Israeli official calls for concentration camps in Gaza

there are many areas without people in Gaza, that Hamas could operate from.

instead they choose to hide amoung millions of people.

 

Are the contents of this manual definitive? If so, prove it. The reality is, many of the accusations thus far pertaining to Hamas's alleged use of human shields, is highly contested. If you understood the complexities, you would know that but you don't. I don't mind outlining the controversies and complexities, just for your benefit. So just ask.

 

Nope, there is no evidence to support such a definitive conclusion. At best, the conclusions are mixed. You have already been shown this so we can only conclude you are in denial.

 

Its not ancient history at all. Hamas doesnt use human shields.

The UK didnt break international law invading the Falklands as you state.

And the UK no more supports Hamas than your country does.

- - - Updated - - -

Where?

The beach where four boys got blown to bits? That beach?

If you want Hamas to stop firing from the city then you must also ask the IDF to stop firing artillery from miles out.

 

The only one in denial that Hamas is deliberately killing its civilians as a pre-meditated tactic is you.

As well your use of the word "we" to suggest you are not expressing your own denial is absurd. You are not "we".

Here knock yourself out denying the following deliberate acts to kill Palestinians by Hamas that violate international law...knock yourself out pretending there's no evidence:

1. Hamas‘ rocket attacks directed at Israel‘s civilian population centers deliberately violates the basic principles of distinction. (Additional Protocol I, arts. 48, 51(2), 52(1).) Any doubt about this is resolved by the fact that Hamas itself has boasted of its intention to hit population centres. It is well accepted in customary international law that ―ntentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking part in hostilities constitutes a war crime. (Rome Statute, art. 8(2)(b)(i))

2. Staging of Attacks From Residential Areas and Protected Sites: The Law of Armed Conflict not only prohibits targeting an enemy‘s civilians; it also requires parties to an armed conflict to distinguish their combatant forces from their own civilians, and not to base operations in or near civilian structures, especially protected sites such as schools, medical facilities and places of worship. As the customary law principle is reflected in Article 51(7) of Additional Protocol I: '―The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or shield, favour or impede military operations."

3. Use of Civilian Homes and Public Institutions as Bases of Operation - see (2) for citations.

4. Misuse of Medical Facilities and Ambulances - Any time Hamas uses an ambulance to transport its fighters it is violating the Law of Armed Conflict: Under Article 23(f) of the 1907 Regulations annexed to the Hague Convention IV Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, which reflects customary international law, it is ―especially forbidden…[t]o make improper use of a flag of truce, … as well as the distinctive badges of the Geneva Convention.. Article 44 of the First Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field (1949) also provides that: ―… the emblem of the Red Cross on a white ground …may not be employed, either in time of peace or in time of war, except to indicate or to protect the medical units and establishments…‖

5. Booby-trapping of Civilian Areas - see (2) for citations.

6. Blending in with Civilians and Use of Human Shields - As the ICRC rule states, "It can be concluded that the use of human shields requires an intentional co-location of military objectives and civilians or persons hors de combat with the specific intent of trying to prevent the targeting of those military objectives."

7. Exploitation of Children - Hamas has paramilitary summer camps for kids. There are reports, from this war and previous ones, of children fighting and being used for tunnel digging. violates the Law of Armed Conflict, including prohibitions against allowing children to take part in hostilities. As customary international law is reflected in this regard in Additional Protocol I, the parties to a conflict must take "all feasible measures" to ensure that children "do not take a direct part in hostilities and, in particular, they shall refrain from recruiting them into their armed forces." (Additional Protocol I, art. 77(2))

8. Interference with Humanitarian Relief Efforts - While Israel kept its end of humanitarian truces. Hamas used them to shoot rockets into Israel, including the Kerem Shalom crossing where humanitarian goods are brought into Gaza. All of these actions violate the Law of Armed Conflict, which requires parties to allow the entry of humanitarian supplies and to guarantee their safety. Article 59 of the Fourth Geneva Convention requires parties in an armed conflict to "permit the free passage of [humanitarian] consignments and shall guarantee their protection." Article 60 of the same Convention protects the shipments from being diverted from their intended purpose, something Hamas has certainly done in the past and is reported to have done in this conflict as well.

