Amnesty confirms Israeli forces committed war crimes in Gaza

[BlackPirate]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8128210.stm
The report says that Israeli forces launched reckless attacks against civilian targets even in some cases shooting civilians at close range killing hundreds of them.The report also condemns Hamas for launching rockets against Israel.

It seems Gaza paid the fact that Israel failed in 2006 war.Israels "proved" who is the powerful again

[Georgy Zhukov]

Nothing that hasn't been covered and argued in 67045034530459345023942 threads before this.

[Space Wolves]

So...whats new?

As guide mentioned already, we have an infinite amount of threads about this issue so much that i can literally live off it if it were in dollar amounts...

[boofhead]

And Amnesty International are a bunch of tossers.

[Tiberios]

What a surprise they would say this. When don't they.

Anyway it isn't a new discussion.

[Desperado †]

What a surprise they would say this. When don't they.

Are you implying that there accusations are based on little evidence or that war crimes aren't serious because many countries commit them?

[Tiberios]

No what I am saying is that the AI always yell war crimes when ever a country go to war.
I think it's good to have such an organization but they are really too much some times.

And I'm not saying that Israel hasn't committed any crimes, just that it don't surprise me that the AI claims it.
An Israeli soldier can hardly fart in the direction of a Palestinian before the AI yells war crimes.

[Каие]

No what I am saying is that the AI always yell war crimes when ever a country go to war.
I think it's good to have such an organization but they are really too much some times.

And I'm not saying that Israel hasn't committed any crimes, just that it don't surprise me that the AI claims it.
An Israeli soldier can hardly fart in the direction of a Palestinian before the AI yells war crimes.

Brilliant misrepresentation of everything.

[danzig]

Well considering the thread title is in caps this must be vitally important breaking news...from 2 weeks ago yes but still it must be something amazing. Oh wait no its just more of the same confirming that yes indeed the middle east is a dump full of violence etc. Course thread title also leaves out that the news article details warcrimes in Gaza BY BOTH SIDES. So I suppose its understandable that you drew a sensationalist thread title from a news article hilighting only things that support your pov.

[Каие]

Course thread title also leaves out that the news article details warcrimes in Gaza BY BOTH SIDES.

Precisely. This war was war crimes on BOTH SIDES. To pretend otherwise is dishonest.

[Poet]

So what would now say people with sig saying Israel Supporter?

[Pious Agnost]

I'm no Israel supporter, but...
Perhaps that not all citizens of Israel commit these crimes?

Is this even a development?

[danzig]

So what would now say people with sig saying Israel Supporter?

The same thing Palenstian supporters (who in the article are also accused of committing war crimes) would say, the same thing people with oh I dont know Pakistani sigs would say in regards terrorist attacks on India, the same thing people with muslim sigs would say as well. Unless of course we now generalize and label an entire group of people based on such things?

[Markas]

Isreal's use of Phosphorous weapons (I'll be generous and say 'alleged') against non-military targets is widely reported. They should really really knock that off.

[roy34543]

No offense but I hardly think that amnesty international are that reliable.
Especially not after a couple of months. They had noone there looking at the actual combat for the entire time, and now after a few months they pull something out of their ass even though they have very little to verify it.
Its like A tree falling in the woods with noone hearing it, and then a scientist 5 months later comes out with a report on the exact sound, its obviously fake or based on hearsay which cant be verified.
Most of the people in gaza didnt see most of the combat that was going on except the actual combatants, the rest just heard hamas propoganda and repeated it.
Amnesty international obviously only interviewed palestinians repeatedly and not IDF soldiers that were involved.

It seems Gaza paid the fact that Israel failed in 2006 war.Israels "proved" who is the powerful again

Its probably better in the long run(obviously not in the short term for the palestinians anyway), now that rockets and suicide bombings have quited down a bit, maybe it will be possible to delay the tit-for-tat attacks for a while.

[justicar5]

No offense but I hardly think that amnesty international are that reliable.
Especially not after a couple of months. They had noone there looking at the actual combat for the entire time, and now after a few months they pull something out of their ass even though they have very little to verify it.
Its like A tree falling in the woods with noone hearing it, and then a scientist 5 months later comes out with a report on the exact sound, its obviously fake or based on hearsay which cant be verified.
Most of the people in gaza didnt see most of the combat that was going on except the actual combatants, the rest just heard hamas propoganda and repeated it.
Amnesty international obviously only interviewed palestinians repeatedly and not IDF soldiers that were involved.


