeted groups of persons for actions that they themselves did not personally commit. The imposition of collective punishment is a war crime. Whether an attack or measure could amount to collective punishment depends on several factors, including the target of the measure and its punitive impact, but of particular relevance is the intent behind a particular measure. If the intention was to punish, purely or primarily as a result of an act committed by third parties, then the attack is likely to have been collective punishment.
Say uncle, Jay.
Do you expect me to believe that YOU believe what you just posted, actually supports you? It doesn't, but it does support my argument very well indeed.
Israelis Boldly Admit they are Collectively Punishing the Palestinian People
Revelation-of-the Method signals accelerated advance of Judaic supremacy
by Michael A. Hoffman II
From Fisher and Erlanger, in the NY Times, July 3, 2006: "The strikes appeared to be a direct response to the instructions of the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, who told subordinates at a cabinet meeting on Sunday that he intended to make the lives of Gazans ever more miserable until the captured soldier, 19-year-old Cpl. Gilad Shalit, was released...Mr. Olmert, whose air force has already bombed Gaza's bridges, crippled its only power plant, shelled the Palestinian prime minister's office here and subjected all 1.4 million Gaza residents to night after night of sleep-depriving sonic booms, said he had ordered the military and government 'to do everything in order to bring Gilad back home.'
"...the Israel military has been steadily increasing the pressure, on both the militant groups and Palestinians generally...The message, underscored regularly by Israeli officials, is that Israel would not hesitate to assassinate top Hamas leaders...Israel('s)... attacks on the infrastructure in Gaza...the bombing of the power plant, which is partly owned by an American company...still smoking four days after all six of its transformers were hit ? was visited Sunday both by the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, and the United Nations special coordinator for the Middle East peace process, Álvaro de Soto. Two days ago, Israeli warplanes also bombed the entrances to all four access roads to the plant, which is insured by the United States Overseas Private Investment Corporation, or OPIC...." (end quote)
The destruction of civilian infrastructure and property and the attacks on civilians by Israeli forces, constitute, as the Israeli Prime Minister virtually admits, collective punishment of the entire population of the Gaza Strip, a violation of Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is now on record at his cabinet meeting declaring "that he intended to make the lives of Gazans ever more miserable."
This is a remarkable public confession of barbarity that even a few years ago would have been concealed behind an Israeli smokescreen of humanitarian rhetoric and misdirection. But there's little need for concealment now.
Answer me: what head of state of which super-power nation on earth, be it Russia, China, the US, Britain or France, could make the following statement: "We intend to make the lives of Judaics in Israeli territory ever more miserable"?
Not one would dream or dare to do so. Any head of state making the preceding statement while his military placed the Judaic population under siege, shutting off their power and water and sending tanks and fighter jets to harass their women and children, would be brought to the bar of history, tarred and feathered, hunted down, lynched, or shot like a dog to the near-universal applause of the West.
Nothing like that will befall Olmert or his generals any time soon. They are immune to war crimes trials. They are above the law which they have established for others. Judiacs, according to their sacred rabbinic texts, are a higher order of humanity, and cannot be judged by any outside legal body or nation. Their attitude toward editorials and columns criticizing them is, this too shall pass. Indeed, there was some editorial outcry in the spring of 2002 when the Israelis committed dozens of war crimes and atrocities, also in Gaza, but all forgotten/forgiven now.
When UN war crimes investigators in 2002 attempted to interview Palestinian survivors of that onslaught, the Israelis told the UN to go to hell. There were no repercussions from the UN for that arrogant defiance on the part of a rogue state. The UN shrugged its shoulders, put its tail between its legs and called it a day. Today, the Palestinian civilians murdered in 2002 are just a statistic compiled by a few record keepers. Otherwise their deaths don't register. This is the bleakest testimony of the sub-human status of Palestinians under Judaism.
Israelis can do whatever they like to these subject people and there is no discernible punishment for "Israel," except perhaps for the fact that in an Internet age, every day a few thousand more Westerners finally grasp what the murderous ideology of Judeo-Zionism represents and become morally revolted and permanently turned-off by everything Israeli. But the Israelis obviously don't care. They are in their supremacist phase and they don't need to care.
Ehud Olmert is collectively punishing the hapless, trapped Palestinian people according to the doctrine of Chazal, Rambam and the modern halakhic authorities. This is what needs to be exhaustively documented from their own original and unimpeachable Aramaic and Hebrew sources, and then hammered constantly from every housetop, street corner, newsletter and website that we own, control or influence.
The Israelis grow ever more bold. The Zionist New York Times is serving as the Revelation of the Method mouthpiece, no longer even bothering to put up a front, as they have in the past. They openly announce and admit that Israelis are collectively punishing an entire nation of people. They do not fear the repercussions in international law because for Holy People possessed of Divine Blood, there aren't any.
Copyright 2006 by RevisionistHistory.org
__________________________________________________ _____________________
"The nation of Israel is pure and the Arabs are a nation of donkeys. They are an evil disaster, an evil devil, and a nasty affliction. The Arabs are donkeys and beasts. They want to take our girls. They are endowed with true filthiness. There is pure and there is impure and they are impure."
--Rabbi David Batzri, head of the Magen David Yeshiva in Jerusalem [Israeli newspaper Haaretz, March 21, 2006]
"One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail."
Rabbi Yaacov Perrin, Feb. 27, 1994 [N.Y. Times, Feb. 28, 1994, p. 1]
Jay_Esbe
08-03-2006, 05:12 AM
Hey, screamer, the Marines will be extremely surprised to discover that they are not US citizens. Whatta dumfuk. How about the Beirut embassy? CIA not American citizens either. Gawd, Jay, have you no shame?