9. Hostage-taking - The Fourth Geneva Conventions, article 34, says flatly "The taking of hostages is prohibited." This is not an "arrest" as Israel-haters claim, and this is not a prisoner of war situation as Hamas has made clear - the purpose of Hamas' hostage-taking falls under the definition on the International Convention Against the Taking of Hostages: "Any person who seizes or detains and threatens to kill, to injure or to continue to detain another person (hereinafter referred to as the "hostage") in order to compel a third party, namely, a State, an international intergovernmental organization, a natural or juridical person, or a group of persons, to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the hostage commits the offence of taking of hostages ("hostage-taking") within the meaning of this Convention."

10. Using the uniform of the enemy - Additional Protocol I prohibits the use of enemy flags, military emblems, insignia or uniforms “while engaging in attacks or in order to shield, favour, protect or impede military operations”.[3] Under the Statute of the International Criminal Court, “making improper use … of the flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy” constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts when it results in death or serious personal injury.[4] According to some, this is considered perfidy, a war crime. (h/t Joshua)

11. Violence aimed at spreading terror among the civilian population - Rule 2 of ICRC's Customary IHL is "Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited." It quotes Article 51(2) of Additional Protocol I prohibits “acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population”. Hamas rockets are aimed not only at killing civilians, but at spreading terror among Israelis.

12. Targeting civilian objects, such as airports or nuclear power plants - Rule 7 of the Customary IHL says "Attacks must not be directed against civilian objects," quoting Articles 48 and 52(2) of Additional Protocol I.

13. Indiscriminate attacks - Besides targeting civilians and civilian objects, Rule 11 of the ICRC CIHL states flatly that "Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited." By definition, every Qassam rocket attack and most of the other rocket and mortar attacks are by their very nature indiscriminate.

See also Rule 71, "The use of weapons which are by nature indiscriminate is prohibited."

14. Proportionality in attack - ICRC's Rule 14 states "Launching an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated, is prohibited." Rocket attacks against civilians have zero military advantage, so by definition they are disproportionate to their military advantage.

See also Rule 18: "Each party to the conflict must do everything feasible to assess whether the attack may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated."

15. Advance Warning - Rule 20 of the ICRC CIHL states "Each party to the conflict must give effective advance warning of attacks which may affect the civilian population, unless circumstances do not permit." Given that Hamas has used the media and SMS calls to threaten Israelis, it is clear that they have the ability to warn before every rocket attack. Their failure to do so is a violation of IHL.

16. Protecting civilians - Rule 22 of the ICRC Customary IHL states "The parties to the conflict must take all feasible precautions to protect the civilian population and civilian objects under their control against the effects of attacks." Hamas not only has failed to protect civilians in Gaza by building bomb shelters, they have deliberately put civilians in harm's way.

17. Attacking medical units - Rule 28 states "Medical units exclusively assigned to medical purposes must be respected and protected in all circumstances." Hamas has shot mortars at the Israeli field hospital, set up for Gazans, near the Erez crossing.

18. Protection of Journalists - Hamas has threatened journalists, implicitly and explicitly, accusing some of being spies and sometimes not allowing them to leave Gaza, making them effectively hostages. Rule 34 states "Civilian journalists engaged in professional missions in areas of armed conflict must be respected and protected as long as they are not taking a direct part in hostilities."

19. Mistreating the dead. Rule 113 says "Each party to the conflict must take all possible measures to prevent the dead from being despoiled. Mutilation of dead bodies is prohibited." Hamas has shown off an alleged chip cut out from the (presumably) dead body of Shaul Oron.

source: http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=64667

We are done.

 

LOL...Far from it. All you have done is to highlight the complexities which make definitive claims regarding the concept and use of human shields all the more problematic. I'll educate both Drew and yourself simultaneously if you want. The call is yours.

 

if folks who support Hamas are unwilling and unable to accept that Hamas has committed war crimes, don't expect supporters of Israel to condemn Israel's actions.

meanwhile Israeli society will continue to grow, prosper, and flourish. While Palestinian society will continue to wallow in misery and suffering.

 

Rocket attacks targeting towns and villages, suicide belts, co-location of military targets and civilians... come on, trout, who are you kidding?

 

This is all irrelevant in respect to claims made that Hamas have used Human Shields during this latest phase. There is no evidence that they have. Perhaps you are aware of any independent investigations that we are unaware of.

 

I'm a sucker for facts, I know it's irksome for those whose who are indoctrinated by a hateful pre-disposition towards the inherently and pathologically violent "Ayyyyyyyrabs" and therefore have dubious ideological motives, but I cannot be blamed for that.

 

choosing to fire rockets from densely populated civilian areas and storing weapons in civilian buildings, and attacking Israel with civilians very close by, is as good as using human shields.

no army with honor or love for their people, does such a thing.


and its all also illegal under international law.