Its probably better in the long run(obviously not in the short term for the palestinians anyway), now that rockets and suicide bombings have quited down a bit, maybe it will be possible to delay the tit-for-tat attacks for a while.

except that iseral breaks it's promises every time, more illegal setlements, more walledd ghettos. If some one was doing to jews what the isrealis are doing to palestinians it would cause international action, but palestinians don't count right? And no I do not support hamas, they are part of the problem.

[boofhead]

Amnesty have always had an agenda, and a bias.

The Truth About Amnesty International: The Lies And The Whole Truth
Today, Amnesty International (predictably) slammed the US and Israel in a report on the state of global human rights. Notwithstanding the upside down nature of the report- somehow democratic states are portrayed as the worst offenders, with the mainstream media dutifully and gleefully playing along as the most egregious human rights violators barely are worthy of mention.

The media, in their response to the AI report are devoting millions of words excoriating the US, Israel and other democratic states. What the media and AI will not tell you is why there is an imbalance in the amount of words expended on the US, Israel and other states in the AI report. The fact of the matter is, outside of democratic states, AI is severely hampered in their information gathering. That's right- the worst offenders do not allow access to their countries. There is a dearth of information. In other words, AI is aware they don't know. AI can't be bothered to tell you that reality. If they did, their credibility as the informed source of human rights information would be compromised.

There is something else AI and the media won't tell you. What little access AI has to many countries is directly related to what they write about that country. Ask yourselves a question: Why would a country with a notorious human rights record allow AI back in, after a 'bad' report? The answer is simple. By playing down the severity of the human rights violations, AI guarantees itself the ability to return. Once again, it's about credibility. If AI can show 'access,' it is presumed they are reporting the truth. Notorious human rights violators are only too happy to be in 'middle of the pack.'

When the Arab world, for example, or China lecture us on human rights violations, we can be excused for a reflexive bit of laughter. Sudan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt and Jordan are far more egregious purveyors of human rights violations, including religious persecution and the persecution of women. China, for years the standard bearer of political persecution, continues it's 'long march' of oppression (and the sale of human organs 'donated' by prisoners) during the current economic boom.

Do you suppose these Arab countries and China allow unrestricted access to AI investigators? We have been to some of these countries. Tourists are not allowed unrestricted access and movement. Why doesn't AI report that truth?

We are not questioning the need for vigilance in the protection of rights. We are questioning- actually, confronting- AI and the media and asking if their concern is really human rights or if in fact their agenda is political.

AI has long had a political agenda. That agenda has long been endorsed and embraced by the media. The media does not question AI on access, content influence or on final recommendations. Suppose an organization of different kind produced a report on matters controversial and said, 'Here is the truth- we have no agenda.'

[Markas]

So an article written in 2005 has a bearing on what AI are reporting on in 2006 and 2008/9?

[boofhead]

So an article written in 2005 has a bearing on what AI are reporting on in 2006 and 2008/9?

Yes, nothing has changed. They still target those who are democratic and open enough to give them access.

What I want to know, is, why does anybody let them operate at all?

This from the wiki

Criticism of Amnesty International may be classified into two major categories: selection bias and ideological bias.

The more serious of the two is selection bias. AI admits to reporting disproportionately on relatively more democratic and open countries, arguing that its intention is not to produce a range of reports which statistically represents the world’s human rights abuses, but rather to apply the pressure of public opinion to encourage improvements.[25]

According to the late U.S. Senator and former Ambassador to the United Nations Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the number of complaints about a nation’s violation of human rights is inversely proportional to their actual violation of human rights. Critics[who?] charge that since openness causes violation incident reports, AI policy pushes countries to be less open while undermining the moral authority of those countries working hardest to spread human rights.

In the matter of ideological bias, many governments, including those of the Democratic Republic of Congo,[26] the People's Republic of China,[27] Vietnam,[28] Russia[29], Israel[30], and the United States,[31] have attacked Amnesty International for what they assert is one-sided reporting or a failure to treat threats to security as a mitigating factor. The actions of these governments — and of other governments critical of Amnesty International — have been the subject of human rights concerns voiced by Amnesty. The Catholic Church has also criticized Amnesty for its stance on abortion.[32]

Charity Navigator gave Amnesty International a 2 star rating for efficiency.[33]

Now when AI reports are used by people like Hamas to point the finger - you've really got to just ignore them, and the reports.

[tree151]

Oh, wow. AI and BBC. When will I see credible sites with acual proof of war crimes and such, and not 117-page reports who just try to illustrate the word "It cannot be" in the most credible way possable. I'm sure they didn't notice the fact that an Israeli tank shell accidenty shot 3 IDF soldiers? Well, I guess that's counted as a war crime too? Only then that's collateral damage.