Military personale are subject to military law, and lack civil rights. When one enlists, they are no longer a "civilian". The rights of citizenship has been replaced by an oath and restrictions on civil liberties. You want to play word games? Fuck you.
Gerry
08-03-2006, 07:34 AM
Hezbollah is an illegal private army on the territory of sovereign country. They don't give a shit about law.
From Human Rights Watch (http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006/07/17/lebano13748.htm)
Hezbollah – must take all necessary precautions to protect civilians against the dangers resulting from armed hostilities, and must never use the presence of civilians to shield themselves from attack. That requires positioning its military assets, troops and commanders as much as possible outside of populated areas. The use of human shields is a war crime.
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5200791,00.jpg
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5200790,00.jpg
Why don't you write what Human Rights Watch says about Israeli targeting of civilians. About THEIR aggression. Never mind human shield although THEY have used Palestinians as human shield.
All Israeli action in the past 50 years have been illegal, and by definition immoral. What the hell do you think 60 U.N Security Council Resolutions are all about. Israel is condemned in all of them and Israel is in violation of each and everyone still today. Check the U.N Website and read them. Just because Israel, after killing civilians hollors "they use them as shield and we are innocent" (as a f-ing excuse) and the U.S. joins the choir, that makes it so. ? Just who are you kidding with this tripe.
There are international diplomates, scholars, law professors, Israeli academics, all of whom condemn what Israel is doing. The world has turned against Israel. THEY (those Jews) understand the Israel is not doing THEM any favors with their violence and their attrocious conduct against the Palestinian and that it will only serve to spread well-desrved hatred against Jews accross the globe. You are instrumental in cultivating that hatred. Israel is self-destructing they say. I believe it is, thanks to people such as yourself.
You write what Human Righta Watch says about it. I love it when you make an ass of youself. over and over.
Military personale are subject to military law, and lack civil rights. When one enlists, they are no longer a "civilian". The rights of citizenship has been replaced by an oath and restrictions on civil liberties. You want to play word games? Fuck you.
Word games Jay? Please. They are your words and your words are wrong. If you meant to say civilians you are still wrong. Beirut Embassy bombing. Sorry pal, you're an ignorant loser.
Say uncle, Jay.
Or ask me if you may have another.
Felicity
08-03-2006, 09:42 AM
Word games Jay? Please. They are your words and your words are wrong. If you meant to say civilians you are still wrong. Beirut Embassy bombing. Sorry pal, you're an ignorant loser.
Say uncle, Jay.
Or ask me if you may have another.
Military still have the civilians right to vote (although sometimes the dems make it very difficult). Military still have to pay taxes where they live. Why would they have to do that if they aren't citizens?
Jay you are so full of crap I wanna spread you around on my crops.
Felicity
Trent
08-03-2006, 01:04 PM
Esbe is right. I am wrong. The IDF has used human shields. The practice is reprehensible and I condemn it. I will not make the claim again that Israel does not use human shields. I think hell just froze over. http://bestsmileys.com/scared/4.gif
Gerry
08-03-2006, 03:16 PM
Military still have the civilians right to vote (although sometimes the dems make it very difficult). Military still have to pay taxes where they live. Why would they have to do that if they aren't citizens?
Jay you are so full of crap I wanna spread you around on my crops.
Felicity
Military are NO civilians......the fact that they can vote is immaterial. Man in uniform are military and those Marines in Lebanon were there to support the illegal invasion of Israel. Small wonder they became a target. Unfortunate for them, but if anyone is guilty it is the Reagan Administration for sending them there in the first place. They had absolutely NO reason to be come involved in an illegal invasion.
Military are NO civilians......the fact that they can vote is immaterial. Man in uniform are military and those Marines in Lebanon were there to support the illegal invasion of Israel. Small wonder they became a target. Unfortunate for them, but if anyone is guilty it is the Reagan Administration for sending them there in the first place. They had absolutely NO reason to be come involved in an illegal invasion.
I have to agree that civilians are distinguishable from the military. If someone had said CITIZENS, then we might have had an argument.
In fact, the Geneva Convention rules seem to hang on the military distinguishing itself from civilians...
Inhale2theChief
08-03-2006, 03:30 PM
Military are NO civilians......the fact that they can vote is immaterial. Man in uniform are military and those Marines in Lebanon were there to support the illegal invasion of Israel. Small wonder they became a target. Unfortunate for them, but if anyone is guilty it is the Reagan Administration for sending them there in the first place. They had absolutely NO reason to be come involved in an illegal invasion.
What a load of BULLSHIT.The Marines were there ,along witht he French,as part of a peace keeping taskforce(MNF) under the auspices of the UN,so your Terrorist buddies could get the HELL OUT OF LEBANON! You madame are a god damned disgrace.
Gerry
08-03-2006, 04:40 PM
What a load of BULLSHIT.The Marines were there ,along witht he French,as part of a peace keeping taskforce(MNF) under the auspices of the UN,so your Terrorist buddies could get the HELL OUT OF LEBANON! You madame are a god damned disgrace.
And didn;t THEY get bombed as well.....Mr. Brilliant.....BTW they were NOT there under the auspices of the U.N. The U.N. condemned the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and it therefore could not and would not have supported a U.S. force in a country illegally invaded by Israel. and financed by the U.S.
The French were heading a small "multinational force" consisting of themselves and Italians, but they got bombed as well and lost something like 54 people. They left shorty after the U.S. Marines, having learned their lessons in Algiers and Tunisia. They were a peacekeeping force but were constantly attackee by Hezbollah, so anyone attempting to install another "pacekeeping" force will face the same scenario. Lebanese will not tolerate anyone illegally on their soil.
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.