 

Have a guess where the Jewish extremists of Likud have many of their weapons stored and Israel isn't no where near densely populated as Gaza is.

 

Use of human shields is defined as intentional co-location of military targets and civilians which is Hamas MO, Hamas appeals to the population to not leave the battlefield, when warned about imminent military operation is another Hamas' use of human shields.

The UK should have solved their disputes with Argentina in international courts if you wanted to stay legal and clearly you have no excuse for your illegal actions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, other than trying to deflect and point fingers elsewhere.

The UK doesn't support Hamas, the British public does. "We are all Hamas now" is one of your slogans at your Israel hatefests, aka "peace rallies"

 

Likud doesn't have any weapons. Not one.

They are a purely political party.

Now stop diverting the topic and deal with Hamas' war crimes.

 

Fighting in urban areas is not prohibited. So its not human shields. And appealing to the population to stay isnt human shields either -the UK did the same in the blitz.

No taking back our territory was perfectly legal. The Afghan operation is UN supported. As was the Libya campaign.

The British public supports all Palestinians. We are correct in doing so, so do Khazakstanis.

 

I'm not diverting the topic. I've outlined my position on Hamas's illegal firing of rockets on Israel describing them as war crimes. But you don't want to hear that. Here's something else you don't want to hear. There is no evidence that Hamas has used Palestinian's as human shields during this latest phase of Israeli-instigated brutality - none, nada, zilch. However, even if Hamas were violating the law on this matter, it would not legally justify Israel's bombing of areas where civilians are known to be. That much is clear as the Geneva Conventions makes clear.

"Any violation of these prohibitions shall not release the parties to the conflict from their legal obligations with respect to the civilian population and civilians, including the obligation to take the precautionary measures,"

http://www.theguardian.com/law/geneva-conventions

As for the Likud thin, sorry, my bad, I meant to say the IDF:

"The IDF's headquarters, the Kiriya, is in central Tel Aviv, surrounded by a hospital, blocks of flats, shopping centres and offices."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...tary-bases-guerrilla-war-civilians-israel-idf

 

Co-locating militarily targets and civilians is use of human shields and a war crime no matter how you spin it, the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq were not authorized by the UN, the mandate in Libya was no fly zone and ceasefire, not taking sides and becoming rebels' airforce and the status of disputed territories should be decided in negotiations and international courts, not by wars.

 

Did Hamas cease all terrorist attacks surrender and plead for peace with Israel? Did they move out of the populated areas? If no to those questions they are still an enemy who attacks Israel and to take them out, no matter where they are or what the cost is the right of Israel, the nation who had war declared on them by the Palestinians. If their enemy wishes to commit war crimes by hiding within their civilian population then it is their crime, not Israel's when they are hunted down.

As for your support of Goldstone's self admitted erroneous report, running around using it as proof of anything other than to show your contention is wrong is humorous as he states the official document is in error since new information came to light so, error away!

Lastly, to say Israel uses human shields is wrong as it is illegal for them to do so as ruled by their own legal system. Individuals may do this and are breaking the law but Israel as policy does not rather Hamas, by their own admission and procedural manual do.

 

Israel has on various occasions used Palestinian's as human shields. This is not even controversial and has been documented independently by numerous reports, not just Goldstone. Israel as well as Hamas commit war crimes but you are so ideologically welded to Israel, you refuse to acknowledge the former.

 

So why do you support war criminal Hamas and what do you think the world should do to stop this endless wave of Hamas' murderous rampage and crimes against humanity?

 

The overriding issue is one of justice for the oppressed Palestinian's. You'd be better directing the second part of your question to the fanatics of the Likud.

 

We have an Hamas manual instructing on the benefits of using civilians to aid in terrorism, statements and bragging of Hamas leaders of how people volunteer to be used as human shields and the fact that Hamas operates under the cover of their civilian population when they hide, attack and cower under cover to avoid the inevitable Israeli action to take out the site.

Can you show us a similar across the board Israeli policy to show how they use human sheilds? Now there's a good chap.

 

So Hamas war crimes and their oppression of the Palestinians don't matter to you in the slightest? All you are doing is coming up with bogus excuses designed to let Hamas off the hook and look elsewhere? Are you certain that this position of yours is pro-Palestinian? Cause it awfully resembles the pro-Hamas one.

 

Yep, just invent stuff based on what you imagine my position to be as opposed to any stated position I've made.

 

Why would I invent stuff when posting history speaks for itself...